The Importance of an Interreligious Quranic Hermeneutics for a Gender-Sensitive Reading of the Quran, Using the Example of the Story of the Queen of Sheba

Abstract

This article explores a novel perspective on the Quran by examining its interreligious and intercultural dimensions, challenging traditional readings that often treat it solely as a religious or historical text. By focusing on the Quran’s engagement with diverse religious traditions, the article highlights how the Quran negotiates and reflects its multicultural context. The analysis centers on the story of the Queen of Sheba, revealing how her portrayal disrupts conventional gender roles and provides a unique lens for understanding the Quran’s treatment of gender and religious diversity. Through a comparative study with Jewish intertexts, the article demonstrates that the Quran not only engages with other religious traditions but also incorporates and positively represents figures from these traditions. This approach offers new insights into how interreligious hermeneutics can enhance our understanding of the Quran’s stance on religious plurality and gender dynamics.

1. Introduction

The Quran reflects the multicultural and multireligious context in which it was written and can therefore also be understood as a sign of interreligious and intercultural processes of negotiation. This heritage has been dealt with in different ways in Quranic exegesis. Recent years, though, have seen a clear interest both in the late antiquity for the purposes of locating the text historically and in the exchange with other scriptural religions and their exegesis. This interreligious and intercultural perspective is also playing an increasingly important role in relation to feminist and gender-sensitive readings of the Quran, with approaches from systematic theology, exegesis, and hermeneutics being central here. This article aims to provide a brief overview of these approaches, before then using the specific example of the story of the Queen of Sheba and Jewish intertexts to illustrate what an interreligious hermeneutics could look like in a gender-sensitive reading of the Quran.

2. Interreligious Quranic Hermeneutics in Feminist and Gender-Sensitive Exegesis of the Quran

Feminist and gender-sensitive exegesis of the Quran takes different stances regarding interreligious approaches. On the one hand, it is fundamentally open to an interreligious perspective when it comes to interpreting the Quran, but on the other, it is also very critical and negative, with scholars pointing especially to the fact that some classical commentaries on the Quran used intertexts (Arabic: Isrāʾīliyyāt), mostly biblical and apocryphal material from late antiquity, to close purported narrative gaps in Quran stories, thereby undermining the reformist character of some of these stories with regard to gender roles (El Omari 2021, p. 335). The term Isrāʾīliyyāt, “which takes the form of an Arabic plural” (Lang 2015, p. 25) and “from the origin of the Arabic word is close to the term Israel” (Ibid.), is usually associated with material of Jewish origin, but Christian narrative traditions can also be found, so that the material cannot be narrowed down precisely (McAuliffe 2013, p. 238). Feminist exegesis criticizes the use of this material in exegesis, usually in the context of the interpretation of the Quranic story of the first human couple in paradise, since this story neither purports that the first woman was created from the rib of the man nor blames the fall of man on the woman as Adam’s seductress, but instead, depending on the narrative, says that Adam sins either alone or together with his wife, who is referred to in the Quran as (gender-neutral) “partner” (Arabic: zawǧ). However, classical works of exegesis reproduce these elements again and again, and they do not cast the first woman in a favorable light (Ibid., p. 334).

The American theologian Riffat Hassan blames this state of affairs not only on the classical exegetes themselves but also on the biblical influence, which she says distorts what the Quran says and should therefore be rejected as inauthentic (Hassan 1991, pp. 101–14). Despite this critical stance, feminist and gender-sensitive interpretations have become increasingly open to an interreligious perspective in recent years. This may involve adapting hermeneutical concepts (Ibrahim 2020; El Omari 2023) but occurs primarily at the level of content. The most frequent textual comparison here is between the Quran and the Bible (OT and NT), but also between the Quran and other religious texts that are relevant to the period when the Quran was written. For example, Nimet Şeker compares female connotations in the Quranic image of God, and in particular the concept of raḥma (mercy), with Christian-feminist discourses concerning female images of God in the Hebrew Bible (Seker 2020, pp. 27–28).1

In doing so, she works out different perspectives from which reference to the Hebrew raḥămīm (mercy) appears particularly interesting when compared with the Quran, since both refer to the womb. Transferred to the image of God, this creates a relationship between God and humans as between mother and child (Ibid., p. 32). Asma Lamrabet also makes an interreligious comparison when she deals with the issue of the Quranic bridal gift, pointing out that, in the Islamic context, the bridal gift is by no means used to determine the bride’s price but is instead a gift to the bride to make clear the serious intentions. Thus, contrary to pre-Islamic practice, the bridal gift is given to the bride herself. She compares this practice with a biblical text, but also with the statement of a contemporary rabbi, from which it emerges that both the Hebrew term “mohar” and the transfer of the bridal gift from the father to the bride are clear parallels between Judaism and Islam (Lamrabet 2018, p. 65). Many more such reflections can of course be cited here, and the gender perspective also plays a role time and again within so-called scriptural reasoning (Aboud 2014). Nonetheless, despite such work, it is still not possible to speak in terms of an interreligious hermeneutics or a holistic systematic theology or methodology when it comes to an interreligious exegesis of the Quran.

A different path is taken by Jerusha Tanner Lamptey, as well as by other scholars whose work I shall draw upon to interpret the text example. In addition to deconstructive and theological perspectives, the “Muslima theology” developed by Lamptey also gives a key role to the comparative perspective, which is why she also denotes her theory as comparative feminist theology (Lamptey 2018, p. 21). She explains that, although she locates herself in the field of gender theory and feminist discourse (Lamptey 2017, p. 34), the concept of feminism or feminist theology has caused a major rift among Muslim academics, which is particularly noticeable with regard to terminology, feminist approaches, and general norms (Ibid., p. 27).

She also stresses the danger in feminism, or in some currents of feminism, of a hegemonic discourse, which for her is a discourse of white middle-class women and has often tried to subsume the experiences of other women from different cultures, such as the representatives of Africana and Latina theology, under this “white” feminism. However, this striving for hegemony could threaten diversity and turn efforts at emancipation ultimately into a discourse of power, while also resulting in useless polemics, polarization, and dogmatism (Lamptey 2018, p. 25). She therefore opts for the term “Muslima theology”, explaining her use of “Muslima” by pointing to the fact that she sees herself as a female Muslim and wants to use this perspective to explore questions relating to Islam and gender, and that this term clarifies her theoretical position as a scholar in the field of gender theory, as well as feminist discourses and methodology (Ibid., p. 21.9). She describes the comparative pillar of her theology as follows:

“Muslima theology is comparative—carried out in critical conversation with other discourses on religion, women, and gender, especially those that women in other faith traditions articulate. Explicit engagement with other traditions is a unique feature of my formulation of Muslima theology. And while not all Muslim women scholars, activists, or theologians embrace a comparative approach, in my opinion, it is essential for three primary reasons. The first reason is that comparative engagement is not actually new; it is already ongoing ... The second reason is that—since comparative engagement is ongoing—new strategies for explicit, strategic, and conscientious comparative engagement are necessary ... This brings me to the third and final reason for comparative engagement in Muslima theology: comparative engagement may actually be helpful. There may actually be something to learn.”.

(Lamptey 2018, p. 38)

For Tanner Lamptey, then, the comparative approach means learning from how other traditions understand themselves and then ideally gaining a new perspective on one’s own tradition (Ibid., pp. 28–29). A comparative analysis should therefore result ideally in “new theological insights, questions and approaches” (Ibid., p. 30). These ideas she then transfers to a comparative feminist theology, one that, in focusing on “feminist discourses, texts and practices”, seeks to rescue women from the marginalization that they have been subjected to in many areas and place them at the center of comparative analysis (Ibid., p. 33).

Let us now move on from one comparative perspective to another, one that underlies my analysis. Adopting Angelika Neuwirth’s methodology (Neuwirth 2014, p. 44).

This perspective also compares the Quran with other religious texts of late antiquity, but it does so against the background of the question of a new emphasis of these traditions in the Quran. The starting point for adapting this methodology within feminist and gender-sensitive exegesis of the Quran lies in reflections in systematic theology on the Quran as the word of God. As early as the 20th century, many Muslim reformers called for a rereading of the Quran using new methods, emphasizing that this could only be done based on a new understanding of the text. They were all united by the fact that they understood the Quran not as the word of God in the sense of an eternal word of God, but as having been created by God in its linguistic form in time and in human language. The Prophet proclaimed the Quran orally to his contemporaries over a period of approximately 23 years, with the Prophet’s environment, i.e., the cultural, historical, and linguistic surroundings, as well as the experiences of the Prophet and his contemporaries, being both constitutive for the creation of the text and reflected within it. According to Quran scholar Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid, the revelation thus takes on a dialogical and communicative character.

He applies to the Quran the concepts from communication theory of “sender” and “receiver”, and of a “code” required between them to transmit a “message”, because his point is that, since the receiver must be able to decode the message, God uses the linguistic code of the first addressee. However, these communication codes are not fixed entities, but change with people. For this reason, it is the task of all Muslims to preserve the core of the message by translating what God spoke in the 7th century from its original code into the language and perspective of each subsequent time. Abu Zaid believes that this is the only way to ensure that the Quran and its meanings can be translated into statements that are appropriate for today (Abu Zaid 2009, pp. 122–59). This perspective is particularly relevant regarding the androcentric language of the Quran, since this is therefore also bound to and determined by the historical context. However, it is important not simply to dismiss the Quran as an androcentric text, but to analyze each case in detail. For example, there are verses that are androcentric, but Arabic grammar makes it difficult to exclude women directly, especially in the masculine plural, as this can also include women. In turn, there are verses that address people collectively, without distinguishing gender. There are also gender-neutral verses, verses that explicitly address both genders, verses that speak about women, and, finally, verses that directly address men but also discuss matters that concern women. Thus, the Quran is androcentric, and at the same time it is not; sometimes it appears androcentric, but it does not necessarily have to be viewed that way, as we will see below.

Angelika Neuwirth’s approach can also be adopted at this point, as she not only picks up on Abu Zaid’s reflections, but also expands on them by emphasizing that the Quran testifies to a community formation and must therefore be read chronologically, as this is the only way to bring out the text’s processual nature (Neuwirth 2010).

This means two things for the methods of interpretation. First, that we must read the Quran using both a historical and a literary approach. Second, that we can take up the ideas of Amina Wadud, who argues that the trajectory of the Quran with regard to gender roles moves in the direction of equality, which in turn explains why the Quran already implemented some reforms and only initiated others (Wadud 2004, p. 334). The fact that the Quran is bound to external circumstances means that the equality inherent in the Quran only ever had as much room to develop as the circumstances at the time allowed. Applied to the text, this also means that we could expect the Quran to have a clear stance regarding the establishment of mercy and thus also equality, while at the same time mirroring the historical, socio-cultural circumstances and language of the period, i.e., the patriarchal structures of society at the time, which could not always allow this mercy or equality to develop fully.

In concrete terms, this means that the wording of the text is not to be regarded as absolutely equitable or merciful; rather, attention must be paid to the trajectory mentioned by Wadud. For this, exegesis can explore where socio-cultural and historical circumstances allowed equality to develop fully and where it did not yet, and how a constant exegesis that is linked to the reality of people’s lives can continue the processes initiated by the Quran. The interpretation of the Quran can therefore discover ever deeper dimensions of mercy and equality, making interpretation an open process since the understanding of the text can never be deemed complete.

I will now show from an Islamic theological view how exactly this methodology can be used in dealing with intertexts by using the example of a Quranic story that has its precursors in the Hebrew Bible and apocryphal texts, thereby illustrating especially the relationship between Jewish intertexts and the Quran. I am particularly interested in a gender-sensitive perspective with regard to the gender roles of the Queen of Sheba and King Solomon in the Quran in the light of the Targum Sheni.

3. Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (Q 27:22-44)

The Queen of Sheba is a figure whose origins can be traced to the south of the Arabian Peninsula in the Hebrew Bible, specifically in I Kings 10:1. She is associated with the tribe of the Sabaeans, which itself can be traced back in texts to the 1st century BCE. The story of the meeting between King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba in Sura 27 is one of the stories told in the Quran that can be seen as fully rounded. It is placed in the late Middle Meccan period, i.e., in the last phase before the Prophet and his companions emigrated to Medina in 622. In Sura 27, the story is part of a series of prophetic stories that are followed by two more legends of punishment of peoples who refused to obey God and were therefore doomed to destruction. Nevertheless, it stands out from the other stories due to its fantastic narrative elements and is at the center of the Sura. Its link to earlier texts from late antiquity is particularly interesting and will be the focus of my analysis.

The story of the Queen of Sheba has already been treated in different ways regarding interreligious perspectives, especially comparing Jewish and Muslim perspectives on the story. With the perspective on gender roles, there are a few texts focusing very often on the negative reception of the Queen of Sheba regarding her hairy legs or her demon being (Rees 2022; Stinchcomb 2022). An analysis from an Islamic-theological perspective with the goal of reaching a gender-sensitive reading of the Quranic story in comparison to its possible intertexts is still missing. That is why, in my analysis, I will especially focus on the Quranic story of the Queen of Sheba and how the Quran plays with gender roles, picking out three topics of the story, as a full analysis would take up too much space, which is not given in the format of an article. This example is used here for showing how the abovementioned interreligious hermeneutics are working regarding a gender-sensitive reading of the Quran. I will not refer to gender roles in the later reception of the story, such as in Qur`anic exegesis or Qiṣaṣ literature, nor to the debate of women and leadership in Islam, as these are other topics that are treated in other contexts (Jeenah 2004; Lala 2022).

3.1. Presentation of the Texts

The nucleus of the Quranic story seems to lie in the First Book of Kings 10:1-13, but the story is much more similar to its haggadic development in Jewish midrash literature, in which Neuwirth depicted Solomon and the Queen of Sheba in late antiquity (Neuwirth 2021, p. 537). This reveals very special links between the Quran and an apocryphal writing, the Aramaic Targum Sheni on Esther, the date of which is disputed, but, according to Neuwirth, can certainly be seen as a precursor to the Quran in terms of content (Ibid.).

It is also noticeable that it contains elements that can also be found in some early classical works of Quranic exegesis, which also suggests that the Targum Sheni predates the Quran (Azouaghe, unpublished). Furthermore, while the Quran does indeed take up narrative traditions from the apocryphal text, the former (as Neuwirth states) “turns the entertainingly sensational details [...] into theologically relevant statements” and dispenses with “details that discredit prophets” (Neuwirth 2021, p. 537). Before embarking on a concrete analysis, I will compare the texts with regard to their respective storylines:

Targum Sheni

Quran

The king’s scribes called them by name, and all of them came forth without compulsion, without being led by anyone. Only one was missing, the capercaillie; they searched for him among those present but could not find him. Then the king commanded that he be brought and was so enraged with him that he intended to punish him. But the capercaillie said, “Hear me, my lord, King of the World! Let my word reach your ear and listen! Behold, for three months, since I devised a plan in my heart, I have neither eaten food nor drunk water. For as I fly around the world and look to see if there is any land or kingdom that does not yet obey my lord, I perceived a great city, Kitor is its name, in a land of the east, where the dust, more precious than silver and gold, lies like manure on the streets; trees as old as the world are there, nourished by the waters from the Garden of Eden. Crowds adorned with garlands that come from Eden are seen gathered there. They do not know how to wage war; but indeed, I have seen a woman there who rules overall and is called Queen of Sheba. If it pleases you, O King, I will gird my loins like a hero, go to the land of Sheba, bind their princes in chains, their heroes in iron fetters, and bring them to my lord and king.” [...] This pleased the king, and his scribes were called to draft a letter, which was tied to the wing of the capercaillie. He then rose into the air and flew away, and wherever he encountered flocks of birds, they followed him.

20. Then he inspected the birds, and said, “Why do I not see the hoopoe? Or is he among the absentees? 21. I will punish him most severely, or slay him, unless he gives me a valid excuse.” 22. But he did not stay for long. He said, “I have learnt something you did not know. I have come to you from Sheba, with reliable information. 23. I found a woman ruling over them, and she was given of everything, and she has a magnificent throne. 24. I found her and her people worshiping the sun, instead of God. Satan made their conduct appear good to them, and diverted them from the path, so they are not guided. 25. If only they would worship God, who brings to light the mysteries of the heavens and the earth and knows what you conceal and what you reveal. 26. God—There is no god but He, the Lord of the Sublime Throne.” 27. He said, “We will see, whether you have spoken the truth, or whether you are a liar. 28. Go with this letter of mine and deliver it to them; then withdraw from them and see how they respond.”.

The story is very similar in both passages. The initial situation is the absence of a bird when Solomon summons all his animals. He is very angry and wants to punish the bird for its absence. But the bird tells him about its discovery: the kingdom of the Queen of Sheba. It does so much more extensively and ornately in the Targum than in the Quran, which generally dispenses with excessive narrative elements and instead foregrounds the moral and ethical message. In the Targum, the bird only mentions the queen at the very end of its ramblings, when it makes the exuberant offer to subjugate her.

The Quran, on the other hand, places her directly at the center of the narrative, making it clear that the issue concerns her submission not to Solomon, but to God, with the hoopoe thus making a short speech in praise of God. Both storylines then end with the bird sending the letter, with the scene then shifting to the queen’s realm:

Targum Sheni

Quran

At dawn, he arrived in Kitor, in the land of Sheba; just as the Queen of Sheba had stepped outside to greet the new day, flocks of birds darkened the sky. The frightened queen seized her garment and tore it in distress. As she stood there, still terrified, the capercaillie landed before her, and she noticed the letter tied to its wing. She opened it and read the following: “From me, King Solomon, peace to you, peace to your nobles! You should know that the Holy One, blessed be He, has appointed me as ruler over the beasts of the forest, the birds of the sky, demons, spirits, and Liliths; and all the kings of the East and West, the North and South, come to greet me. If you also come to greet me, I will honor you more than all the kings who are my guests. But if you do not come to greet me, I will send against you commanders, legions, and riders. And if you ask: ‘What commanders, legions, and riders does King Solomon have?’ Know this: The beasts of the forest are my commanders, the birds of the sky are my riders, the spirits, demons, and Liliths are my legions, who will strangle you in your beds; the beasts of the forest will kill you in the field, and the birds of the sky will consume your flesh.” When the Queen of Sheba had read the contents of the letter, she again tore her garment and summoned the elders and nobles of the kingdom. She said to them, “Do you not know what message King Solomon has sent to me?” They replied, “We do not know King Solomon and do not heed his rule.” But she disregarded their words and summoned all the sailors, to whom she gave rings, pearls, and precious stones to load for King Solomon. She sent six thousand boys and girls, all born in the same year, month, day, and hour, of the same height and stature; all were dressed in purple garments. Through them, she sent the following letter to King Solomon: “From the city of Kitor, in the land seven years’ journey from Israel, I will come to you after three years to ask you questions.”

29. She said, “O Counselors, a gracious letter was delivered to me. 30. It is from Solomon, and it is, ‘In the Name of God, the Gracious, the Merciful. 31. Do not defy me and come to me submissively.’” 32. She said, “O counselors, advise me in this matter of mine. I never make a decision unless you are present.” 33. They said, “We are a people of might and great courage, but the decision is yours, so consider what you wish to command.” 34. She said, “When kings enter a city, they devastate it, and subjugate its dignified people. Thus, they always do. 35. I am sending them a gift and will see what the envoys bring back.”.

As in the previous storyline, there are some similarities between the two texts. The queen receives Solomon’s letter and consults with her elders. To avoid a military confrontation with Solomon, she decides against their advice and sends him a gift instead. While Solomon’s letter in the Targum is very detailed, the Quran is content with two short sentences. The introductory formula of the letter with the basmala2 is particularly striking, as it is the first mention of this formula in a story. However, the two texts diverge towards the end of this storyline, as the Queen of Sheba intervenes directly in the Targum, but not in the Quran.

This is why there is an interlude at this point in verses 36–41 of the Quran: Solomon’s anger at the gift and a renewed threat of violence. However, he then decides to remove her from the throne and force her to come to his kingdom. At the same time, he wants to test her orthodoxy. This is where the two storylines meet again:

Targum Sheni

Quran

After three years had passed, the Queen of Sheba came to King Solomon. When the king heard that she was coming, he sent Benaiah, son of Jehoiada to meet her, who was as beautiful as the dawn, resembling the star Venus that shines among the stars, like a rose by a water pool. When the Queen of Sheba saw Benaiah, she alighted from her carriage. Upon his question as to why she did this, she said, “Are you not King Solomon?” He replied, “I am not King Solomon; I am but one of the servants who stand before him.” Immediately, she turned to her nobles with the parable: “You do not see the lion, you see its claw; you do not see King Solomon, you see the handsome man who stands serving before him.” Benaiah then led her to the king. When the king heard that the Queen of Sheba was near, he took his seat in his glass hall. The queen, thinking that Solomon’s throne stood in the midst of water, lifted her garments so they would not get wet, at which point the king noticed that her legs were hairy. Then the king said, “You are beautiful like a woman, but your hair is like that of a man; for a man, such is beautiful, but for a woman, it is unsightly.” She replied, “My lord and king! I will pose three riddles to you; if you solve them, I will recognize that you are a wise man, but if not, you are like any other man.” She then asked, “A well made of wood, an iron bucket, it draws stone and brings forth water?” He answered, “The kohl container.” Then she asked further, “Dust that comes from the earth, its food is dust from the earth, it was poured out like water and illuminates the house! What is that?” He answered, “Naphtha.” Then she posed a riddle darker than the others: “It cries out loud and bitterly, its head is like a reed, an ornament for the dead, a shame for the living, delight for birds, destruction for fish?” He answered, “That is hemp. ”Then she said, “I did not believe the reports until I came here and saw it with my own eyes. Not even half of your great wisdom was told to me. Blessed are your men, blessed are these your servants!” He then led her into his royal palace, and when she saw its greatness and splendour, she praised his Creator and said, “Blessed be the Eternal, your God, who has delighted in you, setting you on the throne of the king to perform goodness and justice.” She gifted the king with gold and fine silver, and the king gave her whatever she desired. And when the kings of the East and West, North and South heard of his fame, they trembled and came from their lands with precious treasures of gold and silver and gemstones and pearls. (...)

42. When she arrived, it was said, “Is your throne like this?” She said, “As if this is it.” “We were given knowledge before her, and we were submissive.” 43. But she was prevented by what she worshiped besides God; she belonged to a disbelieving people. 44. It was said to her, “Go inside the palace.” And when she saw it, she thought it was a deep pond, and she bared her legs. He said, “It is a palace paved with glass.” She said, “My Lord, I have done wrong to myself, and I have submitted with Solomon, to God, Lord of the Worlds.”

Both storylines are about testing the queen, but in the Targum, this is done by Benajahu bar Jehojada; the sequence of the glass palace only has a humiliating function here (which I will discuss further below). Nevertheless, both here and in the Quran, she experiences (dis)enchantment, with this occurring in the Quran both on the throne and in the glass palace. Both texts also differ regarding the motif of the queen’s presence in Solomon’s kingdom, because the Targum is not concerned with the testing of the queen as to her orthodoxy (which Solomon undertakes with his deception regarding the throne) but about her own active testing of Solomon’s person, which ultimately convinces her to follow Solomon and his God. The story therefore also ends with a monotheistic confession.

3.2. Consideration of the Figure of the Queen of Sheba in the Quran Against the Background of the Targum Sheni

Since, for reasons of space, I cannot carry out a complete analysis of the story here, I will focus on three aspects that illustrate the Quran’s special treatment of the figure of the Queen of Sheba in the light of the Targum Sheni.

3.2.1. Threat of War

In the Quranic story, the threat of war hovers over the entire storyline and thus over the meeting between King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (Bechmann 2021, p. 517; Neuwirth 2021, p. 540). With regard to the former, the threatening scenario is built up even before the Sheba narrative, since he summons his hosts of jinn, birds, and men, lined up in rank and file (vv. 16–17), and marches with them into the Valley of the Ants (v. 18).3

The ants have the same fear of Solomon as the Queen of Sheba will have later: vulnerable bystanders will be harmed in an attack. The difference in the two stories, however, is that Solomon reacts with empathy to the ants’ concern and shows leniency with his smile (v. 19) (Neuwirth 2021, p. 540).

This is not the case with the Queen of Sheba, since he is on an equal footing with her and wants to gain the upper hand. The threatening element also remains in the rest of the storyline, as Solomon notices when he inspects the flock of birds that the hoopoe is missing, and he wants to punish and even kill it (vv. 20–21). The letter that he then sends to the queen is a clear demand for submission, and the queen indeed finds it threatening (v. 34).

The reaction of the male counselors to this threat is also to respond with violence, and they therefore argue for war and point to the might of the army (v. 33). Even their gift cannot calm the situation, as Solomon sees it as an affront and now openly threatens destruction by his army (v. 36).

This concentrated force of threats and violence is now confronted by the Queen of Sheba. She is Solomon’s adversary, and the Quran portrays her in this context as a reflective and empathetic ruler. Faced with the threatening situation, she does not adopt a combative stance in this role; instead, she contradicts her advisors, something that she herself says she has never done before, pointing out that the invasion of a kingdom by kings would plunge the kingdom into disaster. Especially given the historical context, this rejection of the council of elders and thus of violence clearly shows emancipatory traits that cannot necessarily be expected in the patriarchal environment of the Prophet. This is what makes the role of the Queen of Sheba in the Quran so special and is also clearly reflected in her subsequent actions. In response to Solomon’s letter, she decides to take a different, diplomatic path, initially avoiding direct confrontation as well as Solomon’s demand for submission: she sends him gifts. Whether she, as Solomon thinks, has bribery in mind remains open, however (Bechmann 2021, p. 518). Through her actions, she initially manages to avoid a violent confrontation, since, after reacting angrily to begin with, Solomon refrains from using violence against the queen and decides to subject her to a test that brings her into his kingdom.

The Quran thus contrasts the queen’s level-headed behavior with Solomon’s initially rather impulsive actions. He seems to be offended by the queen’s gift at first, and only then gains control over his emotions and chooses a more considered and less violent way of meeting the queen. According to Ulrike Bechmann, who in turn refers to Angelika Neuwirth, we cannot help but notice one thing if we place these two different patterns of behavior in the context of the ancient Arab modes of behavior that shaped the historical context: namely, that it is not the typical characteristics and motifs of pre-Islamic poetry (e.g., warlike conflicts, the courage to die, the urge to destroy) that yield the solution here, but rather the prudence of the queen that helps prevent a violent invasion of her kingdom (Ibid.). In this way, the Quran breaks with the possible expectations of its first addressees. This break is also supported by the fact that it is not the strong jinn who brings the throne to Solomon, but the one who possesses the knowledge of scripture. Here, too, then, knowledge/wisdom is contrasted with, and ultimately favored over, the brutality of strength (Ibid.).

If we now look at the relationship between the Quran and the story in the Targum, it becomes clear that the underlying scenario is the same in both texts, but the Targum gives much greater emphasis to Solomon in his role as the threatening man, and much greater emphasis to the Queen of Sheba in her role as the intimidated woman. This can be seen on the one hand in the description of the delivery of the letter, which is presented in the Targum in a much more threatening and terrifying way than in the Quran, as well as in the content of the letter, which appears longer and more intimidating, and on the other in the reaction of the queen herself, who tears her dress twice in fright, thus appearing in the Targum as an overly emotional, almost hysterical woman. Despite this initial shock, she also acts diplomatically in the Targum against the instructions of her male advisors and sends goods as gifts to King Solomon. The Quran thus takes up this aspect of prudence, but softens both characters, in particular lending her more dignity and grandeur by omitting the narrative elements that depict her fright too emotionally and that thus reinforce stereotypes. Given this new emphasis, we can clearly trace a further development of the narrative design, one that appears innovative for the time, especially regarding gender roles.

3.2.2. The Queen of Sheba Is Placed on an Equal Footing with King Solomon Under the Rule of God

The Queen of Sheba does not have her say at the very beginning of the story; instead, it is the hoopoe who meets Solomon’s anger by telling him about two (as Neuwirth puts it) supposed scandals. In doing so, however, the hoopoe places the queen directly at the center of the story, which is contrary to the storyline in the Targum, which initially describes the kingdom in detail (Neuwirth 2021, p. 542). According to the hoopoe, there is a woman in free Sheba who rules over her people, the description of this queen that the hoopoe chooses corresponding here to that of King Solomon himself: “Of all things she was given”, because, according to verse 16, Solomon was also “given of all things”. In addition, just like the king, she has a magnificent throne (Arabic: ͑arš ͑aẓīm), which also characterizes her like Solomon. This is described both in the Bible (Ibid., p. 541; 1 Kings 10:18-20). and in the Targum in a very pompous manner, while in the Quran it remains with the aforementioned designation (Neuwirth 2021, pp. 541–43).

Although, in the case of Solomon, the throne is only named kursī in Q38:34 (more on this below). Here, then, two rulers are initially on an equal footing.

The second scandal, however, shows the difference between the two: the hoopoe accuses her and her people of worshipping the sun instead of God, but only because the devil had made them believe that doing so was good (“Satan beguiled them with their works and kept them from the way” (v. 24)).

This formulation is surprising given the otherwise very harsh condemnation of any form of worship of God, as well as the proclamation of monotheism, since the Quran does not accuse them of any malice at this point; rather, they are victims of deception (this (dis)enchantment will be discussed in more detail below).

But let us now return to the role of the throne, which the hoopoe describes very emphatically with a term that is only used in the Quran for the throne of God: magnificent throne (Arabic: ͑arš ͑aẓīm). So why is this name chosen for the queen’s throne? On the one hand, this could be interpreted as a special honor for the Queen of Sheba and especially so regarding King Solomon, whose throne is not described in such terms. On the other hand, it could also have something to do with the role of the throne in the further course of the story and its related outcome: namely, the recognition of God. Solomon first has the queen’s throne brought to him and rendered unrecognizable. When she then comes to him, he wants to test her “right guidance” and confronts her with the riddle of whether the throne that is with him is hers. Unlike the Targum, the Quran at this point in the narrative does not take up her active role as Solomon’s challenger, as someone who presents him with riddles that he must solve; rather, she is now the one being tested. However, as when she receives the letter, she does not react in the expected way by choosing one of the two obvious solutions. She chooses neither yes, which would lay claim to the throne, nor no, which would negate her power and position. Rather, she chooses a third way here, too, by leaving the answer open: “As if it were it!” (Bechmann 2021, p. 514). Now that this path of (dis)enchantment has not worked, the Quran once again takes up the accusation that the queen and her people are following a deception by worshipping something other than God and are therefore among those who deny God.

A second attempt at (dis)enchantment is therefore required, which then leads to the queen’s final recognition of God. When she sees the palace and wants to enter, she mistakes the floor for water and lifts her clothes so high that both her legs are visible. Solomon then tells her that it is only glass, and she realizes that the spectacle has deceived her. Overwhelmed by this, she recognizes God as the only sovereignty. The exposure of her legs can be interpreted in this context as symbolizing this recognition. A parallel can also be drawn to the story of the first human couple in paradise, Adam and his partner (Arabic: zawǧ), since here, too, the exposure of nakedness after the fall into sin, the eating of the forbidden fruit, symbolizes knowledge.

If we now link this ending to the earlier naming of the throne, then the outcome of the story is given a special emphasis, since, after her answer to Solomon’s question, Sheba no longer claims the throne for herself, and nor does Solomon claim the throne to emphasize his triumph over her, as ultimately it is not his intention to subjugate her to him. Rather, renouncing the throne at this point means recognizing the true ruler, i.e., God, whose due alone is to sit on a great throne (Arabic: ͑arš ͑aẓīm). The Queen of Sheba and King Solomon are now united under this throne as equals (Ibid.). In the Targum, it is neither the throne nor her experience with the reflection that provides the insight, but her questions to Solomon. It is particularly in relation to the latter that the new shade of meaning in the Quran becomes especially interesting. It is to this third aspect that I will now turn.

3.2.3. The Quran Does Not Take Up Misogynistic Connotations in Relation to the Queen of Sheba

There is no question that the idea of monotheism runs like a backbone through the Quranic story of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, which also ends with the recognition of this idea. What seems particularly exciting here from an interreligious perspective is that the Quran portrays the figure of the queen as being so special and exemplary even before she embraces monotheism that she is also a role model as a non-monotheist. The Quran did not have to give her this positive connotation, which is developed even further in the Quran than in the Targum; it could have kept its focus on the conversion story or dealt with her character in the harsh manner of the punitive legends found in the Quran, especially as the Bible provides only a faint outline of her character. It would also have been possible to portray her much more negatively as an unbeliever—for example, in the Testament of Solomon, an apocryphal writing from the 4th century, she is portrayed as a witch or demon (Neuwirth 2021, p. 548). However, the Quran does not do this. Instead, it gives the portrayal of her personality greater scope for development than in the Hebrew Bible; it takes up positive elements from the Targum; and not only does it ignore misogynistic elements in relation to her person but gives them a positive connotation. This can be seen in the Targum’s description of her hairy legs becoming visible and in Solomon’s negative reaction to this.

In the Targum, this scene not only seems completely out of place within the overall structure of the narrative and its appearance seems abrupt; it also has the sole function of exposing her in a burlesque manner (Neuwirth 2021, p. 550).

The Quran does not leave it at that but takes up the scene without the misogynistic elements and gives it a different connotation, so that the scene is afforded a very special role: it shows the recognition of God through (dis)enchantment, symbolized by the exposure of her legs. This scene not only takes on a purpose now; it is also no longer humiliating.

4. Conclusions

The portrayal of the Queen of Sheba certainly makes her a special female character in the Quran. Not only does she break with the stereotypical expectations of the society of the Prophet and his contemporaries; she can also be described as a role model for them.

Not only does she play the role of a clever and diplomatic woman; she is also one of the few women in the Quran whose speech is directly quoted, i.e., she has her say directly in the Quran. Thus, despite the initial premise that she belonged to a belief system that is not monotheistic, her word is immortalized in the Quran. The comparison with the Targum in particular, but also the structure of the story within the Quran, has clearly shown that the new depiction of her person once again shook up existing gender roles in society at the time.

This leads to a further concluding idea: this article has also shown that the Quranic perspective on religious diversity can be approached in terms not only of how the Quran relates to other religious denominations, but also of how it shows its openness towards other religious traditions and denominations by taking up their traditions or even using people from these traditions as figures of identification or viewing them positively. This idea is also important in the context of interreligious hermeneutics.