/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Which son was to be sacrificed?



tresbien
12-25-2006, 09:12 PM
Question:
I understand that Prophet Ibrahim (pbuh)intended to sacrifice his son, Prophet Ishmail (pbuh), according to Muslim belief. However, a non-Muslim that I had a discussion with pointed out that this is not mentioned in the Quran. Upon investigating this matter, it seems that the Quran is ambiguous as to which son is intended to be sacrificed (as least in my English translation) (surah 37). Please explain the Muslim position on Prophet Ibrahim and the sacrifice, using textual evidence.
jazakallah khairun

Answer:

Praise be to Allaah.

Allaah says of His slave and Close Friend (Khaleel) Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) (interpretation of the meaning):

“99. And he said (after his rescue from the fire): “Verily, I am going to my Lord. He will guide me!”

100. “My Lord! Grant me (offspring) from the righteous.”

101. So We gave him the glad tidings of a forbearing boy.

102. And, when he (his son) was old enough to walk with him, he said: “O my son! I have seen in a dream that I am slaughtering you (offering you in sacrifice to Allaah). So look what you think!” He said: “O my father! Do that which you are commanded, In shaa’ Allaah (if Allaah wills), you shall find me of As-Saabiroon (the patient).”

103. Then, when they had both submitted themselves (to the Will of Allaah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (or on the side of his forehead for slaughtering);

104. We called out to him: “O Ibraaheem!

105. You have fulfilled the dream!” Verily, thus do We reward the Muhsinoon (good-doers).

106. Verily, that indeed was a manifest trial.

107. And We ransomed him with a great sacrifice (i.e. a ram);

108. And We left for him (a goodly remembrance) among the later generations.

109. “Salaam (peace) be upon Ibraaheem!”

110. Thus indeed do We reward the Muhsinoon (good-doers).

111. Verily, he was one of Our believing slaves.

112. And We gave him the glad tidings of Ishaaq (Isaac) ¾ a Prophet from the righteous.

113. We blessed him and Ishaaq (Isaac). And of their progeny are (some) that do right, and some that plainly wrong themselves.” [al-Saaffaat 37:99-113)

Ibn Katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Allaah tells us that when His Close Friend (Khaleel) Ibraaheem migrated from the land of his people, he asked his Lord to grant him a righteous son, so Allaah gave him the glad tidings of a forbearing boy. This was Ismaa’eel (peace be upon him), because he was the first child who was born (to Ibraaheem, peace be upon him). There is no dispute on this point among the followers of the various religions [Jews, Christians and Muslims], that (Ismaa’eel) was the first child born to Ibraaheem.

“And, when he (his son) was old enough to walk with him” means, when he grew up and was able to take care of himself, like his father. Mujaahid said: “And, when he (his son) was old enough to walk with him” means, when he grew up and was able to ride and walk and work like his father did. When this happened, then Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) saw a dream in which he was commanded to sacrifice this son of his. According to a hadeeth narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas and attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “The dreams of the Prophets are Wahy (revelation).” So Allaah was testing His Close Friend by commanding him to sacrifice this beloved son who had come to him in his old age, when he was very old, and after he had been commanded to settle the child and his mother in the desert, in a valley in which there was no noise, no people, no vegetation and no animals. So Ibraaheem obeyed the command of Allaah and left them there, putting his trust in Allaah, and Allaah sent them provision, from an unexpected source. After all that, when Ibraaheem was ordered to sacrifice this son of his, who was his firstborn and his only child, he responded to his Lord and obeyed His command, hastening to do as He willed. So he told his son about it so as to put him at ease and not sacrifice him by force.

“He said: ‘O my son! I have seen in a dream that I am slaughtering you (offering you in sacrifice to Allaah). So look what you think!’” The forbearing boy immediately responded: “He said: ‘O my father! Do that which you are commanded, In shaa’ Allaah (if Allaah wills), you shall find me of As-Saabiroon (the patient).’” This was the best answer he could give, an example of obedience to his father and to the Lord of mankind. Allaah said (interpretation of the meaning):

“Then, when they had both submitted themselves (to the Will of Allaah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (or on the side of his forehead for slaughtering).” It was said that “when they had both submitted themselves” meant when they had both surrendered to the command of Allaah. “and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead” means that he put him face down. It was said that he wanted to slaughter him from behind so that he would not see his face at the time of slaughter. This was the view of Ibn ‘Abbaas, Mujaahid, Sa’eed ibn Jubayr, Qutaadah and al-Dahhaak… “They both submitted themselves” means that Ibraaheem said Bismillaahi’r-Rahmaan ir-Raheem and said Allaahu akbar and the boy said La ilaaha ill-Allaah because he was about to die. Al-Saddi and others said that (Ibraaheem) passed the knife over the boy’s throat but it did not cut him at all. It was said that a sheet of copper was placed between the knife and his throat, and Allaah knows best. Then it was called out from Allaah:

“’O Ibraaheem! You have fulfilled the dream!’” meaning, the purpose has been achieved, you have been tested and your obedience and willingness to do what your Lord commands have been proven. An alternative sacrifice will be provided instead of your son, just as you willingly submitted your body to the flames and you spent your wealth to honour your guests. Hence Allaah said:

“Verily, that indeed was a manifest trial” meaning that it was an obvious test.

“And We ransomed him with a great sacrifice” means, We provided a ransom for his son, an alternative to be sacrificed in his stead. According to the best known opinion of the majority of scholars, this was a fine white horned ram. Al-Thawri narrated from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Uthmaan ibn Khaytham from Sa’eed ibn Jubayr that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: It was a ram that had grazed in Paradise for forty years.

It was also narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas that the dried ram’s head was still hanging on the downspout of the Ka’bah. This alone is evidence that the one who was to be sacrificed was Ismaa’eel, because he was the one who was settled in Makkah and we have never heard that Ishaaq ever came to Makkah from the time he was little. And Allaah knows best.

See Al-Bidaayah wa’l-Nihaayah by Ibn Katheer, 1/157-158

The one who was to be sacrificed was Ismaa’eel and not Ishaaq, because of the reasons stated above. In his Tafseer (commentary) on these Ayaat, Ibn Katheer also mentioned a number of points which prove that it was Ismaa’eel who was to be sacrificed. These points may be summed up as follows:

Ismaa’eel was the first child of whom glad tidings were given to Ibraaheem. He was older than Ishaaq according to the consensus of the Muslims and the People of the Book (Jews and Christians). According to the scriptures of the People of the Book, it was stated that Allaah commanded Ibraaheem to sacrifice his only son, and in some manuscripts it says that he was to sacrifice his first-born son.

The first son is usually more dear than other children, so the command to sacrifice him is a more exacting test.

It is mentioned that glad tidings of a forbearing boy were given, and that he was the one who was to be sacrificed. Later in the passage it says (interpretation of the meaning): “And We gave him the glad tidings of Ishaaq (Isaac) ¾ a Prophet from the righteous.” When the angels brought the glad tidings of Ishaaq to Ibraaheem, they said: “We give you glad tidings of a boy (son) possessing much knowledge and wisdom” [al-Hijr 15:53 – interpretation of the meaning].

Allâh said (interpretation of the meaning): “But We gave her glad tidings of Ishaaq, and after him, of Ya’qoob.” (Hood 11:71) meaning that a child called Ya’qoob would be born during their (Sara and Ishaaq’s) lifetimes, and he would have many descendents… and it does not sound right for Ibraaheem to be commanded to sacrifice him when he was little, because Allaah had promised that he would have many descendents.

Ismaa’eel is described here (in Soorat al-Saffaat) as being “forbearing” because this is very appropriate in this context


Ishaaq to Ibraaheem, they said: “We give you glad tidings of a boy (son) possessing much knowledge and wisdom” [al-Hijr 15:53 – interpretation of the meaning].

Allâh said (interpretation of the meaning): “But We gave her glad tidings of Ishaaq, and after him, of Ya’qoob.” (Hood 11:71) meaning that a child called Ya’qoob would be born during their (Sara and Ishaaq’s) lifetimes, and he would have many descendents… and it does not sound right for Ibraaheem to be commanded to sacrifice him when he was little, because Allaah had promised that he would have many descendents.

Ismaa’eel is described here (in Soorat al-Saffaat) as being “forbearing” because this is very appropriate in this context
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Malaikah
12-26-2006, 01:22 AM
Interesting. Do you have a source for this please? I know that the Christians (and Jews too?) believe it was Ishaaq who was to be sacrificed.
Reply

- Qatada -
12-26-2006, 12:59 PM
:salamext:


Try referring to these posts regarding the issue:


http://www.islamicboard.com/8336-post11.html

http://www.islamicboard.com/10079-post14.html

http://www.islamicboard.com/12447-post24.html


http://www.islamicboard.com/14197-post37.html

http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...-bible-3.html?
Reply

tresbien
12-26-2006, 02:57 PM
Assalamu-alaikum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu:

It is well known to Muslims, Christians and Jews that Abraham(P) was ordered to sacrifice his son and he was willing to do so but God gave him a sheep to sacrifice instead of his cherished progeny. So far, everybody agrees. However, Jews and Christians say that the sacrificed was Isaac(P) -"Abraham's only son", whereas according to the Islamic tradition the sacrificed is Ishmael(P). The opposition between the two versions has not bothered any side that much because in the common mind "what we think is certainly right and those who think differently are necessarily wrong". Recently, we came across an article by the Christian missionaries claiming that according to the Islamic sources themselves the sacrificed was Isaac(P) (i.e., the Judeo-Christian version of the story). In the following article, the reader will get the fruits of our research about this matter.

The most relevant passage in the Qur'ân is from verse 37:99 to verse 37:109, a passage including two different glad tidings brought to Abraham(P). Here under, we quote the verses concerning the sacrificed:





99. He said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me
100. "O my Lord! Grant me a righteous (son)!"
101. So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son.
102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!"
103. So when they had both submitted (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),
104. We called out to him "O Abraham! ...
105. "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" - thus indeed do We reward those who do right.

A Strange Logic

The first argument put forward by those who support the Isaac-theory is that, in the Qur'ân, the name associated to glad tidings is Isaac(P) while Ishmael's(P) name was never associated to good news or glad tidings. They quote verse 37:112

"And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a Prophet - one of the righteous."

and verse 51:28

"They said, "Fear not," and they gave him glad tidings of a son endowed with knowledge."

Some points have to be made clear in this concern:

It is well known that Abraham(P) got his first child in his old days (more than 80 years old). By all means, when he was given the news of his first son, Ishmael(P), the news were great and not only good. It seems reasonable to think that the news of having his second son, Isaac(P) would be equal or less because in the first time the surprise factor has certainly increased his happiness.

More to the point, using the same argument as the opposition, one can safely say that the sacrificed was described as forbearing and steadfast in the Qur'ân and if we search the whole Qur'ân we will find the name of Ishmael(P) associated to patience and steadfastness and not Isaac(P)!

Indeed verse 21:85 (in red in the picture below) reads
"And (remember) Ishmael, Idris, and Zulkifl, all (men) of constancy and patience".

Conclusion: The sacrificed is Ishmael(P) according to the opponent's own logic.



Further scrutiny requires that we quote the full passage in surah 37:

99. He said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me!
100. "O my Lord! Grant me a righteous (son)!"
101. So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son.
102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!"
103. So when they had both submitted (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),
104. We called out to him "O Abraham! ...
105. "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" - thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
106. For this was a clear trial-
107. And We ransomed him with a momentous sacrifice:
108. And We left for him among generations (to come) in later times:
109. "Peace and salutation to Abraham!"
110. Thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
111. For he was one of Our believing Servants.

112. And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous.
113. We blessed him and Isaac: but of their progeny are (some) that do right, and (some) that obviously do wrong, to themselves.

It is very obvious that, in this passage, there are two distinct good news, the first one about a forbearing son (the one to be sacrificed) and the second one about Isaac(P). Thus, the sacrificed cannot be Isaac(P) at least not according to the Qur'ân. But, once again, the opponent avoided (willingly?) to quote the full passage and this is frequently their way of doing things. Moreover, those who support that the two news are actually the same show their incompetence with the Qur'ânic style. Such a repetition cannot be imagined nor accepted by anyone who studied the Qur'ân, God's Final Book.

The Opinion Of Ibn Kathîr[1]



The above scan is the exegesis of verse 37:101 "So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son". Here is the translation of the above passage:

"So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son."

And this son is Ishmael(P) for he is the first son whose good news was brought to Abraham(P). He is older than Isaac according to Muslims and ahl al-kitâb (i.e., the People of the Book) too. It is even said in their Scripture that Ishmael(P) was born when Abraham(P) was 86 years old and Isaac(P) was born when Abraham(P) was 99. In their Scripture as well, God is said to have ordered Abraham(P) to sacrifice his only son and in another version his firstborn. And, at this spot, they inserted falsely the name of Isaac(P) against the text of their very Scripture. The reason they inserted Isaac(P) is that he is their father whereas Ishmael(P) is the father of the Arabs. They added Isaac(P) out of envy and brushed away "only son" by saying that Ishmael(P) and his mother had already been to Makkah. This is a mere [farfetched] explanation since we never say "only son" except to a person who hasn't got but one son. Moreover, the firstborn has got a special place [in the heart of his father] that is not given to the following children and the order to sacrifice him is therefore a greater test. Some knowledgeable people were inclined to say that the sacrificed was Isaac(P). This was reported from some people of the salaf (i.e. people of the previous generations) and it was even reported from some Companions(R) but [this opinion] does not have any bearings from the Book [i.e., the Qur'ân] nor from the Sunnah. I think such opinion was received from the Rabbis of ahl al-Kitâb as is without evidence. Moreover, God's Book is a witness and points to the fact that it is Ishmael(P) because the glad tiding said that the son was patient and that he is the sacrificed. Only afterwards, He said: "And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous." and when the Angels brought the good news of Isaac(P) to Abraham(P) they said: " "Fear not," and they gave him glad tidings of a son endowed with knowledge." And the Most High said: " We gave her [Sarah] glad tidings of Isaac, and after him, of Jacob." [11:71] meaning that in the lifetime of Abraham(P) and Sarah(P), Isaac(P) will beget a child that he will call Jacob(P) implying that Isaac(P) will have a progeny. We have already explained why it is not possible that Isaac(P) be sacrificed while still a child i.e., because God promised them [Abraham and Sarah] that he will have a progeny. On the other hand, Ishmael(P) was described as forbearing and he fits that description.

[Note that many commentators including Ibn Kathîr believe that "forbearing" does not fit a child, it can at least describe teenagers for they are old enough to be described as such.]

In a nutshell, the great Qur'ânic commentator Ibn Kathîr adds to our first three arguments two new ones: according to the Bible, the sacrificed is said to be Abraham's(P) only son (or his firstborn in some versions), which cannot fit Isaac(P); according to the Qur'ân, the good news of Isaac(P) said that he would have a progeny and consequently God cannot order Abraham(P) to sacrifice Isaac(P) before the promise is fulfilled. Again, according to the Qur'ân, the sacrificed cannot be Isaac.

The Opinion of cUlûm al-Hadîth

As a matter of fact, there was a debate between Muslim scholars whether the sacrificed was Isaac(P) or Ishmael(P). But the critical study of the reports allows us to drive safe conclusions. Here is the opinion of a scholar of the Science of Hadîth:

The truth is that the reports stating that the Sacrificed is Isaac are part of the Isrâ'îliyyât due to the People of the Book, it was transmitted by those who converted among them like Kacb al-Ahbâr and it was conveyed [from the converts] by some Companions and Followers [tâbicûn] as sign of trust. Later, the scholars who came after them were fooled by such reports and supported that the Sacrificed was Isaac(P). Every book of exegesis [tafsîr] or biography or even history would mention the argument that took place among the salaf. However, some [of those books] would follow the argument by outlining the truth and others wouldn't add any commentary either by conviction or surrender [to these reports].[2]

And further:

The truth is that the Sacrificed is Ishmael(P). This is supported by the Qur'ânic verses and reports from the Companions and Followers and reports rated Marfuc by approval of the Prophet [i.e., when something is said in the presence of the Prophet(P) and he does not oppose it then we consider that it is correct but it does not amount to Sahîh which is, by the way, what the Prophet(P) himself said.].

No wonder that many Companions and Followers and the later scholars of [Qur'ân] and hadîth among which we enumerate great Companions and poles of knowledge like: cAlî, Ibn cUmar, Abû Hurayrah, Abû Tufayl, Sacîd Ibn Jubayr, Mujâhid, al-Sha'by, Al-Hasan al-Basri, Muhammad Ibn Kacb al-Qardhy, Sacîd Ibn al-Musayyab, Abû Jacfar Muhammad al-Bâqir, Abû Sâlih, al-Rabî' Ibn Anas, Abû cAmr Ibn al-cAlâ' and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and others and it is one version and the strongest from the reports of Ibn cAbbâs.

In Zâd al-Ma'âd by Ibn al-Qayyim: It is the correct opinion according to the knowledgeable among the Companions and Followers and later generations. This opinions was famous among the Arabs before the advent of Islam and it was transmitted from generation to generation in tawâtur and it was also mentioned in the poetry of Umayyah Ibn Abî al-Salt.[3]

The Opinion Of Judeo-Christian Scholars & Islamic Viewpoint

The Encyclopaedia Judaica says:

In the tale of binding (surah 37:99-110) Muhammad identified the son who was to be sacrificed as Ishmael and, indeed, the opinion of the traditionalists were also divided on this subject. It is related that a renowned traditionalist of Jewish origin, from the Qurayza tribe, and another Jewish scholar, who converted to Islam, told that Caliph Omar Ibn cAbd al-cAzîz (717-20) that the Jews were well informed that Ismail was the one who was bound, but that they concealed this out of jealousy. The Muslim legend also adds details of Hajar (Hagar), the mother of Ismail. After Abraham drove her and her son out, she wandered between the hills of al-Safa and al-Marwa (in the vicinity of Mecca) in search for water. At that time the waters of the spring Zemzem began to flow. Her acts became the basis for the hallowed custom of Muslims during the Hajj.[4]

The testimony of the former Jew as mentioned hadîth literature as quoted in the Encyclopaedia Judaica reads:

Another proof of our speech [i.e., that sacrificed was Ishmael(P)] is reported by Ibn Ishâq: "Muhammad Ibn Ka'b narrated that cUmar Ibn cAbd al-cAzîz sent for a man who had been a Jew then converted to Islam and showed signs of true Islam. [Before his conversion], he was one of their scholars [i.e., he was a Jewish scholar] So he [i.e., cUmar] asked him: which son did Abraham(P) sacrifice? He replied: 'It is Ishmael(P). By God, O Commander of the Believers, the Jews know that but they envy you - the Arabs.'[5]

The Oxford Companion To The Bible echoes the same position as the Encyclopaedia Judaica.

In Muslim tradition, the Arabs trace their ancestry back to Abraham through Ishmael. Because Ishmael was circumcised (Gen. 17:25), so are most Muslims. And, analogous to Paul's reversal of the figures of Isaac and Ishmael (Gal. 4:24-26), Muslim tradition makes Ishmael rather than Isaac the son Abraham was commanded to sacrifice.[6]

It is quite clear from the statement of Judeo-Christian scholars what the Muslim position is about the person who was sacrificed by Abraham(P).

Further Evidence From Hadîth Literature

The following says:

Some reports and traditions from the Companions and Followers state that the Sacrificed is Ishmael(P). Narrated by al-Hâkim in Al-Mustadrak, and Ibn Jarîr [at-Tabarî] in his commentary with its isnâd, and others that cAbdullâh Ibn Sacîd al-Sâbihy said: "We were at Mu'âwiyah's reception and the people started discussing [the story of] Ishmael and Isaac(P) and which one was the sacrificed. Some said Ishmael and some said Isaac(P). Mu'âwiyah said: I am the expert you need; We were at the Prophet's(P) when a bedouin came to him saying "O Prophet of God, I have left the pasture dry and the life hard, the children died and the wealth is gone, so give me [something] of what God has bestowed on you, O Son of the two sacrificed." The Prophet(P) smiled and did not blame/criticize what he said. The people asked: Who are the two sacrificed O Commander of the believers? He replied: When cAbdul Muttalib was ordered to dig Zamzam he vowed to sacrifice one of his sons if God helps him with his mission [i.e., Zamzam]. When he achieved the mission, he cast lots on his children, there were ten of them. The choice fell on cAbdullâh so he decided to sacrifice him but the child's uncles, Banu Makhzûm, opposed the sacrifice and said satisfy your Lord and ransom your son. So, he ransomed him with a hundred camels. Mu'âwiyah said: this is one [of the two Sacrificed] the other is Ishmael(P)."

This report is regarded as Marfuc.[6]

There is another report according to which the Prophet(P) is believed to have said: "I am the son of the two Sacrificed". The authenticity of this report is very controversial so we will not use it as evidence especially when the above report is correct enough and suffices to our study.

Conclusion

According to the Qur'ân, the sacrificed cannot be Isaac(P). According to authentic Islamic tradition, the sacrificed is Ishmael(P). The Muslim scholars have solved this case a long time ago and, very early in the history of Islam, the popular Islamic tradition has integrated the fact that Ishmael(P) was the sacrificed.

Concerning the claim of 'world-renowned commentary of Yusuf Ali', any Muslim with a basic knowledge of Qur'ânic commentary would have a good laugh. The 'commentary' in the translation of the Qur'ân by Yusuf cAlî is just about good enough to be qualified as 'footnotes'. And of course, the commentary on the Qur'ân contains much more than these footnotes. Secondly, the statement

It is obvious that the claim that the son was Ishmael is not according to the Qur'ân!

is a rather foolish and reflects colossal ignorance on the part of the critic who has no idea about how the Qur'ânic exegesis is carried out.

Let the Christian missionaries study the Qur'ân thoroughly before calling upon ghosts that will frighten nobody but themselves. Indeed, the Biblical version of the story: "sacrifice your only son, Isaac" or "sacrifice your firstborn son, Isaac" is an enigma they must live with.

Praise be to Allah that guided us to Islam and gave us in the Qur'ân healing and guidance.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
rav
12-26-2006, 04:31 PM
an article by the Christian missionaries
read the bold word. that explains it all.
Reply

glo
12-27-2006, 04:33 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
Interesting. Do you have a source for this please? I know that the Christians (and Jews too?) believe it was Ishaaq who was to be sacrificed.
The Biblical account is quite clear that the son in question is Isaac (Ishaaq).
I always assumed that the Islamic teachings were the same ...
Perhaps it's helpful to this discussion to post the Old Testament here:
Abraham Tested
Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, "Abraham!"
"Here I am," he replied.

Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about."

Early the next morning Abraham got up and saddled his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. He said to his servants, "Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you."

Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, "Father?"
"Yes, my son?" Abraham replied.
"The fire and wood are here," Isaac said, "but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?"

Abraham answered, "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son." And the two of them went on together.

When they reached the place God had told him about, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, "Abraham! Abraham!"
"Here I am," he replied.

"Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."

Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. So Abraham called that place The LORD Will Provide. And to this day it is said, "On the mountain of the LORD it will be provided."

The angel of the LORD called to Abraham from heaven a second time and said, "I swear by myself, declares the LORD, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me." (Genesis 22:1-18)
peace
Reply

- Qatada -
12-27-2006, 12:48 PM


Let’s attempt to ascertain the true identity of this covenant son by closely examining the book of Genesis in the Jewish Torah.

We are told in Genesis 22:2: “Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” At no time during the lifetime of Isaac (upon whom be peace) was he ever the “only son” of Abraham. Did “God” forget about Ishmael, Isaac’s brother who was fourteen years his senior?

Christians will retort that God only intended the son Abraham “loved,” the implication being that Abraham hated Ishmael. Although we can never believe such nonsense, what does the Law say about this?


In Deuteronomy 21:15-17 we read: “If a man has two wives, one loved and the other unloved, and they have borne him children, both the loved and the unloved, and if the firstborn son is of her who is unloved, then it shall be, on the day of bequeaths his possessions to his sons, that he must not bestow firstborn status on the son of the loved wife in preference to the son of the unloved, the true firstborn. But he shall acknowledge the son of the unloved wife as the firstborn by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.”

Therefore, it matters not whether Abraham loved Ishmael, he IS the first-born. It was none other than the evil pen of a scribe who changed the name “Ishmael” to “Isaac” in Genesis 22:2. Truly Allah has told us: “Of the Jews there are those who displace words from their (right) places…” (Qur’an 4:46).

“But Ishmael was the illegitimate son of a bondswoman!” the Christian will shout. Tell him to consider the following passage: “Then Sarah, Abram’s wife, took Hagar her maid, the Egyptian, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his WIFE, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan. So Hagar bore Abram a SON; and Abram named his SON, whom Hagar bore, Ishmael. Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore Ishmael to Abram” (Genesis 16:3, 15-16).



According to the Bible, Ishmael is Abraham’s son through his wife Hagar.

Now listen to what Abraham has to say about the mother of Isaac, Sarah: “Because I thought, surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they kill me on account of my wife. But indeed she is truly my sister. She is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife” (Genesis 20:11-12).

Once again we have a breach of the book of Deuteronomy: “Cursed is the one who lies with his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother. And all the people shall say, Amen!” (Deuteronomy 27:22).

If Abraham lived during the time of Moses, the latter would have had him stoned to death. So how can the son of Abraham’s sister be legitimate? He can’t!

Genesis 15 reveals to us two vital stipulations in the covenant between God and the chosen child of Abraham. It reads: “Then He (God) brought him (Abraham) outside and said, ‘Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them.’ And he said to him, (1) ‘So shall your descendants be.’ On the same day, the Lord made a covenant with Abram saying, (2) ‘To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates’” (Genesis 15:5, 18.).

The vast majority of land between the two great rivers constitutes the Arabian desert and peninsula. This region was never conquered by the Children of Israel, but immediately upon the emergence of Muhammad and the Muslims. It was only with the appearance of the Messenger of the Covenant Muhammad (Malachi 3) that all idolatry was rooted out of these lands promised to the covenant progeny of Abraham. Jewish history demonstrates the obvious ineptness of the Children of Jacob to abolish the heathen worship of statues in Palestine and even in their very Temple!



Karen Armstrong, author of the popular book A History of God remarks: “We have seen that it took the ancient Israelites some 700 years to break with their old religious allegiances and accept monotheism, but Muhammad managed to help the Arabs achieve this difficult transition in a mere 23 years” (page 146).

At this point it is worth giving an overall breakdown of the family of Abraham the Patriarch, the true in faith (Hanifah). Abraham’s first son and covenant child was Ishmael, whom he bore through Hagar. Next, Sarah conceived a son called Isaac. Abraham took a third wife, Keturah, and had six sons with her.

Ishmael’s first born, Nebajoth, had a brother named Kedar (Genesis 25:13) and his progeny are called the Kedarites or Ishmaelites. Ishmael’s two daughters Basemath and Mahalath wed Esau, who is Edom. The Lexicon Strongs’ Concordance gives Esau the title, “the progenitor of the Arab peoples” and this to a son of Isaac! These become known as the Edomites.

From Jacob, Isaac’s other son, twelve luminaries appear with names such as Ruben, Levi, Judah, Joseph, and Benjamin. The descendants of Jacob, and not Jacob or Isaac, are dubbed the Children of Israel (Bani Isra’il). Abraham’s first born of Keturah, Midian, is described by the Strongs’ Concordance as, “progenitor of Midians or Arabians.”

Therefore these Arabs are called the Midianites. A descendant of Midian named Jethro (Shu’ayb in the Qur’an) gave his daughter Zipporah permission to marry a Levite and fugitive of Egypt named Moses. Therefore, it can be observed that the vast majority of the progeny of Abraham were and are in fact Arabs “as numerous as the stars” who intermarried and accepted the sons and daughters of Jacob as righteous servants of the Almighty.



The Sign of God’s covenant was circumcision. In Genesis 17:9, 11 God tells Abraham: “As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations…and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you.”

In verse 26 we are told: “That very same day Abraham was circumcised, and his son Ishmael.” So far we have been told that:

1) Ishmael is Abraham’s first-born son.

2) Hagar is Abraham’s lawfully wedded wife.

3) The covenant seed will be as numerous as the stars.

4) The covenant seed will be given the land between the Nile and Euphrates Rivers.

5) Ishmael was Abraham’s only son and seed for fourteen years.

6) Circumcision is the symbol of God’s covenant.

7) Ishmael was circumcised with his father on the same day to fulfill the covenant with the flesh of their foreskins.


NONE of the above have anything to do with Isaac!

Christians will no doubt point to verse 19 where God tells Abraham, “No, Sarah your wife shall bear you son, and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish My covenant for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him.”

Why has God changed his mind? He continues: “And as for Ishmael, I have heard you. Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall beget twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation” (verse 20).

In other words: “Don’t worry about Ishmael, I’ll throw him a bone or two!” The most obvious piece of Jewish scribal deception, however, occurs in Genesis 21:



“Now Abraham was one hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him…So the child grew up and was weaned. And Abraham made a great feast on the same day Isaac was weaned. And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing (playing with Isaac, REB version).

Therefore she said to Abraham, ‘Cast out this bondswoman with her son; for the son of this bondswoman shall not be heir with my son, namely with Isaac’…So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water; and putting it on her shoulder, he gave it and the boy to Hagar, and sent her away (he set the child on her shoulder, REB version).

Then she departed and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba. And the water in the skin was used up, and she placed the boy under one of the shrubs. Then she went and sat down across from him at a distance of about a bowshot; for she said to herself, ‘Let me not see the death of the boy.’ So she sat opposite him, and lifted her voice and wept. And God heard the voice of the lad (God heard the child crying, REB version).

Then the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said to her, ‘What ails you, Hagar? Fear not, for God has heard the voice of the lad where he is. Arise, lift up the lad and hold him with your hand (in your hand), for I will make him a great nation.’ Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water. And she went and filled the skin with water, and gave the lad a drink.” – Genesis 21:5-19.

It is very clear from the text that we are given the profile of an infant here and not that of a seventeen-year old man. In Jewish custom, a child (Isaac) is weaned after three years. This would have made Ishmael seventeen (Remember that Abraham was 86 when Ishmael was born and 100 when Isaac was born, Gen. 16:16, 21:5). Can you imagine a grown man sitting on Hagar’s shoulder, CRYING beneath a shrub for water, and then being LIFTED UP and FED by his mother? It is very interesting to note that although Ishmael is referenced in no less than eleven places in this passage, he is never addressed by name.


It seems as if the chronologies of these events have been deliberately manipulated in order to give the reader the impression that Ishmael was banished due to a conflict between him and Isaac. In actuality, the nameless infant would not know his younger sibling until many years later. According to Islam, Ishmael and his mother were never banished at all. Abraham was told by God to leave them in the wilderness as a sign of his faith that God would fulfill His covenant under any circumstances. This was where Ishmael grew up and continued his father's work.


According to Genesis 16:10-11, God called him “Ishmael” because He heard Hagar crying after she ran away from Sarah. This concocted story serves as a clever way for the rabbinical scribes to explain the meaning of Ishmael’s name, meaning “God heard,” while also making the point that Hagar and her son are inferior to Sarah. It is possible, however, that the child was not named until after Genesis 21:5-19 was written and “God heard” (verse 17) the infant child Ishmael crying while he and his mother settled in Baca, “the weeping valley” (Psalm 84:6; Qur’an 3:96), and not Beersheba as the Bible states. Another possibility is that God named him Ishmael because He had heard the prayer of Abraham for a son to continue his legacy. Why exactly Ishmael’s name is not mentioned in Genesis 21:5-19 remains a mystery.

We are also told in Genesis 25:9 that in the spirit of brotherhood, both sons of Abraham buried their father. From this we can also conclude that the story given in Genesis 16:10 in which God tells Hagar that she must “submit herself under Sarah’s hand,” and Ishmael is called a “wild ass of a man,” are undoubtedly forgeries penned by the Jewish rabbis and scribes in order to discredit the God-given rights of Ishmael, the ancestor of Muhammad -- The Messenger of God (salallau ‘alayhi wa sallam).


Extract from:
http://www.islamicboard.com/12447-post24.html
Reply

Muslim Woman
12-28-2006, 07:37 AM
Salaam/peace;


format_quote Originally Posted by glo
The Biblical account is quite clear that the son in question is Isaac (Ishaaq).
I always assumed that the Islamic teachings were the same ...
Perhaps it's helpful to this discussion to post the Old Testament here:


peace

I did not read the whole thread.....a quick reply.....compu is very slow today.


Isaac (p) was NEVER the only son.....he was the second son of Abraham (p). Ismail (p) is the First born son. Bible tells u that God commanded Abraham (p) to sacrifice his ' only ' son.....so , undoubtedly it was Ismail (p) as Isaac ( p ) was not born at that time.

Muslims all over the world remember the great sacrifce .......to my knowledge no Jew or Chritians celebrate the occasion. May be , it's another proof that it was really Ismail (p) and Not the Isaac (p).

Anyway , u may watch TV or see online today how Muslims celebrate this occasion. Millions are gathered in Saudi Arabia where the incident took place.
Reply

glo
12-28-2006, 11:37 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman
Salaam/peace;
I did not read the whole thread.....a quick reply.....compu is very slow today.


Isaac (p) was NEVER the only son.....he was the second son of Abraham (p). Ismail (p) is the First born son. Bible tells u that God commanded Abraham (p) to sacrifice his ' only ' son.....so , undoubtedly it was Ismail (p) as Isaac ( p ) was not born at that time.
I agree, Ishmael was Abraham's first-born. He was thirteen by the time Isaac was born.
But God's decision is made very clear here:
God also said to Abraham, "As for Sarai your wife, you are no longer to call her Sarai; her name will be Sarah. I will bless her and will surely give you a son by her. I will bless her so that she will be the mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her."

Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, "Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?" And Abraham said to God, "If only Ishmael might live under your blessing!"

Then God said, "Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation. But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year." When he had finished speaking with Abraham, God went up from him. (Genesis 17:15-22)
I don't know why God refers to Isaac as Abraham's only son in Genesis 22, but he clearly does:
Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about."
In context with the previous quote it is evident that Isaac is the one God will make his convenant with - consequently he is the 'only son' of relevance in this scenario.

I am aware that this issue is fiercly debated between Muslims and Christians, and I have no interest in getting into this debate.
I leave that to those heated refuters on sites such as answer-christianity and answer-islam, which some people love to copy and paste from ... it's not what God has called me to.

Instead I just post God's word, and leave people to make up their own mind ...

Muslims all over the world remember the great sacrifce .......to my knowledge no Jew or Chritians celebrate the occasion. May be , it's another proof that it was really Ismail (p) and the Isaac (p).

Anyway , u may watch TV or see online today how Muslims celebrate this occasion. Millions are gathered in Saudi Arabia where the incident took place.
I have learned that many Muslims are devout and committed followers of God.
Thanks for sharing!
I wish you a happy Eid, sister. :)

Peace
Reply

IzakHalevas
12-28-2006, 04:20 PM
Muslims all over the world remember the great sacrifce .......to my knowledge no Jew or Chritians celebrate the occasion. May be , it's another proof that it was really Ismail (p) and the Isaac (p).
Jews do commemorate the event.
Reply

Keltoi
12-28-2006, 04:22 PM
Another translation problem from Greek. "Begotten" was a translation of the word "monogenes", which means one of a kind or unique, or other variations of that description. As discussed in another thread about Christ and the word "begotten", many Christian scholars find this word to be innappropriate in the context of discussing Isaac or Jesus Christ.
Reply

Muslim Woman
12-29-2006, 03:56 AM
Salaam/peace;

format_quote Originally Posted by glo
I agree, Ishmael was Abraham's first-born. He was thirteen by the time Isaac was born.
But God's decision is made very clear here:


I don't know why God refers to Isaac as Abraham's only son in Genesis 22, but he clearly does:

In context with the previous quote it is evident that Isaac is the one God will make his convenant with - consequently he is the 'only son' of relevance in this scenario.

I am aware that this issue is fiercly debated between Muslims and Christians, and I have no interest in getting into this debate.
I leave that to those heated refuters on sites such as answer-christianity and answer-islam, which some people love to copy and paste from ... it's not what God has called me to.

Instead I just post God's word, and leave people to make up their own mind ...

well , how do u explain this verse ?

“If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have borne him children, both the beloved and the hated;

and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn:


but he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his” (Deuteronomy 21: 15, 16, 17).


I have learned that many Muslims are devout and committed followers of God.
Thanks for sharing!
My pleasure :statisfie



I wish you a happy Eid, sister. :)

Peace[/QUOTE]

thank u sooooooooooooooo much ; Eid Mubarak to u , too sis :p
Reply

Muslim Woman
12-29-2006, 04:09 AM
Salaam/peace;

format_quote Originally Posted by IzakHalevas
Jews do commemorate the event.
pl. let us know how Jews remember the event.


Those who are interested to watch Muslims celebration , keep an eye on TV or watch online :)

sorry i mistakenly wrote to watch yesterday :-[


related links:

http://islam.about.com/cs/hajj/v/hajj_sauditv.htm

Available Formats:
Real Player

Nearly three million Muslim pilgrims gather for the annual Hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca) each year.

The massive numbers of pilgrims is a spectacle that must be seen to be believed.

Watch live Saudi TV coverage of the Hajj here (beginning 28 December 2006).


http://www.ameinfo.com/106303.html
Reply

Muslim Woman
12-29-2006, 04:20 AM
Salaam/peace ;


one more link.......day by day events are describe here.

http://www.channel4.com/culture/micr...indd_live.html
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-10-2012, 07:46 PM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-09-2012, 03:06 AM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-24-2011, 08:49 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-11-2007, 12:08 PM
  5. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-22-2006, 01:07 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!