Difference between revisions of "Purpose of Akeidat Yitzchak/1/en"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
Line 12: Line 12:
  
 
<h2>What about "לא תרצח"?</h2>
 
<h2>What about "לא תרצח"?</h2>
A final question relates to the morality of the command, an issue which is hinted to already in Midrashic literature,<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="BereshitRabbah56-4" data-aht="source">Bereshit Rabbah</a><a href="BereshitRabbah56-4" data-aht="source">56:4</a><a href="Bereshit Rabbah" data-aht="parshan">About Bereshit Rabbah</a></multilink> (and in more detail in <a href="Tanchuma4" data-aht="source">Tanchuma 4</a>), which presents the Satan questioning Avraham, "אָמַר לוֹ לְמָחָר אוֹמֵר לְךָ שׁוֹפֵךְ דָּם אַתְּ חַיָּב שֶׁשָּׁפַכְתָּ דָּמוֹ שֶׁל בִּנְךָ".</fn> ignored by many medieval exegetes, but takes center stage in most discussions of the story in the last couple of centuries.<fn>This fact highlights how the issues which are burning questions for one generation of commentators do not necessarily bother another.&#160; Cultural, historical, and polemical factors all influence not only how we understand a story but even the very questions we assume lie at its core.<br/> It is possible that the difference in focus in this case stems from varying attitudes towards martyrdom. In medieval times, many were forced to martyr either themselves or their children in the face of forced conversions. As such, they were not bothered by how Avraham could comply with Hashem's request, and definitely did not view the directive as resembling murder.&#160; In fact, they even questioned why they were not perceived as more God-fearing than Avraham. After all, Avraham in the end only brought Yitzchak as an offering, while they actually sacrificed their loved ones. They question not the morality of the command to give up one's son, but why only in the case of Avraham did Hashem intervene to stop the act. Thus, one poet of the time writes: טרם היה אזרחי כזורז יחידו לעקידה / ישמיעו מן השמים: אל תשלח ידך להשמידה / כמה עתה נשמדים בנים ובנות ביהודה / לא חש להושיע טבוחים ושרופים&#160; (brought by&#160;A. Sagi, יהדות: בין דת למוסר (Tel Aviv, 1998): 257-267). <br/>A second possible explanation for the difference in focus might relate to opposing conceptions of morality in medieval and contemporary times.&#160; The concept of "individual morality" is a fairly modern one.&#160; In medieval times, it was much more accepted that there was no independent ethic outside of religion, and thus more obvious that whatever God declared must be just. This explanation, however, would not account for why many medieval commentators do not address the question of how Hashem can command something which He Himself later declares unethical.</fn>&#160; How can a just and ethical God, who later in the Torah Himself prohibits murder and child sacrifice,<fn>See <a href="Devarim12-31" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:31</a> where Hashem refers to child sacrifice as an abomination, and <a href="Vayikra18-21" data-aht="source">Vayikra 18:21</a> where He prohibits the giving of one's children to the Molekh, often understood as a cult of child sacrifice.&#160; [See, though, <a href="Giving One's Seed to Molekh" data-aht="page">Giving One's Seed to Molekh</a>, for other understandings of the prohibition.]</fn> demand of someone that they kill their child? Furthermore, why did Avraham comply without questioning the directive, as he had done when troubled by Hashem's decision regarding Sedom?<fn>The question is movingly formulated&#160; by Yochanan HaKohen, a liturgical poet of the seventh century.&#160; He presents Hashem as trying to find a partner for His daughter, the Torah, and the Torah's refusal of Avraham when he is raised as a possible match:<br/>עָנְתָה אָמוֹן לְדָר בַּמְּרוֹמִים / יָדַעְתִּי גַּם אֲנִי כִּי הוּא טוֹב והוֹלֵךְ תָּמִים<br/>אֲבָל עַל יְחִידו לֹֹא קָנָה רַחֲמִים / וְשָׁלַח יָד כְּאַכְזָר לִשְׁפֹּךְ דָּמִים<br/>וְכָל כָּךְ לַעֲשׂוֹת רְצוֹנָךְ בְּלֵב תָּמִים / וּבָטוּחַ כִּי אַתָּה טוֹב וּמָלֵא רַחֲמִים<br/>אֲבָל הָיָה לוֹ לְהִתְחַנֵּן לְפָנֶיך וּלְבַקֵּשׁ רַחֲמִים / וְלַחֲשׂוֹךְ יְחִידוֹ מֵאֵשׁ פֶּחָמִים<br/>הוּא לֹא רִיחֵם לוּלֵי רִחַמְתָּה בַּעַל הָרַחֲמִים. <br/>For a discussion of the poem, see Dr. A. Sapir, <a href="https://www.biu.ac.il/JH/Parasha/vayerah/sha.html">מבט שונה על עקדת יצחק</a>.</fn>&#160; In more general terms, the story makes one ask: What is one to do when human conceptions of morality and especially when the Torah's own ethical system conflict with a Divine command?
+
A final question relates to the morality of the command, an issue which is hinted to already in Midrashic literature,<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="BereshitRabbah56-4" data-aht="source">Bereshit Rabbah</a><a href="BereshitRabbah56-4" data-aht="source">56:4</a><a href="Bereshit Rabbah" data-aht="parshan">About Bereshit Rabbah</a></multilink> (and in more detail in <a href="Tanchuma4" data-aht="source">Tanchuma 4</a>), which presents the Satan questioning Avraham, "אָמַר לוֹ לְמָחָר אוֹמֵר לְךָ שׁוֹפֵךְ דָּם אַתְּ חַיָּב שֶׁשָּׁפַכְתָּ דָּמוֹ שֶׁל בִּנְךָ".</fn> ignored by many medieval exegetes, but which takes center stage in most discussions of the story in the last couple of centuries.<fn>This fact highlights how the issues which are burning questions for one generation of commentators do not necessarily bother another.&#160; Cultural, historical, and polemical factors all influence not only how we understand a story but even the very questions we assume lie at its core.<br/> It is possible that the difference in focus in this case stems from varying attitudes towards martyrdom. In medieval times, many were forced to martyr either themselves or their children in the face of forced conversions. As such, they were not bothered by how Avraham could comply with Hashem's request, and definitely did not view the directive as resembling murder.&#160; In fact, they even questioned why they were not perceived as more God-fearing than Avraham. After all, Avraham in the end only brought Yitzchak as an offering, while they actually sacrificed their loved ones. They question not the morality of the command to give up one's son, but why only in the case of Avraham did Hashem intervene to stop the act. Thus, one poet of the time writes: טרם היה אזרחי כזורז יחידו לעקידה / ישמיעו מן השמים: אל תשלח ידך להשמידה / כמה עתה נשמדים בנים ובנות ביהודה / לא חש להושיע טבוחים ושרופים&#160; (brought by&#160;A. Sagi, יהדות: בין דת למוסר (Tel Aviv, 1998): 257-267). <br/>A second possible explanation for the difference in focus might relate to opposing conceptions of morality in medieval and contemporary times.&#160; The concept of "individual morality" is a fairly modern one.&#160; In medieval times, it was much more accepted that there was no independent ethic outside of religion, and thus more obvious that whatever God declared must be just. This explanation, however, would not account for why many medieval commentators do not address the question of how Hashem can command something which He Himself later declares unethical.</fn>&#160; How can a just and ethical God, who later in the Torah Himself prohibits murder and child sacrifice,<fn>See <a href="Devarim12-31" data-aht="source">Devarim 12:31</a> where Hashem refers to child sacrifice as an abomination, and <a href="Vayikra18-21" data-aht="source">Vayikra 18:21</a> where He prohibits the giving of one's children to the Molekh, often understood as a cult of child sacrifice.&#160; [See, though, <a href="Giving One's Seed to Molekh" data-aht="page">Giving One's Seed to Molekh</a>, for other understandings of the prohibition.]</fn> demand of someone that they kill their child? Furthermore, why did Avraham comply without questioning the directive, as he had done when troubled by Hashem's decision regarding Sedom?<fn>The question is movingly formulated&#160; by Yochanan HaKohen, a liturgical poet of the seventh century.&#160; He presents Hashem as trying to find a partner for His daughter, the Torah, and the Torah's refusal of Avraham when he is raised as a possible match:<br/>עָנְתָה אָמוֹן לְדָר בַּמְּרוֹמִים / יָדַעְתִּי גַּם אֲנִי כִּי הוּא טוֹב והוֹלֵךְ תָּמִים<br/>אֲבָל עַל יְחִידו לֹֹא קָנָה רַחֲמִים / וְשָׁלַח יָד כְּאַכְזָר לִשְׁפֹּךְ דָּמִים<br/>וְכָל כָּךְ לַעֲשׂוֹת רְצוֹנָךְ בְּלֵב תָּמִים / וּבָטוּחַ כִּי אַתָּה טוֹב וּמָלֵא רַחֲמִים<br/>אֲבָל הָיָה לוֹ לְהִתְחַנֵּן לְפָנֶיך וּלְבַקֵּשׁ רַחֲמִים / וְלַחֲשׂוֹךְ יְחִידוֹ מֵאֵשׁ פֶּחָמִים<br/>הוּא לֹא רִיחֵם לוּלֵי רִחַמְתָּה בַּעַל הָרַחֲמִים. <br/>For a discussion of the poem, see Dr. A. Sapir, <a href="https://www.biu.ac.il/JH/Parasha/vayerah/sha.html">מבט שונה על עקדת יצחק</a>.</fn>&#160; In more general terms, the story makes one ask: What is one to do when human conceptions of morality, and especially when the Torah's own ethical system, conflict with a Divine command?
  
 
<h2>Additional Questions</h2>
 
<h2>Additional Questions</h2>

Version as of 02:07, 18 September 2017

Purpose of Akeidat Yitzchak

Introduction

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

A Test for Whom?

Bereshit 22, the story of Akeidat Yitzchak, is one of the most well known narratives in Torah, but also one of the most troubling. The chapter tells of Hashem's command to sacrifice Yitzchak, Avraham's readiness to comply, and climaxes with the angel's prevention of the deed.  What, though, was the goal of the whole experience? 

The chapter defines the episode as a test ("וְהָאֱלֹהִים נִסָּה אֶת אַבְרָהָם"), and the declaration at the end of the trial, "Now I know that you are God-fearing" would seem to support such a reading.  Yet, given an omniscient God, is it really possible to say that Avraham needed to undergo the binding of Yitzchak in order for Hashem to recognize the extent of his awe? Moreover, had Avraham not already proven his dedication and loyalty, regardless of this new test?  What prompted the need for a further demonstration right now? If the test was not for Hashem, though, for whom was it meant?  What lessons were Avraham, Yitzchak, or any outsiders supposed to gain from it?

Can Hashem Go Back on His Word?

Many medieval commentators are troubled by a second theological question: How can Hashem command Avraham to do one thing, and a few days later, direct him to do the exact opposite?1  Is it possible for Hashem to retract a command?  Does not doing so pave the way for people to dismiss all Divine directives as being fickle, or to suggest that the Torah is not eternally binding and that Hashem can replace it with a new one?

What about "לא תרצח"?

A final question relates to the morality of the command, an issue which is hinted to already in Midrashic literature,2 ignored by many medieval exegetes, but which takes center stage in most discussions of the story in the last couple of centuries.3  How can a just and ethical God, who later in the Torah Himself prohibits murder and child sacrifice,4 demand of someone that they kill their child? Furthermore, why did Avraham comply without questioning the directive, as he had done when troubled by Hashem's decision regarding Sedom?5  In more general terms, the story makes one ask: What is one to do when human conceptions of morality, and especially when the Torah's own ethical system, conflict with a Divine command?

Additional Questions

  • "וַיְהִי אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה" – This opening phrase appears redundant, as the logical assumption of the reader is that a story follows the preceding one.  Why is the Torah highlighting the connection between chapters 21 and 22?  Does the former somehow shed light on the latter?
  • Avraham's feelings en route – The story is silent regarding the emotions of Avraham and Yitzchak as they trek to the mountain.  Was Avraham filled with trepidation at the act or was his heart joyful to do God's bidding?  Does the text give any hints one way or another?
  • Angel versus Hashem – Why is it Hashem Himself who gives the command to sacrifice Yitzchak, but it is only an angel who prevents the act?