Sarah's Treatment of Hagar/2
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
Sarah's Treatment of Hagar
Exegetical Approaches
Sarah Was Justified
Sarah's treatment of Hagar was justified.
Sources:Philo, R. Saadia Gaon, R. Chananel, Ralbag, Abarbanel, Seforno, HaKetav VeHaKabbalah, R. S.R. Hirsch, and R. David Zvi Hoffmann
"וַתֵּקַל גְּבִרְתָּהּ בְּעֵינֶיהָ"
"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 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. 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?
"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.7
- R. Samet8 alternatively suggests that the angel is referring to Hagar's present afflictions in the Wilderness.
"וַתֵּקַל גְּבִרְתָּהּ בְּעֵינֶיהָ" – These commentators do not explain what Hagar did.9
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.
Were Avraham and Sarah punished? Avraham and Sarah did nothing wrong, so they deserved and received no punishment.
Relationship to the banishment
Purpose of the story: – It is unclear what is the purpose of this story.
Sarah Sinned
"וַתְּעַנֶּהָ שָׂרַי וַתִּבְרַח מִפָּנֶיהָ" – These commentators read "וַתְּעַנֶּהָ" as torture. Radak says that Sarah worked Hagar extremely hard, and possibly hit and cursed her until she ran away because she couldn't bare the suffering any more.
Avraham's role – Radak and R. Avraham Saba assume that Avraham gave Sarah permission to do whatever she wanted to Hagar, and made clear that he still considered Hagar to be Sarah's maid even though he had relations with her. Radak asserts that Avraham had not intended that Sarah torture Hagar, but he didn't interfere so as not to anger Sarah. Ramban says explicitly that this was sinful, while the Tzeror HaMor maintains that he shouldn't have even given Hagar back to Sarah.12
Were they punished? Ramban and the Tzeror HaMor add that they were punished for these actions, that Yishmael will torture Sarah's descendants.13
"וַתֵּקַל גְּבִרְתָּהּ בְּעֵינֶיהָ" – This approach says that Hagar didn't listen to what Sarah commanded her to do because she thought she will be the mistress if Avraham has children from her.
Was Hagar freed? R. Avraham Saba14 says Sarah freed Hagar when she gave her to Avraham. He views this as the beginning of Avraham's sin.15 Avraham should have refused to marry an Egyptian concubine after Hashem promised him children.
"וְהִתְעַנִּי תַּחַת יָדֶיהָ" – This verse is troublesome as it seems to justify the oppression. The commentators try to explain that she needed to return in order to fulfill the future oppression.16
Angel's promise – Radak views this verse as a blessing; in compensation for the oppression, Hagar will have many descendants from Avraham. R. Avraham Saba, in contrast, views this as the beginning of Avraham and Sarah's punishment. Hagar was to bear descendants who will later torture the Children of Israel, measure for measure.
Relationship to the banishment – Radak and Ramban justify the banishment of Hagar and Yishmael in Bereshit 21 because of Yishmael's evil conduct17 or to ensure Yitzchak's inheritance.18 The Tzeror HaMor portrays Sarah in that story the same way as here, that she sinned by expelling them. See Banishment of Hagar and Yishmael for further analysis of that story.
Purpose of the story:
- Radak says the story is coming to teach us good virtues, not to learn from Sarah's actions of oppression.
- R. Avraham Saba asserts that the story informs why the Children of Israel were exiled, as a punishment for taking Hagar to be a wife for Avraham.19
