Does The Quran say God told Abraham to sacrifice his son? - Eid Al Adha
-
Peace..
Few additional comments for question No. 9... (for blue highlights).
Moses Mother reluctantly put Mosa in the river... To do that she received a revelation (Wahi). This was separation of Mother and infant son.. As a mother she would have taken the baby to forehead or whatever to the points she could... Needless to say about love of mothers...
Did Allah called out "O! Mother of Musa you followed our command" and thus we reward...
In my human nature what Mosa mother did was greater being suckling mother than Ibrahim did(if Ibrahim separated his son)..
Is Allah partial to admire Ibrahim while nothing is stated for Mosa mother... What Mosa mother did was mammoth risk... Is it coz she was a woman and not a Prophet.... Allah is just... Coz Ibrahim never separated his son by those verses but brutally attempted to slaughter...Allah only favored Ibrahim and delivered of disastrous slaughter -
Peace...
QUESTION NO. 08
i have responded in my previous thread 55 &57 .. Pls... Refer...
dhāl bā ḥā (ذ ب ح) in QURAN is always SLAUGHTER and it befit to 37107 as well easily ... Unless it doesn't befit we could have resorted to any other possible meaning... It is none other but SLAUGHTER... Not even SACRIFICE befit to any dhāl bā ḥā word in my perception .. So all slaughter... . Sacrifice is kind of conventional word it has only meaning with those who sacrifice animal to Aaliha(gods) etc etc with their INTENT (that convert a slaughter to sacrifice) .. Allah doesn't need sacrifice... If we slaughter that benefit for us... Allah orders to slaughter...We have no sacrifice but slaughter.... Had I used sacrifice only for the sake of argument.... -
QUESTION NO. 07
Sahih translation.... 37102 " ...... .....He said, "O my father, DO (af'al) as you are commanded. You will find me, if Allah wills, of the STEADFAST."
37103 " And when they had both submitted and HE put HIM down upon HIS forehead,"
37104 " We called to HIM, "O Abraham,"Note here the DOER is Ibrahim... His son requested Ibrahim to DO... Son will be at the receiving end.. otherwise son would have said "I would DO it as you commanded" if in fact son to leave ... Son cannot say father "do what you are commanded" while son is the one who has to execute what his father saw..
When son is not the DOER, son accepted to be patient/ STEADFAST letting the DOER to carry out his task without obstacles... If separation, then son needless to say patience coz without having patience you cant carry out long journey and loads of task (if Ibrahim intended his son to preach god's law- which dream never state)...
Note below.. dream itself is not complete for Ibrahim to carry out either slaughter or separation ...
37102 " ..... O my son, indeed I have seen in a dream that I sacrifice you...." sahih ..Separate for WHOM / Slaughter for WHOM?
**Separate and send where? For what?
** slaughter and do what? Bury the body? Or eat the flesh?
Dream never said a word that it is "FOR ALLAH" ... clear confusion of Ibrahim..(note, Moses's mother instructed with complete picture, promising to return him and make him messenger) . Was his son a messenger to do that? Who will accept him if he was sent to a place other than his language ? If going to place spoken same language then not far.. Then why all drama? If he was already a grown man and a messenger then no need Ibrahim's dream.... His son clearly underaged...Now.. We know, the DOER is Ibrahim and he is the older and father... If you take "as took to his forehead to say farewell" then most suited in both of them is Ibrahim... Coz that's reasonable and most of all Doer... Acting person is Ibrahim...
Even to slaughter, Ibrahim is the doer and he would have put his son on slautering position.... (whatever "li" applies)
Now doer is Ibrahim Remember.
Then suddenly in that posture God calls out...How?.. That's key..
""" We called out to HIM..".. Who is this him and why Him and then quote O! Ibrahim ? Coz Doer...
If separation son is the Doer... But God calls out the right person Doer who is Ibrahim before slaughter ...
If separation who in fact carried out the task? In fact son.. Coz Ibrahim just saw the dream.... But burden was on his son....
But if slaughter who carried out completely as he seen in dream? Ibrahim.. Only son was patient and surrendered enabling father to accomplish his dream ..
Then comes the next verse.. It was MANIFEST TRIAL...
If separation for the cause of Allah, how can that be a trial manifest? They both doing a great job... Not a trial manifest (mubeen) ..Trial coz, Ibrahim took the wrong path....trial always when we are wrong if it was self conduct.. .... And trial only to Ibrahim coz his son was innocent and followed a Messenger's request by obeying him..
Ibrahim was REWARDED not coz he attempted to slaughter, coz of he was used to be a muhsinun (good doer).. Just coz Ibrahim got one thing wrong that also hoping that it was from God, how come God punish.... His reward was delivering his beloved son... Wasn't it a reward for a father? What could have been had he slaughtered ? To date all would be cursing him... Coz son was pure not a tyrant or destined disbeliever...
Mosa teacher we don't curse coz God speak the truth about boy...further God said it was INTENDED 1881.. so the teacher did what God intended.... -
QUESTION NO. 06
Peace…
below blue highlighted waqas's comment and question....
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 they HAVEN'T CONFIRMED it yet, i.e. it is intention only.You have utterly messed up what INTENTION is &.. haven’t you?
For example … I saw while driving a matured person keeping his head on the rail track for suicide while train is getting closer… when the train approached so near someone suddenly pulled him out with his legs and saved his life which he never wanted…His intention was to die and if not for that brave young man he would have died on the spot… it doesn’t mean suicide person didn’t carry out his intention …Intention was carried out to its maximum but not the outcome…
So, Ibrahim saw the dream and took it as command… not actually a kind of his own intention but based on dream hoping it is from Allah as a command.. So he was about to carry out the INTENTION of God in his view..
Yes.. 37103 they both surrendered purely … (so it is perfect verb) they in fact did the (Aslama) surrendering part...
Then.. Ibrahim about to slaughter and no one would stop Ibrahim.. He carried out his dream…Didn’t he?
Now, who did in fact stop it from doing it? God… what He said? O! Ibrahim you believed the dream… Dear Waqas.. Believing part didn’t take place AFTER the SURRENDER but before Surrendering.. that’s why they surrendered and about to slaughter…
But, God comes in to picture later… When God said O! Ibrahim… suddenly Ibrahim would have stopped … then God says.. You believed the Dream… Did Ibrahim believe at that time while God said? No… no way..No chance..Technically they have CONFIRMED everything in advance… Only God stopped it as a mercy and rewarded..
-
Peace ……..
QUESTION NO. 05
Waqa's question and comments below in blue..
can you provide some examples 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.Are you sure, is that you who asked this question…I wonder what made you to pose such a weak query….Not expected from your standard as I know of you through your articles…
REWARDS are not for the particular act stated here (whether done or not done)…. Don’t you get that… “LIKE THUS WE REWARD THE GOOD DOERS” is in the same chapter few times… Just explain for what reason they were rewarded based on the story presented in quran? For example Moses, Nuh, etc etc…. No. No.. don’t complicate... REWARD is for sheer performance good things in the life and God knew they were Muhsinun and for that precise reason they were thus rewarded coz they were in total dilemma… Wasn’t Ibrahim a Good doer (Muhsinun) … He was always…. So delivered from nasty act he completely got wrong…
Examples you ask for “like thus We reward the Doer of Good” … okay note below.. 3780 (Nuh) … 37121 (Mosa, Harun) …. 37131 (Ilyaseen)
What they in general did or what they about to do but didn’t do to deserve by a statement by GOD saying soon after “like thus We reward the Doer of Good” ? Nothing …right? But they deserve in God’s vision coz they were pure human…
-
Peace…
QUESTION NO. 04
below are Waqas's question and comments in blue..
can you provide a classical Arabic dictionary reference which states the meaning of the verb TLL 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 , i.e. not willingly, but Quran states both submitted so the action was willingly, i.e. no force needed).I am extremely sorry question No. 04 asking Dictionary reference… I don’t use dictionary, so I am unable to give you..(I beg you pardon).. I know, whoever translated would have used dictionaries in their support to give certain meaning…that’s enough for me plus pure quran..But I am not blind to accept as it is translated without verification with quranic flow and sheer meaning… it has worked out for me and continuing to do so…...
This word ( tā lām lām (ل ل ت) occurs once.. okay..but it has been translated referring dictionaries as put him down…or even take as throw down / make one prostrate / hold down / wrestle down…. Never mind.. just coz it occurs once in quran, I won’t panic….
Just look what is written in quran other than the particular word T L L… what is attached with TLL to give meaning.. what is the act to happen.. that’s important…..
Note they surrendered willingly … fine..… Surrendered for what? For slaughtering not for wandering…Once surrendered to slaughter it has to be done in its own/unique manner…no kindness can creep in while you are about to slaughter anything (coz life like us)… then you won’t be able to do… Honestly I cannot slaughter even a tiny animal… Why God says… when they are to whisk/lash the culprits not to have pity….with such atmosphere job cannot be done…
We know Ibrahim is kind (incredibly) and most of all that was his son… But,… somehow he controlled his mind to do the slaughtering … If he can come up to the slaughtering point, why can’t he throw his son down to further proceed? Is throwing down is mighty or slaughtering? How he would carry on slaughtering if he can’t even first throw him down…. Ibrahim adjusted clearly his mind…
Further… why he threw him down… probably his son’s face was covered (usual way of human slaughter) and he was unable to see where to keep his head on his own…Or though his was patient and surrendered still afraid to face… Slaughtering will take place in slaughtering manner… with kindness cannot execute..it doesn’t mean they don’t have kindness.. I never said gentle / soft willing manner as you claim …. -
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.
