Dear Rabbi,
The Torah portions leave much to the imagination and it is from
what we don't know that I suppose gets rabbis thinking of answers from what we
are told. This week's parshah is prime example of this.
At the end of the First Aliyah we are told:
Fearing that the Egyptians would
kill him in order to take Sarai, Abram asked her to allege that he was her
brother.
The Second Aliyah then follows this up with:
Second
Aliyah: And indeed because of her beauty, Sarai was taken captive and
brought to Pharaoh. G‑d struck the members of Pharaoh's palace with a plague,
causing Pharaoh to hastily release Sarai. Pharaoh loaded Abram and Sarai with
gifts and riches, and had them escorted out of his land. Abram returned
triumphantly to Canaan.
For someone that has no fear of
leaving his father's land and house at the age of 75, and venturing into the
unknown on the word of G-d, why does Abram suddenly fear for his life and want
his wife to lie for him in order for him to be spared?
For that matter, why doesn't Sarai
put up any protest against being forced on another man, Pharaoh?
Finally, how does Pharaoh put two
and two together to determine that it was because of his taking of Sarai that
his house is overcome with the plague?
The interpretation I got from the
paragraphs of the Second Aliyah is as follows:
|
17And the Lord plagued
Pharaoh [with] great plagues as well as his household, on account of Sarai,
Abram's wife.
|
|
י
|
|
18And
Pharaoh summoned Abram, and he said, "What is this that you have done to
me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife?
|
|
|
Now as to the above, I am anticipating that you will say it was
G-d that told Pharaoh that it was his taking of Sarai that caused the
problem and that Abram was her husband and not his sister, but a literal
reading does not explicitly say that.
I am pointing this out because if the "plague" that
has now overtaken us as well as most of the rest of the world has its origin
from something that was delivered from "above" what was the delivery
to the modern day "Pharaoh" that caused it, and who is the
"husband" that it is to be given back to in order for us to get out
of this.
Shalom,
Mordecai
Dear Mordecai,
In answer to your first question, Avram’s decision to leave his homeland
demonstrates a certain kind of courage and taste for adventure. It does not
make him immune to fear in toto. To be confronted by a ruler as powerful as Pharaoh
is frightening. His assessment of the situation was that if Avram and Sarei
spoke with truth, he would never survive, but if she lied, he had a chance of survival.
Nevertheless, the story is disturbing, as Sarei is the one who puts herself in
real danger, as she is now at the mercy of Pharaoh’s sexual whims. Sarei’s
silence is puzzling. We know that she is capable of speaking her mind. This is
the same woman who said, “Cast out that slave woman and her son” (21:10). Not
only that but G-d told Abraham to obey Sarah’s demand. Might she not have said
something as forceful to Avram when he shared with her the plan to which you
refer? As for your third question, this is a rich opportunity for Midrash
since, as you rightly point out, the text is silent about how Pharaoh
discovers he has taken another man’s wife. Then, there is your last point – the
contemporary matter, which is what always animates your reading of the Torah. I
admit that your description of the plague and the question of what needs to be
righted for our own afflictions to lift is so rich in metaphor that it qualifies
as kabbalistic. I admit that I don’t have the tools to unpack a satisfactory
answer.
What this incident has always meant to me is the power of personal sacrifice
and the astounding rapidity with which a dangerous situation can become
prosperous and fruitful. Perhaps we can apply that to our contemporary
situation. Just as Avram and Sarei were in great danger and then suddenly found
themselves bathed in wealth so too may we rapidly transition from the danger
COVID presents to a prosperous world. Think of how many skills we are
developing, how many problems we are being forced to solve during this COVID
crisis. It has surely expedited some innovation. That is at least one of the
glimmers of light that I see at the end of this long dark tunnel.
Shalom,
Rabbi
Dear Rabbi,
In answer to your first question, Avram’s decision to leave his
homeland demonstrates a certain kind of courage and taste for adventure. It
does not make him immune to fear in toto. To be confronted by a ruler as
powerful as Pharaoh is frightening. His assessment of the situation was that if
Avram and Sarei spoke with truth, he would never survive, but if she lied, he
had a chance of survival. Nevertheless, the story is disturbing, as Sarei is
the one who puts herself in real danger, as she is now at the mercy of
Pharaoh’s sexual whims. Sarei’s silence is puzzling. We know that she is
capable of speaking her mind. This is the same woman who said, “Cast out that
slave woman and her son” (21:10). Not only that but G-d told Abraham to obey
Sarah’s demand. Might she not have said something as forceful to Avram when he
shared with her the plan to which you refer? As for your third question, this
is a rich opportunity for Midrash since, as you rightly point out, the text is
silent about how Pharaoh discovers he has taken another man’s wife.
Then, there is your last point – the contemporary matter, which is what always
animates your reading of the Torah. I admit that your description of the plague
and the question of what needs to be righted for our own afflictions to lift is
so rich in metaphor that it qualifies as kabbalistic. I admit that I don’t have
the tools to unpack a satisfactory answer.
What this incident has always meant to me is the power of personal
sacrifice and the astounding rapidity with which a dangerous situation can
become prosperous and fruitful. Perhaps we can apply that to our contemporary
situation. Just as Avram and Sarei were in great danger and then suddenly found
themselves bathed in wealth so too may we rapidly transition from the danger
COVID presents to a prosperous world. Think of how many skills we are
developing, how many problems we are being forced to solve during this COVID
crisis. It has surely expedited some innovation. That is at least one of the
glimmers of light that I see at the end of this long dark tunnel.
Shalom,
Mordecai
Dear Mordecai,
Rereading how I characterized
Avram, I see that he now sounds more like a pirate than a patriarch. Still, I
wonder if your picture of Avram’s faith is one of perfect trust. Perhaps that
is correct. I tend to see Avram as more susceptible to the variegations of his
journey. Don’t you think he would have reacted with doubt when almost as soon
as he arrived in Canaan a famine brought him down to Egypt?
Fair. But according
to this depiction, we have no problem at all to wrestle with. This strikes me
as an Orthodox answer that smooths over all the difficulties that naturally
arise in our hearts when we read this narrative.
Lord
knows I know how you feel about Jacob.
This is a fascinating
question. In a sense, it only needs to be asked about Avram since Isaac and
Jacob inherited their chosenness to some extent, though each had to establish an
independent relationship with G-d as demonstrated by the Amidah, which states:
G-d of Abraham, G-d of Isaac, and G-d of Jacob rather than G-d of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob. From Abraham’s circumcision of himself, his serving food to the
strangers, his pleading on behalf of Sodom and Gemorrah, and, of course, the
Akedah, a picture emerges of a special person whose chosenness makes sense.
Why does this bother
you? Is it because it’s a lie? Or because she is endangering herself? Did they
have a better option at the time?
In fact, Rashi deals with this question in his comment on 13:5.
This comment appears to derive from Baba
Kama 93A. In short, Lot’s proximity to Avram is what made Lot wealthy. Presumably,
after Avram returned to Canaan a wealthy man, Lot was in his presence and acquired
wealth through his association with Avram.
Shalom,
Rabbi
Dear Rabbi,
As to your first question of "reacting with doubt"
when he arrives and has to go to Egypt, why at the age of 75 does he leave the
comfort of his home? He seems to be well off where he lived. He catches the eye
of G-d by being true believer in one Supreme Being and when G-d tell him to go,
he does not hesitate. I don't see why the "doubt" factor should come
upon him when he is sort of directed to Egypt. Why does Lot stay? Avram is
being driven by someone from above and he should have had complete faith.
As to your second response, in a sense "see
above". He was either in with who was going to protect him or he was not.
As to your third comment, I do have major problems with
Jakob, but Sarah is at the very top. To me, she has caused most of the problems
Jews have. She tells Abraham to take her hand maiden and when he does and has a
son, Ishmael, she wants Ismael and her mother to die. Well the decedents of
Ishmael have carried on this grudge to this very day.
Your forth comment disturbs me in a way. When you say Isaac
and Jacob to a degree inherited their choseness, what happened to Ishmael and
Esau. I know the rabbinic interpretation was they were not worthy, but that to
me is the easy Orthodox explanation.
Your fifth comment troubles me as well. It seems to me that
Sarei took the easy way out. Being "chosen" by Pharaoh meant she
would live the life of luxury. She could have "stood by her man" and
see how it would have played out. I don't see the "danger" to her
with going with Pharaoh.
Your last comment about Lot does not seem to jive with the
Parshah's account. Does it not say in the Third Aliyah:
5And also Lot, who went with Abram, had flocks and cattle
and tents.
6And the land did not bear them to dwell together, for their
possessions were many, and they could not dwell together.
I take that to mean he had his own flocks,
cattle and tents and did not take them from Avram. In other words, he was
independently wealthy. How did he come to have this wealth?
Dear Mordecai,
I do believe we are meant to identify with Abraham, not see him as super human. I try to imagine how I would have responded if G-d had promised me a land and then as soon as I arrived there, I was forced to depart from it because of famine. Your point about Lot staying does demonstrate your basic point, however, which is that Abraham and G-d clearly enjoy a special communication such that, Abraham would overcome this doubt and proceed to Egypt even though that's completely counterintuitive.
I reject your understanding of Sarah, Ishmael, and the "grudge" the descendants of Ishmael bear toward the Jews to this very day. From a historical, scholarly standpoint, no evidence demonstrates that Muslims can trace their lineage to Ishmael. Connecting Ishmael to the religion he founded was a brilliant move by Muhammad. Yet this very move - perhaps intentionally - puts Muslims and Jews on a collision course. The strife between Jews and Muslims began with Muslim animosity and continues to be driven by that. Sarah has nothing to do with it.
The key differences between Isaac and Jacob and Ishmael and Esau are who the mothers are. For a patriarchal society, the importance of the mother in determining who will inherit the mantle is surprising.
Had Sarah "stood by her man" she would fast have not had any man at all as the Torah indicates that Abraham would have been killed. The danger of religion is when it loses contact with real world possibilities and consequences.
Because in verse 5, the phrase "And also Lot" is separated from "had flocks and cattle and tents" by "who went with Abram," I believe my contention stands that being in the presence of Avram strengthened Lot's position to acquire wealth. So, it's half way between your position and mine. He came by it independently but only because he was associated with Avram.
Shalom,
Rabbi
Comments
Post a Comment