FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS IN THE BIBLE

Instructor: Barbara Sutnick
sutnick@internet-zahav.net

Week 4
LISTEN TO HER VOICE: ABRAHAM AND SARAH

We first meet Abram at the time that the Lord calls upon him to separate from all that is familiar to him, including his family of origin, and travel to an unspecified location. At the time of this charge, God promises to make a great and blessed nation out of Abram's progeny. As Rashi tells us, Abram was busy both before, during and after his journey preaching about the One God to his entourage. Sarai, his wife, was at his side, serving as spiritual leader to the women. His initial calling and the couple's life together are documented in Genesis 12ff.

(N.B. Abraham and Sarah's original names were Abram and Sarai respectively.)

Separated from their families of origin, parents and in-laws alike, Abram and Sarai are very much alone together in their leadership role. Guided by their faith, they must build their dream together from scratch. An important element of this dream is family. On the national level, they have the Divine promise of a great nation. On the psychological level, the desire to replace the families they left behind with a new shared one must have been very strong. How does one become "the father of a great nation" without having children? The failure to have children for so many years leaves Abraham and Sarah feeling cut adrift -- uprooted from both past and future. Aviva Zornberg in her book, Genesis: The Beginning of Desire, points out that the word for "uprooted" and the word for "barren" share the same Hebrew root, A.K.R. Thus the Hebrew language poignantly captures the emptiness and restless desperation of a couple that desires a child, but does not succeed in having one. In an additional play on this Hebrew word, we see that the word for "the most important thing" or "the essence" also comes from the root A.K.R. It is as if the Hebrew language is telling us that for an UPROOTED, BARREN woman, there is nothing more ESSENTIAL than having a child.

Time goes by. Abram and Sarai's wealth grows over the years in their new promised land. Abram goes to war and returns victorious. Still there is no child for the parents of "a great nation". Again the Lord appears in a vision to Abram, promising that his progeny will be as numerous as the stars in the heavens and that the Land of Israel will belong to his people (Genesis 15:1-7). Abram has faith in God. He waits.

Abram's waiting is actually not a small matter. It reflects a willingness to remain loyal both to God and to Sarai throughout years of disappointment. In fact, if we peruse chapter 11 of Genesis, just before Abram's landmark calling (Genesis 12) to leave his native land, we learn something powerfully important about the patriarch. In the long list of begats, from Noah's sons to Abraham (10 generations) each man is listed in terms of the sons and daughters he sires. Only about Abram does it say "the name of Abram's wife was Sarai...now Sarai was BARREN; she had no child." In the days when "begats" were what put a man on the map, Abram must have been a very special husband to have stood by his wife during all those years of barrenness.

More time goes by. After 10 years of marriage, Sarai is desperate to find a solution to the barrenness that plagues the marriage. In perhaps the first recorded cases of maternal surrogacy in human history, Sarai offers her Egyptian maid, Hagar, as a consort to her husband. So that "I shall have a son through her," Sarai explains to her husband. Since this practice of offering a slave-girl to one's husband to multiply births in the family is repeated two generations later, we must assume that it was not so rare. As the Bible shows, the child born to the slave is "credited" to the mistress. This builds up the status of the mistress. (It is not completely clear in any of these stories whom the child was actually expected to call "mother"!) Please read about the birth of Ishmael, Genesis 16:1-16.

Reading only a far as 16:4a, it would seem that an ideal solution had been found. However as soon as Hagar realizes that she is pregnant, she begins to revel in feelings of superiority, and gloats before Sarai. Hagar has achieved exactly what has remained outside her mistress' grasp. What is more, if Hagar should succeed in achieving the legal status of full wife, then she and not Sarai would be "credited" as mother of the first-born. This would disenfranchise the barren Sarai considerably from the family's fortunes and future. Rivalry ensues between the two women, and Sarai complains to her husband. Abram all but tells her to leave him out of it: "your maid is in your hands."

It would be hasty on our parts to read apathy or annoyance into this response of Abram's. His words clearly establish the pecking order in his home, and dispel any fear on Sarai's part that Hagar may have achieved the legal status of a wife (the Hebrew word for "wife" had been used to describe Hagar in verse 5) through her cohabitation with Abram. Abram tends to Sarai's feelings when he makes it clear that she is still Hagar's mistress and not her rival. It is interesting to note that in the Code of Hammurabi, a Mesopotamian legal document roughly contemporary to the Genesis stories, we find relavent law on this subject:

"If a man has married a priestess and she has given a slave-girl to her husband and she bears sons, [if] thereafter that slave-girl goes about making herself equal to her mistress, because she has borne sons, her mistress shall not sell her; she may put the mark [of a slave] on her and may count her with the slave-girls..."(Vol 2, pg. 57 of The Code of Hammurabi is quoted in Otwell's book And Sarah Laughed.)

The relevance of the Code of Hammurabi to the Bible is a subject for scholarly discussion. However, we see that when Hagar flees, no less than an angel of the Lord addresses her as "Hagar, SLAVE of Sarai". His emphasis of the terms SLAVE and MISTRESS puts Hagar firmly in her place from the Bible's viewpoint (16:7).

One thing apparent in these stories is that Abram and Sarai's marriage is characterized by open lines of communication. Unlike some of the other biblical marriages we have encountered, husband and wife talk and even problem-solve together. It is Sarai who takes the initiative in proposing a concrete approach to the barrenness problem. Araham goes along with her plan even though one suspects that he would have been content to have waited for the Divine promise to have fulfulled itself. When Sarai has problems with Hagar, she discusses the situation with her husband. Abram is again amenable to following Sarai's wishes. We never see him putting pressure on her about having a child.

Sarai and Hagar's rivalry persists. Hagar's pregnancy drives home to Sarai her own failure to bear a child. Hagar lords it over Sarai, and Sarai treats her harshly. The rabbinic commentators do not excuse Sarai's unkindness toward Hagar (Ramban, Radak). Although Sarai's original intention (to fulfill God's promise) had been admirable, human nature got in her way. Ramban cites this story as a lesson warning all those who would bite off more than they can chew in the emotional or inter-personal arena. Human passions are often too unruly to be transcended by noble intentions. The Ramban goes so far as to suggest that Ishmael's wild nature was a punishment to Abram and Sarai for misusing Hagar. Indeed, we shall see that as events progress, Hagar and Ishmael become increasingly irritable thorns in Sarai's side.

After the birth of Ishmael, God appears again to Abram (chapter 17). This time he promises to make Abram "a father of MANY nations" (cf. "a great nation" in 12:2). It is at this point that God changes Abram's name to Abraham, an addition whose meaning reflects the multiplicity of nations. Sarai shall be the one to bear this child. With His promise, God changes her name to Sarah.

The Hebrew letter H (heh), added to both names is a theophoric addition, i.e. it represents the name of God. It is at this point when the many years of barrenness are to end, that God enters even more fully into a three-way spiritual partnership with the first Hebrew couple. The birth after all these years is to be miraculous in almost every way. Both parents are beyond the normal age of childbearing. God has master-minded the event, choosing the time and the circumstances. The Bible leaves us no doubt that Isaac is born by the grace of Divine will and Divine intervention.

The two scenes in which first Abraham and then Sarah actually receive the Divine announcement of Isaac's impending birth are a delightful point-counterpoint. Please read Genesis 17:15-22 and 18:9-15, so we can compare them. As you read, pay particular attention to Abraham's and Sarah's reactions to the news.

In the first account, God speaks directly to Abraham. He is told that he will have a child through Sarah, and that she will be a mother of nations. Abraham laughs with a type of delighted disbelief. He cannot fathom himself at age 100, with a wife aged 90, having a child. He implores God to consider Ishmael his worthy heir -- a request that would have been difficult to make in Sarah's presence. The Lord insists: Isaac (yiTZCHaK) shall indeed be born to Sarah, the boy's name meaning "he (shall) laugh". (The Hebrew root TZ,CH,K refers to laughter/laughing) Ishmael is also destined to become the father of a great nation; but it is through Isaac that the Lord will establish His covenant.

For the second telling, Sarah is present, but behind the scenes. Three "humanoids" (men? angels? God himself? -- the designation changes as the story unfolds) appear and tell Abraham that a child will be born to Sarah at the same time next year. (The pregnancy, presumably a normal one of no more than nine months duration, will be conceived approximately three months after this theophany.) Sarah, who the narrator tells us is past menopause, laughs to herself: "Now that I am withered, am I to have enjoyment -- with my husband so old?" The Lord is "miffed" at Sarah's laughter. He asks Abraham "Why did Sarah laugh...Is anything too wondrous for the Lord?" Sarah is frightened by this heavenly challenge. She says "I did not laugh". At this the Lord speaks directly to her for the first and only time, saying "But you did laugh."

Why does God chide Sarah on the special occasion of His only direct communication with her? This question is even stronger when we note that He makes no such comment when Abraham reacts with laughter to the same announcement. Even more interesting is the discrepancy between what Sarah actually said in the tent and what God chooses to report to Abraham. Sarah's remark "now that I am withered, am I to have enjoyment -- with my husband so old?" is rendered by the Lord to Abraham as "Shall I in truth bear a child, as old as I am?" God leaves out Sarah's designation of Abraham as "old" when He "quotes" the remark to him. This kind of Divine tactfulness has been viewed by Jewish commentators as a positive example for us to follow. Although God even "erred" slightly (so to speak) on the side of untruth in leaving out a part of Sarah's observation, an important value in the laws of SHaLoM BaYiT (peace in the home/family) is learned from this: One is permitted by Jewish law to tell a "little white lie" if necessary to preserve the peace between a husband and a wife. The harmony of a marriage takes precedence over the value of absolute honesty. It seems that God was hinting here to Sarah (and to the rest of us) that brutal honesty does not a peaceful marriage make!

The joyous birth of Isaac is reported in chapter 21. We see that Sarah has recovered from any timidity about being caught in the act of laughing, for she says "God has brought me laughter; everyone who hears me will laugh with me." Sarah is punning on the name of her son, but also, her joy must truly have been boundless. Her laugh of disbelief has turned to one of joy, relief, and renewed faith in the future and in the Lord's promise. She might even be taking gratification from the fact that Hagar and Ishmael have suddenly become potentially superfluous, now that Sarah has born the true heir. She delights in the fact that the breasts she once called "withered" (Rashi's comment on 18:12) are now nursing a child. What a wonderful expression of the maternal bountifulness she had long ago despaired of having! In the midrash, the feast that was made at the occasion of Isaac's weaning becomes an opportunity to show that Sarah is truly the bountiful mother, in need of no wet-nurse: Sarah suckles all of the babies of all of the celebrants who attend! (Talmud, Baba Metzia 87a) What is more, Sarah literally oozes spiritual influence, implies the midrash, since all righteous gentiles and converts are descended from these infants! (Bereshit Rabba 53,9)

Next we read, that "Sarah saw the son, whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham, playing (mTZaCHeK)." She asks Abraham to "cast out that slave-woman with her son, for he shall not share in the inheritance with my son Isaac" (21:9-10). Despite the Bible's distinct tendency towards brevity, the fact that Hagar is an EGYPTIAN and a SLAVE is again emphasized in the language of these verses. The legal right of the foreign slave woman to a share in the family's fortune or its destiny is nil. If this is so clear why does it become necessary to banish Hagar and Ishmael at all? The irregular Hebrew word for "playing" (mTZaCHeK*) and to this question prompt the commentators to attribute the banishments to Ishmael's undesirable behavior. The root TZ,CH,K, cast here as it is to describe Ishmael's behavior, takes on extremely sinister overtones in Rashi's comments. (You may notice that it is made up of the same root, TZ,CH,K, as was used for Abraham and Sarah's laughter, and Isaac's name, while the ordinary Hebrew word for playing uses the somewhat different root S,CH,K.) Rashi imputes the three most serious sins in Judaism to Ishmael by citing their connections to the word mTZaCheK: idolatry, illicit sexual relations and murder. Rashi also adds the midrash which reports that Ishmael "makes Isaac dance" in the style of the "wild west" by shooting arrows all around him. Ramban disagrees with Rashi. God forbid, he counters, that such heinous sins should have gone on in Abraham's house. Indeed the Torah says that Abraham was singled out by the Lord to instruct his children in what is just and right (18:19). Rather, the Ramban believes Ishmael's crime to be that he mocked his baby brother, and claimed that he (Ishmael) will inherit the special portion of the first-born. Radak adds that Ishmael mocks Isaac for having such old parents!

We see in the above a tug of war between Ishmael's behavioral problems -- theoretically within the control of the family -- and destiny issues that are beyond human control. Which best explains the banishment of Ishmael? Perhaps the combination of factors is the best explanation. Whatever the reason for the dispute, Aviva Zornberg points out that Sarah was able to detect that "there is a mortal struggle under way, here... and Ishmael is DEADLY SERIOUS..." (pg. 135) Unlike the many parents who ignore family crises-in-the-making until it is too late, Sarah steps in preemptively. The fact that she loved only one of the boys (and that she was a prophetess, according to Jewish tradition) afforded Sarah clearer vision than most mothers have when their children do battle. From the Torah's point of view, we know her drastic solution is the "correct" one, since the Lord agrees with her. "The matter distressed Abraham" is a phrase that is taken in more than one way. Was Abraham vexed because Sarah called upon him to banish his child whom he loved? Alternatively, is the text telling us that he was distressed at Ishmael's outrageous behavior? According to Radak, Abraham's distress at Sarah's mistreatment of Hagar was already in evidence when Hagar first beacame pregnant. He had decided at that time to support his wife's for the sake of SHaLoM BaYiT -- family harmony (the principle we discussed above). Now, when she calls for the drastic measure of banishing Hagar and Ishmael, can he continue to go along with this heartless request. Abraham is spared the angst of grappling with this dilemma. The Lord tells him clearly "whatever Sarah tells you, do as she says" (vs 12), a landmark statement for biblical marriages! Rashi points out that we learn from this that Sarah was a greater prophetess than Abraham was a prophet. It is S'forno's reading that he was told to listen to her because she was right! Sarah and Abraham are undoubtedly in different positions with respect to Ishmael. He is Abraham's flesh and blood son; he is not Sarah's. Sarah feels the threat that Hagar/Ishmael represent on a personal level; but her concern goes beyond that. She, the "greater in prophecy" does not lose sight of who must be allowed to flourish in order to fulfill his national destiny. Her vision is not clouded by love for Ishmael, and certainly not for Hagar. God shows sensitivity to Abraham's feelings, but His language makes a distinction between Ishmael and Hagar: He opens with "Do not be distressed over the boy or your slave..." In the case of "the boy", Abraham's love for him is the issue; in the case of "the slave" the issue is one of the morality of banishing a threatening foreign influence. God tells Abraham to get past both. He must send away both the slave and his beloved son. They will become a great nation, which should reassure Abraham the worried father; but should alarm Abraham the father of the Hebrew nation. Thus, with a heavy heart, Abraham arises early to send away the rivals of Isaac and Sarah, effectively ensuring that his people will face their descendents as eternal rivals in the centuries to come.

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

1. Why do you think Abraham was willing to let Sarai have her way with Hagar?

2. Rashi and S'forno disagree as to the reason why God tells Abraham to listen to Sarah's voice. (See the last paragraph of this lesson) Which one thinks Abraham should listen on a regular basis?

3. Can we derive lessons for today from the story of Hagar?

4. Laughter can reflect many different emotions, since people laugh for different reasons at different times. Compare the different moods of laughter reported in this story. Include your ideas about why Isaac is named for laughter (you may have even more ideas about this after the Lesson 9).

5. Do you agree that there are times when in it desirable to tell a white lie rather than disturb peace in the home? Can you think of some examples?

6. Reflect on today's political implications of Abraham and Sarah's decision, encouraged by God, to send away Hagar and Ishmael.

[Previous] [Home] [Homepage] [Next]