Difference between revisions of "Endangering Sarai in Egypt/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
<mekorot><multilink><a href="BavliBavaBatra16a" data-aht="source">Bavli Bava Batra</a><a href="BavliBavaBatra16a" data-aht="source">16a</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="TanchumaLekhLekha5" data-aht="source">Tanchuma</a><a href="TanchumaLekhLekha5" data-aht="source">Lekh Lekha 5</a><a href="Tanchuma" data-aht="parshan">About the Tanchuma</a></multilink>,<fn>The Midrash also mentions Avraham's attempts to protect Sarah by hiding her in a box, combining this approach with the one below.</fn> <multilink><a href="RambamCommentaryontheMishnahAvot5-17" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamCommentaryontheMishnahAvot5-17" data-aht="source">Commentary on the Mishnah Avot 5:17</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Maimonides</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RadakBereshit12-11-17" data-aht="source">Rad<multilink data-aht=""></multilink>ak</a><a href="RadakBereshit12-11-17" data-aht="source">Bereshit 12:11-17</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBereshit.2316" data-aht="source">Akeidat Yitzchak</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBereshit.2316" data-aht="source">Bereshit #16</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="AbarbanelBereshit12-10" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelBereshit12-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 12:10</a><a href="AbarbanelBereshit12-16" data-aht="source">Bereshit 12:16</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink><fn>Abarbanel combines this approach with the others below.</fn></mekorot> | <mekorot><multilink><a href="BavliBavaBatra16a" data-aht="source">Bavli Bava Batra</a><a href="BavliBavaBatra16a" data-aht="source">16a</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="TanchumaLekhLekha5" data-aht="source">Tanchuma</a><a href="TanchumaLekhLekha5" data-aht="source">Lekh Lekha 5</a><a href="Tanchuma" data-aht="parshan">About the Tanchuma</a></multilink>,<fn>The Midrash also mentions Avraham's attempts to protect Sarah by hiding her in a box, combining this approach with the one below.</fn> <multilink><a href="RambamCommentaryontheMishnahAvot5-17" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamCommentaryontheMishnahAvot5-17" data-aht="source">Commentary on the Mishnah Avot 5:17</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Maimonides</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RadakBereshit12-11-17" data-aht="source">Rad<multilink data-aht=""></multilink>ak</a><a href="RadakBereshit12-11-17" data-aht="source">Bereshit 12:11-17</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBereshit.2316" data-aht="source">Akeidat Yitzchak</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBereshit.2316" data-aht="source">Bereshit #16</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="AbarbanelBereshit12-10" data-aht="source">Abarbanel</a><a href="AbarbanelBereshit12-10" data-aht="source">Bereshit 12:10</a><a href="AbarbanelBereshit12-16" data-aht="source">Bereshit 12:16</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink><fn>Abarbanel combines this approach with the others below.</fn></mekorot> | ||
<point><b>Descent to Egypt</b> – These commentators assert that Avraham only left the land promised to him by Hashem because the severe conditions brought by the famine left him no choice.<fn>In explaining the necessity, Tanchuma and Abarbanel point to the harshness of the famine while Radak and R. Yitzchak Arama note the many members of his household and the numerous cattle that Avraham had to provide for.  Abarbanel brings evidence for this assertion from the opening verse of the story which emphasizes that Avraham left only "כִּי כָבֵד הָרָעָב בָּאָרֶץ". Had the situation been less severe, Avraham would not have gone down.  To further support this positive evaluation of Avraham's decision to leave the land, both Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel points to the discussion in <a href="BavliBavaKamma60b" data-aht="source">Bava Kama</a> which sees Avraham's actions as worthy of emulation.</fn>  As such, his actions are not considered problematic. Both Radak and Abarbanel further stress that Avraham only planned to move temporarily and was thus not rejecting Hashem's chosen land.</point> | <point><b>Descent to Egypt</b> – These commentators assert that Avraham only left the land promised to him by Hashem because the severe conditions brought by the famine left him no choice.<fn>In explaining the necessity, Tanchuma and Abarbanel point to the harshness of the famine while Radak and R. Yitzchak Arama note the many members of his household and the numerous cattle that Avraham had to provide for.  Abarbanel brings evidence for this assertion from the opening verse of the story which emphasizes that Avraham left only "כִּי כָבֵד הָרָעָב בָּאָרֶץ". Had the situation been less severe, Avraham would not have gone down.  To further support this positive evaluation of Avraham's decision to leave the land, both Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel points to the discussion in <a href="BavliBavaKamma60b" data-aht="source">Bava Kama</a> which sees Avraham's actions as worthy of emulation.</fn>  As such, his actions are not considered problematic. Both Radak and Abarbanel further stress that Avraham only planned to move temporarily and was thus not rejecting Hashem's chosen land.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>"הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי..."</b> – Most of these commentators define the word "נָא" in this verse as  "now".<fn>Though Radak agrees that the word means "now", he suggests that in this case it is simply being used as a figure of speech (similar to its usage in Bereshit 19:2 and 18).  Thus, one should not conclude from this statement that Avraham had never before recognized that his wife was beautiful.  For more about the usage of the word "נָא" in Tanakh see the lexical entry <a href="Dictionary:נָא" data-aht="page">נָא</a>.</fn> Avraham had either truly never noticed Sarah's beauty beforehand,<fn>Bava Batra, Tanchuma and Rambam understand the verse in this way, suggesting that due to Avraham's great modesty he had never looked carefully at his wife.  Tanchuma maintains that he only did so now because he happened to see her reflection in a river, "shining like the sun".</fn> or only first appreciated it now, when contrasting Sarah with the Egyptians.<fn>See Radak, Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel. Abarbanel asserts that until now Avraham had not thought that there was anything extraordinary about Sarah's beauty since there were other women who were comparable to her in Canaan.  Only upon arrival in Egypt, when he found himself surrounded by "dark-skinned and ugly" people, did he realize that she might be deemed beautiful by the locals.  Akeidat Yitzchak instead posits that Avraham recognized too late the base nature of the Egyptians, and that it was a country where the majority of the inhabitants would have no qualms about killing him in order to take his wife.</fn> It was thus, only on entry into Egypt, that Avraham recognized that there was potential danger.<fn>Akeidat Yitzchak asserts that Avraham had weighed the relative dangers of staying in Canaan (almost definite death due to famine) and what he deemed as only an unlikely possibility that there would be danger enroute.   Unfortunately, it turned out he had vastly underestimated the latter.  He points to the four lepers of Malkhim II, chapter 7 for another case where people weigh the likely death resulting | + | <point><b>"הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי..."</b> – Most of these commentators define the word "נָא" in this verse as  "now".<fn>Though Radak agrees that the word means "now", he suggests that in this case it is simply being used as a figure of speech (similar to its usage in Bereshit 19:2 and 18).  Thus, one should not conclude from this statement that Avraham had never before recognized that his wife was beautiful.  For more about the usage of the word "נָא" in Tanakh see the lexical entry <a href="Dictionary:נָא" data-aht="page">נָא</a>.</fn> Avraham had either truly never noticed Sarah's beauty beforehand,<fn>Bava Batra, Tanchuma and Rambam understand the verse in this way, suggesting that due to Avraham's great modesty he had never looked carefully at his wife.  Tanchuma maintains that he only did so now because he happened to see her reflection in a river, "shining like the sun".</fn> or only first appreciated it now, when contrasting Sarah with the Egyptians.<fn>See Radak, Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel. Abarbanel asserts that until now Avraham had not thought that there was anything extraordinary about Sarah's beauty since there were other women who were comparable to her in Canaan.  Only upon arrival in Egypt, when he found himself surrounded by "dark-skinned and ugly" people, did he realize that she might be deemed beautiful by the locals.  Akeidat Yitzchak instead posits that Avraham recognized too late the base nature of the Egyptians, and that it was a country where the majority of the inhabitants would have no qualms about killing him in order to take his wife.</fn> It was thus, only on entry into Egypt, that Avraham recognized that there was potential danger.<fn>Akeidat Yitzchak asserts that Avraham had weighed the relative dangers of staying in Canaan (almost definite death due to famine) and what he deemed as only an unlikely possibility that there would be danger enroute.   Unfortunately, it turned out he had vastly underestimated the latter.  He points to the four lepers of Malkhim II, chapter 7 for another case where people weigh the likely death resulting from hunger against potential dangers of entering enemy territory and choose the latter.</fn>  Radak and Abarbanel maintain that had he known sooner, Avraham would never have gone down.</point> |
− | <point><b>"וְהָרְגוּ אֹתִי וְאֹתָךְ יְחַיּוּ"</b> – According to Radak, Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel, in these words Avraham is pointing to the dangers that faced both him and Sarah - for him, death and for her, an equally terrible fate, to be left alive so as to be raped.</point> | + | <point><b>"וְהָרְגוּ אֹתִי וְאֹתָךְ יְחַיּוּ"</b> – According to Radak, Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel, in these words Avraham is pointing to the dangers that faced both him and Sarah - for him, death, and for her, an equally terrible fate, to be left alive so as to be raped.</point> |
<point><b>"וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי" - Is his life more important?</b> Radak explains that Avraham thought that Sarah would be in worse danger if he were dead rather than alive.  Though the Egyptians might take her either way, Avraham's presence would shame them into minimizing their base actions, whereas his death would leave Sarah at the mercy of their whims.<fn>In this Radak is similar to the approach below that suggests that Avraham's actions were aimed at protecting Sarah.</fn></point> | <point><b>"וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי" - Is his life more important?</b> Radak explains that Avraham thought that Sarah would be in worse danger if he were dead rather than alive.  Though the Egyptians might take her either way, Avraham's presence would shame them into minimizing their base actions, whereas his death would leave Sarah at the mercy of their whims.<fn>In this Radak is similar to the approach below that suggests that Avraham's actions were aimed at protecting Sarah.</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Why a sister specifically?</b> | + | <point><b>Why a sister specifically?</b> Radak does not address the issue explicitly, but he might maintain that Avraham thought he could best watch over Sarah if others believed that they were related (but not married).  This way they could live together, and their kinship would help ensure that the Egyptians acted with at least a modicum of conscience.<fn>See above that Radak assumes that the Egyptians' embarrassment in front of others might not prevent their licentious actions, but at least would put them in check.  Abarbanel, instead, follows in the path of the Ran, asserting that Avraham planned to portray himself as Sarah's guardian, in charge of her nuptials, enabling him to prevent her from being taken by potential suitors.  For elaboration, see below.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Lying and leading Egypt to sin</b> – Most of these commentators would likely maintain that lying is not problematic if it will help save a life, and that telling the truth would not have stopped the Egyptians from sinning anyway.<fn>It would have led instead to the murder of Avraham and the subsequent taking of Sarah by force.  Though the specific sin of adultery might be eliminated, the alternatives are not better.</fn> Akeidat Yitzchak suggests that even Paroh agreed that the ruse was valid in light of the Egyptian's reputation, and that he only complained why Avraham had not told him personally the truth.</point> | <point><b>Lying and leading Egypt to sin</b> – Most of these commentators would likely maintain that lying is not problematic if it will help save a life, and that telling the truth would not have stopped the Egyptians from sinning anyway.<fn>It would have led instead to the murder of Avraham and the subsequent taking of Sarah by force.  Though the specific sin of adultery might be eliminated, the alternatives are not better.</fn> Akeidat Yitzchak suggests that even Paroh agreed that the ruse was valid in light of the Egyptian's reputation, and that he only complained why Avraham had not told him personally the truth.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>"לְמַעַן יִיטַב לִי בַעֲבוּרֵךְ" - asking for riches?</b> Radak, Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel explain that this clause is parallel to and defined by the immediately following one, "וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי בִּגְלָלֵךְ".‎<fn>Compare <a href="Devarim5-30" data-aht="source">Devarim 5:30</a>, <a href="Devarim6-24" data-aht="source">Devarim 6:24</a> and <a href="Yirmeyahu38-20" data-aht="source">Yirmiyahu 38:20</a> where the two phrases are similarly paired and seem to be equivalent in meaning.</fn>  It is inconceivable that Avraham would desire to get rich off the shame of his wife.<fn>As proof of the absurdity of the possibility, Radak points to the story of Sedom where Avraham had legitimate rights to gifts and nonetheless refused them.</fn>  Moreover, he had no need of riches, being independently wealthy.  The only reason he even accepted the later gifts was his fear of displeasing Paroh.<fn>According to Abarbanel, even in the end Avraham does not accept gifts from Paroh.  He asserts that the referent of the words, "וּלְאַבְרָם הֵיטִיב בַּעֲבוּרָהּ" is actually Hashem (mentioned in the next verse) and that the verb in the clause is in the past perfect tense. One might question why the text would be sharing this information now. Abarbanel answers that the verses are simply saying that Hashem had previously given Avraham wealth due to Sarah's righteousness, and here too, He is plaguing Paroh on her behalf.</fn></point> | + | <point><b>"לְמַעַן יִיטַב לִי בַעֲבוּרֵךְ" - asking for riches?</b> Radak, Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel explain that this clause is parallel to and defined by the immediately following one, "וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי בִּגְלָלֵךְ".‎<fn>Compare <a href="Devarim5-30" data-aht="source">Devarim 5:30</a>, <a href="Devarim6-24" data-aht="source">Devarim 6:24</a> and <a href="Yirmeyahu38-20" data-aht="source">Yirmiyahu 38:20</a> where the two phrases are similarly paired and seem to be equivalent in meaning.  The difficulty for this position is the fact that the very same words, "וּלְאַבְרָם הֵיטִיב בַּעֲבוּרָהּ", appear several verses later and are understood by these commentators to refer to the giving of riches to Avraham.</fn>  It is inconceivable that Avraham would desire to get rich off the shame of his wife.<fn>As proof of the absurdity of the possibility, Radak points to the story of Sedom where Avraham had legitimate rights to gifts and nonetheless refused them.</fn>  Moreover, he had no need of riches, being independently wealthy.  The only reason he even accepted the later gifts was his fear of displeasing Paroh.<fn>According to Abarbanel, even in the end Avraham does not accept gifts from Paroh.  He asserts that the referent of the words, "וּלְאַבְרָם הֵיטִיב בַּעֲבוּרָהּ" is actually Hashem (mentioned in the next verse) and that the verb in the clause is in the past perfect tense. One might question why the text would be sharing this information now. Abarbanel answers that the verses are simply saying that Hashem had previously given Avraham wealth due to Sarah's righteousness, and here too, He is plaguing Paroh on her behalf.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Why punish Paroh?</b></point> | <point><b>Why punish Paroh?</b></point> | ||
<point><b>Why does Avraham repeat the actions in Gerar?</b> The repeated actions in Gerar are difficult for this position as it would be hard to say that there too Avraham was taken by surprise.<fn>Radak and Abarbanel, who maintain that Sarah's beauty was only in contrast to the Egyptians, could suggest that Avraham did not think it would be a problem elsewhere.  Nonetheless, one would think that after the near disaster in Egypt, Avraham would have been wary regardless.</fn></point> | <point><b>Why does Avraham repeat the actions in Gerar?</b> The repeated actions in Gerar are difficult for this position as it would be hard to say that there too Avraham was taken by surprise.<fn>Radak and Abarbanel, who maintain that Sarah's beauty was only in contrast to the Egyptians, could suggest that Avraham did not think it would be a problem elsewhere.  Nonetheless, one would think that after the near disaster in Egypt, Avraham would have been wary regardless.</fn></point> |
Version as of 13:06, 2 November 2014
Endangering Sarah in Egypt
Exegetical Approaches
This page is a stub.
Please contact us if you would like to assist in its development.
Please contact us if you would like to assist in its development.
Endangered Unwittingly
Avraham never intended to place his wife in danger and can not be blamed for the fact that Paroh took her to his palace. This position subdivides regarding what Avraham was thinking in acting as he did:
Unaware of Danger
Avraham simply did not recognize that going down to Egypt was going to endanger Sarah until it was too late.
Descent to Egypt – These commentators assert that Avraham only left the land promised to him by Hashem because the severe conditions brought by the famine left him no choice.3 As such, his actions are not considered problematic. Both Radak and Abarbanel further stress that Avraham only planned to move temporarily and was thus not rejecting Hashem's chosen land.
"הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי..." – Most of these commentators define the word "נָא" in this verse as "now".4 Avraham had either truly never noticed Sarah's beauty beforehand,5 or only first appreciated it now, when contrasting Sarah with the Egyptians.6 It was thus, only on entry into Egypt, that Avraham recognized that there was potential danger.7 Radak and Abarbanel maintain that had he known sooner, Avraham would never have gone down.
"וְהָרְגוּ אֹתִי וְאֹתָךְ יְחַיּוּ" – According to Radak, Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel, in these words Avraham is pointing to the dangers that faced both him and Sarah - for him, death, and for her, an equally terrible fate, to be left alive so as to be raped.
"וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי" - Is his life more important? Radak explains that Avraham thought that Sarah would be in worse danger if he were dead rather than alive. Though the Egyptians might take her either way, Avraham's presence would shame them into minimizing their base actions, whereas his death would leave Sarah at the mercy of their whims.8
Why a sister specifically? Radak does not address the issue explicitly, but he might maintain that Avraham thought he could best watch over Sarah if others believed that they were related (but not married). This way they could live together, and their kinship would help ensure that the Egyptians acted with at least a modicum of conscience.9
Lying and leading Egypt to sin – Most of these commentators would likely maintain that lying is not problematic if it will help save a life, and that telling the truth would not have stopped the Egyptians from sinning anyway.10 Akeidat Yitzchak suggests that even Paroh agreed that the ruse was valid in light of the Egyptian's reputation, and that he only complained why Avraham had not told him personally the truth.
"לְמַעַן יִיטַב לִי בַעֲבוּרֵךְ" - asking for riches? Radak, Akeidat Yitzchak and Abarbanel explain that this clause is parallel to and defined by the immediately following one, "וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי בִּגְלָלֵךְ".11 It is inconceivable that Avraham would desire to get rich off the shame of his wife.12 Moreover, he had no need of riches, being independently wealthy. The only reason he even accepted the later gifts was his fear of displeasing Paroh.13
Why punish Paroh?
Why does Avraham repeat the actions in Gerar? The repeated actions in Gerar are difficult for this position as it would be hard to say that there too Avraham was taken by surprise.14
Hoped to Avert Danger
Avraham's actions were part of a calculated plan which was meant to protect Sarah and prevent her from being forcibly taken by the Egyptians.
Sources:Bereshit Rabbah, Tanchuma, Rashi, Ba'alei HaTosafot, Ran, Abarbanel, Seforno, Ma'asei Hashem, Shadal, R. S"R Hirsch, Malbim, Hoil Moshe
Self-preservation
Avraham's conduct was motivated by a desire to save himself. Placing Sarah in potential danger was justified in face of the supreme value placed on preservation of life.
Descent to Egypt – This approach lauds Avraham's decision to escape almost certain death due to famine rather than trust that Hashem would save him.16 Commandments were given to live by, not to die for, and thus, temporarily leaving the land to escape famine is not seen as a transgression, but rather an act to be emulated.
"וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי" - Is Avraham's life more important? The commentators differ
- Pirkoi b. Baboi asserts that all other transgressions are overridden in order to save a life. Even a case of potential danger to life allows one to push off a potential case of illicit relations. One might question this assumption from the gemara which asserts that....
- Ralbag suggests that
- Abarbanel
"הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי..." – Ralbag does not read any significance into the word "נא" and assumes that Avraham had recognized Sarah's beauty earlier. He is remarking upon it now only in the context of the danger that this fact brings to Avraham's life.
"וְהָרְגוּ אֹתִי וְאֹתָךְ יְחַיּוּ" – According to Ralbag these phrases are simply flip sides of the same idea. Avraham is telling his wife that the Egyptians will kill him, leaving only her alive, emphasizing that the danger is to him personally (rather than to Sarah).
Why a sister specifically?
Lying and leading Egypt to sin
"לְמַעַן יִיטַב לִי בַעֲבוּרֵךְ" - asking for riches?
Why punish Paroh?
Why does Avraham repeat the actions in Gerar?
Avraham Sinned
Avraham's actions in descending to Egypt and endangering Sarah were problematic and Avraham was punished for them.
Sources:Ramban