Toreng4.doc init:
25.12.01 last:
15.01.02
Binding, Diversion and Vision for the Future.
The Last Trials of Abraham: The
Seventh Trial; The Eighth Trial; The Ninth Trial; The Tenth Trial; The Eleventh
Trial
Yishma’el and the hints for the Tikkun
of Ham-Kena’an
The Figure of Yishma’el According
to the Revealed Torah
The Regard to Ishmael among
Modern Authors
The Figure of Ishmael in the
Qur’an
The Development of the Figure of
Ishmael in Islamic Legend.
The Akedah
– A word by word analysis
The Joint
Akedah in Jerusalem: the struggle over the inheritance of Abraham.
The Family of Nahor
– a Possible Resolution
About the
Future Torah of Yitzhak
Restitution of
Kayin and Hevel in the Inheritance of Yitzhak and Yishma’el
Appendices:
The Akedah as allegory for the relationship of David
and Shelomoh/Solomon
Shelomoh’s Geopolitics as reflected in his Jerusalem
Temples
The Four altars and temples of Abraham and of Shelomoh
The place f the alter in the 1st and 2nd
Temples.
The Fifth Temple of Abraham
The Dome of the Rock and Moslem-Jewish Reconciliation
The former Parashah
– Lekh-Lekha – began with the command “Walk/Get thee out of thy
country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, to the land that I
will show thee-Ar’eka (in Hebrew, “see” – ra’ah
– and “show” – har’eh – are different declination of the same
verb-root). The completion of this special “walking” is with a special kind of
“seeing”. The name of this Parash is vayera “And (the
Lord) appeared” (using again the same Hebrew word root for “sight”, “see”,
“show” and “appear”). This shows that its main subject is seeing
– at times plain, at times hidden and implied – as well as Yir’ah-Awe.
To these there are added Shmi’ah-Hearing and Mishma’at-Obedience.
The parashah
begins with a revelation (epiphany) to Abraham: “And the Lord-YHWH
appeared to him by the terebinths of Mamre”, and ends with a combination of the
act of Abraham – who gave a new name for the place of the Binding: “And Abraham
called the name of the place YHWH yir’e (“the Lord will See” - in
the Active Voice), together with an “editorial comment” – that hints at the future
of the site, which would eventually become the Temple site: “as it is said to
this day, In the mount the Lord will appear” – YHWH yera’e (“The
Lord will be seen” - in the passive voice).
The entire
portion deals with the continuation of the trials of Abraham, and with the
question of inheritance: the inheritance of the blessings that Abraham
received.
The dramatic peak
of the parashah is the eleventh trial of Abraham – and the first of Yitzhak-Isaac
– the trial of the Akedah – the Binding of Isaac. There is a
tremendous significance both to the Binding per se, and in its marking the
place of the Temple for times to come and for our own times.
We shall see how
all the various topics that the Parashah deals with , which are
ostensibly disparate, are all bound together for this one end.
We shall examine
not only the seeing of Abraham, but also the meaning of the special seeing of Yitzhak-Isaac,
who was bound to the altar.
In twelve
occurrences in this Parashah there are mentioned the vision, the sight,
or the inability to see.
1. vayera
elav YHWH - “And the Lord-YHWH appeared to him by
the terebinths of Mamre, as he sat at the tent door in the heat of the day; and
he raised his eyes and looked (va’yar), and, lo, three men stood by
him; and when he saw them (va’yar), he ran to meet them” (18:1).
2. “And
there came two angels to Sedom at evening, and Lot sat in the gate of Sedom,
and Lot seeing them (va’yar) rose up to meet them” (19:1).
3. “And
they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness,
both small and great, so that they wearied themselves to find the door” (19:11).
4. “But
his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar of salt” (19:26).
5. “And
Abraham went early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the
Lord-YHWH; and he looked toward Sedom and Amora, and
toward all the land of the plain, and beheld (va’yar), and, lo,
the smoke of the country went up like the smoke of a furnace” (19:27-28).
6. “What
hast thou done to us…. What sawest thou (mah ra’ita), that thou
hast done this thing?” (20:9-10).
7. “And
to Sarah he said, behold, I have given thy brother a thousand pieces of silver;
behold, it is thee covering of the eyes, to all that are with thee” (20:16).
8. “And
God heard the voice of the lad…. And God opened her eyes, and she saw a
well of water; and she went and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad
drink” (21:19). (This was almost a
repetition of Hagar’s experience in parashat Lekh-Lekha “And she
called the name of the Lord-YHWH that spoke to her, Thou God
seest me; for she said, Have I also looked after him that sees me?
Therefore the well was called Be’er Lahay-ro’I – well
to the Living (God) that sees me” (16:13-14).)
9. “Then
on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place (va’yar
et hamakom) afar off” (22:4).
10. “And Abraham said,
My son, God will provide himself (Elohim yir’eh-l) a lamb for
offering” (22:8).
11. “And Abraham lifted
up his eyes, and looked, and behold (va’yar)behind him a ram caught
in the thicket with his horns” (22:13).
12. “And Abraham
called the name of the place YHWH yir’e, (the Lord will
see), as it is said to this day, in the Mount of the Lord will appear (YHWH
year’e)” (22:14).
(There is
another place in the Bible where such a revelational sight is described – the
epiphany to Moses in parashat Shemot:
1. “And the
angel of the Lord-YHWH appeared (va’yera) to him in
a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush” (Exodus
3:2).
2. “And he looked
and, behold, the bush burnt with fire, but the bush was not consumed” (3:2).
3. And Moshe
(Moses) said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the
bush is not burnt” (3:3).
4. “And when
the Lord-YHWH saw that he turned aside to see, God
(Elohim) called to him out of the midst of the bush” (3:4).
5. “And Moshe
hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God” (3:6).
6. “And the
Lord (YHWH) said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people
who are in Egypt-Mizrayim” (3:7). )
Ten of these
sightings, which are mentioned in parashat Vayera are miraculous,
and testify to the divine presence in the world, and the overseeing and
providence from his side. In the majority of these are involved also angels of
God. But the parashah contains another, hidden sight – that of Yitzhak.
According to Rashi: “When Yitzhak-Isaac was bound upon the altar
and his father was proceeding to slaughter him, in that moment the skies opened
to him (Isaac) and he saw the ministering angels who were crying, and their
tears went down and fell on his eyes, therefore his eyes became blinded”.
What else did Yitzhak-Isaac
see when the heavens opened to him? In the sequel we shall lean upon later
sacred traditions, in order to try and reproduce what was the vision that Yitzhak-Isaac
beheld, to what extent it aids the understanding of our contemporary situation
and to the understanding of the pattern of the future Temple in Jerusalem.
But before we
shall survey the trials that Abraham experienced, in the narrative of parashat
Vayera.
The Seventh
Trial: it started with the arrival of the three miraculous guests to
the tent of Abraham. This is a trial put to Abraham and to Sarah alike: one of
the angels came to announce to Sarah the birth of her son, and received from
her the same response that Abraham already failed in – a laughter of distrust.
The major trial
for Abraham was in the negotiations that he conducted in order to enable a
merciful judgement towards the people of Sedom. He surely knew that they were
mostly sinners, but he also knew that his nephew lived among them, and perhaps
other virtuous persons as well. Abraham thus started to dispute with God, and
to adopt various tactics: first he threw at him the complaint: “Shall not the
Judge of all the earth do right?” (18:25).
But then quickly moved to an entirely different tone: “Behod now, I have taken
upon me to speak to the Lord, who am but dust and ashes” (18:27). Abraham continued the bargaining,
until he succeeded to lower the price of saving the city to ten righteous
people. But the next day: “And Abraham went early in the morning to the place
where he had stood before the Lord” (19:27),
and discovered that the destruction had already been meted.
(As an aside we’ll
note that parallel those of Abraham, also his nephew Lot passed trials. He
repeated one-for-one the experiences of Noah: Like Noah, he is the only
righteous person among the wicked people of Sedom, and therefore he was saved
from the total destruction. Like with Noah, also the offsprings of Lot (females
in this case), thought that the world had been destroyed and they have to start
humankind all over again. Noah got drunk in his tent and was taken advantage of
by one of his sons, and Lot’s daughters made their father drunk with wine until
“he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose”. In both cases the
incest had its consequences. The son of Ham, Kena’an
(Canaan) would establish a people that were cursed from the outset: “Cursed be Kena’an;
a servant of servants shall he be to his brethren” (9:25).
The sons of Lot’s daughters, Mo’av and Ammon, would also establish peoples who
were at first held as bastards and undesirables in comparison with the children
of Abraham. Yet the Messiah King, David, is an issue of both sides: of Ruth the
Mo’abite and of Bo’az from the issue if Judah, the grand-grandson of Abraham.
The Eighth
Trial is a bit like a repetition of the second trial: Abraham yielding
his wife for the ruler of the land. This time the ruler was Avimelekh king of
Gerar, in the land of the philistines. Abraham once again presented his wife as
his sister. The affair concerning Avimelekh was much more severe – for had
Abraham and Sarah believed fullheartedly to the message of the angel about the
future birth of Isaac, they should have considered the likelihood that Sarah
was already becoming pregnant. Avimelekh complained to Abraham (and rightly
so): “what hast thou done to us? And in what have I offended you, that thou
hast brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? Thou hast done deeds to me
that ought not to be done” (20:9). And
abraham chose an excuse that could exacerbate the situation and to entangle
Abimelekh, and himself, in further incest: “And yet indeed she is my sister,
she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother”. This time
again, like in the case of Pharaoh in Egypt, the consequence of the deed is a
monetary compensation. Abraham gained a tremendous material wealth – sheep, and
oxen, and menservants, and women servants, plus a thousand pieces of silver
(twice and a half times the great amount he would pay for the Makhpela
Cave), and Abraham was invited to continue dwelling in Gerar.
Ostensibly, the
problem has been solved, but only apparently. We are suddenly informed on a
punishment that was put upon the house of Abimelekh because of Sarah: The
cessation of pregnancies. The barren Abraham then heals the barrenness of the
people of Gerar. Abimelekh’s wife and maidservants gave birth, and only then –
Sarah conceived. It is for a reason that the account twice recalls that
Abimelekh had not come near her.
In summary, there
formed a de-facto family connection between Abraham and the people of Pleshet
(Philistines). Abraham enjoyed their hospitality and their property and could
not disengage from or deny them.
The Ninth
Trial is again a repetition – repeating the fifth trial: that of
casting Hagar away. This time the son – Ishmael, accompanies her. With the
birth of her longed-for son, and especially from his weaning, Sarah became
still more jealous, and when she saw Ishmael mocking – she demanded to expel
both him and his mother. On the day of the feast of Yitzhak-Isaac,
Yishma'el-Ishmael was expelled and sentenced to thirst – “for the
son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, with Yitzhak” (Gen. 21:10).
“And the thing was very grievous in Abraham’s eye because of his
son” (21:11).
Ishmael was his natural and loved son, whereas in the birth of Isaac there was
something supernatural and therefore perhaps even frightening. But God-Elohim
(for again there appears the name of God-Elohim, which represents the
quality of judgement, of division and or ruling – Serara, and not
YHWH, the Name of Being and of mercy) commanded him “in all that
Sarah has said to thee, harken (shma) to her voice”. Like in two
other cases in this portion, cases of disaster and heartbreak (the destruction
of Sedom and the Binding of Isaac) “And Abraham rose up early in
the morning”, this time to hasten and cast Ishmael and Hagar out to the desert.
Hagar lost her way in the desert of Be’er Sheva, which would also
be the site where the tenth trial would take place, the trial that starts with
contention, and its end a covenant with the Philistines, a covenant that spells
the yielding of territories.
And Abraham? We
can only guess whether there was left in Abraham a residue of pain over the
expulsion of his beloved son, and to what extent did the sending out of Ishmael
influenced the Binding of Isaac (and it is clear that there must be a
connection, as the text renders the actions of Abraham in these two cases
starting with the same words “And Abraham rose up early in the morning”. Both the
Jewish Midrash and the Moslem Qur’an agree that the connection
between Abraham and his son Ishmael did not end on this jarring note. The
Midrash (______) tells that Abraham eventually visited the tent of Ishmael, to
inquire what happened to him, yet under the command of Sarah not to dismount
there from his camel. The Qur’an goes on to tell (Sura
2, 119-121) that not only Abraham eventually visited Ishmael, but that
they both built together a shrine in Mecca. Whichever, also the Bible marks
that after the death of Abraham, his two sons; Isaac and Ishmael buried him
together.
It is thus evident
that there is a connection between this trial and the trial of the Akedah,
and that even the sending out of Ishmael is not absolute but temporary, and
under certain conditions he might return.
The Tenth
Trial: is in the dispute and negotiation with Avimelekh and Pikhol
captain of his host over territory and water (wells). At its conclusion came
the drawing of a covenant, in which Abraham conceded to the Philistines all the
rights that were promised him by God in the land of the Philistines. This
requires some reflection. Abraham had already obtained from Avimelekh the right
to dwell in this area. He was also equipped with the divine promise that the
whole land will be given to his seed. Actually, the one who was worried was
Avimelekh, and he sought to make with Abraham a covenant that would stand for
generations, for his grandchildren and grand-grandchildren, according to the
kindness that he had done to Abraham. (As an aside, it is possible to claim
nowadays that since Abraham himself has made a covenant with the ruler of the
Philistines, the covenant stands for all generations, even to our own times,
and obliges the Children of Abraham in a covenant with the Philistine-Palestinians
and in conceding them “The Land of the Philistines”). According to the
commentary of Rabbi Hayim Vital, in the name of the ARI”zl, Abraham
failed in this tenth trial in that he did not trust the Lord and his promises –
which became apparent from the covenant he made with the Philistines – and this
failure necessitated a test of absolute faithfulness, in the binding of Isaac.
The
Eleventh Trial: The Binding of the younger son, Yitzhak-Isaac,
in which there is a repetition and intensification of the firstborn son – Yishma’el-Ishmael.
“And it came to pass after these things, that God-Elohim did test
Abraham”. After the experiences with the people of Sedom, after the sending
away of Hagar and Ishmael and after the covenant with the Philistines – there
became a need for this awesome trial.
The story of the Akedah
– the Binding – that is so extremely terse, is surely immense and exalted, but
also very difficult. The majority of Biblical commentators preferred to ignore
and not to contend with it. But in our days, the meaning of the Binding is so
palpable, that there is an existential need to understand it anew.
But before our focusing on the Akedah, which came “after these things”, let us return to two other issues with which this parashah deals: the special relationship that is fashioned in its course (through two different incidents) with the Philistines, and the casting away of the other son, Ishmael.
The Avimelekh
affair looks, on the face of it, as unrelated with the other topics of the parashah.
But when we examine it deeper, we find it has connection both with Re’iyah–sight
and with Yir’ah-awe.
After the
destruction of Sedom, Abraham migrated to the Negev, to Gerar. He
left the place where his tent stood for years, where he built an altar and
hosted the angels, and went to the land of the Philistines. It is likely that
he did this out of fear, preferring not to stay by the dangerous zone – and
thereby he showed a rather limited trust in the divine providence and
punishment.
Upon his arrival
to Gerar, Abraham again resorted to the suspect security measure that he used
earlier, in Egypt, and presented his wife as his sister. When Avimelekh, who saw
God who came to him in a dream by night, asked Abraham “what sawest thou
– mah ra’ita - that thou hast done this thing” (Gen. 20:10), Abraham
answered “Because I thought, Surely the fear of God – yir’at
Elohim – is not in this place; and they will slay me for my
wife’s sake”.
“And Avimelekh
king of Gerar sent – vayishlah – and took Sarah” (20:2). Much before
the sending away of Ishmael there were sent the envoys to take
the wife (or sister) of Abraham. God immediately came to Avimelekh in a vision
of the night and warned him from taking a married woman, “Therefore Avimelekh
rose early in the morning, and called all his servants, and told all these
things in their ears, and the men were sore afraid – vayir’u”.
The rising early in the morning to fulfill a divine command, which characterized
Abraham, also characterized Avimelekh, the king of “the land of the
Philistines”. The order between seeing and hearing of revelations is
interesting here: the Philistine sees a vision of God, he rises early in
the morning, pronounces (mashmi’a – which
has to do with shmi’ah – hearing) and then the listeners
become afraid – it is like a chain that leads from a divine vision to
awe – or the reverse.
Also the monetary
compensation that Avimelekh gave Abraham was meant to allay “the evil eye” –
“And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the
daughter of my mother; and she became my wife” (20:12), alludes to a known situation in the
ancient east, where priests used to marry their sisters, as a means for
safeguarding fertility.
But instead of
bringing fertility and a blessing upon himself or to the land of the
Philistines which he entered, Abraham was childless, his wife barren, and
together they brought to bareness in Avimelekh’s household “For the Lord had
fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Avimelekh, because of Sarah
Abraham’s wife” (20:18).
Thus, we
understand by implication that the sojourn of Abraham in Gerar and the sojourn
of Sarah in the house of Avimelekh were by no means short. There had to elapse
enough time until the Philistines would notice that the house of the king was
inflicted by bareness, a process that must have taken at least half a year. All
through this time Abraham did not protest before Avimelekh. This patience of
Abraham is prominent in comparison with his heroism against the four kings and
his agility to negotiate with God on behalf of the people of Sedom. He did not
try to strike Avimelekh by night, and not to plead from his God.
We have already
seen that the connection of Israel to Mo’av and Ammon is tied somehow to
matters of incest. Now we find that also the connection with the Philistines
(Palestinians) is marked, in a certain way, with matters of incest. IT is the
weakness of Abraham that opened a passage for making a covenant with the king
of the Philistines in the sequel of the parashah.
But yet before the
second act of the encounter of Abraham and the Philistines, There is brought
the matter of the sending away of Ishmael at Sarah’s command. This way, the
Philistines become connected with the Ishmaelites. Since then, the two entities
became entangled together, until today it is pretty evident to almost all of
the Arabs in the Land of Israel (be they Israeli citizens or not), the majority
of them are Moslems-Ishmaelites, that they are actually
Palestinians-Philistines.
And thus, when in
the third act Abraham made a covenant with Avimelekh, king of “The Land of the
Philistines” this became a long-term treaty with “Philistines”, so it was at
the time of the kingdom of David and Shelomoh-Solomon and so it
is today – in the treaty between Israel and the Palestinians-Ishmaelites.
Yet it is seen
from the scriptural text that this arrangement – which contradicts the promise
gave by the Lord to Abraham – is not the most desirable arrangement. We can see
the proper sequence of arrangements according to the historical example of the
beginning of the Kingdom of Israel: Sha’ul-Saul fought the
Philistines to the bitter end. The wandering David held a treaty with Akhish
the Philistine king of Gat, a treaty that was made in a period when his status
was quite similar to that of Abraham in the Land of the Philistines, and he was
ready to join with him even in the war of the Philistines against Israel. It
seems that after David became the victor and conquering king, he still held to
that treaty, and even had Philistine soldiers as his royal guard. A generation
later, in the kingdom of Shelomoh-Solomon, the ideal Kingdom of
Israel, the Philistines became absorbed and assimilated in Israel during the attempt
of Shelomoh to reorganize the tribes. In the sequel, when we shall
discuss Jacob and his sons, we shall see that the Torah already hints there at
a similar solution, which has very important implications for our time.
From the text
there can be gleaned the possibility that Yitzhak-Isaac
was Avimelekh’s son. The sages noted (__________) that the jokers of that
generation claimed as much. The connection with the Philistines could be much
more intimate than we would like to figure. Thus several commentators
interpreted the verse “And it came to pass, when Par’oh had let the people go,
that God led them not through the way of the land of the Pelishtim
(Philistines), because that was near” – ki qarov hu – (Exodus
13:17) in the sense that the Philistines were the closest people to the
Israelites, in their manners and character. But the Torah clarifies it in the
most certain way that the blocking of fertility in the whole house of Avimelekh
included the king himself “And God healed Avimelekh, and his wife, and his
maidservants; and they bore children” (Gen.
20:17).
The connections
with the Philistines are not, therefore, incestuous relationship, but the
connection of a covenant that was made on the brink of such relationship,
probably instead of such.
When Yitzhak-Isaac
was born, his mother Sarah arose to protect him, and as soon as she saw Yishma’el
mocking (in Hebrew metzahek, from tzehok
– laughter), she demanded of Abraham “Cast out this bondwoman and her son, for
the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, Yitzhak” (21:10). In the past, Sarah already was
stricken with laughter and was afraid of its expression: “Then Sarah denied,
saying, I laughed not; for she was afraid. And he said, No; but thou didst
laugh” (18:15). On this occasion, again
it is laughter, the laughter of Yishma’el-Ishmael (God will
hear), that is a hindrance for her, and she is again afraid.
The demand of
Sarah was for casting out, expulsion, - for a total act that cannot be
retracted. This was difficult and seemed bad – “And the thing was very grievous
in Avraham’s eyes (judgmental viewing) because of his son”. But Elohim-God
(which is, as already noted, the measure of judgment) demanded of him complete
submission (Islam) to Sarah “in all that Sarah has said to thee,
hearken to her voice”. Abraham was commanded on discipline, but when he
proceeded to enact that which he had to, he hurried to do it in a more loving
manner – “And Avraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a
bottle of water, and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the
child, and sent her away” (vayeshalheha). Not
expulsion but sending – shiluah – and perhaps even mission
– shlihut.
Yishma’el was not
sent to get perish in the desert, but to contend, to survive and to wander. He
is one who marked the trail before the wanderings of the children of Israel for
forty years in the desert, and before the wanderings of the Israelites for
about two thousand years in “the desert of the nations” (midbar ha’Umot).
It is instructive
that the four hundred years period of sojourn and exile “Know surely that thy
seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them;
and they shall afflict them four hundred years” (Gen.
15:13) starts with the sending of Ishmael and ends with “when
Par’oh had sent the people” – beshalah Par’oh et ha’Am (Exodus 13:17).
The saving of
Yishma’el is well connected to parashat vayera and the special seeing
of the whole. Yishma’el gained his first lesson of desert survival through the
grace of God, when the eyes of Hagar opened: “And God opened her eyes, and
she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water,
and gave the lad drink” (21:19), and
immediately in the sequel it is told “And God was with the lad, and he grew…” Yitzhak,
the tent dweller, who had missed the lesson, bequeathed the contention with the
desert to his grandchildren who went down to Egypt.
Is it not the case
that, contrary to the express demand of Sarah for the casting out of
Yishma’el, what really transpired was the intention of Abraham for sending
Yishma’el? Was Yishma’el sent on a mission from God?
Yishma’el
and the hints for the Tikkun of Ham-Kena’an
Yishma’el is the
son of Hagar the Egyptian, from the race of Ham, the
father of Kena’an-Canaan. Her marriage to Abraham, the
Semite-Hebrew, is the beginning of the chain of the Restoration – Tikkun
– of the relationships among the three races of humankind, relations that were
damaged after the curse of No’ah to Ham
“Cursed be Kena’an, a servant of servants shall he be to his
brethren. And He said, Blessed be the Lord-YHWH God of Shem, and Kena’an
shall be his servant. God-Elohim shall enlarge Yefet,
and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, and Kena’an shall be his
servant” (Gen. 9:25-29). Hagar the
Egyptian was a servant to Sarah, the Semite lady. When she gained the status of
a wife, she rebelled against Sarah. “And Saray Avram’s wife took Hagar, her
maid, the Mitzrian, after Avram had dwelt ten years in the land of Kena’an, and
gave her to her husband Avram for a wife. And he went in to Hagar, and she
conceived, and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised
in her eyes” (Gen. 16:3-4). This led to
an open conflict, to the tormenting of Hagar by Saray, and to the flight of
Hagar to the desert. “And the angel of the Lord-YHWH said to her,
Return to thy mistress, and submit (Islam) thyself to her hands.
And the angel of the Lord-YHWH said to her, I will multiply thy
seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude. And the angel of
the Lord-YHWH said to her, Behold, thou art with a child, and
shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Yishma’el, because the Lord-YHWH
has heard thy affliction” (16:9-11). In
these words of the angel, their solemn style, the repetition of “And the angel
of the Lord-YHWH said to her” thrice, and in their message, there
is a preamble to the story of the children of Israel in Egypt and their
affliction under the Egyptians. It is a sort of “measure for measure” for the
tormenting of Hagar and the injustice in the expulsion of Yishma’el. But
perhaps there is also a message for all the children of Ham.
The contention
derives from understandable master-slave relationship between the lady and her
maid. Only after two generations, among the wives of Jacob-Ya’aqov,
there is found an amicable solution for similar relationship.
When we reach this
part, we shall also examine the extent of potential integration of “Yishma’el”
within the community of “Yisra’el”.
(Moreover, through
our discussion of the nature of the entity of “Yisra’el” we shall also deal
with the foundation of the United States of America and the self-conception of
the founders, that they were restoring Israel. The great conflict of the USA,
which brought to the Civil War, was the question of the liberation of the Negro
slaves, the Hamites, who were brought in multitude as
slaves to “the promised land” of the white people. The slaves were liberated
and their offspring are becoming gradually integrated in the social tissue of
the USA, until many of them have reached a status much superior to their
brethren in the African states. The road to progress has been, then, actually
through slavery.)
The Figure
of Yishma’el According to the Revealed Torah
Already in parashat
Lekh-Lekha, when Hagar was tormented in the hands of Saray and escaped
to the desert, she was given the message: “Behold, thou art with a child, and
shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Yishma’el, because the Lord-YHWH
has heard thy affliction. And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against
every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence
of all his brethren” (16:11-12).
In the making of
the Covenant (when Abraham was 99 years old, and Yishma’el 13) of circumcision,
the Elohim promised Abraham a son from Sarah, and Abraham laughed
and then “Abraham said to God, O that Yishma’el might live before thee” (17:18). God then re-affirmed his promised,
requested to call the son of Sarah by the name of Yitzhak, and then
continued to treat the future of Yishma’el: “And as for Yishma’el I have
heard thee (ul’Yishma’el shma’atikha – a word play); Behold,
I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him
exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation”
(17:20). This is almost the same blessing
that was made to Adam upon their formation: “And God blessed them, and God said
to them, Be fruitful, and multiply, replenish the earth, and subdue it” (Gen. 1:28). Namely, there is a parallel
between Adam and Yishma’el, the fertile “pere Adam” (wild man).
In parashat
Vayera Sarah saw “the son of the bondwoman” (Yishma’el) laughing
(metzahek) during the feast of weaning Yitzhak
and demanded to cast him away. God commanded Abraham to obey to Sarah,
but added a consolation along with the draconian measure: “And also the son of
the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed” (21:13). And again, when the young Ishmael was
in mortal danger and his mother thought that he would not survive, the angel of
the Lord and reaffirmed “for I will make him a great nation” (21:18).
In the next parashah
– Haye Sarah – Ishmael is mentioned again briefly: “Then Avraham
expired, and died in a good old age, and old man, and full of years; and he was
gathered to his people. And his sons Yitzhak and Yishma’el
buried him in the cave of Makhpelah” (25:8-9). It is also worth noting that after
the burial Yitzhak-Isaac returned to dwell “with the well
of lahay ro’I” – exactly at the spot where Hagar became
informed of the anticipated birth of Yishma’el. The parashah
ends with the list of the chronicles of Ishmael, all his twelve princely sons
and then “And these are the years of the life of Yishma’el, a hundred and
thirty seven years; and he expired and died; and was gathered to his people.
And they dwelt from Havilah to Shur, that is
before Mitzrayim (Egypt), as thou goest toward Ashshur
(Assyria); and he dwelt in the presence of all his brethren” (25:17-18). The wording about the death of
Ishmael is identical to that of the death of Abraham, with all the
characteristics of death of saints. And even if Ishmael did not live as long as
Abraham (175), he still lived longer that Sarah (127).
The scriptural
description of Ishmael is a positive one. The “wild man” – pere Adam
– becomes a fertile man – Adam Poreh. HE shares in the burial of
the common father and raises princes as a dignified nobleman.
In the time of the
Sages, when the Jewish attitude to Esau already turned negative (a topic to
which we shall return in the parashot of vaYetse
and vaYishlah), the attitude towards Ishmael was still
positive. This attitude is evident from this that the name “Yishma’el”
was popular respected and endeared. In the first century C.E. there was a high
priest called Yishma’el, and in the second century there were two
Tana’im (authors of the Mishnah) with that name. Especially
famous was Rabbi Yishma’el, “the couple” (Ben Zugo) of the great
Rabbi Akivah, and whose teachings are quoted in many places in the Mishnah,
including the beginning of Torat Kohanim (the Torah of the
Priests) with the 13 methods according to which the Torah is to be studied. It
was only after the appearance of Muhammad, the Islamic conquests and the life
of Jews in “The Exile of Yishma’el”, that the attitude to Yishma’el became a
negative one and the later legends and Midrashim (such as Midrash
haZohar) started to regard him as a devilish figure.
Before we analyze
the changes and development that the figure of Ishmael underwent in the Qur’an
and following the Islam, we may recall the approach of modern authors who
employed the Biblical image of Ishmael, that f the wanderer. Thus in Melville’s
great American epos “Moby Dick”, Ishmael is the person who grows tired of
living on the land in the puritanical-Biblical society of New England, and goes
down the seas in search of the great whale, which we can see as a symbol of the
unconscious (see also legends and Midrahim about the Great Whales – haTaninim
haGdolim). In the book of Daniel Quinne “Ishmael”, the hero is an
intelligent male Gorilla, who teaches humankind the ecological moral that is
required to save the destructive modern industrial society.
The Torah dealt
very briefly with the figure of Ishmael, and left an open place to elaborate,
which was eventually taken up by Muhammad.
The Qur’an refers
to Ishmael many times, but in most of them he does not appear as a person on
his own, but is listed among the issue f Abraham or among all the prophets of
God. These Suras were written, as far as we know, in the beginning of the
Medina period, when Muhammad used to orient his prayers towards Jerusalem, like
the Jews, and hoped that the Jews would join him and recognize his prophecy as
their own religion. Ishmael-Isma’il was mentioned at that period
as a legitimate prophet, but not more than that – there is no mention of any
special teaching of Ishmael, and he seems to have no seniority in the religion
of Abraham.
In his important book
“Fusus al-Hikam” – “The Wisdom of the Prophets” - the major Sufi
philosopher Ibn Al-Arabi tried to characterize the teachings of the different
prophets that are mentioned in the Qur’an. It seems that he leaned only on
these first Suras and all he had to remark on the prophecy of Ishmael was that
he had, as did any genuine prophet, his own unique prophetic inspiration,
through the unique root of his soul.
In the 2nd
Sura, Al-Bakara – “The Cow” the Qur’an however gives a special
role for Ishmael as the builder of the “House” (the Temple of the Qa’aba in
Mecca) together with his father Abraham: “ ______” (Sura 2,
119-121). This implies that Ishamel, with Abraham, was the founder of
the sacred center of Islam in Mecca, and Mohamad’s role was just to return and
purify it from the idolatry that clung to it in the course of the generations.
It should be noted
that the Qur’an does not mention “The Binding of Ishmael”. There is a mention
of Abraham, who was commanded to sacrifice his son and the son who agreed to
this (Sura 37, 99),
but the name of the son is not expressed in the Qur’an. The Moslem commentatrs
were divided over the identity of the son who was bound. In the commentary of
Ibn-Arabi (see above), for example, it is entirely clear that the son that was
bound was Isaac-Ishaq.
The
Development of the Figure of Ishmael in Islamic Legend.
Yet since with
this Sura there was formed an opening for Moslems to get interested in Ishmael
and his life, there came the Moslem legend, the Hadith, to
add lines to his figure. These lines were borrowed from the Jewish sources and Midrashim,
and include the three visits of Abraham from afar to see Ishmael. In the first
two visits, Ishmael was not at his home and Abraham did not stay to wait for
him (according to the Jewish Midrash, Abraham promised to Sara not to dismount
his camel), but he left for Ishmael hints regarding his wives. Ishmael obeyed
his father’s hints, divorced his first wife and endeared his second. In
Abraham’s third visit, adds the Moslem legend, the father and son proceeded to
build together the temple of Mecca.
This threefold
pattern accords with the pattern we find throughout the Book of Genesis, and we
shall return to it, for example (in parashat Toldot), as relating
to the three wells of Yitzhak-Isaac and their allusions to
the Temple of Jerusalem.
Legends have many
levels and allude to certain hidden things. The recent discoveries of “The
Abraham Triangle” that connect the very ancient shrine that is the Great
Pyramid of Egypt to the Temple of Jerusalem and to the Qa’aba of Mecca, hints
that these three sites might have been nodes of a very ancient grid, to which
the legends quoted above refer in a different, veiled way.
Thus Ishmael was
“resurrected” by Muhammad, who imprinted in the Arab Mind their being the
scions of Ishmael and Abraham. Even though the sacred center for Islam was
fixed at Mecca, the ancient shrine of the Arabs, then also Jerusalem, connected
with Abraham and Isaac and their progeny, became a sacred city also for Islam.
In the generation
after Muhammad, when the Moslems conquered the Land of Israel, and liberated
Jerusalem from the Byzantine rule and allowed Jews to return and live in
Jerusalem – there came the recognition of the possibility, even the need, to
build also a Moslem shrine on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. During the time of
the Khalif Abd al-Malik, whose capital was in Damascus, and his son _______
there were built two structures, first the Dome of the Rock and later the
El-Aksa Mosque – of which only the latter is a mosque, oriented to Mecca. The
Dome of the Rock stayed oriented to itself, to a certain rock on the Temple
Mount, that the Islamic Hadith eventually connected with
the visionary “Night Journey” – al-Isra’ – of the prophet, but
also recognized as the Foundation Rock and the place of sacrifice of Abraham’s
son.
Even though the
Dome of the Rock has a tremendous value nowadays for the Moslems and especially
the Palestinians, until most of them mistakenly consider it to be the El-Aksa
Mosque, in fact it is by no means evident why was it built and what was its
original religious importance. The scholars are divided in their opinions; so
much so, that the late Rabbi Goren, who was the chief Rabbi of Israel, could
have claimed (in his book “The Temple Mount” in Hebrew) that originally there
was a Moslem intention to grant this shrine to the Jews as a place of prayer,
and that it even served thus for a while.
We shall return to
discuss this sacred place below, in dealing with the Akedah. We
shall only note here that through the agency of this place and this edifice,
the Moslems and the Jews became bound-together in Jerusalem, in a binding that
cannot be easily undone.
We have already
shown, at parashat Lekh-Lekha, the geographical pattern – “The
Abraham Triangle” – that connects between Mecca and Jerusalem. But in this parashah
are expressed the actual connections, even the bindings, that connect between
the places and prepare for the central connection – which is the Binding at
Mount Moriah. Four experiences or acts preceded the setting of the Akedah:
1) First came the story of Lot, when Abraham was at the terrbinths of Mamre,
by Hebron, Lot was at the plain of the Jordan and his progeny became Ammon and
Mo’av Eastward of the Jordan and the Dead Sea. Thereby was formed the Eastern
sector for potential connections (as did happen during the Kingdom of Solomon).
2) At the next act the action moves westwards to the Land of the Philistines,
to Gerar. 3) From there Abraham moves South-East, to Be’er Sheva
as his center of dwelling and there took place the sending of Ishmael and Hagar
Southwards to the desert. This is the sector of the Children of Ishmael (the
ancient Arabs) that is mainly of the South, but it spreads out also East, North
and West at the edges of the settled land – from Egypt until Geshur.
Here formed the Southern sector for potential connection. 4) The fourth act
turns again westward, to the Land of the Philistines and brings to a
contractual covenant with them, and this is the sector for potential connection
with the peoples of the West.
The Akedah at
Mount Moriah would fix Jerusalem as the primary center, from where are
determined the axes to the twelve directions. From the perspective of the
center at Jerusalem, “The Land of the Philistines” is situated on the same axis
that leads also to Egypt (Giza), whereas the sending of Ishmael marks the
connection, historical and religious, between Judaism and Islam along the
Jerusalem-Mecca axis.
“And it
came to pass after these things”: On the basis of these four acts, and
the connections enfolded in them, there starts the quest for finding the center
point, central to them all, a place visible from afar, destined for the
integration of all those connections – that is the Quest for the Land of Moriah
(or the Re’iyah-Vision, namely to the Akedah-binding).
The trial of the
Akedah, namely the very agreement to yield the natural heir, opens in principle
the possibility of seeking an alternative heir, not necessarily on a biological
basis. Already in the past, at the covenant (Brit ben haBetarim),
Abraham conceived of the possibility that the steward of his house, Eli’ezer of
Dammeseq, will inherit him. But as we noted, in the course of preparations for
the Akedah-Binding, Abraham became “bound” in a nexus of connections
to those who would beget neighboring peoples: to his nephew were born
sons-grandsons who would develop into the Ammonites and Moabites (in today’s
terms: Jordanian Arabs), he had a biological son (from Hagar) from whom would
issue twelve princes (the Arabs in general), and he had just made a covenant,
one that came instead of relation by marriage, with the Philistines (or the
Palestinians, in today’s parlance). The saving of Yitzhak-Isaac
at the end of this trial, would give the seniority to him and his sons, but it
does not cancel the additional possibilities that became conceivable in the
course of this experiment.
Chapter 22 – The
Akedah:
The story of the Akedah
– the Binding of Isaac-Yitzhak is the eternal story of the
Jews. In the course of history it became evident that it was this terrible tale
that became a source of pride and strength for the Jewish soul, and from the
Binding of Yitzhak/Isaac and to the assassination of Yitzhak
Rabin, Jews repeatedly give up their soul for the sake of the betterment
of the world (as the saying goes “In the Kingdom of Heaven”).
But there are also
later versions to the story: The Islamic version and the Christian version.
The Qur’an implies
to most Moslems (even if it does not say so specifically) that the bounded son
was Ishmael, who is mentioned also as the partner to Abraham in the building of
the shrine in Mecca. The Christian version was based on the exegesis of Saint
Paul (Saul of Tarsus), that in the crucifixion of Jesus, God bounded his only
son, and sacrificed him for the sake of all humankind (to rectify the supposed
“Original Sin”, as noted earlier). The three religions are thus based on three Akedot.
This is also the route that leads to “Then on the third day Avraham lifted up
his eyes, and saw the place” (22:4).
Already in parashat
Bereshit – in the account of the formation of Adam – we noted that the
Day of the Creator is of a thousand years, as was written “For a thousand years
in Thy sight are but like yesterday when it is passed” (Psalm 90:4). We also noted that the
Torah was written in a future, or an inverted past, tense, so that all that is
written in the Torah is still likely to happen in the course of the times. This
conception gives an added dimension to the three-day passage that was undertaken
by Abraham and his son Yitzhak/Isaac – along with the
accompanying retinue – to Mount Moriah, the Mount of the House of the Lord/YHWH.
We ourselves are all there, on the way to the place/Maqom.
“And it
came to pass after these things”
The verse “And it
came to pass after these things….” Relates apparently to immediate occurrences,
in the near domain of the protagonists. There are three chapters that are near
the Act of the Akedah: 1) a chapter about the arrival of Abraham
and Sarah to Gerar and Abraham’s self-presentation as Sarah’s brother, 2) a
chapter about the birth of Isaac/Yitzhak and the sending
away of Ishmael/Yishma’el, and 3) a chapter about the covenant
with Avimelekh.
As we saw, none of
these chapters presents Abraham in a particularly positive manner. He had no
confidence, in himself or in the divine promises. He was forced to get
entangled in lies, instead of waiting patiently to the day he would inherit the
land he made a covenant with the people of the land he is supposed to inherit, and
he betrayed his firstborn son – albeit with divine sanction – and drove him out
of his house, which could cost the son his life.
The
experience/trial of the Akedah (which most traditional
commentators avoid, as they cannot note any blemish with Abraham) can
definitely be explained as an attempt to atone for any of these things, in
which Abraham failed. He was afraid that Avimelekh would kill him because of
his wife - and was sent to kill his own son, his bone and his flesh. He did not
rely on the Lord’s promise that the land would be his for inheritance – and was
sent to tour the land, to an unknown destination. He sent his firstborn from
home away to the wasteland – and experienced the sacrifice of his younger son
“On one of the mountains”.
Yet “And it came
to pass after these things”, is also after all that was told till here, from
the creation of the world to the circumcision of Abraham and the covenant with
him.
Moreover, the
words “and it came to pass after these things” alludes – as we try to show for
all the chapters – also to the future, after all comes to pass.
Abraham and Isaac
searched, together, after the place from where will start – in time, “after
these things” – the three-days journey.
For Abraham and
Isaac had no means to actualize what was drawn through their journey. They were
nomads in the land. They still had to wait for other times, to progeny who
would acquire sovereignty of the place, who would form a kingdom. They were
required to only prepare the settings for those who would follow them.
Therefore “Then of the third day Avraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar
off”. Only David, who conquered the city with Mount Moriah – could have
started the actual journey. Accordingly, the end of these three days, which
count as three thousand years of history, is calculated to occur in our
generation, as we shall still show.
“And God
did test Abraham” – veha’Elohim nisa et Avraham
The Hebrew word
for “tested” – nisa – has to do with Nes – sign,
the setting up of a sign and a model for coming generations, through a drama
that touches the most basic human urges and feelings: fear of death, father-son
relationship, and submission to God – whatever his name be.
The one that does
the testing is “Elohim”, the name that is given in the first
Genesis story – the name of Law and Judgment. Even the tense of the story is
past tense, such as in the first sentence of Genesis: “and God/Elohim
did test Avraham”, parallel to “Bereshit Elohim/God created”.
But then there is immediately a return to the eternal and prophetic inverted
time: vayomer elav…” – and He would say to him.
In the course of
the exceedingly terse account of the Akedah – an account without
a single superfluous word, but on the contrary: there is created the feeling
that there is something lacking in the account, that it is given merely by
allusions, through codes of extreme brevity – the name Elohim
appears five times and the name of YHWH five times. In the
language of the Kabbalah – five judgments and five mercies, which together
comprise “a whole countenance” (partzuf shalem) of epiphany, of
the revelation of “YHWH Elohim”.
And indeed,
Judgment and Mercy are intertwined in this story all mixed up. It is likely
that even Abraham – the one who was being tested – was unable to separate
between them. He could not figure out the real intention, the essence of the
test.
Abraham had
already been required in the past to give up on his fatherly feelings, in the
course of the sending away of Ishmael “in all that Sarah has said to thee, hearken
to her voice; for in all that Sarah has said to thee, hearken to her voice; for
in Yitzhak shall thy seed be called” (21:12). That is what he was commanded, and
his love for his firstborn son was sacrificed for the sake of Sara and the
considerations of loyalty to her, after she bore him an additional and
preferred child. Whatever the trial at Moriah might be, it is undoubtedly also
connected with the sending of Ishmael. Abraham gave up on Ishmael/Yishma’el,
and now he was called to give up on Isaac/Yitzhak, “to
bring him up in offering”.
“And the
Elohim tested Abraham – and the Role of Yitzhak in the Akedah:
Not just the
Torah, but also many commentators have extolled the greatness of Abraham in
that trial. But only few have considered the trial of Yitzhak/Isaac.
For in truth there were two main actors in this plot: Abraham and Yitzhak/Isaac.
Had Isaac been a
small child, it would be justified not to dwell on his part. Indeed, from the
face of the text it might be claimed that he was a child, so small and light
that the old Abraham could lift him and place him upon the altar. But this
would be difficult: the narrative states explicitly that Isaac was stronger
than Abraham and had thus to carry the wood on his back up the hill. “And
Avraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Yitzhak
his son” (Gen. 22:6).
This means that Isaac/Yitzhak was a strong youth, and thus
it would have been difficult to force him into something. He could have put a
stop to the trial at any moment, even at the course of the binding, if he would
have wanted to. His participation through the whole procedure must have been a
conscious one.
The Midrash (Yalkut Shim’oni, vayera, 22) claims that Yitzhak
asked his father to tie him down, so that the basic instinct of the
will to live would not rise and spoil the experiment. Another Midrash goes
further, and asserts that Yitzhak was thirty-seven years old then, namely that
the Akedah occurred close to the death of Sarah, which is
mentioned following it, and that the death of Sarah was caused by the shock
from hearing about the Akedah. There is a certain confirmation to
this in that after parashat ha’Akedah the life of Sarah is being
summed up, and that Abraham – the father – was required to handle the
matchmaking for Yitzhak, and he sent Eli’ezer Haran.
Another clue is implied in the sacrifice of the ram – Ayil –
instead of Yitzhak. The gematria for AYiL is
the same as for EM – Mother.
At any rate, we
are trying here to examine the story of the Akedah from the point
of view of Yitzhak:
Yitzhak
was the preferred heir, the pampered son of the first lady. He was destined to
inherit – without any effort of his own – the exclusive world rights of
representing the One God for all humankind. The valor of Yitzhak
in the course of the Akedah is in his very agreement to give up
on these rights, or, at least, to ask himself whether he is really interested
in them. Moreover: this is the great opportunity for him to try and test, by
himself, whether this God answers his pondering and is fit to be his God whom
he represents, and whether he himself is of any interest to the universal
divinity, or whether he was chosen only for functional reasons, being the son
of Abraham.
Namely: Yitzhak
chose willingly to take part in the Akedah, and while the
action of “And God did try Abraham” was continuing, Yitzhak
did test YHWH by choice. Namely, he chose
the complete valor – Gevurah – and when the decisive moment came,
and his father was proceeding to do that which he understood from the divine
command that he must do, Yitzhak was able to see in his
own eyes the divine intervention for his sake. From here on, the salvation of YHWH
was no longer a rumor from his fathers, but the experience of his life and
its essence. He could now observe his father – who in this act transferred to
him his central role in the guidance of future history - and laugh.
For the creator
gave the examining tool to Yitzhak already before he was born: God gave him the
name Yitzhak, and thereby He gave him a role: a role of laughter
and play (Mis’hak, related word to Yitzhak)
the place for the test was at Mount Moriyyah, in the course of the Akedah.
There, Yitzhak had to play according to the rules laid by
his father: not to resist, to allow his father to continue the story of his
complex relationship with his God, but also to create by himself – through
humor – a distinct and genuine relationship with the Master of the Universe,
and Yitzhak stood the test.
After the Akedah
was accomplished, Abraham and Isaac-Yitzhak no longer
returned together, so that in effect Yitzhak lost –
through the Akedah – both his father and his mother, but had
gained an additional, divine, soul from the Master of the Universe Himself, who
gave him a new life and an extra immortal soul. The Akedah was therefore
necessary so that from now on his hope would not be fixed on his natural
father, who was ready to slaughter him, but from “his father in heaven”.
In the
relationship of father and son there can occur many emotional complexes. There
are precedents for killing of the father by his sons, and also to the killing
of offspring and their sacrifice by their fathers. It would be facile to
explain away “The Mysteries if the Akedah” as a part and parcel
of the rituals which were prevalent then in Kena’an/Canaan, such
as the sacrifice to the Molekh.
But the sacrifice
to the Molekh was considered in the Biblical conception, as one
of the most heinous abominations, that whoever committed it should be executed
by stoning.
Our exegesis of
the parashah dwells upon its name – vayera. There
is in the Torah another parashah with a close name – re’eh
– in which there are given very severe judgments against human sacrifices:
“Take heed to thyself… that thou
inquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods?
Even so will I do likewise. Thou shalt not do to the Lord/YHWH thy God;
for every abomination to the Lord/YHWH, which He hates, have they done
to their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the
fire to their gods” (Deuteronomy
12:3—31).
Yiftah –
who hastily made a vow “Whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me,
when I return in peace from the children of ‘Ammon, shall surely be the Lord’s,
and I will offer it up for a burnt offering” (Judges 11:31) – was held in scorn and pity.
So assuming that
this is the a-priori attitude of the Torah to human sacrifices – it should be
assumed that the conclusion of the drama is embedded in it from the beginning:
the moral of the Akedat Yitzhak – the Binding of Isaac – is in
its happy ending and the implication from it on the annulment of human
sacrifices from there onward.
Moreover: we have
already claimed that Yitzhak/Isaac was aware about the Akedah,
and chose to take a part in it – not as the object, the one being tried,
but as the actor, the one who puts his God on trial. It can be claimed, by the
same token, that Yitzhak/Isaac would have rather chosen
death, than to worship a god who demands human sacrifices. Only a divine plan
that its basic rules include an angel who sends his hand to stop the knife –
would allow him to identify with it. Yitzhak/Isaac –
according to this conception – exhibits the perspective of Gevurah
(valor/judgement), through the very passivity which he assumes.
Only the role of
Abraham remains hazy, and in light of this perspective, he looks a bit mocked,
as Yiftah.
One can hardly
refrain from comparing the figure of the Biblical Yitzhak/Isaac
with the figure of the contemporary “Yitzhaks”. I would
not be the first to associate the generation of the Palmah –
“the generation of 48” – with the Akedah. The Israeli art of all
types has already assumed this spirit. Enough would be to note the literary
works of Amihay, Guri and Moshe Shamir. The assassination of Yitzhak
Rabin, who had been a commander in the Palmah, has
fixed a new image of “Yitzhak/Isaac our father” – Yitzhak
Avinu.
Like the Biblical Yitzhak/Isaac
– the people of that generation have not invented something new. Their parents,
those who parallel Abraham – people of the “Lekh-Lekha”, formulated the
principles of Zionism. They were born in the land, destined to become bound to
the idea(l)s of their parents, to fight many wars – and to pass the torch
onward.
“Take now
thy Son”
The relationship
of Father and Child is the most basic there are in the psyche. In the psyche of
each of us there dwell figures of The Father and The Mother (and woo to those
who lack them, or that these figures inside them are problematic, and torment
the other parts of the psyche). The image of the parent in the psyche is the
first image that we carry with us, along with its beliefs, and these largely
determine our identities (be it benign or tormented). In the psyche of each one
of us there is also engraved the figure of the Child/Son. Also in common psychological
schemes – and especially in “Transactional Analysis (TA) – there is a
representation of figures of “Parent” (Father) and “Child” (Son) in the psyche,
and the noting of the need for an additional and connecting figure – the
“Adult”. In schools that appreciate creativity, and also built-in in
Christianity, there is also emphasis upon childhood and a sense of “The
Miraculous Child”.
In the Kabbalah,
the Hebrew word for “son” – Ben – is used also for the definition
of a spiritual entity that is derived from a certain “filling” and certain
enunciation of the divine Name of YHWH. In the following, we
shall give a very rough approximation of the Hebrew letter operations through
English letters. When the Name of YHWH is written in the following “filling” (namely,
when letters are spelled out by the letters that denote the name of the
said letter) – Yod Hh Ww Hh – the gematric value is 52, as the value of the
word “BeHeMaH” (beast), which is twice the value of the (strict)
Name of YHWH = 26. The meaning of this “filling” in the Kabbalah of the ARI’zl
is probably to complex for this discussion, but we can appreciate that the
annunciation of this name is influenced by the mechanical duplication of the
vowel-letters, much like the mooing of the beast that may express emotion but
not sophisticated/symbolic concepts. Another filling of the Name of YHWH is the
“Name of Rectification” or the “MaH Name” as follows: Yod He Waw He, where the
added “e” and “a” denote the added latter Aleph to the
pronunciation of each letter, and Aleph has to do with Iluph,
or training, of the beast, as well as instructing the Alphabet, and the
recognition of God, called “The Aluph of the World”. This filling
and pronunciation have a gematrical numerical value of 45, which is denoted in letters
as MaH (M’em H’e) which also means in Hebrew “What” (which hints also at an
ability to pose questions. This is also the gematric value of the word “ADaM”.
This form of filling the Name of YHWH represents in the Kabbalah of the ARI”zl
the whole, rectified human.
This is actually
the only sentence in the scriptures that attribute love to Abraham. Even though
the Kabbalah regards Abraham as personifying the side/principle of Hesed
– Love and Mercy – he does not appear in the scriptures as a great lover. It is
actually Yitzhak/Isaac – who is regarded in the Kabbalah
as representing the side/principle of valor – he loved his wife so much, that
he was comforted with her from his mother’s death. And Jacob – the
representative of the Sefirah of Tif’eret – half of
his life story is determined by his love to Rahel/Rachel.
The sages
maintain: “The Patriarchs are the Merkavah”(assembly/chariot)
namely, they serve as a system assembled or built from different sides
or components with different character, that only with the help of this
assembly/vehicle is it possible to overcome the perennial conflict that
characterizes the relation among two sides.
According to the
Book of Zohar, Abraham is (as noted) the representative of the
side of Hesed and Love (the Right side), and Yitzhak/Isaac
– the side of rigor (the Left side). (Jacob would come later representing the
mediation between these two – the Middle Pillar – Tif’eret). But
in the Act of the Akedah, it seems that the two sides switch the
roles between them: Abraham discovers the aspect of Rigor-Gevurah
within Mercy-Hesed, and overcomes even his natural love
(what loving father would sacrifice his own son?), whereas Yitzhak/Isaac
discovers the aspect of Mercy-Hesed in Rogor-Gevurah
(what hero would agree to be tied up and slaughtered without resistance?) and
agrees to take the greatest risk, even from his compassion over his father.
In the Akedah
there is thus formed the connection, which allows the formation of a real Merkavah.
There forms the connection between the two lines, which might have been
parallel lines that never meet.
Almost no
traditional commentator has paid attention that the name of the protagonist was
determined beforehand by God, and that thereby there was alluded a deep
significance to the story of the Akedah.
As noted, Yitzhak/Isaac
means, “(he who) will laugh”. As the saying goes, “The one who laughs is He who
laughs last”. What was the last laugh of Yitzhak/Isaac in
the Akedah? There must have fallen upon him “a horror of great
darkness” even greater than that befell Abraham during the covenant (15:12). He
witnessed, fully awake and conscious, how his own beloved father raised upon
him the knife to slaughter him. Can there be any greater horror?
We claim that Yitzhak/Isaac
did manage to see in that fateful instant the whole of human history, as it is
prone to be reflected off the central perspective of all humankind – from the
rock on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the center point from which the
continents crystallized, and the place to where the dust that formed the first
Adam was gathered. He saw the destiny of the place through the thousands of
years of the Biblical time-frame (as we discussed it in the introduction) and
until our own times. He could see the appearance of the First Temple, its
destruction and re-building and its second destruction. He saw also the
erection of the Dome of the Rock and its survival until this time – and he saw
the use that it can serve as the gate of heaven for all the Children of
Abraham.
When, through this
stupendous vision, the soul of Yitzhak/Isaac gained its
ascent to heaven, via the pattern in the Dome, and to experience herself the
reality of the divinity, what else was left for it to do but to laugh?
There is only left
to point to the similarity between the motifs of the Dome of the Rock and the
description of the appearance of the divine countenances in the Idra Zuta
in the Book of the Zohar (during the heavenly ascent of the soul
of Rabbi Shim’on Bar Yohay). The stage of these occurrences is like a
Garden of Eden that is being watered and sustained from these divine
countenances. It is also difficult to imagine a more appropriate and glorious
place for representing “the Earthly Paradise” than the lower inner part of the
Dome of the Rock shrine. The mosaics there of their abundant floral motifs are
considered the finest mosaics in the whole world.
But the Dome of
the Rock gives us a very sophisticated picture of “the Heavenly Paradise”, the
glorious place where “the righteouses sit with their crowns on their head
gazing at the Shekhinah” (the Divine Presence). The emphasis is
on sophistication and Wisdom. The pattern painted over the ceiling of the dome
is likely the world’s best portrayal of the concept of “The Holy Wisdom” (Hagia
Sophia), as it (she) appeared over the generations to hidden sects and circles
of esoteric philosophers, Sufi freemasons and Mekubalim
(Kabbalists).
The
numerical-formal codes confirm this. The 32 paths between the 32 “figures” on
the ceililing of the dome represent well “The 32 Wondrous Paths” of the Sefer
Yetsira and the Idra Zuta. The component elements of
these figures together with the spaces enclosed between the figures form a
radial matrix of 160 units – 160 being the gematria of the word Tselem
– the Divine Image in which Man was formed.
Yitzhak/Isaac,
with the knife over his throat, saw that the future continues on and on, and
even his own memory is not forgotten and that there is much remuneration for
his trials. He saw the rock he was tied upon becoming the “stone of contention”
that is likely to develop over the Temple Mount, and how the solution and the
reconciliation are placed upon that very rock and the temples upon it – and he
could laugh a great laugh.
“And get
thee…” – ve’Lekh-Lekha
The story of
Abraham started with the words “Get thee out – Lekh-Lekha – of
thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, to the land
that I will show thee” (12:1).
After all the things recounted in the two parashot, after ten
trials, there comes again the command: “Take now thy son, thy only son, Yitzhak,
whom thou lovest and get thee – Lekh-Lekha – into the land
of Moriah (22:2).
It is exactly the same words that specify the beginning of the journey and its
peak. The first trial was to disengage from the intimate connection that
existed and was still present: “get thee out of thy country, and from thy
kindred, and from thy father’s house”. Now, in the parashah with
which we are dealing, the test is to disengage from the most intimate
connection with what is and shall be. Together, this is a giving up of the
immortality afforded by nature (as noted, the gematria of “the nature” – HaTeVA
– is 86, which is the same as of “ELoHIM’ – God), which is
granted by procreation, in order to cling to the primary cause, to the
revelation of HaWaYaH-Being as parent. In that state of
consciousness, from the space of conscious Being, it is possible to recognize
that our spiritual essence derives not from the order of nature, but from our
being “Sons-of-YaH”.
“To the
Land of Moriah”- Mori-YaH (YaH is my Teacher)
This is the land
of the hidden deity. YH, the first two letters of the Name of YHWH,
are considered as signifying the three supernal, hidden, Sefirot:
the top “barb” of the Y’od (kutso shel Yod) signifies the Sefirah
of Keter (Crown); the Y’od signifies the Sefirah
of Hokhmah (Wisdom); and the first H’e, the
higher one, signifies the Sefirah of Binah
(Understanding). This even though the root of the word Moriah has to do with
Instruction – hora’ah – and Vision – re’iyah, these
have still to become revealed. The question that is raised is how to turn the
hidden into the revealed – until “as it is said to this day, In the mount the
Lord-YHWH will appear” (22:14).
Ve’ha’alehu
sham le’Olah - “And offer him there as Burnt Offering”?
On the face of it,
at last the revelation that Abraham had yearned for at last arrived. The choice
fell on the beloved son, who is described in sweet words by God, Abraham was
asked to get on his way again, in the very same language that God addressed him
with promises years ago. But then, all of a sudden, fell the terrible blow.
What should Abraham do with “your son, your only son Yitzhak whom thou
lovest”? Apparently “and offer him as burnt offering”.
The willingness of
Abraham is of the same kind as that of Rabbi Akiva who in the torment of his
deadly tortures was glad for having the opportunity of fulfilling the
commandment of Kiddush haShem (the giving up of one’s soul
completely, “for the sanctification of God’s Name”). It is only from the end of
the story that we can learn that Abraham did not precisely understand what he
was asked/commanded. He was like the prophet Jonah, who prophesied in the exact
words God commanded him (Jonah 3:2): “Another forty days, and Ninve shall be
overturned” (od arba’im yom ve’Ninveh ne’hepakhet) (Jonah 3:4). He
brought its citizens to repent and did not realize that it was not through
physical destruction, but through the rectification of the spirit, that the
city was indeed overturned. Abraham was commanded, literally “Ve’ha’alehu
sham le’Olah”, which literally means “raise him up as Olah”
– as (she) who ascends; and Yitzhak/Isaac would indeed
ascend up and up – but in the steps of the soul. But without the terrible seriousness,
without the mortal danger and the agreement to kill and to be killed, there may
not occur the raising of the Animal Soul – nefesh haBehemit
– the natural selfish and territorial soul, and its transmutation to the spirit
of the completed man. This is according to the verse of Ecclesiastes (3:21):
“Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upwards, and the spirit of the beast
goes downward to the earth”. In terms of the Kabbalah (which does not see it as
a question but as a statement), this has to do with the transformation of the
Son – BeN (recall that BeN = 52, same as Behemah
– beast, and corresponding with the expanded Name of YHWH – Yod Hh Ww Hh)
into an Adult – AdaM (recalling that AdaM = MaH
= 45, corresponding with Name of YHWH with the expansion of Yod
He Waw He), that only through their union it is possible to attain the
formation of the whole Ben-Adam (Son of Man, if you like).
Abraham did not
understand the meaning of the word le’Olah, which is formed from
the meaning of getting bound to the Ol – the Yoke
of the Kingdom of Heaven (ol Malkhut Shamayim), in the yoke
of the heavenly vehicle/assembly – the Merkavah – that ascends
and descends between earth and heaven.
“And
Abraham rose up early in the morning and saddled his donkey”
On three occasions
it is told that “Abraham rose up early in the morning”: in the sending away of Yishma’el/Ishmael,
in the observation to see what happened to the people of Sedom, and now in the Akedah.
Here is added the detail of saddling the donkey. In Hebrew, the word for
“donkey” is Hamor, which by exegesis is related to Homer
– namely “matter”. The donkey-Hamor is a beast-Behemah,
and his presence there alludes to the objective of this trial – the
yoking-binding of the Son-BeN-BeHeNaH, in order to generate the
transformation of the Ben-Son to Adam, and their
joining-together into a whole, Ben-Adam – the divine human.
“And (he)
took two of his young men with him, and Yitzhak his son”
The identity of
the two young men who accompany the journey is potentially quite meaningful.
Abraham is “the father of many nations” (17:5).
It is thus that the Midrash (___________) that the two who
accompanied the journey to the land of Moriah – in addition to Yitzhak/Isaac
– were Ishmael and Eli’ezer. With their agency, there could join the journey to
Mount Moriah, and to the messianic quest, also the Moslems and the Christians.
The connection between Ishmael and the Moslems is quite well known (see above
the discussion of Ishmael). But the connection between the steward of the house
of Abraham – Eli’ezer of Dammeseq – to Christianity requires special
explanation.
We may just note
that Paul-Saul of Tarsus, the creator and designer of the Christian religion –
as we know it – went to Dammeseq/Damascus to persecute the Christians. On
his way to Damascus he received his revelation, and in Damascus he joined with
the Christians.
Also among the
Dead Sea sect, from which the ancient Christian Church undoubtedly drew from
its principles, Dammeseq/Damascus had religious significance, and
one of their own scrolls was called “The Dammeseq Scroll” (There
may be a significance in that in Hebrew, the letters of Dammesek
are the same as the letters of Mikdash the Temple – and that
community saw themselves as a Temple).
The Joint Akedah in Jerusalem:
the struggle over the inheritance of Abraham.
The goal of the
journey and its destination was Mount Moriyyah – namely Jerusalem – whose name
– Yerushalayim – contains in it the concept of Inheritance
– Yerusha. There is a conflict among the three îìååéí about inheritance – who would be declared as the inheritor of
the divine covenant that was acquired by Abraham.
In a different
time sequence than of the journey in the Torah – to which there went Abraham,
Yitzhak and the two young men, but Abraham and Yitzhak left the
party, who had to wait – the historical monotheistic move was started by the
children of Yitzhak, and only later there joined them the children of
Eli’ezer – the Christians – and the children of Ishmael – the Moslems.
But the issue of
the inheritance arose much earlier, with the birth of Yitzhak/Isaac:
Sarah (whom the Zohar presents as the material-bodily part of Abraham)
insisted, “for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, with
Yitzhak” (21:10), and this was
well founded. For Sarah and Abraham had received nine divine promises about the
inheritance of the land and about a divine blessing:
1. “I
will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name
great; and thou shalt be a blessing” (12:2).
2. “To
thy seed will I give this land” (12:7).
3. "Lift
up now thy eyes, and look from the place where thou art, northward, and
southwards, and eastwards, and westwards. For all the land which thou seest, to
thee will I give it, and to thy seed forever. And I will make thy seed
(numerous) as the dust of the earth; so that if a man can number the dust of
the earth, then shall the seed also be numbered. Arise, walk through the land
in the length of it and in the breadth of it, for I will give it to thee” (13:14-17).
4. “This
(Eli’ezer) shall not be thy heir, but he that shall come forth out of thy own
bowels shall be thy heir…. Look now towards heaven, and count the stars, if
thou be able to number them; and He said to him, So shall thy seed be” (15: 4-5).
5. “I
am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur-Kasdim, to give thee this
land to inherit it” (15:7).
6. “In
the same day the Lord made a covenant with Avraham, saying, To thy seed have I
given this land, from the river of Mitsrayim to the great river, the river
Perat. The Qeni, and the Qenizzi, and the Qadmoni, and the Hitti, and
the Perizzi, and the Refa’im, and the Emori, and the Kena’ani, and the
Girgashi, and the Yevusi” (15:18-21).
7. “As
for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many
nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Avram, but thy name shall be
Avraham, for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee
exceedingly fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out
of thee, And I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed
after thee in their generations for everlasting covenant, to be a God to thee,
and to thy seed after thee. And I will give thee, and to thy seed after thee,
the land in which thou dost sojourn, all the land of Kena’an, for an
everlasting possession; and I will be their God” (17:4-9).
There are also specific personal promises included in these promises: Ishmael
will be rewarded for being the son of Abraham, but the major inheritor was Yitzhak.
8. “Sarah
thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Yitzhak,
and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with
his seed after him. And as for Yishma’el I have heard thee: Behold, I have
blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly;
twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. But my
covenant shall I establish with Yitzhak, whom Sarah shall bear to thee
at this time next year” (17:19-21).
9. "for
in Yitzhak shall thy seed be called. And also of the son of the
bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed” (21:12-13).
These nine
promises were given before the Akedah, whereas after the Akedah
there was given a tenth promise: “By Myself have I sworn, says the Lord-YHWH,
because thou hast not withheld thy son, thy only son. That I will exceedingly
bless thee, and will exceedingly multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven,
and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the
gate of its enemies; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be
blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice”; and thy seed shall possess the
gate of its enemies; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be
blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice” (22:17-18).
.
The tenth
blessing, the last given to Abraham after the explicit trial of the Akedah,
elucidates the problem inherent in all the nine former blessings and promises.
It is natural that a man wants to bequeath all his rights and properties to his
sons from him – his biological seed. But at times the inheritors are not
worthy, and receive something through the merit of their fathers and not
through their own merit, namely: not for their own compliance with the terms of
the covenant.
Both Adam and No’ah,
who were tried by God at the beginning of the Biblical narrative, failed
because of unworthy sons. Here came the time for this glorious lineage, whose
role is to give blessed service to al the nations of the earth, as the promise
goes “kings shall come out of thee” (17:6).
But we also know in history even kings who became corrupt and made damage, such
who only had the rights of their forefathers. For this is the main content of
the Biblical Book of Kings: the seed of King David did not keep the covenant
even for one generation!
Yet the seed of
Abraham was required to keep the covenant for thousands of years. It was for
this need that the Akedah came – to establish the covenant on a
stronger basis than the natural-biological basis.
The Family
of Nahor – a Possible Resolution
The very dramatic Parahat
vayera ends with a section that looks, on the face of it, as
marginal and unconnected, as something that had to be reported for the sake of
historical update, which was stuck by the editor at the end of the drama. But
we shall show that both in this parashah, and in parashat vayishlah
that comes later, the short ending paragraph is used to give a hint about the
far future – or past, which completely changes the immediate understanding of
the parashah.
“And it came to
pass after these things, that it was told Avraham, saying, Behold Milkah, she
also has born children to thy brother Nahor”. After all the dramas of
infertility, the marrying of the bondwoman before the lady, the birth of one
natural son and the flaring of jealousy between the women, the giving of the
wife to the foreign ruler, the birth of the son of the lady, the sending out of
the firstborn son and at last the giving away of the young son – after all
these dramatic entanglements, there appears another possibility. In the family
of Nahor, Abraham’s own brother, his flesh and blood, things transpired
in a different way. There were born twelve sons, the perfect number, which the
family of Abraham would gain only in another two generations of struggles, and
these twelve are divided to two types: eight sons to Milkah, the
official first wife, and four more sons to the concubine Re’umah.
The clue is that the status of Milkah was like the status of Sarah (the
meanings of the two names are almost identical, and they testify to the senior
status of their bearers). From this we also get the clue that the status of
Re’umah at Nahor’s house was the status that should have been granted to
Hagar at Abraham’s house. It is possible to assume that Milkah did not react as
Sarah and did not say, “the sons of the bondwoman will not inherit with my
sons”. When there are two sons, the contrast is very marked, but when there are
a dozen, the contrasts lessen, and it becomes easier to settle the different
problem of inheritance.
The ancient law of
inheritance was that the firstborn inherited twice the share of any of the
other children. In the case of Yitzhak and Yishma’el,
it is obvious that such a possibility – a double inheritance to the son of the
bondwoman was inconceivable. But in the case of the children of Nahor
there came another possibility: the children of the official wife, as a unit,
are considered firstborns, and the children of the concubine are considered,
again as a unit, as junior. Had Sarah been willing to accept such an
arrangement, that Yitzhak would inherit twice the portion
of Yishma’el, there might perhaps have arose no conflict between
the two.
The fact is, that
this kind of arrangement is the arrangement that was accepted in Abraham’s
family, after two generations – in the family of Jacob. There we shall find the
two sisters, the grand daughters of Nahor, Rahel/Rachel
and Le’ah, both in the status of the official wife, the senior, and they had
together eight sons, the number of sons of their grandmother Milkah, and facing
them two maid-wives who together have four sons. The ratio between the sons of
the official wives and the sons of the bondwomen is of two-to-one, namely
status of seniority and æåèøåú, and this is the ratio that is considered
right and which was destined to serve as basis for the estates of the Twelve
Tribes of Israel.
The future vision
which is hinted at this passage, a vision which will still be clarified in the
sequel, is that all those nations with whom Abraham connected and became bound
with – the Hagarite-Ishmaelites, Philistines, Ammonites and Moabites (and
perhaps even Aramites) might have been capable of being tied together to Israel
in a dynamic covenant of twelve tribes, which gives seniority to the original
Tribes of Israel, but allows an expansion, of up to an additional third, at
each Jubilee.
The terse and
compact structure of the story of the Akedah is a masterpiece of
secrets and hints that relate, among other things, to the reasons (Te’amim
– “Tastes”) of some of the important commandments in the Torah. Among others,
we see a hint about the law of the Jubilee/Yovel.
What is the
problem that causes the tragedies, both of Yitzhak and of Yishma’el?
It is the struggle over inheritance of earthly properties, the decision of
Sarah that “the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, with Yitzhak”.
The whole socioeconomic regime of the ancient Middle East was based on inheritance
rulings and conflicts over inheritance, and this, as we have already seen, the
strife that accompanies all the Genesis stories. The story of the Akedah,
on the other hand, is the story of the Great Renunciation. Abraham received
many promises that “for in Yitzhak shall thy seed be called” - and in
the Akedah he was called to give up on everything.
The laws of the
Torah offer a wonderful socioeconomic order – the law of the Jubilees –
according to which all of Israel would agree to give up on the slaves and on
the land estates that was acquired by them and their fathers and perhaps even
their grandparents, for the sake of justice and equal sharing, so that there
will be no paupers and destitute among Israel. This is difficult and goes
against the natural inclination and the human greed – to acquire properties (in
Hebrew Qinyan, related to the figure of Qayin/Cain)
and to bestow them (lehaqnot) to our progeny, our self and flesh.
The Law of the
Jubilee has a characteristic structure – of seven seven-year cycles, followed
by the divine release of the slaves and the lost estates. Remarkably, also the
Story of the Akedah, in chapter 22 of Genesis, there is embedded
a structure of seven sevens (heptads):
7 addresses of God or his angel to Abraham
7 mentions of Yitzhak/Isaac by God
7 mentions of Yitzhak/Isaac as “Ben” – Son.
7 Activities by Abraham until he saw the mountain.
7 Activities by Abraham on the way to the mountain.
7 Activities of Abraham in the act of the Akedah
7 Activities of Abraham after the Akedah.
Following is the text that relates to the Akedah,
where each heptad is colored in the same color as listed above:
“And it came to pass after these things, that God did test Avraham, and said to him, Avraham: and he said, Here I am! And He said, Take now thy son, thy only son Yitzhak, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriyyah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Yitzhak his son, and broke up the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went to the place of which God had told him. Then on the third day Avraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off. And Avraham said to h