Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View The Spirit of Animal Sacrifice in the Hajj Ritual
2 years ago  ::  Jun 03, 2012 - 5:31PM #1
visio
Posts: 3,394

The background root story of this Islamic practice of Qurban centred around Prophet Ibrahimsaw (Abraham), as most Muslims were made to believe by scholars.   Which verses of the Al-Quran and/or narratives (hadith) of Prophet Muhammadsaw indicate that it was against Ismailsaw, and, not Ishaksaw (Isaac), as indicated quite clearly in a verse of the written Taurat, that Ibrahimsaw was tested for a particular knowledge of the Divine Law?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 03, 2012 - 8:57PM #2
visio
Posts: 3,394

The said verse in the Taurat reads:


Genesis  22:2   And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.


Please note the phrase "...thy only son Isaac......"

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 04, 2012 - 11:09AM #3
Ibn
Posts: 4,939

Jun 3, 2012 -- 8:57PM, visio wrote:


The said verse in the Taurat reads:


Genesis  22:2   And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.


Please note the phrase "...thy only son Isaac......"



Isaac was never the "only son" of Ibrahim (as). Ishmael (Ismael) was the son who was the "only son" of prophet Ibrahim for 13 years before Isaac was born.


Here is the story in the Qur'an from Shakir's translation:


[37.100] My Lord! grant me of the doers of good deeds.


[37.101] So We gave him the good news of a boy, possessing  forbearance.


[37.102] And when he attained to working with him, he said: O my  son! surely I have seen in a dream that I should sacrifice  you; consider then what you see. He said: O my father! do  what you are commanded; if Allah please, you will find me of  the patient ones.


[37.103] So when they both submitted and he threw him down upon  his forehead,


[37.104] And We called out to him saying: O Ibrahim!


[37.105] You have indeed shown the truth of the vision; surely  thus do We reward the doers of good:


[37.106] Most surely this is a manifest trial.


[37.107] And We ransomed him with a Feat sacrifice.


[37.108] And We perpetuated (praise) to him among the later generations.


[37.109] Peace be on Ibrahim.


[37.110] Thus do We reward the doers of good.


[37.111] Surely he was one of Our believing servants.


[37.112] And We gave him the good news of Ishaq, a prophet among  the good ones.


[37.113] And We showered Our blessings on him and on Ishaq; and  of their offspring are the doers of good, and (also) those  who are clearly unjust to their own souls.


As you can see, the news of Ishaq was given to prophet Ibrahim AFTER he had gone through the trial of sacrifice of his only son by obeying Allah (SWT).


The story in Genesis does not make sense unless Isaac is replaced by Ishmael for the sacrifice event. Then it makes perfect sense.

I know one thing: There are a billion Islamic people in the world today, and there will be about 2 billion by the time we're dead. They're not going to give up their religion.
(Chris Matthews)
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 04, 2012 - 7:21PM #4
visio
Posts: 3,394

Jun 4, 2012 -- 11:09AM, Ibn wrote:


Jun 3, 2012 -- 8:57PM, visio wrote:


The said verse in the Taurat reads:


Genesis  22:2   And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.


Please note the phrase "...thy only son Isaac......"



Isaac was never the "only son" of Ibrahim (as). Ishmael (Ismael) was the son who was the "only son" of prophet Ibrahim for 13 years before Isaac was born.



Assalamu'alaikum wrhmtllh br. Ibn,  thank you for those passages of the Al-Quran.   And my contention is that until Ibrahimsaw married a third one (from wiki sources), Ismail was the only son with a seed (zuriat) and, thus, a heir status.   Verily this Divine Law is implied in the Genesis itself by the following string of verses:


Genesis 15:1-4    After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.   15:2 And Abram said, LORD God, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?    15:3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.  15:4    And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.


What the verse is implying is that an inheriting seed/hear cannot be any son or daughter but is limited strictly to the child who were conceived by both male and female sperms DIRECTLY.   Sons and daughters can be adopted and that is by the laws we human make to consolate ourselves.   Therefore, before the birth of any of Ibrahimsaw's sons - seeded or non-seeded, he was well informed in advance of what is the Divine Law on Inheritance.   The fact as written in Genesis Ibrahimsaw did approach Hagar and the latter was of a fertile age and Ismael was conceived.   The fertility of Ibrahimsaw was thus confirmed, even at old age.   Ha! Ha! Ha! to all women activists, please, please, please, allow us men to have more than one wife! irrespective of wether we can (financially) afford it or not.


There are many other interesting lines in Genesis for some fundamental background information that led to this convention on inheritance especially of our spiritual nature/status.  InshaAllah. i'll present it in my next post.


Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 05, 2012 - 7:15AM #5
Ibn
Posts: 4,939

Actually, the narrative about Isaac as the "only son" is important for another reason; the birthright of the firstborn in Deuteronomy 21:


21:15 [This is the law] when a man has two wives, one whom he loves and one whom he dislikes, and both the loved and unloved wives have sons, but the first-born is that of the unloved one.


21:16 On the day that [this man] wills his property to his sons, he must not give the son of the beloved wife birthright preference over the first-born, who is the son of the unloved wife.


21:17 [Even if] the first-born is the son of the hated wife, [the father] must recognize him so as to give him a double portion of all his property. Since [this son] is the first fruit of [his father's] manhood, the birthright is legally his. 


It is to deny the birthright of Ismael; the firstborn.

I know one thing: There are a billion Islamic people in the world today, and there will be about 2 billion by the time we're dead. They're not going to give up their religion.
(Chris Matthews)
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 05, 2012 - 6:03PM #6
visio
Posts: 3,394

Jun 5, 2012 -- 7:15AM, Ibn wrote:


Actually, the narrative about Isaac as the "only son" is important for another reason; the birthright of the firstborn in Deuteronomy 21:


21:15 [This is the law] when a man has two wives, one whom he loves and one whom he dislikes, and both the loved and unloved wives have sons, but the first-born is that of the unloved one.


21:16 On the day that [this man] wills his property to his sons, he must not give the son of the beloved wife birthright preference over the first-born, who is the son of the unloved wife.


21:17 [Even if] the first-born is the son of the hated wife, [the father] must recognize him so as to give him a double portion of all his property. Since [this son] is the first fruit of [his father's] manhood, the birthright is legally his. 


It is to deny the birthright of Ismael; the firstborn.




Not only Ismael but the other six sons conceived thru Keturah, the concubine Abraham married (presumably of fertile age to facilitate normal conception and birth.  No angelic visitatiton for Keturah to get her children born) after the death of Sarah.   By virtue of Genesis 15 : 4, they were entitled heir.  My read on this verse, Isaac was not entitled.   Unfortunately, we don't hear or see Abraham's wills before he died.   The deutronomis you quoted above seems to be an extended effort to justify Genesis 22 : 2 (which obviously came after 15 : 4) which declared Isaac as the only son.   If the verse really means son and not daughter, then it appeared to me that this part of the Toraic Law looked like an ancient Chinese Law which are still observed till to-day - i.e. the eldest son walloped all, which led the youngest ones to learn all the kungfus and then we have the mighty walloped all coming into the picture.  Birth right now is not the main issue.   It is the contradiction between 15 : 4 and 22 : 2.  I do not read the latter as divine because the All-Knowing God knew very well that Abraham already had a son - normally conceived and born.   That would put the whole of the deutronomies quoted above in the same catagory.   The Al-Quranic Laws on inheritance served to correct those aberration that developed in the Law of the Ancients.   The Quranic Laws don't discriminate between sons, wives, hated or non-hated.   Yes there would be preceived difference in the quantum between male and female but there are other non-quantum factors to be considered, which those skeptics seem not to be doing.   There is every lesson to learn from Sarah.   And Abraham, according to Genesis, also made a mistake.  He taught Sarah to lie.  Please don't misunderstand me, this is not meant for any disrespect.  Even, Prophet Muhammadsaw, in a hadith, said that there has been no man (human) born out of a woman's womb, from the day they were born,  that Satan/Iblis has not touched him/her except Isasaw (Jesus).   




Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 07, 2012 - 6:38PM #7
visio
Posts: 3,394

Jun 4, 2012 -- 11:09AM, Ibn wrote:


Jun 3, 2012 -- 8:57PM, visio wrote:


The said verse in the Taurat reads:


Genesis  22:2   And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.


Please note the phrase "...thy only son Isaac......"



Isaac was never the "only son" of Ibrahim (as). Ishmael (Ismael) was the son who was the "only son" of prophet Ibrahim for 13 years before Isaac was born.



Substitionary animal sacrifices had been practised by pagans before Abraham came into the picture which included the Egyptians where they were presented as a burnt offering which signalled a rather different kind of spirit/purpose built into the ritual.   The above verse clearly says "....offer him (Isaac) for a burnt offering..."  The Hebrews of the day would have known that already and the slaughter story seemed to me a bit redundant.   The Quranic story on Ismael doesn't carry the specific message of burnt offering.  


Here is the story in the Qur'an from Shakir's translation:


[37.100] My Lord! grant me of the doers of good deeds.


[37.101] So We gave him the good news of a boy, possessing  forbearance.


[37.102] And when he attained to working with him, he said: O my  son! surely I have seen in a dream that I should sacrifice  you; consider then what you see. He said: O my father! do  what you are commanded; if Allah please, you will find me of  the patient ones.


[37.103] So when they both submitted and he threw him down upon  his forehead,


[37.104] And We called out to him saying: O Ibrahim!


[37.105] You have indeed shown the truth of the vision; surely  thus do We reward the doers of good:


[37.106] Most surely this is a manifest trial.


[37.107] And We ransomed him with a Feat sacrifice.


[37.108] And We perpetuated (praise) to him among the later generations.


[37.109] Peace be on Ibrahim.


[37.110] Thus do We reward the doers of good.


[37.111] Surely he was one of Our believing servants.


[37.112] And We gave him the good news of Ishaq, a prophet among  the good ones.


[37.113] And We showered Our blessings on him and on Ishaq; and  of their offspring are the doers of good, and (also) those  who are clearly unjust to their own souls.


As you can see, the news of Ishaq was given to prophet Ibrahim AFTER he had gone through the trial of sacrifice of his only son by obeying Allah (SWT).


The story in Genesis does not make sense unless Isaac is replaced by Ishmael for the sacrifice event. Then it makes perfect sense.




Of manifested divine trial I could think of several messages that the verse carries.....


A trial of a Ibrahimsaw  obedience to a specific Divine Command.


A trial of a rememberance of what he was made to witness in a revelation such as in the dream mentioned in As-Saffat 37 : 102.   What the verses never said was where and when he received the dream.   We know from Muhammadsaw's hadith [Sahih Al-Bukhari Vol 4, #583] that after leaving Sarah and her suckling toddler in the barren and deserted Makkah, he left them and returned to Canaan only to appear again after Ismaelsaw had just passed his age of puberty and married to a Jurhum girl.  It makes a theological and psychological sense that if there was an urgent need for Ibrahimsaw to make the long journey, it was prompted by the revelation he received.  And we are not wrong to speculate that the two elements in his dream were associated with Ismaelsaw's sacrifice and construction of the Ka'aba and a form of a hajj ritual to be attached to it.


The phrase " And when he attained to working with him, ........." in 37 : 102 is significant because there is a lot of facts attached to it.   The original Arabic word BLGH (balagha) means the age of puberty.   Other than a boy started to start generate his dischargeable and reproductive biofluid at this very age his inherited spiritual color [from SELF = Soul + Spirit/Mind + Body], good or evil, began to gradually and detectibly show up in his beingness (SELF/Behaviour).  So while Ibrahim was in Canaan and Ismael approached/past his pubert age in a far distant Makkah, the former had a dream about his long forgotten son.   And it wasn't a good one.   He could have been seeing one of the spirit of his ancestors of upto the last four generation his son, Ismaelsaw, had inherited.   This was not what he had prayed for in 37 : 100.   During his dream he could be pleading to ALLAHswt for a change as based on one of the following Quranic verses:


Ibrahim 14 : 19   Do you not see that ALLAH has created the heavens and the earth with truth?   If He wills, He can remove you and bring (in your place) a new creation!


Al-Ma'arij  70 : 40 - 41   So I swear by the Lord of all the points of sunrise and sunset in the east and the west that surely We are Able to replace them by better than them; and We are not to be outrun.


The norm for such a replacement is death.   In Ismaelsaw's case the death was ransomised [37 : 107] by the great sacrifice of slaughtering a ram and distributed to the needy.  Finally, Ibrahimsaw's prayer [37 : 100] for a righteous son was granted.


The Hajj performance, as it is to-day, as reformed by Muhammadsaw. is a reminder of the long journey for each of our soul.   This long journey had caused us and will be causing us to inherit a multitude characters of spirit/mind of our ancestors and other people.   Thus upon self reflecting and self realisation that may occur during the Hajj rituals one may plead to ALLAHswt for a change of that spirit we (the soul) have inherited for a better one.   For this reason the Hajj ritual ends up with with particpants offering their chips, the Qurban, after a Hindustani movie of the same title.


So what divine dream Ibrahimsaw had received had been implemented and fulfilled as he wlaked with his married teenaged son Ismaelsaw.   And it had taken a couple of thousand years when Muhammadsaw was chosen to perfect them, as to fully remind mankind of their soul's journey.   As ALLAHswt says it in Fussilat 41 : 11   Then He rose over (istawa) towards the heaven when it was smoke, and said to it and the earth:   "Come both of you willingly or unwillingly."   They (the heavens and the earth) both said:  "We come willingly." 


The story in the present day written Taurat that Ismael was a wild man who would step his foot on everyone's toe could be what Sarah had heard about Ibraham's dream of his son Ismael.   After the great sacrifice by the Will of ALLAHswt, things changed.   So be it.  It is not mentioned in the Al-Quran of Sarah's defilement.   In the hadith quoted above, however, it is mentioned that she was a jealous and filled with a hatred for Hagar woman.   ALLAHswt could have told Abraham to Sarah for a burn ofering, but then He didn't.




Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 09, 2012 - 8:28PM #8
visio
Posts: 3,394

It is interesting to find out that after more than 20 years (my  estimate) after the substitutionary sacrifice prescribed for Ismailsaw by Ibrahimsaw,   the latter had to perform on the latter born Isaac, what appeared to be  the same process, but it wasn’t.  The circumstances that led to the event and its process as described in Genesis  draw  quite a few distinctive differences which defined different purpose or objectives of the story.  Please allow me to quote some of those strings of verses and make some comments on them which are entirely my personal.   There are some interesting theological data that go beyond the context of sacrifice, that I would like readers to share and think.


22: 1-2   And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.


There was no pre-witnessing/dream involved.   The trial is in the form of tempting Abraham with an established practice/ritual of burn offering that Abraham would have known of its proceedings.


22: 3-5   And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him. 22:4 Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off.  22:5 And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.


Abraham knew and take all the usual/normal preparations required to the place, guided as it were, and with the intent of a form of normal worship.


22: 6-10   And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together. 22:7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? 22:8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together. 22:9 And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. 22:10 And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.


In these verses are the key and critical difference in scenarios of the events between that of Ismael and Isaac.   In the case of Ismael, he was pre-described of his father’s dream and events that would end up by him being slaughtered by his own father, and, willingly, expressed his unconditional acceptance of ALLAHswt’s Will and Command.   On the contrary, in Isaac’s case, like his father, all the way he was assuming that it was just a kind of normal worship with a burnt offering and never expected that he was supposed to be the object of a slaughter.  Isaac never knew of his father real intention and there was no mention of Isaac’s resistance, nor, acceptance, of what his father was trying to do to him.   All we know is that there was an intervention by the angel of the Lord who appeared with a ram. [See the following verses]  


22:11 And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. 22:12 And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me. 22:13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.


There, in these verses you have it – an intervention by the angel of the Lord with a substitutionary and magical ram, appearing to both Abraham and Isaac.   One critical difference leads to another.  Please note well that the wordings in these verses are – ... angel of the LORD,…,  and, …. thine only son from me. …..   What it really says is that Isaac was Abraham’s only son from the angel of the Lord.   It doesn’t say Isaac was the only son from the Lord.   This verse, therefore, validates, prior verse Genesis 22 : 2 but we have it clear, in front of us, here, in the verse, there is an angel of the Lord who is claiming that he was the l seed father of biological Isaac, thus denying Isaac as an heir of Abraham to whom was revealed the defining verse of Genesis 15 : 3-4.


15:3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.  15:4    And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.


The whole divine concept/principle that are drawn from these verses follows the same that described the virgin birth of Isasaw (Jesus).  Thus, this is yet come to extra-Quranic sources to further confirm a distinction between the Al-Quranic terms of Bani-Adam (Children of Adam) and Bani-Israel (Children of Israel).  As I have often said in some other threads, the makeup of human soul, there are two typres.  One is created from a spirit of the offspring in the jinnic kingdom in the heavens chosen to descent and take a human form, only yet to ascend again towards ALLAHswt (Bani-Israel).  The other is created from the spirit of the animal kingdom of the earth (forms of catlle?) [See Az-Zumar 39 : 6] to be purified as the fruit the soul would surrender and submit to ALLAHswt by the way of progressive/evolutionary ascent towards ALLAHswt.   This is the mechanism/process ALLAHswt had it willed for Himself when He made His Vow in Fussilat 41 : 11.


Coming back to the topic, the stories of Abrahamic Sacrifices ends up with a prescription of animal sacrifice for both Bani-Adam and Bani-Israel.   The practice of human sacrifices to be applied to replace evil spirit/mind principle inherited by some Bani-Israel of the past was an aberration.  It was an attempt by some accomplished spiritualists to capture the astral or spirit/mind energy that separates out of the sacrifice and use it to power up their evil intention and desires, such as to dominate/control/deceive communities from their path of dedicating their lives towards THAT ONE GOD/ALLAHswt.    Only ALLAHswt knows as to how many Bani-Israel (as defined in the Quranic Cosmology) there are among Muslims to-day in proportion to Bani-Adam.   Obviously. even before Abraham there were strings of inter-tribe marriages among ancient man.   After all, the word pertaining to Israel appeared in the Pharaoh’s Egyptian Scrolls before Abraham was, i.e. much earlier than Isaac was.  Perhaps those lines of Pharaoh descendent among the Egyptians were another set of Bani-Israel who obtained their miraculous power and know how thru engaging in abusive kind of animal, or, even of human sacrifices.   The same kind of abuse, history being told, was generated by the progeny of Isaac and Ismael.   And Islam, Al-Quran as revealed to Muhammadsaw serve to correct those aberrations/abuses.   


I must mention it here that the angel of the Lord frequently used in Hebrew scriptures is a loose generic terms thru lacks of description.   In the Islamic/Quranic context, Jinns are the lower forms of angels which may appear and interact to a living person singly or in a group of two, three, four  … and in various human images.  Anyone of those can be an agent to directly cause a biological conception in a human female.   Guardian Angel or Gabriel (Generic) doesn’t function as such.   It only interacts with specific soul, irrespective of whichever spirit/mind and bodies it inherits during any lifetime period prescribed to it (the soul) and not the same of the soul of others.   The same kind of principle and process apply for both Bani-Israel and Bani-Adam.   As a matter of fact, the bottom line is none of except some group of gifted person could have some idea who is a Bani-Israel and who is a Bani-Adam.  Compared to men, women who bore children could have a better feel and smell, though they may be reluctant to speak about it.


At the core of the matter is that no one should question the validity of the animal sacrifice stories in both scriptures - Quran and Taurat.   By ALLAHswt they were presented to supplement and complement each other for a common purpose of knowing our true human nature, which, at the end of his prescribed term, Ibrahimsaw was made to realise.   It had taken us to yet another level from the Adamic story of sacrifices of Caine and Abel which carry the meassgae that between the animal spirits and vegetative spirits, of course, that of the animal are closer to ALLAHswt.   And ALLAHswt would receive them back first.  That is the divine order of things. 


Walaikumsalaamwrhmtllhwbkth,


BB Bangi, Malaysia.

Quick Reply
Cancel
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook