Does The Quran say God told Abraham to sacrifice his son? - Eid Al Adha

[Houriya]

Thabaha / thibh / sacrifice, separation

thibh 3atheem : great sacrifice, separation for a great mission

[ibn_a]

Salaam,

peace ibn_a,

What I said refers to AFTER (and immediately after) he had enacted the vision, hence my use of "said" not "says". Not at the moment (i.e. in the process of doing) or was about to enact. That's the difference.

...

...
*Arabic "sa" is a prefixed particle (i.e. coming before the verb "find me") indicating action in the future. The obvious problem for the conventional understanding is how can one be of the patient ones after having been sacrificed/killed?
....
http://mypercept.co.uk/articles/Quran-Abraham-sacrifice-son.html

Peace Wakas,


Adapted my previous comment, but still don't see an issue about "Sa" / سَ 

The conventional understanding:

I think that when his son said: ... you will find me, if God willed, of the patient ones. / ... satajiduni, in sha'a Allahu, mina alssabireena,
refers to the MOMENT ( if3al ma tu amru i.e  when Abraham would do what he saw in his dream),
and NOT AFTER:  if3al ma tu amru.


If patience refers to AFTER, then of course there would be a problem with the conventional understanding,
but if patience refers to the MOMENT, then I dont think there is an issue.

Unless the Arabic language rules don't allow that it could be understood that way ( i.e. the conventional understanding).

...

All you or anyone needs to do is bring one example from the over 100 uses of "sa" in Quran that matches with whatever you/anyone takes it to mean in this Abraham story. jkhan provided one example but issue is it depends on how you interpret that story, if it is taken as is commonly taken then it fails as an example.

What I'm asking is not difficult, but it seems getting an answer to my questions is proving difficult.

I don't know if there is an appropriate example, there could be, maybe some one knows about an example.
If there is no example, what do you think that it could mean for the Abraham leaving scenario and for  the conventional understanding?


والله اعلم
Allah knows best.

[Houriya]

peace,

Quote :

I think that when his son said: ... you will find me, if God willed, of the patient ones. / ... satajiduni, in sha'a Allahu, mina alssabireena,
refers to the MOMENT ( if3al ma tu amru i.e  when Abraham would do what he saw in his dream),
and NOT AFTER:  if3al ma tu amru.

if3al ma tu amru : do what you order in the present,
Abraham's vision :  He did not say I was ordered to do.

[jkhan]

peace ibn_a,

What I said refers to AFTER (and immediately after) he had enacted the vision, hence my use of "said" not "says". Not at the moment (i.e. in the process of doing) or was about to enact. That's the difference.

All you or anyone needs to do is bring one example from the over 100 uses of "sa" in Quran that matches with whatever you/anyone takes it to mean in this Abraham story. jkhan provided one example but issue is it depends on how you interpret that story, if it is taken as is commonly taken then it fails as an example.

What I'm asking is not difficult, but it seems getting an answer to my questions is proving difficult.

<<<< <<< Cites 28:27, which possibly works depending on how one interprets it:
1) 28:27 means Moses would marry one of his daughters and go on to fulfill the condition set ---> does not work as a qualifying comparable example
2) 28:27 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.>> >>>>>

Above waqas's comment..

Peace Waqas...

 In fact the flaw of verses says Musa married and seems to be fulfilled term only first part of the term that is to say 8 years.. As soon as he fulfilled the term (ajall not ajalain) he is leaving with his family (married family)  fortunately God uses what Musa said in verse 28:29...here the usage is in plural(aathikum, umkuthzu) that also 3 or more plural.. So it shows Musa's wife plus 2kids or more with him.. Coz they can only be Musa's family non other coz God called musa leaving after completing a term... So musa would not have married after completing the term but when they agreed initially.. Musa cannot have two more kids once completed 8 years and leave otherwise. ..
Here important thing is term agreement was only with musa and father in law not with his daughter... Musa agreed to the basic term 8 years...  So he married.. Agreeing to the term is important completing or not completing is in Musa's hand and their family life...
So what you should consider is what Musa agreed with his father in law and not the time he completes.. The ACT is term agreement...
So they agreed, and marriage took place...  That's the story.. So why not particle "SA' shouldn't match ... Musa didn't betray the term..  That was part of his married life in the end... Point to note is unless musa agreed the second part i.e marriage won't take place.. 
So act of agreeing to the requested term took place before marriage took place...
First... Agreement
Second....  Marriage

Is that clear now dear brother waqas... Is your long pending particle 'Sa' issue satisfies you now?  If not explain me why....

[Wakas]

peace jkhan,

Thanks for clarifying however you have invalidated the example you cited and thus strengthened my argument. Let me explain:

I said:

Cites 28:27, which possibly works depending on how one interprets it:
1) 28:27 means Moses would marry one of his daughters and go on to fulfill the condition set ---> does not work as a qualifying comparable example
2) 28:27 means Moses would fulfill the request then after that marry a daughter ---> does work

Previously you never clarified which of the above two was your view, however in your above post you have now clarified your view is (1) when you said "So musa would not have married after completing the term but when they agreed initially". This is also my view.

To explain it away, you try and make the case it is about the act of agreeing, but this fails logic.
When one makes an agreement with another it is impossible to tell if the other party is righteous or not at that point, and that can only be determined if/when they stay true to what was agreed upon. Since this was an agreement with a time component then by Moses experiencing his father-in-law's behaviour/demands/actions/etc over the course of the agreement Moses will be able to determine if he was true to his word and righteous (or not)..

28:27 says:
He said, "I wish to offer one of my two daughters for you to marry, in return for working for me for eight HaJJ; if you make them ten, it will be voluntary on your part and I do not intend to make difficulty for you. You will find me, GOD willing, righteous."

[jkhan]

peace jkhan,

Thanks for clarifying however you have invalidated the example you cited and thus strengthened my argument. Let me explain:

I said:
Previously you never clarified which of the above two was your view, however in your above post you have now clarified your view is (1) when you said "So musa would not have married after completing the term but when they agreed initially". This is also my view.

To explain it away, you try and make the case it is about the act of agreeing, but this fails logic.
When one makes an agreement with another it is impossible to tell if the other party is righteous or not at that point, and that can only be determined if/when they stay true to what was agreed upon. Since this was an agreement with a time component then by Moses experiencing his father-in-law's behaviour/demands/actions/etc over the course of the agreement Moses will be able to determine if he was true to his word and righteous (or not)..

28:27 says:
He said, "I wish to offer one of my two daughters for you to marry, in return for working for me for eight HaJJ; if you make them ten, it will be voluntary on your part and I do not intend to make difficulty for you. You will find me, GOD willing, righteous."

Dear Waqas...
From your side it may be illogical... But from my side it is logical... I will explain why...
First of all I find the old man even before Musa agreed to marry a righteous person...

After watering for the women... Women would have noticed the behavior of Musa and the way he talked to them...
All these stories they both would have thoroughly told the old father... That would have already impressed the old man...
No one would send his daughters to a stranger again asking to meet him for just watering... It shows the old man's quality as a person... He wanted to reward.... But he just not rewarded for musa watered.. It seems like they were in serious conversation narrating all Musa's story to him... Musa also seemed impressed about the behavior of daughters and and the old man already... Soothing words of old man saying "Don't fear you have escaped from wring doers" these are peaceful words from good people.   
Musa was not a child not to understand that family... Musa would have never agreed to strangers without anyone for him to Knkw about them.. He was all alone and judged them.. He would have never agreed if he didn't find the old man and daughters as believers.. If what musa judged is right then he can expect him to be righteous... But it was old man's  duty to give a word saying that you will find me righteous... That would be moral confidence boost to musa coupled with what old man stated...
Further... Daughter claimed musa as trustworthy (ameen)  ..disbelievers don't need trustworthy person.. They were also looking a righteous person and they found in musa...
Don't tell me musa blindly agreed to marry coz he was in a pathetic situation... It is God who gave musa from a righteous family a righteous daughter...
Did musa say.. If I don't find you righteous I will withdraw from the term.. Musa was convinced...

So for me it is meaningful that musa trusted the whole family and agreed to the old man's condition and married immediately... For this agreement they both placed God as witness ...this is a righteous act...
The confidence musa kept on old man judging him is the triguring point.. Then marriage.. I don't see any flaw in using particle "Sa"..
It doesn't take years to judge a true righteous person... Like the daughter of old man instantly told musa as Alameen (Trustworthy)...

Whatever you decide this story won't change the Ibrahim's story.. Evidences are glaring fir physical sacrifice...

[jkhan]

@ Waqas...
would like to add below comment for previous thread..

remember the old man called himself "you will find me God will Saaliheen" it means simple law abiding good doer" = salaihin.. not a great Muththaqun... So to identify a simple law abiding good doer being a believer is within the reach of a persons simple acts if one meets and stays a few moment with him is more than enough to grasp....

[Wakas]

peace jkhan,

It seems your view is based on presumptions. You nor I can change the Arabic.

Your basic claim is that the old man was already righteous and Moses already determined that hence agreed, rendering the Arabic redundant:

"...you will find me, God willing, of the righteous..." (imperfect, future tense)

[jkhan]

peace jkhan,

It seems your view is based on presumptions. You nor I can change the Arabic.

Your basic claim is that the old man was already righteous and Moses already determined that hence agreed, rendering the Arabic redundant:

"...you will find me, God willing, of the righteous..." (imperfect, future tense)

We don't want to neglect Arabic or its pattern... And I think I or you won't... Problem here is I think you forgot your initial question and opinion...you keep skipping or jumping one to another... Below your statement

///Arabic "sa" is a prefixed particle (i.e. coming before the verb "find me") indicating ACTION in the FUTURE. The OBVIOUS PROBLEM for the conventional understanding is how can one be of the patient ones AFTER HAVING been sacrificed/killed?///

who explained to you that Ibrahim's son was patient after being sacrificed...? Look brother... Note both stories Ibrahim and musa...

Ibrahim saw a dream... Explained to his son... And wanted his suggestion and opinion...his son agreed... This consent of Ibrahim's Son is very crucial... From the moment until Ibrahim about to sacrifice we have no clue how many days passed away.. Anyhow till the sacrifice took place Ibrahim's son was patient and offered his father total commitment to make his job easy... So the future was from the time Ibrahim's son agreed for his father's request until God called Ibrahim.. So Ibrahim saw the promised patience of his son.. He didn't betray...

Same way... Musa had a conversation with the old man that too very amicable one like Ibrahim did with his son.. Then old man put his wish into Musa's ear.. Same way like Ibrahim asked his son.. What old man asked is would you like to marry one ofy daughter but with a condition ..?  Musa agreed.. Same way Ibrahim's son agreed... Here the one who put the condition is telling you will find me patient in sha Allah... Coz he is the one who is going to make conditions throughout 8yrs.. Observer will be musa... In Ibrahim's case.. His son is the one who surrenders to Ibrahim's request and observer will be Ibrahim..
So.. Ibrahim story....
Asking suggestion (ibrahim) >>> Acceptance of sacrifice (son) >>> 'sathajiduni' you will find me ..future till sacrifice action took place.. .... Isn't the acceptance the key ?

So.. Musa story...

Asking suggestion (Old Man) >>> Acceptance of marriage (Musa) >>> 'sathajiduni' you will find me ..future till term complete .. .... Isn't the acceptance the key in both?

If Musa and Ibrahim's son not accept the requests then NO future...

[Houriya]

Peace,

Other example of "You will find me, God willing, to be patient"

18:69    He said (Moses): "You will find me, God willing, to be patient. And I will not disobey any command of yours."
18:70    He said: "If you follow me, then do not ask about anything until I mention it to you."
18:71    So they ventured forth until they rode in a boat and he made a hole in it. He said: "Have you made a hole in it to drown its people? You have done something dreadful!"
18:72    He said: "Did I not tell you that you will not be able to have patience with me?"

For Moses, this is  the future that precedes the following action : they ventured forth until they rode in a boat and he made a hole in it. Moses was not patient

In the case of Abraham's son, this is  the future that precedes the following action  : Abraham has confirmed the vision, they both had submitted, .

The clear test is the confirmation of the vision by Abraham, the patience of his son, and their submission.