Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Avraham Avinu: The First Jew

     On Monday we spent our class talking Avraham Avinu (Abraham our father). We began by talking about his call from Hashem (Genesis 12) and whether or not we thought it was a literal call or more of a gut feeling or inspiration. The students offered a number of interesting suggestions for what kind of man they thought Abraham must have been, which I hope they'll share in the comments.
     Moving forward in Avraham's life we see that he travels along derekh hahar (the mountain road) to arrive at Shechem (near modern day Nablus in the West Bank). Whereas most of the modern Israeli population is located on the coastal plain, traditionally it's the mountainous interior where most Jews lived. This is an important fact to keep in mind when we talk about giving up land for peace. The Tanakh tells us that Avraham avinu, the founder of our people, lived in the area that, if there's a two state solution, will one day be a part of Palestine.
     He then continues down into Egypt where he curiously refers to his wife Sarah as his "sister". After giving the students a chance to think of reasons why he might do this I told them about the Nuzi documents, documents found in modern day Iraq that mention a legal principle in which the sister-wife is the most important wife. But if we accept that explanation then there are other incongruities in the story (and my understanding is that the most recent evidence suggests that sister-wife explanation is likely flawed). For example, if this was a well-known status, why were the Egyptians angry when they found out about it? Understanding the Tanakh is rarely simple. Solving one problem often creates another.
     We then talked about one of Avraham's most well-known brits (covenants), his circumcision. As with every covenant there are two sides; Avraham promises to walk in Hashem's ways and God promises to give Avraham the land of Canaan and make him the father of a great nation. The physical sign (another requirement for a brit) for this brit is circumcision (brit milah in Hebrew).
     Perhaps more interesting than the brit milah itself is what happens afterward. Avraham is sitting in his tent, talking to Hashem when three strangers walk up. Avraham immediately rises to greet them (after just getting circumcised as an old man no less!), completely ignoring Hashem. In these few short verses we learn a number of things (and see how the Tanakh is simultaneously an incredible piece of literature and an instruction manual for how to live your life). First, we see Avraham ignore Hashem (who is in the middle of bikur holim, visiting the sick) for the sake of three strangers. In Judaism we divide the 613 mitzvot (commandments) in a number of ways: do/don't do, understand (don't murder) and can't understand (keeping kosher), etc. In Avraham's behavior we see one of the most important divisions, the difference between mitzvot ben adam l'makom (commandments that deal with the relationship between humans and god) and mitzvot ben adam l'chavero (commandments that deal with the relationship between humans). Unlike other religions of the time (and perhaps even of our own time) in Judaism the interactions between people are more important than those between people and Hashem. As I'm sure many of you are aware on Yom Kippur Jews are expected to apologize to the person we wronged, not ask forgiveness from Hashem.
Another interesting mitzva we see demonstrated here is "welcoming the strangers." Even today in desert cultures the idea of hospitality is incredibly important. Given the difficulty of traveling in the desert--little food, even less water--hospitality may well save your life. So while Avraham is making the effort toward his guests in this case, he may well be the needy one next time. Not only is "welcoming the guest" a lovely value, it's a clear reminder of the fact that Am Yisrael began in a desert landscape as nomads.
     Having learned a bit about what kind of man the founder of Am Yisrael is we arrived to what, in my opinion, is the most challenging aspect of the Avraham story. Hashem tells Avraham he's going to destroy Sodom and Gemorrah. Avraham, unhappy with this decision, argues with Hashem, questioning whether Hashem will destroy the righteous together with the wicked. Avraham negotiates with Hashem over how many righteous people need to be present to make the towns worth saving, starting with 50 and eventually talking Hashem down to ten. What chutzpah! A few verses later Hashem commands Avraham to sacrifice his only son, Yitzchak, and Avraham doesn't make a peep. For me, this is a difficult series of events to try and understand. We know that Avraham is willing to argue with Hashem, but doesn't try to save his only son. Is Avraham willing to argue for the public good, but not for his personal happiness? Is God testing Avraham? If so, what's the test? Is it, as tradition teaches, a test of Avraham's faith? Is it a test to see whether Avraham understands that Judaism is a truly different religion that doesn't demand human sacrifice? Is Avraham testing God? How do you think this episode affects Avraham's relationship with God? His relationship with Yitzchak? How do you think this event affects Yitzchak? I look forward to hearing all your suggestions in the comments. 

6 comments:

  1. Hey Aaron, in response to your question about whether it is a test of faith, I say yes, although this would be a really screwed up test of faith. I think that this is one example of a time that G-d makes a mistake. G-d does not think about the implications of his actions, and he actually causes Isaac and Abraham to never speak again in the entire Tanakh. Though Abraham technically passed the test, he failed to think about what would happen if he went through with it. Just because we have the image of G-d and Abraham as being 100% perfect beings doesn't mean it's true. In fact, in this example, they make a huge mistake, much larger than many people today have ever made.

    ReplyDelete
  2. In order to decide whether or not Avraham was tested, I think it's important to look at their relationship. When Avraham was concerned that he had no children, G-d promised him countless children, bringing faith into their relationship. G-d commits His land to Avraham, bringing eternal protection into their relationship. When G-d asked Avraham to sacrifice Isaac, I think he was trying to teach Avraham to balance the relationships in his life. Of course Avraham seemed to value his relationship with G-d rather than his own son, thus causing a shift in his family relationships. This means that G-d had the intentions of teaching Avraham a lesson of balancing different interactions, but Avraham didn't seem to figure this out. His relationship with Isaac was forever changed. So, in my opinion, Avraham definitely failed the test that G-d put before him, as well as failing to recognize his mistakes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. In response to what type of person Abraham was, I believe he was quintessentially human. Like all humans, Abraham was not completely good nor was he completely bad. There was the side of Abraham who called his wife his sister, and nearly killed his son. But there was also the side of Abraham who saved the lives of forty innocent people and boldly followed his own faith. Similarly to the rest of the Tanakh, the character of Abraham is very complex. And I think that's what makes it so interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Regarding Abraham's test of faith, I think the aspect of God's direct tone must be called into context. When confiding in Abraham His plan to destroy the unworthy of Sodom and Gemorrah, God is rebuked, and Abraham convinces Him not to destroy the city based on the good potential it has. However, when God specifically orders Abraham to sacrifice his son, what choice does he have? Refuse the word of God directly and risk His wrath? Yes, Abraham has chutzpah, but when is talking back to God too far? Perhaps Abraham realized that this God, this God who has seemed so righteous and just, would never ask him to sacrifice his own son. Perhaps he realized that it was a test all along, and played right along with השם...

    ReplyDelete
  5. God here in Genesis 12 is testing Abraham to see if he can see the difference between the lives of a group of innocent people and the life of the one who was most important to him. He must have figured that God had a good reason for him to kill the son of the man he had made a covenant with, and that he took lightly to (in the grand scheme of things) the deaths of fifty random people. Abraham saw it as his duty to protect those who might not be getting justice, even if god was administering it. Abraham, however, was oblivious to the fact that almost sacrificing Isaac would leave his son traumatized, forever worsening their relationship. This is an example of an imperfect Jewish hero.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think Abraham chose to argue with God over 50 people he did not know and not about his son, because he realized if he didn't stand up for this group, no one else would. I think Abraham did not stand up for his son because he knows that his son came to be because of a covenant with god. God gave Abraham his son, so god can take his son away. I think Abraham was too wrapped up in wanting to please god, that he lost track of whats really important in life, his family. Abraham may have passed gods test of faith but he not only hurt his only son, but lost the test of morals.

    ReplyDelete