Difference between revisions of "Purpose of Akeidat Yitzchak/2/en"
m |
m |
||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
<point><b>Hashem's knowledge</b> – According to Ralbag, Hashem's knowledge is not complete.  While He knows all the choices open to a person, He does not know which path the individual will choose to follow.<fn>According to Ralbag, there can only be free choice if Hashem does not know what people will in fact choose to do. He, nonetheless, does not think that limiting God's knowledge makes Hashem an imperfect being, since that which cannot be known cannot be considered a lack in God. For more about Ralbag's understanding of God's omniscience, see</fn> As such, He did not know in advance whether or not Avraham would acquiesce to sacrifice his child upon Hashem's demand.<fn>Cf. Ibn Kaspi. He suggests that the Torah uses the term "test" since that is the "language of men" (דברה תורה בלשון בני אדם), but really Hashem's testing of a person and human testing are distinct, since Hashem, as opposed to humans, does know in advance what a person is thinking and willing to do.  Nonetheless, Ibn Kaspi, like Ralbag, simultaneously implies that perhaps Hashem's knowledge is not complete. He asserts that Hashem had "theoretical knowledge" (ידיעה שכלית) regarding the extent of Avraham's fear of God, but not "practical knowledge" (ידיעת ניסיון) thereof. He writes, "אע"פ שה' ידע ידיעת שכל טרם זה המעשה שאברהם היה ירא ה' הנה עתה רצה לדעת זה ידיעת ניסיון".</fn></point> | <point><b>Hashem's knowledge</b> – According to Ralbag, Hashem's knowledge is not complete.  While He knows all the choices open to a person, He does not know which path the individual will choose to follow.<fn>According to Ralbag, there can only be free choice if Hashem does not know what people will in fact choose to do. He, nonetheless, does not think that limiting God's knowledge makes Hashem an imperfect being, since that which cannot be known cannot be considered a lack in God. For more about Ralbag's understanding of God's omniscience, see</fn> As such, He did not know in advance whether or not Avraham would acquiesce to sacrifice his child upon Hashem's demand.<fn>Cf. Ibn Kaspi. He suggests that the Torah uses the term "test" since that is the "language of men" (דברה תורה בלשון בני אדם), but really Hashem's testing of a person and human testing are distinct, since Hashem, as opposed to humans, does know in advance what a person is thinking and willing to do.  Nonetheless, Ibn Kaspi, like Ralbag, simultaneously implies that perhaps Hashem's knowledge is not complete. He asserts that Hashem had "theoretical knowledge" (ידיעה שכלית) regarding the extent of Avraham's fear of God, but not "practical knowledge" (ידיעת ניסיון) thereof. He writes, "אע"פ שה' ידע ידיעת שכל טרם זה המעשה שאברהם היה ירא ה' הנה עתה רצה לדעת זה ידיעת ניסיון".</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>"עַתָּה יָדַעְתִּי כִּי יְרֵא אֱלֹהִים אַתָּה"</b> – Ralbag is able to explain this verse according to its simple sense; only "now," after the trial, did Hashem know with certainty how God-fearing Avraham was.<fn>One might question how it is possible that Hashem gained new understanding; does that not mean that Hashem changed? Ralbag does not find this problematic. Since Hashem had always known that Avraham's choice was a possibility, this had always been a part of His knowledge.</fn></point> | <point><b>"עַתָּה יָדַעְתִּי כִּי יְרֵא אֱלֹהִים אַתָּה"</b> – Ralbag is able to explain this verse according to its simple sense; only "now," after the trial, did Hashem know with certainty how God-fearing Avraham was.<fn>One might question how it is possible that Hashem gained new understanding; does that not mean that Hashem changed? Ralbag does not find this problematic. Since Hashem had always known that Avraham's choice was a possibility, this had always been a part of His knowledge.</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>The test</b> – Ralbag asserts that Hashem intentionally worded His demand ambiguously<fn>Cf. R. Saadia Gaon and Ibn Janach  who also suggest that Hashem intentionally spoke ambiguously. Ibn Janach | + | <point><b>The test</b> – Ralbag asserts that Hashem intentionally worded His demand ambiguously<fn>Cf. <multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit22-1-2" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonCommentaryBereshit22-1-2" data-aht="source">Commentary Bereshit 22:1-2</a><a href="RSaadiaGaonHaEmunotVeHaDeiot5-2-3" data-aht="source">HaEmunot VeHaDeiot 5:2-3</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RYonahibnJanachSeferHaRikmahGate6" data-aht="source">Ibn Janach</a><a href="RYonahibnJanachSeferHaRikmahGate6" data-aht="source">Sefer HaRikmah Gate 6</a><a href="R. Yonah ibn Janach" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yonah ibn Janach</a></multilink>  who also suggest that Hashem intentionally spoke ambiguously. Ibn Janach claims that the more esoteric meaning of Hashem's words was "raise him up on one of the mountains in place of a burnt offering".  He is not explicit whether Hashems intended for Avraham to misunderstand him, or if Hashem had meant for him to comprehend it.</fn> so that it could be understood in one of two ways: Avraham was to sacrifice Yitzchak as an Olah offering, or Avraham was to take Yitzchak in order to sacrifice an Olah.<fn>The למ"ד of " לְעֹלָה" can be understood to mean "as" or "for the purpose of".</fn> Since the second reading is one which a person would only understand if they found the first possibility objectionable, Hashem wanted to see if Avraham was so willing to abide by Hashem's word that he would not even seek out the alternative reading.<fn>In other words, Hashem tested Avraham to see if he was willing to abide by the more obviously intended command, despite having an alternative, but poorer, reading to fall back upon as an excuse.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Avraham's feelings</b> – Ralbag presents an Avraham whose love for Hashem and desire to obey Him was so strong that all else paled in comparison, enabling him to go with ease even to sacrifice a beloved son.<fn>He points out that one who is able to cleave to Hashem in the manner of Avraham will never miss other goods, because the good achieved through clinging to Hashem and following in His path so far surpasses all else.  This idea has been used to understand the theological problem posed by the suffering of the righteous.  The truly righteous never suffer, since the benefits gained by their love of Hashem are so great that all else is as if nothing.</fn>  Avraham's eagerness to comply with Hashem's words is demonstrated by his early rising to do God's bidding and lack of questioning of the command.<fn>Ralbag points out that Avraham did not even question Hashem's previous promises that Yitzchak would carry on Avraham's line.  He suggests that Avraham recognized that Hashem's promises are always conditional on merit, and therefore it is possible that they might no longer be deserved.</fn> Ralbag further claims that the fact that Avraham achieved prophecy while awake proves that even in the moment of the actual slaughter he was neither worried nor sad about the act.<fn>Otherwise, he would not have been in a state fit for prophecy. Ralbag points to Elisha's request, "וְעַתָּה קְחוּ לִי מְנַגֵּן וְהָיָה כְּנַגֵּן הַמְנַגֵּן וַתְּהִי עָלָיו יַד י"י" (Melakhim II 3:15) as proof that distress prevents one from receiving prophecy.</fn></point> | <point><b>Avraham's feelings</b> – Ralbag presents an Avraham whose love for Hashem and desire to obey Him was so strong that all else paled in comparison, enabling him to go with ease even to sacrifice a beloved son.<fn>He points out that one who is able to cleave to Hashem in the manner of Avraham will never miss other goods, because the good achieved through clinging to Hashem and following in His path so far surpasses all else.  This idea has been used to understand the theological problem posed by the suffering of the righteous.  The truly righteous never suffer, since the benefits gained by their love of Hashem are so great that all else is as if nothing.</fn>  Avraham's eagerness to comply with Hashem's words is demonstrated by his early rising to do God's bidding and lack of questioning of the command.<fn>Ralbag points out that Avraham did not even question Hashem's previous promises that Yitzchak would carry on Avraham's line.  He suggests that Avraham recognized that Hashem's promises are always conditional on merit, and therefore it is possible that they might no longer be deserved.</fn> Ralbag further claims that the fact that Avraham achieved prophecy while awake proves that even in the moment of the actual slaughter he was neither worried nor sad about the act.<fn>Otherwise, he would not have been in a state fit for prophecy. Ralbag points to Elisha's request, "וְעַתָּה קְחוּ לִי מְנַגֵּן וְהָיָה כְּנַגֵּן הַמְנַגֵּן וַתְּהִי עָלָיו יַד י"י" (Melakhim II 3:15) as proof that distress prevents one from receiving prophecy.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>"אֱלֹהִים יִרְאֶה לּוֹ הַשֶּׂה לְעֹלָה בְּנִי"</b> – Ralbag maintains that these words of Avraham constitute a prayer<fn>Thus, Avraham was not lying to or misleading Yitzchak.</fn> that Hashem's command to him actually turn out to mean<fn>Ralbag claims that the word  "יִרְאֶה" is related to understanding rather than showing, as in the verse "וְלִבִּי רָאָה הַרְבֵּה חׇכְמָה וָדָעַת" (Kohelet 1:16).</fn> that a sheep (and not YItzchak) would be the Olah.  Ralbag, thus, suggests Avraham recognized that there was a second way to comprehend Hashem's words, but that, nonetheless, he was unwilling to act upon it without a direct clarification by Hashem.</point> | <point><b>"אֱלֹהִים יִרְאֶה לּוֹ הַשֶּׂה לְעֹלָה בְּנִי"</b> – Ralbag maintains that these words of Avraham constitute a prayer<fn>Thus, Avraham was not lying to or misleading Yitzchak.</fn> that Hashem's command to him actually turn out to mean<fn>Ralbag claims that the word  "יִרְאֶה" is related to understanding rather than showing, as in the verse "וְלִבִּי רָאָה הַרְבֵּה חׇכְמָה וָדָעַת" (Kohelet 1:16).</fn> that a sheep (and not YItzchak) would be the Olah.  Ralbag, thus, suggests Avraham recognized that there was a second way to comprehend Hashem's words, but that, nonetheless, he was unwilling to act upon it without a direct clarification by Hashem.</point> | ||
Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
<li><b>Demonstration of Avraham's worthiness</b> – Most of these sources claim that the trial was meant to prove to all the extent of Avraham's love of and obedience to God, and hence the worthiness of Hashem's choice.<fn>See Jubilees, Pseudo-Philo,Bavli, Bereshit Rabbah, Rashi, and R"Y Bekhor Shor who all have the Satan (or other angels) question Avraham's obedience and love of Hashem.  [R"Y Bekhor Shor has the angels echo the complaints the Satan makes regarding Iyyov as they question why Avraham's fear of God is considered so special; after all he is protected by God and admired by others so he had no reason not to be God-fearing.] R. Saadia, Rambam and Radak more simply claim that Avraham's display of loyalty was meant to be a lesson to the people of his time, or to future generations.</fn>  Radak points out that though there were no witnesses to the event, word of it spread due to its being recounted in the Torah.<fn>As such, he suggests that the main target were future generations rather than Avraham's own generation.</fn> </li> | <li><b>Demonstration of Avraham's worthiness</b> – Most of these sources claim that the trial was meant to prove to all the extent of Avraham's love of and obedience to God, and hence the worthiness of Hashem's choice.<fn>See Jubilees, Pseudo-Philo,Bavli, Bereshit Rabbah, Rashi, and R"Y Bekhor Shor who all have the Satan (or other angels) question Avraham's obedience and love of Hashem.  [R"Y Bekhor Shor has the angels echo the complaints the Satan makes regarding Iyyov as they question why Avraham's fear of God is considered so special; after all he is protected by God and admired by others so he had no reason not to be God-fearing.] R. Saadia, Rambam and Radak more simply claim that Avraham's display of loyalty was meant to be a lesson to the people of his time, or to future generations.</fn>  Radak points out that though there were no witnesses to the event, word of it spread due to its being recounted in the Torah.<fn>As such, he suggests that the main target were future generations rather than Avraham's own generation.</fn> </li> | ||
<li><b>Prohibition of child-sacrifice</b> – The experience of the <i>akeidah</i> was meant to proclaim Hashem's rejection of child sacrifice.  Though one would have thought that a prohibition would suffice, Shadal suggests that the trial was necessary so that both Israel and other nations of the time did not belittle the religion, concluding that its adherents must not be particularly devoted to God if they are unwilling to practice child sacrifice. Hashem, thus, had Avraham prove his loyalty and show that Israelites, too, were willing to offer up their loved ones, had that been Hashem's desire.</li> | <li><b>Prohibition of child-sacrifice</b> – The experience of the <i>akeidah</i> was meant to proclaim Hashem's rejection of child sacrifice.  Though one would have thought that a prohibition would suffice, Shadal suggests that the trial was necessary so that both Israel and other nations of the time did not belittle the religion, concluding that its adherents must not be particularly devoted to God if they are unwilling to practice child sacrifice. Hashem, thus, had Avraham prove his loyalty and show that Israelites, too, were willing to offer up their loved ones, had that been Hashem's desire.</li> | ||
− | <li>< | + | <li><b>Truth of prophecy</b> – Rambam further asserts that the story teaches that prophets have no doubts at all as to the veracity of their prophecies.  Avraham knew with certainty that it was Hashem speaking to him, or he would never have done the deed.</li> |
− | < | + | <li><b>Priority of Divine will over human ethics</b>  – Many moderns scholars suggest that the point of the akeidah was to teach that when human ethics seem to contrast with the Divine will, priority must be given to Hashem's command. This is either because Hashem's command is of necessity moral, or because true morality is only defined by Hashem's word (and as such, Hashem can command that one give up their concept of morality).<fn>Kiekegard in his work, Fear and Trembling, refers to this as "the suspension of the ethical".</fn></li> |
− | <li></li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>For whom?</b> These sources disagree regarding both who was the main group who was to learn from the experience, and what they needed to learn:<br/> | <point><b>For whom?</b> These sources disagree regarding both who was the main group who was to learn from the experience, and what they needed to learn:<br/> |
Version as of 12:59, 14 September 2017
Purpose of Akeidat Yitzchak
Exegetical Approaches
For Hashem: Evaluating Avraham
Hashem tested Avraham in order to evaluate the extent of his faith. Before the trial, Hashem did not know whether or not Avraham would be willing to sacrifice his son for God.
For Avraham
Avraham, rather than Hashem, was supposed to learn something new from the experience. This position subdivides regarding whether it views the test as beneficial or punitive in nature:
Means to Benefit Avraham
Acting on Hashem's directives brought Avraham to new levels of faith, and merited him rewards that he would never have received had Hashem not tested him.
- Test – Both R. Saadia and Ramban explain that the word "נִסָּה" means tested, but suggest that a test need not be for the tester. It is the person being tested who gains from the experience. [Hashem, in contrast, knew all along what was to happen.]
- Accustom – According to R"Y Albo and the Biur, on the other hand, the root "נסה" means to habituate.14 By commanding Avraham to sacrifice his son, Hashem trained his heart towards proper fear and service of God.
- Self-development: R"Y Albo and the Biur explain that acting on a belief serves to strengthen that belief.16 Though Avraham's willingness to do Hashem's bidding and sacrifice his son was not in question, having to actively bind Yitzchak and raise the knife brought his fear of God to new levels. Undergoing a trial changes a person in a way that merely thinking can never do.17
- Increase reward: Ramban and R"Y Albo18 maintain that after the trial, Avraham could receive a reward not only for his good intentions, but also for his positive actions. R. Saadia points out that Hashem often gives the righteous many trials on earth so as to merit them redoubled reward later.19
- Made known / was known – Rav Saadia suggests that the word "יָדַעְתִּי" should read as if written, "והודעתי".24 Through the akeidah Hashem announced to the world the level of Avraham's righteousness. Ramban similarly rereads the verb "יָדַעְתִּי", but turns it into the passive, "נודעה". Now that Avraham actualized his potential, his awe of God was known in practice.
- Speech of angel – Seforno, instead, claims that it is the angel speaking in his own name who declares, "now I know that you are more God-fearing [than me, the angel]."25
Means to Punish Avraham
The experience was meant to punish Avraham for having made a covenant with the Philistines.
- Rashbam understands the verse to mean that after the event, Avraham's fear of God became public knowledge, apparent to the entire world.33 It was not Hashem who gained new knowledge, but rather the public.
- Alternatively, Hashem might be speaking of His own knowledge. Earlier, in his interactions with the Philistines, Avraham had not acted in a God-fearing manner, but now, once again Hashem can recognize Avraham's obedience. This is not theologically difficult, since according to this reading Hashem did not lack knowledge which was then supplied, but rather Avraham lacked fear which he then achieved.
- Since Christians view the story as a prefiguration of Jesus's death on the cross, Rashbam might have wanted to cast the story in a much more negative light, suggesting that it describes not the epitome of Avraham's relationship with Hashem, but a punishment.
- Y. Bin-Nun34 alternatively suggests that Rashbam might be combating the idealization of the akeidah common among those in the Middle Ages who were forced to martyr their children for God, and looked to Avraham's action as a model to emulate.35
For Others
The trial was intended for outsiders so that they appreciate both Hashem's choice of Avraham, and understand what is the correct and desired service of Hashem:
Demonstration of Avraham's Worthiness
The Akeidah was meant to demonstrate Avraham's worthiness and why he merited to be chosen by Hashem.
- Test – Most of these sources understand the word according to its simple sense, to mean "to test" or "try" but claim that a test is sometimes aimed not at the tester, or even at the one tested, but rather at the audience who watches or hears of the trial.37
- Raise as a banner – Bereshit Rabbah, Abarbanel and Keli Yekar38 assert that the word "נִסָּה" is related to the word "נס", or banner. Through the akeidah, Hashem set up Avraham as a sign for others to emulate.
- Demonstration of Avraham's worthiness – Most of these sources claim that the trial was meant to prove to all the extent of Avraham's love of and obedience to God, and hence the worthiness of Hashem's choice.39 Radak points out that though there were no witnesses to the event, word of it spread due to its being recounted in the Torah.40
- Prohibition of child-sacrifice – The experience of the akeidah was meant to proclaim Hashem's rejection of child sacrifice. Though one would have thought that a prohibition would suffice, Shadal suggests that the trial was necessary so that both Israel and other nations of the time did not belittle the religion, concluding that its adherents must not be particularly devoted to God if they are unwilling to practice child sacrifice. Hashem, thus, had Avraham prove his loyalty and show that Israelites, too, were willing to offer up their loved ones, had that been Hashem's desire.
- Truth of prophecy – Rambam further asserts that the story teaches that prophets have no doubts at all as to the veracity of their prophecies. Avraham knew with certainty that it was Hashem speaking to him, or he would never have done the deed.
- Priority of Divine will over human ethics – Many moderns scholars suggest that the point of the akeidah was to teach that when human ethics seem to contrast with the Divine will, priority must be given to Hashem's command. This is either because Hashem's command is of necessity moral, or because true morality is only defined by Hashem's word (and as such, Hashem can command that one give up their concept of morality).41
- Satan and other angels – Jubilees, Pseudo-Philo, Rashi, R"Y Bekhor Shor suggest that the test was aimed at the Satan and/or other angels who questioned Avraham's loyalty and obedience to Hashem.42
- People – The other sources more simply suggest that the lesson was for those living in or after Avraham's generation:
- R. Saadia, Radak, Rambam43 and Keli Yekar suggest that the trial was meant to prove to all the extent of Avraham's love of God and hence the worthiness of Hashem's choice. Radak points out that though there were no witnesses to the event, word of it spread due to its being recounted in the Torah.44
- Shadal suggests that Hashem wanted to teach both Israel and other nations of the time that His followers do not practice child sacrifice only because Hashem does not desire it, not because they are unwilling. No one should conclude that Avraham (or any of his descendants) are less devoted to Hashem since child sacrifice is not part of their service of God. As proven by Avraham, they too would do so, if asked.45
- R. Yochanan suggests that phrase refers to the complaints of the Satan against Avraham. The Stan tried to cast doubt on Avraham's love of Hashem by pointing out that at the party in honor of Yitzchak's weaning he did not think to honor Hashem through a sacrifice. In response, Hashem showed the Satan that Avraham would be willing to offer him even his son.
- R. Levi, instead, asserts that the phrase refers to the words of Yishmael who claimed that he was more worthy than Yitzchak since he was circumcised at an age in which he could protest, while Yitzchak had no choice. Yitzchak responds that he would be willing to give not just one limb, but even his whole life, if asked.
Lesson in Avodat Hashem
- Child sacrifice is not wanted
- Willingness to sacrifice is wanted
- Obedience over ethic