Translation:
So when they had both 4100 submitted their wills (to Allah., and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice), 4101
So when they had both 4100 submitted their wills (to Allah., and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice), 4101
Translation:
But as soon as the two had surrendered themselves to [what they thought to be] the will of God, 40 and [Abraham] had laid him down on his face,
But as soon as the two had surrendered themselves to [what they thought to be] the will of God, 40 and [Abraham] had laid him down on his face,
Commentary:
40 The above interpolation is, I believe, absolutely necessary for a proper understanding of this passage. As pointed out repeatedly in these notes, the verb aslama signifies, in Quranic usage, "he surrendered himself to God", or "to God’s will", even if there is no express mention of God; hence, the dual form aslama occurring in the above verse might, on the face of it, have this meaning as well. Since, however, the sequence clearly shows that it was not God’s will that Ishmael should be sacrificed, his and his father’s "self-surrender to God’s will" can have in this context only a purely subjective meaning - namely "to what they thought to be the will of God".
40 The above interpolation is, I believe, absolutely necessary for a proper understanding of this passage. As pointed out repeatedly in these notes, the verb aslama signifies, in Quranic usage, "he surrendered himself to God", or "to God’s will", even if there is no express mention of God; hence, the dual form aslama occurring in the above verse might, on the face of it, have this meaning as well. Since, however, the sequence clearly shows that it was not God’s will that Ishmael should be sacrificed, his and his father’s "self-surrender to God’s will" can have in this context only a purely subjective meaning - namely "to what they thought to be the will of God".
4100 Note that the sacrifice was demanded of both Abraham and IsmaTl. It was a trial of the will of the father and the son. By way of trial the father had the command conveyed to him in a vision. He consulted the son. The son readily consented, and offered to stand true to his promise if his self-sacrifice was really required. The whole thing is symbolical. Allah does not require the flesh and blood of animals ( 22:37 ), much less of human beings. But he does require the giving of our whole being to Allah, the symbol of which is that we should give up something very dear to us, if Duty requires that sacrifice, (R).
4101 Our version may be compared with the Jewish-Christian version of the present Old Testament. The Jewish tradition, in order to glorify the younger branch of the family, descended from Isaac, ancestor of the Jews, as against the elder branch, descended from Isma'il, ancestor of the Arabs, refers this sacrifice to Isaac (Gen. 22:1-18). Now Isaac was born when Abraham was 100 years old (Gen. 21:5), while Isma'il was born to Abraham when Abraham was 86 years old (Gen. 16:16). Isma'il was therefore 14 years older than Isaac. During his first 14 years Isma'il was the only son of Abraham; at no time was Isaac the only son of Abraham. Yet, in speaking of the sacrifice, the Old Testament says (Gen. 22:2): 'And He said, Take now thy son, thine only son Issac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah : and offer him there for a burnt offering..." This slip shows at any rate which was the older version, and how it was overlaid, like the present Jewish records, in the interests of a tribal religion. The " land of Moriah " is not clear: it was three days journey from Abraham's place (Gen. 22:4). There is less warrant for identifying it with the hill of Moriah on which Jerusalem was afterwards built than with the hill of Marwah which is identified with the Arab tradition about Isma'il.