In a recent essay, I discussed an interpretation of Moses that is not found at all in Judaism or Christianity. In both of those faiths, he is the giver of law and the leader of a national community. He is unable of doing wrong: his people fail, as when they create the golden calf, as do his siblings, but he upholds God’s will to the greatest extent possible.
I like the story of al-Khiḍr because Moses acts in ways that are profoundly familiar to us. He is the voice of justice in a situation that seems remarkably unjust. How could al-Khidr get away with sinking a boat and killing a young boy? These are atrocities to us as much as they are to Moses. Should an al-Khiḍr come to us today, I think that I would respond in exactly the same way that Moses did.
I suspect that the story isn’t meant to be taken literally. In the Qurʿan, the story has an oneiric atmosphere: Moses and Joshua visit the place where “the two seas meet,” they lose their fish, and there is a now a spiritual figure where the fish were lost. Did the fish themselves become the teacher, or did a substitution take place, or did it occur by chance?
Moreover, the jump from one anecdote to the next–sinking the boat, killing the boy, repairing the wall–they occur without transition, just as any strange dream might.
What does that tell us about the story? Frankly, I’m not quite sure, but it is my single favorite story in the Qurʿan.
