Sarah's Treatment of Hagar/2

Sarah's Treatment of Hagar

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Sarah Was Justified

Sarah's treatment of Hagar was justified.

Sources:PhiloQuestions and Answers on Genesis, III:25-26About Philo, JosephusAntiquities of the Jews 1:10:4About Josephus, R. Saadia GaonCommentary Bereshit 16:6About R. Saadia Gaon, R. Chananel(cited by R. Yehoshua ibn Shuib Bereshit 16:5)About R. Chananel b. Chushiel, RalbagBereshit Beur HaParashah 16:4-11Bereshit 16 Toalot 3-5About R. Levi b. Gershom, AbarbanelBereshit 16:6About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, SefornoBereshit 16:6About R. Ovadyah Seforno, HaKetav VeHaKabbalahBereshit 16:5-12About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg, R. S.R. HirschBereshit 16:6-12About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch, and R. David Zvi HoffmannBereshit 16:5-6About 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.  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.

"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.¹ 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,² but once Hagar disrespected her, Sarah took her back as a maidservant. 

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. Sarna³ notes parallels to our story in a law mentioned in the Code of HammurabiLaw Code of Hammurabi 146-147.  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. ⁴
•  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 Samet⁵ 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.⁶

"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.⁷

"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.⁸
• R. Samet⁹ 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" – Many of these sources read the blessing in a positive light, a means to encourage Hagar to return home, which was a safer haven than the wilderness: 

• Freedom – R. Hirsch,¹⁰ following Ibn Ezra, explains that a "פֶּרֶא אָדָם" refers to a person who is free.¹¹  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, it is preferable to return there than face the dangers of the desert.

These sources could have alternatively read negative traits into the angel's words, that Yishmael was to be a wild man, living by the sword and in constant strife.  If Sarah's reaction to Hagar was justified, it suggests that Hagar's prior behavior was deserving of punishment, and if so, perhaps the angel's words served to curse and not bless.¹²

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.

Sources:RadakBereshit 16:4Bereshit 16:6Bereshit 16:9About R. David Kimchi, RambanBereshit 16:6Bereshit 16:9About R. Moshe b. Nachman, R. Avraham SabaTzeror HaMor Bereshit 16:1-5,8About R. Avraham Saba (Tzeror HaMor)

"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 because she couldn't bare the suffering any more.  This approach might go further and  follow Bereshit Rabbah in assuming 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.¹³ He views this as an act of cruelty not becoming of Avraham.¹⁴

Were they punished? Ramban and the Tzeror HaMor maintain that Avraham and Sarah were punished measure for measure for their actions.  Yishmael's descendants tortured Avraham and Sarah's descendants in the future.

"וְהִתְעַנִּי תַּחַת יָדֶיהָ" – This verse is troublesome for this position, as it seems to justify the oppression. If Sarah's actions were problematic, how could the angel tell Hagar to return?

• 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.¹⁵
• Radak, instead, suggests that the angel encouraged Hagar to return because it was only due to Avraham that she would merit to become the mother of multitudes.

"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,¹⁶ and though he would have spats with others he would not flee, but rather "עַל פְּנֵי כׇל אֶחָיו יִשְׁכֹּן".
• R. Avraham Saba, in contrast, views this as the beginning of Avraham and Sarah's punishment.  Hagar is told that she is to bear descendants, for these would later torture the Children of Israel, measure for measure.

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.¹⁷  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 Grossman¹⁸ 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,¹⁹ compensation, and inheritance.²⁰   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.²¹

¹ Cf. Ralbag who does not explain what form the "עינוי" took, but appears to similarly justify it as a legitimate form of reproof.

² See Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan) who also has Sarah freeing Hagar in order to marry Avraham. 

³ See N. Sarna, Understanding Genesis, (New York, 1966): 128-129.

⁴ See below that these sources maintain that Hashem's judgement came via the angel's words to Hagar "שׁוּבִי אֶל גְּבִרְתֵּךְ וְהִתְעַנִּי תַּחַת יָדֶיהָ".  If Hagar was told to return to Sarah and continue to be "oppressed", then Sarah's treatment of her must not have been problematic.  If it had been, how could the angel have directed Hagar to return?

⁵ See his article, "?ותענה שרי` - האם חטאה אמנו בעינוי הזה'".

⁶ In calling her "שִׁפְחַת שָׂרַי" the angel lets Hagar know her true place.

⁷ See Josephus who adds that the angel further told Hagar that if she did not return she would perish in the wilderness.

⁸ R. Hirsch notes the unique language of "hearing" rather than seeing Hagar's oppression. He explains that since Sarah had not actually treated Hagar cruelly, there was nothing to see.  It was only Sarah's words to Hagar, that reminded her of her slave status, which bothered Hagar.

⁹ See the article cited above.

¹⁰ Cf. R. D"Z Hoffmann who writes that Hagar's descendants will be "אוהבי חופש".

¹¹ Ibn Ezra notes the free nature of the wild donkey, pointing to Iyyov 39:5, "מי שלח פרא חפשי".

¹² It is not clear, though, why this would be prefaced with the promise of progeny and a large nation.

¹³ R. Avraham Saba writes, "ואיה תורתו שלמד שכתוב בה לא תסגיר עבד אל אדוניו".

¹⁴ 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.

¹⁵ 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.  It is still difficult to understand how being given such news would encourage Hagar to return to Sarah's home.

¹⁶ He understands the phaשse "פא אדם" to mean "אדם מדבר כפרא".

¹⁷ See Radak.

¹⁸ See his article, "שעבוד הגר ושעבוד מצרים".

¹⁹ He reads the blessing of "' like Ibn Ezra above, that the angel promised Hagar that Yishmael would grow into a free adult.

²⁰ Avraham is told that his descendants will inherit Israel and Hagar is told "וְעַל פְּנֵי כׇל אֶחָיו יִשְׁכֹּן".

²¹ Cf. Seforno who learns the opposite, that anybody who degrades the Children of Israel will be put in place, as was Hagar.