Difference between revisions of "Endangering Sarai in Egypt/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
<p>Avraham's actions in descending to Egypt and endangering Sarah were problematic and Avraham was punished for them.</p> | <p>Avraham's actions in descending to Egypt and endangering Sarah were problematic and Avraham was punished for them.</p> | ||
<mekorot><multilink><a href="RambanBereshit12-10-13" data-aht="source">Ram<multilink data-aht=""></multilink>ban</a><a href="RambanBereshit12-10-13" data-aht="source">Bereshit 12:10-13</a><a href="Ramban20-12" data-aht="source">Bereshit 20:12</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ZoharPart1p81b" data-aht="source">Zohar</a><a href="ZoharPart1p81b" data-aht="source">Part 1, p. 81b</a><a href="Zohar" data-aht="parshan">About the Zohar</a></multilink>, U. Cassuto<fn>While the Ramban focuses on the problematic decision to go down to Egypt and endanger Sarah, Cassuto emphasizes Avraham's lack of faith once in Egypt that led him to lie in order to save his wife.</fn></mekorot> | <mekorot><multilink><a href="RambanBereshit12-10-13" data-aht="source">Ram<multilink data-aht=""></multilink>ban</a><a href="RambanBereshit12-10-13" data-aht="source">Bereshit 12:10-13</a><a href="Ramban20-12" data-aht="source">Bereshit 20:12</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="ZoharPart1p81b" data-aht="source">Zohar</a><a href="ZoharPart1p81b" data-aht="source">Part 1, p. 81b</a><a href="Zohar" data-aht="parshan">About the Zohar</a></multilink>, U. Cassuto<fn>While the Ramban focuses on the problematic decision to go down to Egypt and endanger Sarah, Cassuto emphasizes Avraham's lack of faith once in Egypt that led him to lie in order to save his wife.</fn></mekorot> | ||
− | <point><b>Descent to Egypt</b> – Ramban views Avraham's decision to leave Israel as an expression of lack of faith in Hashem.<fn>Cassuto does not fault Avraham on this point, asserting that he did so against his will, only due to the severity of the famine.  His intentions were only to stay there temporarily ("לָגוּר") and as soon as the danger passed to return to the land promised him by Hashem.</fn>  He claims that Avraham was in fact punished severely for his actions and the decree of slavery in Egypt was a direct outcome of this story.  As evidence, he points to the many parallels | + | <point><b>Descent to Egypt</b> – Ramban views Avraham's decision to leave Israel as an expression of lack of faith in Hashem.<fn>Cassuto does not fault Avraham on this point, asserting that he did so against his will, only due to the severity of the famine.  His intentions were only to stay there temporarily ("לָגוּר") and as soon as the danger passed to return to the land promised him by Hashem.</fn>  He claims that Avraham was in fact punished severely for his actions and the decree of slavery in Egypt was a direct outcome of this story.<fn>For elaboration, see Ramban's position in  <a href="Purposes_of_the_Egyptian_Bondage/2" data-aht="page">Purposes of the Egyptian Bondage</a>.</fn>  As evidence, he points to the many parallels<fn>Both stories open with a famine causing those affected to descend to Egypt.  Once there, the Egyptians oppress them leading Hashem to punish the oppressors via plague.  In the end both Avraham and the nation leave with great wealth.<br/>The Genesis Apocryphon and Jubilees, interestingly, add another potential parallel between the two stories. They both suggest that Avraham stayed in Chevron for two years and then in Egypt for five years before Sarah is taken. Michael Segal, in his article, "The Literary relationship between the Genesis Apocryphon and Jubilees: The Chronology of Abram and Sarai's Descent to Egypt", Aramaic Studies 8 (2010): 71-88, suggests that the works are alluding to the similar chronology in the Yosef story. The brothers first go to Egypt after two years of famine and stay there, unharmed, for the remaining five years. Only afterwards do troubles start.</fn> between the two episodes,<fn>Ramban points to R. Pinchas in Bereshit Rabbah who also enumerates the many similarities between the stories, asserting that Hashem told Avraham, "צא וכבוש את הדרך לפני בניך". R. Pinchas, however, does not view Avraham's actions as a sin.  In fact, Abarbanel points to his words in order to justify Avraham's descent, asserting that Hashem planted the idea in his head so that he could pave the way before his children.<br/>See, though, A. Shammah,"תהליכי גיבוש ותמורות בעמדתו הביקורתית של רמב"ן על אברם בירידתו מצרימה", Megadim 50 (2009):199-220, who suggests that Ramban might have originally agreed with the Midrashic take and only later changed his stance to view Avraham more critically.  Thus, when he wrote the first part of his comments on verse 10, he might have simply been showing how Avraham set in motion, on God's bidding, what was to come. Only later did Ramban add the last few lines ("דע כי אברהם אבינו חטא").  It should be noted, though, that this section is found in all the manuscripts of Ramban and does not seem to be  a later edition, so if Ramban's view changed over the years, the change was early enough that it found its way to the earliest versions of the commentary.</fn> suggesting that the enslavement was a measure for measure punishment for Avraham's deeds.</point> |
<point><b>"וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי" - Is Avraham's life more important?</b> Ramban and Cassuto fault Avraham for trying to save himself at the expense of endangering Sarah, claiming that Avraham should instead have trusted in Hashem to save them both.<fn>In his commentary on the Torah, Ramban suggests that Avraham asked Sarah to do this during many of their travels, suggesting that the ruse in and of itself might not have been such a bad idea. Perhaps what troubled Ramban was the decision to go to Egypt specifically, since its inhabitants were likely to harm Sarah's honor.   If so, this would explain why Ramban does not criticize Avraham in the parallel story in the land of the Philistines. <br/>In his דרשת תורת ה' תמימה, in contrast, Ramban does not mention the repeated usage of the plan and does assume that Avraham sinned in Gerar as well. See Shammah, as per the above note, who suggests that the different works might reflect different stages in Ramban's read of the story.</fn></point> | <point><b>"וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי" - Is Avraham's life more important?</b> Ramban and Cassuto fault Avraham for trying to save himself at the expense of endangering Sarah, claiming that Avraham should instead have trusted in Hashem to save them both.<fn>In his commentary on the Torah, Ramban suggests that Avraham asked Sarah to do this during many of their travels, suggesting that the ruse in and of itself might not have been such a bad idea. Perhaps what troubled Ramban was the decision to go to Egypt specifically, since its inhabitants were likely to harm Sarah's honor.   If so, this would explain why Ramban does not criticize Avraham in the parallel story in the land of the Philistines. <br/>In his דרשת תורת ה' תמימה, in contrast, Ramban does not mention the repeated usage of the plan and does assume that Avraham sinned in Gerar as well. See Shammah, as per the above note, who suggests that the different works might reflect different stages in Ramban's read of the story.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>"הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי..."</b> – Ramban  maintains that the word "נָא" refers to any fact which is a continuous truth<fn>In Ramban's words: על כל דבר הווה ועומד יאמרו כן, כי הוא רומז על הענין לומר שהוא עתה ככה. הנה נא ידעתי כי אשה יפת מראה את, מאז ועד עתה.</fn> pointing to its usage in Bereshit 16:2 and 19:8.  The phrase does not connote that Avraham first came to recognize Sarah's beauty upon entry into Egypt, but rather that he had known it all along.</point> | <point><b>"הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי..."</b> – Ramban  maintains that the word "נָא" refers to any fact which is a continuous truth<fn>In Ramban's words: על כל דבר הווה ועומד יאמרו כן, כי הוא רומז על הענין לומר שהוא עתה ככה. הנה נא ידעתי כי אשה יפת מראה את, מאז ועד עתה.</fn> pointing to its usage in Bereshit 16:2 and 19:8.  The phrase does not connote that Avraham first came to recognize Sarah's beauty upon entry into Egypt, but rather that he had known it all along.</point> | ||
Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
<point><b>Why a sister specifically?</b> Ramban does not address this point.  Cassuto maintains, like the Ran above, that Avraham was hoping to pass as Sarah's guardian so as to negotiate her nuptials and thus push off potential suitors.  In contrast to the Ran, though, he views this ruse as problematic, asserting that Avraham should not have trusted in his own cleverness (which in the end failed him) but in Hashem.</point> | <point><b>Why a sister specifically?</b> Ramban does not address this point.  Cassuto maintains, like the Ran above, that Avraham was hoping to pass as Sarah's guardian so as to negotiate her nuptials and thus push off potential suitors.  In contrast to the Ran, though, he views this ruse as problematic, asserting that Avraham should not have trusted in his own cleverness (which in the end failed him) but in Hashem.</point> | ||
<point><b>Lying and leading Egypt to sin</b> – Cassuto views this as Avraham's main sin. He should have had faith in Hashem's salvation rather than resort to trickery and trust his own wiles to outwit the Egyptians.  Cassuto asserts that in the end Avraham's plan totally backfired. His fear that the Egyptians might take Sarah never materialized, and what he had not planned for, that Paroh might be interested, did occur.  In the end, it was his lie itself that endangered Sarah; passing himself off as Sarah's brother is what enabled Paroh to take his wife.<fn>Ramban, in contrast, does not fault Avraham for this action.  He asserts that the Egyptians took Sarah without asking about her marital status at all and only afterwards did Avraham say that he was Sarah's brother to save himself from potential death. [He further maintains that Sarah herself did not say anything one way or the other and simply kept silent on the matter.] Thus, Avraham's words in no way casued the near catastrophe and Avraham did not lead anyone into sin<br/><br/></fn></point> | <point><b>Lying and leading Egypt to sin</b> – Cassuto views this as Avraham's main sin. He should have had faith in Hashem's salvation rather than resort to trickery and trust his own wiles to outwit the Egyptians.  Cassuto asserts that in the end Avraham's plan totally backfired. His fear that the Egyptians might take Sarah never materialized, and what he had not planned for, that Paroh might be interested, did occur.  In the end, it was his lie itself that endangered Sarah; passing himself off as Sarah's brother is what enabled Paroh to take his wife.<fn>Ramban, in contrast, does not fault Avraham for this action.  He asserts that the Egyptians took Sarah without asking about her marital status at all and only afterwards did Avraham say that he was Sarah's brother to save himself from potential death. [He further maintains that Sarah herself did not say anything one way or the other and simply kept silent on the matter.] Thus, Avraham's words in no way casued the near catastrophe and Avraham did not lead anyone into sin<br/><br/></fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>"לְמַעַן יִיטַב לִי בַעֲבוּרֵךְ" - asking for riches?</b> Ramban minimizes the possible negative connotations of Avraham's words by explaining that the good Avraham is referring to relates to the provision of sustenance during the famine, not riches. In addition, in paraphrasing Avraham's thoughts Ramban puts them into plural language, thereby having Avraham include Sarah as a beneficiary of this "good."<fn>See Shammah (ibid) who makes this point. He asserts that this more positive reading of Avraham's words reflects Ramban's wavering in his criticism of Avraham's actions.</fn></point> | + | <point><b>"לְמַעַן יִיטַב לִי בַעֲבוּרֵךְ" - asking for riches?</b> Ramban minimizes the possible negative connotations of Avraham's words by explaining that the good Avraham is referring to relates to the provision of sustenance during the famine, not riches. In addition, in paraphrasing Avraham's thoughts Ramban puts them into plural language, thereby having Avraham include Sarah as a beneficiary of this "good."<fn>See Shammah (ibid) who makes this point. He asserts that this more positive reading of Avraham's words reflects Ramban's wavering in his criticism of Avraham's actions.</fn> Cassuot instead suggests that all Avraham's words are parallel to the end of the verse, "וְחָיְתָה נַפְשִׁי בִּגְלָלֵךְ" and that the good he speaks of refers to the saving of his life.</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 Ran questions Ramban's criticism of Avraham from this point, asking how it is possible that Avraham would have repeated his sin by doing the same exact thing a few chapter later. In Ramban's Derashat Torat Hashem Temimah<fn>He does not address the issue in his Torah commentary, and does not even criticize Avraham in the second story.</fn> he suggests that Avraham never knew for what he was being punished in the Covenant between the Pieces and so he repeated the error.</point> | <point><b>Why does Avraham repeat the actions in Gerar?</b> The Ran questions Ramban's criticism of Avraham from this point, asking how it is possible that Avraham would have repeated his sin by doing the same exact thing a few chapter later. In Ramban's Derashat Torat Hashem Temimah<fn>He does not address the issue in his Torah commentary, and does not even criticize Avraham in the second story.</fn> he suggests that Avraham never knew for what he was being punished in the Covenant between the Pieces and so he repeated the error.</point> |
Version as of 23:53, 15 January 2015
Endangering Sarah in Egypt
Exegetical Approaches
Please contact us if you would like to assist in its development.
Endangered Unwittingly
Avraham never intended to place his wife in danger and had not thought that she would be taken to Paroh's 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.
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.
- Prolong marital negotiations – Most of these commentators assert that Avraham meant to act as Sarah's guardian who could negotiate her nuptials,15 and planned to ask for such a high dowry that no one would be able to meet it. During the prolonged discussions Avraham would be able to get provisions enabling him to return to Israel before any harm was brought to Sarah.16
- Pass Sarah off as married – Chizkuni, instead, suggests that Avraham told the Egyptians that Sarah was indeed married but that her husband was overseas. Unable to kill her spouse, and fearful of committing adultery, they would thus leave Sarah alone.17
- Hide Sarah – According to Bereshit Rabbah, Tanchuma, and Rashi, Avraham was hoping to hide Sarah during their stay.18
All of these sources justify Avraham's decision, but for different reasons:
- Test from Hashem – Rashi, Ran and Malbim count the famine as one of Avraham's ten trials,19 asserting that Hashem was testing whether Avraham would complain when forced out of the land. As such, they assume that Hashem intended Avraham to leave and view his acceptance of the situation as a show of faith, not a lack thereof.20
- No reliance on miracles – R. Hirsch and Malbim maintain that one is not supposed to rely on miracles,21 but rather do whatever one can to avert disaster naturally.22
- Caring for others – The Ran suggests that had Avraham only needed to care for himself and Sarah, he would likely not have gone to Egypt, but since he felt responsible for many others and desired to continue his hospitable ways, he chose to go down.
- Plan to save Sarah – Ran points out, though, that even the necessity to escape death from famine can not explain nor justify a decision to endanger Sarah's honor, leading him to conclude that Avraham descended with a ruse which he thought would prevent such an issue.23
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.
- Pirkoi b. Baboi asserts that all other transgressions are overridden in order to save a life.33 Even a case of potential danger to life allows one to push off a potential case of forced relations.34
- Abarbanel instead suggests that Avraham was convinced that Sarah's being taken was inevitable. If so, nothing is gained by Avraham martyring himself and it is logical that he should try to save himself.
Avraham Sinned
Avraham's actions in descending to Egypt and endangering Sarah were problematic and Avraham was punished for them.