Shabbat Shalom: Parshat Vayera Genesis (18:1-22:24)Efrat, Israel - Many are the crucial and extraordinary messages about commitment and sacrifice which emanate from the seminal incident of the AKEDAH or binding of Isaac. But additionally it seems to me that the AKEDAH can also serve as a model for one of the most human questions of our daily lives: how far does a parent's control extend in his/her relationship to his/her adult child? To what degree should a parent influence, direct, or channel a child's life? Can the power of a parent go too far? On the surface, it would seem that G-d's command to Abraham that he bring his beloved son Isaac as a whole burnt offering demonstrates the ultimate power on the part of a father, the power to even sacrifice his son's life to a higher ideal. But this perception is radically reworked in the Torah commentary of Rav Joseph Ibn Kaspi (1279-1340) who maintains that the real test of Abraham lay not in the command of G-d that he sacrifice Isaac but rather in the second command of the angel that he stay his hand from the sacrifice. We must remember, suggests Ibn Kaspi, that the social reality of Abraham is rooted in the blood-drenched days of the god Moloch, where child sacrifice was the normative expression of religious commitment. Hence, Abraham must very well have been expecting his newfound G-d of justice and righteousness to require that same act of devotion. From this perspective, the true test of Abraham's dedication was not his willingness to obey G-d and sacrifice but rather in his ability to heed the angel and stop the sacrifice even when the knife was but an inch from Isaac's throat: "Lay not your hand upon the lad, neither do anything to him."(Genesis 22:12) Indeed, it is even possible to understand the verse usually translated as, "For now I know that you are a G-d fearing man, seeing you have not WITHHELD (chasachta) your only son from Me. (Genesis 22:12)," to mean "For now I know that you are a G-d fearing man, seeing you have not DONE AWAY WITH (the Hebrew CHASACH can also mean to remove, or cause to be absent) your only son BECAUSE OF MY (My command)." In the traditional reading Abraham is praised by the angel for his willingness to sacrifice Isaac; in the alternative reading, Abraham is praised for his willingness not to sacrifice Isaac. (See Ish Shalom, AKEDAH, Adamot, August '96). From this perspective, the critical lesson being taught is not how far Abraham's authority reaches, but how limited it is; the focus is less on how close Abraham came to sacrificing his own son, but rather on what a father does not have --and will never again be given-- the authority to sacrifice a child. If this interpretation is valid - and it is possible that Rashi is making a similar point when he suggests that Abraham did not understand G-d's command, for the Almighty only meant for the patriarch to elevate and dedicate his son (by prayer and living commitment) and never to slaughter him, (Rashi, ad loc) - we can then understand another textual difficulty. What happens to Isaac after the AKEDAH? The text reads: "So Abraham returned (singular form) to his young men (the midrash tell us, to Eliezer and Ishmael, who accompanied them, but did not go to the actual place of the appointed sacrifice) and they rose up and went together to Beer Sheba: (Genesis 22:19). Didn't Isaac also return to his father? Yonatan Ben Uziel, in his Aramaic translation - interpretation - embellishment of the Torah, maintains that Isaac is not included as having returned home to Beer Sheba because he went instead to the Yeshiva of Shem and Ever. In other words, at the moment of the akedah, father and son not only magnificently joined together - "and they walked, the two of them, together" - but they also separated, or individuated, one from the other. Abraham returns to his household and future progeny of nations (the father of a multitude of nations); Isaac returns to his books, to a Torah Academy of solitude and study. In the vocabulary of my teacher and mentor Rav J.B. Soloveitchik, Abraham is the outer-directed, extroverted, aggressive Adam I, while Isaac is the more inner-directed, introverted, introspective Adam II; in the conceptual scheme of the mystical Zohar, Abraham is the out-going, overflowing symbol of chesed, while Isaac is the disciplined and courageous symbol of GEVURAH. The akedah is paradoxically both the point of unity as well as the point of departure between father and son. Isaac enters the akedah as Abraham's son; he emerges from the akedah as Jacob's father (Jacob, too, is to study at the Yeshiva of Shem and Ever). Isaac's commitment is equal to that of his father, but his path is very different. The akedah is at the same time, the point of unity as well as separation between father and son; each must respect both the similarities as well as the differences. The commandment to circumcise one's son is most certainly modeled on the symbol of the Akedah. A father must always transmit to his son commitments and limitations; after all, every child receives nature and nurture, genes and environment, from his/her parents, often for the good but sometimes even with unfortunate and negative ramifications. One's manner of propagation may be limited by one's parents - but one's life ought never be sacrificed by one's parents. The Bible and Talmud ordain that a child must respect and even revere his parents, but the existential decisions of how to live one's life, which profession to enter and which spouse to marry are decisions which can only be made by the adult child him/her self. (Yoreh Deah, Laws of Respecting Parents, the last comment of Isserless citing the Maharik). Paradoxically, when a parent enables a child to properly individuate, the child will ultimately move forward by stepping back. Isaac returns from theYeshiva to continue his parents' idea; he digs those wells specifically dug by his father's directive. However, we must learn from the AKEDAH that a father may bring his child to the altar - but he dare not sacrifice him. We must allow our children to ultimately be themselves, and learn to respect their individual choices.
|
||||||