Yet, when asked to sacrifice his son, he silently acquiesces. No argument, no challenge, no question. How about a little pleading? Why does he just saddle up the donkeys and set out to fulfill the mission? How can this be the same Abraham who challenges God's verdict on Sodom? How can this be the Abraham who is known to God as the one who will "instruct his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of the LORD, to do righteousness and justice"? (Gen 18:19)
There is a beautiful poem about the Akeda that part of the Sephardic Rosh Hashana liturgy that describes Abraham and Isaac's experience of the three day trip to Mount Moriah. The eight stanza of the poem describes the following:
דָּפְקוּ בְּשַׁעְרֵי רַחֲמִים לִפְתֹּחַ
הַבֵּן לְהִזָּבַח וְאָב לִזְבֹּחַ
They pounded on the gates of mercy to open
The son who was to be sacrificed, and the father who was to sacrifice
The poet seems to share my feeling - how could it be that Abraham and Isaac did not challenge God's command? The text must have left it out, so the poet adds it back in.
While the poet's question resonates with me, it is hard for me to believe the text would leave such an important detail out.
Tradition holds that this the final of Abraham's ten trials. The interpretation that makes sense to me right now is that Abraham failed this last one. God chose Abraham to found the Jewish people because he passed 9 out of 10, but he did not get a perfect score. He should have challenged. He should have fought. I have no sources to back this up, but it seems to me to be the only interpretation I can live with. I cannot believe, given Abraham's behaviour earlier in the Parsha, or for that matter, Moshe's behaviour when told the Israelites will be wiped out, that God wants us to accept his decrees passively. My own moral compass cries out against Abraham's acquiescence.
The interpretation is very problematic. The text seems to contradict it completely. Abraham is blessed, because he did not withhold his son from God. (Gen. 22:16-18). However, the text uses a very strange phrase: כִּי, יַעַן אֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתָ אֶת-הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה, וְלֹא חָשַׂכְתָּ, אֶת-בִּנְךָ אֶת-יְחִידֶךָ. I am still looking, but I can't find its parallel anywhere else in Scripture. Why כי יען? Why not just כי? The root verb ענה, means to answer. It indicates a counterpoint. Perhaps we could read it, instead of כי יען meaning "because", but instead כי יען, meaning "despite." God chooses Abraham despite his failure to argue on behalf of his son. However, by hearing the voice of the angel telling him to stop, and by immediately bringing another sacrifice of a ram to atone for his sin, he has shown that he is still the right man for the job. He missed his chance here, but he understood the message, and will not make the mistake again.
The Akeda stands as an icon of all the sacrifices we have had to make as Jews over the centuries. It embodies our willingness to give our lives, and sometimes our children's lives for our faith. I understand that theme, that message. The selichot prayers make it clear that this is how the Akeda was seen at least through Ashkenazi eyes of the middle ages, as the Crusades forced them to sacrifice their children over and over. I myself expect to send my children to risk their lives in the IDF.
However, I don't think we need to accept this sacrifice willingly or without question. I think we need to fight it until we have no choice. We have to challenge and question and look for alternatives.
Perhaps Abraham did eventually have to get to the top of that mountain and sacrifice Isaac. Maybe that is what is demanded from us in the face of a direct command from God.
But he should have at least argued first.
Posts
1 comment:
As my friend, Amir Karger, pointed out in an e-mail, my כי יען attempt does not hold water. I need to find a better way of making sense of this part of the text.
Post a Comment