FATHER
AND SON- On the Binding of Isaac and the Theology of Extremism
Over a
century ago, the English writer, Charles Dickens, looked at the end of the
century that preceded him, the century that culminated in the French
Revolution. He described it in the words: It was the best of times, it was the
worst of times."
We look
back upon the previous century, the 20th century, which in sheer
numbers of dead, was probably the bloodiest in history. It is also the century,
in which the largest mass of humanity has risen above the level of mere
survival to living well. We have seen, in the ending decades of the century,
the relatively peaceful fall of the Iron Curtain and the rise of a militant
religious radicalism, the end of the imminent threat of nuclear immolation and
the beginning of the threats of biological and chemical terror, the conquest of
horrendous plagues, and the creation of new ills. We have unprecedented wealth,
yet there are still regions with people living in abject poverty. It was the
best of times; it was the worst of times.
Now, we
look at the secular 21st century, and at the beginning of the Jewish year 5775 and
we are stunned. We are just 100 years
from the start of the Great war, the war to end all Wars, the War to Save Democracy,
World War I. We thought, scholars told us, that we were at the end of history
and we find ourselves, instead, retreading centuries old conflicts, the old Great
Game of the West versus Russia and a
flourishing of murderous radical movements.
Will
this too, be .like the last century, " the best of times, the worst of
times." Can we find advice in our teachings to guide us into the next
year, the rest of the century, the rest of the 58th century, that
is.
It is
ironic, that at the start of this secular millennium, after two centuries of
the rise of the modern, secular world, that the great divide of humanity is the
same great divide of the beginning of the last millennium, the divide between
the Christian world and the Moslem world, aggravated by another dividing line
of Moslem world versus Moslem world, while
the Jewish world, tiny as it be, is sitting on the dividing line between them.
Can we
bring the three together? Is there a common ground?
Our
Torah reading of this season speaks of a theme that our great civilizations
share. Three world religions, more than half of all humanity revere the story
which we read today and tomorrow from the Torah. The two readings actually form
one, as they center around the birth of Isaac today and then around his
near-death experience tomorrow.
For
us, as Jews, the Akedat Yitzhak, the binding of Isaac, is chosen for the
reading for the Rosh Hashanah service. The traditional interpretation of our ancestors
has been that God should remember and spare us, just as he spared Isaac at the
altar, and, further, that for the sake of Abraham who was willing to
offer his only chosen son, we be granted mercy from God.
For the Christian, this tale is a
precursor to the Crucifixion of Jesus -Abraham takes his beloved son up the
mountain top to be offered like a lamb as a sacrifice, just as, in Christian
thought, Jesus is to be brought up to the top of Calvary to be
sacrificed like a lamb as the beloved son of God.
For
Islam, this story forms an integral part of the Koran. There is, however, a
fundamental change --In the Koran , Ishmael, not Isaac, is bound to
the altar, thereby giving the followers of Mohammed the claim to being
Abraham's chosen descendents, and not the Jews.
How can one story provide inspiration for three different
religions? The answer is to be found in
the nature. of the biblical tale which is surprisingly simplistic
in outward style, yet as complex and unfathomable as the most difficult maze.
Unlike stories told by a
storyteller, the Torah gives us very few details.
What did Abraham look like? How old
was Isaac? Who went with them? This is kept a secret. Abraham and Isaac walk for three days and we
have no hint of what was said, done, or thought, as they approach the most
painful crisis in their lives. We are left guessing.
This is not the kind of story we can just soak in as we
lie back in our easy chair. It demands
involvement, investigation; it challenges us with the words
"Dirshuni" - Comprehend me.
Therein
lies the story's power. The understanding of the story in fact revolves
around one sentence.
Al tishlakh
yadcha al ha naar...
" Do not lay
your hand on the boy, nor do him any harm, for now I know that you
fear God, that you
withheld not even your only son from me."
One of the great modern philosophers and theologians,
Soren Kierkegaard, saw in this account the basis for his perspective. Reason is
futile and flawed as the basis for human existence. One is overwhelmed with fear and trembling at the
perplexities and vanities of human existence.
The only solution could be found in a leap of faith that bridged the gap
from man to the true reality, God.
It was in our Abraham of the Akedah,
that this philosopher found the Knight of Faith. Here was the true man of faith, in the
fullest sense of the word, who, at God's command, did not even hesitate to
offer his own son. It represents the realization that
morality and. ethics are secondary to God, and that God can suspend the rules
of reason and morality. "For now I know that you fear God, for
you have not withheld your only son from me."
Sounds strange? Yet this
line of thought represents a serious strain in the religious realm
for if God is above all, he is also above his
own laws. There is no ethics beyond that
which God determines. God commands and we do.
When
we come to Jewish interpretations of the Akedah, we find, indeed, many who
emphasize the willingness of Abraham to carry out God's command unhesitatingly,
as
proof of his faithfulness.
These interpretations depict Abraham
as defying even the command to let Isaac live.
Legends
depict the angel snatching the knife from zealous Abraham, who then attempts to
strangle Isaac. Other legends describe
the knife actually cutting Isaacs throat, which, by miracle, turns into iron
and is safe from the blade of the knife; even others suggest that Abraham actually
killed Isaac. These emphasize the sentence: "Now I know that you fear God,
for you have not withheld your only son from me."
All of this is to prove the
greatness of Abraham's faith, of the ability to transcend doubt and confusion
and emotions and human laws for the sake of God. Is it such a strange
interpretation?
When
we look back on Jewish history, how many Abrahams have there been to sacrifice
their Isaacs for the sake of Kiddush Hashem, the sanctification of the name. Up and down the Rhine land, during the
Crusades, so many Jewish fathers cut the throats of their own wives and
children, and themselves, rather than convert and give in to the demands of the
raging mob. The prayers of that period
are filled with declarations that descendents of Abraham were indeed capable of
greater faith than Abraham himself, for while Abraham had God's promise that Isaac would be his
heir, these latter day Abrahams knew that, in the face of the raging mobs
outside, no angel would enter to spare them their anguish.
But, I said, the
story of the binding of Isaac is not an open and shut case.
The
above interpretations rest on the ending of the sentence: "For I know now
that you fear God, for you have not withheld your only son from me. But it is possible to look at that
sentence, and look at the beginning of that sentence to
find the opposite interpretations - "Don't raise your hand against the
boy, and don't do him any harm:"
. The
interpretation may rest on the words, "Don't raise your hand."
Medieval
Jewish commentators are quick to point out, that from the very opening of the
story, it is clear that God never could have intended a sacrifice. The first words are "God tested
Abraham"-- to let us know that
the real object of our story is Abraham, and not Isaac, to let us know that it
is only an experiment.
Modern
commentators, like Rabbi Hertz, whose, bible we use during the year, are quick
to take the story in an entirely opposite meaning. It is a denunciation of
human sacrifice; God tries to see if Abraham has yet understood completely the
idea of ethics and a just God. Abraham, overly zealous, is ready to sacrifice
his child, and therefore God stops him.
This
approach is in line with the declaration of the Bible that human sacrifice is
abhorrent.
Something can be
said for this outlook. Human sacrifice
had long since been replaced with animal offerings in most of the world of
Abraham's wanderings, yet, in the land of Israel, among the Canaanites, it was
still an accepted practice in times of troubles. An enemy King
offers his child to his god before he enters war with the children of Israel; a
renegade Judean king offers his own son to Moloch; even a Jewish leader, Jephtah
, can think of offering his daughter to God.
It was
against this that the prophet Micah spoke:
Shall
I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of
my soul? It hath been told thee, 0 man, what
is good, and what the Lord requires of thee: To do justly, and love mercy, and
to walk humbly before God."
Which
approach is correct? We have before us two entirely opposite understandings of
this same story.
One understanding tells us that
God's word is so vital that we must follow it even though it seems against all
reason and morality, because God is above all and God is the basis of all
existence. The other understanding tells
us that God demands of us to follow his law at all times but to
recall that the Divine law is itself rooted in justice and mercy; we must know
where is the border between obedience and madness.
Which is correct?
You know
that in Jewish thinking, there is no such thing. Both are the word of God. But
the final decision. must be made by us--According to
which interpretation shall we live.
I
ask you-- by which interpretation can we live? There lies the rub.
History has taught us that we must follow the second
interpretation. We must look at that part of the story that says "Don't touch the
boy!" The other interpretation rubs us the wrong way - it rings a bell in
our minds that says--here is something dangerous.
Let's think in terms of the world
today; let's think of what we call "great men." Abraham
of 4000 years ago was undoubtedly a great man. He let his son live.
Look back at the last century. It
was a century of “great men” who had visions of a new society to be attained at
all costs.
Adolf Hitler was considered to be a great man - yet we
know what he was. One third of all our family was brutally murdered by this man
.Millions from all nations killed, millions uprooted - we know what he was. For
the sake of his ideals, a world was destroyed. For the sake of his great cause,
millions died. The same could be said of Lenin and Stalin and Mao, all great
visionaries who led millions to their destruction.
That is the danger
of the interpretations of the first kind. Ad maioram gloriam Dei - For
the greater glory of God or of the party, the state, the people -
all of these great causes are taken as the license to commit every sin
imaginable.
In this
century, we are witnessing what horror results when such an ideology is taken
to it as full extent. I recently saw a
book, published in Pakistan and sold openly here, in English, in the United
States. It is entitled" Is Dajjall's coming Immanent? Dajjall, meaning
Satan. It is the Moslem equivalent of Christian and Jewish apocalyptic visions.
In this, America, and Israel, under the thumb of the World Jewish Congress,
created the first and second World Wars to control the Moslem world, Israel
would soon destroy the Al Aksa mosque and then conquer all Arab and Moslem
lands, which would in turn bring on the onset of the end of days. It then
outlines the plan of action in which Islam would then overcome the West .It is
this mind-set that is tearing up Syria and Iraq and fueled the rocket and
tunnel attacks on Israel . This is the mind -set which prepares otherwise
intelligent people to create acts of mass horror. These are issues for the
Moslem world to resolve, but we, as Jews, sit on the receiving end of their
debate!
That
is why we have to teach the verse - al tishlakh Yadchah el Hanaar -
don't touch the boy.
Now, we look back to our reading of
the Torah portion. Today, for our own sanity, we have to insist on those
interpretations that say "Al tishlakh yadchah - Don't touch the lad.
"Don't forget humanity and decency in the name of God or any other cause.
Our ancestors were very cautious people. Being
a minority requires an extra measure of
sanity in order to survive. Therefore, we were
very wary of anyone who claimed to speak for God. Our sages went so
far as to declare "Prophecy is now in the hands of fools
and toddlers "Let us have no more of divine calls or great causes, they
were saying, let us live properly, and not listen to fools and little children.
All authority, they announced, is now given over to the sage, the cautious wise
man, who will examine tradition and reason before acting.
The story of the
binding of Isaac by Abraham can be used as the source of inspiration for every
would be "great man” or leader for the great cause - for the greater glory
of mankind, or for the sake of heaven, or for the sake of science - or whatever
cause you will.
But in the long
run, we have to remember that part of the story that says - Lay not your hand
on the lad. We have to remember that we can, at no point sanction the
abandonment of reason in the name faith, nor abandon morality in the name of
God , the proletariat, or the nation. Ours is not a blind faith, but a faith
grounded upon reason, for our faith has taught us, V
chay bahem, You shall Live by Them.
We have to
remember that, in the long run of Jewish tradition, we no longer listen to
prophets, but only to wise old men, very cautious and timid, careful
not to cause hurt.
My teacher,
Abraham Joshua Heschel, retells the following story, with which I shall
conclude:
A
child of seven was reading the story of Abraham and Isaac aloud in class.
As he read of
Isaac being tied to the altar, his heart beat faster, with pity
for Isaac.
As
he read of Abraham raising the knife, his heart froze with fright; and when the
voice of the angel called out to Abraham, "Lay not your hand
on the lad" - he burst out into tears. The Rabbi teaching the class was surprised,
"Why are you crying? You know that Isaac was not killed?" The little
boy turned to him and weeping, said, "But Rabbi, suppose the angel had
come too late?"
The
Rabbi comforted him by assuring him that angels can never come too late. Heschel
pointed:
An
angel can never come too late, but man, of flesh and blood can.
An
Abraham can act with the faith an angel would save him. We cannot do as we wish for the greater glory
of Heaven or mankind or society - because we know that on Tuesday of last week,
no angel came to stop our hand in the last minute.
All
people on the face of the earth must remember those few words - "Don't lay
a hand on the lad, and don't harm him in anyway. In
that way, we shall all of us, succeed in the intent of the Toarh--Ve Chay
Bahem-- You shall live through the Divine Teachings. May we always choose life.
Amen.