Continuation of the commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “And We ransomed him,” meaning the one commanded to be sacrificed, namely Isma'il, or Ishaq.

The Shaykh : The author said “And We ransomed him, meaning the one commanded to be sacrificed, namely Isma'il or Ishaq; there are two opinions”. Or, in the author’s wording, it is not for doubt but for variation; that is, some scholars said the one sacrificed was Ishaq, and others said the one sacrificed was Isma'il. However, the stronger opinion is that the one sacrificed was Isma'il, for several reasons, among which are:
What will follow in the author’s words regarding his statement , where the author said: “He cited this as evidence that the one sacrificed was other than him.”
And among them is that Allah the Exalted said regarding Ishaq, “We gave him the glad tidings of a boy, gentle” , and regarding the one sacrificed, He said . This is different from that, because the one described as gentle is the one who was patient with the sacrifice and the execution of the command of Allah Mighty and Majestic. And among them is that Allah described Isma'il as one who kept his promise . This description is only said regarding a great matter in which a person was truthful, and the promise he made was his saying to his father, “You will find me, if Allah wills, among the patient” , and he fulfilled it.
And among them is also that Allah the Exalted described Isma'il as being among the patient, and He did not describe Ishaq with that. He said, Exalted is He, , and He did not mention Ishaq, nor did He describe Ishaq with patience. It is known that the patience with which Isma'il was patient is the patience that deserves to be praised for him, because it was a great patience.
And among them is that Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, gave the glad tidings of Ishaq and, behind Ishaq, Ya'qub, and He said, . If Ishaq had been the one commanded to be sacrificed, there would have been a contradiction, because how could he be commanded to be sacrificed when he had been given the glad tidings of a son, namely Ishaq, because Ya'qub is the son of Ishaq? So if he was given the glad tidings that he would have a son named Ya'qub, it is not fitting that he be commanded to be sacrificed. One might say that he was given the glad tidings of Ya'qub in terms of the ultimate outcome, because when the obligation of the sacrifice was abrogated, this son remained and was provided with a son. It is said, yes, this can be a response, but the glad tidings of Ya'qub would be lost; the glad tidings of Ya'qub would have been negated in that state. And it is known that a person given the glad tidings of something cannot be distressed by its opposite; if he is distressed by its opposite, the glad tidings turn into bad news. These are five reasons, all of which indicate that the one sacrificed was Isma'il.
The sixth reason is His statement here, , after He mentioned the story of the sacrifice in its entirety, and it is not possible for there to be repetition in the Qur'an.
The seventh is that Allah the Exalted mentioned the glad tidings of Ishaq to the mother, , and He did not mention that regarding Isma'il.
The eighth is that Allah the Exalted said regarding Ishaq, . And even if he was given the glad tidings that he would be a prophet, it is not fitting and not permissible to command his sacrifice after he was given the glad tidings of his prophethood. These are eight reasons, all of which indicate that the one sacrificed was Isma'il. The ninth is that it was narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that he said, , meaning Isma'il, and his father was 'Abdullah ibn 'Abd al-Muttalib. If this hadith is authentic, it is also clear evidence that the one sacrificed was Isma'il, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was from the descendants of Isma'il and was not from the descendants of Ishaq, but was from the descendants of Isma'il. Perhaps other reasons will come to us that support that the one sacrificed was Isma'il.
The author, may Allah have mercy on him, said, “With a great ram from Paradise, which is the one that Habil brought near. Jibril (peace be upon him) brought it, and the noble Ibrahim slaughtered it while glorifying Allah”. It has been mentioned previously that this is an opinion for which there is no authentic evidence, and that this ransom was from the livestock that existed at that time. There is no evidence that it was from Paradise, nor that there are rams in Paradise. The correct view is that he slaughtered one from the livestock of the world. The command of Ibrahim (peace be upon him) to slaughter it, and the apparent meaning of the noble verse, is that he slaughtered it as a ransom for Isma'il. It is also permissible that it was, in addition to the ransom, a thanksgiving to Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, for His blessing with this clear trial.