Chayye Sarah
Genesis 23:1-25:18
Précis: The parasha begins with the counting of the life of Sarah (chayye Sarah), and with her death. It continues with a detailed description of the purchase of the cave of Machpela by Abraham for a family burial site. Abraham orders his servant to go to Abraham’s ancestral home to obtain a wife for Isaac, and after a series of fulfilled signs, the servant finds Rebecca. Rebecca returns with the servant; she and Isaac meet, fall in love at first sight, and wed. The parasha ends with the death of Abraham, his burial by Isaac and Ishmael in the family plot, and with the genealogy of Ishmael.
This week’s parasha is thick with life cycle events describing the stresses that families face with a special focus on estrangement, separation, and attempted reconciliation. Before the parasha begins, we had already learned of the challenges found in Abraham’s household: the late-in-life separation and relocation of Abraham from his home in Haran to Canaan, Sarah’s infertility, the birth of Ishmael, the birth of Isaac, Ishmael’s banishment, and the aborted sacrifice on Mount Moriah. The half-brothers, Isaac and Ishmael, have been separated. Both appear to be estranged from Abraham. Abraham’s wife Sarah dies suddenly and Abraham buries her. Isaac, the son so recently the subject of the Akedah, is absent. Where is he? We are not informed.
Abraham, perhaps because he is lonely following the death of Sarah, now seems intent on reestablishing a relationship with Isaac when he sends his “senior servant” (most assume it is Eliezer) on a trip to Abraham’s homeland to obtain a wife for Isaac.
When Eliezer returns, the separation between Abraham and Isaac is subtly reinforced by the text. The servant does not report back to Abraham. Instead, Eliezer brings Rebecca to Isaac (whom he refers to as "my master," another indication that all is not well between Abraham and Isaac).
Isaac, by the way, has been living in Be’er lahai roi. This location is coincidentally (or not so coincidentally!) the same location to which Hagar and Ishmael fled upon their expulsion from Abraham’s household. Was Isaac seeking a reunion with his brother Ishmael after the experience on Moriah and the death of Sarah? Was he seeking family reconciliation? The text fails to tell us.
We do learn that after Isaac is comforted by Rebecca, Abraham (who we’ve all assumed was close to death) takes another wife (by the name of Keturah) with whom he has an additional six sons, all who become the future heads of nations. Was this another indication that all was not well between Abraham and Isaac, or that Abraham felt the need for an alternative heir? Some midrashim suggest that “Keturah” was actually Hagar! If this is the case, one might consider that Abraham’s reestablishing connections with Hagar (and Ishmael) was another sign that all seemed lost between Abraham and Isaac.
Whatever the relationship actually was between Abraham and Isaac, Abraham reaches out at death by making sure that Isaac inherits all of his property. We also know that upon Abraham’s death, Isaac and Ishmael together bury Abraham next to Sarah in the Cave of Machpela.
What are we to learn from this narrative, and from the implications which seem to be lurking just beneath the text itself? First, family life is complicated. There are always opportunities for misunderstandings and for one's own needs to conflict with those whom one loves. It is easy to blame others in the family, and to break away and alienate family members. Second, reconciliation is difficult but is possible, even at death. Reconciliation may come through joining together for a funeral (as with Isaac and Ishmael), or (more hopefully) by considering the needs of others and seeking to help them once again, as Abraham did with Isaac by securing a wife for him.
In our own lives, we may have witnessed the awkward reunion of long-estranged family members at a funeral. How much better would it be if such reconciliations took place at a simchas? We can’t burn bridges with those we love. This week’s reading reminds us of the ever-present potential for reconciliation where love exists.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
The Moral Education of God
Vayera
Genesis 18:1-22:24
Précis: God “appeared” (vayera) to Abraham in the form of three travelers to whom Abraham shows hospitality. They predict the birth of Isaac, overheard by Sarah (who laughs). God reveals His plans for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Abraham argues for its salvation for the sake of any innocent who might dwell there. The scene shifts to Sodom, where Lot lives, and he and his daughters are rescued first from an unruly mob, and then from the destruction of the city itself. Lot’s wife glances back and turns into the pillar of salt. His daughters, fearing that they are the last females alive, make Lot drunk and engage in sexual relations with him, later giving birth to founders of the tribes of Moab and Ammon (traditional adversaries of the Israelites).
Back with Abraham, Sarah conceives and gives birth to Isaac. She becomes unhappy with the continued presence of Ishmael and prevails upon Abraham to expel Ishmael and Hagar from the household, which he does (after being promised by God that Ishmael, too, will be the father of a great nation). Thereafter, the story continues with the attempted sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham, called the Akedah (the Binding of Isaac).
Genesis 18:23-33 “Abraham came forward and said, ‘Will you sweep away the innocent along with the guilty? What if there be fifty innocent within the city…? Far be it from You to do such a thing, to bring death to the innocent as well as the guilty…’ And Adonai said, ‘I will forgive the whole place for their sake.’ And Abraham said, ‘What if the 50 innocent will lack five? Will you destroy the whole city for want of the five?’"
In my recent comments about the parasha Noach, I suggested that we should consider God as a character in the narrative: God undergoes changes and growth which can give us vital insights into the text.
Similarly, Jerome M. Segal suggests in his book, Joseph’s Bones (Riverhead Books, 2007) that the story of Sodom and the bargaining about its fate is an example of what he calls “the moral education of God.”
Regarding the Flood story, God felt that all of humanity, with the exception of Noah, was evil (Gen. 6:5: … “every form of their heart’s planning was only evil all the day”). But we know that humanity was not entirely evil, based upon the fact that the Bible has positive things to say, at times, about other earlier characters (Abel offers an appropriate sacrifice, for example). When we add to this the fact that God expresses regret for the Flood, and promises never to repeat it, we can conclude that God has “learned a lesson” not to slay the innocent with the guilty. This lesson is documented by the rainbow, a sign of a new covenant.
In this week’s reading, God asks the angels whether He should hide His intentions regarding Sodom from Abraham. He states that Abraham has been “singled out” so that he “may instruct his children and his posterity to keep the way of the Eternal, doing what is right and just” (Gen. 18:19). Thus, because Abraham is to be a teacher of morals, God becomes an early practioner of “teaching the teacher.”
It is ironic, then, that the roles are immediately reversed: Abraham becomes the teacher, and God the student. Abraham knows what God has planned, because God has done it before (the Flood). Abraham asks in the best of Socratic instruction: “Will you sweep away the innocent with the guilty?...Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?” Abraham asserts that moral law is binding, even upon God. Mankind cannot be viewed as God’s plaything merely because He created it.
The midrash supports this interpretation. In Genesis Rabbah 49:9, Abraham reminds God about His promise: “You have sworn not to bring a deluge upon the world. Would You evade Your oath? Not a deluge of water but a deluge of fire? Then You have not acted according to Your oath.” Abraham chides God for looking for a loophole. The Torah seems to be telling us that God’s understanding of morality grows as His understanding of humanity grows. God’s initial subscription to the theory of collective punishment slowly gives way to the conception of individual culpability: the innocent should not suffer on account of the guilty.
God learns, and we should learn by His example. We are repeatedly told to act as God would act. “Just as God visits the sick, we should visit the sick. Just as God comforts mourners, so should we.” (BT Sotah 14a). The story of the Flood and the story of Sodom taken together show that God has the ability to grow as His understanding of human beings grows. What a wonderful metaphor for all of us to consider as we strive to live ethical lives.
Genesis 18:1-22:24
Précis: God “appeared” (vayera) to Abraham in the form of three travelers to whom Abraham shows hospitality. They predict the birth of Isaac, overheard by Sarah (who laughs). God reveals His plans for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Abraham argues for its salvation for the sake of any innocent who might dwell there. The scene shifts to Sodom, where Lot lives, and he and his daughters are rescued first from an unruly mob, and then from the destruction of the city itself. Lot’s wife glances back and turns into the pillar of salt. His daughters, fearing that they are the last females alive, make Lot drunk and engage in sexual relations with him, later giving birth to founders of the tribes of Moab and Ammon (traditional adversaries of the Israelites).
Back with Abraham, Sarah conceives and gives birth to Isaac. She becomes unhappy with the continued presence of Ishmael and prevails upon Abraham to expel Ishmael and Hagar from the household, which he does (after being promised by God that Ishmael, too, will be the father of a great nation). Thereafter, the story continues with the attempted sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham, called the Akedah (the Binding of Isaac).
Genesis 18:23-33 “Abraham came forward and said, ‘Will you sweep away the innocent along with the guilty? What if there be fifty innocent within the city…? Far be it from You to do such a thing, to bring death to the innocent as well as the guilty…’ And Adonai said, ‘I will forgive the whole place for their sake.’ And Abraham said, ‘What if the 50 innocent will lack five? Will you destroy the whole city for want of the five?’"
In my recent comments about the parasha Noach, I suggested that we should consider God as a character in the narrative: God undergoes changes and growth which can give us vital insights into the text.
Similarly, Jerome M. Segal suggests in his book, Joseph’s Bones (Riverhead Books, 2007) that the story of Sodom and the bargaining about its fate is an example of what he calls “the moral education of God.”
Regarding the Flood story, God felt that all of humanity, with the exception of Noah, was evil (Gen. 6:5: … “every form of their heart’s planning was only evil all the day”). But we know that humanity was not entirely evil, based upon the fact that the Bible has positive things to say, at times, about other earlier characters (Abel offers an appropriate sacrifice, for example). When we add to this the fact that God expresses regret for the Flood, and promises never to repeat it, we can conclude that God has “learned a lesson” not to slay the innocent with the guilty. This lesson is documented by the rainbow, a sign of a new covenant.
In this week’s reading, God asks the angels whether He should hide His intentions regarding Sodom from Abraham. He states that Abraham has been “singled out” so that he “may instruct his children and his posterity to keep the way of the Eternal, doing what is right and just” (Gen. 18:19). Thus, because Abraham is to be a teacher of morals, God becomes an early practioner of “teaching the teacher.”
It is ironic, then, that the roles are immediately reversed: Abraham becomes the teacher, and God the student. Abraham knows what God has planned, because God has done it before (the Flood). Abraham asks in the best of Socratic instruction: “Will you sweep away the innocent with the guilty?...Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?” Abraham asserts that moral law is binding, even upon God. Mankind cannot be viewed as God’s plaything merely because He created it.
The midrash supports this interpretation. In Genesis Rabbah 49:9, Abraham reminds God about His promise: “You have sworn not to bring a deluge upon the world. Would You evade Your oath? Not a deluge of water but a deluge of fire? Then You have not acted according to Your oath.” Abraham chides God for looking for a loophole. The Torah seems to be telling us that God’s understanding of morality grows as His understanding of humanity grows. God’s initial subscription to the theory of collective punishment slowly gives way to the conception of individual culpability: the innocent should not suffer on account of the guilty.
God learns, and we should learn by His example. We are repeatedly told to act as God would act. “Just as God visits the sick, we should visit the sick. Just as God comforts mourners, so should we.” (BT Sotah 14a). The story of the Flood and the story of Sodom taken together show that God has the ability to grow as His understanding of human beings grows. What a wonderful metaphor for all of us to consider as we strive to live ethical lives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)