Reflections on Rosh Hashanah 5782
The two Torah portions we read on Rosh Hashanah contain two stories: the story of Yitzhak’s birth and the Biding of Yitzchak story, known as Akeda. The latter has become extremely popular and widely commented by entire generations of commentators, writers, philosophers, thinkers and spiritual leaders, both Jewish and non-Jewish. This has resulted in countless interpretations of the story. In the Jewish tradition, its message has often been understood as a lesson for mankind to stop sacrificing children. According the famous interpretation of the Danish philosopher, Søren Kierkegaard, Abraham, in this story, is a “knight of faith” who allows the possibility of murder “in the name of faith.” Within this framework we can portray Abraham as a religious fanatic or, without trying to discredit him, simply recognize that faith and religion are superior to ethics; that they themselves dictate ethics and sometimes transcend it.
But here I will focus on the common ground of the two stories and will extract the message that stems from both of them read together. Let’s start our analysis with the following passage:
And He said: Take your son, your only one, Yitzhak, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains that I will point out to you. (Bereshit 22:2)
What is strange about this verse? The fact that God calls Yitzhak the only son of Abraham. Did not Abraham have an older son, Ishmael? Obviously he did, so why is Isaac called here his only son?
Commentators are not particularly effusive on this point. Rashi gives us a midrash explaining why God did not immediately point to Yitzhak, but used the term “the only son you love”. An important hint, however, can be found in Nahmanides’ commentary, where we read:
קח נא את בנך את יחידך בעבור היותו בן הגבירה והוא לבדו אשר יקרא לו זרע קראו יחידו ובא הלשון להגדיל המצוה אמר קח נא את בנך היחיד האהוב יצחק והעלהו עולה לפני
TAKE NOW THY SON, THINE ONLY SON. Since Isaac was the son of the mistress and he alone was to be the one to carry his name, He called him Abraham’s only son. The description was for the purpose of magnifying the command, thus saying: “Take now thy only son, the beloved one, Isaac, and bring him up before Me as a burnt-offering.”
Besides the purpose of “magnifying the mitzvah” this commentary suggest something essential: Yitzhak is the only Abraham’s legitimate son. Only he (and his descendants) can be called rightfully “the seed of Abraham”. Is it not, by any chance, contrary to the idea that Abraham is the rightful father of all nations? Not necessarily, because he is indeed the father of the nations, nevertheless the fact that he is also the father of the chosen people is something definitely more important, also for Abraham himself.
Not judging, in any way, this way of reasoning I would suggest a bit different interpretation here, which will direct us towards a more universal understanding of this verse as well as of the entire story of Abraham, Sarah, Hagar and their sons. Let’s begin by tracing what happened in our biblical story earlier, starting from the moment before Ishmael was conceived:
And Sarai said to Abram, “Look, the LORD has kept me from bearing. Consort with my maid; perhaps I shall be built up through her.” And Abram heeded Sarai’s request. (Bereshit 16:2)
According to Bereshit Rabbah 45:2, quoted by Rashi, Sarah decided to have a son through Hagar because a person who has no children is not firmly established (literally, built up: her name and future are not perpetuated) and is unstable. So, was the conception of Ishmael only meant to build up Sarah? Not at all, as we learn from verses 17:20-21:
As for Ishmael, I have heeded you. I hereby bless him. I will make him fertile and exceedingly numerous. He shall be the father of twelve chieftains, and I will make of him a great nation.
But My covenant I will maintain with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this season next year.
The same promise is repeated again in verse 21:18. Ishmael also receives God’s blessing and his conception was also intended to populate the land with the seed of Abraham, with “a small difference” – the covenant between God and the chosen people was reserved only for Isaac and his offspring. It is also known from the verse 16:12 that Ishmael will be a wild ass of a man, His hand against everyone, And everyone’s hand against him; but He shall dwell alongside of all his kinsmen.
What was then the purpose of conceiving Ishmael? There might be many answers to this question. The answer that comes to my mind at the moment is the following: the chosen nation must be constantly challenged by the existence of other nations, also brutal and violent, so that the Israelites/Jewish people may be aware of their separateness and intentionally remain God’s chosen people
In the meantime, God promises twice, to Abraham and Sarah (Bereshit 17:21 and 18: 10-15), that Sarah will give birth to a son and in both cases even the name of the promised son appears. They both already “know” that the God’s promise will become real and their desires will be fulfilled. However, they all still live in “a love triangle”. This relationship comes to an end shortly after Yitzhak is weaned (21:8-12), which causes Abraham’s distress.
Therefore, even though Ishmael and his descendants are also considered to be of Abraham’s seed (21:13), in fact it is Yitzhak only who is his “rightful seed” and that’s the reason the Torah, in another chapter (22:2) speaks about him as of Abraham’s only son. In short, we can say that Yitzhak is the covenantal seed of Abraham, whereas Ishamel is the non-covenantal seed of Abraham.
* * *
What can be the common meaning of both of these stories for us today? I will propose two possible messages here. The first, more succinctly, concerns the tribal aspect of our religion and history, and boils down to the following thesis: our covenant with God was “hanging in the balance” before it was even made with us. Nevertheless, it has never been broken, Abraham did not sacrifice Yitzhak and the Divine promise was fulfilled. Therefore, even though our covenant with God may seem fragile, it is not: it is permanent and eternal.
The second message is universal: people have their own plans and great visions, but when they encounter problems in implementing them, they choose different, alternative and often temporary solutions. They choose what is given to them, what is within their reach. But it often happens that despite choosing a temporary solution they do not abandon their original visions and still think about them, hoping that they will eventually come true.
When it comes to love relationships, it happens that people know that they will not be together forever, they know that they are not meant for each other. Sometimes they even openly talk to each other about what it will be like in the future when they are not together anymore. Nevertheless, they remain in their relationships as if they were to last forever.
However, sometimes there comes a time when their original visions become possible, completely realistic or even within easy reach. Then people abandon their temporary solutions, although often, especially in situations related to love, these are very difficult decisions. That was also the reason for Abraham’s despondency after the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael, whom he also loved, as all indicates.It is also possible that it was this state of depression that made him decide to sacrifice Isaac (there is a midrash that adds to the Akeda a prologue similar to the one in the Book of Job, according to which God allowed Satan to come to Abraham to test him the way he later put Job on the test. The voice that prompted Abraham to sacrifice his son would be thereby a Satan’s voice).
When it comes time to make such difficult decisions, one would often like to simply annul the current state of affairs: relations with other people, obligations to them or promises made to them. In our biblical story, it is God himself who cancels Abraham’s obligations to Hagar and Ishmael.
