of Semitic .

Vtudies XXXI V/i Spring 1989

aI

I ABRAHAM’S SON AS THE INTENI)ED

SACRIFICE (AL-DIIABIH, QUR’ AN
37: 99 113): ISSUES IN QUR’ANIC
EXEGESIS

I REUvEN
FIRESTONE

I30SION UNIV I: RSI1\

appears in
The story of the binding of Abraham’s son first
Genesis za: 1 19 and unfolds in a terse but powerf narrative
ul
style that is typical of much of the hebrew Bible. Modern
critics have generally understood the major goal of the stun to
have been a protest against human sacrifice or an actiological
legend explaining why human sacrifice was abandoned and
replaced by the sacrifice of domestic 1animals.
When one examines the legend within its context of the
sacred history of the Israelite people , one notes a consistent
genealogical agenda as well. The genealogical theme is explicit
in many of the early Abraham stories and implicit in many of
the pre-Abrahamic legends. We note in the stories of Adam
and Eve, Cain and Abel, and the generations of Noah and the
Tower of Babel, for example, that the human race as a whole
proved itself unworthy of an enduring relationship with God. 2
After humankind demonstrated its failure s, God, though still
the God of the entire world, would hencef orth carry on an
exclusive relationship with only one small tribe represe nted by
Abraham and his progeny, the cthno-(religio-)nationai group
edled the people of Israel. Within Israel’s sacred history,
particularly within the Pentateuch but in other books as well,

1 I
2
clopaeclia Judaica, 2:480-i.
9
En
Though Noah and his family were chosen for survival because
Abraham and his family
ot
is
%oah’s righteousness, God’s relationship with
depicted quite differently. The covenant with Noah includes all living
creatures (Gen. 9:8-17), while the covenant with Abraham is specific only
to him and his offspring (Gen. i z:’-, etc.).

I
the issue
remains an extremely
ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN

of who would
important 3
one.
37:99-113

be included in that sacred geneak

‘the biblical story of the Binding of isaac includes amoru Is

concerns the genealogy of that people having an exciusne
covenantal relationship with God. The saga only begins. for
r
I
ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 9
-ii3
9
:
37

Additionally, throughout the centuries of persecution, Jews

nsiked to the Binding of Isaac as a paradigm for self-sacrihce.
uñcring Jews likened themselves to Isaac on the altar, ready
to utter themselves up to an unfathomable God who
he ultimate sacrifice: that of their own lives and
calls for
the lives of
example, after Isaac’s half-brother lshmael has been successfufl incit children in the final act of kiddusli liashem.
banLshed from the household and the birthright. Isaac’s politi In Christianity, Isaac becomes a prefiguration of Jesus as
cally astute and effective mother, Sarah, wins the battle flit 5 and his near-sacrifice a paradigm excelled only by
mc Christ,
posterity that was instigated by her rival and contender, the sacrifice of Jesus himself. In the same way that Isaac’s
3 By Genesis az, Isaac is indeed Abraham’s ‘only son’
Ilagar. willingness to be an offering is seen as merit that effectively
(yehidkha). I Ic and only he can continue the genealogical line 9 the sacrifice of Jesus atones for the sins
tt,nes for Israel’s sins,
established earlier between God and Abraham. The outcome of ii all humankind.
the hiblical legend assures the reader that despite Ahraham’c The unknown author of the Letter to the Hebrews was quite
terrible trial, God’s promise endures. i’he legend reinforces the aware of the genealogical importance connected with the
power and efficacy of the covenant with Abraham and his lint, Binding of isaac; irs significance is noted clearly in ii: t7-
a genealogically determined covenant which. acording to the lisewhere, however, the covenantal genealogy is re-interpreted
sacred history of Israel, is to endure forever.
5 n clearly Christian terms. Just as lshmael was born from a
later rabbinic Judaism reaffirms the message of exclusiiity and excluded from the covenant of old, Israel had become
‘lace
inherent in the biblical story of the Sacrifice, but aLso invests ii slave to the old and outmoded covenant of Sinai. ‘l’he new
with new meaning. The concept avot or ‘merit of the covenant is a covenant of the spirit and God’s promise; it
Jesus
fathers’ is assigned to Abraham for his unflinching willingness obtains among the newly chosen: those who have chosen
to carry out God’s command. This merit serves the purpose of as Christ.” The paradigm of Ishmael versus isaac established
protecting an erring Jewish people from God’s stern hand. in Hebrew Scriptures is expanded and
changed in the New
‘Te%tament. Just as Abraham’s rejected son, Ishmael, was
covenant that was given to his chosen
ticluded from the old
sin. Isaac, the new covenant or testament is passed on through
Various biblical stories and laws are concerned with determining, toe
example, which neighbouring peoples cannot marry into the Israrlttes
(Deut. 7:1 if, a; :4). how many generations certain groups must live amnne
I the newly or truly chosen ‘son’, Jesus. Isaac atoned

Martyrdom through ‘Sanctiflcation of the Divine Name’.

for his

See Shalom
0/kr Isaag
-

o/ the Command to
the Israelites before assimilating the values and responsibilities of Israciiic spiced’s The I .ns/ Iriul: On tht I spends and j.sjr,
‘citizenship’ (Deut. 23:8), and so forth. Jewish Publication Society of America i96;i.
s a airi/ke (Philadelphia.
if. in the ts6nlic extra-qur’anic renditions of this theme (it is
Lien. iG : 4 Gal. :
3 ib.
glosses over
not found in the Qur’ãn), 1-lagar is virtually never portrayed as instigating Rabbinie Judaism stresses the faith of Abraham and
emphasis placed on Isaac within I hristiauity That
the conflict. Isaac’s in reaction to the
Jewish eonccpi is
‘the exclusivity of the covenant is demonstrated again and again in the Isaac’s willingness to die on the altar is originally a
liexareuch. In the following generation. Jacob is destined to continue the itmonstrated by Israel Levi, The sacrifice d’tsaae ci Ic morr de Jesus’, in
Joachim Schoeps he
struggle with Fsau for the birthright and inheritance that began even in the RU 64 (i iz) and supported by the work of F-tans
9
in lounmi of Bib/soil lat,’rature, no.
womb of their mother Rebecca (Gen. ac :22. F.sau represents an ethnicalls ‘ucntice of Isaac in Paul’s Theology’,
related people derived (torn the \brahamic genealogy as well). The thca iiU), 385-92; and Geza ‘ermcs,
‘Redemption and Genesis XXII: The
isaac and the Sacriflce of Jesus’, in his .Vcri p/mr and rradaion
hi
is played over again with the story of Dma and the Shekhemices in Genem Binding of
with the so!ourn in Itgvpt. and again during the conquest of Canaan. juaum (Leidcn i
73)
9
Part of the daily liturgy for centuries, this concept is clear in th iO The example cited here is meant by the author to
demonstrate
geneal
supplication, ‘lord of the world, iust as Abraham withheld his mercy to Abraham’s extreme faith, though it indirectly acknowledges the
Your will with a perfect heart, may Your mercy withhold Your anger fron ‘gil agenda of Hebrew Scriptures as well.
us ...‘ 76}, 2-7).
(Siddur Rims! Yisreset [Jerusalem i
9 ii Gal. 4 22-31.

96 97
a
 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113
people and inherited the old covenant. But Jesus atoned for all
humanity; those who accept that inherit the new covenant
Those who do not will suffer the fate of the rejected Ishmael.
The biblical legend of the Binding of Isaac therefore serves
quite important but different roles for both Judaism and
Christianity. Judaism sees the legend as part of the history of
God’s exclusive covenantal relationship with the Jewish people
based on a spiritual-genealogical orientation. In Chrisrianin-,
Isaac’s binding served as the paradigm for the ultimate sacrifice
of God’s only son. As such, it became a foundation for the new
definition of covenant: also exclusive, but now based purely on
the determination of one’s belief.
As the Islamic understanding of the near-sacrifice evolved in
the first two Islamic centuries, it too shared a concern for an
exclusivist approach. We shall demonstrate below that while
the story plays a less central role in Islam than in either
Judaism or Christianity, the Sacrifice’
2 came to serve as a proof
in Islam for the exclusive relationship between God and the
Arab Muslim people.
I Satan Attempts to Interfere
The Qur’anic story of the dhabib or intended sacrifice of
Abraham’s son, like the biblical rendition, is noteworthy for its
terse style; and like the biblical story, it has remained subject to
varied ilnerpretations. Somewhat different from the rendition
found in Genesis,
13 the Qur’an never mentions the name of the
son to he sacrificed,’
4 and it is impossible to determine conclu
sively from the Qur’an which son was intended.
12 Referred to in Arabic as al-dhabih, and more accurately translated as
‘the intended sacrificial offering’.
Qur’än 37:99-113. °n the issue of the integrity of qur’anie versus
biblical versions of parallel stories found in the Bible and the Qur’in, set
Marilyn R. Waldman, ‘New Approaches to “Biblical” materials in the
Qur’an’, in Muslim World (1985), i-i6.
I example, generally began their works with an account of Creation and
14 Modern scholars are divided
over which son is intended in the
qur’anic rendition. Abraham Geiger, in his ground-breaking study, Was bar
Mohammed aus dem judentbnme aufgenommen? (‘834), supported the belief that
Ishmael was the intended sacrifice and based his view on logic and the
arguments presented by some Muslim exegetes (translated into English
under the title, Judaism and Islam [New York ijoj, 103-7). Richard Bell
supported the argument favouring Isaac, and based his decision on a critical
analysis of the structure of the qur’anic textual rendition (‘The Sacrifice of
I
Ishmael’, in Transactions of the Glasgow University Oriental Society to (n.d.),
2931.
98
.4
ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-’ 13
The Muslim exegetes were troubled by a number of aspects
of the story, but none more than the issue of which son was the
intended victim. Unlike the Bible, the Qur’an is not interested
in sacred genealogy, and makes no effort to preserve a holy
5 from Abraham. Both sons are identified as
biological isnad’
6 isaac is mentioned more often in the Qur’an than
prophets.’
7 but Ishmael is associated with the all-important act
lshmael,’
of building the Ka’ba (Qur’an a: 127). Either might be a pious
candidate for the honour of being the intended Sacrifice of
God, dhabN’i Allah.
The qur’anic depiction of the Sacrifice not only fails to name
the intended sacrificial victim, it provides no location for the
event and alludes only vaguely to a chronological context. As
in Jewish and Christian exegesis of biblical narratives, medieval
Islamic exegesis of Qur’anic narratives often attempts to fill in
the lacunae of sacred Scripture. This study examines a full
range of traditional medieval Islamic exegesis on the specific
issue of which of Abraham’s sons was intended to be the
8
Sacrifice.’
According to one series of narrative traditions filling out the
qur’anic story, Abraham is confronted by Satan who tries to
19 In the various renditions,
divert him from sacrificing his son.
1 The term usually refers to the list of authorities in whose names an
originally oral tradition is passed on. For example, ‘x’ heard the tradition
from ‘y’, who received it on the authority of ‘z’, etc.
1 Ishmael in 19:54, Isaac in 37:112.
Isaac is referred to by name seventeen times while lshmael is named
twelve times.
‘ Various genres of Islamic literature besides the type referred to
specifically as ‘exegesis’ served this function. Islamic historians, for
worked their way through the legends and stories of ancient pre-Islamic
history until they arrived at the period which they intended to study in
detail. Many of these works include legends and opinions about the life of
\braham and the Sacrifice depicted in the Qur’än. It is well-known that the
the acts of the
tlndith literature includes comments or anecdotes referring to
Muhammad. Finally, collections
pre-Islamic prophets as well as the prophet
q4ra al-an/4yJ’ or ‘Stories of the Prophets’ often
of folk literature known as
the
refer in some detail to our story as well. All function as exegesis of
this endeavour in a systematic
Qur’in, whether or not they carry out
shion.
The parallels between these and Jewish and Christian sources have
99
 ABRAI-IAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113
° approaches each of the three
Satan, the devil or an old man
2 z. After Abraham is shown his vision about thc sacrifice,
characters in the story and tempts them through logical argu
ments to disobey the command of God. Yet in every C25C,
absolute obedience to God prevails. The tempting arguments
are ignored and the drama of the sacrifice continues.
This tradition is found in three different versions distin
guished in two cases by the ultimate authorities of their isnads,
Ka’h al-Abbir and Ibn lsbiq. A third version lacks an isnad.’
2 Satan tells her that Abraham actually took Isaac out to sacrifice
With five renditions,
22 the most prevalent of the three
versions is that attributed to Ka’b al-Ahbar (d. 32/652—3 or 3S
6), a well-known and learned Jewish convert to islam who
-
is credited with bringing many Jewish traditions into the
corpus of Islamic religious literature. The Ka’b version under
stands the intended sacrifice to be Isaac. Considering Kab’s
background, reputation, and era, it would appear quite logical
for him to transmit coherent legends based on the biblical
23 And in fact,
version assuming the victim to have been Isaac.
the traditions attributed to him invariably place Isaac in the
role of the intended sacrificial victim. The version attributed to
Kah appcars as follows:
- Ka’b asks Ahü 1-lurayra if he would like to hear the stor
of isaac son of Abraham. Abu 1-lurayra responds in the
affirmative.
often been observed. For the most recent study, see Firestone, The heolutiw:
of Islamic Narratw 1 :xesjs on the r-lbraharn-ishmaef Lexends (unpublished
doctoral dissertation, New York University i 988). 210-310.
kJ’. The words .S?iaytJn and lb/is appear to be used interchangcabh
‘ Sha
1 Satan answers: ‘You claimed that your Lord commanded that
ii these texts.
21
Tabarsi, .la/na’ a/-banin (Beirut nd.), XXIII, 78 mentions that this
tradition does have an smad, which can he found in the honks of ‘Aysishi
and ‘Au h. Ihrãhim.
), XXIII, 8:; Tabari, Ta’ri*j,
22 Tabari, JJme’ al-baron (Beirut i4o5!i98
4 2
iI..eiden 1964 Ivolume • cited Univ throughnurji. 292-4: Tha’labi, ‘Ari’,s
(Cairo i -‘4 ‘914), tIm al-Athir, a/-Kdrnif(&irut lsi t96), I io-:,
and Ibn kathir, la/sir (Cairo nd.), IV, q.
25 1 he honorific aI-ahhãr is prisbablv a literal (plural) transmission Iron:
the l-lebrew bin-er, which “-as a title of scholarship hoth among Palestinian
jews of the Tannaitic period und later among Babylonian Jews as well.
Kab was a Jewish scholar or ‘learned fellow’ before his conversion to
Islam during the caliphate of Abu Bakr or ‘Iimar. He was well respected
[or his knowledge. especially of the Bible. Expertise in Bible included
knowledge of lfaggadah or narrative exegesis, which was mostly in oral
[orm during the seventh century (hi 2 lne- editionj 4: ssz).
100
ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113
Satan says: ‘... if I do not beguile the family of Abraham [now]
I will never beguile them!’
.
Satan appears as a man known to Abraham and Sarah and
goes to Sarah after Abraham and Isaac had already left for the
piace of sacrifice. Satan asks Sarah where they went and she
).24
replies: ‘to do an errand’ (415) or ‘to gather firewood’ (t :5
him. Sarah responds that Abraham would never do that (/s)
or that he is more compassionate toward the boy than even she
(i:), but asks why he would ever wish to sacrifice him,
Satan
answers that Abraham claimed God commanded that of him.
Sarah replies: ‘If God commanded that of him, then he should
do it!’ (i/s) or that if God commanded that of him, he would
do it since he is absolutely faithful to God (a/i).
.
Foiled, Satan leaves and finds Isaac walking next to his
father. lie tells Isaac that his lather is going to sacrifice him (t/
answers:
5) or asks Isaac where Abraham is taking him. Isaac
To do an errand’ (j) or ‘to gather firewood’ (ifs). Satan
counters: ‘No by God ... he is going to sacrifice you!’ Isaac
does not believe him and asks why he would do that. Satan
replies that Abraham claimed God commanded that of him.
Isaac answers: ‘If God commanded that, then he should obey
Him’
y. Foiled again, Satan hastens to Abraham and asks him
where he is going. lie replies that he must do some errands
with Isaac. Satan says: ‘Well, by God, you took him in order to
sacrifice him!’ Abraham says: ‘\Vhy would I sacrifice him?’
0 you’ Abraham replies: ‘By God, if my
Lord commanded
that of me, I would do it!’25
The visual format for our reproduction of the paradigmatic versions
employs the listing of motifs, each designated by a number. The numbers in
parentheses (/) represent the number of times that particular motif or
section of the motif occurs in the sources, compared to the total number of
renditions of the version. In the case here, for example. four of the five
renditions in the sources listed above have Sarah telling Saran that they
went to do an errand; the other rendition has Sarah telling him that they
went to gather firewood.
25 The slightly different rendition of Tha’labi has Satan reply to Abra
ham’s comment that he went to do an errand by saying: ‘By God, I see that
Satan came to you in your sleep and commanded you to sacrifice your own
son!’ But Abraham recognized him as Satan and said: ‘Away, 0 cursed
101
 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN n:99-1 13 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 57:99-114

to the
The anonymous version is found only among Shfite exegetes ‘aving: ‘0 Lord! Do not punish me for what I did
and may represent a Shiite version of the tradition.26 The boy’s mother of Ishmael!’
mother is identified here as Sarah, who is engaged in the minor
pilgrimage to the Ka’ba in 27 Mecca. The story is found ‘as The Ibn Ishäq version is represented by two traditions given
been
follows: on his authority, both of which consider lshmael to have
the son intended for 30 sacrifice.
i. An old man approaches Abraham and asks him what he
plans En do with the boy. lie tells him that he will sacrifice him, i. After Abraham is commanded
to sacrifice his son and
The man responds: ‘Heaven ftrbid!22 You will sacrifice an before his son knows about the comm and, Abraham says to
innocent boy?’ Abraham answers that God commanded him, him: ‘0 my son, take the rope and the knife, and let’s go and
Thu man counters by saying that it must have been Satan who gather firewood’.
(lb/is)
commanded that. Abraham replies: ‘\X’oe to you! I know that I a. When Abraham turns onto the path, the devil
asking :
received a truly Godly revelation’. The man repeats that it appears in the form of a man who tries to deter him,
Where are you going, old man V. He replies that he is going to
must have been Satan, and Abraham refuses to speak with him
has
further, lie is resolved to obey his Lord, but the old man says: do an errand. The devil says: ‘I see that Satan (s/ia;’fin)
and has comm anded you to sacrific e
‘0 Abraham, you arc a leader whom people follow. If you come to you in your sleep
m recogn izes him and says:
sacrifice him, then [all the] people will sacrifice their childrenr this little boy of yours!’ But Abraha
But Abraham spoke with him no longer. ‘Away, you enemy of God!’
2, Thu 20devil then comes to the boy’s mother when she is Foiled, the devil (lb/is) comes to lshmael, who is carrying
his
the rope and knife behind his father. He asks him where
.

engaged in what appears to be the ‘Umra pilgrimage to the firewo od’.

Ka’ba. lie tells her that he just saw an old man, and she tells tither is taking him and Ishmael replies: ‘To gather
but
him that that is her husband. He says that he saw a boy u ith The devil tells him that his father will sacrifice him,
him, and she tells him that that is her son. He continues’’. ‘Then lshmael does not believe him. When asked why, the devil says:
l
I saw him laying him down and taking up the knife to sacrifice He claims that his Lord commanded that of him’. So Ishmae
replies: ‘Then let him do what his Lord comm ands in perfect
him!’ She says: “You lie! Abraham is the gentlest of men. Why
would he sacrifice his own son?’ The devil insists that he saw it obedience!’ (san/an wä tä’atan).
and she asks why, lie replies: ‘iie claimed that his Lord Foiled again, he goes to Hagar who is at home and asks
.
l
commanded him’. She concurs: ‘it is true that he would obey her the same question. She tells him that Abraham and lshmae
Abraha m
his Lord’. She becomes agitated but finishes her ritual responsi went to gather firewood. \Vhen Satan tells her that
even
bilities, and then runs toward Mina with her hand on her head went to sacrifice her son, she says: ‘Certainly not! He is
more compassionate toward him than 1! But if his Lord
would
he would submit to the comm and
command that of him, then
one! it was God, and I will obey His commandf’ The ‘rha’labi rendition at
• olGod!’
the ‘KaW version is actually influenced b’ the ‘lbn Ishaq’ version ee
below), as Tha’labi points out himself when he prefaces the story with:
So the ‘enemy of God’ failed in his desire because of God
.
will.
‘Aba Hurayra related on the authority of Ka’b al-Ahbãr, and Ibn lshq and because Abraham’s entire family submitted to God’s
related on the authority of others who said-
20 Qumnfi, Ta/sir (Najaf jS iç,GØ, II, az; and Tabarsi, XXIII, i’.
the tradition on the
‘
Shi’ites have been associated with borrowing more ficely from Jewish Tabari, Ta’rikb, 303-4, in which lbn Ishaq relates
al-Ath ir, i The rendition found
legends than Sunnis. the Shia seems to be responsible for the main flow authority of some scholars, and Ibn ii i-a,
‘...

and given here.. third referen ce is that of ‘l’ha’labi, 9-

of Judaco-Chrisrian motifs into the Muslim literature already since the Iir,t a Tabari is fullest
who claims that his tradition is on the authority of Ka’b al-Abb är to Abi
century A.ll.’ (Un Rubtn, ‘Prophets and Progenitors in the Early Shia note above).
Hunyra, and also lbn lshäq who heard it from others (see 25
Tradition’, in Jrriesaien, Studies hi Arabic and Isiw,, I though it include s
Sabban /11/lb. The traditio n he cites is essenti ally the Ka’b version ,
29 Iblis. The old man (shaykii) of section No. i is not named as the devil, come minor influence from the lbn Isãq version as well.

102 03
 ABRAHAM’S SON: QURAN 37:99-it; ASKAHAM’S SON: QUK’AN 3799-it3
Finally, one miscellaneous rendition is given by Kisã’i This substitution would serve to purify an old and accepted
witFtut an isnad, in which Isaac is named as the intend cultic ritua’ of its original pagan meaning.
ed
vi cr i rn
The three most complete renditions name Ishmatl as the
Among our various versions of Satan’s attempts to interfere intended 34 Sacrifice. One names Isaac,35 and one provides no
with God’s command, most posit Isaac as the intended victim. 36 The tradition follows:
name at all.
1he earliest according to the chain of transmitters is thai
attributed to K-a’b N. C. 652) The only version naming Ishmaei t. Abraham is shown the stations of the
pilgrimage ( / ), or
as the victim is that attributed to Ibn Isbäq (d. 150/767) who is commanded with the sacrifice (i/s).
lived a fuLl century later.
32 a. Satan appears to him at the place of the Running Ritual
or at al-Mash’ar al-Haram (5/4) and tries to get the
Satan and the I .apzdation better of him, but Abraham surpasses him (4/5).
Then Gabriel takes him to al-Jamra al-’Aqaba (4) or
A very different tradition independent of the previous Satan .

Abraham goes there himsel f (1/5) where Satan appear s to him.

traditions is given on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbãs (d. 68/689- Re departs (4/c) or sinks into the ground (ifs) when Abraham
7).33 ‘I’his story
probably derived from the pre-Islamic pagan throws seven stones at him.
custom of stoning the three pillars in Mina, but substituted Satan appears again at al-Jamra al-Wustã. Abraham
Satan for the pre-islamic association of the lapidation ritual.
.

throws the stones, and the scene repeats itself (5/5).

.
He then appears again at al-Jamra al-Quswñ (i;s) or al
jamra al-Kubrã (t/s),° where the scene is repeated (at s)
6. Abraham then flings lshmael, who is wearing a white
SI Qnas a/-anbi;aJ’
(i.eiden 1922), I 50.
32 ihere has been great controversy among
scholars throughout the past
century regarding the reliability of isnaus and the Islamic claims of eark shirt, on to his forehead (3/5), or begins to go through with the
authorship of Islamic traditions. Must recently, Nabia Abbott (Studies in sacrifice of Isaac (i / ).40
rirahi, f.iirrary Papyri vois. 1-Ill, Chicago ‘965 if) tends to support
the .
Ishmael says: ‘0 father, I have no other garment for a
traditional view while John Wanshrough (Qur’anic Studies, Oxford
tr. shroud, so please take off my shirt and use it for that’ (i/s), or
and The Sectarian iIthea, Oxford 1978) would place the composition of the Isaac says: ‘0 father, tie me up so that I will not shake and my
tradition literature nor earlier than the end of the eighth century. Our
research suggests that what is known of the purported authors of blood splash you when you sacrifice me’ (1/5).
traditions tends to support the logic of their making the statements they
our 8. Abraham turns around for a moment and sees a horned
make. This observation could result either from their true authorship or to ram with dark eyes and white wool (/)
or is called From
their attribution by later traditionists who were quite familiar with
the
backgrounds of the early authorities. As we will attempt to demonstrate IV. is.
Tabati, Tafsir. XXIU. So-i; Ta’rikh, 306-7; lbn Kathit. Ta/sir,
below, fin cximple. the earliest authorities cited for the traditions tend
Ibn Hanbal, ibid. The niahi of this tradition has all the appearance of
overwhelmingly to consider Isaac the intended victim, while later authori tampeted with. In fact, it appears to be made up of three short
having been
ties as well as later exegetcs agree that Tshmael was intended. Few scholars tradition of
sections joined together by a redactor. Part one refers to the
would dispute that early Muslims Learned traditions from Jews and Chris which is unrelated, refets to Isaac as the intended
Ibn ‘Abbãs. Part two,
tians see M Kister, ‘Iladdithü an haiti Isn’T/a u’a-iä baraja.’ Israel Oriental
victim, and part three connects the first two to Qur’än. 37: 105-
Studies t (‘97 2’i, at 5-39; Abbott, Studies II, S if). Unless there were some
Kis’i, 95.
reason to think diiterentlv (such as a discrepancy between the Qur’än and ‘ Al-mas’J or al-say. Cf. Norman Calder, ‘The 3ay and the Jabfti: Some
the Bihie), it would he quite logical for early Muslims to agree with their
Notes on Qur’än 37: t02j, JSS 31 (1986), 1726.
lev,sh and Christian neighbours. Thus the attributions do not appear to be 3l The three janiras are stations in the valley of Mini where the
inconsistent with the content of the passages.
lapidation ritual of the I-lap takes place.
Ibn 1-lanbal, Alusnad (Beirut i389/i969), 1, 306-7; Tabari, Tafsfr,
Both are different names lot the same ritual station of the flag
XXIII, 8o-i, 7a’rikb, 306-7; Tha’labi, and lbn Kathir, Tafsir, IV, A pilgrimage.
sixth reference is given by Zamakhshäri, Kasbshaf (Cairo i 385/i 966),i.III, 4° See note 35 above. The Tha’labi rendition ends here with: ‘Then
349 in very brief form: It is related that he threw stones at Satan when he Abraham proceeded to fulfill the command of God, and that is the stoty of
appeared to him and tried to tempt him away from sacrificing his son.’
the sacrifice’.
104 105
I
 ABRAl-fAi’5 SON: QL’R’AN 37:99-113 ABRAHAM’S SON; QUR’AN 37:99-113
behind: U -ibraham,yo,, have a/ready lu/ft//ed th vlsi 0 n’ son, I see in
(Qur’an 37:105) (2:5).
,,!
0 4. Abraham answers with Q. 37: ba: ‘...

a vision that I nill sacrifice jon. So look, what is your

view?’ The son said: ‘0 my fat/icr! Do as you are

i.’ie .lacriftcea/ zl it commanded. If God wi/Is, jon will find iuie pane,,t titid
The story of the actual sacrificial act occurs in three enduring!’ (/)4U
versions:
one attributed to Suddi (ci. i z7/744),’ one
attributed to lbn . Isaac continues by telling his Father to:
lshaq (d. i so:-767),2 and one found only in Shi’ ite a. tighten his bonds so he will not squirm (3/3),
43
sources.
The Suddi version places the Sacrifice in Syria and considers
Isaac to be the intended \‘Ictini, thus following Jewish
Christian traditicin:4-4
and L b. keep back his clothes from him so that no blood will
soil them and cause Sarah grief (j),
e. move the knife quickly to his throat so that death will
be easiest (/),
r. When Abraham is given the good news of a son, 45 he ci
vows to offer him as a sacrifice to God. After the e. give greetings (salam) to his mother when he returns
son grows
up, ;hraham is shown a vision in his sleep telling him
that he (3/3),
must fulfil his vow ;c) and sacrifice his Isaac. (/y). F
2. \braham tells Isaac to come and make a sacrifice (qurban) 6
to God, lie takes a knife and a rope
(/).
3. When they come between some mountains, the boy asks •
. Abraham draws near, kisses Isaac, and binds him (3/3).
They both cry so much that the ground is soaked underneath
where the offering is ( /). Isaac’s cheek where he is lying (2/3).
8
‘fa[,.Af ji, \j , ?a’rfJ, 3024 ‘l’ha’labj n; Tabarsi, XXIII,
and Mujir al-Din, al-Uns al-jath’ hi-ta’rilj al-9s,ds 1171/-Kha/i/
. Abraham draws the knife on to Isaac’s throat but it does
‘6 -‘,
(Amman not cut (/) because God had pounded a sheet of copper over
i9’3’i, T, 40, Tahari’s ‘ia’ri,€b rendition
contains contains an isnad that Isaac’s throat (2/3).
continues beyond Smith. ‘The full isnad is Müsä b. Flärün
Hammad i- Asbar ± Suddi -4- Abu Malik and AbQ Sälih + Ibn
+ ‘Amr b. to. So Abraham throws Isaac sri to his forehead and [tries
‘Abbãs 48 Thus Q. 37:103: So
and Murra at-k lamdjnj -I ‘Abdallab and some of the
Companions of the to] make a gash on the back of his neck.
Prophet. when they bad both submitted, be lay him [threw him] on to
42
Tahari, T 0 ‘rEt/i o-: ‘I’ha’labi 93-4; Tabarsi, XXIH, 78; lbn
al his forehead (2/3).
Athir, I 12.
‘ Ya’qubi,
‘I’a’riMh (J.eiden 1384), 1, z-6 (no isnJd); Qummi, II, 224-5,
ii. And We called out to him, ‘0 Abraham! You
on the authority of Ahñ ‘Abda!láh; Tabarsj, (no. i) XXIII, have already fulfilled the vision !‘ (37: 104—5) (2/3).
77 without
unIt!, and Thharsi (no. z), XXIII, 78-9, on the 12. Abraham turns and sees a ram. He takes it, unties his
authority of Band b.
Ntu’awiva aI-’Aalj, son, and kisses him (/).
13. Abraham says: ‘0 son, you have been given to me!’
14 Mupir
al-Din’s ‘Suddi’ traditic,n never names the intended victim.
Though attrihuted to uddi, it is ictuallv -a hybrid tradition incorporating
motifs from the tbn lsbq version given below. Similarly, Tha’labi’s
Therefore verse Q. 27: 107: We redeemed him wit/i a ina,gni
Ibn ficent sacrifice (2/3).
lsháq rradition, included in the paradigmatic version given
below, is
actually a hybrid that includes motifs from the Suddi version as well. 14. \Vhen Abraham returns to Sarah and tells her what
In
fact, the Tha’lahi and Mujir al-Din renditions are virtually
identical in their occurred, she is unhappy and says: ‘You would sacrifice my
renditions of motifs nos. to it Although each is attributed to a ).
son and not inform me?!’ (zf
3
different
source, the demonstrate the close affinity betwccn the Suddi and
lbn lsaq
version,,. Zamakhshari, (III, 349-10) also provides a hybrid rendition
of
these two versions, though he provides no isuld. 46 Tha’labi’s and Tabarsi’s renditions end here.
All exegetes place this during Abraham’s sojourn in Syria and
connect i Blank lines represent motifs omitted in this version of the legend of
it to Qur’an, 11:69-74, 15:51-9. or 5i :24’jo, all describing the
visit of the the sacrihce, but included in other versions given below.
three angels paralleled in Genesis 18: t-i6. 48 araba hi/il ‘alljabinibi wa.4’az?a mm qafihu.

io6
j 107
 ABRAFIAM’S SON; QUR’AN 37:99-113
According to the lbn Ishq version, lshmael is the victim
and the sacrifice takes place on the outskirts of Mecca. Abra
ham spans the distance between his home in Syria and lshmael
in Mecca by riding on the supernatural creature Buraq.
i..‘thraham would ‘isir F lagar and lshmacl by riding to
Mecca on Buraq. He would leave Syria in the morning and
would return from Mecca to Syria before nightfall so that he
could spend the night with his wife in Syria. This continued
until lshmael reached the age of running with hin.& (37: ioz)
..
(2/4).
a. \hraham tells his son to take some rope and a knife and
to come on to a trail to gather brewood.
4. \Vhen they are alone on the ‘l’hahir trail, .\braham says
(“: 102): ‘0 my son, I ser in a vision that I ni/I sacrifice ron
,54). lie continues: Jo lotiK, ,,‘hat :s your lien’? ‘‘F he son
said : ‘0 my father ! Do as you arr commandrd, If God
Wi/il, you ni/i find me Just/rift and enduring! (2/4).
Ishmacl continues by telling his father to:
.
a. tighten his bonds (;),
h keep hack his clothes from him so that no blood will
soil them (3:4), cause Sarah grief (2/4). and diminish his
reward (2.4); or he careful not to allow anything to
prevent him from fuifluling his task so that Ishmael’s
recompense will not be diminished, for death is severe
and he may waver (1/4),
r. sharpen his knife to finish him off quickly (4/4) to give
him rest (‘:4) or so that death will be easier, for death
is severe (2.4),
d. throw him on to his forehead and not on his side,° for
5 mother Sarah. Each of the four renditions of this version is
ishmacl is afraid that compassion will overcome his
father and prevent him from carrying out God’s com
mand 4
(
) ,5i
please return his shirt to Mother, for it mai’ give her
some comfort
I ‘Now proceed’ (3/4).
-‘ mountain outside of Mecca (see Qummi, II, 22$ note a). l’ãqüt,
.Iu’arn Lcipzig t1468), mentions a number of places by that name, including
,ine near Minã (11, 9(7-19). Burckhardt, Travels, II, 6, places it at the north
end of the Mina valley.
“ As is proper for most sacrifices in Islamic law.
5’ Ci note 6 above.
io8
ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 3799113
6. Abraham tells his son that he is truly a wonderful help in
carrying out God’s command (4/4)52
Abraham binds his son just as lshmael had directed him
.
(3/3).
s. Abraham sharpens his knife (2/3) and then, he hit him
onto his forehead (Q. 37: 103) (/) and Abraham is careful to
avoid looking at him (i/i).
9. lIe puts the knife to his son’s throat but God turns it
over to its blunt side in Abraham’s hand (3/3).
10
ii. When Abraham is about to draw the knife across his
son’s throat to end his Life, his name is called: ‘0 /lbraham !
You have a/ready fulfil/ed the vision!’ (Q. 37:i04—5) (3/3).
12. He is told that a different sacrifice will be the redemption
for his son, so he should slaughter it in Ishmael’s place (z/).
What we designate as the Shi’ite version is found only in
’ The most striking difference between the
Shi’ite sources.
5
Shi’ite and the other versions is that the former carefully
weaves the sacrificial act into Abraham’s precedental ljajj
Pilgrimage. This corresponds exactly with the pre-Islamic pil
grimage slaughtering ritual, which was retained also in the
islamic Hajj.
The various renditions of the Shi’ite version name both Isaac
and Ishmael as the intended sacrifice. Those naming Isaac are
quite striking because they consider him to be the intended
sacrifice at the same time that the act occurs within the cunte%t
of the Meccan Hajj. Both pro-Isaac renditions connect Isaac to
Mecca by having him make the Pilgrimage along with his
provided as foLlows:
Ya
q
t ubi:
After building the Ka’ba and calling the people to
the Pilgrimage, Abraham begins his own Pilgrimage under
Gabriel’s guidance on the ‘Day of Watering’ (jan’s a/-tarn’iya).
52 Tabarsi’s rendition ends here, though he mentions that the story
continues similarly to other versions he gave previously.
53 Ya’qQbi, I, z-6; Qummi, II, zz-; Taharsi, XXIII, Tabarsi,
XXIII, 781.
109
 ABRAhAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-I’s

z. As part of the Pilgrimage, Abraham sleeps at al-Mash’ar. .

During the night, God commands him to sacrifice his son.
When Abraham arrives at Mina, he tells his son that God
.
Then the boy tells Abraham: ‘Hide my face and tighten
my bonds!’
6. Abraham responds thai he will not add to God’s com
donkey
mand, but will onLy do the sacrifice. He takes the

commanded him to sacrifice him. lshmael replies: 0 nfl

father, dr,t as you are con,manded’. (37: toz). saddle, lays his son upon it and takes the knife.
4 .
He places it upon his son’s throat, looks toward heaven,
its back
and leans to pull the knife, but Gabriel turns it over to
6. Abraham takes the knife and lays his son down on top of side.
a donkey saddle over dying embers. 8
A ram is brought from Thabir. Abraham 4Q substitutes the
Abraham places the blade on his son’s throat. When he
.
.
Abraham.
turns his face away so that he will not took at his son, Gabriel tarn for the boy and is called from a distance:
turns the blade over on to its dull side. Abraham notices that it ion have a/read,y fu/fi/led the vision !‘ (Q. 37:104-5).

is inverted and turns it ovcr again. He does that three times,

8. Then Abraham is addressed: 0 Abraham! You have Tabarsi No. (nearly identical with Qummi):
a/ready fulfil/ed the vision / (Q. 37: 104-5). (z.) it is said that Abraham saw in a vision that he
would
.
Gabriel takes the boy and Abraham puts the sheep that sacrifice his sen isaac.
was brought from the summit of Mt. Thabir is his place. He i. When Abraham and Sarah
make the Pilgrimage and come
to go
sacrifices the sheep. to Mina, they do the Lapidation. Abraham teLls Sarah
io. \X’hen Abraham is finished with the pilgrimage and visit the Ka’ba, but the boy stays with him.
intends to leave [Mecca], he charges lshmael to dwell in the I Ic takes Isaac to al-jamra al-Wustã and tells him what
he
Sacred Precinct and instruct the people in the [ritual of the} must do. The boy ans\vers that his father must carry out
.

Pilgrimage.
Qummi:
i. Gabriel comes to Abraham on the ‘Day of Watering’ and
takes him on his first Pilgrimage.
While staying overnight at al-Mash’ar al-l3aram, Abra
ham receives the vision in his sleep that he must sacrifice his
son Isaac, who came along with his mother Sarah to make the
Pilgrimage. \Vhen they get to Mina, Abraham and Sarah do the
Tapidation, and then Abraham tells her to return to the Ka’ba.
God’s
command. So they both submit (as/with) to God’s command.
.
The motif of the old man arguing with Abraham about
God’s command is inserted at this point.55
.
Then the boy tells Abraham: ‘Hide my face and tighten
my bonds!’
God’s com
6. Abraham responds that he will not add to
donkc
mand, but wilL only do the sacrifice. He takes the
saddle, lays his son upon it and rakes the knife.
Abraham places it upon his son’s throat, looks toward
it over to
heaven, and leans to pull the knife, hut Gabriel turns
.

Ic keeps the boy with him.

its hack side.
3. Abraham takes Isaac to al-Jamra al-Wustä and says: ‘0
my son, I see in a vision that I n’i// sacrifice you So look, 8
in
n’hat is your lien’ ?‘ The boy tells him to carry out God’s A ram is brought from Thabir. Abraham puts the ratn
place of the boy and is called from a distance: ‘0
.

Abraham,
command, as in the verse: 0 my father! Do as you are
commanded. If God wi//s. jon will find me patient and you bate alreadj fulfil/ed the vision !‘ (Q. 37: t04-
enduring. (Q. y: 102). They both submit (as/amñ) to God’s
command. Tabarsi No. a:
.
The motif of the old man arguing with Abraham about (motifs t & a). After the conflict with Sarah in Syria,
God’s command is inserted at this point.
54
interfere.
‘4 See the Shi’ite version of Satan attempting to interfere. 55 See the Shi’ite version of Satan attempting to

10
III
 r
ABRAHAM’S SON: QL’R’AN 37:99-! 13 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 99
7
3 :
-tij

Abraham has a night vision in which he is told that he must intended Sacrifice in Mecca. The Shi’ite version names Isaac
sacrifice his son Ishmaci during the festival period in Mecca.
’
5 twice and Ishmael twice and provides the Meccan tiaji as the
When the month of Dhu al-Hijja arrives, he takes Hagar and context for the action. Such data on citations may be noted in
ishmaci to Mecca After raising up the foundations of the simple visual form in Table
Ka’ba, he goes to Minã in pilgrimage, returns to Mecca to
perform the circumamhuiations for a week, and then does the
Running ritual. i: Citations of Isaac and lshmael as Intended Sacrifice
;. As Abraham and Ishmael are doing the Running ritual. in our sample of Qur’anic Exegesis
Abraham says: 0 tier so,;, I .cr’e in a 1151011 that I nil/I ; Authority Intended No. of Context No. of
sacrifece jon during this yearly festival. So nba! is your view?
1 Ic answers, Do as yon were commanded’. (Q. 37: ioz).
...
I Victim Refs. Refs.

4 Satan attempts to interJere

Ka’b Isaac 5 nOt_IC 5
& 6. When they complete the Running ritual, Abraham Ibn lsháq lshmael a none a
takes him to Minà on the Day of Sacrifice (yawm ai-nahr). He no isnad (Qummi) not given ‘Umra
takes him to al-Jamra al-Wusta, lays him unto his left side, and no isnJd (Tabarsi) Isaac ‘Umra
takes the blade to slaughter him.
ia/a,; and the Lapidation
7
lbn ‘Abbäs Ishmael Hajj
6. lIe is called: 0 .ihraham, you haze a/ready fulfil/ed thr
[liii ‘Abbäs Isaac i ljajj
lesion ... (Q. 37: L04-5).

9. Ishm-ael is redeemed with a magnificent ram. The Sacrificial Act

I Ic slaughters it and gives its meat as charity to the Suddi Isaac Fulfil vow
destitute (na-tasaddaqa bi-/a4’mthi ‘a/a afmiskhi). lbn Isiq ishmael Visit on Bunq 4
Shi’ite Isaac a IJaj
l-lajj 4
Of the three miscellaneous renditions that fit into none of Shi’ite lshmael a J
the major versions outlined here, all name isaac as the intended b. ‘Abbas + Proph. Isaac t Haj
victim. Two renditions of a poem attributed to the early poet Sha’bi Isaac i Near Jerusalem i
l.Jmavya b.Abi al-Salt name ‘the first born’ as the intended Ka’b Isaac i Jerusalem
58
Sacrihce. b. Abi al-Salt ‘First born’ a none a
In summary, then, the Suddi version considers the intended
victim to have been Isaac and the, context to have been Syria.
Isaac is specifically named sixteen times and Ishmael eleven
The Ibn Ishaq version names lshmael as the victim of the
as the intended victim. Aside from the Ibn ‘Abbas version
59 the ‘earlier’ sources
describing Satan and the J.apidation,
Be-ma,ssim AIak.ka. would have Isaac as the intended Sacrifice. Not until ibn Ishaq
5 Ibn 1-lanbal, 1, 406-7 (on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas + the Prophet) do we find Ishmael a consistent contender for the title of dhat’ih
places the Sacrifice immediately after the lapidation of Abraham’s first Bail.
Allah, the ‘intended Sacrifice of God’.°°
Lsaac is the victim. Tha’labi. 78 (on the authority of Sha’bi) has ‘The
location of the Sacrihce was two miles from Jerusalem, and when Sarah
found out what Abraham intended with Isaac, she remained [alivel for two
days, and died on the third.’ The fullest and most innovative of all We will demonstrate below why we understand this as a late attribu
renditions is given by Kisä’T, co-i, on the authority of Ka’b and entitled tion to lbn ‘Abbs.
‘The story ol Isaac’. The early reference of Ibn Abi al-Salt (who was a contemporary of
Tahari. Ta’rikb, 308-9; Tha’Iabi, 23-4. Muhammad) to ‘the first born’ must be viewed with caution. Some consider

112 113
 ABRAFIAN1’S SON: QUR’AN
Isaac’s W7sh
;7:99-i
A recurring legend describes a scene in which God offers to
[3
grant Isaac a wish after the ordeal of the Sacrifice. This legend,
which is found in two versions, originates with Ka’b al-Alibar,
r ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37
and what appears to bc the earliest version consists of four
renditions attributed to him directly.” The wording varies
among the renditions, hut the mcssage remains constant.
Immediately after Isaac’s redemption, God tells him directly
that lie will answer any prayer that isaac wishes. Isaac replies:
‘0 Gad, I pray to you that you grant me [thisl: When any
person in any era who does not attribute any partner to You
meets You [at the gates of heaven], allow him to enter
Paradise’ (34); or ‘Lord, 1 ask that you do not punish anyone
who believes in You’ (1/4).
The second version is attributed to Abu 1 lurayra who
reports that the Prophet said:
d allowed me to choose hetwi-en having I urn fi,rgive half of the
0
. exegetes, however, that the finer points of argumentation bad
Muslim people or responding to my intercession on their behalf. I
cht.nc m% own intercession, for 1 hoped [that would bring God’s]
forgiveness for must of the Muslim people. If a pious MusLim dies
after me. then let my prayer hurry jon his behalf]. When God
comforted Isaac from the terror of the Sacrifice, it was said to him:
‘0 Isaac, ask and you will he granted!’ So he said: tJ lie who has
my soul in His hand, will you hasten it [into Paradisel before Satan
incites it to evil? C) God, whoever dies and does not associate any
partner with You, forgive him and bring him into Paradise!’
62
lbn Kathir criticizes this tradition for coming from only
a single source and for being inferior and objectionableP
3 He
is particularly concerned with the fact that Isaac is listed as
the intended sacrifice since he maintained that the intended
his poems genuine, while other sources regard them the work of much later
Hut anic exegetes (hi’ s,. ‘1 malva’). The lack of a specific name given, the
controversy regarding thc authenticity of prc-lslamic poetry, and the
Jewish parallel of two interprctations of reh,dkhcs (‘your oniv son’) of Gen.
:2;: in Herobit Rabbis IV, 7 and other early sources, place Ibn Ahi al-Salt’s
poem outside of our sample.
e Tabari, Tafi-ir, XXIII, 2- (Ka’h al-Abbir), lank_b, 294 (Ka’b tefli
Abü I lutayra); lhn al-Athir, i io (no ssnJd); and lhn Kathir, laJsir, LV, i
(L’.a’h tells Abü Huravra),
62 Tha’labi, a; Ibn Kathir, IV, i6.
63 II&1bJ bailith gbarth nnmkar.
114
64 We note again that Ka
victim was Ishmael.
9-ii3
9
b is associated
t
with traditions in which isaac is the intended Sacrifice. Abu
Hurayra, who learned this tradition from Ka’b, is also associ
ated with the pro-Isaac school.”
5
Isaac or Ishmae/? The zlrRumeuIs
The exegetes did not hesitate to posit arguments and reasoning
in support of either candidate. As Yaqubi writes in the ninth
t
century, ‘There are many traditions about each view and people
66 The final argument often rested upon
disagree about them’.
where the Sacrifice took place. If it took place in Syria, Isaac
was the intended victim. If it took place in Mecca, then ishmaci
was intended.
The arguments cited in support of either candidate are based
on the words of the Qur’an and sometimes on fine points of
grammar, on geographical considerations, chronology, or on
simple logic. It appears from the views expressed by the
Little influence on their ultimate opinions. The final deciding
factor was the period in which the exegetes lived,
It becomes clear from our reading of the sources that Isaac
was originally understood to have been the intended victim,
but that this view was eclipsed by a new perspective which
held Ishmael to have been intended. Tabari was the first to
record the various arguments supporting each son. While he
tried to demonstrate that Isaac was the proper reading, the
arguments supporting Ishmael were already quite imposing by
his generation. After Tabari, the exegetes citing arguments and
giving their own opinions were unanimous in considering
lshmael to be the intended victim, though most cited argu
ments supporting both views. Even the Shi’ite TabarsI, who
quoted Shi’ite versions considering Isaac to have been the
intended sacrifice, held that it was Ishmael.ÔT And Tha’labi,
See p. i i6 below. lbn Kathir is particularly opposed to the traditions
told on the authority of Ka’b, who is credited by the sourccs with passing
the tradition of Isaac’s wish to AbU 1-lurayra.
See p. 127 below.
“ Ta’rik.h, I, 25.
67 NXIII,
741
115
 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 57:99-114
who often followed Tahari, seemed to consider Ishmael the
intended Sacrifice as weil.65
Like the other exegetes after Tabari, Ibo Kathir believed that
the intended sacrifice was Ishmact and did not hesitate to give
his own views on the matter. I [is major argument was based
on the weakness of those sources claiming that it was isaac:
The account that it was Isaac came from lsa’b al-Ahbár Alt of
....
these statements, and Gi,cf knows best, are taken from Ka’b al
.\hbãr. Now when he converted to islam during the caliphate of
Lmar, he began to report traditions to Umar on the authority of his
ancient books. Sometimes Urn-ar listened to him and permitted the
people to listen to what he had with him and to transmit what he had
on his authority, [both 1 th corrupt ones and the superior ones. Now
this Islamic community (:eni;la) has rio need f a one word of [those
traditionsi he possessed - Those who follow Ka’h al- -\bbr’s
. .
traditions include Sa’id b. juhayr, Qanida, MasrUtj, ‘ikrima, ‘Atä’,
Muqâtil, al-Zuhri, and Suddi. i’.ven lhn ‘Abbãs uses him in one of
his two isnads. A hudith is given with it. If it were reliable, I would
gladly give it mvseiq, but its chain of authorities is nor soundA
9 title he uses for his grandfather Isaac is dhabif ,1//Jh: ‘the
It) summarize our findings, we note that until the time of
‘I :ibarI, there appeared to be little argument about who was
the intended victim of the sacrifice. The earlier Ihn Ilanbal (d.
24i8 sc -6) gave a tradition on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas +
the Prophet that it was Isaac, and Ya’qubi (d. 277/891-2)
mentioned the cdstencc of different opinions on the matter
expressed in his ray•’0
Isaac was most likely the original understanding. Tabari
tried to demonstrate that this view was the proper reading,
though he appeared to he losing the battle. After Tabari, the
exegetes were unanimous in considering Ishmael to be the
intended victim, though many dutifully cited arguments in
Liv our of both vews.
P. 92. I lie jisas work attributed to kpsii I, on the i ther hind,
e insiders Is.iac ii have been intended l-iv virtue of the traditions cited
therein, though no argumentation is included.
IV, i-i.
°i’he name of thc buy is rwvcr rneiitioned in :i’qUhis rendition until
[he story of the Sacr,tice is completed: When Abraham linished with his
pilgrimage and wished to depart, he charged his son lshmael that he dwell
at the Sacred 1-louse and that he teach the people their pilgrimage and their
ritual stations.’ (I, z6). This is most likely an insertion. The original text
probably omitted any name, as in the Qur’an.
ii6
ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 57:99-115
J,,cidenta/ References to lilt/icr Son as the ‘Intended Sacrifice’
Certain legends innocently identify the intended sacrificial vic
tim in the course of detailing a different story. Others refer in
passing to either Isaac or Ishmael with the laqab or honorific
title, ‘Sacrifice of God’ attached to the name. Five recurring
traditions are found in the sources considered for this study.
Three are cited in support of Isaac and two in support of
lshmael.
The three pro-Isaac traditions cite the Israelite patriarchs
Abraham. Isaac and Jacob in a formulaic manner in which
Lsaac’s connection with the Sacrifice is explicitly pointed out.
All reflect a style of citation found among the Jews before the
• sixth century.
71 They appear to reflect an early view, held first
among Jews and Christians but later held by Arab Muslims as
well, that Isaac was the intended Sacrifice.
One brief tradition has Joseph giving his genealogy to a
king identified in one rendition as Egyptian.
72 The honorific
intended sacrifice of God’: ‘Joseph told the king to his face:
“Do you wish to eat with me, for by God, I am Joseph, son of
Jacob the prophet of God, son of Isaac the intended sacrifice of
God, son of Abraham the friend of God”’.
73
The second legend has God telling Moses that Isaac was
given exceptional merit for submitting fully to the Sacrifice.
This tradition occurs seven times with great consistency and is
given on the authority of a family isnad connected to ‘Ubayd Ii
74
‘Umayr:
7i Exodus, 32:13- etc.
72 Tabari, Tafsir, XXIII, S (on authority of Abu Maysara). lank/i, 29S
Abü Maysara), ibid. (lbn Abi I ludhayl); Tha’labi 91 (Abü \Iavsara); ibn
Kathir, Taffir. l\’, i (Ahu Maysara), ibid. (lbn Abi liudhavl). The
traditions attributed to lbn Abi l-ludhavl are not given in full, hut are
mentioned -as ‘Joseph said the same thing to the king’ or ‘the same thing
was said’.
‘3 One rendition identifies the king as being the king of Egypt, but none
Qll him Pharaoh (Fir’awn).
Tabari, Tafsir, XXIII, Si (‘Abdallãh b. ‘Umayr), ibid. (‘Abdallàh h.
‘Ubayd b. ‘Limayr), Ta’ri.€b, 294 (the father of ‘Abdallãh b. ‘Ubayd b.
Umayr). ibid. (idemj: Tha’labi, 9i, (the great-grandfather of ‘Ubayd Allah
b. ‘Ubayd b. ‘Umayr); Ibn al-Athir, i io (‘Ubayd b. ‘Umayr); Ibn Kathir,
IV, t7 (the father of ‘Abdalläh b. ‘Ubayd b. ‘Umayr). On the issue of family
maids, see Abbott, ii, 36-9.
‘‘7
A
 AIIRAIIAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113

Moses said: ‘0 Lord, why Will you he called, “0

God of Abraham, Unlike the Isaac traditions, the two Ishmaci traditions differ
Isaac and Jacob?”’ God replied: ‘Abraham
never considered any from one another in form and style. One occurs on the
thing equal to me but always chose Mu above
all things. Isaac was authority of aI-Sunabihi,
” who says:
7
gcnerous to Me in the Sacrifice anji was most
generous in other
things. As for Jacob, the more I put him through trials, We were with Nfu’iwiya b Abi Sufyan
° when they said: ‘Was the
2
the better he
thought of Me’J intended sacrificial victim Lshmael or Isaac?’ lie answered: ‘You
The third pro-Isaac tradition is attribute n, have come to someone well-informed about the matter! \X’c were
Ahu al_Ahvas:Th with the Apostle of God when a man came up and said: “0 Apostle
‘A certain man boasted before Ibn Mas’ud
saving: ‘1 am so- of God, repeat to me [the knowledge] that God has bestowed upon
and-so son of so-and-so son of noble shaykhs”. you, 0 son of two intended sacrifices!”’ So he laughed. Then I said
‘\hdalláh [b.
Mas’ud] said: “That is Joseph son of Jacob. son to him, ‘0 Commander of the faithful, who are the two intended
of Isaac the
intended sacrifice of God (duiahiij ri/lab), son sacrifices?’ lie answered: ‘When ‘Abd al-Muttalib was commanded
of \braham the
friend of God”’. to dig Zamzarn, he vowed to God that if it were made easy for him,
UI three isaac traditions are quite similar and he would sacrifice one of his sons.
8T The lot [-arrowj fell on
employ a style
remmiscent of the Jewish recitation of the most ‘Abdallàh. But his maternal uncles prevented him, saying, “Redeem
important daily your son with one hundred camels!” So he redeemed him with
prayer in which as recited: ‘God of Abraham
God of Isaac, and camels. Ishmael was the second.’
God of Jacob ‘The Islamic traditions cite thu patriarchs in
...‘‘

thu opposite order because they provide The second tradition referring to Ishmael as the intended
a genealogy rather
than a sacred history. They include a formulaic victim is a story which takes place in the court of the Umayvad
use of the laqab
or honuriflc title in the Arabic name, Abraham caliph ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al ‘Aziz.
82 Muhammad b. Ka’b al-Qurai
is the triend of
God’ (kim/il Allah) and isaac [or lshmaelj reports that he asked ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-’Aziz in Damascus who
is the ‘intended
sacrifice of God’ (dhahth Al/ah)jS he believed was the true intended victim of the saerificc.
3
Abraham for evet.’ liven more revealing is Isaiah 4i :8: ‘Hut you, Israel,
Note po55
ibl parallels in BT Sha/,bar oa and HF .anbr,Irjn
toa. A My servant (‘aidñ, Jacob, whom I have chosen (asher haharükha;, Seed of
van-jilt ‘‘1 this tradition is found in Zamak hshari,
III, 0, on the authority Abtaham My friend (ohari ..‘. Isaac is not mentioned. To my knowledge.
of Muhammad h. Ka’h al-QurazI, in which
the intended victim is ishmael: Jewish tradition does not refer to Isaac with a special honorific title such as
pious Israelite çnmurabid Ra,jiisrJ7n used to say aI-dhabm, though he is referred in the Midrash as the t,ne bound up for
when ‘raving, “0 God,
God ot Abraham, Ishmaci and Israel’’. And
Moses said: ‘1.) lord what slaughter: ‘“And the two of them walk-ed on together” (Gen. az:6): one to
should thu iL>U5 children of Israel say when praying
Oh (;od of Abraham, bind and the other to he bound (zeb Ia’aqud rezeb Ie’aqed), one to slaughtet
Ishmael and Israel, I should he included among
theni. \ou Itt me hear and the other to be slaughtered (zth Iishfo( vezth lishahet).’ (BR 6: ). It
Your You have chosen me as Your messenger
“ God replied: “0 woulti he natural for the special names for Abraham and Isaac to have
Moses, no one ever loved me with -Abraham’s
love and nothing ever evolved within a Jewish community living in an Arabic-speaking environ
tempted him away from Me. lshmael was most
generous with his own ment that commonly used the honorific title. To my knowledge, however,
blood. And as for Israel, he never despaired
of My spirit despite the no further evidence for this has been found.
hardships that befell him,”’ Muhammad h. Ka’h 7’ The full tradition is found
al-Qura-,f is a tvcll-known in Tabari, iaJsir, XXIII, 8 (al-Sunabihi),
traditionist of the sch nI of Ibn ‘Abbas, who
lived in the tirst Islamic Ta’rikij, 290-i (al-Sunabihi); Tha’labi, (al-Sabihi); Ibn al-Athir, toN (al
century (cI. c ; s) and was of Jewish origin.
—
Sunabihfl; Ibn Kathir, LV, iS (al-Sunabihi); and Mujir al-Din, 1, 41 (al
Fahari, Itifrir, XXIII, Si, Tarikh, 29:; I’ha’lahi Sahaji). 7.amakhshari, LLI, o gives a slightly shorter tradition without
9i; Ihn Kathir, IV,
isnJd. Four references to the tradition simply have ‘I am the son of two
Kmat Yssra’r/ pp. 67, 144, r6, etc. Th,s, of course, intended saertficcs (awl am dbabihayn) and can be found in Qummi, 11, zz6;
is based upon the
repuat:ng motif throughout the Bible of
God recognizing the three Tabarsi, XXIII, 7; Kis’i, i; and lbn Kathir, Ta’ritb, I, 235.
patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and jacob (hx. 3:6,
ii; 4:s ; 6
:3i; i Kings A Companion of th Prophet who eventually became caliph, and was
18:36; a Kings 1333, etc.).
proclaimed as such in Jerusalem in 66o CE.
The common Arabic honorihc for Abraham, •
o/-KhaiiI ‘the friend (of Cf- Ibn lshäq, Sira, 97-TOO.
God)’, is probably derived from Jewish sources: 52 Also known as ‘Umar II, who ruled from 7i7-zo CE,
Chronicles 20:7, ‘0 out and is con
God, ‘lou dispossessed the inhabitants of
this land before Your people sidered the most (or only) pious Umavyad caliph by later Islamic tradition.
Israel, and You gave it to the descendants
of \our friend (ohai’kba) Tabari, Ta/sir. XXIII, 84-5, Ta’rikh, 299; Tha’labi, 92; Zamak-hshari,
i ‘8 119
 AbRAHAM’S SON; QUR’AN 37:99-113
ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113
‘Umar said to him: ‘I had not considere
d that issue before, but I the divine call to fulfil a vow he had previously made regarding
think it is as you say.’ Then he sent for a man
who was with him iii his son. The ‘trial’ referred to in Q. 37: to6 was to determine
Syria. lie was a Jew who had converted
to Islam and became a good
Muslim. It became apparent that he whether Abraham would he willing to carry out his word.
was one of the religious
scholars of the Jews, so ‘limar b. ‘Abd al-A
5
ziz decided to ask him
According to this view, Abraham’s original vow was a response
about it. Muhammad b. Ka’b al-Qurazi said: to the divine message of the impending birth of Abraham’s son
I was with ‘Umar ft
‘Abd aI ‘Aziz when he said: ‘Which of Abra given by the angels on their way to destroy the people of 8Lot.
°
ham’s two sons was he
commanded to sacrihcc?’ lie answered: ‘Ishma According to this interpretation, the son was isaac because it
ei. And by God, 0
caliph, the Jews know that. However, they was his birth that was announced by the 8
envy the Arab commu angels.
nity because their father was the one com
manded [to be sacrificed} The tradition was first reported by Tabari on the authority
and he is the one who is ascribed for merit
for this steadfastness. But of Suddi:
they deny that and claim that it was Isaac
because Isaac was theit
father.’ Gabriel said to Sarah, I am giving you the good nc’ S of a SL)U
turned Isaac, and after isaac, Jacob.’ She slapped her forehead in
Unlike the Isaac traditions, the lshmael
traditions vary in airprise. Thus the verse, She struck her forehead and said: ‘ -
form and style and appear to be later Islam frarren old u’o,nan? (51:29) —1 tid this, mj hasl,and here is an old
ic (as opposed to
pre-Islamic) legends. Sunabihi’s tradition wan! That is a strange thing indeed!’ (ii: 72). Sarah said to
that Muhammad was ...

the son of two intended sacrifices emphasizes Gabriel: ‘What is a sign of this?’ I-Ic took a dry twig in his hand and
the story of ‘Abd
al-Mualib and only refers to lshmael in the last bent it between his fingers. it quivered and turned grecn. ‘then
sentence as a
kind of afterthought. The reference has all the Abraham said, ‘He will therefore he a sacrifice to G d!’ When Isaac
0
earmarks of a
late addition to an early legend. The story of ‘Um .rrew up, Abraham was visited in his sleep and was told, ‘FulfIl your
ar II and the VOW that you would offer your son as a sacrifice if God bestowed
Jew is clearly late. The Isaac traditions, on the
other hand. upon ou a boy from Sarahl’ lie said to Isaac, ‘l.cr us go and offer a
reflect the form and content of pre-islamic sources,
thus adding sacrifice to G
89 d’. He took a knife and rope and set out with him
0
support to thc theory that the traditions consideri
ng Ishmael as until they came between some mountains. The boy said to him, ‘C)
the intended victim of the sacrifice are late.
Father, where is your offering?’ lie answered, ‘0 m son. I see in
rjsion that I nill sacriJizejou. So look, n-hat is jour i-ira’ ?‘ The
The Context for the Legend on said : ‘0 my father! Do as ‘ou are commanded. If God n-i/Is,
The exegetes placed the isolated incident von will find me patient and enduring ! (37:105)90
‘

of the Sacrifice into

the larger context of the qur’anic Abraham The major significance of this tradition lies in the context it
cycle in various
ways. Some understood the meaning ot’
85 provides for the qur’anic story of the Sacrifice. ‘Ihe qut’anic
dha bib to be a sacrifice
that fulfilled a personal vow. According rendition vaguely places the episode after Abraham’s enligra
to those holding this
view, Abraham’s vision of Qur’an 37: 102
was interpreted to be
Qur’ãn it:69-74, 51:14-30. i:i-, etc.
‘ A ;zd lIe gaze her the good news about Isaac, and a/tee Isaac. Jacob
lit, 5o; Tabarsi, XXIII, ,j; Ibu Kaihir, TaJfir, IV, i, Ta’rikh,
Mupir al-Din, 1, 40-!. 233’b, Qur’Th t.:7i).
‘I Tp
j’
11 Ta/sir, XXIII, 8. It occurs in three other places md IS referred ro tlvc
*45
Some considered Qur’5n verses 37:6 (for this was a more times among our sources: Tha’Iahi, 93; Tabari, i’a’r,kh. 301. 402. and
clear trial) and la[sir, XXIII, 77-8; Zamakhshari, 111, 348; Tabarsi, XXIII, 766; )hn a)
2:124 (Remember that Abraham was tried bJ his Lord
which he fulfilled) to refer to the same incident with kalimit Athir, ITt.
(‘t’ahari, Ta’rikij 309. Ourbin.
Tab-aol, I, .s;, iba ai-Arhir, .14). The context supplied by
non-specific and the exegetes who cke this connec the Qur’an is Note the parallel motifs found in the Bible. On the vow of child
tion assume the Sacrificr sacrihce, see judges :o-o; on a sprouting stick, see Numbers i,:t6-z6
to have taken place at some unspecified
time after Abraham’s experience in and possibly Gen. o: 37
ff. The story of ‘Abd al-Muialib’s vow to sacrihce
the land of Nimrod (See Tabari, Ta’rikh, z6off,
Tha’labi, ‘pIE., Kisã’i, a son in ibn lsaq’s Sira (pp. 97-Too) represents a possible parallel with pre
3811.
islamic Arabia.
120

j Ill
 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113
tion from his people in the land of Nimrod.
i lie asks God for
9 redeemed Abraham’s son. ‘All is credited with saying that the
a son (Qur’an : too) and is told that his request will be
granted (Q. 37: ioi). But the following verse is confusing and
is understood to mean that a number of years pass during
which the son grows up. Abraham then has a vision in which
he learns he must offer that son in sacrifice (Q. 37: ioz). The
obvious lacuna in the qur’anic text is the period between the
granting of Abraham’s request and his vision. Yet other
sections of the Qur’an can be madc to provide narrative
material to fill that gap: namely, the visit of the angels on their
way to destroy the people of Lot. All this would suggest that
the Sacrifice took place in Syria before the transfer to Mecca. If
this were the case, then the intended sacrifice must have been
isaac, though some c\egetes argued that this notion was
contradicted by Q. 37: ia.97
Tabari followed this contextualization of the Sacrifice and
held that this was also the view of Suddi
93 and ‘Abdallah and
Companions of the Apostle of God.94 The Sacrifice took place
before Abraham raised up the foundations of the Ka’ba Qil
h,’t) in Mecca and before he established the stations of the Hal
1 non of the origin for the Mosque of the Ram outside of Mecca,
15 Tahari also quoted Shu’avb al-Jaba’i as saying
Pilgrimage)
that ‘Isaac was sacrificed when he was seven The location
of the Sacrifice was about two miles from Jerusalem.’°
Most of the traditions which Tabari cited, however, place
the location of the Sacrifice in the area of Mecca. ibn ‘Abbãs
placed it at Minã during Abraham’s first Pilgrimage.
97 Others
considered it to have taken place in Minã but did not connect
it with Abraham’s Pilgrimage. This was the view of many
tit 1’abari’s sources which described the ram or goat that
Q. y’:S-
g
9 .
02 A rid tr, are h,rn the good news of Isaac a pious prophet. For a
-
full discussion of the traditional arguments suppontng the candidacy of
cach brother, Sec Firestone, z i--Si.
Tafrir, XXIII, 78.
‘“
‘Lariki’, 30i2.
- I/nd., 308.
‘ Ibid.. 27.
fajsir, XXIII, So, 7a’rikh, ;o6f. In Ta/sir, XXIII. 87 and with a
second tradition in his Ta’rilth, o6, Ibn ‘Abbas connects it to \Iinã, burn
is not clear from the incomplete text whether or not the context
Abraham’s Pilgrimage. Tabari, however, also uses an isnid in which Ibn
‘Abbäs is cited as considering the Sacrifice to have taken place in Syria with
Isaac as the intended victim (ii’oikh, 301-a).
122
ABRAHAMS SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113
ram was Found bound to a tree in Thabir.°
8 Others said that it
was sacrificed at the place of sacrifice in MinV°° or at a
variety of other places in that vicinity According to ibo
lsbãq’s tradition, Abraham commenced with the sacrifice of
lshmael on one of his day-long journeys from Syria to Mecca
on the supernatural steed Buraq. The exact location was on a
trail at Mt. Thabir lust outside Mecca.’°’
On the other hand, Tabari credited ‘Ubayd h. ‘Umavr al
Lavthi with a full narrative tradition detailing Abraham’s first
Pilgrimage, during which Abraham took lshmael and the
people he called to the Pilgrimage and showed them the entire
ritual sequence of the Uajj.’°
2 Although the ritual sacrifice of
the tiaji was counted among the many stations they completed,
there is no hint of this sacrifice having been equated with the
attempted sacrifice of Abraham’s son.
t03
Al-Azraqi (d. 858) referred only in passing to the Sacrifice,
though he included a large number of traditions pertaining to
Abraham and Ishmael establishing the Ka’ba. In his explana
he related two traditions, each referring to a different son and a
different location for the Sacrifice, in the first tradition (attn
buted to Ibn ‘Abbäs) Isaac was redeemed from the Sacrifice
with a ram that was offered on a rock brought from Thahir and
located in the plain of Mina. The second tradition is attributed
to the father of ‘Abd al-Rabman h. Hasan b. al-Qiisim. lshmael
was redeemed from the Sacrifice with a ram brought down
from Thabir. When Abraham released Ishmael to get the ram,
it can away until it came to Uqaysir, which is at the base of the
Ta’rik/i, 3c7.
ai- A Ia,thar.
Ibid.
101 Ibid., ;o;f.
102
Tabari, 1s’rFkb, 287-B.
103 The lack of reference
to the Sacrifice in traditions treating Abraham’s
iirst Hajj Pilgrimage is common and probably typifies traditions that pre
late the connection between the Abrahamic dbabth and the sacrifice of the
liajj. Even as late as Burckhardr (early nineteenth century). thc sacrifice of
the Hajj was not connected in any way to the near sacrihce of Abraham’s
ion. He mentions that only after the completion of the Pilgrimage do sonic
aithe faithful return to Minä and make another sacrifice in commemoration
of the dhabth (Travels, II, 6).
123
 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113
bill al-Saf, and this is where the Mosque of the Ram was
built. 104
The Shi ite Qummi cited a tradition attributed to Abu
t
‘Ahdallâh in which the Sacrifice was to have taken place in
Mina during Abraham’s first Pilgrimage. The sacrificial victim,
however, was to have been Isaac, who had made the Pilgrim
age with his mother Sarah.
105
Mas’üdi’s sequence of the Abraham-Ishmael story begins
with Ishmael’s birth, soon after which he was brought to
Mecca where the J urhumites and Amalekites befriended him
and his mother Hagar. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah
and then commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son. After the
attempted sacrifice, Abraham and lshmael raised up the founda
tions of the Kaba. Only after all this had transpired was Isaac
07 According to Mas’udi’s chronology, the intended
born)
sacrifice must be lshmael, though he provides the standard
explanation that if the Sacrifice took place in Syria, it was
8
Isaac.”’
The later exegetes. Tha’labI, Zamakhshari, Tabarsi, Kisa’i,
lbn al-Athir, and lbn Kathir repeated traditions cited by the
earlier exegetes. They clearly expressed the confusion apparent
in their own sources as to where and when the Sacrifice took
place.
The data gleaned from the contexts established by the
exegetes tend to confirm the trends noticed earlier. Traditions
cited on the authority of Ka’b al-Abbar set the location in Syria
and understand the victim to have been Isaac. Most of the
traditions cited on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbäs and all those
attributed to Ihn Ishãq give a Meccan setting and consider the
9 The Shi’ites provided a Meccan setting
victim to be lshmael.’°
but often noted that Isaac was the intended sacrifice.
‘i-ahari considered Syria to be the location and Isaac to have
‘ According to this tradition, the ram was brought back to al-Manhar
in Mina, where it was sacrificed. Roth traditions can be found in aI-Azraqrs
-Jkbbar Alakka. edited b’ \‘(ustenfeld as Chronikt-,, der Strait rkcca (Leipzig
iS8; rcpr.. Akhbar Alakka al-A lusharrifa (Beirut. n.d.) 1. 401.
I0 J, 224-6. This, as we have suggested above, seems to typify
particularly Shi’ite understanding of the Sacrifice.
“>
Mas’udi, AIur,,’ aI-dha/iab (Beirut 138511965), 1, 574.
Ii;?
Ibid., 1,
lub
Though a few of the Ibn ‘Ahbãs traditions also consider isaac to
have been intended.
124
ABRAHAM’S SON; QUR’AN 37:99-113
been the victim. Most exegetes after him took the opposite
view. It is important to note that the two classic folk-tale
collections (qi,a a/-anl4ya’) of Tha’labI and Kisã’i tend to
follow Tabari’s view, yet they and the genre of literature they
represent are often criticized as preserving distorted and incor
rect traditions that pervert the truth of Islam. In fact, they
often followed the folk-traditions of Jews and Christians,
• which Tabari sometimes followed unselfconsciously as well. By
the generation after Tabari, however, it appears that a more
monolithic approach was established which placed the Sacrifice
in Mecca and held that lshmael was the intended victim. Only
the Shi’ites and the unauthoritative folklore collections con-
• tinued to posit that Isaac may have been the intended sacrifice.
I Ye Traditionists Supporting each Candidate
There appears to be little discussion in the earliest written
works regarding who was the intended Sacrifice. Goldziher
attributes this to a consensus among the early Muslims that
• isaac was the intended victim.
1t0 Among our exegetical works,
the earliest to name the victim of the Sacrifice was Ibn Hanbal,
who referred to the near sacrifice of Isaac while relating a
tradition concerned with the Lapidation ritual of the Ilajj. He
failed to make any mention of Ishmael.
’
11
Ibn Qutayba (d. 890) was the first in our sample actually to
list those who believed the intended Sacrifice to be Isaac and
• those who believed it to be Ishmael.
112 Most exegetes after Ibn
Qutayba followed his practice of recording a list of the
traditionists supporting each When all of the data is
view.
rallied from the ten exegetes listing the supporters of Isaac and
liD He also felt that Muhammad intended Isaac in the Qur’änic rendition
Die Ricbtuugen der isla,nistheu Koranauslegmzg iJ.eiden 1970], See also
Michel Hayek, Is Mj’stire d’Isrnael (Paris 1964), it5 if.
1, 306-7; ‘When Abraham desired to sacrifice his son Isaac, he said:
Q father, tie me up so that I will not shake and my blood splash onto you
when you sacrifice me.”’ In references to Abraham in Mecca, however, Ibn
• Hanbal invariably associates him with Ishmael (1, 253, 347-8, 360, V, [21,
etc.) The problem of which son was the intended Sacrifice begins to stand
out when all of Ihn 1-lanbal’s traditions associate Abraham with Ishmacl in
Mecca, aside from the single act of the Sacrifice, when the son appears to be
Isaac. Ibn Hanbal, who died in 856, cannot be considered an early exegete.
Nevertheless, he appears to provide no traditions considering Ishmael as
• the Sacrifice.
• 112 KiM/I aI-Ala’Jrif (Cairo, nd.), 35-8.
125
 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113 TABLE 2 Opinions of the Tradicionists regarding who was the
Intended Sacrif,tet
(shinaei, we find that thirty-nine early traditionists are quoted
141 times as supporting Isaac in the role of intended Sacrifice qporters of Isaac Supporters of Ishmar/
Twenty-nine are quoted 133 times in support of Ishmael. Ten £-‘Abbãs b. Abd al-Munalib ‘Amir
famous and respected early traditionists such as t Ali b. Ahi 1- the Prophet Amir ft Wrila
iAbbIs b. ‘Ahd al-Munalib S (sec also ‘Arnir)
Talib, Atã’, Ibn ‘Abbas, Mujähid, al-Sha’bi, al-Suddi, and a
thdallah b. Mas’üd Abdalläh b, ‘Uniar
Flasan al-Basri, are quoted variousIas believing it was Isaac
and that it was Ishmael.
Goldziher pointed out long ago that conflicting opinions
were not infre
uently attributed to the same well-respected and
9
I \hdallãh b. Shaqiq
\hd aI-Rahmãn b,Abi Thbit
Abü Iludhavl
\hü l-luravra + Ka’b
a
i
(see also ‘Jbn tniar’:
Abu Abdallãh
(aI-’Abbiis b. ‘Aba
aI-Mutçalih?)
khü Mlik i Abü jaiar 3
early traditionists and,or Companions of the Prophet, or ever.
kbü Mavsara (inc. .\hü la’far
the Prophet himself.”
3 This is clearly the situation here. An ASh. Mas’ud i Muhamnud b. \li ‘

isaac school’ and an ishmael school’ -apparently formed. Each I-{asavn i Ali[i Salih
tried to gather evidence in favour of its own view, and both ibn Abi Burka i Ahu aViufayl 3

probably tried to attribute their position to the most famous lhn AbT al-Hudhavi t mad h. lIanbal
3
At 2
ha Mas’Ud ‘Amr b. al-’Ulä
and well-respected early traditionists. iha Thäbit Dahhãk
¶
it is clear that a significantly larger number of early naW ‘Ikrima 7 Father of lbn Ahi Hätirn
tionists believed isaac to he the intended victim. This fact a-labI’i i lbn lshãq said that he heard
reflects the probability of a greater general acceptance of the rdb al-Ahbãr ic Muhammad h. Ka’S ai-Qurazt
pro-isaac view during the early period. Our examination of the MakbUl 2 say often that ii ‘v-as
\tasruq 8 Ishmaci 4
list of Isaac supporters reveals that Ka’b al-Abbar is the
aI-Qãsim i al-kaIhi
authority quoted most often in support of this view)
t4 2-Qäsim b. Abi Barra i Muhammad b. Ka’b al-Qurtubi
Far fewer uxegetes are cited as exchisively considering ai-Qasim S. ASI Yarn i MujThid + lbn ‘.\hhäs 2

lshmael to be the intended victim of the Sacrifice. The major i?aEda al-Rabi h. AnTs 3

I
supporters of Ishmael -are also cited as supporting Isaac. Ibn bavd S. ‘L’mavr Sa’id b. al-Musavvth 6
Abhâs is quoted most often by far, with thirty-five references Lrnar 5. al-Khacrãb al-Sha’hi F Ibu ‘Abbàs
Uthmn b Abi Nadir t \‘üsuf 5. NliIiran 6
supporting Ishmael, and ten supporting Isaac. Uhman S. Hádir
The full listing of traditionists as reported in the source is 21-Zuhri 4
provided in lable a. Total no. of citations: 91 ‘Iota1 ito. if citat ions:
Because of the great uncertainty and the general unreliability
of the sources regarding isnJds, any conclusions we draw apporlers of both Isaac Ishr,nici
exclusively from isnad studies cannot be considered more than
‘Abdallãh
conjectures. Yet our conclusions here correspond well with the \ji 7
trends noted earlier. The number of supporters of Isaac exceed 4 4
those supporting lshmaei by a ratio of 3/a. This alone suggests .1-tiasan al-Basri ii

that more early traditionists may have believed isaac to be the tim ‘Abbis 10 30

intended victim. ha Thmar IC

\Lujihid 12
Ka’h was the primary source for the Isaac supporters, but Sa’id S. Jubayr 5 -I
because of his association with Jewish traditions, his authority at-Shahi 1)

il-Suddi 5
‘‘‘ Richtungen, So. Total no. of citations: 40 84
14 Thineen times.
Grind totals: 131

t z6
 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN -fl3
99
37:
declined by the ninth century. The best respected traditionist of
all is Ibn Abbas, who was cited as supporting both. It is our
contention that he supported Isaac as the intended victim.ir
But because of his universal respect among the traditionists by
the mid-eighth century. the lshmael school began attributing
their traditions to him.s lbn ‘Abbs came to be considered
the highest authority of early exegesis a century or so after his
death, he became the one upon whom more traditions were
pegged than any other traditionist. Other famous early tradi
tionists were chosen by the lshmael school because they werc
not on record as holding an opinion on the matter. Thet
would therefore be immune from elimination for supporting
both sons. But because of the high status of these early
traditionists, some pro-Isaac traditions came to be attributed to
them as well. They are therefore on record as supporting both.
though statistically their citations for Isaac are basically insig
nificant.
It is interesting to note that Abü I lurayra, one of the most
prolific early traditionists and also a student of Ka’b al—Ahbãr,
supports only Isaac. lie was probably disregarded by the
lshmael school because of his prior record of supporting Isaac.
The lshmael supporters probably felt compelled to latch on to
Ibn ‘Abhãs because of his importance, despite the fact that he
too was already on record as supporting Isaac. But by loading
the evidence in favour of Ishmael, the numbers tended to
render Ibn ‘Abbas’s past record less significant,
The particular make-up of the ultimate authorities of the
isnJds therefore suggests that Isaac was originally considered
the intended victim of the sacrifice. Later, when the status of
lshmael became more important to Islam, traditions evolved or
were attributed to respected early authorities that supported his
position as the intended sacrifice.
Coge/usion
More early traditionists are on record as considering Isaac the
intended victim. The earliest narrative exegesis on the Qur’anic
115 This
list includes only the tally of those craditionists listed by the
exegetes. It does not include the authorities cited in the isnlds of the
traditions analysed above. The number iollowing each name represents the
number of times that authority is listed by all the exegetes who provided
rallies.
° lbn
‘Abbas was a student of Ka’b’s (El’ 4:5Saft).
iz8
ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN 37:99-113
story of the Sacrifice suggests Isaac, and the legends referring
to Isaac as the dbabib A//it predate those so naming lshmael.
The earliest exegetes supported Isaac’s candidacy as the
Sacrifice, while virtually all exegetes after Tabari (d. 923)
supported Ishmael. Finally, the context for the Isaac legends
predominantly parallels that of the Bible and Jewish narrative
exegesis; indeed, the historical record has demonstrated that
the early Muslims went to Christians and Jews in order to learn
their traditions. All the evidence suggests that early Islam
considered Isaac to have been the chosen son for Abraham’s
great and pious act of sacrifice.
The context and message of the legends considering Ishmael
to have been intended are completely at variance with the
Jewish and Christian view. In all likelihood, this approach
developed only after the character of Isaac was found to be
irrelevant to the destiny and religious needs of Islam. The
evidence from the sources suggests that the Islamic view began
to shift increasingly toward the pro-lshmael school during the
eerly second Islamic century and became almost universally
accepted by the end of the third. The question that must be
asked at this juncture is, why the change?
A number of factors are at issue. First of all, it would appear
from the recent research of René Dagorn that the genealogical
connection between Ishmael and the Arab people does not
7 Without a deep-felt genealogical cunnee
predate Islam.’’
non between the Northern Arabs and Ishmael, it would
appear to matter little whether Isaac or Ishmael were the
mended victim and ultimate hero of the Sacrifice. However, as
the genealogical relationship between lshmael and the Northern
.krabs became more firmly established during the first two
Islamic centuries, the importance of the progenitor of the
Quraysh and the family of Muhammad would have naturally
grown.
An unlikely source of support for this view can be found in
the comments of Ibn Kathir, the respected fourteenth-century
exegete who argued staunchly in support of Ishmacl as the
intended sacrificial victim. Ibn Kathir argued that the Jewish
convert Ka’b was the major source of the pro-Isaac school, and
despite the fact that he was an unreliable source, he was a
Ii? La Gesle dIsmaël d’apres I’onomasliqsw ti ía tradition arabes (Paris I 98 i).
I 29
 ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN
strong influence upon early traditionists.
37:99-I’;
1t8 In fact, he argues,
I ABRAHAM’S SON: QUR’AN
the pro-Isaac view is a product of the Isrã’i/iyyJt, a genre of
Arabic literature composed of stories and Legends brought into
Islam by Jews and full of distortionsii
9
But why would the Jews wish to distort the truth? Through
a unwitting reverse of the likely historical situation, he accuses
the Jews of ‘forcing this understanding because Isaac is their
father while Ishmacl is the father of the Arabs’ 120 Elsewhere he
states:
-a group of scholars are of the opinion that the intended sacrifice
was Isaac. They relate this on the authority of the sages (aI-sala,ç
who quote the authority of some of the Companions of the Prophet.
rhi wgh it is not in a book nor is it jinma.
121 I am of the opinion that
this comes from none other than the sages (cthhdr) of rhe People of
the Book. It was taken [into Islam] uncontested and without proof.
The very sources to whom the Muslims turned in the early
period were subsequently rejected, but for logical reasons.
Islam could nor countenance a dependence upon obvioush
foreign sources of authority and tradition when it could boast
of the greatest civilization on earth.
With the advent of the ‘Abbasid Empire in the middle of the
eighth century, Islam began to reach the pinnacle of power and
influence. Militarily, scientifically, intellectually, and artistically,
Islam had demonstrated its superiority to other contemporan
powers. \‘et according to the theological claims of both
Judaism and Christianity, Muslims remained outside of God’s
covenant. Despite the portrayal of Ishmael’s strength in the
Bible, both Judaism and Christianity acknowledged his rejec
tion. God’s covenant would exist only with the genealogical
(Judaism) or spiritual (Christianity) decendants of lsaac. To
the older and established monotheistic creeds, Ishmael, the
progenitor of the Arabs and of the greatest prophet of islam,
remained the symbol of the rejected covenant.
The ambiguous story of the SacrLhee in the Qur’ãn became
an excelLent basis for the claim that God’s true covenantal
relationship wouLd obtain neither with the biological nor the
Fafsir, IV, 17, quoted above, p. ti6.
:9 Ta’rikh, I, a 2-3.
IZu T4sir, IV, i.
lla-Ia)’sa dbaIsks fT kitabin wa-là smma.
t30
I ‘3’
37:99-Il;
spiritual descendants of Isaac. The Qur’an would be under
stood to prove that lshmael was the true hero of the Sacrifice.
By demonstrating his willingness to obey God’s ultimate
command of personal annihilation, ishmael would reflect the
true character of the Arab Muslims, whom God had chosen
because of their excellent virtues. The Jews and Christians,
daimed the Muslim esegetes, knew the truth about Ishmacl
from their own scripture, but denied it and even distorted their
holy books in order to support their false claims supporting
Isaac as the intended sacrifice of God.
Most likely, the change within Islam from Isaac to lshniael
was largely a case of reactive theology. Despite the inability
of Judaism and Christianity to carve out a large niche of
temporal power after the near miraculous successes of the
Muslims, they could still take the theological offensive based on
their sacred scriptures. The changing islamic view toward the
Sacrifice was probably influenced by this phenomenon. It is
true that the Qur’ãn passage itself is unavoidably problematic,
vet the issue of which son was the intended victim was largely
a non-issue until the theological battle was waged.
Finally, the height of the ‘Abbasid Empire experienced a
strong attempt at consolidating and standardizing Islamic prac
tice and belief. Not only was the relationship between islam
and Judaism and Christianity at issue, at issue was also the the
unification of the empire and the relationship between the
Arabs and other Muslim ethnic groups. This was the period of
the Slnisibjyya, the anti-Arab movement of intellectuals of
Persian descent in the ‘Abbasid court and intelligentsia. This
conflict may have -aLso influenced the views of some Arab
scholars, who could have looked to the legend of the Sacrifice
as a source of support.
ifl This is not to imply that a group of religious believers gathered
together one day to think out a refutation of Jewish and Christian claims.
The process of change was gradual and resulted from the unique develop
went of Islamic tradition literature during the first two Islamic centuries. A
theoretical reproduction of the process is the topic of a forthcoming article.
 _
___
___

I-i A I,I N F A a i. N’ ‘ P RI ,
C, xc

\ X I
it
\n. i
Nt

.17

I
I JOURNAL OF
SEMITIC STUDIES
I I I)[’FIU) HY

BROCK, and M. K. J. RICH \R1)SON

LE. J3G WOR I H, S. I’
I
I
I Ri Li
J ( F m I$lI,II(aI

tIa liiiiiiin nt \X rd ( )idcr in \ trIiIt N ‘F.’

11w C , p.
Flebrt “
S
I luist i a
ir’o/ ni K 145 6(1 \ \ 4 z6) Ilid tilt s\riin

1’3ERT J. ( )wi.s
of lkn Sira the I)cmonstrati,nis ‘1

I
I i
The I ri’ S ilk t’<t
39
‘7’

\phnhit
j EERT 11 SRI)
77
I Pstutlo on ithan and \ntI RI linic ‘oLim
Targum

ILnES I [Ill sIO’.i

rhc Inttnltd Sir rifict (al I)huii’/i, (.2111 lfl ,1 9’)
4‘ thrab ni’’, ‘‘on
T13)
is

Isslits in Qur’anic I \t(CS(S

95

I
‘
“SDAN
Vine, \\omtn md Nc is mt tS the r in
1
Ru \I Ia mai
\rahic I irc.rat nrc

R\I4N Rni ii
153
Iii I)Ic.\’ NI. Iigio Ii,ttt (it “I F sal “p un
Polcr”itc iii

‘RI \(ji

(“ irws

I OXFORD UNIVLRSIT’ PRFSS

I
HEnnrv, U:;j
Fr,nrn’,z
Los
F,.”
n’r.:7 Dary