THE LIFE OF ABRAHAM: A COMMENTARY
BY MARK ROSENBLIT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE
PROLOGUE
CHAPTER 1: THE ASCENT TO THE LAND OF ISRAEL
CHAPTER 2: THE DESCENT TO THE LAND OF EGYPT
CHAPTER 3: THE REBELLION OF LOT AND THE PROPOSED
DIVISION OF THE LAND
CHAPTER 4: ABRAHAM’S WAR AGAINST THE MESOPOTAMIAN
KINGS AND THE GIFT OF THE LAND
CHAPTER 5: THE GIFT OF OFFSPRING
CHAPTER 6: THE COVENANT OF CIRCUMCISION
CHAPTER 7: THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM AND GOMORRAH
CHAPTER 8: THE ABDUCTION OF SARAH BY KING ABIMELECH
CHAPTER 9: THE EXPULSION OF ISHMAEL
CHAPTER 10: THE ALLIANCE WITH THE PHILISTINES AND THE
INSTRUCTION TO SACRIFICE ISAAC
CHAPTER 11: THE PURCHASE OF THE CAVE OF MACHPELA
FROM THE HITTITES
CHAPTER 12: THE FINAL WISDOM OF ABRAHAM
CONCLUSION
My clarifications and explanations within quoted statements appear inside [ ]
PREFACE
Judaic tradition tells us that the conduct of our biblical ancestors and the events described in the Hebrew Bible are guideposts for our own conduct and portents of the Future. Accordingly, we are permitted to critically analyze our biblical ancestors' actions -- both the praiseworthy and the blameworthy -- in order that we may know, in our own Day, which paths to choose and which to avoid.
Abraham was the first Hebrew, as a result of which the language spoken by him as well as the covenantal tribes descended from him are designated, respectively, as the Hebrew language and as the Hebrew tribes. And, of course, this is also why our foundational documents are collectively denominated as the Hebrew Bible. Moreover, as a token of respect, Abraham is also deemed to be the first Jew, as well as the first Jewish leader, even though both of those designations actually belong to his great-grandson Judah.
As Abraham was confronted with many of the same challenges that have confronted (and continue to confront) the leadership of the present-day Israel, there is much that can be learned from way he chose to respond to those challenges.
Consequently, through an examination and analysis of Abraham’s life, I intend to elucidate for the reader the character traits to which the leadership of the Jewish State ought to aspire.
As such examination and analysis will necessarily entail criticism (in addition to commendation) of Abraham, I wish to emphasize that I have attempted to proffer only respectful criticism of my righteous ancestor. This approach is based upon God’s Instruction regarding our treatment of a kinsman who has engaged in wrongful conduct, to wit:
"You shall not hate your brother in your heart; [instead,] you shall [constructively] reprimand your kinsman, and [consequently] you will not incur the guilt of Sin because of him."
(Leviticus 19:17)
PROLOGUE
Of Noah the Hebrew Bible says:
"These are the offspring of Noah -- Noah was a righteous man, perfect in his generations; Noah walked with God."
(Genesis 6:9)
But, of Abraham the Hebrew Bible says:
"When Abram was 99 years old, HaShem appeared to Abram and said to him, 'I am Almighty God; walk before Me and be perfect.'"
(Genesis 17:1)
Noah, a part of the antediluvian Gentile World from his birth until its demise, was required only to confront his World spiritually. He was able to successfully accomplish this task by doing God's Bidding -- the incremental construction of an Ark -- in a public manner for a 120-year period, during which God afforded to Noah's fellow human beings an ample opportunity to repent of their Evil and to ponder the consequences of their continued rebellion against His Moral Code, by issuing the following Warning:
"My Spirit shall not contend evermore concerning Man since he is but Flesh; his days shall be 120 years."
(Genesis 6:3)
At the end of this long grace period, God vindicated the faith and obedience of righteous Noah by executing His prophesied Judgment upon the unrepentant World, thereby destroying all (non-aquatic) Life therefrom, except for that which had entered the Ark. This was for the benefit of Posterity, as the Hebrew Bible declares:
"The righteous man shall rejoice when he sees Vengeance. He shall wash his feet in the blood of the Wicked. And Mankind shall say, 'Truly there is a reward for the Righteous. Truly there is a God Who judges on Earth.'"
(Psalms 58:11-12)
In contrast, Abraham, while born into the postdiluvian Gentile World, was separated from it, and he ceased to be a Gentile thereafter. This separation was both spiritual and physical. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"HaShem said to Abram, 'Go for yourself from your land, from your relatives, and from your father's house to the Land that I will show you.'"
(Genesis 12:1)
He was therefore identified as the "Ivri" (the "Hebrew"), not only because he was the sixth-generation descendant of Ever (Eber), but also because God intended that he confront the Gentile World both physically and spiritually. A hint of this can be found in the Hebrew-language name Ever which means "the other side" (from which is derived the Hebrew-language designation Ivri, which idiomatically means “Hebrew”, but which literally means "he who is of the other side"), portending that the Gentile World would stand on one side of the great Moral Divide while Abraham the Hebrew and his Jewish progeny would stand on the other side thereof. This dual separation of the Jewish people from the Gentile nations would later be praised by the Gentile prophet Balaam, who declared:
"'For, from its origins, I see it rock-like, and from hills do I see it; behold! -- it is a people that [physically] shall dwell in solitude, and that [spiritually] shall not be reckoned among the nations.'"
(Numbers 23:9)
And God even chooses to describe Himself to the Jewish people by reference to such dual separation, declaring to them:
"'So, I said to you, "You shall inherit their Land, and I will give it to you to inherit it, a Land flowing with milk and honey" -- I am HaShem, your God, Who has [physically] separated you from the [Gentile] peoples.'"
(Leviticus 20:24); and
"'You shall be holy for Me; for, I, HaShem, am Holy -- and I have [spiritually] separated you from the [Gentile] peoples to be Mine.'"
(Leviticus 20:26)
Clearly, Abraham's task, which included the necessity of physical confrontation as well as its attendant risks, was, by its very nature, more difficult than Noah's task; for, if Noah's faith in God turned out to be misplaced, Noah and his family risked only scorn and derision, while, if Abraham's faith in God turned out to be misplaced, Abraham and his family risked death.
The potential consequences of misplaced faith thereby weighed heavily upon Abraham. And despite the fact that God directly revealed Himself to Abraham, and promised Divine Protection to him in all that he would do -- saying:
"'And I will make of you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you, I will curse; and all the families of the Earth shall bless themselves by you.'"
(Genesis 12:2-3)
-- he still harbored residual doubts regarding God's Power and Promises. These residual doubts usually caused him to act in ways which demonstrated his continued fear of the very Gentile World from which, at God's Behest, he had separated.
However, the fact that Abraham often failed to fulfill God's Expectations of him in no way detracts from his lofty stature as the righteous progenitor of the Jewish people. As is conceded in the Hebrew Bible:
"For, there is no man so wholly righteous on Earth that he will [always] do good and will not [ever] sin."
(Ecclesiastes 7:20)
Yet, by means of the many trials that God would set before him, Abraham ultimately acquired that complete faith in God's Power and Promises for which he is held in so high an esteem to this very Day.
CHAPTER 1: THE ASCENT TO THE LAND OF ISRAEL
The Hebrew Bible relates:
"And these are the generations of Terah:
Terah sired Abram, Nahor and Haran; and Haran sired Lot. Haran died in the
presence of his father Terah in his native land -- in Ur Kasdim.
And Abram and Nahor took for themselves wives: the name of Abram's wife [was]
Sarai; and the name of Nahor's wife [was] Milcah [who was] the daughter of
Haran [who was] the father of Milcah and the father of Iscah. And Sarai was
barren; she had no child. And Terah took his son Abram and Lot -- the son of
Haran -- his grandson and his daughter-in-law Sarai -- the wife of Abram his
son; and they departed with them from Ur Kasdim to go
to the Land of Canaan; they arrived at Charan and they settled there. The days
of Terah were 205 years; and Terah died in Charan. HaShem
said to Abram, 'Go for yourself from your Land, from your relatives, and from
your father's house to the Land that I will show you. And I will make of you a
great nation; I will bless you and make your name great, and you shall be a
blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you, I will
curse; and all the families of the Earth shall [eventually] bless themselves by
you.' So, Abram went as HaShem had spoken to him, and
Lot went with him; Abram was 75 years old when he left Charan. And Abram took
his wife Sarai and his nephew Lot and all their wealth that they had
accumulated and the souls that they had converted in Charan; and they left to
go to the Land of Canaan; and they arrived at the Land of Canaan. And Abram
passed into the Land as far as the site of Shechem, until the Plain of Moreh;
and the Canaanite was then in the Land. And HaShem
appeared to Abram and said, 'To your offspring I will give this Land.' So he
built an altar there to HaShem Who appeared to him.
From there he relocated to the mountain east of Beth-El and pitched his tent,
with Beth-El on the West and Ai on the East; and he built there an altar to HaShem, and he called upon the Name of Hashem."
(Genesis 11:27 -12:8).
"Terah sired Abram, Nahor and Haran; and Haran sired Lot. ... And Abram and Nahor took for themselves wives: the name of Abram's wife [was] Sarai; and the name of Nahor's wife [was] Milcah [who was] the daughter of Haran [who was] the father of Milcah and the father of Iscah." Abraham (originally called by the name Abram) and Haran were half-brothers, as they had different mothers. Moreover, Haran sired three children: Lot, Milcah, and Iscah. Milcah married her uncle Nahor, while Iscah married her uncle Abraham. Yet, the text states that Abraham's wife was Sarah (originally called by the name Sarai) rather than Iscah. This is because -- according to Rabbi Salomon de Troyes (more famously known as Rashi, being the acronym for Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki, b. 1040 - d. 1105) -- Iscah was an alternative name by which Sarah was known, to wit:
(Rashi on Genesis 11:29)
This means that Sarah was Lot’s sister, and that Lot was consequently Abraham’s brother-in-law as well as his nephew. The proof that Abraham and Haran were half-brothers, and that Iscah was really Sarah can be discerned from Abraham's subsequent explanation to Abimelech, monarch of the Philistines, that Sarah was actually his half-sister:
"Moreover, she [i.e., Sarah] is indeed my sister, my father's [i.e., Terah’s] daughter, though not my mother's daughter; and she became my wife."
(Genesis 20:12)
Yet, it is clear from the Hebrew Bible’s recitation of genealogy that Iscah-Sarah was Abraham's niece rather than his sister. Although, by virtue of biology, she was indeed his niece, by virtue of culture, she was also deemed to be his sister, as it was culturally normative in those times to treat one's grandchild (child's child) as one's own biological child and one's niece or nephew (sibling's child) as one's own biological sibling (e.g., see Genesis 29:12, where Jacob identifies himself to Rachel as the “brother” of her father Laban, even though, as the son of Laban’s sister Rebecca, he is actually Laban’s nephew; and see Genesis 29:15, where Laban refers to Jacob as his “brother” even though Jacob is actually Laban’s nephew). Due to unique circumstances, the juridical implementation of this cultural concept would later be explicitly declared by Abraham's grandson, Jacob, to his son, Joseph, concerning his own grandchildren, Manasseh and Ephraim:
"And now your two sons -- who were born to you in Egypt before my coming to you in Egypt -- shall be mine; Ephraim and Manasseh -- like Reuben and Simeon -- shall be mine."
(Genesis 48:5)
Alternatively stated, Jacob declared that his grandchildren, Ephraim and Manasseh, would henceforth be deemed, not only culturally equivalent, but also legally equivalent, to his own sons; and, indeed, thereafter Ephraim and Manasseh each became the founder and eponym of a tribe of Israel.
"And Terah took his son Abram and Lot -- the son of Haran -- his grandson and his daughter-in-law Sarai -- the wife of Abram his son; and they departed with them from Ur Kasdim to go to the Land of Canaan; they arrived at Charan and they settled there." Since Abraham and the other members of Terah's family were already on their way to the Land of Israel (originally called the Land of Canaan), why was it necessary for God to thereafter instruct Abraham to go there? The answer lies in the difference between Volition and Obligation. When it suited them, Terah and his family chose to relocate from Ur Kasdim (Ur of Chaldeans) to the Land of Israel. When it no longer suited them, they changed their minds and chose to live in Charan. Even had they gone directly from Ur Kasdim to the Land of Israel, their journey would have been the product of whim rather than of obedience to the Will and Command of God. By instructing Abraham to continue on to the Land of Israel (although without identifying it as such), God thereby converted Volition into Obligation -- whim into obedience. Accordingly, when Abraham initially departed from Ur Kasdim in order to go to the Land of Israel, no Kiddush HaShem (sanctification of God's Name) was thereby created, but when Abraham resumed the journey, he thereby effected a great Kiddush HaShem. This is a clear proof that the Jew's involuntary performance of God's Commandments is superior to the Jew's voluntary performance thereof. This is because a Jew's voluntary performance of the Commandments merely elevates his own ego, while a Jew's involuntary performance thereof subordinates his will to the Divine Will -- thereby demonstrating his Yirat Elohim (fear of God) and, consequently, effecting a Kiddush HaShem.
"'Go for yourself ...'" God instructed Abraham to embark upon a journey which would remove him from the lands and families of the Gentile World. For Abraham, this journey was as much a spiritual ascent as it was a physical trek.
"'... to the Land that I will show you.'" Nevertheless, the journey's declared purpose was Abraham's physical relocation to the Land of Israel. The spiritual aspects of the journey, while crucial to God's Plan for Abraham and his covenantal descendants (the Jewish people), could not be fulfilled unless and until Abraham practiced his Judaism inside the Land of Israel. This simple message has been largely ignored by the religious leadership of the Jewish Diaspora who persist in living among the lands and families of the Gentile World at a time when ascension to the Land of Israel is feasible. These lovers of the Exile point to the spiritual dimensions of Abraham's journey and conclude that because the purpose of the journey was spiritual elevation and enlightenment, and because such spiritual growth can now be fostered by and among the great Judaic institutions of the Diaspora, consequently nowadays -- before the Messiah has revealed himself -- God does not really care where a Jew practices his Judaism. This view ignores the fact that, if He had so desired, God could have spiritually elevated Abraham in the midst of the Gentile nations -- such as in Ur Kasdim or in Charan -- outside the Land of Israel. However, God knew that Abraham's spiritual growth was dependent upon his physical presence in the Land of Israel. In praise of this special Land, the Hebrew Bible would later say:
"HaShem said, '… a good and spacious Land … a Land flowing with milk and honey …'"
(Exodus 3:8); and
"For HaShem, your God, is bringing you to a good Land: a Land with streams of water, of springs and underground water coming forth in valley and mountain; a Land of wheat, barley, grape, fig, and pomegranate; a Land of oil -- olives and date-honey; a Land where you will eat bread without poverty -- you will lack nothing there; a Land whose stones are iron and from whose mountains you will mine copper. You will eat and you will be satisfied and bless HaShem, your God, for the good Land that He gave you."
(Deuteronomy 8:7-10); and
"But the Land, to which you cross over to inherit, is a Land of hills and valleys; from the rain of Heaven shall you drink water; a Land that HaShem, your God, seeks out; the Eyes of HaShem, your God, are always upon it, from the beginning of the year to the end of the year."
(Deuteronomy 11:11-12); and
"The commander of HaShem's Legion said to Joshua, 'Remove your shoe from upon your foot; for, the place upon which you stand is holy.' And Joshua did so."
(Joshua 5:15).
"'And I will make of you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you, I will curse; and all the families of the Earth shall [eventually] bless themselves by you.'" This Declaration, made in connection with Abraham's imminent entry into the Land of Israel, represented God's first Promise to Abraham -- the Promise of Protection. This Promise was made, not only to Abraham as an individual, but, as well, to Abraham as the progenitor and representative of the Jewish people -- his covenantal descendants who, nearly four millennia later, would be repatriated to the Land of Israel and thereafter constitute the citizenry of a resurrected nation-state of Israel. As such, this Declaration contains two important messages for modern Israel and its leadership.
"'I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you, I will curse ...'" Firstly, this Declaration teaches us that God not only praises and causes benefit to the Righteous, but that He also condemns and causes harm to the Wicked.
Who are the Righteous? -- Those who bless the Jewish people; for, God will bless none but the Righteous.
Who are the Wicked? -- Those who curse the Jewish people; for, God will curse none but the Wicked.
That this Declaration does, indeed, refer to the future Jewish people would later be confirmed through the public declamation of the Gentile prophet Balaam who explicitly declared, in God's Name, concerning the Jewish people:
"... 'Those who bless you are blessed, and those who curse you are cursed.'"
(Numbers 24:9)
Just as the God of Israel, on High, condemns and causes harm to the nation that curses the Jewish people, so must the leadership of Israel, as God's Instrument on Earth, do the same. For, in destroying such an evil nation and thereby preventing it from further rebelling against God, Israel will have bestowed a great benefit, not only upon the Jewish people, but also upon that nation's inhabitants; as its dead will sin no more and its surviving remnant will repent and praise Israel. This is precisely the reason why God later demands of the nations:
"O nations: Sing the praises of His People, for He will avenge the blood of His Servants; He will bring retribution upon His adversaries, and He will appease His Land [and] His People."
(Deuteronomy 32:43)
This is in accord with the teaching of our Sages that when the Jewish people, acting through its leadership, kills an Evildoer it is doing a double kindness:
"The death of the Evildoers is beneficial to them and beneficial to the World. The death of the Righteous is bad for them and bad for the World." (Sanhedrin 71b)
It is understandable why it is good for the World to rid itself of an Evildoer who oppresses the Innocent, but why is this also good for the Evildoer? The answer is that by dispatching the Evildoer from this World, we are actually doing him a kindness, because we are preventing him from committing further Evil, and we are thereby mercifully saving his soul from further descending into Depravity. This is precisely the reason why God had earlier removed Abraham's 13th generation ancestor, Enoch, from the antediluvian World. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"And Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, for God had taken him."
(Genesis 5:24)
Our Sages explain that:
"Enoch was a hypocrite -- sometimes Righteous and sometimes Evil. God said, 'Let Me remove him while he is still Righteous.'"
(Bereshit Rabbah 25:1)
At the End of Days -- in the aftermath of the messianic War of Gog and Magog -- the surviving remnants of the Gentile nations will finally understand, and be grateful for the beneficence of, the principle that "'… all the families of the Earth shall bless themselves by you'". That the Gentile nations will be grateful to the Jewish people for the punishment inflicted upon them at the End of Days is presaged by the reaction of the citizenry of Exodus-era Egypt who -- after suffering God's horrific tenth and final Plague, in which He annihilated all the firstborn sons of Egypt -- voluntarily showered their former Jewish slaves with gifts. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"It was at midnight that HaShem smote every firstborn in the Land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh sitting on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the dungeon, and every firstborn animal. Pharaoh rose up at midnight -- he and all his servants and all Egypt -- and there was a great outcry in Egypt; for, there was not a house in which there was no corpse. He called to Moses and to Aaron at night and said, 'Rise up, go out from among my people -- even you -- even the Children of Israel; go and serve HaShem as you have spoken! Take even your sheep and even your cattle, as you have spoken, and go; and bless me, as well.' Egypt imposed itself strongly upon the people to hasten [in order] to send them out of the land; for, they said, 'We are all dying!' The people picked up its dough before it could become leavened, their leftovers bound up in their garments upon their shoulders. The Children of Israel carried out the word of Moses; they requested from the Egyptians silver vessels, gold vessels and garments. HaShem gave the people favor in the eyes of the Egyptians, and they granted their request -- so they emptied Egypt [of its wealth]."
(Exodus 12:29-36).
"'... and him who curses you, I will curse ...'" Secondly, by making this Declaration, God is giving notice to the Jewish people that, in the Future, He will test their faith in His Promise of Protection by raising up formidable enemies -- those who will curse the Jewish people -- which will cause Israel to fear for its very existence. Since these enemies and their worldwide supporters will be superior to Israel in both number and temporal power, Israel will naturally be tempted towards appeasement and, ultimately, capitulation, in exchange for promises of brief respite and, thus, temporary safety. Only in this manner will Israel's collective faith in God be tested; for God does not test Israel with either weak or cowardly adversaries -- such a "Test" would be no Test at all. However, by making this Declaration, God is also informing the Jewish people of the method by which they may pass such a future Test, namely, that if the Jewish leadership will exhibit, in both word and deed, true faith in God's Power to fulfill His Promise of Protection, then the enemies of Israel as well as their supporters -- all those nations who seek to instill fear among the Jewish people -- will, mida k'neged mida (measure for measure), instead, fear for their own existences, because those nations will then tremble before the Power of Israel's Protector -- the Living God -- Who will then, without delay, curse them.
"So, Abram went as HaShem had spoken to him, and Lot went with him …" God instructed Abraham to separate from his pagan family. Yet Abraham permitted Lot to accompany him from Charan to the Land of Israel, and he further permitted Lot to reside within his encampment after they entered the Land, despite the fact (as discussed elsewhere in this Essay) that Lot was not a righteous person. Why did Abraham do this; and, more importantly, why did God permit Abraham to do this? From Abraham’s perspective, he had a familial obligation to ensure Lot’s safety and prosperity -- regardless of the latter’s moral stature. From God’s Perspective, Lot’s presence in the Land served at least three purposes. The first purpose was to test Abraham’s fealty to God’s Promise of the Land to Abraham and his covenantal descendants (regarding the proposed division of the Land between Abraham and Lot; see Genesis 13:5-12). The second purpose was to test Abraham’s fealty to God’s Promise of Protection to Abraham (regarding Abraham’s war against the Mesopotamian kings; see Genesis 14:11-16). The third purpose was to arrange for Lot to become an ancestor of King David (see Genesis 19:36-37; and Ruth 4:13-17), and consequently also an ancestor of the future Messiah.
"And Abram passed into the Land as far as the site of Shechem, until the Plain of Moreh; and the Canaanite was then in the Land. And HaShem appeared to Abram and said, 'To your offspring I will give this Land.'" Despite the fact that the Land of Israel was then fully settled by the Canaanite nations, the God of Israel nonetheless issued to the newly-arrived Abraham an astounding Declaration: "'To your offspring I will give this Land.'" This Declaration represents the intertwined Promises of Progeny and of the Land which has served, until this very Day, as the foundation stone for both the existence of the Jewish people and their right to the Land of Israel. In order to demonstrate his complete faith in the Promise of Progeny, Abraham was required, at the most basic level, to wholeheartedly believe that, come what may, he would not die before siring children. Similarly, in order to demonstrate his complete faith in the Promise of the Land, Abraham was required, at the most basic level, to wholeheartedly believe that, come what may, he would not be expelled -- by Man or Nature -- from the Land. What rights were conveyed by God to Abraham and his covenantal descendants by virtue of His Gift of the Land of Israel? There are two basic rights that exist with respect to land, namely, title and possession. An owner of land may retain for himself both the title thereto and the possession thereof; or he may transfer to another, as tenant, the possession thereof, while retaining for himself, as landlord, the title thereto. God's Gift of the Land of Israel to the Jewish people was one of possession only. For, the entire Universe was created by God alone; and, consequently, it belongs to Him alone. Accordingly, God divided among the nations, including the Jewish people, not title to, but only possession of, the lands of the Earth. As God would later declare to the Jewish people concerning their right to the Land of Israel:
"'The Land shall not be sold in perpetuity, because the Land is Mine; for, you are [to be in possession of the Land merely as] sojourners and residents with Me."
(Leviticus 25:23); and
"'You shall possess the Land, and you shall settle in it; for, to you have I given the Land to possess it.'"
(Numbers 33:53)
"From there he relocated to the mountain east of Beth-El and pitched his tent, with Beth-El on the West and Ai on the East; and he built there an altar to HaShem, and he called upon the Name of HaShem." Abraham called upon God's Name as an expression of thanksgiving for His Promises and as a declaration of faith in His Power to fulfill those Promises. However, a theoretical belief in God's Power to fulfill His Promises is not equivalent to a pragmatic acceptance thereof. For, while the former entails only benign declarations of faith in God's Power, the latter entails conduct which would be foolhardy but for the sure knowledge that God's Power is real. Accordingly, complete faith in God's Power requires the marriage of pragmatic conduct to theoretical faith, the offspring of which is pragmatic faith. Anything less will not suffice for a leader of the Jewish people.
CHAPTER 2: THE DESCENT TO THE LAND OF EGYPT
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"Then Abram journeyed on, journeying
steadily towards the South. There was a famine in the Land, and Abram descended
to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the Land. And it
occurred, as he was about to enter Egypt, that he said to his wife Sarai, 'See,
now, I have known that you are a woman of beautiful appearance. And it shall
occur, when the Egyptians will see you, they will say, "This is his
wife!" Then they will kill me, but you they will let live. Please say that
you are my sister, that it may go well with me for your sake, and that I may
live on account of you.' And it occurred as Abram was coming to Egypt that
the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. And the officials of
Pharaoh saw her, and they lauded her for Pharaoh, and the woman was taken to
Pharaoh's house. And he [Pharaoh] treated Abram well for her sake, and he
[Abram] acquired [from Pharaoh] sheep and cattle, and male donkeys, and male
servants and female servants, and female donkeys and camels. But HaShem afflicted Pharaoh along with his household with
severe plagues because of the matter of Sarai, wife of Abram. Pharaoh summoned
Abram and said, 'What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that
she is your wife? Why did you say, "She is my sister", so that I
would take her as my wife? Now, here is your wife; take her and go!' So,
Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him, and they escorted him and his wife and
all that was his."
(Genesis 12:9-20).
As a consequence of being confronted with a harsh famine soon after his arrival in the Land of Israel, Abraham was presented with a choice between (a) remaining in the Land and (b) fleeing from the Land. Abraham realized that, by choosing to remain in the Land, he would necessarily be placing all of his trust in God’s Promises to him. And he feared that, if God did not (or could not) fulfill those Promises in the face of the famine, then he and Sarah might starve to death there. Consequently, although Abraham trusted in God, he nonetheless thought it prudent to minimize the risk of harm to Sarah and himself by counterbalancing his theoretical reliance upon God’s Promises with his pragmatic reliance upon a plan to protect himself and Sarah from the famine. Thus did Abraham hedge his bets by departing the Land of Israel and entering the Land of Egypt. Moreover, this would be but the first of six times that Abraham, when faced with a risky situation, thought it prudent to hedge his bets.
"Then Abram journeyed on, journeying steadily towards the South." Why did Abraham travel without deviation towards the southern extremity of the Land of Israel -- and, consequently, towards Egypt -- well-prior to his decision to enter Egypt? Abraham's itinerary was influenced by God. For, He wanted to bring Abraham close to Egypt, so that he would experience the full allure of that wealthy Land from just across its border at the very time that the Land of Israel was being wracked by a harsh famine.
"There was a famine in the Land ..." Why did God reward Abraham with the Gift of the Land of Israel and then, almost immediately thereafter, punish him with an unforgiving famine? It was precisely in order to test whether or not Abraham's theoretical faith in God's Power and Promises constituted, as well, a pragmatic faith therein. Alternatively stated, God wanted to test whether or not Abraham was willing to marry future conduct to his present declarations of faith. Unfortunately, once confronted with the triggering crisis of the famine, Abraham thereupon revealed his lack of pragmatic faith in God's Power and Promises in two separate ways which both stemmed from the root fear that God, despite His Promise of Protection, would not -- or, worse, could not -- safeguard his life.
"… and Abram descended to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the Land." Firstly, Abraham, lacking pragmatic faith that God had the Power to sustain his life in the face of the famine, abandoned the Land of Israel to the Canaanite nations and thereby reentered the accursed Exile, consequently lowering himself spiritually. As the Hebrew Bible explains: "... Abram descended to Egypt ...". Accordingly, as demonstrated by his flight from the famine, Abraham's lack of pragmatic faith in God's Promise of Protection had the infectious consequence of inducing Abraham to also doubt God's Promise of the Land, which, at its most basic level, constituted a Promise that, come what may, Abraham would not be expelled -- by Man or Nature -- from the Land.
"And it occurred, as he was about to enter Egypt, that he said to his wife Sarai, 'See, now, I have known that you are a woman of beautiful appearance. And it shall occur, when the Egyptians will see you, they will say, "This is his wife!" Then they will kill me, but you they will let live. Please say that you are my sister, that it may go well with me for your sake, and that I may live on account of you.' And it occurred as Abram was coming to Egypt that the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. And the officials of Pharaoh saw her, and they lauded her for Pharaoh, and the woman was taken to Pharaoh's house." Secondly, upon the threshold of Egypt, Abraham, lacking pragmatic faith that God had the Power to protect him against the Egyptians, again feared for his life. Consequently, just as Abraham had abandoned the Land of Israel to the Canaanite nations in order to save his life from the famine, he was now willing to abandon his wife Sarah to Pharaoh in order to save his life from the Egyptians. That the term "abandon" accurately describes Abraham's actions with respect to Sarah is demonstrated by the fact that, immediately after Abraham proposed his deception to Sarah, Scripture ceases to refer to her as Abraham's "wife" and, instead, thereafter refers to her merely as "the woman"; for Abraham, by his shameful conduct, had ceased to treat her as his "wife". Accordingly, as demonstrated by his deception of Pharaoh, Abraham's lack of pragmatic faith in God's Promise of Protection had the infectious consequence of inducing Abraham to also doubt God's Promise of Progeny, which at its most basic level, constituted a Promise that, come what may, Abraham would not die before siring children. Since the essence of Abraham was mercy and kindness, it might be argued that his deception of Pharaoh was induced by his natural aversion to conflict rather than by raw fear resulting from a lack of pragmatic faith in the God of Israel. Yet, Scripture itself refutes this view by revealing that Abraham said to Sarah concerning the Egyptians: "'... Then they will kill me ...'".
"And he [Pharaoh] treated Abram well for her sake, and he [Abram] acquired [from Pharaoh] sheep and cattle, and male donkeys, and male servants and female servants, and female donkeys and camels. But HaShem afflicted Pharaoh along with his household with severe plagues because of the matter of Sarai, wife of Abram." Abraham's reprehensible conduct required God's direct Intervention to save, not Abraham, who was made much wealthier by his participation in this transaction, but rather Sarah, who was seized by an evildoer. It is noteworthy that only after God's redemptive Intervention does Scripture resume referring to Sarah as Abraham's "wife".
"Pharaoh summoned Abram and said, 'What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she is your wife? Why did you say, "She is my sister", so that I would take her as my wife? Now, here is your wife; take her and go!' So, Pharaoh gave men orders concerning him, and they escorted him and his wife and all that was his." Abraham's evident fear of Pharaoh, which fear represents, more broadly, Yirat HaGoyim (fear of the nations), not only reflected Abraham’s lack of complete faith in God's Power and Promises, which complete faith is the embodiment of Yirat Elohim (fear of God), but it also created an enormous Chillul HaShem (desecration of God's Name). Why? It is because God’s Purpose in employing Abraham as His Instrument through which to create a magnificent Kiddush HaShem (sanctification of God’s Name) before the nations was thwarted when Abraham's own lack of pragmatic faith in his Divine Protector was laid bare before the Egyptians. This unfortunate absurdity provided evil Pharaoh with the perfect opportunity to falsely portray himself as an innocent victim of deception and, consequently, as the injured party in this episode -- this despite the fact that the God of Israel was the true injured Party.
However, why would the God of Israel, Who had just finished harshly punishing Pharaoh for his detention of Sarah, now enable that same evildoer to shamelessly exploit his feigned victimhood by permitting him to publicly and contemptuously rebuke righteous Abraham, especially in light of the fact that it was obvious that Pharaoh sought to humiliate Abraham, not for the sake of creating a Kiddush HaShem, but only for the sake of assuaging his own injured pride? Moreover, why would God permit that embarrassing rebuke to be forever memorialized in the Hebrew Bible?
The answer to the first question is that, just as Abraham -- by hedging his bets a second time (i.e., attempting to minimize the risk of harm to himself by counterbalancing his theoretical reliance upon God’s Promises with his pragmatic reliance upon a plan to protect himself from Pharaoh) -- had openly exhibited contempt for God -- mida k'neged mida (measure for measure) -- God now permitted Pharaoh to openly exhibit contempt for Abraham. Consequently, the fact that Pharaoh’s motivation for the rebuke was impure could not shield Abraham from the consequences of his own Chillul HaShem. It would have been otherwise if Abraham had fearlessly proclaimed to all that Sarah was his wife, thereby creating a Kiddush HaShem. For, although God's Intervention might still have been necessary to save Sarah (and/or Abraham), evil Pharaoh would neither have been given the opportunity to falsely portray himself as an innocent party nor have been permitted by the God of Israel to openly shame righteous Abraham with words of hypocritical rebuke. Furthermore, due to that rebuke, it is clear that Abraham’s lack of pragmatic faith actually created a triple Chillul HaShem, the first being when Abraham deceived Pharaoh, the second being when Pharaoh falsely portrayed himself as an innocent party, and the third being when Pharaoh rebuked Abraham. For, although God had permitted Pharaoh to rebuke Abraham, the public humiliation of God’s earthly representative by Pharaoh nonetheless brought the Reputation of God Himself into disgrace among the Egyptians. Moreover, this episode may be the reason why, even three generations later, the Egyptians loathed both Hebrews and shepherds (see Genesis 43:32 & 46:34). For, Pharaoh had been defrauded by a Hebrew shepherd -- Abraham.
The answer to the second question is that this episode provides an essential lesson for the Jewish people, especially for modern Israel’s leadership. For, when the Jewish State’s leaders attempt to deceive the Gentile nations concerning the Jewish people’s God-given right to the entire Land by feigning bona fide participation in negotiations whose stated purpose is to abandon portions of the Land -- thereby replacing Yirat Elohim with Yirat HaGoyim and thereby creating an enormous Chillul HaShem -- the God of Israel will permit the immoral Gentile nations to falsely portray themselves as innocent victims of Israel’s duplicity, and He will allow them to publicly and contemptuously rebuke the Jewish State, despite the fact that such rebuke will be motivated, not by the rebukers’ desire to create a Kiddush HaShem, but rather by their evil conspiracy to thwart the everlasting fulfillment of God’s Promise of the Land to His People. Consequently, the modern Jewish leadership’s lack of pragmatic faith in God’s Promise of the Land will actually create a triple Chillul HaShem, the first being when the Jewish State attempts to deceive the Gentile nations, the second being when the Gentile nations falsely portray themselves as innocent parties, and the third being when the Gentile nations publicly rebuke the Jewish State.
Final confirmation that Abraham's departure from the Land of Israel was a breach of faith comes from God's later admonition to Abraham's son, Isaac, during a subsequent famine in the Land, as a result of which Isaac travels to the South thereof with the intention of entering Egypt, as his father had done before him. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"HaShem appeared to him and said, 'Do not descend to Egypt; dwell in the Land [i.e., the Land of Israel] that I shall indicate to you. Sojourn in this Land, and I will be with you and bless you; for, to you and your offspring will I give all these lands, and establish the Oath that I swore to Abraham your father: "I will increase your offspring like the stars of the Sky; and will give to your offspring all these lands; and all the nations of the Earth shall bless themselves by your offspring"'".
(Genesis 26:2-4)
God thereby restrained Isaac from repeating his father's mistake.
Yet, one lingering issue remains. Why did righteous Sarah agree to leave the Land of Israel? And why did Sarah thereafter conspire with Abraham in lying to Pharaoh? There are two possibilities. Either (1) Sarah shared Abraham's doubts about God's Promises to him of Progeny and of the Land, or (2) Sarah did not know about these Promises.
It is my opinion (based upon the subsequent events analyzed in this Commentary) that Abraham, lacking pragmatic faith in these Promises, decided not to inform his wife of their existence. It follows that Sarah, being ignorant of these Promises, had no choice but to honor that which appeared to be Abraham's justified fears -- namely, those of starvation in the Land of Israel and of murder in the Land of Egypt. Consequently, she agreed to leave the Land of Israel and to participate in her husband's deception in the Land of Egypt.
CHAPTER 3: THE REBELLION OF LOT AND THE PROPOSED DIVISION OF THE LAND
After Abraham and his nephew Lot returned to the Land of Israel from Egypt, their respective herdsmen began to fight over access to the Land’s resources. Abraham, fearful of being drawn into an internecine conflict under the gaze of the Canaanite nations, proposed to divide possession of the Land between himself and Lot.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"So, Abram ascended from Egypt, he with his
wife, and all that was his, and Lot with him, to the south [of the Land of
Canaan]. And Abram was very laden with
livestock, silver, and gold. He went on
his journeys from the South and until Beth-El, until the place where his tent
had been in the beginning, between Beth-El and Ai, to the site of the altar
that he had made there at the outset; and there Abram called upon the Name of HaShem. And also
Lot, who went with Abram, had sheep, cattle, and tents. And the Land could not
support them dwelling together, for [the requirements of maintaining] their
possessions were great, and they were unable to dwell together. And there was
quarreling between the herdsmen of Abram’s livestock and the herdsmen of Lot’s
livestock; and the Canaanite and the Perizzite were then dwelling in the
Land. So, Abram said to Lot, 'Please let
there be no strife between me and you, and between my herdsmen and your
herdsmen, for we are kinsmen. Is not all the Land before you? Please separate
from me: If you go left then I will go right, and if you go right, then I will
go left.' So, Lot raised his eyes and saw the entire plain of the Jordan
[River] that it was well watered everywhere -- before HaShem
destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah -- like the Garden of HaShem,
like the Land of Egypt, going toward Zoar. So, Lot chose for himself the whole
plain of the Jordan [River], and Lot journeyed East; and they separated
themselves, one from another. Abram dwelled in the Land of Canaan while Lot
dwelled in the cities of the plain; and he [Lot] relocated his tents as far as
Sodom. Now the people of Sodom were wicked and sinful toward HaShem, exceedingly. HaShem said
to Abram after Lot had parted from him, 'Raise now your eyes and look out from
where you are: northward, southward, eastward and westward. For, all the Land
that you see, to you will I give it, and to your descendants forever. I will
make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if one can count the dust
of the earth, then your offspring, too, can be counted. Arise, walk about the
Land through its length and breadth; for, to you will I give it!' And Abram
relocated his tent, and he came and dwelled among the oak trees of Mamre which
are in Hebron; and he built there an altar to HaShem."
(Genesis 13:1-18).
"And the Land could not support them dwelling together, for [the requirements of maintaining] their possessions were great, and they were unable to dwell together. And there was quarreling between the herdsmen of Abram’s livestock and the herdsmen of Lot’s livestock; and the Canaanite and the Perizzite were then dwelling in the Land." The narrative describes an unusual situation, as it is highly unlikely that the servants of a junior member of the family would dare challenge the servants of the paterfamilias. If, however, a junior family member did challenge the paterfamilias, then that rebellion would normally have terminated in only one of two ways, namely, either (1) in the death of the usurper or (2) in the death of the paterfamilias. So, why did Lot challenge Abraham for supremacy over the family? Due to Abraham’s traits of kindness and mercy, Lot viewed him as lacking the necessary belligerence required for the protection and perseverance of the family in the face of potential aggression from the resident Canaanite peoples -- which is why the text explains that "... the Canaanite and the Perizzite were then dwelling in the Land." Notwithstanding the foregoing, Lot did not challenge Abraham directly. Instead, in order to maintain plausible deniability and thereby hedge his bets, he instructed his servants to challenge Abraham’s servants in order to discover whether Abraham would deal with the situation via suppression or appeasement. However, why didn’t Lot merely wait for the aged and childless Abraham to die, which eventuality would have rendered Lot as the successor paterfamilias? I believe that God Himself inclined Lot to act against Abraham after their return from Egypt as a test of Abraham’s fealty to God’s Promise of the Land to Abraham and his covenantal descendants in the face of internecine strife.
"So, Abram said to Lot, 'Please let there be no strife between me and you, and between my herdsmen and your herdsmen, for we are kinsmen. Is not all the Land before you? Please separate from me: If you go left then I will go right, and if you go right, then I will go left.'" Abraham’s solution -- namely, the trading of land in exchange for peace -- was misguided, for Abraham had no right to relinquish portions of the Land of Israel -- even for the sake of peace and even to his close relation -- because possession of the Land was promised, not to Abraham alone, but to the entire Jewish people (although as yet unborn) in perpetuity.
"So, Lot raised his eyes and saw the entire plain of the Jordan [River] that it was well watered everywhere -- before HaShem destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah -- like the Garden of HaShem, like the Land of Egypt, going toward Zoar. So Lot chose for himself the whole plain of the Jordan [River], and Lot journeyed East; and they separated themselves, one from another. Abram dwelled in the Land of Canaan while Lot dwelled in the cities of the plain; and he [Lot] relocated his tents as far as Sodom. Now the people of Sodom were wicked and sinful toward HaShem, exceedingly." Why does the Hebrew Bible bother to reveal the thought processes and motivations of Lot in choosing a dwelling place for himself and his family? And, moreover, why does the Hebrew Bible also bother, at this precise point in its narration, to describe the immoral character of the Cities of the Jordan River plain? It is to demonstrate that the life decisions of Lot were based, not upon creating a Kiddush HaShem (sanctification of God's Name), but rather upon the acquisition of material wealth, even if that required him and his family to dwell among evildoers and thereby cause a Chillul HaShem (desecration of God's Name). Moreover, the Hebrew Bible will later reveal the disturbing extent to which Lot’s sense of morality had been warped by his relocation to Sodom (i.e., Lot’s plea to the residents of Sodom that they rape his daughters instead of his two guests -- see Genesis 19:1-8). But why does the Hebrew Bible care to teach us all this? It is to emphasize that righteous Abraham was wrong, not only for contemplating, generally, the relinquishment of a portion of the Land of Israel, but moreover, for contemplating, specifically, such relinquishment to one who was so unworthy to receive it. The Hebrew Bible is here teaching to us a profound lesson concerning mercy and kindness, on the one hand, and entitlement to the Land of Israel, on the other hand: The fact that Abraham loved Lot as if he were his son, the fact that Abraham would even risk his own life to save Lot from harm, and the fact that their entire interpersonal relationship was predicated upon Abraham treating Lot with mercy and kindness caused Abraham to erroneously believe that it was permissible for him to bestow upon Lot a portion of the Land of Israel. This was so because righteous Abraham, whose very essence was mercy and kindness, did not yet understand the Divine Principle that there are times when the exhibition and application of mercy and kindness are misguided and wrongful and, consequently, a cause, not of Kiddush HaShem, but rather of Chillul HaShem.
"HaShem said to Abram after Lot had parted from him, 'Raise now your eyes and look out from where you are: northward, southward, eastward and westward. For, all the Land that you see, to you will I give it, and to your descendants forever. I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if one can count the dust of the earth, then your offspring, too, can be counted.'" Since God had already declared to Abraham His intertwined Promises of Progeny and of the Land, saying "'... To your offspring I will give this Land ...'" (Genesis 12:7), why did God find it necessary, at this time, to repeat these Promises, and especially to emphasize their eternal nature by declaring that the Land would be given "'to you … and to your descendants forever'"? This was done precisely in order to teach Abraham that God’s Gift of the entire Land to him and to his as yet unborn covenantal descendants was irrevocable, and to thereby correct his misplaced generosity towards Lot and towards Lot’s as yet unborn descendants. God thereby reminded Abraham that, although he had sought to divide possession of the Land with Lot, he had neither the legal authority (i.e., possession of the Land did not belong to Abraham alone, and the Gift was eternal) nor the moral justification (i.e., Lot was unworthy) to do so. However, even had Abraham alone been given possession of the Land, and even had Lot been of sterling character, Abraham would have, nonetheless, lacked any legal authority to divide the Land between them; for, in that case, God’s Gift would have nonetheless been to Abraham alone eternally (i.e., for his entire lifespan). Moreover, such an unauthorized partitioning by Abraham of God’s Gift would have constituted the equivalent of a rejection thereof -- a great Chillul HaShem.
"'Arise, walk about the Land through its length and breadth …'" God commands Abraham to traverse the Land, because God knew that Abraham would never fully appreciate the Gift of the Land unless he had personally experienced all its natural wonders by inspecting its valleys, mountains, lakes, rivers, plains, deserts and forests. In the absence of this empirical knowledge of the Land, Abraham would always view the Gift as an abstract idea easily abandoned rather than as a tangible reality which needed to be protected against all challenges.
"'… for, to you will I give it!'" To you and your covenantal descendants (i.e., the Jewish people) -- not to Lot and his descendants, and certainly not to any other nation! Consequently, this episode represents a crucial lesson for modern Israel and the Jewish people. For, even should the entire leadership of the State of Israel and the entire Jewish people wish to divide the Land of Israel between the Jewish people and another nation, any attempted partitioning of God’s Gift would constitute a great Chillul HaShem, and would be deemed null and void in His Eyes.
CHAPTER 4: ABRAHAM’S WAR AGAINST THE MESOPOTAMIAN KINGS AND THE GIFT OF THE LAND
While Lot was residing in Sodom, an alliance of four powerful Mesopotamian kings defeated a rebellion staged by five vassal Canaanite kings, including the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah. In doing so, these Mesopotamian kings sacked those cities.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"And it happened in the days of Amraphel,
king of Shinar, Arioch, king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, and Tidal,
king of Goiim, that these [kings] made war on Bera,
king of Sodom, Birsha, king of Gomorrah, Shinab, king
of Admah, Shemeber, king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar. All
of these had joined at the Valley of Siddim, which is [by] the Dead Sea. Twelve
years they served Chedorlaomer, and [then] they rebelled [against him for]
thirteen years. In the fourteenth year [after the commencement of the
rebellion], Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him came and struck the
Rephaim at Ashteroth-karnaim, the Zuzim in Ham, the Emim at Shaveh-kiriathaim, and
the Horites in their mountains of Seir, as far as the Plain of Paran which is
by the desert. Then they turned back and came to En-mishpat, which is Kadesh,
and they struck all the territory of the Amalakites
and also [all the territory of] the Amorites who dwell in Hazazon-tamar.
And the king of Sodom went forth with the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah,
the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar, and they engaged them
in battle in the Valley of Siddim. [They engaged] Chedorlaomer, king of Elam,
Tidal, king of Goiim, Amraphel, king of Shinar, and
Arioch, king of Ellasar -- four kings against five. The Valley of Siddim was
full of bitumen wells. The kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and they fell into
them, while the rest fled to a mountain. They seized all the wealth of Sodom
and Gomorrah and all their food; and they departed. And they captured Lot and
his possessions -- Abram's nephew -- and they left; for he was residing in
Sodom. Then there came the fugitive and told Abram, the Hebrew, who dwelled
among the oak trees of Mamre, the Amorite, the brother of Eschol and the
brother of Aner, these being Abram's allies. And when
Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his disciples who had
been born in his house -- 318 -- and he pursued them as far as Dan. And he with
his servants deployed against them at night and struck them; he pursued them as
far as Chobah which is to the north of Damascus. He
brought back all the possessions; he also brought back his brother Lot with his
possessions, as well as the women and the people."
(Genesis 14:1-16).
Although Lot was not a righteous person, he nonetheless lived under the protection of his uncle, brother-in-law, and guardian -- Abraham. Consequently, this atrocity against a member of Abraham’s family also constituted an affront to that family’s Guardian -- the God of Abraham. For, by this brazen act, the four kings openly demonstrated their disregard for God's Existence and Power, thereby creating a Chillul HaShem (desecration of God's Name).
Yet, how would these Mesopotamian kings have known anything about the God of Abraham prior to their abduction of Lot? During the early 2nd Millennium BCE, there were two competing centers of political and military power in the region -- Egypt and Mesopotamia -- each of which paid close attention to important events transpiring in the other. Consequently, it is likely that -- prior to their abduction of Lot -- these Mesopotamian kings knew about God’s punishment of Pharaoh on account of Sarah.
However, even if these kings lacked any prior knowledge about the God of Abraham, their attack against a member of Abraham’s family nonetheless constituted a Chillul HaShem, because Abraham was God’s earthly representative -- even if these kings were unaware thereof. Consequently, the abduction of Lot was not merely an attack against the individual known as Lot, but was also an affront to God, as the Protector of Abraham’s family. Proof that this atrocity was an affront to God proceeds from the Hebrew Bible’s subsequent account of the abduction, rape, and detention of Abraham’s great-granddaughter Dina by Shechem, the prince of the City of Shechem. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"Jacob's sons arrived from the field when they heard [about the situation]; the men were distressed and were fired deeply with indignation, for he [Prince Shechem] had perpetrated an outrage in Israel by lying with the daughter of Jacob -- such a thing may not be done!"
(Genesis 34:7)
It is noteworthy that the Hebrew Bible here employs the phrase "outrage in Israel" while the verse otherwise refers to "Jacob". Moreover, it is contextually relevant that God had earlier changed Jacob's name to "Israel" (see Genesis 32:29), and that He subsequently reaffirmed that transformation (see Genesis 35:10)
Clearly, by employing the phrase "outrage in Israel", Scripture is making a distinction between (a) the individual known as Jacob, who is the father of Dina, and (b) the embryonic nation of Israel, which is named after and led by Jacob. Consequently, from God’s Perspective, Prince Shechem's crime was directed, neither against Dina nor against her father Jacob, as individuals, but rather against the embryonic nation of Israel and, by extension, against God Himself, as the Protector of that embryonic nation. This created a situation of Chillul Hashem requiring the embryonic nation of Israel to take immediate revenge against the City of Shechem in order to blot out that Chillul HaShem and thereby replace it with a Kiddush HaShem (sanctification of God's Name).
"And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his disciples who had been born in his house -- 318 -- and he pursued them as far as Dan. And he with his servants deployed against them at night and struck them; he pursued them as far as Chobah which is to the north of Damascus. He brought back all the possessions; he also brought back his brother Lot with his possessions, as well as the women and the people." Why did Abraham immediately initiate a war against these Mesopotamian kings, instead of negotiating with them in order to obtain the release of Lot and the other abductees? The likely reason is that these victorious monarchs did not perceive any need to engage in diplomatic communications with Abraham, as they had already suppressed the rebellion of the vassal kings, plundered their cities, and abducted their citizens. Alternatively stated, as these kings had already achieved a complete victory over their foes, they saw no need to enter into negotiations regarding their victory.
This account is meant to teach each and every future Jewish leader, inter alia, that when diplomatic options are not available, engaging in futile diplomacy projects weakness to one’s enemy, delays necessary military action against one’s enemy, and thereby grants an underserved advantage to one’s enemy. This is why Abraham eschewed negotiations in favor of initiating an immediate war. For, Abraham realized that, once Lot had been abducted, all diplomatic avenues to obtaining his release were foreclosed. He thereby concluded that he had no choice but to put aside his natural aversion to conflict, and to instead immediately initiate a war against these Mesopotamian kings for the sake of Kiddush HaShem.
Yet, why was this a war for the sake of Kiddush HaShem, instead of an ordinary war to free Lot and the other abductees? Although Abraham likely viewed the war only as an ordinary war, his fealty to God’s Promise of Protection and his consequent fearlessness in waging the war nonetheless created a Kiddush HaShem, as it erased the Chillul HaShem that was created by the abduction of Lot. For, Abraham waged this war despite the obvious danger to his own life and the lives of his disciples, and despite the adverse consequences that such belligerent conduct might have upon his present and future relationships with these and other nations; and God consequently rewarded him with a miraculous victory over a vastly superior military force. Thus did the nations of the Land see the fearlessness and faith of a Jewish leader backed by the demonstrated Power of the God of Israel. Their awe of Abraham, which was based on their awe of Abraham’s relationship with God, was subsequently evidenced when (1) Philistine king Abimelech entreated Abraham to enter into a nonaggression pact because “‘God is with you [Abraham] in all that you do.’” (Genesis 21:22), and when (2) the Hittites lauded Abraham as “‘… a Prince of God in our midst…’” (Genesis 23:6).
From this episode, each and every future Jewish leader is meant to learn that eradicating Chillul HaShem requires action without delay, despite the fact that the superior forces of the Gentile nations are arrayed against him and despite the fact that Jewish life will thereby be put at risk. As God would later instruct Moses concerning the conquest of the Land of Israel:
"When you go out to the battle against your enemy, and you see horse and chariot -- a people more numerous than you -- you shall not fear them, for HaShem, your God, is with you, who brought you up from the Land of Egypt. It shall be that when you draw near to the war, the Kohen shall approach and speak to the people. He shall say to them, 'Hear, O Israel, you are coming near to the battle against your enemies; let your heart not be faint; do not be afraid, do not panic, and do not be broken before them. For HaShem, your God, is the One who goes with you, to fight for you against your enemies, to save you.'"
(Deuteronomy 20:1-4)
It is instructive to note that, in describing the details concerning Lot's capture, the Hebrew Bible refers to Lot as Abraham's "nephew", yet in describing Abraham's reaction to Lot's capture, the Hebrew Bible twice refers to Lot as Abraham's "brother". Although it was indeed culturally normative for Abraham to have treated his brother's child as if he were his own biological brother, and although Lot was, in fact, Abraham’s brother-in-law as well as his nephew, nonetheless from the text's repeated designation of Lot as Abraham’s “brother” we are able to gain further insight into the Commandment that:
"'... You shall not stand aside while your fellow's blood is shed -- I am HaShem. ... You shall love your fellow as yourself -- I am HaShem.'"
(Leviticus 19:16-18)
Scripture is teaching and warning each and every future Jewish leader that, when he rules in the nation-state of Israel, he must regard the lowliest Jew as his brother and must, consequently, always act, without delay, to safeguard his life to the same extent that he would so act to safeguard his own life, regardless of the consequences that such forthright conduct might have upon relations between Israel and the Gentile nations. It is only in this way that the Gentile nations will come to acknowledge and fear the God of Israel, as the one and only Sovereign of the Universe -- a revelation that will create the ultimate Kiddush HaShem.
Conversely, a Jewish leader's failure to so act will demonstrate to the Gentile nations his abject fear of them, stemming from his lack of faith in the God of Israel -- a revelation that will create the ultimate Chillul HaShem. Due to the fact that the crisis caused by Lot's capture forced Abraham to risk, not only his own life, but, as well, by implication, the future existence of the entire Jewish people -- thereby blatantly implicating issues of Kiddush HaShem and Chillul HaShem -- Scripture chooses, precisely here, to refer to Abraham, for the very first time, as “HaIvri" (meaning: "the Hebrew"); for, it is here that Abraham was blatantly tested, in a manner requiring that he openly demonstrate his complete faith in the Existence, Power and Promises of God, as to whether he really stood on "the other side" (being the meaning of the Hebrew-language name "Ever", from which is derived the Hebrew-language designation "Ivri", which literally means "he who is of the other side") of the great Moral Divide separating him and his Jewish progeny from the Gentile nations.
There is yet another lesson to be gleaned from this episode, namely, the limits of the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh (avoidance of danger to life). Abraham's war against the Mesopotamian kings teaches us that this important doctrine dissipates upon the shoals of those national obligations in which danger to life inheres. The doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh posits that the performance of a Jew's individual obligations to his fellow Jew or even to God Himself will be excused if such performance would endanger the obligor's life. The basis for the doctrine is that preserving one's own life in order to perform many individual Mitzvot (meaning: Commandments) in the Future is of a higher value to God than is sacrificing one's own life in order to perform a single individual Mitzvah (meaning: Commandment) in the Present, especially since the performance of the individual Mitzvot, such as keeping Shabbat (meaning: Sabbath) and observing Kashrut (meaning: kosher laws), are not meant to be dangerous to one's life. A typical example of the application of the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh involves the ill Jew who must determine whether or not the doctrine excuses him from fasting on Yom Kippur (meaning: Day of Atonement), as a result of which he defers to the recommendation of a relevant expert, namely, his physician. Relying upon the Yom Kippur paradigm, most contemporary rabbis have also applied the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh to the permissibility of ceding portions of the Land of Israel to Gentile sovereignty to appease the international community (including Israel's many enemies), in an effort to avoid a war that will inevitably lead to massive Jewish casualties, all based upon the prevailing recommendations of the relevant experts, namely, Israel's military leaders. Of course, since many of Israel’s military leaders are also aspiring politicians, they naturally opine in conformity with their respective preexisting political views. Consequently, in reliance upon those conflicting military recommendations, there are conflicting rabbinical rulings -- predictably mirroring the respective preexisting political views of their authors -- as some rulings permit while others prohibit ceding portions of the Land, all based upon the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh.
Yet, as Abraham's war against the Mesopotamian kings demonstrates, the doctrine was never meant to absolve the Jewish people from collectively fulfilling those national obligations that are inherently dangerous. Otherwise, all dangerous national Torah Mitzvot -- such as conquering the Land of Israel and maintaining possession thereof by force -- would be rendered a nullity, never to be performed even once (unlike those benign individual Torah Mitzvot which, once the abnormal danger had passed, would again be capable of being performed with regularity).
It bears repeating that when Abraham -- the very vessel from which the Jewish people was created -- went to war against the four kings, he endangered, not only his own life, but, as well, the very existence of the future Jewish people. If the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh were to be applicable to determining the permissibility of freeing Lot from captivity, then Abraham would surely have been absolved of that dangerous national obligation. However, Abraham's prosecution of that war, despite its grave risks, establishes that the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh is not applicable to the performance of those national obligations in which danger inheres. In fact, the inapplicability of the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh to the dangerous national obligation of forcibly freeing Jewish captives would subsequently be affirmed by God Himself when Israel reengaged in war against the king of Arad, thereby risking the lives of many Jews in order to retrieve Jewish captives. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"The Canaanite king of Arad, [who] dwelled in the South, heard that Israel had come by the route of the spies, and he fought against Israel and took captives from it. Israel [thereupon] made a vow to HaShem and said, 'If He will deliver this people into my hand, [then] I will consecrate their cities.' HaShem heard the voice of Israel, and He delivered the Canaanite, and it [Israel] consecrated them and their cities. It [Israel] named the place Chormah."
(Numbers 21:1-3)
Likewise, the inapplicability of the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh to the dangerous national obligation of forcibly possessing the Land of Israel would -- decades prior to the incident with the king of Arad -- be affirmed by God Himself when Moses sent 12 tribal leaders from among the Jewish people to reconnoiter the Land in preparation for their invasion and conquest thereof. Ten of the spies urgently recommended to Moses against the invasion. As Hebrew Bible relates:
"They reported to him and said, 'We arrived at the Land to which you sent us, and indeed it flows with milk and honey, and this is its fruit. However, the people which dwells in the Land is powerful; the cities are very greatly fortified; and also the offspring of the giant we saw there. Amalek dwells in the area of the South; the Hittite, the Jebusite and the Amorite dwell on the mountain; and the Canaanite dwells by the Sea and on the bank of the Jordan [River].' Caleb silenced the people towards Moses and said, 'We shall surely ascend and conquer it, for we can surely do it.' But the men who had ascended with him said, 'We cannot ascend to that people, for it is too strong for us.' They brought forth to the Children of Israel an evil report on the Land which they had spied out, saying, 'The Land through which we have passed, to spy it out, is a Land that devours its inhabitants. All the people that we saw in it were huge. There we saw the Nefilim, the sons of the giant from the among the Nefilim; we were like grasshoppers in our eyes, and so we were in their eyes.' The entire assembly raised up and issued its voice; the people wept that night. All the Children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron, and the entire assembly said to them, 'If only we had died in the Land of Egypt, or if only we had died in this Wilderness! Why is HaShem bringing us to this Land [of Israel] to die by the sword? -- Our wives and young children will be taken captive! -- Is it not better for us to return to Egypt?' So, they said to one another, 'Let us appoint a leader and let us return to Egypt!'"
(Numbers 13:27 - 14:4)
The basis for their impassioned recommendation against the invasion was the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh. They argued that the Jewish people were entitled to be excused from performing the national Torah Mitzvah of forcibly possessing the Land of Israel because this Mitzvah was extremely dangerous; and they logically reasoned that Jewish lives would be more endangered by performing this Mitzvah than by desisting therefrom. Yet, God Himself rejected this assertion. Seeing that His Gift of the Land of Israel to the Jewish people was despised, God adjudged that generation, except for Caleb and Joshua, unworthy to leave the Exile, and He thereupon pronounced sentence upon it, declaring:
"'And your young children of whom you said they will become a prey [for the Canaanite nations], I shall bring them; they shall know the Land [of Israel] which you have rejected. But your carcasses shall drop in this Wilderness. And your children will roam in the Wilderness for 40 years and bear [culpability for] your strayings, until the consumption of [the last of] your carcasses in the Wilderness. Like the number of the days that you spied out the Land, 40 days, a day for a year, a day for a year, shall you bear your iniquities -- 40 years -- and you shall comprehend straying from Me. I, HaShem, have spoken -- [I am not HaShem] if I shall not do this unto this entire evil assembly that gathers against Me; in this Wilderness shall they be consumed, and there shall they die.'"
(Numbers 14:31-35)
Clearly, the doctrine of Pikuach Nefesh is not applicable to the inviolability of the Land of Israel. Consequently, the doctrine can never be utilized to permit a Jewish leader to cede to Gentile sovereignty any portion of the Land, even if maintaining possession thereof results in great danger to Jewish lives.
In fact, it may be argued that, although Abraham’s objective was likely limited to rescuing Lot and the other abductees, his successful military campaign against the alliance of Mesopotamian kings constituted the first war waged by a Jewish leader to protect the Land of Israel from external enemies.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"The king of Sodom went out to meet him
[Abraham] after his return from defeating Chedorlaomer and the kings that were
with him, to the Valley of Shaveh, which is the King's Valley. And Melchizedek,
king of Salem [which is Jerusalem], brought out bread and wine; he was a priest
of God Most High. He [Melchizedek] blessed him [Abraham], saying, 'Blessed is
Abram of God Most High, Maker of Heaven and Earth; and blessed be God Most
High, Who has delivered your enemies into your hand'; and he [Abraham] gave him
[Melchizedek] a tenth of everything. The king of Sodom said to Abram, 'Give me
the people, and take the possessions for yourself.' Abram said to the king of
Sodom, 'I lift up my hand to HaShem -- God Most High,
Maker of Heaven and Earth -- if [I have taken] so much as a thread to a shoe
strap; or if I shall take from anything of yours! So, you shall not say,
"It is I who made Abram rich." Only what the young men have eaten,
and the share of the men who accompanied me: [Amorite brothers] Aner, Eschol
and Mamre -- they will take their portion.'"
(Genesis 14:17-24).
After Abraham's return from battle, he simultaneously encountered both Good and Evil. Melchizedek, the king of Salem and a priest of God, gave exclusive credit to the God of Israel for Abraham's victory, while Bera, the humiliated king of Sodom, deviously attempted to share in the credit for Abraham's victory by offering to "permit" Abraham to retain the city's looted possessions which Bera and his army had no part in recovering. Righteous Abraham publicly rewarded Melchizedek with a tithe of his own possessions, while he publicly rebuked Bera by openly crediting his victory to God and refusing Bera's "offer". Moreover, by keeping those looted possessions for himself, instead of returning them to their owners, Abraham would have rendered himself a thief, thereby demolishing his status as God’s Representative. In fact, evil Bera may have been motivated to make his "offer" to Abraham by the possibility of this maleficent result. This episode presents a profound lesson to every person who would become a leader of the Jewish people, namely, that a Jewish leader must always -- and without reservation -- publicly praise and embrace those who are Good, and publicly rebuke and confront those who are Evil. As the Prophet Amos would later declare:
"Seek Good and not Evil ... Hate the Evil, and love the Good"
(Amos 5:14-15)
Yet, while this proposition might seem self-evident in theory, it is extremely difficult to implement in practice. For, many well-meaning people delight in embracing the Good, as this entails pursuing a course of exclusively benign conduct, but they recoil from confronting the Evil, as this entails pursuing a course of potentially dangerous conduct. Accordingly, by refusing to keep possessions that belonged to the citizens of Sodom, and by publicly rebuking its evil king, Abraham thereby enhanced the Kiddush HaShem produced by his military victory over the four Mesopotamian kings. Clearly, had Abraham decided to retain any of those possessions, not only might the king of Sodom have been able to claim that his "generosity" made Abraham wealthy, but others might have also inferred that Abraham went to war for material gain rather than to rescue the abductees -- all being false ascriptions that would have converted Kiddush HaShem into Chillul HaShem. Conversely, by refusing to retain any of these possessions, Abraham sought to avoid any diminishment of the great Kiddush HaShem that he had wrought.
Furthermore, Abraham’s refusal to keep any of Sodom’s possessions demonstrated a recognition by him that his prior acquisition of Pharaoh’s possessions (see Genesis 12:16) had created a great Chillul HaShem. For, by accepting valuable possessions from Pharaoh in exchange for permitting the latter to acquire Sarah, Abraham had enabled Pharaoh to boast (if he had so chosen) that: "It is I who made Abram rich."
Yet, if this be so, then why did Abraham subsequently accept possessions from Abimelech (see Genesis 20:14), thereby enabling Abimelech to boast (if he had so chosen) that: "It is I who made Abram rich"? Firstly, by the time of this subsequent incident, Abraham was already rich -- very rich. Secondly, a significant portion of the possessions given to Abraham by Abimelech (e.g., the huge amount of silver coins) was meant for Sarah (see Genesis 20:16) as proof to everyone that Abimelech had not sexually assaulted her, and that her sexual honor consequently remained intact. Accordingly, she -- as the victim of an abduction -- was entitled to such compensation, even if Abraham was not. Consequently, the receipt of these possessions by Abraham (both for himself and for Sarah) did not by itself constitute a Chillul HaShem. However, such receipt was nonetheless the odious product of an enormous Chillul HaShem, namely, the fact that Abraham feared Abimelech more than he trusted in the God of Israel.
Moreover, the great Kiddush HaShem created by Abraham's self-sacrificing conduct in confronting the four Mesopotamian kings, his consequent military victory over them and his public acknowledgment of God's Providence was nonetheless possibly diminished by two circumstances:
Firstly, there is the fact that Abraham allied himself with a well-known family of Amorites -- consisting of Mamre, Eschol and Aner; for, it is possible that some people might have attributed Abraham's victory, not to the God of Israel, but rather to the assistance of the Amorites.
Secondly, there is the fact that Abraham agreed to repatriate the newly-liberated people, including Lot, to Sodom; for, he thereby arguably made it more difficult for these morally-deficient people to overcome the temptations of their immoral surroundings.
Yet, Abraham's otherwise exemplary behavior in this episode provides us with a profound lesson for future Jewish leadership: True faith in the God of Israel -- which derives from Yirat Elohim (fear of God) -- demands, not only that we publicly reward righteous leaders and publicly associate ourselves with them, but also that we publicly rebuke evil leaders and publicly disassociate ourselves from them -- without fear of the military or diplomatic repercussions of such action. Consequently, modern Israel's leadership should understand that, when Israel is pressured by the nations to embrace Evildoers for the sake of an illusory peace, God is thereby testing that leadership in order to determine whether or not it has true faith in Him -- meaning Yirat Elohim rather than Yirat HaGoyim (fear of the nations). It goes without saying that a Jewish leadership which lacks Yirat Elohim will always fail such a Test.
Yet, one intriguing question remains. Why did Abraham stridently refuse an offer of compensation from the evil king of Sodom but meekly accept an earlier offer of compensation from the evil king of Egypt? Abraham’s shameful acceptance of compensation from Pharaoh in exchange for his sale of Sarah to that evil monarch was caused by Abraham’s lack of complete faith in God’s Power to keep His Promise of Protection. However, after Lot was abducted, Abraham exhibited complete faith in God by fearlessly pursuing and attacking a superior foe. Moreover, in the wake of triumph, he publicly attributed his victory to God. Consequently, between Abraham’s earlier interaction with the king of Egypt and Abraham’s later interaction with the king of Sodom, Abraham’s faith in God had evolved from incomplete to complete. Alternatively stated, from a spiritual perspective, the Abraham who dealt with the king of Sodom was not the same Abraham who had earlier dealt with the king of Egypt.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"After these events, the Word of HaShem came to Abram in a vision saying, 'Fear not, Abram,
I am a Shield for you; your reward is very great.' And Abraham said, 'My Lord HaShem: What can You give me, seeing that I go childless,
and the steward of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?' Then Abraham said, 'See,
to me You have given no offspring; and see, my steward inherits from me.'
Suddenly, the Word of HaShem came to him, saying,
'That one will not inherit from you. Only him that shall come forth from within
you shall inherit from you.' And he took him outside, and said, 'Gaze now,
towards the Sky, and count the stars if you are able to count them!' And He
said to him, 'So shall your offspring be!' And he trusted in Hashem, and He
reckoned it to him as righteousness. Then He said to him, 'I am HaShem Who brought you out of Ur Kasdim
to give you this Land to inherit it.' And he said, 'My Lord HaShem:
Whereby shall I know that I am to inherit it?'"
(Genesis 15:1-8).
"After these events, the Word of HaShem came to Abram in a vision saying, 'Fear not, Abram, I am a Shield for you; your reward is very great.'" Despite Abraham's possible diminishment of the Kiddush HaShem which he had wrought, God was well pleased with Abraham's exhibition of pragmatic faith in the matter of the Mesopotamian kings; and He thereby reassured a doubt-prone Abraham that just as His Promise of Protection had been fulfilled (in the matters of Pharaoh and of the Mesopotamian kings), so would His Promises of Progeny and of the Land also be fulfilled in their respective times.
"And Abraham said, 'My Lord HaShem: What can You give me, seeing that I go childless, and the steward of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?' Then Abraham said, 'See, to me You have given no offspring; and see, my steward inherits from me.'" Why did Abraham declare to God that his servant Eliezer would be his heir? Unfortunately, despite God's reassurance to Abraham that His Promises to Abraham would indeed be fulfilled, Abraham's old doubts over these Promises, fed by his impatience, had already begun to resurface. For, the precise wording of Abraham’s responsive complaint over his lack of offspring: "… 'My Lord HaShem: What can You give me, seeing that I go childless …'", and especially his subsequent identification of Eliezer as his heir, contains within it the implication that God lacked the Power to fulfill His Promise of Progeny to Abraham. Abraham identified Eliezer and not Lot as his heir, because Lot had twice separated himself from Abraham’s household, the first time being when Lot relocated to Sodom after he had challenged Abraham over the resources of the Land, and the second being when Lot returned to Sodom after his rescue by Abraham.
"Suddenly, the Word of HaShem came to him, saying, 'That one will not inherit from you. Only him that shall come forth from within you shall inherit from you.'" God, consequently, found it necessary to brusquely interrupt Abraham's complaints and -- in the several declarations that immediately follow -- to reaffirm to him, yet a third time, His Promises of Progeny and of the Land.
"And he took him outside, and said, 'Gaze now, towards the Sky, and count the stars if you are able to count them!' And He said to him, 'So shall your offspring be!' And he trusted in Hashem, and He reckoned it to him as righteousness. Then He said to him, 'I am HaShem Who brought you out of Ur Kasdim to give you this Land to inherit it.' And he said, 'My Lord HaShem: Whereby shall I know that I am to inherit it?'" This is a perplexing thing because, after putting his doubts to rest and completely trusting in God's Promises, Abraham inexplicably asked a question which betrayed his lack of trust in those very Promises. A close reading of the text, however, appears to solve this puzzle, as it reveals that Abraham completely trusted -- however temporarily -- in God's reaffirmed Promise of Progeny but not in His reaffirmed Promise of the Land! Perhaps that is because, from Abraham's perspective, God's Promise of Progeny seemed more plausible than God's Promise of the Land. After all, in Abraham's eyes, fulfillment of the former was, logically, less dependent upon a Divine miracle than was fulfillment of the latter; and even if a miracle were to be required to effect conception, such a miracle, involving only two human beings, seemed to be considerably less complex, and, consequently, more capable of fulfillment, than the miracle required to cause the dispossession of entire peoples from the Land.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"And He said to him, 'Take to Me three
heifers, three goats, three rams, a turtledove, and a young dove.' He took all
these to Him: he cut them in the center, and placed each piece opposite its
counterpart; the birds, however, he did not cut up. Birds of prey descended
upon the carcasses, and Abram drove them away. And it happened, as the Sun was
about to set, that a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold -- a dread -- great
Darkness fell upon him. And He said to Abram, 'Know with certainty that, for
400 years, your offspring [the Jewish people] shall be aliens in a Land not
their own; they [the Jewish people] will serve them, and they will oppress them
[the Jewish people]. However, also the nation that they shall serve, I shall
judge, and afterwards they [the Jewish people] shall leave with great wealth.
As for you: You shall come to your ancestors in peace; you shall be buried in a
good old age. And the fourth generation shall return here; for, the Iniquity of
the Amorite shall not yet be full until then.'"
(Genesis 15:9-16).
There were two temporal means by which Abraham's covenantal progeny -- the Children of Israel -- could inherit the Land of Israel. The first way was without any suffering, in haste, through Abraham's (or the future Jewish people's) righteousness. The second way was against the collective will of the Jewish people and after much suffering, in its natural time, when the sinfulness of the indigenous peoples would become so great as to cause God to dispossess them in favor of the Jewish people, but only in order to sanctify His Holy Name. After assessing Abraham's lingering doubts as to the Promise of the Land, God determined that the Jewish people would not merit the first path, but would, instead, be forced to endure the second path. And this second way -- the severity of which would be exacerbated by the Chillul HaShem inherent in the Jewish people’s presence in the Exile -- would forever remain the path chosen by the faithless Jewish people throughout their long history.
As Moses would later explain to the Children of Israel concerning their original return to, and conquest of, the Land of Israel under the leadership of Joshua:
"Do not say in your heart, when HaShem pushes them [the Canaanite nations] away from before you, saying, ‘Because of my righteousness does HaShem bring me to possess this Land’; for, because of the wickedness of these nations does HaShem drive them away from before you. Not because of your righteousness and the uprightness of your heart are you coming to possess their Land, but because of the wickedness of these nations does HaShem, your God, drive them away from before you, and in order to establish the Word that HaShem swore to your forefathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. And you should know that not because of your righteousness does HaShem, your God, give you this good Land to possess it; for, you are a stiff-necked people."
(Deuteronomy 9:4-6)
And as God Himself, speaking through the Prophet Ezekiel, would thereafter declare concerning the pre-messianic ingathering of the Jewish people to a resurrected nation-state of Israel in our own Day:
"I scattered them among the nations and they were dispersed among the lands; according to their way and according to their acts did I judge them. They came among the nations where they came, and they desecrated My Holy Name when it was said of them, ‘These are the people of HaShem, but they departed His Land.’ I took pity on my Holy Name which the House of Israel had desecrated among the nations where they came. Therefore, say to the House of Israel: Thus said the Lord HaShem: It is not for your sake that I act, O House of Israel, but for My Holy Name that you have desecrated among the nations where you came. I will sanctify My Great Name that is desecrated among the nations, that you have desecrated among them; then the nations will know that I am HaShem -- the Word of the Lord HaShem -- when I become sanctified through you before their eyes. I will take you from [among] the nations and gather you from all the lands, and I will bring you to your own soil … Not for your sake do I act -- the Word of the Lord HaShem -- let this be known to you! Be embarrassed and ashamed of your ways, O House of Israel!"
(Ezekiel 36:19-32)
A further understanding of the relationship between God's Redemption of the Jewish people "in its natural time" (due to their lack of sufficient merit to justify a hastened redemption) and God's Redemption of the Jewish people "in order to sanctify His Holy Name" can be gleaned from the words of the Prophet Isaiah concerning the End of Days:
"Thus, Justice has been withdrawn and Righteousness stands at a distance; because Truth has stumbled in the street, and Integrity cannot enter. Truth became lacking, and refraining from Evil was considered to be foolish. HaShem saw all this, and it was Evil in His Eyes that there is no Justice. But He saw that there was no [worthy] man, and He was astounded that there was no one to intervene [in order to restore Justice to the World and thereby sanctify His Holy Name]; so, His [own] Arm wrought Salvation for Him, and it was His [own] Righteousness that was His Support. He donned Righteousness like armor and a helmet of Salvation on His Head; and He donned garments of Vengeance as His Attire and clothed Himself in Zealousness like a coat. Just as there were [previous] Retributions [against His enemies], so shall He [now] repay Wrath to His enemies, Retribution to His adversaries; He will pay Retribution [even] to the distant lands. From the West they will fear the Name of HaShem, and from the rising of the Sun [they will fear] His Glory; for [their] travail will come like a river; the Spirit of HaShem will gnaw at them. 'A Redeemer will come to Zion, and to those of Jacob who repent from willful sin' -- the Word of HaShem. 'And as for Me, this is My Covenant with them', said HaShem: 'My Spirit which is upon you and My Words that I have placed in your mouth will not be withdrawn from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your offspring, nor from the mouth of your offspring's offspring', said HaShem, 'from this moment and forever.' Arise! Shine! -- for your Light has arrived, and the Glory of HaShem shines upon you. For, behold, Darkness may cover the Earth and a thick Cloud [may cover] the peoples [of the Earth], but upon you HaShem will shine, and His Glory will be seen upon you. Nations will walk by your light and kings [will walk] by the brilliance of your radiance. Lift up your eyes all around and see; they are all assembling and coming to you; your sons will arrive from afar and your daughters will be raised at [their] side. Then you will see and be radiant, and your heart will be startled and broadened, for the affluence of the West will be turned over to you, and the wealth of the nations will come to you. ... Then the sons of foreigners will build your walls and their kings will serve you. Although I struck you in My Indignation, I have been merciful to you in My Grace. Your gates will be open continuously -- day and night they will not be closed -- in order to bring to you the wealth of nations and their kings under escort. For the nation and kingdom that does not serve you will perish, and those nations will be utterly destroyed. ... The sons of your oppressors will go to you submissively, and all who scorned you will prostrate themselves at the soles of your feet; they will call you 'City of HaShem, Zion of the Holy One of Israel'. Instead of you being forsaken and despised, without any sojourner passing through, I will make you into an eternal pride, a joy for generation after generation. You will nurse from the milk of the nations, and from the breast of kings will you nurse; then you will realize that I, HaShem, am your Savior and your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob. ... No longer will Violence be known in your Land, nor Plunder and Calamity within your borders. You will call [God's] Salvation your protective walls, and [His] Praise [you will call] your gateways. The Sun will no longer be for you the light of day and brightness; and the Moon will not illuminate for you. HaShem will be an Eternal Light for you, and your God will be your Splendor. Never again will your Sun set, and your Moon will not be withdrawn; for HaShem will be unto you an Eternal Light, and the days of your mourning will be ended. Your people will all be righteous; they will inherit the Land forever -- a shoot of My Planting, the work of My Hands in which I will glory. The smallest will increase a thousand-fold, and the least [will become] a mighty nation. I am HaShem: in its time I will hasten it."
(Isaiah 59:14 - 60:22)
Since the redemption of the Jewish people has not arrived in haste, but rather will arrive in its natural time, it is difficult to understand why God then declares that He will "hasten" the Redemption "in its time" -- a formulation that appears to contradict itself. The explanation is that, although the Jewish people lack sufficient merit to warrant their redemption in haste, God's imperative need to sanctify His Holy Name -- not only among the arrogant Gentile nations but, as well, among the faithless Jewish people -- nevertheless causes Him to redeem the Jewish people well before the final Day upon which their redemption would naturally occur.
"And it happened, as the Sun was about to set, that a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold -- a dread -- great Darkness fell upon him." God prepared Abraham for His solemn Response to Abraham's request for proof that he and his progeny would indeed inherit the Land by causing a dread and a great Darkness to envelop Abraham although the Sun had not yet set -- this in order to impress upon Abraham the great disappointment experienced by God that (on account of Abraham's lack of complete faith in His Promise of the Land) the Jewish people would reacquire the Land, not without suffering and in haste -- through Abraham's (or their) merit -- but rather against their collective will, after much suffering and in its natural time -- through the Iniquity of the Canaanite nations.
"And He said to Abram, 'Know with certainty that, for 400 years, your offspring [the Jewish people] shall be aliens in a Land not their own; they [the Jewish people] will serve them, and they will oppress them [the Jewish people]. However, also the nation that they shall serve, I shall judge, and afterwards they [the Jewish people] shall leave with great wealth.'" As punishment for Abraham's sin, God decreed that the Jewish people, in a future generation, would be removed from the Land and become slaves to an evil empire, thereby initiating an era which would become known as the Egyptian Exile.
Yet God's Words are more than merely a declaration of delayed punishment. For, He is also teaching to the Gentile nations and to the Jewish people a profound lesson: If, in the Future, an evil nation should dare to say that, since its persecution of the Jewish people was foreordained by God, its Evildoing was actually Righteousness, then that nation should know that, although its Evildoing may have served God's Higher Purpose, it is not thereby absolved from suffering God's Judgment; for, that arrogant nation will surely be punished for having committed Evil against God's People (-- "'However, also the nation that they shall serve, I shall judge, and afterwards they [the Jewish people] shall leave with great wealth.'" --). As God, acting through the Prophet Zechariah, declares to the nations who persecute the Jewish people:
“… Thus said HaShem of Legions: ‘I have become zealous for Jerusalem and for Zion -- a great Zeal. And I am wrathful -- a great Wrath -- against the complacent nations; for I was slightly wrathful [against the Jewish people], but they [the Gentile nations] augmented the Evil.’”
(Zechariah 1:14-15)
Consequently, the Jewish people will receive just compensation for their ordeal and they, in turn, will exult over their tormentor's just punishment. As the Hebrew Bible explains:
"The righteous man shall rejoice when he sees Vengeance. He shall wash his feet in the blood of the Wicked. And Mankind shall say, 'Truly there is a reward for the Righteous. Truly there is a God Who judges on Earth.'" (Psalms 58:11-12)
With respect to the foreordained Egyptian Exile, although Exodus-era Egypt is merely fulfilling a role assigned to it by the God of Israel, He will purposefully strengthen the resolve of its Pharaoh only so that He may exercise a horrific Vengeance against it as punishment for its evil enslavement of the Jewish people. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"HaShem said to Moses, 'When you go to return to Egypt, see all the Wonders that I have put in your hand, and perform them before Pharaoh; but I shall strengthen his heart, and he will not send out the people. You shall say to Pharaoh, "So said HaShem, 'My Firstborn Son is Israel. So I have said to you: Send out My Son that he may serve Me, but you have refused to send him out; behold! -- I shall kill your firstborn son.'"'"
(Exodus 4:21-23)
It is the same with respect to the later Babylonian Exile. On account of their Sins, the God of Israel determined that the Jewish people were to be subjugated by Babylonia, either through its voluntary submission in situ to Babylonia or through its suffering of re-conquest, massacre, and involuntary exile by Babylonia. As the Prophet Jeremiah recounts, concerning his advice and warning to vassal king Zedekiah who now challenged Babylonian hegemony:
"And to Zedekiah, king of Judah, I spoke the same words, saying, 'Put your necks into the yoke of the king of Babylonia and serve him and his people, so that you may live. Why should you and your people die by the sword, by famine and by pestilence as HaShem spoke concerning the nation that will not serve the king of Babylonia? '" (Jer. 27:12-13). Due to Zedekiah’s rebellion against God in this matter, Babylonia will be permitted to re-conquer the defiant southern kingdom of Judah, sack Jerusalem, destroy the Temple by fire, perpetuate massacres and expel most of the remaining population to Babylonia (where they will join the first wave of Jewish refugees who, together with king Zedekiah’s nephew and predecessor, king Jehoiachin, had been expelled 11 years earlier when Babylonia initially invaded and conquered the kingdom of Judah). Yet, despite the fact that Babylonia is merely fulfilling a role provided to it by the God of Israel, the Prophet Jeremiah, speaking in God’s Name, nonetheless declares concerning that evil empire’s ultimate fate: "'You were a Mallet for Me, a Tool of War; I smashed nations through you, and I destroyed kingdoms through you. … Now I shall repay to Babylonia and to all the inhabitants of Chaldea all their Evil that they did in Zion before your eyes -- the Word of HaShem.'"
(Jeremiah 51:20-24); and
"'Therefore, behold, days are coming when I will deal with the graven idols of Babylonia, and its entire Land will be ashamed; and all its slain will fall in its midst. Heaven and Earth and all that is in them will rejoice over Babylonia; for, the plunderers will come to it from the North -- the Word of HaShem -- because Babylonia caused the slain of Israel to fall, and because of Babylonia the slain of the entire Land fell. … A sound, a cry from Babylonia, and a great calamity from the Land of the Chaldeans. For, HaShem is plundering Babylonia, and He will end the loud sound from it; their waves roared like many waters; the din of their voices went forth. For, upon her, upon Babylonia, a plunderer is coming; her warriors will be captured and their bows will be smashed; for, HaShem is a God of Retribution; He will surely exact Recompense. I will intoxicate her officers and her wise men, her governors, her deputies and her warriors; they will sleep an eternal sleep and never awaken -- the Word of the King; HaShem -- Master of Legions -- is His Name. Thus said HaShem, Master of Legions: The broad walls of Babylonia will be completely uprooted and her tall gates will be set on fire, the peoples will toil in great futility, and nations shall become exhausted through great fire.'"
(Jeremiah 51:47-58).
But how can a Gentile nation's persecution of the Jewish people truly be Evil if it has been foreordained by the God of Israel as a necessary chastisement for His People? The answer lies in the Truth that the same event may constitute the simultaneous fulfillment of that nation’s evil intentions and God's Higher Purpose. As Abraham's great-grandson, Joseph, would explain to his brothers concerning their earlier cruel sale of him to slave traders:
"'Although you meant [to inflict] Evil upon me, God meant it for Good, in order to accomplish -- it is as [clear as] this Day -- that a vast people be kept alive.'"
(Genesis 50:20)
And yet, regardless of how malevolent a Gentile nation’s persecution of the Jewish people may actually be, why doesn’t God’s foreordination of such persecution nonetheless exonerate that nation from moral responsibility for that Evil and, consequently, excuse that nation from suffering punishment on account thereof? The answer lies in the interplay between Predestination and Free Will. The leadership of such a nation will always possess the power to choose between Good and Evil (which is the essence of Free Will), while God -- possessing the Power to see all that was, is and will ever be -- will always know, ab initio, the results and consequences of those future choices (which is the essence of Predestination). Accordingly, it is not that such a nation’s course of action is fixed because God has foreordained it; rather, it is that such a nation’s course of action is fixed because its leadership has chosen it. An example of the interplay between Predestination and Free Will is Egypt’s harsh enslavement of the Jewish people and the horrific punishments it suffered on account thereof, all in conformity with the prior Words of God to Abraham. By informing Abraham about his progeny’s future travails and triumphs, God is declaring that which is predestined to occur owing to the myriad choices which will be made by Jews and Gentiles over the succeeding centuries. Yet, although God will place before Pharaoh a great temptation -- namely, a huge pool of potential slave laborers to be drawn from a segregated minority population which was already being viewed by the majority population with a combination of disdain (see Genesis 46:31-34) and envy (see Genesis 45:4-11; 45:16-23; 47:5-6; and 47:11-12) -- God will not command the leader of Egypt to persecute the Jewish people. Rather, Pharaoh -- after considering the fecundity and growing wealth of the Jews in Egypt and the pecuniary advantages to himself of demonizing and exploiting this foreign population -- will choose to do so. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"Thus, Israel settled in the Land of Egypt in the region of Goshen; they acquired property in it and they were fruitful and multiplied greatly"
(Genesis 47:27); and later continues:
"The Children of Israel were fruitful, teemed, increased, and became strong -- very, very much so; and the Land became filled with them. A new king arose over Egypt, who did not know of Joseph. He said to his people, 'Behold! The people -- the Children of Israel -- are more numerous and stronger than us. Come, let us outsmart it, lest it become [even more] numerous; and it may be that if a war will occur, it too may join our enemies, and wage war against us and go up from the Land.' So, they appointed taskmasters over it in order to afflict it with their burdens; and it built storage cities for Pharaoh -- Pithom and Rameses."
(Exodus 1:7-11)
Similarly, although -- in the wake of 10 horrific Plagues -- God will strengthen Pharaoh’s resolve against succumbing to Moses’ demand that the Jewish people be permitted to leave Egypt without hindrance, God will not force Pharaoh either to obstruct or to facilitate the Exodus at any stage of the Confrontation. Rather, Pharaoh -- after considering the variable dynamics of the Confrontation and its evolving effects upon Egypt and himself -- will, in the exercise of his own free will, make a series of vacillating decisions with respect to the Exodus. (see Exodus 7:1-11:10; 12:29-34; and 14:1-9).
"'As for you: You shall come to your ancestors in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age.'" If only Abraham had not tested God with his query over inheriting the Land, then perhaps the Jewish people, in Abraham's merit, would have been able to reacquire the Land through the first path, namely, without suffering and in haste. However, none of this deprives Abraham of his greatness and exalted stature as our first forefather. For, although Abraham was not sufficiently righteous to merit for his covenantal progeny the first path to the Land of Israel, he was sufficiently righteous to merit for himself the love and respect of God and the promise of a peaceful death at a ripe age in the Land of Israel.
Yet, it seems incongruous that, in response to Abraham's Sin, God would punish Abraham's covenantal descendants with exile and slavery, while rewarding Abraham with a long life and a peaceful death, as such a reward for Abraham would appear to refute the notion that Abraham had sinned at all through his lack of complete faith in God's Power and Promises! However, so concluding would be erroneous. In this regard, let us consider the case of Abraham's righteous descendant, Hezekiah, monarch of the southern kingdom of Judah. Hezekiah was beloved of God on account of the fact that he had eradicated idolatry from Judah and had restored Yirat Elohim (fear of God) among the Jewish people. Unfortunately, righteous Hezekiah, an earthly representative of the God of Israel and a leader of the Jewish people of his Day -- in a moment of weakness -- humbled himself before evil Babylonia, thereby exhibiting Yirat HaGoyim (fear of the nations) and, consequently, causing a great Chillul HaShem (see II Kings 18:1 - 20:21 and II Chronicles 29:1 - 32:33). Due to King Hezekiah's sin, God decreed that the Jewish people would be removed from the Land and become slaves to this same evil empire, thereby initiating an era which would become known as the Babylonian Exile. Yet, despite Hezekiah's sin, God punished neither Hezekiah nor the Jewish people of his Day. Rather, as was the case with Abraham's sin, God delayed the punishment for Hezekiah's sin until a future generation, thereby prompting Hezekiah to exult to himself:
" ...'Is it not true that there will be peace and truth in my days!'"
(II Kings 20:19)
For, despite his momentary lack of complete Yirat Elohim, righteous Hezekiah -- like his ancestor Abraham -- merited God's love and respect as well as a peaceful death. As is recounted in the Hebrew Bible:
"The rest of the deeds of Hezekiah and all his might, and how he made the pool and the channel, bringing the water source into the City [of Jerusalem] -- behold, they are recorded in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah. Hezekiah lay with his forefathers; and his son, Manasseh, reigned in his place."
(II Kings 20:20-21); and
"The rest of the deeds of Hezekiah and his kindnesses -- behold, they are recorded in the Visions of the Prophet Isaiah, son of Amoz, and in the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel. Hezekiah passed away and was buried in the choicest section of the tombs of the children of [King] David. All of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem paid tribute to him when he died. His son, Manasseh, reigned in his place."
(II Chronicles 32:32-33).
"'And the fourth generation shall return here; for, the Iniquity of the Amorite shall not yet be full until then.'" Employing the literal meaning of the verse, the four generations referenced therein are the generations of (1) Abraham, (2) Isaac, (3) Jacob, and (4) the 12 sons of Jacob. However, many more generations ensued before the Exodus from Egypt. So, why did God refer only to four generations from the issuance of this Declaration until the Exodus from Egypt? It is likely that God deemed the fourth generation to be elastic, not only comprising Jacob’s sons as individuals, but also comprising the subsequent multigenerational era of the eponymous Hebrew tribes who were descended from Jacob’s sons, and who would collectively become the nation of Israel. Proof of the elasticity of this fourth generation proceeds from the fact that Scripture equates the sons of Jacob -- who was renamed Israel (see Genesis 32:29 & 35:10) -- with the nation of Israel by designating that nation as “B’nai Yisrael”, meaning the “Children of Israel” (see Exodus 1:7, which represents the first employment of the phrase “B’nai Yisrael” to refer to the nation of Israel rather than to Jacob’s sons). Consequently, the fourth generation comprised both the sons of Jacob and the nation of Israel descended therefrom.
In specifically referring to the Amorites, as a symbol of the evil Canaanite nations, God was implicitly criticizing Abraham for having made an alliance with a clan of Amorites during the war against the four kings. For, that alliance had diminished the Kiddush HaShem resulting from Abraham's miraculous victory by God's Hand.
However, in addition to subjecting Abraham to this specific criticism, God is also teaching to the Jewish people a profound lesson for the Future by earlier informing us that Abraham " ... dwelled among the oak trees of Mamre, the Amorite, the brother of Eshcol and the brother of Aner, these being Abram's allies." (Genesis 14:13). Righteous Abraham did not associate with Evildoers. Accordingly, we can assume that Abraham's Amorite allies -- Mamre, Eshcol and Aner -- were righteous! Yet, in God's Response to Abraham's questioning of the Promise of the Land, He explicitly refers to the "Iniquity of the Amorite". Furthermore, as God later warns Moses concerning the Canaanite nations, including the Amorites, then occupying the Land:
"'Beware of what I command you Today: Behold, I will drive out before you the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite. Be vigilant not to seal a covenant with the inhabitants of the Land to which you are coming, since they will be a fatal trap for you.'"
(Exodus 34:11-12); and
"'You shall devour all the peoples that HaShem, your God, will deliver to you; your eye shall not pity them; you shall not worship their gods, for it is a snare for you.'"
(Deuteronomy 7:16); and
"'But from the cities of these peoples that HaShem, your God, gives you as an inheritance, you shall not allow any person to live. Rather you shall utterly destroy them: the Hittite, the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite, as HaShem, your God, has commanded you, so that they will not teach you to act according to all their abominations that they performed for their deities, so that you will sin to HaShem, your God.'"
(Deuteronomy 20:16-18)
And Isaac ben Judah Abarbanel (b. 1437 - d. 1507), commenting on Exodus 34:11-12, declares:
"Verses 11-12 inform us that since God is driving out the Amorites and the other nations, it is improper for Israel to forge a covenant with them. If a nobleman helps someone by fighting his battles and banishing his enemies, it is morally inappropriate for that person to make peace with them without that nobleman's permission. So, too, with God driving out Israel's enemies, it is inappropriate for Israel to forge a covenant with them, for that would profane God's Glory. This is especially so considering that this friendship and this covenant will not succeed. With Israel having taken their land, there is no doubt that they will constantly seek Israel's downfall. This is why it said, '...[the Land] to which you are coming...' Since Israel came to that Land and took it from its inhabitants, and they feel that it has been stolen from them, how will they make a covenant of friendship with you? Rather the opposite will occur: '...they will be a fatal trap for you.' When war strikes you, they will join your enemies and fight you."
How, then, do we reconcile the seeming contradiction between the righteousness of Abraham's Amorite allies and the iniquity of the Amorite people? And, moreover, how do we reconcile the seeming injustice of repaying Abraham's Amorite allies for risking their lives in aid of Abraham with the expulsion and destruction of their descendants by Abraham's descendants? The general principle to be learned is that while, individually, Gentiles may indeed be righteous, collectively, they are not. That is precisely why Abraham's friends were righteous, but the nation to which they belonged was Evil!
And should we have any doubts as to whether the specific reference to the "Iniquity of the Amorite" in God's Response to Abraham constitutes a sufficient basis upon which to infer, by inductive logic, the general principal so stated, it is pointed out that the case of Mamre and his brothers represents but one example of righteous Gentiles who were members of an evil nation against which the Jewish people were commanded to wage war without mercy.
For example, despite the fact that Melchizedek, king of the City of Salem, was a priest of God who merited to receive a tithe from Abraham (see Genesis 14:18-20), the inhabitants of Salem, a Canaanite city, nonetheless, remained subject to God's Decrees of Expulsion and Destruction.
Furthermore, despite the fact that Jethro (sometimes known as Reuel or Jether or Hobab), high priest of Midian, granted to Moses (after the latter's slaying of an Egyptian taskmaster) asylum from vengeful Pharaoh, subsequently became the fugitive's father-in-law (see Exodus 2:11-21), thereafter declared the primacy of the God of Israel (see Exodus 18:9-12), and ultimately merited a personal invitation from Moses to join the newly-liberated Jewish people (see Numbers 10:29-32), God later instructed the Jewish people, under the leadership of Moses, to annihilate Midian as punishment for its collective Iniquity (see Numbers 25:16-18 & 31:1-20).
Moreover, despite the fact that Rahab, a prominent inhabitant of the City of Jericho, risked her own life to conceal two Jewish spies from City authorities, thereby preserving the secrecy of the impending Jewish invasion and conquest of the Land of Israel (see Joshua 2:1-23), the God of Israel thereafter instructed the Jewish people, under the leadership of Joshua, to lay waste to the entire City in order to intimidate the Canaanite nations then occupying the Land (see Joshua 6:1-27).
Alternatively stated, the individual righteousness of Mamre, Melchizedek, Jethro and Rahab did not confer upon their respective peoples either any right to the Land of Israel or any reprieve from God's Decrees of Expulsion and Destruction.
Moreover, in the modern era, we have the example of Nazi Germany. The fact that righteous Germans risked -- and forfeited -- their lives to save Jews during the Holocaust does not alter the fact that the nation to which they belonged was the epitome of Evil.
A related example concerns the United Nations. Although many member States thereof have cordial bilateral relations with Israel, the respectful nature of those bilateral relationships does not alter the fact that the United Nations itself (representing the collective Will of those member States) has molded itself into a relentless Enemy of the Jewish State.
Accordingly, the corollary principle to be learned is that a leader of the Jewish people is not permitted either to relinquish possession over any portions of the Land of Israel to the immoral Gentile nations or to tolerate any vestiges of their avodah zarah (meaning: idolatry and other deviant worship) in the Land, even if individual members of those nations are themselves righteous and even if such individuals have risked their lives and their property to aid the Jewish people. As to this last point, the God of Israel strictly adjures the Jewish people:
"These are the Decrees and the Ordinances that you shall observe to perform in the Land that HaShem, the God of your forefathers, has given to you, to possess it, all of the days that you live in the Land. You shall utterly destroy all of the places where the nations that you are driving away worshipped their gods -- on the high mountains, and on the hills, and under every leafy tree. You shall break apart their altars; you shall smash their pillars; and their sacred trees shall you burn in the fire; their carved images shall you cut down; and you shall obliterate their names from that place."
(Deuteronomy 12:1-3)
Furthermore, since -- with limited exceptions -- even those righteous Gentiles (who reside either in a Gentile country outside of the Land or in a Gentile-dominated area inside of the Land) will, nevertheless, continue to participate in the life of, and provide support for, their respective amoral societies, they and their descendants (-- as well as those "stiff-necked" Jews who insist on remaining in the Exile even during a time when the gates of the resurrected nation-state of Israel are wide open to receive them --) will ultimately share in the Collective Punishment that the God of Israel will mete out to the Gentile nations during the future messianic War of Gog and Magog (see Deuteronomy 32:43; Isaiah 45:14-23; Ezekiel 38:1 - 39:8; and Zechariah 14:1-21). That this will be the destiny of righteous Gentiles who choose to remain among their respective amoral peoples during the End of Days is portended by the presumed fate of righteous Jethro. For, although Moses persistently invited Jethro the Midianite to join the Jewish people as they journeyed to the Land of Israel, Jethro firmly declined the offer. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"He [Jethro] said to him [Moses], 'I shall not go; only to my Land and to my clan shall I go.'"
(Numbers 10:30).
Since the Jewish people later destroyed all the Midianites except for prepubescent females (see Numbers 31:7-18), it may be presumed that righteous Jethro -- who insisted on living among them -- also perished at that time. However, the fate of righteous Rahab was quite different. For, by agreeing to separate herself from immoral City of Jericho and to, instead, live among the Jewish people, Rahab was spared the destruction meted out to her people. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"They burned the City in fire, and everything that was in it; only the silver and the gold and the vessels of copper and iron they gave to the treasury of the House of HaShem. But Rahab the innkeeper and her father's household and all that was hers, Joshua allowed to live; and she dwelled in the midst of Israel until this Day, because she hid the messengers that Joshua had sent to spy out Jericho."
(Joshua 6:24-25)
However, with respect to God's Commandments to expel and to annihilate the Canaanite nations from the Land of Israel, it must be noted that, at the time of the returning Hebrews' conquest of the Land under the leadership of Joshua, there were certain clans of Hivites residing in the district of Gibeon which -- through an adroit combination of deceit as to their real identity and of complete prostration before Joshua and the Hebrew tribes -- convinced the Jewish people to conclude an alliance with them (in violation of God's Prohibition against such treaties), on account of which they were exempted from God's Decrees of Expulsion and Destruction (see Joshua 9:1-27). This incident raises another issue, namely, what would have happened if all the Canaanite peoples, including the Amorites, had been as peaceful and as submissive towards the Hebrews as the Gibeonites? Putting aside the fact that the Hebrews were tricked into making their treaty with the Gibeonites, isn't it likely that the Hebrews -- as the covenantal descendants of the kind and merciful Abraham -- when faced with a peaceful and submissive native population, would have, in any case, found it morally difficult -- if not impossible -- to treat this population as harshly as God had so commanded, namely, not to make any alliances with them, but rather, without pity, to expel and to annihilate them from the Land? Despite the fact that God's Decrees were not made conditional upon the military posture of the Canaanite peoples towards the returning Hebrews, the answer to this question is in the affirmative: The Jewish people would have had great moral difficulty conducting a war of expulsion and annihilation against a supine Canaanite population. Accordingly, God enflamed the Canaanites’ belligerence towards the Jewish people, so that the latter would have no practical choice but to comply with His Decrees. As is revealed in the Hebrew Bible:
"Joshua waged war with all these [Canaanite] kings for a long time. There was not a city that made peace with the Children of Israel except for the Hivite inhabitants of Gibeon; they [the Hebrews] took everything in battle. For it was from HaShem, to strengthen their [the Canaanite nations'] hearts towards battle against Israel, in order to destroy them [the Canaanite nations] -- that they not find favor [with the Hebrews] -- so that they would be extirpated [by the Hebrews], as HaShem had commanded Moses."
(Joshua 11:18-20)
This provides yet another lesson for the leadership of the present-day nation-state of Israel. For, unquestionably, God has strengthened the resolve of our enemies -- even against a militarily-formidable Israel -- and He has permitted them to perpetrate the most heinous atrocities against the Jewish people only so that when the Messiah -- as a component of the War of Gog and Magog -- finally comes to expel and to destroy them, (most of) Israel will have, at that future time, no moral qualms about complying with God's Decrees which, at this time, so shock the mores and sensibilities of present-day Jewish civilization.
After God had finished responding to Abraham's query seeking proof that his descendants would indeed inherit the Land, God once more repeated the Promise of the Land.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"So it happened: The Sun set, and it was
very dark; and behold -- there was a smoky furnace and a torch of fire which
passed between these pieces. On that day HaShem made
a Covenant with Abram, saying, 'To your descendants have I given this Land,
from the River of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates River: the
[habitations of the] Kennite, the Kenizzite,
and the Kadmonite; the Hittite, the Perizzite, and
the Rephaim; the Emorite, the Canaanite, the
Girgashite, and the Jebusite.'"
(Genesis 15:17-21).
This Covenant, known as the “Covenant between the Pieces”, represented the fourth time (see Genesis 12:7; Genesis 13:14-17; Genesis 15:7; and Genesis 15:18-21) that God had declared to Abraham His Promise of the Land. Perhaps God decided -- mida k'neged mida (measure for measure) -- that just as Abraham, through lack of complete faith, had required Him to promise the Land four times, He would delay His fulfillment of this Promise, combined with much suffering, until the fourth generation of exiled progeny, to wit:
"'And the fourth generation shall return here; for, the Iniquity of the Amorite shall not yet be full until then.'" (Genesis 15:16)
This is similar to the tragedy caused by the lack of complete faith of Abraham's descendant, Jehoash, monarch of the northern kingdom of Israel, in the deathbed prophecy uttered by the Prophet Elisha concerning Israel's war against the Empire of Aram. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"Elisha said to him, 'Get a bow and arrows', so he took for himself a bow and arrows. He then said to the king of Israel, 'Position your hand upon the bow', and he positioned his hand. Elisha placed his hand upon the hands of the king. He [Elisha] then said, 'Open the window towards the East', and he opened [it]. Elisha said, 'Shoot!', and he shot; and then he [Elisha] said, '[It is] an Arrow of Salvation unto HaShem, and an Arrow of Salvation against Aram; you shall strike Aram at Aphek to utter destruction!' Then he [Elisha] said, 'Take the arrows', and he took [them]. He said to the king of Israel, 'Strike [them] to the ground!', and he struck [them] three times and stopped. The man of God became angry with him and said, '[Were you] to strike five or six times, you would have smitten Aram to utter destruction!' But now you will strike at Aram [only] three times.' Then Elisha died and they buried him." (II Kings 13:15-20)
Scripture clearly teaches and warns the Jewish people that their leaders' lack of complete faith in God has dire consequences, not only for them in their Day, but, as well, for their descendants in future days.
CHAPTER 5: THE GIFT OF OFFSPRING
After having seen, with his own eyes, God's Punishment of Pharaoh on account of Sarah in order to restore her to him, and after having heard, with his own ears, God's oft-repeated Promise of Progeny, Abraham could not have believed that his promised offspring would come through a woman other than Sarah, meaning that Abraham must have always understood God's Promise of Progeny to be a promise made to him and Sarah jointly.
This being the case, it is puzzling that righteous Sarah, who had been saved from evil Pharaoh by the Hand of God, would now doubt God's Promise to her of Progeny. For she knew that God would not make such a Promise to her, only to later retract it. She understood -- as the Gentile prophet Balaam would later declare to Balak, king of Moab:
"‘God is not a man that He should be deceitful, nor a son of man that He should relent. Would He say and not do, or speak and not confirm?’" (Numbers 23:19),
and as the Prophet Samuel would thereafter remind Saul, first king of united Israel:
"‘Moreover, the Eternal One of Israel does not lie and does not relent, for He is not a human that He should relent’" (I Samuel 15:29)
-- that once God promised, He would fulfill.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"Now Sarai, Abram's wife, had born for him
no children; and she had an Egyptian maidservant whose name was Hagar. And
Sarai said to Abram, 'See, now, HaShem has restrained
me from bearing; consort, now, with my maidservant; perhaps I will be built up through her [Hagar].' And Abram heeded the
voice of Sarai. So, Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her
maidservant -- after 10 years of Abram's dwelling in the Land of Canaan -- and
gave her to Abram, her husband, to him as a [secondary] wife. He consorted with
Hagar and she conceived; and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress
was lowered in her esteem. So Sarai said to Abram, 'The contemptuous
disrespect for me is due to you! It was I who gave my maidservant into your
bosom, and now that she sees that she has conceived, I became lowered in her
esteem. Let HaShem judge between me and you.' Abram
said to Sarai, 'Behold! -- your maidservant is in your hand; do to her as you
see fit.' And Sarai dealt harshly with her [Hagar], so she [Hagar] fled from
her [Sarah]. An Angel of HaShem found her [Hagar] by
the spring of water in the desert, at the spring on the road to Shur. And he
said, 'Hagar, maidservant of Sarai, where have you come from and where are you
going?' And she said, "I am running away from Sarai, my mistress.' And an
Angel of HaShem said to her, 'Return to your
mistress, and submit yourself to her domination.' And an Angel of HaShem said to her, 'I will greatly increase your
offspring, and they will not be counted for abundance.' And an Angel of HaShem said to her, 'Behold, you will conceive and give
birth to a son; and you shall name him Ishmael; for, HaShem
has heard your prayer. And he shall be a barbarian of a man -- his hand against
everyone, and everyone's hand against him; and over all his brothers shall he
dwell.' And she called the Name of HaShem Who spoke
to her: "You are a God of Seeing"; for, she said, 'Have I even seen
[Him] here after my seeing [Him]?' Therefore, the well was called: "Be’er Lachai Ro’i" [meaning:
"Well of the Living One of Seeing"]. It was between Kadesh and Bered.
Hagar bore to Abram a son; and Abram called the name of his son that Hagar bore
to him Ishmael. And Abram was 86 years old when Hagar bore Ishmael to
Abram."
(Genesis 16:1-16).
"Now Sarai, Abram's wife, had born for him no children; and she had an Egyptian maidservant whose name was Hagar." Hagar was among the servants given to Abraham by Pharaoh in compensation for the latter’s seizure of Sarah. After Sarah was rescued from Pharaoh by God, Abraham gave Sarah authority over Hagar. Had Abraham’s fear of the famine in the Land of Israel not triumphed over Abraham’s faith in the Promises of God, then Abraham would not have descended from the Land of Israel to the Land of Egypt, and Hagar would never have become part of Abraham’s household. Alternatively stated, Hagar’s presence in the Land of Israel and her status as Sarah’s servant were a direct consequence of Abraham’s lack of complete faith in the God of Israel.
"And Sarai said to Abram, 'See, now, HaShem has restrained me from bearing; consort, now, with my maidservant; perhaps I will be built up through her [Hagar].'" Please note, by her choice of words, that Sarah -- unlike Abraham -- never doubted God's Power to cause her to conceive. On the contrary, she explicitly attributed her failure to conceive to God's Power, the necessary corollary of which is that God also possessed the Power to cause her to conceive. But, if Sarah had pragmatic faith in God's Power to cause her to conceive, and if she was also aware of God's Promise that He would, in fact, eventually cause her to conceive, then how can it be that she lacked the patience to wait for the certain fulfillment of that Promise? The answer is that Sarah lacked, not the patience for the fulfillment of that Promise, but rather knowledge of the existence thereof. For, Abraham, lacking pragmatic faith in the efficacy of that Promise, never informed Sarah that God had made to him a Promise of joint Progeny. This would explain why, rather than continuing to wait for her own pregnancy to occur, Sarah advised Abraham to take Hagar as a secondary wife. For, if Sarah had known that God had promised a child to her, then never would she have erroneously concluded that her present barrenness was due to God's Decision to retract that Promise.
"And Abram heeded the voice of Sarai. So, Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her maidservant -- after 10 years of Abram's dwelling in the Land of Canaan -- and gave her to Abram, her husband, to him as a [secondary] wife." However, as it is known to us that God intended to -- and, in fact, would -- eventually fulfill His Promise of joint Progeny, what then might have been God's Purpose in temporarily preventing Sarah from conceiving even after 10 years in the Land? It seems that God was using Sarah's decade-long barrenness as another Test of Abraham's faith. When Sarah urged Abraham to accept Hagar as his concubine so that he might have children, he should have immediately disclosed to her God's Promise of joint Progeny -- a Promise that God reaffirmed to him after the war against the four kings. Had Abraham done so, there is no doubt that Sarah would have, in turn, immediately withdrawn her offer of Hagar in order to thereby demonstrate her fidelity to God's Promise of joint Progeny. However, by his acceptance of Hagar, Abraham instead demonstrated that, after a decade of waiting for joint offspring, he was now willing to hedge his bets a third time (i.e., attempt to minimize the risk of dying without an heir by counterbalancing his theoretical reliance upon God’s Promise with his pragmatic reliance upon a sexual union between Sarah’s maidservant and himself). For this reason, "... Abram heeded the voice of Sarai".
"He consorted with Hagar and she conceived; and when she [Hagar] saw that she had conceived, her mistress [Sarah] was lowered in her esteem. So, Sarai said to Abram, 'The contemptuous disrespect for me is due to you! It was I who gave my maidservant into your bosom, and now that she sees that she has conceived, I became lowered in her esteem. Let HaShem judge between me and you.'" The pregnant Hagar's subsequent disrespect and disdain for her mistress caused Sarah to realize that Abraham's acceptance of Hagar as a secondary wife had been a great mistake. This, then, would serve to explain Sarah's seemingly hypocritical outburst of anger against Abraham. For, while Sarah was hardly justified, on a mundane level, in criticizing Abraham for yielding to her own request to accept Hagar as his concubine, she was justified, on a prophetic level, in criticizing him for so yielding -- since, by his conduct, he had demonstrated his impatience with, and consequent loss of faith in, God's Promise of joint Progeny. This is precisely the meaning of Sarah's demand of Abraham: "'Let HaShem judge between me and you.'" For, while Sarah had offered a concubine to Abraham based upon her complete faith in God’s Power, Abraham had accepted Sarah’s offer based upon his lack of complete faith in God’s Power.
Despite the fact that Sarah was unaware of God’s Promises to Abraham, Sarah nonetheless perceived that Hagar’s disrespect towards her portended a disrespect towards God’s Plan, whatever that Plan might entail. Sarah’s prophetic powers are revealed through the other name by which Sarah was known: "Iscah" (Hebrew: “Yiscah"). As Rashi comments:
"This was Sarah; she was also named Iscah [from a verb root meaning “to see” or “to look”] because she could see the Future by Holy Inspiration …"
(Rashi on Genesis 11:29)
However, Rashi's comment fails to deal with the anomaly that "Yiscah" means "he will see". This is very strange. It seems, rather, that Sarah's alternative name should have been "Tiscah", meaning "she will see". The answer to this puzzle lies in the Purpose for which God granted such prophetic powers to Sarah. These powers were given to Sarah, not to benefit her, but rather to enable her to help Abraham to "see" God's Plan and to thereby accept it as the embodiment of true Morality. As the Prophet Isaiah, speaking in God's Name, would later declare concerning God's Morality:
"For, My Thoughts are not your thoughts, and your ways are not My Ways -- the Word of HaShem. As high as are the Heavens above the Earth, so are My Ways high above your ways, and My Thoughts [high] above your thoughts."
(Isaiah 55:8-9)
Accordingly, it bears reiterating that Sarah's prophetic powers were granted to her so that "he [Abraham] will see" God's Plan and eventually accept it as the embodiment of true Morality -- even though (as will be discussed elsewhere in this Essay) certain of the elements thereof will seem antithetical to his natural inclination towards kindness and mercy.
In fact, in order to truly appreciate Sarah's greatness, we must understand that God chose her as Abraham's mate precisely in order to compensate for Abraham's inherent weaknesses. This was in fulfillment of God's original intention when He created Eve as mate to Adam. As is set forth in the Hebrew Bible:
"HaShem God said, 'It is not good that the man be alone; I will make for him a help-mate.'"
(Genesis 2:18)
This passage employs the Hebrew-language phrase "ezer k'negdo", traditionally translated as "help-mate", but which literally means "helper against him". The use of "ezer k'negdo" in Genesis 2:18 prompts Rashi to comment thereon:
"If he is worthy -- a helper. If he is not worthy -- against him, for strife."
(Rashi on Genesis 2:18)
Alternatively stated, God gave Man a help-mate with the intention that she must support him when he does Good, and that she must oppose him when he does Evil, as only in this way can such a mate truly help her husband. So, it was with Sarah and Abraham; she was an "ezer k'negdo" -- a "helper against him".
"Abram said to Sarai, 'Behold! -- your maidservant is in your hand; do to her as you see fit.' And Sarai dealt harshly with her [Hagar], so she fled from her [Sarah]." Sarah dealt harshly with Hagar, because Sarah prophetically discerned that Abraham's error in taking Hagar as a secondary wife would lead to strife on a national scale. What exactly did Sarah foresee? Did she foresee the birth of a son (i.e., Ishmael) to Hagar whose existence would be misused -- thousands of years later -- by Mohammed ibn Abdullah, the founder of Islam, to falsely claim that he and his people (i.e., the Arab people) were the descendants of that son and, consequently, the true covenantal progeny of Abraham? Did she foresee that this false connection to Hagar’s son would, inter alia, result in that people’s erroneous belief that the Land of Israel belonged to them by virtue of God’s Covenant with Abraham? While the extent and details of her gaze into the Future are unknown, it is likely that what she saw triggered her harsh response to Hagar. Although Abraham -- due to the traits of mercy and kindness that permeated his being -- was not able to discern any of those future adverse consequences resulting from his marital union with Hagar, he nevertheless acknowledged the justness of Sarah's anger. For, Sarah was entitled to be treated by Hagar with respect, especially as the only reason for Hagar’s pregnancy by Abraham was for Sarah to "…be built up through her [Hagar]", meaning that Hagar’s child by Abraham would belong not only to Abraham but also to Sarah. As the affront to Sarah was indisputable, "Abram said to Sarai, 'Behold! -- your maidservant is in your hand; do to her as you see fit.'"
"An Angel of HaShem found her [Hagar] by the spring of water in the desert, at the spring on the road to Shur. And he said, 'Hagar, maidservant of Sarai, where have you come from and where are you going?' And she said, "I am running away from Sarai, my mistress.' And an Angel of HaShem said to her, 'Return to your mistress, and submit yourself to her domination.'" God, Master of Justice, acting through His Angelic Messenger, thereafter ratified Sarah's harsh treatment of Hagar. For proof of this we must pay close attention to the Angel's words: The Angel of God, describing Hagar as "maidservant" and Sarah as "mistress", instructed Hagar to return and submit to Sarah's "domination". These words represent God's Messianic Judgment that, with respect to the ultimate inheritance of the Land of Israel, the falsely-claimed descendants of Hagar (i.e., the Arabs), will be rightfully subjected to the domination of the covenantal descendants of Sarah (i.e., the Jews).
Some 13 years later, God again tested Abraham's faith by repeating His -- as yet unfulfilled -- Promise of joint Progeny.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"When Abram was 99 years old, HaShem appeared to Abram and said to him, 'I am El Shadai;
walk before Me and be perfect. I will set My Covenant between Me and you, and I
will increase you most exceedingly.'"
(Genesis 17:1-2).
The Hebrew-language appellation "El Shadai", usually translated as "God Almighty" or "Almighty God", literally means "God Who is Sufficient". God prefaced His Repetition of the Promise of joint Progeny by describing Himself to Abraham as "El Shadai" in order to impress upon him that He had sufficient Power to fulfill all of His Promises -- sufficient Power, in fact, to continue to sustain all of Creation. God's request to Abraham that he "walk before Me and be perfect" reflected God's acknowledgment, not only that Abraham, unlike Noah (-- "These are the offspring of Noah -- Noah was a righteous man, perfect in his generations; Noah walked with God." (Genesis 6:9) --), did not yet have complete and enduring faith in God's Promises, but also God's Confidence that Abraham had the potential to achieve such perfection. That God will patiently wait for a human being to actualize his potential is profoundly demonstrated by God's Advice and Warning to a very imperfect Cain, as recounted in the Hebrew Bible:
"And HaShem said to Cain, 'Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance fallen? Surely, if you improve yourself, you will be forgiven. But if you do not improve yourself, Sin rests at the Door. Its desire is towards you; yet you can conquer it.'"
(Genesis 4:6-7)
If God had exhibited such great patience with, and enduring readiness to forgive, the flawed Cain, how much more was He willing to provide extended opportunities for the righteous Abraham to improve himself? It was in this context that -- after more than two decades of Sarah's barrenness -- God, describing Himself as "El Shadai", again tested Abraham's faith by repeating His unfulfilled Promise of joint Progeny. But this time, instead of placing before Abraham a temporally indefinite Promise of joint Progeny, God finally disclosed to him the imminence of its fulfillment.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"Abram threw himself upon his face, and God
spoke with him saying, 'As for Me, this is My Covenant with you: You shall be a
father of a multitude of nations; Your name shall no longer be called Abram,
but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude
of nations; I will make you most exceedingly fruitful and make nations of you;
and kings shall descend from you. I will ratify My Covenant between Me and you
and between your offspring after you, throughout their generations, as an Everlasting
Covenant, to be a God to you and to your offspring after you; and I will give
to you and to your offspring after you the Land of your sojourns -- the whole
of the Land of Canaan -- as an everlasting possession; and I shall be a God to
them.' ... And God said to Abraham, 'As for Sarai, your wife -- do not call her
name Sarai; for, Sarah is her name. I will bless her; indeed, I will give you a
son through her; I will bless her and she shall give rise to nations; kings of
peoples will rise from her.' And Abraham threw himself upon his face, and he
laughed; and he thought, 'Shall a child be born to a 100-year-old man? And
shall Sarah -- a 90-year-old woman -- give birth?' And Abraham said to God, 'O
that Ishmael might live before You!' And God said, 'Nevertheless, your wife,
Sarah, will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will
fulfill My Covenant with him as an Everlasting Covenant for his offspring after
him. But regarding Ishmael I have heard you; I have blessed him, will make him
fruitful, and will increase him most exceedingly; he will sire 12 princes, and
I will make him into a great nation. However, I will maintain My Covenant
through Isaac whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year.' And when He
had finished speaking with him, God ascended from upon Abraham."
(Genesis 17:3-22).
"And Abraham threw himself upon his face, and he laughed; and he thought, 'Shall a child be born to a 100-year-old man? And shall Sarah -- a 90-year-old woman -- give birth?'" On its face, this passage is ambiguous, indicating either Abraham's jubilation over the imminence of God's Promise of joint Progeny finally being fulfilled, or, alternatively, Abraham's skepticism that -- after all of this time -- God's Promise was even capable of being fulfilled. The respected Torah commentators have unanimously interpreted Abraham's laughter and thoughts as demonstrative of his jubilation and, consequently, his broad faith in God's Power and Promises. However, I respectfully dissent; and I submit that, on the contrary, Abraham's laughter and thoughts concerning God's announcement of the fulfillment of His Promise of joint Progeny were demonstrative of Abraham's skepticism, and, consequently, his lack of complete faith in God's Power to fulfill this Promise.
"And Abraham said to God, 'O that Ishmael might live before You!'" Abraham's lack of pragmatic faith was reinforced by his supplication on behalf of Ishmael. That Abraham would promote the ascendancy of one who represented, not the sweet fruit of God's Promise of joint Progeny (through Abraham's union with Sarah), but rather the bitter fruit of Abraham's loss of faith in that Promise (through Abraham's union with Hagar), led God to understand that Abraham's laughter was motivated neither by joy nor by the self-assured satisfaction of one who had patiently waited for -- and who, consequently, should not have been surprised by -- the long-awaited denouement of His Promise. Moreover, by promoting Ishmael’s candidacy to be his covenantal heir, Abraham thereby hedged his bets a fourth time (i.e., attempted to minimize the risk of not siring a covenantal heir by counterbalancing his theoretical reliance upon God’s Promises with his pragmatic reliance upon the logical argument that Ishmael was the only viable candidate to inherit the Covenant). Yet, this instance of hedging was unique. For, in all other instances of his hedging (both past and future), Abraham would counterbalance his theoretical reliance upon God’s Promises with his pragmatic reliance upon an immediate remedial plan. However, in this instance, there was no counterbalancing immediate remedial plan available to Abraham. Consequently, in this instance, Abraham sought to minimize the risk by striving to convince God that He ought to substitute a Fact (i.e., a present son) for a Promise (i.e., a future son).
"And God said, 'Nevertheless, your wife, Sarah, will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will fulfill My Covenant with him as an Everlasting Covenant for his offspring after him. ... However, I will maintain My Covenant through Isaac whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year.'" Clear proof that God understood Abraham's laughter and thoughts as demonstrative of his skepticism thus comes by way of the very first Word of God's Response to Abraham. This Hebrew-language word is "Aval", which may be translated as "Nevertheless", "However", "Nonetheless" or "But". Yet, regardless of its English-language translation in a particular context, "Aval" always represents the concept of opposition to the words against which it has been directed. With all due respect to these Torah commentators, I believe that God's Response to Abraham constituted, not merely a more detailed recitation of the imminent fulfillment of His Promise of joint Progeny, but rather a rebuke. In fact, this is the very reason why, as an integral part of His Response to Abraham, God -- rather than leaving the name of the promised child to the discretion of Abraham and Sarah -- Himself chose the name for the child: "Isaac" (יצחק, transliterated as "Yitzchak"), which means "he will laugh". However, this name seems to be a misnomer because, in fact, Abraham had already laughed. Accordingly, either "Tzachak" or "Vayitzchak", which respectively mean "he laughed" and (due to the grammatical rules of biblical Hebrew) "and he laughed", would arguably have been the appropriate name for the promised child. So, what Message is the God of Israel conveying to Abraham (and, through him, to us, his covenantal descendants) by naming the prospective child "Yitzchak" ("he will laugh") instead of "Tzachak" ("he laughed") or "Vayitzchak" ("and he laughed")? In order to decipher God's Message we must first return to the language used by Scripture to describe Abraham's reaction to the news that he would finally have a child through his beloved wife Sarah. The Hebrew Bible says of Abraham: ויצחק, transliterated as "vayitzchak" (spelled with the letters "vav", "yud", "tzadi", "chet" and "kuf"), which translates as "and he laughed". If we remove from ויצחק "vayitzchak" the grammatical conjunction ו "va" (represented by the letter "vav") which means "and", then ויצחק"vayitzchak" becomes יצחק "yitzchak" (spelled with the remaining letters "yud", "tzadi", "chet" and "kuf"). But this transformation is not limited to the simple grammatical effect of removing the word "and" from the phrase "and he laughed"; for it also alters the tense of the verb from past tense to future tense, with the full grammatical effect being that the phrase "and he laughed" ("vayitzchak") becomes "he will laugh" ("yitzchak"). Alternatively stated, God took Abraham's reaction -- "vayitzchak" -- and, by removing the letter "vav" therefrom, He thereby transformed its meaning from being a reference to the Past (“and he laughed”) into being a reference to the Future (“he will laugh”). Why did He do this? The reason is as follows: Since, in the Past, Abraham had laughed the laughter of skepticism on account of God's Message that he would soon receive a son through Sarah, God now determined -- mida k'neged mida (measure for measure) -- that, in the Future, Abraham would instead laugh the laughter of jubilation on account of this same Message, and, furthermore, that the very product of this Message would serve, through his name Isaac (Yitzchak), as a perpetual remembrance for his father Abraham regarding how utterly misplaced was the latter's original skepticism. This provides the reason why God did not name the prospective child "Tzachak" ("he laughed") or "Vayitzchak" ("and he laughed"); for, either name would have represented Abraham's past skepticism rather than his future jubilation. Consequently, neither name would have been an appropriate name for the heir to God's Everlasting Covenant.
Moreover, as the unique grammatical rules of biblical Hebrew permit the same verb form to exist simultaneously in the Past and in the Future, thereby blurring the presumed distinction between the two, those rules yield a profound insight into the Metaphysics of God and His Relationship to the passage of Time. Being Incorporeal, God purposively lacks mass (like a Photon of Electromagnetic Energy traveling through the vacuum of Outer Space), and He thereby exists outside the passage of Time. Consequently, as suggested by the grammatical rules of biblical Hebrew, God -- unlike human beings -- experiences an Everlasting Present, which encompasses both the Past and the Future.
After Abraham had been informed of Isaac’s impending conception and birth, his lack of complete faith in God's Promise of joint Progeny was subsequently confirmed when three Angels visited him in order to repeat God's announcement of the good news.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"They said to him, 'Where is Sarah, your
wife?' -- And he said, 'Here in the tent.' And he said, 'I will surely return
to you at this time next year, and behold Sarah, your wife, will have a son.'
-- Now Sarah was listening at the entrance of the tent that was behind him. Now
Abraham and Sarah were old, well on in years; the manner of women had ceased to
be with Sarah. And Sarah laughed at herself, saying, 'After I have withered
shall I again have delicate skin? And my husband is old!' Then HaShem said to
Abraham, 'Why is it that Sarah laughed, saying, "Shall I truly bear a
child, although I have aged?" Is anything beyond HaShem?!
At the appointed time I will return to you at this time next year, and Sarah
will have a son.' Sarah denied it, saying, 'I did not laugh', for she was
frightened. But He said, 'No, you laughed indeed.'"
(Genesis 18:9-15).
Why do I say that these verses confirm Abraham's lack of pragmatic faith? It seems, rather, that they demonstrate Sarah's lack of pragmatic faith. This is, indeed, the view of the respected Torah commentators who have opined that Sarah's laughter was demonstrative of her skepticism, for which she was harshly rebuked by God. However, again, I must respectfully dissent. And, in order to explain the basis for my dissent, I must pose a question: Why did God find it necessary to declare to Abraham twice the Message that Sarah would give birth to Isaac in a year's time? For, it is clear that conveying the Message to Abraham once would have been adequate to accomplish the task. However, God was interested, not only in conveying information, but -- more importantly -- in discerning Abraham's reaction to it. The doubling mechanism was part of God's testing of Abraham, as God desired to see whether Abraham, despite any initial skepticism, really believed -- and would, consequently, openly exhibit pragmatic faith in -- God's Promise of joint Progeny. And God determined that the best proof of Abraham's complete faith in His Promise would be found in Abraham's immediate communication to his beloved Sarah of the wonderful news that -- at long last and in fulfillment of His Promise -- she would finally receive her child!
The Original Message of Isaac’s prospective birth transpired as follows:
"And God said to Abraham, 'As for Sarai, your wife -- do not call her name Sarai, for Sarah is her name. I will bless her; indeed, I will give you a son through her; I will bless her and she shall give rise to nations; kings of peoples will rise from her.' ... And God said, 'Nevertheless, your wife, Sarah, will bear you a son and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will fulfill My Covenant with him as an Everlasting Covenant for his offspring after him ... But I will maintain My Covenant through Isaac whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year.'"
(Genesis 17:15-16, 19 & 21)
The first time that God informed Abraham of Isaac's prospective conception and birth, the Message was meant for Abraham's ears in order to observe his reaction, and to thereby ascertain whether he was joyful or skeptical.
The Reiterated Message of Isaac’s prospective birth transpired as follows:
"They said to him, 'Where is Sarah, your wife?' -- And he said, 'Here in the tent.' And he said, 'I will surely return to you at this time next year, and behold Sarah, your wife, will have a son.' -- Now Sarah was listening at the entrance of the tent that was behind him."
(Genesis 18:9-10)
The second time that God (through His Angels) informed Abraham of Isaac's prospective conception and birth, the Message was meant for Sarah's ears in order to observe her reaction, and to thereby ascertain whether or not Abraham, despite any initial skepticism, had nonetheless previously informed her of God's Message.
"And Sarah laughed at herself, saying, 'After I have withered shall I again have delicate skin? And my husband is old!'" Why did only Sarah -- and not also Abraham -- laugh at this news? For, if Abraham had really laughed the laughter of joy upon initially being informed of Isaac's prospective conception and birth, why wouldn't he again laugh the laughter of joy upon hearing this wonderful news being reiterated -- this time in the auditory presence of his beloved Sarah? There are two answers. The first answer is that Abraham was especially careful not to laugh a second time at this news, lest God be reminded of Abraham's earlier affront, namely, that he had laughed the laughter of skepticism. The second answer is that Abraham did not laugh a second time at this news because it was, by then, no longer news to him. Alternatively stated, it was, by then, old news to him. Yet, it was not old news to Sarah, as she was obviously hearing it for the very first time; and, thus, she laughed! Consequently, it is clear that Sarah's spontaneous reaction to God's repetition of His Message to Abraham in her auditory presence resulted from Abraham's failure to inform her of its initial conveyance to him. Furthermore, Sarah did not laugh at God, but only "at herself". Moreover, it is noteworthy that, unlike Abraham, Sarah did not attempt to deflect God’s Promise by implying that Ishmael’s existence rendered its fulfillment unnecessary.
"Then HaShem said to Abraham, 'Why is it that Sarah laughed, saying, "Shall I truly bear a child, although I have aged?" Is anything beyond HaShem?! At the appointed time I will return to you at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son.'" It is crucial to note that, with respect to Sarah's laughter, God rebuked, not Sarah, but rather Abraham -- for, due to his doubt that God's Message was real, he had neglected to inform his 90-year-old wife that she would shortly conceive, and thereafter give birth. Consequently, when Sarah heard -- for the very first time -- that God's Promise of joint Progeny was about to be fulfilled, she laughed at herself in surprise and delight. That Sarah laughed the laughter of joy -- rather than the laughter of skepticism -- upon hearing God's Message is established by the fact that God did not rebuke Sarah on account of her laughter, as He had determined that her pristine laughter merited no such rebuke. Rather, God rebuked only Abraham on account of Sarah's laughter, because her laughter established that Abraham had neglected to inform her of God's Message upon its initial conveyance to him, thereby betraying his lack of pragmatic faith in its fulfillment.
"Sarah denied it, saying, 'I did not laugh', for she was frightened. But He said, 'No, you laughed indeed.'" Sarah's denial was prompted only by fear. After hearing God's rebuke of Abraham on account of her own laughter, Sarah reasonably -- but incorrectly -- believed that, through her laughter, she had offended God. Consequently, in a desperate effort to erase a Chillul HaShem (desecration of God's Name) which she assumed that she had wrought, she reflexively denied that which could not be denied. As a consequence thereof, Sarah was indeed rebuked by God, but not on account of her laughter -- rather, only on account of her false denial thereof. And Scripture is quite clear that her false denial was prompted only by her fear of offending God -- which fear was a natural consequence of her Yirat Elohim (fear of God) -- and not by any desire (or belief that she was able) to deceive God.
This narrative of the doubled Message strengthens the hypothesis that Abraham had, decades earlier, also neglected to inform Sarah of God's oft-repeated Promise of joint Progeny -- a failure of communication which had led barren Sarah to erroneously believe that God did not ever intend for her to bear children and which, consequently, had induced Sarah to offer to Abraham her handmaiden, Hagar, as a secondary wife for that very purpose. For, it seems certain that if Abraham, at the present time, lacked sufficient faith in God's Promise of joint Progeny to so inform Sarah when its fulfillment was declared to be imminent, then Abraham must have, in earlier times, lacked sufficient faith in that very Promise to so inform Sarah when its fulfillment was yet temporally indefinite.
Moreover, Sarah’s purity and innocence in this matter was finally confirmed by the Hebrew Bible’s subsequent narrative concerning the birth of Isaac.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"And HaShem
remembered Sarah as He had said; and HaShem did for
Sarah as He had spoken. Sarah conceived
and bore for Abraham a son in his old age, at the appointed time of which God
had spoken to him. Abraham called the
name of his son that was born to him -- that Sarah bore for him -- Isaac. And Abraham circumcised his son Isaac at the
age of eight days as God had commanded him.
And Abraham was 100 years old when his son Isaac was born to him. And Sarah said, 'God has made laughter for
me; everyone who hears will laugh for me.'
And she said, 'Who would have said to Abraham, "Sarah would nurse
children?" -- for, I have borne a son in his old age.'"
(Genesis 21:1-7)
"And HaShem remembered Sarah as He had
said; and HaShem did for Sarah as He had spoken. …
And Sarah said, 'God has made laughter for me; everyone who hears will laugh
for me.'" God
“remembered” and “did for” Sarah rather than for Abraham! For, upon learning of the imminent miracle of
Isaac’s conception and birth, Sarah had laughed the laughter of joy, while
Abraham had laughed the laughter of skepticism.
Moreover, after Isaac’s birth, Sarah was given the high honor of
declaring for Posterity the connection between her son’s Divinely-decreed
name (i.e., the name “Yitzchak”, which is rendered into the English
language as the name “Isaac”; see Genesis 17:19) and the Divinely-inspired
reaction of anyone who hears about the miracle, namely, that “‘… everyone
who hears will laugh …’”, which is the meaning of “yitzchak”. In fact, the very language used by Sarah to
describe the birth of Isaac, namely, “‘God has made laughter for me; everyone
who hears will laugh for me’”, reinforces the conclusion that Sarah had previously
laughed the laughter of joy rather than the laughter of skepticism,
as such birth-describing language would have caused a great Chillul
HaShem had it been intended to memorialize the latter
rather than the former.
CHAPTER 6: THE COVENANT OF CIRCUMCISION
At the earlier time that God had changed Abraham's name from Abram to Abraham, he had commanded Abraham (and, through him, the Jewish people) to observe the Covenant of Circumcision.
The Hebrew Bible relates:
"God said to Abraham, 'And as for you, you shall keep My Covenant -- you and
your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is My Covenant that
you shall keep between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male
among you shall be circumcised. You shall circumcise the flesh of your
foreskin, and that shall be the sign of the Covenant between Me and you. At the
age of eight days every male among you shall be circumcised, throughout your
generations -- he that is born in the household or purchased with money from
any stranger who is not of your offspring. He that is born in your household or
purchased with your money shall surely be circumcised. Thus, My Covenant shall
be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. An uncircumcised male, the flesh
of whose foreskin shall not be circumcised -- that soul shall be cut off from
its people; he has invalidated My Covenant.'"
(Genesis 17:9-14).
"… 'Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and that shall be the sign of the Covenant between Me and you.'" Why does God demand that the sign of His Covenant be embedded in the male sexual organ? The reason is that the human being is a combination of the Spiritual and the Physical. As is set forth in the Hebrew Bible:
"And God said, 'Let us make humankind in Our Image, after Our Likeness. They shall rule over the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and over the cattle, the whole Earth, and every creeping thing that creeps upon the Earth.' So God created humankind in His Image, in the Image of God He created him; male and female He created them."
(Genesis 1:26-27)
Unlike the human-like creatures (such as Neanderthal beings) that preceded God’s creation of Humankind (i.e., Homo Sapiens) in His Image in the form of Adam and Eve, we human beings were infused by God with the unique “Nishmat Chaim” (“Soul of Life”) which endowed us with the ability to exercise true Free Will and thereby purposefully choose between promoting Good and perpetrating Evil. As the Hebrew Bible states with respect to the creation of Adam, the very first human being:
"And HaShem God formed the man of dust from the ground, and He blew into his nostrils the Soul of Life; and the man became a living being."
(Genesis 2:7)
Although Humankind was created in the Spiritual Image of God, Humankind was also given physical dominion over the Earth. With such raw physical power at Humankind's disposal came the natural temptations towards egotism, corruption and wanton violence. Our physical nature and its attendant temptations are symbolized by the male sexual organ. By placing the sign of His Covenant precisely there, God is providing us with a tangible reminder that we are not only physical beings, but also spiritual beings -- and that we are, consequently, capable of subjugating and even ennobling our innate physical temptations. The removal of the foreskin symbolizes the diminishment of our physical self (i.e., our status as an autonomous being) in favor of our spiritual self (our status as a servant of God). However, the fact that circumcision is a cosmetic change only, leaving the sexual organ structurally and functionally unchanged, teaches us that, despite the elevation of our spiritual self over our physical self, our spiritual essence must, nevertheless, continue to co-exist with, and even thrive in, a World created and defined according to physical parameters. In this way, despite living in the physical World, we are constantly reminded that we are more than a human animal. We will thereby be drawn towards the Yetzer HaTov (Inclination to do Good) and away from the Yetzer HaRah (Inclination to do Evil); and by understanding the underlying purpose of the Commandment of Circumcision, we will be better able to observe, as well, the remainder of God's Commandments.
"'At the age of eight days every male among you shall be circumcised, throughout your generations ...'" The number "seven" represents the plane of physical existence. This is because the last Day that God counted as part of His Scheme of Creation was the Seventh Day. As is set forth in the Hebrew Bible:
"Thus, the Heavens and the Earth were finished, and all their Vast Array. By the Seventh Day God completed His Work that He had done, and He abstained on the Seventh Day from all His Work that He had done. God blessed the Seventh Day and sanctified it because on it He abstained from all His Work which God created to make."
(Genesis 2:1-3)
Thus, we count the days of our physical existence in cycles of seven. However, the number "eight" represents the plane of spiritual existence, because it is outside the cycle of seven. This is the reason why the seven-day Torah holiday of Sukkot (known in the English language as: Feast of Tabernacles) is followed on the eighth day by the Torah holiday of Shemini Atzeret (known in the English language as: Eighth Day Assembly). In order to further transcend the cycle of seven, God also utilizes the number "fifty". That is the reason why the date of the Torah holiday of Shavuot (known in the English language as: Pentecost) is calculated by counting from (but excluding) the first day of the Torah holiday of Pesach (known in the English language as: Passover) a week of weeks -- seven cycles of seven days (49 days) -- and by then adding thereto one more day (the 50th day), thereby rendering the Torah holiday of Shavuot outside the cycle of seven. That is also the reason why the date of the Yoval (meaning: Jubilee) year was calculated by counting a week of Shmitot (meaning: Sabbatical) years, each such Sabbatical year being the seventh year in the cycle of years -- seven cycles of seven years (49 years) -- and by then adding thereto one more year (the 50th year), thereby rendering the Yoval year outside the cycle of seven. By designating that circumcision take place on the eighth day after birth, God is reminding us of the spiritual nature of the Covenant of which circumcision is but the physical sign.
Then, after God informed Abraham that He had also changed Sarah's name -- from Sarai to Sarah -- and that her son, Isaac, rather than Hagar's son, Ishmael, would inherit God's Everlasting Covenant, Abraham immediately acted to fulfill this Commandment.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"Then Abraham took his son, Ishmael, and
all those servants born in his household and all those he had purchased for
money -- all the male members of Abraham's household -- and he circumcised the
flesh of their foreskin on that very day, as was spoken to him by God. Abraham
was 99 years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. On that
very day Abraham and his son, Ishmael, were circumcised. And all the men of his
household -- born in his household and purchased with money from a stranger --
were circumcised with him."
(Genesis 17:23-27).
CHAPTER 7: THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM AND GOMORRAH
Subsequent to God’s announcement of the Covenant of Circumcision and its initial fulfillment by Abraham but prior to the Angels’ repetition of God’s Announcement of the prospective conception and birth of Isaac, the Hebrew Bible relates:
"HaShem appeared
to him among the oak trees of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance of the
tent in the heat of the day. He lifted his eyes and saw: And behold! -- three
men were standing over him; and he perceived; so he ran towards them from the
entrance of the tent, and he bowed towards the ground. And he said, 'My lord,
if I find favor in your eyes, please do not pass away from your servant. Let
some water be brought, and wash your feet, and recline beneath the tree. I will
fetch a morsel of bread that you may sustain yourselves -- afterwards you may
pass through -- inasmuch as you have [already] passed your servant's way'; and
they said, 'Do so -- just as you have said.' So Abraham hastened to the tent of
Sarah and said, 'Hurry! -- [prepare] three seahs of
meal [as] fine flour! -- knead and make cakes!' Then Abraham ran to the cattle,
took a calf -- tender and good -- and gave it to the youth who hurried to
prepare it. He took cream and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and he
placed these before them; he stood over them beneath the tree, and they
ate."
(Genesis 18:1-8).
Why does the Hebrew Bible describe, in such detail, the great lengths to which Abraham went in order to minister to the three strangers? It is to emphasize that Abraham's mercy and kindness -- whether to family or to strangers -- knew no bounds.
These three strangers -- actually Angels (see Genesis 19:1) -- had come Abraham's way on a multiple mission: firstly, to announce the prospective conception and birth of Isaac in the auditory presence of the long-barren Sarah (see Genesis 18:9-15); and then afterwards, to facilitate the annihilation of thousands of human beings in Abraham's midst. There was a pedagogical connection between these two tasks. The first task -- that of creating human life -- exuded Mercy and Kindness, while the second task -- that of destroying human life -- reeked of its polar opposite, namely, Harshness and Cruelty. God knew that, in Abraham's eyes, the first deed would seem Good, while the second deed would seem Evil. After all, how else could Abraham -- master of mercy and kindness -- possibly view these two sequential actions? And that is precisely the reason why God bound together these two seemingly antithetical deeds, and then set both of them before Abraham. For, in order to truly understand the Ways of God, Abraham would first have to learn that the act of exhibiting mercy and kindness to those who deserve it (-- namely, rewarding the Righteous --) and the act of exhibiting harshness and cruelty to those who deserve it (-- namely, punishing the Wicked --) stand, not in contradiction to one another, but rather as coequal aspects of true Morality. As David, second king of united Israel, would later declare:
"You that love the Lord, hate Evil." (Psalms 97:10)
And as Solomon, third king of united Israel, would later declare:
"Fear of the Lord is hatred of Evil." (Proverbs 8:13)
God wanted to teach the righteous Abraham a profound lesson, namely, that he should rejoice -- rather than weep -- at the punishment of the Wicked; for, as King David would later declare:
"The righteous man shall rejoice when he sees Vengeance. He shall wash his feet in the blood of the Wicked. And Mankind shall say, 'Truly there is a reward for the Righteous. Truly there is a God Who judges on Earth.'" (Psalms 58:11-12)
So, it came to be, that on account of their great evildoing, God determined that, in order to restore Kiddush HaShem (sanctification of God's Name), it was necessary to punish the cities of the Jordan River plain -- epitomized by Sodom and Gomorrah -- with the destruction of their entire populations -- a harsh Collective Punishment. Since God knew that Abraham's essence consisted of mercy and kindness, He knew that Abraham would have difficulty comprehending the justice of this Punishment and might thereby incongruously attribute to God, Master of Justice, an "unjust" act. Such an improper attribution to God by righteous Abraham would have resulted in a Chillul HaShem (desecration of God's Name) -- the very antithesis of that which God sought to achieve by the destruction of these Cities. In order to avoid this result, God decided to confide in His Servant Abraham so that he and his progeny might comprehend that Humankind's "morality" is not God's Morality. For, as the Prophet Isaiah, speaking in God's Name, would later declare concerning God's Morality:
"'For, My Thoughts are not your thoughts, and your ways are not My Ways -- the Word of HaShem. As high as the Heavens are above the Earth, so are My Ways high above your ways, and My Thoughts [high] above your thoughts.'"
(Isaiah 55:8-9)
After the Angels had finished speaking with Abraham and Sarah about the prospective conception and birth of Isaac, they turned their attention to their next task.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"So, the men arose from there, and they
gazed down upon the face of Sodom, while Abraham walked with them to escort
them. And HaShem said, 'Shall I conceal from Abraham
what I do, now that Abraham is surely to become a great and mighty nation, and
all the nations of the Earth shall bless themselves by him? For I have loved
him, because he commands his children and his household after him that they
keep the Way of HaShem, -- [by] doing [acts
of] Righteousness and Justice -- in order that HaShem
might then bring upon Abraham that which He had spoken of him.' So HaShem said [to Abraham], 'Because the outcry of Sodom and
Gomorrah has become great, and because their Sin has been very grave, I will
descend and see: If they act in accordance with its outcry -- then Destruction!
And if not, I will know.'"
(Genesis 18:16-21).
"So HaShem said [to Abraham], 'Because the outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah has become great, and because their Sin has been very grave, I will descend and see: If they act in accordance with its outcry -- then Destruction! …'" It is noteworthy that God’s Declaration of Crime and Punishment does not include a prior Warning to these Cities and an opportunity for them to accomplish satisfactory Repentance as prerequisites for His Imposition of Punishment. This contrasts with the manner in which God will later deal with the Evilness of the City of Nineveh. In that situation, God will provide Nineveh with an opportunity to avoid its Destruction by repenting of its Evil. God will do this by sending to Nineveh, as His Emissary, Abraham’s descendant, the Prophet Jonah, to give a prior Warning to the City. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"And the Word of HaShem came to Jonah, son of Amittai, saying, 'Arise -- go to Nineveh, the huge city, and call out against it, for their Wickedness has ascended before Me. '"
(Jonah 1:1-2).
In fact, God will afford Nineveh a generous 40-day grace period to accomplish satisfactory Repentance before His Imposition of Punishment (see Jonah 3:4). Conversely, it appears that Sodom and Gomorrah were to be subjected to a harsh summary Punishment (i.e., without being afforded an opportunity to avoid Destruction by accomplishing satisfactory Repentance). Why would God treat two groupings of Evildoers, each deserving of utter Destruction, so differently? The answer is revealed by analyzing the differing attitudes of the inhabitants of Nineveh and the inhabitants of the cities of the Jordan River plain towards the God of Israel.
Of the inhabitants of Nineveh, the Hebrew Bible states:
"The people of Nineveh believed in the [one and only] God; so [due to their belief in Him] they proclaimed a fast and donned sackcloth, from their great [personages] to their small [personages]."
(Jonah 3:5)
The Hebrew Bible makes no such redemptive observation about the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. In fact, the Hebrew Bible implies the opposite to be true, by revealing that the inhabitants of Sodom rejected the very concept of moral oversight (see Genesis 19:9). God does not engage in futile conduct. Due to their refusal to acknowledge His Dominion over them, God determined that affording the cities of the Jordan River plain a Warning and an opportunity for Repentance would have been futile. Consequently, none was warranted or provided.
Upon hearing God’s Declaration, Abraham -- the epitome of mercy and kindness -- recoiled at the concept of Collective Punishment and felt pity for the doomed inhabitants of the cities of the Jordan River plain.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"The men had turned from there and went to
Sodom, while Abraham was still standing before HaShem.
Abraham came forward and said, 'Will You also stamp out the Righteous along
with the Wicked? What if there should be 50 righteous people in the midst of
the City? Would You still stamp it out rather than spare the place for the sake
of the 50 righteous people within it? It would be Sacrilege to You to do such a
thing, to bring death upon the Righteous along with the Wicked; so, the
Righteous will be like the Wicked. It would be Sacrilege to You! Shall the
Judge of all the Earth not do Justice?' And HaShem
said, 'If I find in Sodom 50 righteous people in the midst of the City, then I
would spare the entire place on their account.' Abraham responded and said,
'Behold, now, I desired to speak to my Lord although I am but dust and ash:
What if the 50 righteous people should lack 5? Would You destroy the entire
city because of the 5?' And He said, 'I will not destroy if I find there 45.'
He further continued to speak to Him, and he said, 'What if 40 would be found
there?' And He said, 'I will not act on account of the 40.' And he said, 'Let
not my Lord be annoyed and I will speak: What if 30 would be found there?' And
He said, 'I will not act if I find there 30.' So he said, 'Behold, now, I
desired to speak to my Lord: What if 20 would be found there?' And He said, 'I
will not destroy on account of the 20.' So he said, 'Let not my Lord be annoyed
and I will speak but this once: What if 10 would be found there?' And He said,
'I will not destroy on account of the 10.' HaShem
departed when He had finished speaking to Abraham; and Abraham returned to his
place."
(Genesis 18:22-33).
"'It would be Sacrilege to You to do such a thing, to bring death upon the Righteous along with the Wicked; so the Righteous will be like the Wicked. It would be Sacrilege to You! Shall the Judge of all the Earth not do Justice?'" By uttering this blunt criticism of God’s Judgment upon the Cities of the Jordan River plain, Abraham audaciously substituted his human judgment for God’s Divine Judgment, thereby committing the gravest Sin attributable to a leader of the Jewish people. This is the very Sin which, during the generation of the Exodus from Egypt, would be committed by Abraham’s illustrious descendant and leader of the Jewish people -- Moses -- and tragically result in his exclusion from the Land of Israel (see Numbers 20:1-13).
In order to convince God that his human judgment was superior to God’s Divine Judgment, Abraham argued that Collective Punishment was intrinsically immoral because it had the effect of treating the Righteous as if they were Evildoers, thereby causing the Gentile nations to perceive that God, Master of Justice, was indifferent to the plight of the Righteous. Indeed, Abraham’s moral argument that the Righteous should not be punished for the Sins of the Wicked would seem not to be susceptible to refutation. Yet, merciful Abraham was unable to limit himself to a moral request that was consistent with his moral argument that it would be unjust to punish the Righteous, namely, a moral request that God spare only the Righteous (presumably by extracting them from the doomed Cities prior to His Destruction thereof) and thereby punish only the Wicked. Instead, Abraham utilized his moral argument that it would be unjust to punish the Righteous as a springboard to make a very different -- and immoral -- request, namely, a request that God spare the Wicked as well as the Righteous. Abraham thereby committed the additional Sin of False Moral Equivalency (namely, the Sin of treating the Wicked as if they merited the same Beneficence as the Righteous). Moreover, he also acted hypocritically towards God; for, he accused God of planning to do the very thing that he himself now sought to accomplish, namely, securing the same Fate for the Wicked and the Righteous. Specifically, at the very same time that Abraham criticized God for planning to treat the Righteous as if they were Wicked, he demanded that God treat the Wicked as if they were Righteous. And, remarkably, God appeared to concede the validity of Abraham's Moral Equivalency argument, as He immediately agreed to rescind His Decree of Collective Punishment if even 50 righteous citizens could be found interspersed among the wicked population of these Cities. However, a closer look is in order. Although God eventually agreed that even for the sake of a mere 10 righteous citizens He would spare the entire population of these evil Cities, this Concession did not have any effect whatsoever upon God's original Intention -- the Cities were still obliterated. How can this be? Could not even 10 righteous residents be found within all of Sodom and Gomorrah (and the other doomed cities of the Jordan River plain)? The answer is in the negative -- and for the same reason that, in later times, the "righteous" among the pre-Exodus era Shechemites and the "righteous" among the Exodus era Egyptians were also not spared from suffering their respective Collective Punishments.
With respect to the pre-Exodus era City of Shechem (site of modern-day Nablus), the entire adult male population of the city was destroyed by Simeon and Levi, the sons of Jacob, on account of the abduction, rape, and detention of Dina, the daughter of Jacob, by Shechem, the prince of the City, with the acquiescence of his father, King Chamor. (See Genesis 34:1-31). Why, in this situation, was collective, rather than individual, punishment warranted? Why did the righteous of the City have to suffer the same fate as the directly culpable parties, namely, Prince Shechem and King Chamor? Rambam (being the acronym for Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, also known as Maimonides, b. 1135 - d. 1204), in viewing the City as a collection of individual citizens with individual responsibilities, opines that:
"All the residents of [the City of] Shechem incurred a death sentence because [Prince] Shechem stole, and they saw and knew, yet did not put him on trial"
(Hilchot Melachim 9:14),
while Rabbi Bonastruc ça Porta (famously known to the Jewish World as Ramban, being the acronym for Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman, also known as Nachmanides, b. 1194 - d. 1270), in viewing the City as a single social unit with a collective responsibility, opines that:
"They [brothers Simeon and Levi] killed the king and all the people of his city because the latter were his servants and under his charge."
(Ramban on Genesis 34:13)
Both views represent the Torah concept of Collective Punishment -- that is, the idea that ordinary people justly suffer the Divine Consequences of their leadership's conduct.
Similarly, with respect to Exodus era Egypt, God imposed upon it ten awful plagues, representing a harsh Collective Punishment, including the final plague which destroyed all of its firstborn "…from the firstborn of Pharaoh sitting on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the dungeon…" (Exodus 12:29). Why were the imprisoned of Egypt, of all people, morally culpable for the crimes of their jailer, Pharaoh, against the Jewish people? This was a group with negligible influence upon Egyptian society, in general, and upon Pharaoh, in particular; and it was certainly not a group which was itself responsible for the enslavement of the Hebrews. However, like the Shechemites before them, all Egyptians (both law abiders and prisoners) were part and parcel of a society whose leader committed a great Evil against the people of Israel and, consequently, against the God of Israel. Instead of protesting or leaving (while they were still able to do so), these citizens elected to stay and enjoy the fruits of that society while supplying its government with the taxes, military conscripts, civilian workforce, agricultural produce, and moral support which facilitated the perpetuation of the leadership’s evil conduct towards the Jewish people. For this, and this alone, God decreed that all such individuals were subject to Collective Punishment, despite their wildly varying degrees of complicity (whether direct or indirect) in the sins of their government.
As in the later cases of the Shechemites and the Egyptians, if there were some truly righteous people living in Sodom and Gomorrah, they would have rebelled against, or at least fled from, their evil societies. By continuing to reside within -- and participate in the daily life of -- their societies, these "righteous" people passively ratified the Evil perpetrated by their governments, and could not thereafter be considered by God to be righteous. That is why God's great concession to Abraham was no concession at all. Although Abraham was, indeed, questioning the morality of Collective Punishment, God, the Great Educator, was teaching to him and to us -- his covenantal descendants -- a profound lesson, namely, that Collective Punishment, when warranted, is, in fact, the embodiment of Divine Justice. To argue otherwise is to succumb to the false morality of the nations and to thereby rebel, in our arrogance, against God's Morality.
That, in order to avoid death and destruction, righteous persons are required to separate themselves from the evil societies in which they dwell is proven by reference to the plight of the Kenites during King Saul’s war of annihilation against the Amalekites. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"Saul came to the City of Amalek, and he fought [against them] in the valley. Saul said to the Kenite, 'Go, withdraw, descend from among the Amalekite, lest I destroy you with them; for, you acted kindly to all of the Children of Israel when they went up from Egypt' -- so, the Kenite withdrew from among Amalek."
(I Samuel 15:5-6)
God's exemption of unrighteous Lot, a resident of Sodom, from Collective Punishment is the exception that proves the rule. Lot was saved by God’s Angel only
(1) in the merit of Abraham, because Lot was his nephew, brother-in-law, and ward, to wit:
"And so it was when God destroyed the cities of the plain that God remembered Abraham; so He sent Lot from amidst the upheaval when He overturned the cities in which Lot had lived."
(Genesis 19:29), and
(2) in the merit of the future Messiah, because Lot was chosen to be an ancestor (via Ruth of Moab) of King David, progenitor of the Messiah, to wit:
"Thus, Lot's two daughters conceived from their father. The older bore a son and she called his name Moab; he is the ancestor of Moab until this day."
(Genesis 19:36-37), and
"And so, Boaz took Ruth ... and she bore a son. ... They named him Obed; he was the father of Jesse, the father of David."
(Ruth 4:13-17)
However, even Lot’s salvation required his prior removal from evil Sodom.
Abraham's Hebrew descendants certainly acknowledged the reality, and feared the consequences, of Divine Collective Punishment. For, when the leadership of the tribes which had been granted lands on the west side of the Jordan River mistakenly believed that the leadership of the tribes which had been granted lands on the east side of the Jordan River (namely, the tribe of Reuben, the tribe of Gad, and half of the tribe of Manasseh) had erected an idolatrous altar there, they were determined to wage war against their brethren in order to avoid God's Wrath against all the people of Israel. However, as a prelude to military confrontation, a diplomatic delegation representing the western Hebrew tribes met with the leadership of the eastern Hebrew tribes. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"They came to the Children of Reuben, the Children of Gad, and half of the tribe of Manasseh, to the Land of Gilead, and they spoke with them, saying, 'Thus said the entire assembly of HaShem: "What is this treachery that you have committed against the God of Israel -- to turn away from HaShem this Day, by building for yourselves an altar for your rebellion this Day against HaShem? Is the Sin of Peor not enough for us -- from which we have not become cleansed until this Day, and which resulted in the Plague in the assembly of HaShem? Yet, Today, you would turn away from Hashem? If you rebel against HaShem Today, [then] Tomorrow He will be angry with the entire assembly of Israel!"'"
(Joshua 22:15-18)
Moreover, even the evildoing of a single person was sometimes enough to justify the imposition of Divine Collective Punishment against the entire people. As the Hebrew Bible relates, concerning the consecrated valuables of the destroyed City of Jericho:
“The Children of Israel trespassed against the consecrated property because Achan, son of Carmi, son of Zabdi, son of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah, took [some] of the consecrated property; and the Wrath of God flared against the Children of Israel.”
(Joshua 7:1)
Yet, the Hebrew Bible also declares:
"Fathers shall not be put to death because of sons, and sons shall not be put to death because of fathers; a man should be put to death for his own sin."
(Deuteronomy 24:16)
Isn’t this statement a repudiation of the doctrine of Collective Punishment? No. It is, instead, a repudiation of the precept then common among the Gentile nations that an innocent person may be justifiably punished for the individual sin of his family member. This situation is very different from the situation in which the leadership and supportive population of a nation have perpetuated such collective Evil that the entire nation, including those generations too young to have participated in such Evil, becomes collectively liable for punishment. With respect to such a situation, the Hebrew Bible declares that the God of Israel will visit "the iniquity of fathers upon children unto the third and fourth generations of them that hate Me" (Exodus 20:5)
There is one last question to be asked. Why does Abraham's negotiation with God appear to focus only on Sodom when, clearly, Abraham was pleading to save all the doomed cities of the Jordan River plain? The answer may be found in the fact that Abraham now experienced guilt over his prior mistake in repatriating to Sodom those of its citizens, including Lot, who had been captured by the four Mesopotamian kingdoms during their war against Sodom and the four other vassal kingdoms. As is set forth in the Hebrew Bible:
"The king of Sodom said to Abram, 'Give me the people, and take the possessions for yourself.'"
(Genesis 14:21)
By having returned these newly-liberated people to evil Sodom, Abraham violated the prohibition that
"... you shall not place a stumbling block before the blind; you shall fear your God -- I am HaShem"
(Leviticus 19:14);
for, he had thereby made it more difficult for these morally-deficient people to overcome the temptations of their immoral surroundings.
Consequently, this constitutes an additional explanation for God's Decision to inform Abraham of His Judgment concerning the fate of the City. As Abraham's earlier decision to return the abductees to Sodom was partially responsible for their present predicament, he was entitled to be informed of its ultimate resolution. In this way, Abraham would come to understand that his protestations concerning God's Sense of Justice were misplaced; for, Abraham's own actions had also contributed to the Judgment now being imposed upon the City.
CHAPTER 8: THE ABDUCTION OF SARAH BY KING ABIMELECH
Thereafter, Abraham and Sarah journeyed to the south of the Land of Israel -- to a region then occupied by the Philistines.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"Abraham journeyed from there to the region
of the South and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar.
Abraham said of Sarah, his wife, 'She is my sister'; so, Abimelech, King of
Gerar, sent [for], and took Sarah. And God came to
Abimelech in a dream by night and said to him, 'Behold, you are to die because
of the woman you have taken; moreover, she is a married woman. Now, Abimelech
had not [yet] approached her; so, he said, 'My Lord, will you kill a nation
even though it is righteous? Did not he himself tell me, "She is my
sister?" And she, too, herself said, "He is my brother"; in the
innocence of my heart and integrity of my hands have I done this.' And God said
to him in the dream, 'I also know that it was in the innocence of your heart
that you did this, and I also prevented you from sinning against Me; that is
why I did not permit you to touch her. But, now,
return the man's wife, for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you, and you
will live; but if you do not return her, be aware that you shall surely die --
you and all that is yours.' Abimelech arose early the next morning; he
summoned all his servants and told them all these things in their ears, and the
people were very frightened. Then Abimelech summoned Abraham and said to him,
'What have you done to us? How have I sinned against you that you brought upon
me and my kingdom such great sin? Deeds that ought not to be done have you done
to me!' And Abimelech said to Abraham, 'What did you see that that you did such
a thing?' And Abraham said, 'Because I said,
"There is no fear of God in this place, and they will slay me because of
my wife." Moreover, she is indeed my sister, my father's daughter, though
not my mother's daughter; and she became my wife. And so it was, when God
caused me to wander from my father's house, I said to her, "Let this be
your kindness which you shall do for me -- to whatever place we come, say of
me: He is my brother."' So, Abimelech took flocks
and cattle and servants and maidservants and gave [them] to Abraham; and he
returned his wife Sarah to him. And Abimelech said, 'Here, my land is before
you; settle wherever you please.' And to Sarah he said, 'I herewith give your
brother a thousand pieces of silver; this will serve you as a covering of the
eyes before all who are with you that you are cleared [of any suspicion of
sexual impropriety] before everyone.' Abraham then prayed to God, and God
healed Abimelech and his wife and his female servants, so that they bore
children. For, HaShem had sealed every womb of the household of
Abimelech because of Sarah, the wife of Abraham."
(Genesis 20:1-18).
"Abraham said of Sarah, his wife, 'She is my sister'; so, Abimelech, King of Gerar, sent [for], and took Sarah." Incredibly, after all the open miracles that God had already performed for Abraham (including His Delivery into Abraham's hand of the four Mesopotamian kings), and after God had explicitly given to Abraham His Promise of Protection -- initially saying: "'And I will make of you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you, I will curse; and all the families of the Earth shall bless themselves by you.'" (Genesis 12:2-3); and subsequently saying: "'As for you: You shall come to your ancestors in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age.'" (Genesis 15:15) -- Abraham still lacked complete faith that God would safeguard his life. So, he hedged his bets a fifth time (i.e., attempted to minimize the risk of harm to himself by counterbalancing his theoretical reliance upon God’s Promises with his pragmatic reliance upon a plan to protect himself from Abimelech). Of course, by once again fabricating the canard that Sarah was merely his sister, he thereby, once again, precipitated Sarah's abduction by a powerful monarch, which, in turn, once again, forced God to intervene in order to save her.
However, how could it be that righteous Sarah -- after having been directly saved by God from the hand of Pharaoh in Egypt, after having directly heard God's Revelation to Abraham that she would finally bear him a son, and after having directly seen the complete destruction wrought by God upon Sodom and Gomorrah -- again participated in a deception which was so thoroughly infused with a lack of pragmatic faith in God's Power and Promises? The answer is that, unlike the prior deception of Pharaoh in which Sarah was an active participant, in this subsequent deception of Abimelech, Sarah was only a passive participant. In the prior deception, Abraham had implored his wife: "'Please say that you are my sister, that it may go well with me for your sake, and that I may live on account of you.'" (Genesis 12:13). Yet, in this subsequent deception, the text states: "Abraham said of Sarah, his wife, 'She is my sister'; so Abimelech, king of Gerar, sent [for], and took Sarah." (Genesis 20:2). Clearly, both Abraham and Sarah had lied to Pharaoh, but only Abraham lied to Abimelech.
Yet, nonetheless, how could it be that righteous Sarah participated in the deception of Abimelech even passively? The answer is that, while Sarah was willing to challenge and even chastise Abraham in the privacy of their own encampment (see Genesis 16:5), she would never have humiliated him in public, especially in the presence of an evil king and his evil nation. Accordingly, when Abraham told Abimelech that Sarah was his sister, she neither contradicted nor confirmed the falsehood.
The concept that only God has the Prerogative to execute Judgment (of whatever nature) upon His Anointed Ones will later be demonstrated through the tale of the conflict between two of Abraham's royal descendants, namely, Saul, first king of united Israel, and David, second king thereof. Although God, acting through the Prophet Samuel, had informed Saul that he had forfeited his kingship over Israel due to his lack of faith and his disobedience, Saul defiantly remained on the throne. When God thereupon instructed Samuel to choose David as king of Israel in Saul's stead, Saul not only refused to acknowledge David as the anointed king, but he serially attempted to assassinate him. Yet, despite the fact that David possessed both justification and opportunity to kill Saul and thereby seize the throne for himself, he refused to do so. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"When Saul returned from [pursuing] after the Philistines, they told him, saying, 'Behold, David is in the Wilderness of Ein-gedi.' So, Saul took 3,000 chosen men, from all of Israel, and went to seek David and his men on the face of the rocks of the wild goats. He came to sheep enclosures along the road, and there was a cave there, in which Saul entered to urinate; and David and his men were sitting at the far end of the cave. David's men said to him, 'Behold, this is the day which HaShem said to you, "Behold, I am delivering your enemy into your hand, and you may do to him as you please"'; so, David arose and secretly cut off a corner of Saul's robe. Afterwards, however, David's conscience troubled him for having cut off the corner of that which was Saul's. He said to his men, 'It would be sacrilegious before HaShem for me to do this thing to my lord, the Anointed of HaShem, to send forth my hand against him, for he is the Anointed of HaShem.' And David divided his men with [his] words, and he did not permit them to rise up against Saul; and then Saul arose from the cave and continued on the way."
(I Samuel 24:2-8)
The text continues that David also exited the cave and then called out to the departing Saul, saying:
"'May HaShem judge between me and you, and may HaShem avenge me from you, but my hand will not act against you.'"
(I Samuel 24:13)
"And God came to Abimelech in a dream by night and said to him, 'Behold, you are to die because of the woman you have taken; moreover, she is a married woman. Now, Abimelech had not [yet] approached her; so, he said, 'My Lord, will you kill a nation even though it is righteous? Did not he himself tell me, "She is my sister?" And she, too, herself said, "He is my brother"; in the innocence of my heart and integrity of my hands have I done this.' And God said to him in the dream, 'I also know that it was in the innocence of your heart that you did this, and I also prevented you from sinning against Me; that is why I did not permit you to touch her. But, now, return the man's wife, for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you, and you will live; but if you do not return her, be aware that you shall surely die -- you and all that is yours.'" Abimelech’s claim that both Abraham and Sarah had lied to him was obviously false, as only Abraham had lied to him (see Genesis 20:2). Why did Abimelech lie to God about Sarah’s role? He lied, because he thought that blaming the victim would exonerate him. In fact, because he feared for his life, he also uttered several other falsehoods in order to justify himself before the God of Israel. So, he falsely claimed that the Philistines were righteous even though they worshipped idols and participated in his abduction of innocent sojourners. Moreover, he falsely claimed that his motivation in abducting Sarah was innocent; and God seemed to accept this claim, initially replying to him: "... 'I also know that it was in the innocence of your heart that you did this ...'" Yet God was merely mocking this evildoer, as He immediately completed His Reply by saying to him: "... '... and I also prevented you from sinning against Me; that is why I did not permit you to touch her. But, now, return the man's wife, for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you, and you will live; but if you do not return her, be aware that you shall surely die -- you and all that is yours.''' Since the God of Justice does not restrain or threaten an innocent person, it is clear that God recognized Abimelech’s assertions of innocence to be lies uttered to avoid Divine Wrath.
"Now, Abimelech had not [yet] approached her; so, he said, 'My Lord, will you kill a nation even though it is righteous?'" Ironically, Abimelech cynically employed the same plea against God’s annihilation of him and his household as Abraham had earlier employed against God’s annihilation of the citizens of Sodom -- neither of whom were righteous. Yet, God accepted the plea of evil Abimelech regarding himself and his household, even though God had rejected the plea of righteous Abraham regarding the citizens of Sodom. Why? The reason is that, despite his base intentions, Abimelech did not perpetrate a sexual assault against Sarah, while the citizens of Sodom did perpetrate a huge number of crimes, including sexual assault, against each other. However, Abimelech’s failure to rape Sarah was not due to any change of intentions, but only due to God’s Intervention. Why did God prevent that crime rather than impose the death penalty upon Abimelech after its commission? As the intended victim was Sarah, and as Sarah was chosen by God to become the ancestress of the Jewish people by conceiving progeny with Abraham, God was “forced” to intervene. That Intervention saved Abimelech and his household from sharing the same fate as the citizens of Sodom.
However, one question remains. What is the significance of God accepting the plea of an evil person, but rejecting the plea of a righteous person? This demonstrates that the Judge of Existence judges a matter according to the merit of the plea, rather than according to the merit of the pleader. This ethical principle will be subsequently bequeathed to the Jewish people in the form a Commandment imposed upon Hebrew judges, to wit:
“‘You shall not render an unfair judgment -- do not favor the poor or show deference to the rich; by [recourse to] justice shall you judge your people.’”
(Leviticus 19:15)
"'But, now, return the man's wife, for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you, and you will live …'" Why did God tell Abimelech that Abraham was a “prophet”, as there is no evidence in the Hebrew Bible that Abraham ever uttered a prophecy? Alternatively expressed, how can someone who never uttered a prophecy be a prophet? These questions presume that a person cannot be a prophet unless he issues prophecies. Yet, these questions and the foregoing presumption ignore a more fundamental query, namely: What is a prophet? A prophet is God’s earthly representative to the people (including to the leadership that governs the people). In that role, a prophet enjoys Communion with God, which interactive relationship endows that prophet with the ability to intercede with God on behalf of individuals and nations. That is why God employed the word “prophet” when explaining to Abimelech the nature of His relationship with Abraham. Yet, is it not strange that Abraham was a prophet who did not prophesy? While it is indeed unusual for a prophet not to prophesy, it must be recalled that the Hebrew prophets were imbued with a range of skills, only one of which was the ability to predict future events. For example, at least one Hebrew prophet possessed the ability to multiply the food supply (see I Kings 17:9-16, where the Prophet Elijah multiplied a woman’s supply of flour and oil ex nihilo). Furthermore, at least two Hebrew prophets possessed the ability, after petitioning God, to revive people from clinical death (see I Kings 17:17-23, where the Prophet Elijah revived a clinically-deceased boy; and II Kings 4:16-36, where the Prophet Elisha revived a clinically-deceased boy). Moreover, one Hebrew prophet was able to serially petition God against the annihilation of the Hebrew tribes on account of their serial Sins (see Exodus 32:9-14, where the Prophet Moses successful petitioned God on behalf of the Children of Israel regarding the Sin of the Golden Calf; and Numbers 14:11-20, where the Prophet Moses again successfully petitioned God on behalf of the Children of Israel regarding the Sin of the Spies). Consequently, although the Prophet Abraham never uttered a prophecy, he -- like those of his descendants who were also appointed as prophets -- was nonetheless God’s earthly representative during his lifetime, thereby enjoying Communion with God, which afforded Abraham the ability to petition God on Abimelech’s behalf.
"Then Abimelech summoned Abraham and said to him, 'What have you done to us? How have I sinned against you that you brought upon me and my kingdom such great sin? Deeds that ought not to be done have you done to me!'" Abraham's conduct again impelled the God of Israel to permit the abductor, Abimelech -- like Pharaoh before him -- to falsely portray himself as an innocent victim of deception and, consequently, as the injured party in this episode (despite the fact that the God of Israel was the true injured Party), and to openly rebuke righteous Abraham, earthly representative of the God of Israel, in the midst of the Philistines. Consequently, Abraham’s lack of pragmatic faith had, once again, wrought a triple Chillul HaShem (desecration of God's Name), the first being when Abraham deceived Abimelech, the second being when Abimelech falsely portrayed himself as an innocent party, and the third being when Abimelech rebuked Abraham.
"And Abimelech said to Abraham, 'What did you see that that you did such a thing?' And Abraham said, 'Because I said, "There is no fear of God in this place, and they will slay me because of my wife.'''" “There is no fear of God in this place” was Abraham's initial response to Abimelech's question. It was the truth, but it was not the whole truth. For, ironically, Abraham, himself, lacked sufficient Yirat Elohim (fear of God) to overcome his Yirat HaGoyim (fear of the nations).
"'Moreover, she is indeed my sister, my father's daughter, though
not my mother's daughter; and she became my wife. And so it was, when God
caused me to wander from my father's house, I said to her, "Let this be
your kindness which you shall do for me -- to whatever place we come, say of
me: He is my brother."'"
This was Abraham's further and more elaborate response to Abimelech's
question. It was also the truth, but only in the narrowest sense.
Accordingly, it was entirely unworthy of righteous Abraham, earthly
representative of the God of Israel and progenitor of the Jewish people. For,
in trying to salvage what little of his honor remained, Abraham now implausibly
attempted to convince Abimelech that, since Sarah was, in fact, his close
relation ( -- actually his father's granddaughter, hence his niece, but, in the
cultural context of that era, acceptably referred to as his father's
"daughter", hence his "sister" -- ) there was actually no
deception at all. But Scripture itself had previously disposed of this unworthy
pretext by stating clearly: "Abraham said of Sarah, his wife, 'She
is my sister'; so Abimelech, King of Gerar, sent [for], and took
Sarah."
But there is another aspect to Abraham's "justification" for his deception of Abimelech -- an aspect that is brought into sharp relief upon a comparison between Abraham's reaction to the denouement of this deception and his reaction to the denouement of his earlier deception of Pharaoh. In the wake of the earlier deception, Abraham did not offer to Pharaoh any justification for his behavior, while in the wake of this later deception, Abraham offered to Abimelech a multi-tiered justification for his behavior. Why the difference? In the earlier incident Abraham was not at all prepared for Pharaoh's harsh criticism of his moral character. In fact, Abraham was humbled by Pharaoh's rebuke -- which exuded an attitude of disgust and ostracism toward Abraham -- and he did not relish reliving that unpleasant experience at the hand of Abimelech. Consequently, in order to make himself less odious to Abimelech, Abraham sought to justify his mistrustful behavior toward Abimelech with a convoluted explanation that he hoped would placate the Philistine monarch. However, this is very strange; for, Abraham's offense was, not in mistrusting the immoral Abimelech (who habitually abducted women entering territory under his control), but rather in mistrusting the God of Fidelity to His Promises. Consequently, Abraham owed his explanations, not to Abimelech, but rather to God. And by, instead, offering such explanations to Abimelech, righteous Abraham thereby made evil Abimelech a judge over his behavior!
The Chillul HaShem inherent in Abraham's desire to appease Abimelech rather than God cannot be overstated. Indeed, Abraham's urge to justify himself before Abimelech is a precursor to a disease that has ever since plagued Jewish leadership -- a disease that is the handmaiden to Yirat HaGoyim -- namely, the obsessive need to be understood, accepted and even loved by the immoral family of nations. This disease has erupted, not only in modern times, but was present, as well, in the (post-Abrahamic) biblical era. For example, after Abraham’s great-grandchildren, Simeon and Levi, impose Collective Punishment upon the City of Shechem for its prince’s abduction, rape, and detention of their sister Dina, their father, Jacob, laments to them:
"… 'You have gotten me into trouble and caused me to be repulsive to the Canaanites and Perrizites who live in the Land. I am few in number, and should they band together and attack me, I will be annihilated -- I and my household.'"
(Genesis 34:30)
Subsequently, when Egypt’s Pharaoh initially increases the Hebrew slaves’ burdens in response to Moses’ demand that Egypt permit the exodus of the Hebrews, the Hebrew foremen lament to Moses and Aaron:
"… 'May HaShem look upon you and judge; for, you have made our very scent abhorrent in the eyes of Pharaoh and in the eyes of his servants, to place a sword in their hands to murder us.'"
(Exodus 5:21)
The latter example is particularly noteworthy, because the Egyptian people’s patent disdain for the Jewish people had preceded their enslavement by generations. As the Hebrew Bible relates, concerning the banquet that Abraham’s great-grandchild, Joseph, as Pharaoh’s viceroy, had prepared for his brothers in Egypt prior to their immigration thereto:
"They [Joseph’s servants] served him [Joseph] separately and them [Joseph’s brothers] separately and the Egyptians who ate with him separately; for, the Egyptians could not bear to eat food with the Hebrews, it being loathsome to Egyptians."
(Genesis 43:32)
So, although the enslaved Jewish people craved to be viewed favorably by their Egyptian neighbors, they failed to understand that Egypt’s longstanding hatred and contempt for the Jewish people could not be cured by the latter’s continued passivity and appeasement. However, since the harm to be inflicted by a powerful enemy is more likely to be temporarily avoided by appeasement than by battle, it is only natural that appeasement has always been the dispersed Jewish people’s response of choice to Gentile hostility. Consequently, the present-day Jewish leadership’s desire to render the Jewish people and the present-day State of Israel palatable to the Gentile nations is merely the final outcome of an historical coping mechanism developed during the past several millennia by the Jewish people residing in the Diaspora (as well as in the Land of Israel during those periods when Gentiles ruled the Land) in order to safeguard themselves from the wrath of their Gentile rulers. Nonetheless, the Jewish leadership's historical fear of, and consequent desire to appease, the Gentile nations, while justified in its era, has no place Today (due to the fact that the resurrected nation-state of Israel has an army that is well able to protect the Jewish people, provided that its leadership exhibits complete faith in God's Power and His Promises to the Jewish people) -- just as it had no place during the lifetime of Abraham (due to the fact that Abraham was the original and direct beneficiary of God's Power and His Promises to the Jewish people). Accordingly, any Jewish leader of Israel would do well to comprehend that, in dealing with the Gentile nations, he must make himself acceptable and stand in judgment, not to and before them, but only to and before his (and their) Maker -- the God of Israel.
The lesson that is imparted to the leadership of modern Israel via Abraham’s deception of Abimelech is identical to the lesson that is imparted to such leadership via Abraham’s prior deception of Pharaoh, namely, that if the State of Israel does not deal forthrightly with the immoral Gentile nations concerning the exercise of its God-given right to possess the entire Land of Israel, then those Jewish leaders will create a great Chillul HaShem, on account of which the God of Israel will permit those hypocritical nations both to feign injury and to rebuke the Jewish State, thereby ultimately rendering a triple Chillul HaShem.
"So, Abimelech took flocks and cattle and servants and maidservants and gave [them] to Abraham; and he returned his wife Sarah to him. And Abimelech said, 'Here, my land is before you; settle wherever you please.' And to Sarah he said, 'I herewith give your brother a thousand pieces of silver; this will serve you as a covering of the eyes before all who are with you that you are cleared [of any suspicion of sexual impropriety] before everyone.'" It is noteworthy that regarding the deception of Pharaoh, Abraham received possessions from Pharaoh when Sarah was taken, whereas regarding the deception of Abimelech, Abraham received possessions from Abimelech when Sarah was returned. This was because Pharoah’s seizure of Sarah was part of a marriage transaction, for which Abraham was compensated in advance (see Genesis 12:15-19), while Abimelech’s seizure of Sarah was done to enable a sexual assault, for which for which a financial penalty was afterward paid to Abraham. Moreover, a significant portion of the possessions given to Abraham by Abimelech was meant for Sarah (e.g., the huge amount of silver coins) in order to vindicate her sexual honor. As she was a double victim in this episode (i.e., a victim both of Abraham’s lack of complete faith in God and of Abimelech’s predilection for seizing women journeying within his kingdom), she was entitled to such compensation, even if Abraham was not. Sarah’s entitlement to compensation is what distinguishes this episode from the one in which Abraham rejected the offer from Bera, king of Sodom, to keep all the possessions looted from the citizens of Sodom, after Abraham had recovered those possessions in his war against the four Mesopotamian kings (see Genesis 14:17-24). Consequently, the receipt of these possessions by Abraham (both for himself and for Sarah) did not by itself constitute a Chillul HaShem. However, such receipt was nonetheless the odious product of an enormous Chillul HaShem, namely, the fact that Abraham feared Abimelech more than he trusted in the God of Israel.
CHAPTER 9: THE EXPULSION OF ISHMAEL
Thereafter, in fulfillment of God's Promise of joint Progeny, Isaac was born to Abraham and Sarah. And Sarah became deeply concerned with Ishmael's potential influence over Isaac, for she knew very well that an Angel of God had said of Ishmael prior to his birth:
"'And he shall be a barbarian of a man -- his hand against everyone, and everyone's hand against him ...'"
(Genesis 16:12).
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"Sarah saw the son of Hagar, the Egyptian,
whom she had born to Abraham, mocking. So, she said to Abraham, 'Drive out this
slave woman with her son, for the son of that slave woman shall not inherit
with my son -- with Isaac!' The matter greatly distressed Abraham regarding his
son. So God said to Abraham, 'Be not distressed over the youth or your slave
woman: Whatever Sarah tells you, heed her voice, since [only] through Isaac
will offspring be considered yours.'" (Genesis 21:9-12).
"Sarah saw the son of Hagar, the Egyptian, whom she had born to Abraham, mocking. So, she said to Abraham, 'Drive out this slave woman with her son, for the son of that slave woman shall not inherit with my son -- with Isaac!'" Ostensibly, Sarah's solution to the problem of Hagar and Ishmael -- their expulsion from Abraham's and Sarah’s encampment -- seems, not only immoral, but draconian. But, Humankind's "morality" is not God's Morality. Sarah knew that the falsely-claimed descendants of Ishmael (i.e., the Arabs) were not meant to inherit the Land together with the covenantal descendants of Isaac (i.e., the Jews); and she also knew that only by creating a separation between them could Abraham assure the latter's spiritual and physical survival. That is why the only truly moral solution to the problem of Hagar and Ishmael was expulsion.
Yet Abraham's merciful and kind nature caused him to equate such expulsion with Harshness and Cruelty -- traits from which he instinctively recoiled. So, despite God's prior Declaration that only Isaac and his covenantal descendants would inherit the Land of Israel, merciful and kind Abraham was not capable of inflicting the harshness and cruelty of expulsion upon his son Ishmael. Sarah, however, was not hampered by false morality, namely, the belief that traits and situations such as Kindness, Mercy, Love, Forgiveness and Peace are inherently and absolutely Good, and that traits and situations such as Cruelty, Harshness, Hatred, Revenge and War are inherently and absolutely Evil.
As declared in the Hebrew Bible:
"Everything has its season, and there is a time for everything under the Heavens: A time to be born and a time to die; a time to plant and a time to uproot the planted. A time to kill and a time to heal; a time to wreck and a time to build. A time to weep and a time to laugh; a time to wail and a time to dance. A time to scatter stones and a time to gather stones; a time to embrace and a time to shun embraces. A time to seek and a time to lose; a time to keep and a time to discard. A time to rend and a time to mend; a time to be silent and a time to speak. A time to love and a time to hate; a time for war and a time for peace. What gain, then, has the worker by his toil? I have observed the task with which God has given the sons of Humankind to be concerned: He made everything beautiful in its time; He has also put an enigma into their minds so that Humankind cannot comprehend what God has done from Beginning to End."
(Ecclesiastes 3:1-11)
Only the rare person who truly understands the foregoing concept will be able to avoid that dangerous inversion of Morality of which the Hebrew Bible warns:
“Woe unto those who speak of Evil as [if it were] Good, and of Good as [if it were] Evil; who make Darkness into [the semblance of] Light, and Light into [the semblance of] Darkness; who make Bitter into [the perception of] Sweet, and Sweet into [the perception of] Bitter.”
(Isaiah 5:20)
According to God's Moral Code, traits and situations such as Kindness, Cruelty, Mercy, Harshness, Love, Hatred, Forgiveness, Revenge, Peace and War are -- in and of themselves -- neither Good nor Evil but, instead, Neutral. It is only the specific circumstances in which, and the particular motivation with which, a particular trait is exhibited or a particular situation is initiated that determines whether such a trait or situation is Good, thereby creating a Kiddush HaShem (Sanctification of God's Name), or Evil, thereby creating a Chillul HaShem (Desecration of God's Name).
For example, God has elevated Hatred to the status of a Commandment under the appropriate circumstances. As the Hebrew Bible declares:
“Seek Goodness and not Evil ... Hate Evil, and love Goodness …”
(Amos 5:14-15); and
“Fear of HaShem is hatred of Evil …”
(Proverbs 8:13); and
“You that love HaShem, hate Evil …”
(Psalms 97:10)
Likewise, God has extolled and implemented Revenge, even describing Himself as a God of Vengeance, under the appropriate circumstances. As the Hebrew Bible declares:
"HaShem is a Zealous and Vengeful God; HaShem is Vengeful and full of Wrath; HaShem is Vengeful to His adversaries and reserves Hostility for His enemies. HaShem is slow to Anger, but He has great Power and He will not absolve [Evil]."
(Nahum 1:2-3); and
"The righteous man shall rejoice when he sees Vengeance. He shall wash his feet in the blood of the Wicked. And Mankind shall say, ‘Truly there is a reward for the Righteous. Truly there is a God Who judges on Earth.’"
(Psalms 58:11-12)
Also, with respect to the foreordained Egyptian Exile, although Exodus-era Egypt will merely be fulfilling a role assigned to it by the God of Israel (see Genesis 15:13-16), He will purposefully stiffen the resolve of its evil Pharaoh only so that He may exercise a horrific Vengeance against it as punishment for its enslavement of the Jewish people:
"HaShem said to Moses, 'When you go to return to Egypt, see all the wonders that I have put in your hand, and perform them before Pharaoh; but I shall strengthen his heart, and he will not send out the people. You shall say to Pharaoh, "So said HaShem, 'My Firstborn Son is Israel. So I have said to you: Send out My Son that he may serve Me, but you have refused to send him out; behold! -- I shall kill your firstborn son.'"'"
(Exodus 4:21-23)
Furthermore, God will command that Israel take revenge upon its enemies, which, by definition, also constitute God's enemies:
"HaShem spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Take vengeance for the Children of Israel against the Midianites …’", but: "Moses spoke to the people, saying, ‘… inflict HaShem’s Vengeance against Midian.’"
(Numbers 31:2-3)
Moreover, God even demands that the Gentile nations praise the Jewish people on account of the Vengeance to which these nations will be subjected during the End of Days:
"O nations: Sing the praises of His People, for He will avenge the blood of His Servants; He will bring retribution upon His adversaries, and He will appease His Land [and] His People."
(Deuteronomy 32:43)
Finally, prophesying about the End of Days, the Prophet Isaiah, describing the Vengeance that God will wreak upon the nations who have persecuted the Jewish people, declares:
"He donned Righteousness like armor and a helmet of Salvation on His Head; and He donned garments of Vengeance as His Attire and clothed Himself in Zealousness like a coat. Just as there were [previous] Retributions [against His enemies], so shall He [now] repay Wrath to His enemies, Retribution to His adversaries; He will pay Retribution [even] to the distant lands. From the West they will fear the Name of HaShem, and from the rising of the sun [they will fear] His Glory; for [their] travail will come like a river; the Spirit of HaShem will gnaw at them."
(Isaiah 59:17-19)
So, it is with Cruelty and Harshness, under the appropriate circumstances. God will later command the Exodus-era Israelites to treat the Canaanite nations who were then occupying the Land of Israel with cruelty and harshness. As the Hebrew Bible declares:
"HaShem spoke to Moses in the plains of Moab, by the Jordan [River], at Jericho, saying, 'Speak to the Children of Israel and say to them, "When you cross the Jordan [River] to the Land of Canaan, you shall drive out all the inhabitants of the Land from before you; and you shall destroy all their prostration stones; all their molten images shall you destroy; and all their cultic places shall you demolish. You shall possess the Land, and you shall settle in it; for, to you have I given the Land to possess it."'"
(Numbers 33:50-53); and
"'You shall devour all the peoples that HaShem, your God, will deliver to you; your eye shall not pity them. ...'"
(Deuteronomy 7:16)
Yes -- righteous Sarah understood that, sometimes, the exhibition and application of Cruelty and Harshness was Good, and that, sometimes, the exhibition and application of Kindness and Mercy was Evil.
"The matter greatly distressed Abraham regarding his son. So God said to Abraham, 'Be not distressed over the youth or your slavewoman: Whatever Sarah tells you, heed her voice, since [only] through Isaac will offspring be considered yours.'" By His Instruction to Abraham, God placed the judgment of Sarah above the judgment of Abraham. From this, we learn that Abraham's mercy and kindness towards Ishmael was not Good -- it was, rather, Evil -- and that Sarah's harshness and cruelty towards Ishmael was not Evil -- it was, rather, Good. For, in his great love for Ishmael, Abraham came dangerously close to rebelling against God's earlier Selection of Isaac (and the latter’s covenantal descendants) as the sole recipient of God's "Everlasting Covenant" (see Genesis 17:19 & 17:21). Thus, Abraham’s kindness would have resulted in a great Chillul HaShem; but Sarah prevented him from committing this Sin -- thus, her cruelty resulted in a great Kiddush HaShem.
Moreover, another important lesson regarding Jewish leadership inheres in God’s Instruction to Abraham, namely, that a Jewish leader must never allow his personal feelings to interfere with the performance of his national obligations. Just as Abraham accepted (albeit reluctantly) that his duty to safeguard the existence of the future Jewish people had to prevail over his natural love for Ishmael, so must a future leader of the Jewish people accept (even if reluctantly) that his duty to the Jewish collective must always prevail over any contrary personal predilections.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"'But the son of the slave woman as well
will I make into a nation; for, he is [also] your offspring.' So, Abraham awoke
early in the morning, he took bread and a skin of water, and he gave them to
Hagar. He placed them on her shoulder along with the boy, and he sent her off.
She departed, and she strayed in the desert of Beersheba. When the water of the
skin was consumed, she cast off the boy beneath one of the trees. She went and
she sat herself down at a distance -- some bowshots away; for, she said, 'Let
me not see the death of the child.' And she sat at a distance, she lifted her
voice, and she wept. God heard the cry of the youth, and an Angel of God called
to Hagar from the Heavens and said to her, 'What troubles you, Hagar? -- fear
not; for, God has heeded the cry of the youth in his present state. Arise, lift
up the youth and grasp your hand upon him; for, I will make a great nation of
him.' Then God opened her eyes, and she perceived a well of water; and she went
and filled the skin with water, and she gave it to the youth to drink. God was
with the youth, and he grew up; and he dwelled in the desert, and he became an
accomplished archer. And he lived in the desert of Paran; and his mother took a
wife for him from the Land of Egypt."
(Genesis 21:13-21).
"'But the son of the slave woman as well will I make into a nation; for, he is [also] your offspring.'" Ishmael was indeed given an important destiny to fulfill; but this destiny was not to be fulfilled within the encampment of Abraham and Sarah. Neither are the alleged descendants of Ishmael given a national destiny to be fulfilled within the encampment of the Land of Israel.
"And she sat at a distance, she lifted her voice, and she wept. God heard the cry of the youth, and an Angel of God called to Hagar from the Heavens and said to her, 'What troubles you, Hagar? -- fear not; for, God has heeded the cry of the youth in his present state. Arise, lift up the youth and grasp your hand upon him; for, I will make a great nation of him.'" Why does Scripture state that God heard the “cry of the youth” when it was only Hagar who wept? It is likely that the “cry of the youth” refers to Ishmael’s despair, which he did not permit to become audible, so as not to cause further distress to his grieving mother.
Moreover, what is meant by the Angel's declaration that: "... God has heeded the cry of the youth in his present state"? Once God had confirmed the correctness of Sarah’s decision, Hagar and Ishmael obediently and peacefully removed themselves from the encampment of Abraham and Sarah. Accordingly, in his present state, Ishmael was in compliance with God's Will. Consequently, in his present state, Ishmael merited God's Assistance. If Ishmael's falsely-claimed descendants (i.e., the Arab people) were to obediently and peacefully remove themselves from the encampment of the Land of Israel, they would, as well, be in compliance with God's Will, and they would, as well, merit God's Assistance.
CHAPTER 10: THE ALLIANCE WITH THE PHILISTINES AND THE INSTRUCTION TO SACRIFICE ISAAC
Thereafter, Abraham's faith in God's Power and Promises was again found to be wanting.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"At that time, Abimelech and Phicol,
general of his legion, said to Abraham, 'God is with
you in all that you do. Now swear to me here, by God, that you will not
deal falsely with me nor with my son or with my grandson. According to the
kindness that I have done with you, do with me and with the Land in which you
have sojourned.' And Abraham said, 'I will swear'. Then Abraham disputed with
Abimelech regarding the well of water that Abimelech's servants had seized. But
Abimelech said, 'I do not know who did this thing; furthermore, you have never
told me; and, moreover, I myself have heard nothing of it except for today.'
So, Abraham took flocks and cattle, and he gave them to Abimelech; and the two
of them entered into a covenant. Abraham [then] set seven ewes of the flock by
themselves. And Abimelech said to Abraham, 'What are these seven ewes which you
have set by themselves?' And he replied, 'Because you are to take these seven
ewes from me, that it may serve me as testimony that I dug this well.' Thus, that
place was called Beersheba [meaning: well of oath] because there the two of
them took an oath. Thus, they entered into a covenant at Beersheba. Abimelech
then arose, with Phicol, general of his legion, and they returned to the Land
of the Philistines. He [Abraham] planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba; and
there he proclaimed the Name of HaShem: 'El Olam'.
And Abraham sojourned in the Land of the Philistines for many years. And it
happened after these events that the [one and only] God tested Abraham and said
to him, 'Abraham'; and he replied, 'Here I am.' And He said, 'Please take your
son, your only one, whom you love -- Isaac -- and go for yourself to the Land
of Moriah; offer him up there as an offering upon one of the mountains which I
shall tell you.'"
(Genesis 21:22 - 22:2).
Why did God suddenly find it necessary to test Abraham's faith in Him? And what severe breach of faith did Abraham commit in order to warrant such a severe Test? Rabbi Samuel ben Meir (more famously known as Rashbam, being the acronym for Rabbi Shmuel ben Meir, b. 1085 - d. 1174), grandson of Rashi, comments:
"After the pact that Abraham made with Abimelech, [a pact also] with Abraham's [unborn] grandchildren and [unborn] great-grandchildren, he gave him seven lambs. And the Almighty became enraged by this, for behold, the Land of the Philistines had been given to Abraham ... and the Almighty had commanded them [the Children of Israel]: '... You shall not allow any person to live' [Deuteronomy 20:16]. Therefore, 'God tested Abraham' in order to teach to him a lesson ... that is: You were proud of the son [Isaac] that I gave to you, and you made a pact between your sons and their sons?! Go now, and offer him [Isaac] as a sacrifice, and find out how useful to you is this pact!"
"At that time, Abimelech and Phicol, general of his legion, said to Abraham, 'God is with you in all that you do. Now swear to me here, by God, that you will not deal falsely with me nor with my son or with my grandson. According to the kindness that I have done with you, do with me and with the Land in which you have sojourned.' And Abraham said, 'I will swear.'" Ironically, while Abraham's consent to the alliance was motivated by his fear of Abimelech, the latter's proposal of the alliance was motivated by his fear of the God of Israel! The Hebrew Bible reveals that Abimelech brought with him Phicol, the general of his army, in order to emphasize that Abimelech intended to create, not only a political alliance, but also a military nonaggression pact, between the two nations -- the Philistines and the embryonic Jewish people. By entering into a nonaggression pact with Abimelech, Abraham sacrificed a portion of the Land of Israel to the Philistines. Abraham did this in order to safeguard the life and prosperity of his heir Isaac. But Isaac's safety and wealth were dependent, not upon the power and promises of Abimelech, but only upon the Power and Promises of the God of Israel. Due to Abraham's hedging of his bets a sixth time (i.e., attempting to minimize the risk of harm to Isaac’s future by counterbalancing his theoretical reliance upon God’s Promises with his pragmatic reliance upon a political-military pact with the powerful Philistines), he betrayed a lack of complete trust in God and, consequently, a lack of Yirat Elohim (fear of God).
"Then Abraham disputed with Abimelech regarding the well of water that Abimelech's servants had seized. But Abimelech said, 'I do not know who did this thing; furthermore, you have never told me; and, moreover, I myself have heard nothing of it except for today.'" By means of Abimelech's callous response to Abraham’s complaint of theft, God is teaching to the Jewish people a profound lesson that their leadership never seems to learn, namely, that it is an exercise in utter futility for the Jewish people to constantly complain to the Gentile nations that they are the victim rather than the perpetrator of aggression. This is so even if the acts of aggression perpetrated against Israel are so heinous in intensity and so public in manner as to permit no reasonable human being to dispute the matter. For, in such a case, the Gentile nations will either feign ignorance of the matter or accuse Israel of provoking the very aggression that has been directed against it, thereby -- in the eyes of the immoral World -- transforming Israel from victim into perpetrator!
"So, Abraham took flocks and cattle, and he gave them to Abimelech; and the two of them entered into a covenant." Abimelech, king of the Philistines, sought to obtain the benefits of an alliance with Abraham while, at the same time, aggressing against Abraham. Despite his adversary’s duplicitous scheme, Abraham -- naively hoping that Abimelech’s character would nonetheless be transformed thereby -- entered into the requested treaty. Abraham sealed the treaty by bestowing upon evil Abimelech valuable assets; but, in return, he received nothing but Abimelech’s untrustworthy promise of peace. This episode is a clear portent of the future time when the resurrected State of Israel will naively enter into accords with its evil adversaries who will publicly extol peace but covertly, and sometimes overtly, continue to make and/or support war against the Jewish State. Moreover, these accords will require the Jewish State to make huge concessions to its adversaries of land, money and security in exchange for their false promises of profound peace and normalization of relations.
"Abraham [then] set seven ewes of the flock by themselves. And Abimelech said to Abraham, 'What are these seven ewes which you have set by themselves?' And he replied, 'Because you are to take these seven ewes from me, that it may serve me as testimony that I dug this well.'" As the Hebrew Bible makes clear, Abraham not only entered into the treaty, but, by paying symbolic tribute to Abimelech in order to induce him to recognize Abraham's ownership of the "disputed" well, Abraham also -- and for the second time -- made Abimelech a judge over him, the first instance thereof having occurred during Abimelech's earlier abduction of Sarah (see Genesis 20:1-18). In fact, it may be said that, by giving those seven sheep to Abimelech, Abraham had repurchased the very well that already belonged to him. This, in turn, created a great Chillul HaShem (desecration of God's Name), as Abraham's quick consent to the treaty coupled with his consequent appeasement of Abimelech (concerning the well which the latter's minions had stolen from Abraham) -- all born of Abraham's lack of complete faith in God -- had caused the Philistines’ manifest fear of God to diminish. After the death of Abraham, this loss of fear would lead the Philistines to harshly treat and expel Isaac in violation of their treaty with Abraham (see Genesis 26:12-21).
"Abimelech then arose, with Phicol, general of his legion, and they returned to the Land of the Philistines." Indeed, by making this treaty with the Philistines, Abraham abandoned to them a portion of the Land of Israel -- this is why thereafter, and only thereafter, the Hebrew Bible refers to the sacrificed Land as "Eretz Pelishtim" (meaning: "Land of the Philistines"); for, Abraham had made it so. As a stunning example of the Prescience of the Hebrew Bible, it is noteworthy that the present-day Arabs of the Land of Israel, a majority of whom seek to destroy the State of Israel, have chosen, for propaganda purposes, to identify themselves by a conjured ethnicity known as the "Palestinians". This present-day appellation derives from the Roman Empire’s re-designation, in 135 CE, of the Land from Judea (the Latin-language word for which was Iudaea, meaning Land of the Jews) to Palestine (the Latin-language word for which was Palaestina, meaning Land of the Philistines). The Philistines were a people who had invaded the Land of Israel from the Aegean Sea region. Ironically, the English-language appellation "Philistine", as well as its English-language cognate appellation "Palestine" and the Arabic-language appellation "Filastin" (meaning: "Palestine"), are all ultimately derived (via the Latin language and, earlier, via the Greek language) from the Hebrew-language appellation "Pelishtim" -- which idiomatically means “Philistines” but which literally means "Invaders". Hence, the literal meaning of the Hebrew Bible's appellation "Eretz Pelishtim" ("Land of the Philistines") is "Land of the Invaders". Moreover, it is possible that Abraham’s covenantal descendants in the Land of Israel are being subjected to horrific atrocities perpetrated by these present-day "Philistines" due, in part, to Abraham’s willingness to abandon a portion of the Land of Israel to those ancient Philistines.
"He [Abraham] planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba; and there he proclaimed the Name of HaShem: 'El Olam.'" After hedging his bets by making a treaty with the Philistines, in order to celebrate that "achievement", Abraham planted a hardy tree in order to symbolize his expectation of dynastic permanence in the Land. He then used that very occasion to re-hedge his bets by publicly declaring that his God of Promises was also "El Olam". This Divine Appellation means both “God of the Universe” and “Eternal God”, thereby expressing the concept that God is Master of both Space and Time -- in the argot of modern Physics: the Creator of the Space-Time Continuum. By employment of that lofty Name, Abraham ostensibly acknowledged that his God of Promises was, in fact, the Deity of All Existence. However, despite the Supreme Name by which Abraham now addressed God, his orchestration of a counterbalancing process between Righteous God and evil Abimelech had nonetheless betrayed a lack of complete trust in God, as a result of which Abraham's worthiness to continue in his role as God's Emissary and Covenantee became suspect. For, if Abraham had really been certain that his God of Promises was “El Olam”, then he would not have felt the need to make a covenant with the Philistines in order to guarantee a secure future for his progeny in the Land.
"And Abraham sojourned in the Land of the Philistines for many
years." As a prelude
to God's imposition upon Abraham of the harshest trial that he would ever face,
the Hebrew Bible now reiterates that, by sacrificing a portion of the Promised
Land to the Philistines, Abraham thereafter resided, not in the Land of
Israel, but rather in the "Land of the Philistines";
for, he had made it so.
"And it happened after these events that the [one and only] God tested Abraham and said to him, 'Abraham'; and he replied, 'Here I am.' And He said, 'Please take your son, your only one, whom you love -- Isaac -- and go for yourself to the Land of Moriah; offer him up there as an offering upon one of the mountains which I shall tell you.'" As a result of his lack of complete trust in God, Abraham had impermissibly attempted to sever the eternal connection between God's intertwined Promises of Progeny and of the Land (-- "HaShem appeared to Abram and said, 'To your offspring I will give this Land ...'" (Genesis 12:7) --). By arrogating to himself the "right" to sacrifice the one (Promise of the Land) for the sake of the other (Promise of Progeny), he transgressed against the Owner of the Land. For this reason, it became necessary for God to show to Abraham the consequences of breaking the connection between the Promise of the Land and the Promise of Progeny. So, just as Abraham had readily initiated the sacrifice of (a portion of) the Land -- mida k'neged mida (measure for measure) -- God now readily initiated the sacrifice of Abraham's son. And just as Abraham had tested God with his apparent disregard for God's beloved Land -- mida k'neged mida -- God now tested Abraham with His apparent disregard for Abraham's beloved son.
"'… go for yourself to the Land of Moriah …'" This is the second (and final) time that God instructed Abraham to undertake a special journey. The first time was when God instructed Abraham to: " … 'Go for yourself from your land, from your relatives, and from your father's house to the Land that I will show you.'" (Genesis 12:1). Both times (and only in these two instances), God employed the unique phrase: "lech l’cha" (meaning: "go for yourself"), indicating that the main purpose of both treks was to provide Abraham with the opportunity to spiritually elevate himself. The First Instruction required Abraham to spiritually ascend from the Gentile World by physically relocating himself and his family to a new Land, namely, the Land of Israel, where he would become the first "Hebrew" (meaning, "he who is of the other side") under God’s Tutelage. The Second Instruction required Abraham to confront his own innate essence, namely, that of mercy and kindness, by seeming to effectuate something abhorrent to him, namely, the murder of his son and sole covenantal heir. While Abraham had readily complied with the First Instruction by traveling, without delay, to the Land of Israel, his subsequent responses to the challenges he encountered there (as well as in the Land of Egypt) almost always betrayed a lack of pragmatic faith in the Power and Promises of the God of Israel. The treasonous nature of Abraham’s treaty with the Philistine king -- especially in light of God’s prior Declaration to Abraham that the Land was not to be divided even with his kinsman Lot (see Genesis 13:1-18) -- required that Abraham’s faith be tested in a way that differed from all previous trials. Although, in each previous trial, Abraham was faced with a challenge that required him to choose between a response predicated upon the Existence of God’s Power and Faithfulness to His Own Promises and a response predicated upon the Absence of God’s Power and Faithfulness to His Own Promises, God always refrained from directly instructing Abraham which response to choose. As a result, Abraham’s previous bad choices were always a product of his endemic lack of pragmatic faith rather than of his outright disobedience.
Consequently, God issued the Second Instruction for two reasons:
(1) to determine whether Abraham’s faithlessness had degenerated into disobedience; and
(2) to determine whether Abraham had finally internalized the lesson from his prior dispute with God over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah (see Genesis 18:16-33), namely, that it would constitute the apex of Immorality for him to substitute his will for God’s Will. For, as Abraham’s illustrious descendant will later explain in God’s Name:
"For, My Thoughts are not your thoughts, and your ways are not My Ways -- the Word of HaShem. As high as the Heavens are above the Earth, so are My Ways high above your ways, and My Thoughts [high] above your thoughts."
(Isaiah 55:8-9)
Yet, despite the severity of Abraham's past transgressions against God and His Promises, the ensuing Test that God devised for Abraham nevertheless shocks modern sensibilities, especially since, as is known, the God of Israel abhors human sacrifice and declares it to be an abomination to Him, to wit:
“‘Do not allow any of your offspring to be offered up [as a fire sacrifice] to [the pagan god] Moloch, and do not profane the Name of your God: I am HaShem.’”
(Leviticus 18:21); and
“And HaShem spoke to Moses: ‘Say further to the Children of Israel: “Anyone among the Children of Israel, or among the strangers residing in Israel, who gives any of his offspring [as a fire sacrifice] to [the pagan god] Moloch, shall be put to death; the people of the Land shall pelt him with stones. And I will set My Face against that man and I will cut him off from among his people, because he gave of his offspring to Moloch and so defiled My Sanctuary and profaned My Holy Name. And if the people of the Land should shut their eyes to that man when he gives of his offspring to Moloch, and should not put him to death, then I Myself will set My Face against that man and his kin, and will cut off from among their people both him and all who follow him in going astray after Moloch.’”
(Leviticus 20:1-5); and
“You shall not act in this way towards HaShem your God; for, they [the surrounding nations] perform for their gods every abhorrent act that HaShem detests; they even offer up their sons and daughters in fire to their gods.”
(Deuteronomy 12:31); and
“Thus said HaShem [to the Prophet Jeremiah]: ‘Go, and get a potter's earthen bottle, and take of the elders of the people, and of the elders of the priests, and go forth unto the valley of the son of Hinnom, which is by the entry of the gate Harsith, and proclaim there the Words that I shall tell you, and say: “Hear the Word of HaShem, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem. Thus says HaShem of hosts, the God of Israel: ‘Behold, I will bring Evil upon this place, and whoever hears of it, his ears shall tingle, because they [the people of Jerusalem] have forsaken Me, and they have estranged this place, and have offered [sacrifices] in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah [have known]; and they have filled this place with the blood of innocents; and they have built the high places of [the pagan god] Baal, to burn their sons in the fire for burnt offerings unto [the pagan god] Baal; which I did not command, nor have I spoken of it, neither did it come it into My Mind.”’’”
(Jeremiah 19:1-5); and
“They [the people of Jerusalem] turned their backs to Me, not their faces; although I have taught them persistently, they do not give heed or accept rebuke. They placed their abominations in the House which bears My Name and defiled it; and they built the high places of [the pagan god] Baal, which are in the Valley of the son of Hinnom, where they offered up their sons and daughters [as a fire sacrifice] to [the pagan god] Moloch, which I never commanded, nor did it come into My Mind, that they should do such an abomination, and so cause Judah to sin.”
(Jeremiah 32:33-35).
Additionally, since Omniscient God does not utter a Promise which He knows He will never fulfill, it is clear that He never intended to permit Abraham to slay Isaac -- the sole inheritor of God's "Everlasting Covenant" (see Genesis 17:19 & 17:21). And yet, God did, nonetheless, impose upon the kind and merciful Abraham a trial that ostensibly endangered the life of his precious child -- a trial that ran counter to every personality trait with which Abraham was imbued -- in order to ascertain whether Abraham, in the face of such a horrible Instruction, was capable of demonstrating complete and unconditional faith in Him and in His Morality.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"So, Abraham woke up early in the morning
and he saddled his donkey; he took his two young men with him and Isaac, his
son; he split the wood for the offering, and stood up and went to the place of
which God had spoken to him. On the third day, Abraham raised his eyes and
perceived the place from afar. And Abraham said to his young men, 'Stay here by
yourselves with the donkey, while I and the lad will go yonder; we will worship
and we will return to you.' And Abraham took the wood for the offering, and placed
in on Isaac, his son. He took in his hand the fire and the knife, and the two
of them went together. Then Isaac spoke to Abraham, his father, and said,
'Father.' And he said, 'Here I am, my son.' And he said, 'Here are the fire and
the wood, but where is the lamb for the offering?' And Abraham said, 'God will
seek out for Himself the lamb for the offering, my son.' And the two of them
went together. They arrived at the place of which God had spoken to him;
Abraham built the altar there, and arranged the wood; he bound Isaac, his son,
and he placed him on the altar atop the wood. Abraham stretched out his hand,
and he took the knife to slaughter his son. And an Angel of HaShem
called to him from Heaven, and said, 'Abraham! Abraham!' And he said, 'Here I
am.' And he said, 'Do not stretch out your hand against the lad nor do anything
against him; for, now I know that you are a God-fearing man, since you have not
withheld your son, your only [covenantal] one, from Me.' And Abraham raised his
eyes and saw -- behold, a ram! -- afterwards caught in the thicket by its
horns; so Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as an offering
instead of his son. And Abraham called the name of that site "HaShem Yireh" [meaning: HaShem
Will Perceive], as it is said this Day: ‘On the Mountain, HaShem
will perceive [the true character of a person].’ The Angel of HaShem called to Abraham a second time from Heaven. And he
said, 'By Myself I swear -- the Word of HaShem --
that because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your
only [covenantal] one, that I shall surely bless you and greatly increase your
offspring like the stars of the sky and like the sand which is on the seashore;
and your offspring shall inherit the gate of its enemies. And all the nations
of the Earth shall bless themselves by your offspring, because you have
listened to My Voice.' Abraham returned to his young men, and they stood up and
went together to Beersheba; and Abraham stayed at Beersheba."
(Genesis 22:3-19).
"So, Abraham woke up early in the morning and he saddled his donkey; he took his two young men with him and Isaac, his son; he split the wood for the offering, and stood up and went to the place of which God had spoken to him." Abraham’s reaction to God’s Instruction to sacrifice his son Isaac was to promptly prepare for and commence the journey to the Land of Moriah. It is noteworthy that, unlike the prior episode in which God had informed Abraham about His impending Judgment upon Sodom and Gomorrah (see Genesis 18:16-33), in this episode Abraham neither accused God of being Unjust nor otherwise attempted to persuade Him to rescind His Instruction. This is very strange. For, other than Lot, the inhabitants of the cities of the Jordan River plain were both evil and strangers to Abraham, while Isaac was both righteous and Abraham’s closest kin. Why did Abraham aggressively advocate for them, but not at all for his only covenantal offspring? The answer is that Abraham had indeed learned a profound lesson from that prior episode, namely, that the Judge of all the Earth does indeed do Justice (see Genesis 18:25); and he had consequently internalized the fact that even if God’s Instruction was incomprehensible to him, it was nonetheless Just. Being Just, it must be obeyed without disputation.
"On the third day, Abraham raised his eyes and perceived the place from afar. And Abraham said to his young men, 'Stay here by yourselves with the donkey, while I and the lad will go yonder; we will worship and we will return to you.' … Then Isaac spoke to Abraham, his father, and said, 'Father.' And he said, 'Here I am, my son.' And he said, 'Here are the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for the offering?' And Abraham said, 'God will seek out for Himself the lamb for the offering, my son.' And the two of them went together. They arrived at the place of which God had spoken to him; Abraham built the altar there, and arranged the wood; he bound Isaac, his son, and he placed him on the altar atop the wood." It is clear that, until the very last moment, Abraham actively concealed from Isaac the Instruction that he was to offer him as a sacrifice to God. Consequently, while Abraham was able to exercise his God-given right of Free Will to choose whether to obey or disobey God’s Instruction, Isaac was denied that same prerogative. The reason for Abraham’s conduct is that he understood that God’s Instruction was meant only for him and was thereby intended to implicate only the exercise of his Free Will. By informing Isaac of the Instruction, and by giving Isaac the opportunity to choose whether or not to participate in the implementation thereof, Abraham would be making his own obedience to God dependent upon and secondary to Isaac’s obedience to God, thereby subverting the raison d'être of the trial. Yet, despite Abraham’s evasion of the Truth, it is nonetheless likely that Isaac, who was approximately 37 years old at the time of this incident -- calculated by comparing Sarah’s age at his birth (90 years old per Genesis 17:17) with Sarah’s age at her death (127 years old per Genesis 23:1), which happened shortly after this incident -- understood that he was to be the sacrificial offering. Why did he cooperate with the ruse? The reason is that he completely trusted in his father, just as Abraham now completely trusted in his Father.
"Abraham stretched out his hand, and he took the knife to slaughter his son. And an Angel of HaShem called to him from Heaven, and said, 'Abraham! Abraham!' And he said, 'Here I am.' And he said, 'Do not stretch out your hand against the lad nor do anything against him; for, now I know that you are a God-fearing man, since you have not withheld your son, your only one, from Me.'" That God's Purpose in testing Abraham was to ascertain whether or not Abraham was capable of demonstrating complete and unconditional trust in Him and, consequently, true Yirat Elohim, is confirmed by the Angel's laudatory declaration to Abraham as the latter was about to slaughter his son. By explicitly declaring: "… for, now I know that you are a God-fearing man …", the Angel was explicitly confirming that Abraham’s prior conduct had demonstrated an endemic lack of pragmatic faith in God’s Power and Promises.
"The Angel of HaShem called to Abraham a second time from Heaven. And he said, 'By Myself I swear -- the Word of HaShem -- that because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only one, that I shall surely bless you and greatly increase your offspring like the stars of the sky and like the sand which is on the seashore ..." As a reward for Abraham's demonstration of complete faith, God reiterated to Abraham His Promise of Progeny through Isaac, who was described to Abraham, for the third time since God's announcement of His Test, as "your son, your only one". Yet this characterization was factually incorrect because Abraham then had two sons, namely, Ishmael and Isaac. Obviously, God was speaking, not in terms of Abraham's biological offspring, but rather in terms of Abraham's covenantal offspring -- of whom Isaac was the only one. Clearly, by referring three times to Isaac as Abraham's only son, God sought to emphasize to Abraham -- in the strongest possible manner -- that God's intertwined Promises of Progeny and of the Land were meant to be fulfilled only through Isaac and his covenantal descendants, namely, the Jewish people. For, it is by virtue of these intertwined Promises that God has granted to the Jewish people -- and only to the Jewish people -- rightful and eternal possession of the Land of Israel.
"... and your offspring shall inherit the gate of its enemies." This represented God's Promise of military victory and domination in favor of Abraham’s progeny. Consequently, it was a pointed reminder to Abraham of how utterly worthless was his treaty with the Philistines. Moreover, by issuing His Promise of military supremacy in the wake of Abraham’s compliance with His Instruction to offer Isaac as a sacrifice, God was informing the Jewish people (being the covenantal beneficiary of this Promise) that, in order to merit the fulfillment of this Promise, they must be willing to sacrifice their children in pursuit of the necessary wars that Israel must periodically conduct against its enemies.
Through this incident, God is teaching to Abraham and to the Jewish people a crucial lesson concerning the fruit of the tree that is rooted in complete and unconditional trust in Him: Although God commanded Abraham to initiate a procedure which ostensibly endangered Isaac's life, Abraham's compliance with such Instruction further safeguarded Isaac's life. In our own Day, this lesson takes the following form: Although acting in compliance with God's national Commandments may endanger the lives of individual Jews, the exercise of such complete and unconditional trust in God will assuredly further safeguard the collective existence of the Jewish people. With this lesson in mind, we can see that the Test imposed by the God of Israel upon Abraham was also intended to serve as a portent of the End Time when God will test the Jewish people still residing in the Exile by presenting them, in fulfillment of Prophecy (see Deuteronomy 30:3-5), with the opportunity to freely return to the resurrected nation-state of Israel -- but at a time when Israel would be subjected to such unrelenting threat of annihilation and international hostility that both common sense and parental instinct would naturally conspire against their exercise of this God-given Opportunity. In this way, God intends to discover whether or not His People -- as demonstrated by their collective willingness or unwillingness to place themselves and their children in harm's way -- will follow in the footsteps of their ancestor Abraham by completely and unconditionally trusting in Him. To date, the bulk of Exilic Jewry -- both the Secular and the Religious -- have failed this Test. And, accordingly, the God of Israel will adjudge this generation for their lack of trust in Him, just as He once adjudged the generation of the Exodus for their lack of trust in Him -- a generation which, upon hearing the fearful report of 10 out of the 12 tribal leaders sent to reconnoiter the Land of Israel (then occupied by the Canaanite nations), complained to Moses that the Land would devour them and their children. The harsh Judgment that God pronounced upon our wayward ancestors for their lack of faith in His Promises ought to penetrate our very souls and cause us to reconsider our misguided collective judgment that the modern countries of the Diaspora are -- while the modern State of Israel is not -- a safe harbor for the Jewish people. God declared to that prior generation:
"'And your young children, of whom you said they will be taken captive, I shall bring them [to the Land of Israel]; they shall know the Land [of Israel] that you have despised. But your carcasses shall drop in this Wilderness.'"
(Numbers 14:31-32)
So, it will be with our wayward generation!
There is one final lesson to be learned from this episode. When the God of Israel prevented Abraham from appeasing and/or honoring Him by means of a human sacrifice, God was forever warning the Jewish people (1) that He would never accept a human sacrifice as an atonement for Sin or for any other purpose, and (2) that any otherwise blameless person who dared to claim that God demanded his murder as an atonement for Sin was thereby acting against -- rather than in compliance with -- the Will of God. Consequently, the Hebrew Bible’s account of the aborted sacrifice of Isaac represents a preemptive repudiation of the central tenet of Christianity that God not only accepted, but orchestrated, a human sacrifice as an atonement for Sin.
"Abraham returned to his young men, and they stood up and went together to Beersheba; and Abraham stayed at Beersheba." Scripture is silent as to whether Isaac was one of the young men who returned with Abraham to Beersheba, or as to whether Abraham and his young men went directly to Beersheba. At some point, however, Isaac did return to Beersheba because he subsequently joined himself to his wife Rebecca in the Beersheba-based tent of his deceased mother Sarah (see Genesis 24:62-67).
CHAPTER 11: THE PURCHASE OF THE CAVE OF MACHPELA FROM THE HITTITES
After the death of righteous Sarah, Abraham's faith was again tested. Arriving in Hebron, he desired to acquire for Sarah (and for himself) possession of a burial site -- the Cave of Machpela (also known as the Tomb of the Patriarchs and the Matriarchs) -- then controlled by the Hittites.
The traditional rabbinic view is that Abraham's acquisition of the Cave and the surrounding field through the payment of money was an act of righteousness, and thereby resulted in a Kiddush HaShem (sanctification of God's Name), based primarily upon the following ancient Talmudic statement:
"Rabbi Yehuda Bar Simon said: It is one of the three places where the nations of the World would not be able to deceive Israel by claiming, 'You are thieves.' And they are: The Cave of the Patriarchs [in Hebron], the Temple Mount [in Jerusalem], and Joseph's Tomb [in Shechem, which is modern-day Nablus]."
(Bereshit Rabba, 89)
-- the underlying rationale being that, by having purchased these places from their Gentile occupiers, we thereby prove to the Gentile nations and to ourselves that our claim of possessory right thereto is valid and, consequently, beyond any legitimate challenge or dispute.
However, this venerable justification for the acquisition of possession by purchase ignores (or, at least, obscures) the fact that the true and only basis for our claim of possessory right to these places is God's Promise of the Land to the Jewish people, thereby rendering the approbation over acquisition by purchase -- at least under circumstances in which acquisition may be obtained without having to compensate the occupiers -- misplaced. This is so for four basic reasons:
Firstly, by paying the Hittite occupiers for that which the Jewish people had already acquired from the True Owner thereof, Abraham exhibited a lack of complete faith in God's Promise of the Land and thereby diminished the Hittites' evident awe of him and, consequently, of his -- and their -- Master, the God of Israel.
Secondly, in claiming that the acquisition by purchase of these three specific places in the Land of Israel proves that Israel's possession of those places is legitimate, we wrongly imply that the acquisition by conquest of the remainder of the Land of Israel establishes the converse, namely, that Israel's possession of the remainder is illegitimate.
Thirdly, despite their knowledge that we have purchased these three specific places, the Gentile nations are not impressed by our proofs and, consequently, they persist in declaring that we have stolen these places -- as well as the remainder of the Land -- from its "rightful owners"; and, unfortunately, many Jews accept this Falsehood as Truth.
Fourthly, and most importantly, by praising the acquisition of possession by purchase, we wrongly declare to the Gentile nations and to ourselves that rightful possession of the Land of Israel may be acquired by means of our own resources rather than by virtue of God's Promise of the Land to the Jewish people.
Accordingly, I dissent from the traditional view.
Nonetheless, when the Gentile nations are the masters of the Land of Israel, it is clear that the Jewish people cannot acquire possession of any portion thereof except by purchase. Consequently, during such a bleak period, it is a Kiddush HaShem for the Jewish people to redeem by purchase any portion of the Land. However, when the Jewish people are again the masters of the Land, their government is mandated to acquire possession thereof by seizure in the Name of the God of Israel. During such a period, although it remains a Kiddush HaShem for the Jewish people to redeem by purchase any portion of the Land that a faithless Jewish government refuses to so seize, it is a Chillul HaShem (desecration of God's Name) for the Jewish people to justify their Covenantal Possession of the Land by reference to such acquisition by purchase.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"Sarah’s life was 127 years -- the years of
Sarah’s life. Sarah died in Kiryat Arba
-- this is Hebron -- in the Land of Canaan; and Abraham came to eulogize Sarah
and to mourn her. Abraham rose up from the presence of his dead, and spoke to
the Children of Heth, saying, 'I am an alien and a resident among you. Grant to
me an estate for a burial site with you, so that I may bury my dead from before
me.' And the Children of Heth answered Abraham, saying to him, 'Hear us, my
lord: You are a Prince of God in our midst; in the choicest of our burial
places bury your dead; any of us will not withhold his burial place from you,
from burying your dead.' Then Abraham rose up and bowed down to the members of
the council, to the Children of Heth. He spoke to them saying, 'If it is truly
your will to bury my dead from before me, heed me, and intercede for me with
Ephron, son of Zohar. Let him grant to me the Cave of Machpelah which is his,
on the edge of his field; let him grant it to me for its full price, in your midst,
as an estate for a burial site.' Now, Ephron was sitting in the midst of the
Children of Heth; and Ephron the Hittite responded to Abraham in the hearing of
the Children of Heth, of all who had come to the gate of his city, saying, 'No,
my lord; heed me! I have given to you the field, and as for the cave that is
within it I have given it to you. In the view of the children of my people have
I given it to you. Bury your dead!' So, Abraham bowed down before the members
of the council. He spoke to Ephron in the hearing of the members of the
council, saying, 'Rather, if only you would heed me! I give to you the price of
the field. Accept it from me, so that I may bury my dead there.' And Ephron
replied to Abraham, saying to him, 'My lord, heed me! Land worth 400 silver
shekels; between me and you -- what is it? Bury your dead.' Abraham heeded
Ephron, and Abraham weighed out to Ephron the price which he had mentioned in
the hearing of the Children of Heth -- 400 silver shekels in negotiable
currency. And Ephron's field, which was in Machpelah, facing [the oak trees of]
Mamre, the field and the cave within it and all the trees in the field, within
all its surrounding boundaries, was confirmed as Abraham's, as a purchase in
the view of the Children of Heth, among all who came to the gate of his city.
And afterwards Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of
Machpelah facing [the oak trees of] Mamre, which is Hebron, in the Land of
Canaan. Thus, the field with its cave was confirmed as Abraham's, as an estate
for a burial site, from the Children of Heth."
(Genesis 23:1-20).
"Sarah’s life was 127 years -- the years of Sarah’s life. Sarah died in Kiryat Arba -- this is Hebron -- in the Land of Canaan; ..." Abraham and Sarah resided among the oak trees of Mamre -- located in Hebron (also called Kiryat Arba) -- and subsequently in Beersheba. After the denouement of the binding of Isaac for sacrifice, Abraham returned to Beersheba and stayed there (see Genesis 22:19). However, at some point, Sarah left Beersheba and returned to Hebron, thereby raising questions that cannot be answered by reference to the revealed text of the Hebrew Bible. For example, did Sarah journey to Hebron at the same time as Abraham and Isaac journeyed to the Land of Moriah, or only after Abraham returned to Beersheba? And why did Sarah go to Hebron? If Sarah journeyed to Hebron before the binding of Isaac, then perhaps Abraham had told her of God’s Instruction, and she -- believing that God was now going to take away her child -- wanted to return to the place where she had first learned that God was going to give her that child. For, she might have naturally felt that Hebron was the appropriate place for her to pray for Isaac’s deliverance or, in the alternative, to eulogize and mourn Isaac. In that case, Abraham, Isaac and Sarah could have travelled part of the way together, as Hebron was on the way to the Land of Moriah. Moreover, one or more of Abraham’s Amorite allies (namely, Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner) might have given her shelter there. And, if Abraham and Isaac passed through Hebron on their way back to Beersheba, then perhaps Sarah chose to remain a while longer in Hebron in order to give thanks to God for not taking away her child. Alternatively, if Sarah journeyed to Hebron only after Abraham had returned to Beersheba, then perhaps Abraham had not told her of God’s Instruction until after his return, and she likewise might have naturally felt that Hebron was the appropriate place for her to give thanks to God for not taking away her child.
"… and Abraham came to eulogize Sarah and to mourn her." After Sarah’s death, Abraham travelled from Beersheba to Hebron to conduct her funeral and burial. However, Scripture is silent as to whether Isaac accompanied Abraham on that journey and thereafter attended the funeral and burial, thereby again raising questions that cannot be answered by reference to the revealed text of the Hebrew Bible. However, whether or not Isaac accompanied Abraham on the journey to Hebron, is it possible that Isaac did not attend his own mother’s funeral and burial there? If Sarah travelled to Hebron before the binding of Isaac, then perhaps Isaac, returning with Abraham from the Land of Moriah, chose to remain with her in Hebron with the intention of accompanying her back to Beersheba, as it is unlikely that he or Abraham would have permitted Sarah to travel such a long distance by herself. Alternatively, if Sarah travelled to Hebron only after Abraham had returned to Beersheba, then perhaps Isaac chose to accompany her to Hebron, as -- again -- it is unlikely that he or Abraham would have permitted Sarah to travel such a long distance by herself. In either case, Isaac would have already been with his mother in Hebron when she died. Consequently, when Abraham arrived in Hebron, he would have joined Isaac for the funeral and burial.
"Abraham rose up from the presence of his dead and spoke to the Children of Heth, saying, 'I am an alien and a resident among you. Grant to me an estate for a burial site with you, so that I may bury my dead from before me.'" This event took place after God's direct intervention against, and humiliation of, Pharaoh; and after Abraham's miraculous victory over the four kings; and after God's destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and, in the merit of Abraham, His miraculous extraction of Lot therefrom; and after God's direct intervention against, and humiliation of, Abimelech; and after the miraculous birth of Isaac; and after the political-military alliance solicited by Abimelech due to the latter’s publicly-declared awe of the God of Israel; and after the binding of Isaac for sacrifice and God's resultant Promises to Abraham of majesty, including military victory and domination. Moreover, since, by Divine Promise, the entire Land of Israel was given to Abraham -- God's earthly representative and the progenitor of the Jewish people -- he was its earthly master, and he was thereby entitled to physically exercise his possessory right over any portion thereof, including the Cave of Machpela, without having to compensate its present occupiers on account thereof. Nevertheless, despite all this, Abraham supplicated the Hittites with the utmost humility, portraying himself, not as the Land's earthly master, but rather as its transient guest -- "an alien and a resident among you". Abraham's exhibition of such humility before the Hittites was not appropriate to his true status as Prince of God. In fact, it constituted a Chillul HaShem; for, all the nations of the World, including the Jewish people, are slaves to God, and, consequently, His Servant Abraham was not permitted to be, or to even portray himself as, a supplicant to his fellow slaves but only to his and their Master, the God of Israel. As God would later explain concerning the reason why an indentured Jew is not permitted to serve his human master in perpetuity, but must either be redeemed by his family prior to the Jubilee Year or be released by his human master in the Jubilee year:
"'For, the Children of Israel are Servants to Me; they are My Servants, whom I have taken out of the Land of Egypt -- I am HaShem, your God.'"
(Leviticus 25:55)
"And the Children of Heth answered Abraham, saying to him, 'Hear us, my lord: You are a Prince of God in our midst; in the choicest of our burial places bury your dead; any of us will not withhold his burial place from you, from burying your dead.'" The Hittites were well aware of Abraham's illustrious history; and, moreover, they knew that Abraham and his heir Isaac were the bearers of God's "Everlasting Covenant" (see Genesis 17:7; 17:19; and 17:21). Accordingly, while Abraham improperly displayed his subservience towards the Hittites by humbly petitioning them for a burial site, they properly displayed their subservience towards the God of Israel by openly acknowledging His Servant Abraham's supremacy over the Land and over them -- "a Prince of God in our midst".
"Then Abraham rose up and bowed down to the members of the council, to the Children of Heth. He spoke to them saying, 'If it is truly your will to bury my dead from before me, heed me, and intercede for me with Ephron, son of Zohar. Let him grant to me the Cave of Machpelah which is his, on the edge of his field; let him grant it to me for its full price, in your midst, as an estate for a burial site.' Now, Ephron was sitting in the midst of the Children of Heth; and Ephron the Hittite responded to Abraham in the hearing of the Children of Heth, of all who had come to the gate of his city, saying, 'No, my lord; heed me! I have given to you the field, and as for the cave that is within it I have given it to you. In the view of the children of my people have I given it to you. Bury your dead!'" Ironically, while an incredulous Abraham ignored the Hittites' open awe of the God of Israel, by prostrating himself before them and offering to pay full value for the Cave of Machpela, an incredulous Ephron ignored Abraham's display of servility, by publicly insisting that, not only the Cave, but also the surrounding field, already belonged to Abraham.
"So, Abraham bowed down before the members of the council. He spoke to Ephron in the hearing of the members of the council, saying, 'Rather, if only you would heed me! I give to you the price of the field. Accept it from me, so that I may bury my dead there.' And Ephron replied to Abraham, saying to him, 'My lord, heed me! Land worth 400 silver shekels; between me and you -- what is it? Bury your dead.' Abraham heeded Ephron, and Abraham weighed out to Ephron the price which he had mentioned in the hearing of the Children of Heth -- 400 silver shekels in negotiable currency." But Abraham, due to his personal humility and on account of his insistence on treating the Hittite occupiers as the true owners of the Land, thereby caused their manifest fear of the God of Israel to diminish and, accordingly, Ephron gladly accepted Abraham's money as a purchase price for that which already belonged to the Jewish people! This is similar to Abraham's earlier treaty with the Philistines in which he essentially purchased from King Abimelech the very well that he already owned (see Genesis 21:22-34).
"And Ephron's field, which was in Machpelah, facing [the oak trees of] Mamre, the field and the cave within it and all the trees in the field, within all its surrounding boundaries, was confirmed as Abraham's, as a purchase in the view of the Children of Heth, among all who came to the gate of his city." This publicly-conducted transaction constituted a great Chillul HaShem; for Abraham did not yet understand that he was standing, not only before the Hittites, as an individual on a personal errand to bury his wife, but, as well, before the entire Gentile World, as the progenitor of the Jewish people on a national mission to publicly exercise the Jewish people's possessory right to the Land in the sight of the nations and to thereby demonstrate his complete faith in God's Power and Promises. Instead, Abraham publicly demonstrated to the Gentile World that, despite his exalted true status, he still considered himself, not "a Prince of God in our midst", but rather "an alien and a resident among you".
Conversely, the traditional rabbinic view asserts that Abraham's servile attitude towards the Hittites and their respectful counter-attitude towards him, as well as their offer to provide to him a burial site without request for payment, were merely component parts of an elaborate, convoluted, and traditional Hittite negotiating ritual -- and therefore feigned; and that, since the attitudes and offer were feigned, they bore no relationship to the parties' true positions. But, in my opinion, the God of Israel, Who meticulously chose the contents of the Torah, did not include therein the full details of the parties' negotiations in order to educate us as to the intricacies of the Hittite negotiating process. Rather, God desired to educate us as to the conflict that raged within our Patriarch Abraham concerning issues of Kiddush HaShem and Chillul HaShem -- issues of Yirat Elohim (fear of God) and Yirat HaGoyim (fear of the nations). Accordingly, while Abraham's recurring humility in the Presence of God was certainly a virtue and thereby created a Kiddush HaShem, his recurring humility in the presence of the Gentile nations (including the Hittites) was not a virtue, and thereby created a Chillul HaShem.
That a Jewish leader is prohibited from flattering, and humbling himself before, the Gentile nations is demonstrated by the tragedy of righteous Hezekiah, monarch of the southern kingdom of Judah (see II Kings 18:1 - 20:21 and II Chronicles 29:1 - 32:33). King Hezekiah eradicated idolatry from the kingdom of Judah and restored Yirat Elohim among the Jewish people. Consequently, he was beloved of God. Yet despite his great personal merit and accomplishments, he nevertheless caused the kingdom of Judah, in a future generation, to fall into the hand of evil Babylonia, thereby initiating the destruction of the First Temple and the commencement of the Babylonian Exile. What was righteous Hezekiah's sin? -- Only that, in a moment of weakness, he flattered, and humbled himself before, Babylonia's leadership. Hezekiah's moment of weakness occurred after a series of events culminating in God's Rescue of the kingdom of Judah from certain destruction. First, Sennacherib, king of Assyria, destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel and exiled its survivors. Next, Assyria captured many of Judah's cities and advanced towards Jerusalem. In response to Assyria's invasion of Judah, and its sacking of the fortified cities thereof (except for Jerusalem), Hezekiah humbled himself before Sennacherib by declaring:
"... 'I have sinned. Withdraw from me, and whatever you impose upon me I will bear.'"
(II Kings 18:14)
In response to this plea Sennacherib imposed upon Hezekiah an enormous tribute which the latter paid by giving to Sennacherib all the treasures found in the Temple and in his palace. However, despite Judah's appeasement of Assyria, the latter's army nevertheless laid siege to Jerusalem; and because of Judah's appeasement of Assyria, the latter's spokesman publicly boasted before the Jewish people that the God of Israel was a false god who was incapable of saving Jerusalem from the might of Assyria. Seeing that neither military prowess nor naked appeasement would suffice to rescue Judah from certain defeat, Hezekiah finally appealed to the God of Israel. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"Hezekiah then prayed before HaShem, and said, 'HaShem, God of Israel, Who dwells atop the Cherubim: You alone are God of all the kingdoms of the World; You made Heaven and Earth. Incline Your Ear, Hashem, and hear; open Your Eyes, HaShem, and see! Hear the words of Sennacherib that he has sent to insult the Living God! Indeed, HaShem, the kings of Assyria have destroyed the nations and their lands, and have placed their [i.e., the conquered nations’] gods into the fire, for they are not gods, but the work of Man's hands -- wood and stone -- so they destroyed them. So, now, HaShem, our God, save us please from his [i.e., Sennacherib’s] hand; then all the kingdoms of the World shall know that You alone are HaShem God.'"
(II Kings 19:15-19)
God responded to Sennacherib's public denigration of Him -- an enormous Chillul HaShem -- and to Hezekiah's pleas for Divine Intervention by decimating the Assyrian army and by causing Sennacherib to be assassinated by two of his sons. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"So, HaShem saved Hezekiah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem from the hand of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, and from the hand of everyone else; and He guided them [i.e., the Jewish people] all around. Many [foreigners] brought tributes for HaShem to Jerusalem, and luxurious gifts to Hezekiah, king of Judah; and, from that time forward, He was exalted in the eyes of all the nations."
(II Chronicles 32:22-23)
God's Intervention thereby effected a great Kiddush HaShem among the Gentile nations and among the Jewish people. Ironically, it was after all these events that Hezekiah converted Kiddush HaShem into Chillul HaShem! Despite being shown by God Himself that the Jewish kingdom’s appeasement of an aggressor kingdom leads, not to a cessation of aggression, but rather to an acceleration thereof, and despite God's very public Demonstration in the sight of the nations that He -- and He alone -- was the Protector of the Jewish people, Hezekiah, nevertheless, attempted to ingratiate himself with a newly-ascendant power emanating from the East -- Babylonia -- by showing to its emissaries all of his replenished royal treasuries. This display of Yirat HaGoyim by Hezekiah, leader of the Jewish people, enraged God. For, Hezekiah's humbling behavior before the emissaries of Babylonia had caused a great Chillul HaShem due to the inevitable inference that was drawn therefrom by the Gentile nations that, despite God's prior Exhibition of His Power in order to rescue the Jewish people from a past threat, the leader of the Jewish people nevertheless lacked complete faith in God's Ability to protect them from a future threat. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"Isaiah, the prophet, came to King Hezekiah and said to him, 'What did these men say, and from where did they come to you?' Hezekiah said, 'They came from a faraway land -- from Babylonia.' He said, 'And what did they see in your [treasure] house?" Hezekiah said, 'They saw everything in my house; there was nothing that I did not show them in my treasuries.' Isaiah then said to Hezekiah, 'Hear the Word of HaShem: "Behold, the days are coming when everything in your house, and that which your forefathers have accumulated until this Day, will be carried off to Babylonia. Not a thing will be left" said HaShem.'"
(II Kings 20:14-17)
The respect and awe that the Gentile nations had accorded the kingdom of Judah and its Protector, the God of Israel, as a result of Assyria's rout and humiliation was dissipated when these same nations saw the kingdom of Judah prostrate itself before Babylonia. As punishment for the Jewish people's voluntary humbling before Babylonia -- mida k'neged mida (measure for measure) -- God, in a later generation, effected the Jewish people's involuntary humbling before that same empire.
That a Jewish leader is prohibited from flattering, and humbling himself before, the Gentile nations was also demonstrated, in an earlier generation, by the prescient words of the Prophet Samuel to Saul, first king of united Israel, after the latter sought to ingratiate himself with Agag, the defeated king of the Amalekites, by sparing that king’s life, to wit:
"'Although you may be small in your own eyes, you are [nonetheless] the head of the tribes of Israel; and HaShem has anointed you to be king over Israel.'"
(I Samuel 15:17)
However, Abraham was more than king over the nation of Israel -- he was the nation of Israel, personified. And he was the undisputed human master over the Land of Israel. As such, he had a responsibility to his Master -- the God of Israel -- to openly and fearlessly assert Israel's national possessory right to the Land which God had given, in perpetuity, to him and to his covenantal descendants -- the future Jewish people. For, there is a distinction between the exercise of personal possession over a part of the Land of Israel and the exercise of national sovereignty thereover. While Abraham accomplished the former, he did not even attempt to accomplish the latter.
This is the reason why the Hebrew Bible, in describing the nature of Abraham’s possession of the field in which the burial cave was situated, subsequently explains:
“And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in
the Cave of Machpela, in the field of Ephron, the son
of Zohar the Hittite, facing [the oak trees of] Mamre. The field that Abraham
had bought from the Children of Heth; there Abraham was buried -- and [also]
Sarah, his wife.”
(Genesis 25:9-10)
By continuing to identify the field after its purchase by Abraham as being “the field of Ephron, the son of Zohar the Hittite”, the Hebrew Bible is making it clear that Abraham’s acquisition of this portion of the Land of Israel constituted an act of personal possession only -- and not an assertion of national sovereignty.
CHAPTER 12: THE FINAL WISDOM OF ABRAHAM
Towards the end of his life, Abraham finally learned from his mistakes and ceased to continue them. And, for the first time in Scripture, he began to publicly acknowledge -- as an established fact not subject to doubt or equivocation -- God's intertwined Promises of Progeny and of the Land. The proof of this comes from Abraham's instructions to his chief steward concerning the acquisition of a wife for Isaac.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"Now Abraham was old, well on in years, and
HaShem had blessed Abraham with everything. And
Abraham said to his servant, the elder of his household who controlled all that
was his, 'Place now your hand under my thigh. And I will have you swear by HaShem, God of Heaven and God of Earth, that you not take a
wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell.
Rather, to my Land [of birth Aram Naharayim -- see
Genesis 24:10] and to my kindred shall you go and take a wife for my son -- for
Isaac.' The servant said to him, 'Perhaps the woman shall not wish to follow me
to this Land. Shall I take your son back to the Land from which you departed?'
Abraham answered him, 'Beware not to return my son to there. HaShem, God of Heaven, Who took me from the house of my
father and from the land of my birth, Who spoke concerning me, and Who swore to
me saying, "To your offspring I will give this Land" -- He
will send His Angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son from there.
But, if the woman will not wish to follow you, you shall then be absolved of
this oath of mine. However, do not return my son to there.'"
(Genesis 24:1-8).
Abraham was faced with an existential dilemma. How could his small covenantal family -- consisting only of himself and Isaac -- eternally possess the Land of Israel in the absence of creating a succeeding covenantal generation? While solving this problem was not as harsh a Test as God’s earlier Instruction to offer up Isaac as a sacrifice, the Test of finding a suitable wife for Isaac was nonetheless daunting. This was because Abraham needed to satisfy conflicting requirements -- namely, the geographic requirement and the demographic requirement. Although the Land of Israel satisfied the geographic requirement (as it was the Land that God gifted to Abraham and his covenantal descendants), it failed the demographic requirement (as it did not host Abraham’s extended family). Conversely, although the Land of Aram Naharayim (meaning: “Exalted Place between the Two Rivers”), being ancient Mesopotamia (much of which was situated between the Tigris River and the Euphrates River, and which encompasses portions of present-day Turkey, Syria, and Iraq), satisfied the demographic requirement (as it did host Abraham’s extended family), it failed the geographic requirement (as it was not the Land that God gifted to Abraham and his covenantal descendants).
Consequently, Abraham sought to solve this conundrum by offering his future daughter-in-law the opportunity to immigrate to the Land of Israel, thereby proactively addressing both the geographic requirement and the demographic requirement.
It is noteworthy that the State of Israel faced the same geographic-demographic dilemma as did Abraham, as the Land of Israel contains a substantial population of hostile and irredentist Arabs, augmented by a high birthrate. Consequently, rather than abandon those portions of the Land that were dominated by Arab clans, the Jewish State decided to solve its geographic-demographic conundrum by enacting the “Law of Return”, which law has successfully encouraged much of diaspora Jewry to immigrate to Israel, thereby (in tandem with a rising Jewish birthrate) greatly reducing the demographic threat to Jewish hegemony in the Land of Israel.
By permitting Isaac neither to assimilate into the resident Canaanite peoples of the Land nor to leave the Land, and by openly reiterating God's intertwined Promises of Progeny and of the Land, Abraham finally demonstrated his complete faith in God's Power and Promises.
After Abraham had, from among his extended family, secured for Isaac a righteous wife -- Rebecca (being Abraham’s grandniece and Isaac’s first cousin once removed) -- he himself remarried.
The Hebrew Bible continues:
"Abraham proceeded and took a [secondary]
wife whose name was Keturah. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian,
Ishbak, and Shuah. Jokshan sired Sheba
and Dedan; and the children of Dedan were Asshurim, Letushim, and Leummim. And
the children of Midian: Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah; all these were
the descendants of Keturah. Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac. But to the
children of the concubine who were Abraham's, Abraham gave Gifts. Then he sent
them away from Isaac, his son, while he [Abraham] was still alive -- eastward
to the Land of the East."
(Genesis 25:1-6).
"Abraham proceeded and took a [secondary] wife whose name was Keturah. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah. Jokshan sired Sheba and Dedan; and the children of Dedan were Asshurim, Letushim, and Leummim. And the children of Midian: Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah; all these were the descendants of Keturah." Why does the Hebrew Bible recite all this information concerning, not only the children, but also certain of the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Abraham by his new secondary wife? This is done only to establish and emphasize how much Abraham loved his non-covenantal descendants.
"Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac. But to the children of the concubine who were Abraham's, Abraham gave Gifts. Then he sent them away from Isaac, his son, while he [Abraham] was still alive -- eastward to the Land of the East." By the end of his life, Abraham had inculcated himself with the strength and wisdom of Sarah; for although he remarried after her death and sired additional descendants whom he loved greatly, he expelled them from the Land of Israel. Abraham did this precisely because he now understood that God's intertwined Promises of Progeny and of the Land actually constituted a bilateral Contract between God and himself, which imposed obligations on both parties. Abraham finally understood that, in order to facilitate the fulfillment of God's Promises, he was required to separate -- both physically and spiritually -- his covenantal offspring (i.e., Isaac) from his non-covenantal offspring (i.e., Ishmael and the progeny of Keturah). The unprompted expulsion of his beloved non-covenantal descendants for the sake of Isaac constituted Abraham’s final Test.
Finally, the Hebrew Bible continues:
"Now these are the days of the years of
Abraham's life which he lived: 175 years. And Abraham expired and died at a
good old age, mature and content; and he was gathered to his people. And his
sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the Cave of Machpela,
in the field of Ephron, the son of Zohar the Hittite, facing [the oak trees of]
Mamre. The field that Abraham had bought from the Children of Heth: there
Abraham was buried -- and [also] Sarah, his wife. And it was after the death of
Abraham that God blessed Isaac, his son; and Isaac settled near Be’er Lachai Ro’i."
(Genesis 25:7-11).
"And his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the Cave of Machpela, in the field of Ephron, the son of Zohar the Hittite, facing [the oak trees of] Mamre." Ishmael's participation in Abraham's burial is proof that even he ultimately accepted the Justice -- by Abraham's hand -- both of his expulsion from the Land of Israel and of his forced separation from Isaac. So too will Ishmael's falsely-claimed descendants (i.e., the Arab people) ultimately accept the Justice -- by the Messiah's hand -- both of their future expulsion from the Land and of their forced separation from Isaac's covenantal descendants, the Jewish people.
"And it was after the death of Abraham that God blessed Isaac, his son." God blessed his son Isaac, and not his son Ishmael. For, although Ishmael had exhibited great respect towards Abraham by the end of the latter's life, it was exclusively to Isaac that God's Everlasting Covenant passed. And it is only with Abraham’s covenantal descendants -- first through his son Isaac, then next through his grandson Jacob, and then finally through those Hebrew tribes sired by Jacob who presently comprise the Jewish people -- that God's Everlasting Covenant continues to reside.
CONCLUSION
Abraham was a product of the Gentile World -- first Ur Kasdim (Ur of Chaldeans) and then Charan. When he came to the Promised Land, he made many mistakes, but by the end of his life, he had atoned for all of them, thereby fulfilling, in toto, God's Command to him:
"'... Walk before Me and be perfect.'"
(Genesis 17:1)
The lesson finally learned by a perfected Abraham must not be ignored by the present-day Jewish leadership, namely, that the Jewish people are required to settle the Land of Israel, and are forbidden to abandon any portion thereof to the Gentiles, whether due to:
(1) adverse environmental conditions (e.g., the severe famine that plagued Abraham when he first ascended to the Land), or
(2) generosity towards other claimants (e.g., Abraham’s desire to partition the Land between himself and Lot; and Abraham’s desire to recognize Ishmael as his heir), or
(3) the dangers attendant to repelling aggressors (e.g., the invasion of the Land by four powerful kings), or
(4) the advantages created by forming political and/or military alliances (e.g., Abraham’s treaty with the Philistines), or
(5) bleak demographic forecasts (e.g., the risk that residing in the Land would not enable sufficient growth of Abraham’s small family to ensure its longevity).
Furthermore, although individual righteous Gentiles, who abandon avodah zarah (meaning: idolatry and other deviant worship) and submit to Jewish sovereignty in the Land, may merit to reside therein, the nations to which they belong have no share in it -- either physically or spiritually. God Himself would later repeat this very message to the Jewish people in the form of a national Commandment. As the Hebrew Bible relates:
"HaShem spoke to Moses in the plains of Moab, by the Jordan [River], at Jericho, saying, 'Speak to the Children of Israel and say to them, "When you cross the Jordan [River] to the Land of Canaan, you shall drive out all the inhabitants of the Land from before you; and you shall destroy all their prostration stones; all their molten images shall you destroy; and all their high places shall you demolish. You shall possess the Land, and you shall settle in it; for, to you have I given the Land to possess it."'"
(Numbers 33:50-53)
Moreover, at the dawn of History, the God of Israel bestowed upon the future Jewish people, in perpetuity, sole possessory right to the Land of Israel. He declared His Gift of the Land to our Patriarchs fully 10 times:
To Abraham, five times, in Genesis 12:7; 13:14-17; 15:7; 15:18-21; and 17:7-8.
To Isaac, three times, in Genesis 17:18-21; 21:9-13; and 26:1-5.
To Jacob, two times, in Genesis 28:13-15; and 35:9-13.
And God ultimately reiterated His Promise to Moses and the Jewish people in the form of a national Commandment:
"'See, I have given the Land before you; come and possess the Land that HaShem swore to your forefathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give to them and to their offspring after them.'"
(Deuteronomy 1:8)
Hopefully, the leadership of present-day Israel will internalize and apply the lessons that are embedded in the Hebrew Bible’s account of the Life of Abraham.
© Mark Rosenblit