Difference between revisions of "Sarah's Treatment of Hagar/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
m |
m |
||
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
<point><b>Avraham's role</b> – Radak and Ramban blame Avraham not for actively oppressing Hagar, but for not interfering and thereby condoning Sarah's mistreatment of her.  R. Saba goes further and faults Avraham for giving Hagar back into Sarah's hands to begin with, quoting the prohibition against returning a slave to his master.<fn>R. Avraham Saba writes, "ואיה תורתו שלמד שכתוב בה לא תסגיר עבד אל אדוניו".</fn> He views this as an act of cruelty not becoming of Avraham.<fn>He further claims that the Avraham and Sarah's first mistake was even prior to this, when Sarah gave Hagar in marriage to Avraham.  Avraham should have refused to marry an Egyptian concubine and instead trusted in Hashem who had promised him children.</fn></point> | <point><b>Avraham's role</b> – Radak and Ramban blame Avraham not for actively oppressing Hagar, but for not interfering and thereby condoning Sarah's mistreatment of her.  R. Saba goes further and faults Avraham for giving Hagar back into Sarah's hands to begin with, quoting the prohibition against returning a slave to his master.<fn>R. Avraham Saba writes, "ואיה תורתו שלמד שכתוב בה לא תסגיר עבד אל אדוניו".</fn> He views this as an act of cruelty not becoming of Avraham.<fn>He further claims that the Avraham and Sarah's first mistake was even prior to this, when Sarah gave Hagar in marriage to Avraham.  Avraham should have refused to marry an Egyptian concubine and instead trusted in Hashem who had promised him children.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Were they punished?</b> Ramban and Tzeror HaMor maintain that Avraham and Sarah were punished measure for measure for their actions.  Yishmael's descendants were a source of affliction to Avraham and Sarah's descendants, tormenting them just as Sarah had tormented Hagar.</point> | <point><b>Were they punished?</b> Ramban and Tzeror HaMor maintain that Avraham and Sarah were punished measure for measure for their actions.  Yishmael's descendants were a source of affliction to Avraham and Sarah's descendants, tormenting them just as Sarah had tormented Hagar.</point> | ||
| − | <point><b>"וְהִתְעַנִּי תַּחַת יָדֶיהָ"</b> – This verse is | + | <point><b>"וְהִתְעַנִּי תַּחַת יָדֶיהָ"</b> – This verse is difficult for this position, as it seems to justify Sarah's actions, suggesting that they were not overly harsh. For, if Sarah's actions were indeed problematic, how could the angel tell Hagar to return to be further abused? <br/> |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
| − | <li>R. Saba suggests that returning was the first step in Hagar's ultimate revenge and paved the way for her descendants to be able to oppress Israel in the future.<fn>Ramban takes an almost opposite approach, suggesting that returning to be oppressed was a sign for the future, that Sarah's descendants would ultimately rule over Yishmael forever.  This, though, is very difficult in context.  If Sarah had sinned, why is it Hagar who is given a punishment?  One might respond that both Sarah and Hagar were in the wrong, and thus, both were to be punished.  | + | <li>R. Saba suggests that returning was the first step in Hagar's ultimate revenge and paved the way for her descendants to be able to oppress Israel in the future.<fn>Ramban takes an almost opposite approach, suggesting that returning to be oppressed was a sign for the future, that Sarah's descendants would ultimately rule over Yishmael forever.  This, though, is very difficult in context.  If Sarah had sinned, why is it Hagar who is given a punishment?  One might respond that both Sarah and Hagar were in the wrong, and thus, both were to be punished.  However, it is still difficult to understand how being given such news would encourage Hagar to return to Sarah's home.</fn></li> |
| − | <li>Radak, instead, suggests that the angel encouraged Hagar to return | + | <li>Radak, instead, suggests that the angel encouraged Hagar to return so as to reap her reward; it was only via Avraham that she would merit to become the mother of multitudes.<fn>This, though, suggests that on her own, Hagar would not merit compensation for her woes.</fn></li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>"כִּי שָׁמַע י"י אֶל עׇנְיֵךְ"</b> – This verse supports the idea that Sarah's "עינוי" was not justified. The angel tells Hagar that Hashem has heard Sarah's afflictions of her and will compensate her.</point> | <point><b>"כִּי שָׁמַע י"י אֶל עׇנְיֵךְ"</b> – This verse supports the idea that Sarah's "עינוי" was not justified. The angel tells Hagar that Hashem has heard Sarah's afflictions of her and will compensate her.</point> | ||
Version as of 01:35, 8 November 2019
Sarah's Treatment of Hagar
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
Commentators evaluate Sarah's seemingly overly harsh treatment of Hagar in opposing ways. Perhaps not surprisingly, the majority of commentators justify Sarah's actions. Abarbanel sees in them legitimate rebuke of inappropriate behavior. R. Chananel, in contrast, mitigates their severity by reinterpreting the word "וַתְּעַנֶּהָ", understanding it to mean that Sarah sought Hagar's subservience and servitude, but not that she abused or afflicted her. These sources find support for their position in the angel's admonition to Hagar that she return to Sarah and continue to be "afflicted".
A minority of sources disagree with this positive evaluation of Sarah and suggest that Sarah erred and was unjustly harsh in her reproof of Hagar. Ramban and R. Saba even suggest that Sarah is later punished for her actions measure for measure as Yishmael's descendants oppress Israel, just as Sarah had oppressed Hagar. These sources, too, find support for their position in the angel's words to Hagar, viewing the statement "כִּי שָׁמַע י"י אֶל עׇנְיֵךְ" as acknowledgment that Hagar was mistreated and the angel's promises as blessings meant to compensate her for her travails.
Sarah Was Justified
Sarah's treatment of Hagar was justified.
Sources:Philo, Josephus, R. Saadia Gaon, R. Chananel, Ralbag, Abarbanel, Seforno, HaKetav VeHaKabbalah, R. S.R. Hirsch, and R. David Zvi Hoffmann
"וַתֵּקַל גְּבִרְתָּהּ בְּעֵינֶיהָ" – Most of these sources understand that Hagar grew haughty when she conceived, belittling Sarah and thinking herself more worthy than she. It is possible that this in particular bothered Sarah who might have always harbored fears that her barren state meant that she was unworthy of being the mother of the chosen nation. When Hagar taunted her, she did not take it as a personal affront but was dismayed and worried that this meant that Hagar would take her place as the spiritual head of the nation.1
"וַתְּעַנֶּהָ שָׂרַי וַתִּבְרַח מִפָּנֶיהָ" – These commentators differ in their understanding of the nature of this "עינוי" and, hence, why it was legitimate:
- Affliction – Philo maintains the simple meaning of the word, understanding that Sarah oppressed Hagar, but suggests that this is a legitimate form of rebuke.2 Sometimes one needs to be harsh in order to correct inappropriate behavior. As this is for the good of the recipient, such rebuke should be viewed positively, not negatively.
- Hard work – Abarbanel and HaKetav VeHaKabbalah claim that Sarah worked Hagar harder than normal (but not that she physically abused her or the like). In order to diminish Hagar's pride, Sarah felt that she had to go to the other extreme, treating her more harshly than before.
- Enslavement – R. Chananel, R. Hirsch, and R. D"Z Hoffmann, in contrast, explain that "עינוי" means enslavement. According to R. D"Z Hoffmann, Sarah had freed Hagar when she gave her in marriage to Avraham,3 but once Hagar disrespected her, Sarah took her back as a maidservant.4
Why did Hagar flee? According to Philo, who maintains that Sarah oppressed Hagar, it is understandable why Hagar fled, but according to the other commentators who claim that Hagar was not treated so badly, how is her flight to be understood?
- Abarbanel explains that Hagar could simply not handle being rebuked, even if deserved.
- R. D"Z Hoffmann asserts that though Hagar was treated in the same way she had been before she was given to Avraham in marriage, once having tasted freedom, she could no longer endure her slave status.
Ancient Near Eastern parallels – N. Sarna5 notes parallels to our story in a law mentioned in the Code of Hammurabi. The law stipulates that if a maidservant is given to a man in marriage and she bears him children, leading her to "assume equality with the wife," then despite her having been given in marriage she may still be kept as a slave. This might support R. Chananel's reading of the story, that Sarah's "affliction" was really only the resumption of mistress-slave relations. Moreover, it suggests that this was the norm of the time and was considered both legal and legitimate.
Avraham's role – These sources disagree regarding whether Avraham condemned or condoned Sarah's actions:
- Felt that Sarah was too harsh – R. Saadia and R. Chananel learn from Sarah's words "יִשְׁפֹּט י"י בֵּינִי וּבֵינֶיׄךָ" that Avraham and Sarah had disagreed about how to treat Hagar. Avraham felt that Sarah was too harsh. 6
- Agreed that Hagar deserved rebuke – According to Abarbanel, in contrast, Avraham had never disagreed that Hagar deserved rebuke. He had only refrained from acting on his own because he felt that it was Sarah's place to chastise, as Hagar was her maidservant.
- Reluctant to punish – R. D"Z Hoffmann takes a middle position, suggesting that Avraham did not want Hagar punished, only that she learn her proper place. As such, he suggested that Sarah resume treating Hagar as a servant, but not that she treat her harshly.
"מִפְּנֵי שָׂרַי גְּבִרְתִּי אָנֹכִי בֹּרַחַת" – R" E Samet7 notes that in explaining the reason for her flight, Hagar says nothing of undeserved affliction, but only that she was running away from her mistress, suggesting that what bothered her was her slave status. He further points out that the angel makes a point of referring to Hagar as "שִׁפְחַת שָׂרַי, " as, he, too recognized that this (and not unwarranted oppression) was the core issue.8
"וְהִתְעַנִּי תַּחַת יָדֶיהָ" – R. Saadia proves from this verse that Sarah did not sin in oppressing Hagar, for if Sarah's actions were problematic, how could the angel tell her to return for more of the same treatment? In fact, one might even suggest that the angel is rebuking Hagar for fleeing in face of warranted chastisement. Her belittling of Sarah made her deserving of Sarah's "עינוי" and so the angel tells her to return to get her just due.9
"כִּי שָׁמַע י"י אֶל עׇנְיֵךְ" – These words are somewhat difficult if one maintains that Sarah's treatment of Hagar was justified.
- These sources might respond that the angel is speaking from the perspective of Hagar who felt oppressed because she could not appreciate that her chastisement was deserved or that her slave status needed to be reinstated.10 Though Sarah was jsutified, hashem still had mercy onHhagar.
- R. Samet11 alternatively suggests that the angel is referring to Hagar's present afflictions in the wilderness rather than any at the hand of Sarah.
Angel's promise: "וְהוּא יִהְיֶה פֶּרֶא אָדָם" – This approach might read the angel's promises in one of two ways:
- Blessing – Many of these sources read the promises as blessings. Despite the fact that Sarah's actions were warranted, Hashem recognized Hagar's suffering and encourages her:
- Freedom – R. Hirsch,12 following Ibn Ezra, explains that a "פֶּרֶא אָדָם" refers to a person who is free.13 The angel might be telling Hagar that despite her resumption of slave status, her son will eventually be a free man.
- Return to civilization – Abarbanel reads the angels statement as a rhetorical question, "will your son be a man of the wilderness?" According to him, the angel is encouraging Hagar to return home to civilization. Since Sarah had not meant her any real harm and was chastising her for her own benefit, he explains that it is preferable to return there than face the dangers of the desert.
- Curse – These sources could have alternatively read negative traits into the angel's description of Yishmael, seeing in it a promise that he was to be a wild man, living by the sword and in constant strife. According to this reading, the angel's words served to curse and not bless. As it was Hagar, not Sarah, who was in the wrong, it is she who is rebuked and punished.14
Were Avraham and Sarah punished? Avraham and Sarah did nothing wrong, so they deserved and received no punishment.
Relationship to the banishment – These sources are consistent in justifying Sarah's later banishment of Hagar and Yishmael as well. See Banishment of Hagar and Yishmael for details.
Sarah Sinned
Sarah's treatment of Hagar was unduly harsh and constituted a sin.
"וַתֵּקַל גְּבִרְתָּהּ בְּעֵינֶיהָ" – According to Radak, both Sarah and Avraham had despaired of Sarah ever bearing children, leading them to conclude that Hashem's promise was to be fulfilled through a different wife. When Hagar conceived, she assumed that her children were to continue the line and that she was now to take the status of first wife. As such, she stopped heeding Sarah's commands. Though Hagar's behavior was problematic, considering that Sarah herself had basically come to the same conclusion and it was she who proposed the marriage in the first place, perhaps Hagar's behavior should not have elicited such anger.
"וַתְּעַנֶּהָ שָׂרַי וַתִּבְרַח מִפָּנֶיהָ" – These commentators read "וַתְּעַנֶּהָ" as oppression or affliction. Radak claims that Sarah worked Hagar extremely hard and possibly even hit and cursed her until she ran away, unable to bear the suffering any longer. Opinions in Bereshit Rabbah go further to suggest that Sarah was abusive, did not allow Hagar further relations with Avraham, and that Sarah's actions even caused Hagar to miscarry. [See Hagar – How Many Pregnancies for the textual motivations behind this reading.]
Avraham's role – Radak and Ramban blame Avraham not for actively oppressing Hagar, but for not interfering and thereby condoning Sarah's mistreatment of her. R. Saba goes further and faults Avraham for giving Hagar back into Sarah's hands to begin with, quoting the prohibition against returning a slave to his master.15 He views this as an act of cruelty not becoming of Avraham.16
Were they punished? Ramban and Tzeror HaMor maintain that Avraham and Sarah were punished measure for measure for their actions. Yishmael's descendants were a source of affliction to Avraham and Sarah's descendants, tormenting them just as Sarah had tormented Hagar.
"וְהִתְעַנִּי תַּחַת יָדֶיהָ" – This verse is difficult for this position, as it seems to justify Sarah's actions, suggesting that they were not overly harsh. For, if Sarah's actions were indeed problematic, how could the angel tell Hagar to return to be further abused?
- R. Saba suggests that returning was the first step in Hagar's ultimate revenge and paved the way for her descendants to be able to oppress Israel in the future.17
- Radak, instead, suggests that the angel encouraged Hagar to return so as to reap her reward; it was only via Avraham that she would merit to become the mother of multitudes.18
"כִּי שָׁמַע י"י אֶל עׇנְיֵךְ" – This verse supports the idea that Sarah's "עינוי" was not justified. The angel tells Hagar that Hashem has heard Sarah's afflictions of her and will compensate her.
Angel's promise
- According to Radak, the angels' words constituted a blessing. In compensation for the oppression, Hagar was to have many descendants from Avraham. In addition, her son Yishmael was to live in the wilderness,19 and though he would have spats with others he would not flee, but rather "עַל פְּנֵי כׇל אֶחָיו יִשְׁכֹּן".
- R. Avraham Saba views these promises, too, is as the beginning of Avraham and Sarah's punishment. Hagar is told that she is to bear descendants who would later torture the Children of Israel, measure for measure. According to him, "פֶּרֶא אָדָם" might refer to a wild, unrestarined man, capable of attack, and "יָדוֹ בַכֹּל וְיַד כֹּל בּוֹ" to a nation of warriors.
Relationship to the banishment
- In contrast to their evaluation of Sarah here, in Bereshit 21, both Radak and Ramban justify Sarah's banishment of Hagar and Yishmael.20 The difference might stem from the fact that there Hashem seems to explicitly side with Sarah, telling Avraham, "כֹּל אֲשֶׁר תֹּאמַר אֵלֶיךָ שָׂרָה שְׁמַע בְּקֹלָהּ".
- Tzeror HaMor, however, is consistent in viewing Sarah's actions as unjustified and suggests that there too, Sarah sinned by expelling them. See Banishment of Hagar and Yishmael for further discussion.
Biblical parallels – R"Y Grossman21 points to several parallels between this incident and the Covenant Between the Pieces and prophecy regarding the enslavement in Egypt. In both cases, there is oppression followed by a promise of freedom,22 compensation, and inheritance.23 In both chapters, too, there is a promise of progeny whose great numbers will not be able to be counted. Finally, Hagar is an Egyptian who runs away to the desert, while Israel flees Egypt to the wilderness. He suggests that through the parallels to an overtly problematic oppression, the text subtly relays its discomfort with Sarah's actions.
Purpose of the story:
- Radak says the story comes to teach good virtues, not to learn from Sarah's actions of oppression.
- R. Avraham Saba asserts that the story comes to explain why the Children of Israel were exile; this was a punishment for Avraham's marriage to Hagar and the ensuing oppression by Sarah.24
