Difference between revisions of "Endangering Sarai in Egypt/2"
m |
|||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
<point><b>Descent to Egypt</b> – <p> All of these commentators justify Avraham's decision, but for different reasons:</p> | <point><b>Descent to Egypt</b> – <p> All of these commentators justify Avraham's decision, but for different reasons:</p> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li>Test from Hashem - Bereshit Rabbah, Rashi, Ran and Malbim count the famine as one of Avraham's ten trials, asserting that Hashem was testing whether Avraham would complain when forced out of the land despite the previous promises.  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.</li> | + | <li><b>Test from Hashem</b> - Bereshit Rabbah, Rashi, Ran and Malbim count the famine as one of Avraham's ten trials, asserting that Hashem was testing whether Avraham would complain when forced out of the land despite the previous promises.  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.</li> |
− | <li>No reliance on miracles - R. Hirsch and Malbim maintain that one is not supposed to rely on miracles,<fn>Malbim adds that Avraham was humble enough not to expect that Hashem would make one on his behalf.</fn> but rather do whatever one can to avert disaster naturally.<fn>R. Hirsch adds that it is easy for a modern person to argue that Avraham should have trusted in Hashem, since, from history, one knows that He always cares for the righteous and would never forsake them.  Avraham, though, did not yet have that experience, there being no "Avrahams" before him.  It was only through trials like this one that he was to learn this lesson.</fn></li> | + | <li><b>No reliance on miracles</b> - R. Hirsch and Malbim maintain that one is not supposed to rely on miracles,<fn>Malbim adds that Avraham was humble enough not to expect that Hashem would make one on his behalf.</fn> but rather do whatever one can to avert disaster naturally.<fn>R. Hirsch adds that it is easy for a modern person to argue that Avraham should have trusted in Hashem, since, from history, one knows that He always cares for the righteous and would never forsake them.  Avraham, though, did not yet have that experience, there being no "Avrahams" before him.  It was only through trials like this one that he was to learn this lesson.</fn></li> |
− | <li>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.<fn></fn></li> | + | <li><b>Caring for others</b> - 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.<fn></fn></li> |
− | <li>Plan to | + | <li><b>Plan to save Sarah</b> - 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.</li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>"הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי..."</b></point> | <point><b>"הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי..."</b></point> |
Version as of 12:48, 4 November 2014
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.
All of these commentators justify Avraham's decision, but for different reasons:
- Test from Hashem - Bereshit Rabbah, Rashi, Ran and Malbim count the famine as one of Avraham's ten trials, asserting that Hashem was testing whether Avraham would complain when forced out of the land despite the previous promises. 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.
- No reliance on miracles - R. Hirsch and Malbim maintain that one is not supposed to rely on miracles,15 but rather do whatever one can to avert disaster naturally.16
- 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.17
- 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.
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. Even a case of potential danger to life allows one to push off a potential case of illicit relations.21 One might question this assumption from the gemara which asserts that
- Ralbag suggests that
- 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.