Before Orthodoxy; The Story of Abraham's Sacrifice (Dzabīh) in Early Muslim Commentaries

Authors

  • Azhari Andi Universitas Islam International Indonesia
  • Hamdi Putra Ahmad University of Oxford, Wellington Square, Oxford OX1 2JD

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15575/ijik.v14i1.29413

Keywords:

Abraham’s Sacrifice, Dzabīh, Isaac, Ismael, Tafsīr and Muslim Commentaries

Abstract

The story of Abraham's sacrifice holds significant place in Islam, and what Muslims believe about Ishmael as the intended sacrifice is not the only belief in the Muslim tradition. This paper examines the historical transformation of Abraham’s sacrifice narratives in Muslim commentaries (tafsīrs), with a focus on revealing how, when, why, and at whose hands this transformation occurred. Employing the theory of tafsir as a genealogical tradition of Walid A. Saleh and adopting a socio-historical approach, this paper investigates the evolution of the interpretation of the story of dzabīh from Isaac to Ismael and the factors contributing to this evolution. The analysis reveals that in the first four centuries of Islam, Muslim interpretations and attitudes regarding the story of dzabīh were the complete opposite of what is common today. Muslim commentators, such as al-Suddī, Ibn Juraij, Muqatil ibn Sulaiman, al-Thabarī, and al-Samarqandī, firmly believed that Isaac is dzabīh. However, Ibn Athiyyah and al-Baghawī, the commentators of the sixth century hijri, showed different responses towards this story, neutral and favoring Ismael as dzabīh. Additionally, in the eighth century Hijri, Ishmael as dzabīh gained orthodoxy and popularity, as demonstrated by Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn Kathir. They condemned the pro-Isaac as heretical interpretation and rejected it. Even though they disagree with the pro-Isaac commentators, they still quoted the narrations and opinions of previous commentators by providing counter-arguments, and this is what is called tafsir as a genealogical tradition. Furthermore, power dynamics and the socio-political setting of the eighth century may have had an impact on this change in the story of dzabīh. This evolution highlights the dynamic nature of Islamic interpretation, where interpretation is not necessarily static but evolves over time, shaped by historical contingencies and socio-political dynamics. This historical re-evaluation illuminates the complexity of Islamic intellectual history and the fluidity of religious interpretation in the Muslim tradition.

Author Biographies

Azhari Andi, Universitas Islam International Indonesia

Azhari Andi is a PhD candidate in Islamic Studies at the Indonesian International Islamic University (IIIU) Depok, West Java, Indonesia. He obtained his MA and BA in Quranic Studies from Sunan Kalijaga State Islamic University Yogyakarta. His research focuses on classical, medieval and modern tafsīrs and hadith studies.  He has been teaching at Mahmud Yunus State Islamic University (UIN) Batusangkar, West Sumatra, in the Department of Qur’anic Studies since 2021. He wrote several articles on Qur’anic and hadith studies, tafsīr and Islamic education.   

Hamdi Putra Ahmad, University of Oxford, Wellington Square, Oxford OX1 2JD

Hamdi Putra Ahmad is an MPhil Candidate in Islamic Studies and History at the University of Oxford, United Kindom. He completed his BA in Qur'anic and Exegesis Sciences at State Islamic University of Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta. His focus of research is the Intratextual and Intertextual Analysis of Father-Son Relationships in the Qur'an. He is currently active as the coordinator of Media division for the Special Branch of Nahdlatul Ulama in the United Kingdom (PCINU UK). He wrote several articles on the Qur'an and its tafseer.

 

References

Abdel Haleem, M. A. (Ed.). (2005). The Qurʼan. Oxford University Press.

Afsar, A. (2007). A Comparative Study of the Intended Sacrifice of Isaac and Ismael in the Bible and the Qur’an. Journal of Islamic Studies, 46(4). https://www.jstor.org/stable/20839091

al-BaghawÄ«, A. M. al-H. ibn M. (1989). Ma’Älim al-TanzÄ«l. DÄr al-Taibah.

al-BÄqÄ«, M. F. A. (1364). Al-Mu’jam al-Mufahras Li AlfÄz al-Qur’Än al-KarÄ«m. Dar al-Hadis.

al-Dzahabī, M. H. (1989). IsrĒiliyyat fī al-Tafsīr wa al-Hadīth (D. Hafidhuddin, Trans.). Pusaka Litera Antarnusa.

al-GhanÄ«, H. A. (1413). TafsÄ«r Ibn Juraij. Maktabah al-TurÄts al-IslÄmÄ«.

al-JazairÄ«, A. B. (n.d.). Aysar al-TafÄsir (Vol. 3). Maktabah Shamilah.

al-MarÄghÄ«, A. M. (2007). TafsÄ«r al-MarÄghÄ« (1–23). MustafÄ al-BÄbi al-HalbÄ«.

al-QattÄn, M. (2008). MabÄhis fÄ« ’UlÅ«m al-Qur’Än (8th ed.). Maktabah Wahbah.

al-SÄbÅ«nÄ«, M. ’AlÄ«. (1981). Safwah al-TafÄsir (Vol. 2). DÄr al-Qur’Än al-KarÄ«m.

al-SamarqandÄ«, A. L. N. ibn M. ibn A. ibn I. (1413). TafsÄ«r al-SamarqandÄ«; Bahr al-’UlÅ«m (A. M. Mu’awwid, A. A. A. al-Maujud, & Z. A. al-Majid al-Nawti, Eds.). DÄr al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah.

al-ShanqitÄ«, M. al-Amin. (1415). TafsÄ«r AdwÄ’ al-BayÄn fÄ« Īdlah al-Qur’Än bi al-Qur’Än (Vol. 6). Dar al-Fikr.

al-TabarÄ«, M. bin J. (n.d.). JÄmi’ al-BayÄn fÄ« Ta’wÄ«l al-Qur’Än (Vol. 21). Dar al-Tarbiyyah wa al-Turas.

al-TabarÄ«, M. ibn J. (1442). TafsÄ«r al-TabarÄ«; JÄmi’ al-BayÄn ’an Ta’wÄ«l al-Qur’Än (A. A. ibn A. Al-Muhsin al-TurkÄ«, Ed.; 1–19). DÄr Hajar.

al-Usaimin, M. ibn S. ibn M. (1993). MajmÅ« FatÄwa wa RasÄ’il. Dar al-Wathan.

al-TabÄtabÄ’ī, M. H. (1417). Al-MÄ«zÄn fÄ« TafsÄ«r al-Qur’Än (Vol. 17). Muassasah al-A’lamÄ« li al-Matbū’Ät.

Asad, T. (2009). The Idea of an Anthropology of Islam. Qui Parle, 17(2), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.17.2.1

’AshÅ«r, M. al-TÄhir ibn. (2008). Al-TahrÄ«r wa al-TanwÄ«r (Vol. 23). Dar Tunisiyah.

Barlas, A. (2011). Abraham’s sacrifice in the Qur’an: Beyond the body. Scripta Instituti Donneriani Aboensis, 23, 55–71. https://doi.org/10.30674/scripta.67380

Ehrman, B. (2023). The Socio-Historical Method. The Bart Ehrman Blog; The History and Literature of Early Christianity. https://ehrmanblog.org/the-socio-historical-method/

Firestone, R. (1989). Abraham’s Son as The Intended Sacrifice (Al-DhabÄ«h, Qur’Än 37: 99–113): Issues in Qur’Änic Exegesis. Journal of Semitic Studies, XXXIV(1), 95–131. https://doi.org/10.1093/jss/XXXIV.1.95

Firestone, R. (1998). Abraham’s Son as the Intended Sacrifice (al dhabih [Qur’an 37:99 113]): Issues in Qur’anic Exegesis. Journal of Semitic Studies, 34(1). https://www.academia.edu/3768824/Abrahams_Son_as_the_Intended_Sacrifice_al_dhabih_Qur_an_37_99_113_Issues_in_Qur_anic_Exegesis

Hamka. (1986). Tafsir al-Azhar (Vol. 23). Panjimas.

Hamka. (2015). Tafsir Al-Azhar. Gema Insani.

Hanafi, H. (1996). Method of Thematic Interpretation of the Qurʿan. In Wild (Ed.), The Qur’an as Text (pp. 195–211). BRILL. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004452169_014

Ibn Athiyyah al-AndÄlusiah, A. M. A. al-H. ibn G. (2010). Al-Muharrar al-WajÄ«z fÄ« TafsÄ«r al-KitÄb al-’AzÄ«z. DÄr Ibn Hazm.

Ibn Taimiyah. (n.d.). Al-TafsÄ«r al-KabÄ«r (1–3). DÄr al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah.

Ibn Taimiyah. (2005). Majmū’ah al-FatawÄ (1–4). DÄr al-WafÄ’.

KathÄ«r, A. al-F. I. ibn ’Umar ibn. (1999). TafsÄ«r al-Qur’Än al-’Azim (Vol. 7). DÄr al-Thayyibah.

KathÄ«r, A. al-F. I. ibn ’Umar ibn. (2012). FadÄ’il al-Qur’Än (A. Hapid, Trans.). Pustaka Azzam.

Lakhdar, S. (2001). Qissah al-DzabÄ«h Baina al-RiwÄyÄt al-KitÄbiyyah wa al-IslÄmiyyah; DirÄsah DÄ«niyyah Manhajiyyah MuqÄranah. Muassasah al-Risalah.

Mirza, Y. Y. (2013). Ishmael as Abraham’s Sacrifice: Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Kathīr on the Intended Victim. Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations, 24(3), 277–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/09596410.2013.786339

Nahdi, S. A. (1993). Yang Disembelih Ishaq atau Isma’il? Arista Brahmatyasa.

Qastah, I. A. (2022). KhalÄ«l al-RahmÄn IbrÄhÄ«m ’Alaih al-SalÄm. Mazeedah.

Qutub, S. (2003). FÄ« ZilÄl al-Qur’Än. Dar al-Shuruq.

Saleh, W. (2004). The Formation of the Classical TafsÄ«r Tradition: The QurʾÄn Commentary of al-ThaÊ¿labÄ« (d. 427/1035). BRILL.

Shihab, M. Q. (2011). Tafsir Al-Misbah; Pesan-Kesan dan Keserasian al-Qur’an (Vol. 11). Lentera Hati.

Sirry, M. (2018). Islam Revisionis; Kontestasi Agama Zaman Radikal. Suka Press.

Slade, D. M. (2020). What is the Socio-Historical Method in the Study of Religion? Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry, 2(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.33929/sherm.2020.vol2.no1.01

SulaimÄn, M. I. (1423). Al-TafsÄ«r al-KabÄ«r (A. M. Shahatah, Ed.; Vol. 2). Muassasah al-Tarikh al-’Arabiy.

YÅ«suf, M. “AthÄ.†(1414). TafsÄ«r al-SuddÄ« al-KabÄ«r. Dar al-Wafa.

Downloads

Published

2024-02-04

Issue

Vol. 14 No. 1 (2024): IJIK

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

 

Â