Does The Quran say God told Abraham to sacrifice his son? - Eid Al Adha
-
peace jkhan,
Can you clarify if you replied to the correct question in your "Question 7" comment above?
- preposition "li" occurs over 2000 times in Quran. Please provide clear examples of it meaning "upon" as you take it to mean in 37103 (i.e. upon his forehead).
It is better to quote the question then reply, as you started to do recently, so it is clearer and easier to follow.
-
peace jkhan,
Can you clarify if you replied to the correct question in your "Question 7" comment above?
It is better to quote the question then reply, as you started to do recently, so it is clearer and easier to follow.
Cope with my answers... I don't have answers beyond that for the question..
Let others decide at their own will what could've been story... I will come up with answers to your other questions within this weekend... -
QUESTION NO. 02
I added the question on top is to coz people won’t have that much of time to go back to each page to see what actually the questions are… unless they are so curious of those..
below Waqas's question and comments..
when Abraham asks "...look what you see?" his son seems to automatically assume it is a command when he says "...do what you are commanded...". Do you agree? If not, please say why.
Look brother… Keep in mind the truth…the truth is Ibrahim never said it was a COMMAND or rather “I have been COMMANDED by GOD to Slaughter you”…… and DREAM never stated it was a COMMAND… only person who used the word COMMAND was Ibrahim’s son….Why did he use it meticulously? .. He knew as a believer we are to follow commands of God being the slaves of God.. if we deny, then we are to blame ourselves..Ibrahim was a messenger but not his son to that point… So, his son needs to obey what Messenger says as a believer … coz “obeying the Messenger is obeying the God”..
But his son used a very important word(COMMAND) which ibrahim couldn’t grasp by the dream and never verified how he previously got commands (look what you see itself a confused statement like having a suggestion to God’s command) or what is the normal medium of getting commands from God.. By saying DO what you are COMMANDED is clearly an indication only the COMMAND his son was surrendering not the DREAM or IBRAHIM as person on the matters of God..…Who will command a Messenger? God.. so his son didn’t use the word to the phrase Do what you are commanded BY GOD.. Messenger should verify before presenting to the public and messenger cannot lie and should not… Suppose… Prophet receives a message.. He should verify what actually the message is and how to present it and how it came to him..(simply thoroughly understand the message and present).. Needless for son to verify coz he was a messenger ordering him (if his son pose question after question, then he is transgressing same as people of musa on the order of God before slaughter a cow)… like the true people as quran points out.. “We hear we obey”… but we don’t have to do the part of “we hear we obey” coz we don’t hear it from the Messenger, God assigned to take it AS IT IS…We are bound to verify everything, even the quran and it’s verses… Coz we have no clue unless we verify…No living Messenger who take speech of God directly and present..That’s why his son naturally assumed it was a COMMAND… but Ibrahim didn’t verify and failed … A Messenger failing is whole community failing…That failure had to bear by his innocent son who trusted the Messenger… But, God delivered him… it would have been a very good profound advice and trial for Ibrahim in his life time not to take dreams as literal and command of God since God never authorized.... God talks in three mediums only to any human being 4251 (unless God talk, how a command can be released to human? If not in those three mediums, then how God talk? Do you say about God what you do not know, while God emphasizes that he talks only in three ways.. Whatever the other mediums are not speech / talk of God..but signs…..Signs are not command…)
-
QUESTION NO. 01
Below Waqas's question..
what relevance, if any, is there for Quran to mention his son reached the age of striving/working with him?Don’t your dictionary reference/s giving the above meaning… I don’t think anything wrong in it any normal sense… with flow of previous verses..further after God telling that he was given a good news of a child when Ibrahim requested of saliheen and then starts this verse..37102..
No issues for me the translation.. -
QUESTION NO. 03
The future particle "sa" occurs over 100 times in Quran. Can you provide one example of usage which matches how you claim it is used here, i.e. what comes after particle "sa" refers to an ongoing future activity that occurs prior to what came before particle "sa"?
Let me clarify, here is structure of the Arabic ABC <future particle sa> XYZ
My view is XYZ occurs in the future, i.e. after ABC
Your view is XYZ occurs prior to ABC or XYZ occurs until ABC takes place.
Ref http//corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=(3710221)Compare this verse with subject verse..
2827 “He said, "Indeed, I wish to wed you one of these, my two daughters, on that you serve me for eight years; but if you complete ten, it will be from you. And I do not wish to put you in difficulty. YOU WILL FIND ME (sa-tajidu-nī,) if Allah wills, of the righteous (Saliheen)."
37102 " …… He said, "O my father, do as you are commanded. YOU WILL FIND ME (sa-tajidu-nī,), if Allah wills, of the steadfast (Sabirieen)."
I hope my clarification and answers matches to what is written in 37102…
-
QUESTION NO. 03
The future particle "sa" occurs over 100 times in Quran. Can you provide one example of usage which matches how you claim it is used here, i.e. what comes after particle "sa" refers to an ongoing future activity that occurs prior to what came before particle "sa"?
Let me clarify, here is structure of the Arabic ABC <future particle sa> XYZ
My view is XYZ occurs in the future, i.e. after ABC
Your view is XYZ occurs prior to ABC or XYZ occurs until ABC takes place.
Ref http//corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology.jsp?location=(3710221)Compare this verse with subject verse..
2827 “He said, "Indeed, I wish to wed you one of these, my two daughters, on that you serve me for eight years; but if you complete ten, it will be from you. And I do not wish to put you in difficulty. YOU WILL FIND ME (sa-tajidu-nī,) if Allah wills, of the righteous (Saliheen)."
37102 " …… He said, "O my father, do as you are commanded. YOU WILL FIND ME (sa-tajidu-nī,), if Allah wills, of the steadfast (Sabirieen)."
I hope my clarification and answers matches to what is written in 37102…
Salam,
Sorry to disturb you in your debate but your example (2827) demonstrate that an action of a long-term action was taken (but not a lifetime with the use of "Sa" = near future, just a few months or years max). Allah strengthens his signs with the use of the word "sabireen" which is used for a long period..
So, sa-tajidu-nī + Sabirieen + ṣaddaqta (37105) => long-acting action that was REALIZED/ACHIEVED from a vision.
The message is CLEAR just by using these words.
After, to everyone to accept it or not and to draw is own conclusion.A bonus ṣaddaqta = Verb form II express "Intensity of the verb (repetition or/and the energy in which the action is performed)."
Please let the text speaks.
Peace
-
1869 said, "YOU WILL FIND ME (Sa-tajidu-nī), if Allah wills, patient (Sabir), and I will not disobey you in order."
Dear Iyyaka.. Peace...
Participate as much as you want in every important thread, that’s why I requested personally everyone to participate… and use quran to explain… it’s not my forum and my topic and debate… When more and more comments positive and negative raised we come to know our opinion and our own understanding where it stands… I have learnt a lot arguing with people in any level in my life… arguing peacefully is huge weapon for augment knowledge…
But, I don’t agree with you in this point long term or short term… future is future…take the above example… for me with thorough exploration Mosa had only a short visit with how journey started and ended with a partaking.. Here also sabir (patient) is used..
Dear, these words Patient or Righteous are not merely applied for verses but it is their qualities as a believer that they apply in action …When Mose’s father-in-law said you will find me Righteous, it doesn’t mean he will be righteous in the future, he is righteous and he will, only thing mosa has to recognize it on the first day or the last day of his stay..Dear Waqas… I have nothing more to say about your 10 questions which I intended to reply by the weekend But I am totally free today since I am attending a New International airport inauguration in northern Srilanka on 17th… So for some work I have shifted from Colombo to Jafna but hardly any work… lol…lol…
No more comments in this topic from my side… If what I wrote are meaningful for anyone, make sure to verify with quran, and those who are negative, pls comment at your convenient time, for me to understand…
Thank you Brother Waqas being patient with me and giving me this opportunity to debate with you… let people decide with their own understanding of this topic and if possible have some support with what we discussed..
Thank you…
. -
peace jkhan, all,
Thanks for replying. I have discussed with many people and it is common for people to simply avoid the questions so it's good to see some actual response. I did find your replies verbose so I have summarised your replies below-
what relevance, if any, is there for Quran to mention his son reached the age of striving/working with him?
Reason in my Abraham leaving scenario, it makes perfect sense because it is telling us the son had reached a somewhat independent age, i.e. able to fend for himself.
No relevance cited. -
when Abraham asks "...look what you see?" his son seems to automatically assume it is a command when he says "...do what you are commanded...". Do you agree? If not, please say why.
You explained they (Abraham and son) took it as a command but it was not a command (or test) from God, even though you admit the dream was from God. This raises further issues such as God sending a disturbing dream to Abraham for no apparent reason. -
The future particle "sa" occurs over 100 times in Quran. Can you provide one example of usage which matches how you claim it is used here, i.e. what comes after particle "sa" refers to an ongoing future activity that occurs prior to what came before particle "sa"?
Let me clarify, here is structure of the Arabic ABC <future particle sa> XYZ
My view is XYZ occurs in the future, i.e. after ABC.Your view is XYZ occurs prior to ABC or XYZ occurs until ABC takes place.
Cites 2827, which possibly works depending on how one interprets it -
2827 means Moses would marry one of his daughters and go on to fulfill the condition set ---> does not work as a qualifying comparable example
-
2827 means Moses would fulfill the request then after that marry a daughter ---> does work
I haven't studied it in detail to see if we can glean from Quran which is meant but the flow suggests (1) is more likely. -
can you provide a Classical Arabic dictionary reference which states the meaning of the verb TaLLa can mean what you take it to mean and can be done in a gentle/soft/willing manner? i.e. without force.
Reason the primary meaning of this definition is to throw down / make one prostrate / hold down / wrestle them down etc but Quran states both submitted so the action was willingly, i.e. no force needed.
No reference provided. Until proven otherwise, your meaning of "TaLLa" inherently implies with force and this contradicts Quran when it says they both submitted willingly. -
can you provide an example elsewhere in Quran in which God rewards us/someone for what they were about to do but did not do.
Reason stating "like thus We reward..." implies an exemplar, if so, where are the other examples, or where such a principle is mentioned.
You were able to show this phrase may refer to general aspects and may not need a specific good deed to be mentioned in context, which is a fair point. Even so, it would have been nice to cement your understanding with a specific example from Quran, if such an example exists. -
can you provide another example in Quran wherein it states someone did X (e.g. perfect verb) but what is meant is they intended to do X.
Reason you take "...when they both had submitted..." in 37103 as submitted in intention only (i.e. not actually done the slaughter). Similar case with "...Surely you have believed/confirmed..." in 37105, i.e. technically he hasn't confirmed it yet, i.e. it is intention only.
Note perfect verbs are used thousands of times in Quran.
Claims I have misunderstood intention. No example from Quran given. -
preposition "li" occurs over 2000 times in Quran. Please provide clear examples of it meaning "upon" as you take it to mean in 37103 (i.e. upon his forehead).
No example from Quran given.
8.) please explain why Quran describes the sacrifice/dhibhin in 37107 as great/mighty/azeem?
Jkhan quotes "disastrous/great(great in the bad aspect) sacrifice", "something of unpleasant, evil oriented Azeem…Same way God absolutely delivered Abraham’s Son form a Azeem (Great) grievous Sacrifice.", "He was ransomed of a Horrible Sacrifice "Your interpretation fails according to the Arabic "exchange/ransom" means to swap A with/for B, i.e. swap son for/with something else, NOT save him from something. Simply ask yourself what was the son replaced with? Then let us know.
- If you consider killing of an innocent child an evil act and you consider God was simply testing Abraham but was always going to stop him before he actually did it, is there any other example similar to this in Quran (i.e. God commanding or condoning an evil act)?
No example cited.
Jkhan quotes "So, we can naturally deduce that Allah WOULDN’T COMMAND Evil, Immoral, Hateful act "
"Dreams are from God according to Quran… don’t they… But are the dreams(words used Mana/Ru’ya) literal in any of those occasion? NO"
"Problem with Ibrahim is coz he took it as COMMAND and LITERAL without any command from God while no dream is literal"
"Ibrahim forgot that killing is Evil and blinded and believed the dream in its literal aspect"
You admit "Yousuf (Specialist of Interpreting dreams)" but claim Abraham (and his son) were confused/wrong, despite no indication of this in Quran and bear in mind 126
- how do you reconcile Moses objecting to the killing of an innocent boy whereas Abraham and his son did not?
Jkhan quotes "entirely different scenario", "Do you see the difference…coz Ibrahim was confused", "Just coz Ibrahim got one thing wrong", "but Ibrahim didn’t verify and failed"
It seems a core difference between our understandings is that you consider Abraham (and his son) to be wrong/mistaken in this story, whereas I do not. I consider my view befitting their status in Quran. An interesting question to ponder will be does Quran always highlight when a prophet/messenger errs, because if so your view is in more trouble.
You say dream is from God AND dream is not literal, which are two of my core points so you agree with that at least.
-
-
//You say dream is from God AND dream is not literal, which are two of my core points so you agree with that at least.//
Dreams are always ''literal'' in the meanings of actual scenes. The basis of dream interpretation is to identify important dream symbols and look for the concept. Since what object he was seeing during sleeping was that he will slaughter his son. Slaughter of a young boy is obviously not for other purposes; thereby, they interpreted it in the concept of command to sacrifice for Allah the Exalted.
Allah swt confirmed it as trial; and whatever he had done laying the son down in the manner which is the process immediately before slaughter was all that had seen in dream. He never saw having slaughtered the son. That is why Allah called upon him that you have already accomplished what you saw in the dream.
-
//You say dream is from God AND dream is not literal, which are two of my core points so you agree with that at least.//
Dreams are always ''literal'' in the meanings of actual scenes. The basis of dream interpretation is to identify important dream symbols and look for the concept. Since what object he was seeing during sleeping was that he will slaughter his son. Slaughter of a young boy is obviously not for other purposes; thereby, they interpreted it in the concept of command to sacrifice for Allah the Exalted.
Allah swt confirmed it as trial; and whatever he had done laying the son down in the manner which is the process immediately before slaughter was all that had seen in dream. He never saw having slaughtered the son. That is why Allah called upon him that you have already accomplished what you saw in the dream.
Peace Big brother...
Good point "Ibrahim never saw having slaughtered his son" ...
If what you claim is within the possible frame, Then Ibrahim should have told his son "I saw in dream that I was about to slaughter" And if it is about to slaughter then there is no point of command and no need of patience and worries and surrender.. .. Ibrahim should have stopped even before God called out... He shouldn't continue beyond what he saw...
In case your argument is to say Ibrahim didn't perceive what he saw and got carried away though he saw only the sword came up to his son's neck(for argument sake) .. If God didn't stop .... He would have executed beyond what he saw...
Look.. Ibrahim didn't perceive the dream was not a command of God is fair call out of his sheer belief in God..
But claiming Ibrahim didn't know what he actually saw in dream is below average call... God directly put in Quran what Ibrahim said to his son.. He said slaughtering and not "About to slaughter" or "l saw like slaughtering you"
Then your claim has meaning...
'Slaughtering' has no other meaning other than take the life of another being... That's what Ibrahim saw... -
'Slaughtering' has no other meaning other than take the life of another being... That's what Ibrahim saw...
Salam,
Incorrect if you mean "The triliteral root dhāl bā ḥā (ذ ب ح) = slaughtering"
First, the Arabs of that time used it in expressions that did not necessarily refer to a sacrifice of being.
Second, let's look at what the Qur'an says about this word in (2721) " - "
2720 And he inspected the birds, then said "Why do not we see the hoopoe, is there anyone missing?"
2721 "I will punish him severely, or I will laādh'baḥannahu /kill? Him, or he should have a clear excuse."Point 1
=> Does Sulaiman, who was a prophet of Allah, slaughtering the "hoopoe" just because he was late?Point 2
=> In this short passage we have 3 choices dictated by Sulaiman
(1) punish
(2) laādh'baḥannahu/Kill?
(3) excuse
Logic would be Allah to start with the strongest punishment Kill. However, it is not the case.The only answer that remains after analyzing these 2 points is that laādh'baḥannahu does not mean to kill/slit troat BUT "to SEPARATE from him / NO longer to SERVE ..". To make a modern analogy it's like an employee who dismiss an employee for serious misconduct ..
-
Salam,
Incorrect if you mean "The triliteral root dhāl bā ḥā (ذ ب ح) = slaughtering"
First, the Arabs of that time used it in expressions that did not necessarily refer to a sacrifice of being.
Second, let's look at what the Qur'an says about this word in (2721) " - "
2720 And he inspected the birds, then said "Why do not we see the hoopoe, is there anyone missing?"
2721 "I will punish him severely, or I will laādh'baḥannahu /kill? Him, or he should have a clear excuse."Point 1
=> Does Sulaiman, who was a prophet of Allah, slaughtering the "hoopoe" just because he was late?Point 2
=> In this short passage we have 3 choices dictated by Sulaiman
(1) punish
(2) laādh'baḥannahu/Kill?
(3) excuse
Logic would be Allah to start with the strongest punishment Kill. However, it is not the case.The only answer that remains after analyzing these 2 points is that laādh'baḥannahu does not mean to kill/slit troat BUT "to SEPARATE from him / NO longer to SERVE ..". To make a modern analogy it's like an employee who dismiss an employee for serious misconduct ..
Peace..
You rushed to answer…First of all, I responded to Mazhar based on his point which he was referring SLAUGHTER merely…. Not SEPARATION he was refering… So.. what is slaughter if not taking the life of another… You get me Dear Iyyaka..
And your point… Honestly very impressive…
Below your comment…=> Does Solomon, who was a prophet of Allah, slaughtering the "hoopoe" just because he was late?
And note the above for this verse 2721 “I will surely PUNISH him with a SEVERE punishment or SLAUGHTER him unless he brings me clear authorization."
Now, you yourself pose the your question which is “Does Solomon, who was a prophet of Allah, slaughtering the "hoopoe" just because he was late?”
Just coz HudHuda (Hoopoe) was JUST LATE, why Sulaiman should PUNISH him that also crystal clearly with (extra word-Shadeed) such a SEVERE punishment… severe punishment for an employee is firing him and not hurting him but not in sulaiman’s statement..…inside this severe punishment can be anything of HudHuda couldn’t bear (for instance… cut one wing, or sever a leg or sever wing and a leg of opposite sides or remove one eye..etc. etc.. that’s severe)…but later Sulaiman said SLAUHTER which is severe than severe punishment..(as per you SEPARATION)… Is separation SEVERE or the SEVERE PUNISHMENT? It was just a bird, Being separated from Sulaiman wont’ make any difference to it..and it was a talented one based on story… Any how the separated bird only Sulaiman was looking for with anger… shows No need permission from sulaiman to get separated…Only thing sulaiman was using his God gifted power to control them….It’s God’s wish that they serve sulaiman..
You were asking about the particle ‘SA’… … are you okay with my second example..
-
Salaam,
...
8.) please explain why Quran describes the sacrifice/dhibhin in 37107 as great/mighty/azeem?
Jkhan quotes "disastrous/great(great in the bad aspect) sacrifice", "something of unpleasant, evil oriented Azeem…Same way God absolutely delivered Abraham’s Son form a Azeem (Great) grievous Sacrifice.", "He was ransomed of a Horrible Sacrifice "Your interpretation fails according to the Arabic "exchange/ransom" means to swap A with/for B, i.e. swap son for/with something else, NOT save him from something. Simply ask yourself what was the son replaced with? Then let us know.
......
The conventional understanding claims that "the great/mighty sacrifice" refers to a sacrificial animal that was exchanged/ransomed for Abraham's son, which seems odd to me, because one may ask why the sacrificial animal is described as "great/mighty", especially in comparison to the slaughter of a son. In the Abraham leaving scenario the "great/mighty sacrifice" would refer to the great sacrifice made by leaving his beloved son, making it a self-contained explanation.
...
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/Quran-Abraham-sacrifice-son.htmlPeace Wakas
Could you explain what you mean by "a self-contained explanation" and what is A and B in the "Abraham leaving scenario"?Salam,
Incorrect if you mean "The triliteral root dhāl bā ḥā (ذ ب ح) = slaughtering"
First, the Arabs of that time used it in expressions that did not necessarily refer to a sacrifice of being.
Peace Iyyaka,
Could you share those sources please.
Sorry for this off- topic.
Other possible explanations about Solomon, jinn, shayateen, Naml, Al-Tayr, HudhudSalaam,
Possible explanations
-------1----------
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607818.msg376044#msg376044
part The jinns of Solomon.
-------2---------
from page
https//www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/?page=1093®ion=E3
to page
https//www.alislam.org/quran/tafseer/?page=1105®ion=E3...
-------3 ---------
https//quranistvoices.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/sulaiman-and-the-queen-part-i/
https//quranistvoices.wordpress.com/2011/04/29/sulaiman-and-the-queen-part-ii/https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9609105.0
jinn workers 3412-13
https//www.alislam.org/quran/view/?page=1240®ion=E3&CR=
https//www.alislam.org/quran/view/?page=1241®ion=E3
shayateen builders and divers 3837
shayateen held in chains 3838
https//www.alislam.org/quran/view/?page=1318®ion=E3
والله اعلم
Allah knows best. -
Dear Jkhan,
I do not know if you're ironic with me or not (I quote you "Honestly very impressive ..." or it's my english which is too limited) but your speech would be more clear if you removed the "..." or make it a very moderate use.
Regardless, I just wanted to point out to you that the word does not always mean slaughtering and that the proof is in the Qur'an itself in 2721. I think you would take my arguments more seriously if you correctly translated the word "aw" in 2721 "I would surely PUNISH him with a SEVERE punishment OR SLAUGHTER him OR (not unless) he brings me clear authorization."
A remark with the word "la-uʿadhibannahu/I will surely punish him" in 2721. the root of this word refers first to the notion of PRIVATION. Punishment or torment is the consequence of this privation. So in my example with our business world in case of serious misconduct of an employee
(1) disciplinary layoff or demotion
(2) dismissal
(3) valid excuseAs for the use of "sa" I just wanted to say that he was expressing a near and not far future. Yes you are right "future is future"..
The root S-B-R expresses a duration, a prolonged action in time as in your last example with the journey of Moussa.
To translate by "patient" in English is incorrect because this word refers to a notion of "passivity" whereas SABR it refers to a connotation of activity, a commitment to remain firm in an action.Peace
-
peace ibn_a,
Could you explain what you mean by "a self-contained explanation" and what is A and B in the "Abraham leaving scenario"?
As I mentioned previously HERE the pronoun "hu" could refer to either Abraham or his son. In my understanding it doesn't seem to make a difference.
Thus, it would be either
- exchanged him (the son) with a mighty sacrifice, i.e. replaced the son with a mighty sacrifice Abraham made (by separating from his son)
- exchanged him (Abraham) with a mighty sacrifice, i.e. replaced Abraham with a mighty sacrifice the son made (by separating from his father)
Interestingly, such an event would have effected both, so each one will have experienced the above. This mighty deed was taken into account by God and he/they were rewarded as a result.
I take it as a play on words as mentioned in my article, quote
My view is that this is a play on words to emphasise the significance/severity of this event, i.e. Abraham was giving up his son, never to see him again, thus it is as if his son was sacrificed, lost to him forever. It is interesting to note the core meaning of the root seems to be "to split something".
It is a self-contained explanation because there is absolutely nothing else in the context to explain it. I'm personally not a fan of inserting things into the text to explain Quran when there is no warrant, and especially if there is a fitting explanation that does not require an insertion.
-
Does The Quran say God told Abraham to sacrifice his son?
New article - click HEREFeedback welcome, especially corrections. Thanks.
Salam Wakas,
In your article you translate "So when they both submitted and he (Abraham) brought** him (son) to*** his (Abraham's) forehead (or side of head)."
Fine to put in brackets what does not appear literally in the text.Question why not put in brackets the pronoun "his" (in red below)?
Indeed, It does not appear in the Quranic text.Peace
-
Peace Big brother...
Good point "Ibrahim never saw having slaughtered his son" ...
If what you claim is within the possible frame, Then Ibrahim should have told his son "I saw in dream that I was about to slaughter" And if it is about to slaughter then there is no point of command and no need of patience and worries and surrender.. .. Ibrahim should have stopped even before God called out... He shouldn't continue beyond what he saw...
In case your argument is to say Ibrahim didn't perceive what he saw and got carried away though he saw only the sword came up to his son's neck(for argument sake) .. If God didn't stop .... He would have executed beyond what he saw...
Look.. Ibrahim didn't perceive the dream was not a command of God is fair call out of his sheer belief in God..
But claiming Ibrahim didn't know what he actually saw in dream is below average call... God directly put in Quran what Ibrahim said to his son.. He said slaughtering and not "About to slaughter" or "l saw like slaughtering you"
Then your claim has meaning...
'Slaughtering' has no other meaning other than take the life of another being... That's what Ibrahim saw...There are two things called tense and aspect. If it were "about to" then verb is not used, instead active participle would have been used to make it current affair.
Both the verbs are imperfect indicative mood. It is not just ONE dream seen once. It is continuing happening. If that was not the case there was no need of prepositional phrase. It is future. that I will......
Dream conveys a concept. He sees laying down his son in the manner mammals are slaughtered. Both interpret it as sacrifice and move ahead. The moment he did that to slaughter, he gets the loud call that the dream already stands executed.
The son also uses passive verb in indicative mood. "Do that which your are being commanded" - telling slaughter your son as sacrifice, and assures him that in doing so he will find him coolly perseverant.
-
peace,
Question why not put in brackets the pronoun "his" (in red below)?
Indeed, It does not appear in the Quranic text.I wasn't sure what the implication was of the word usage, i.e. "...his forehead" and/or "...the forehead" and it didn't affect the article which option was chosen, hence the translation.
Upon reviewing it just now, it seems the latter is more accurate. I have amended the article. Thanks.
-
Salaam,
peace ibn_a,
As I mentioned previously HERE the pronoun "hu" could refer to either Abraham or his son. In my understanding it doesn't seem to make a difference.
Thus, it would be either
- exchanged him (the son) with a mighty sacrifice, i.e. replaced the son with a mighty sacrifice Abraham made (by separating from his son)
- exchanged him (Abraham) with a mighty sacrifice, i.e. replaced Abraham with a mighty sacrifice the son made (by separating from his father)
Interestingly, such an event would have effected both, so each one will have experienced the above. This mighty deed was taken into account by God and he/they were rewarded as a result.
I take it as a play on words as mentioned in my article, quote
It is a self-contained explanation because there is absolutely nothing else in the context to explain it. I'm personally not a fan of inserting things into the text to explain Quran when there is no warrant, and especially if there is a fitting explanation that does not require an insertion.
Peace Wakas,
Thanks for your explanations.
I am sorry but I don't see the difference between A and B in "your scenario".
It seems more that in "your scenario" that B is a result of A ."your scenario"
A = his son leaving to spread the message and never see his father again.
fadaynahu / exchanged / replaced with / for a mighty / great sacrifice.
B = mighty / great sacrifice = Abraham will live for the rest of his life without his son.
I think there would be no need to use the word fadaynahu / exchanged / replaced.
Wouldn't it suffice to say it is / was a great/ mighty sacrifice in "your scenario" ?والله اعلم
Allah knows best. -
peace ibn_a,
There definitely is a difference between A and B in my scenario. I would correct your example with the following
exchange A with B...
A = him (whom the him refers to is unclear, but for sake of argument let's say it's the son which is the most common understanding)
B = mighty/great sacrifice (i.e. the mighty/great deed Abraham did, by separating from his son), this is what was left in place of his sonI think there would be no need to use the word fadaynahu / exchanged / replaced.
Wouldn't it suffice to say it is / was a great/ mighty sacrifice in "your scenario" ?In my scenario, yes I suppose that could have been used, however I would say that since this word is associated with slaughter to say "exchanged A with B" clarifies no son-slaughter took place, i.e. worded in a way so it cannot be taken to mean a son-slaughter took place. Also use of "exchanged", it could be argued, further cements the leaving scenario interpretation.
