Sermons and Divrei Torah
The Akedah- The Binding of Isaac
Ron Clavier
I. What If Abraham Had Actually Killed Isaac? What Would The Headlines Have Read?
"Dad Killed Son In An 'Act Of Love' "
This headline did not run 4 thousand years ago. It ran 5 days ago.
David Carmichael was found not to be criminally responsible for the death of his son because he was mentally ill at the time and because he later came to feel remorse.
Robert Latimer, on the other hand, was found criminally responsible for the death of his severely handicapped daughter. He has never apologized, and he remains unswerving in his belief that by saving her from a life of intolerable suffering, he did the right thing.
If that's not the definition of "FAITH", what is? He is not the first human to be placed in prison for acting on his beliefs.
II. What Did Abraham Believe?
Before Abraham's story can be relevant today, we need to know "What, exactly, did he believe at the time of his actions?" But the answer to this question is elusive because scholars disagree about subtle variations in translation and semantics. Take the clause right at the beginning of the story:
"…God put Abraham to the test…"
This tells us, the readers, that God is testing Abraham. To some scholars, this means that God never intended to let Abraham go through with it. This was like those tests of the emergency broadcasting system: "This is just a test". Well….maybe.
Some even say that Abraham was in on it too. They say this because God asks Abraham to do something (kill Isaac) that will prevent God from fulfilling his part of the bargain (make Isaac's kids… "…as numerous as the stars in the heavens, etc." So, Abraham must know that Isaac is going to survive, right? Well… maybe.
What do you think Abraham believed? I think that Abraham did not believe this was "just a test"… that he believed that God really wanted him to kill his son… his favourite son…the one he loved…and offer him up as a burnt sacrifice.
III. Was Abraham's Belief "Normal"?
Let's say Abraham really believed this. He had FAITH. And because he believed, then he would have actually killed Isaac. He would probably have been considered mentally ill (which was then considered an affliction of the soul, not the brain); and he would never have apologized or suffered remorse, because psychopharmacology was not what it is today.
And who are we to say he's wrong?
The depressed woman believes she has nothing to offer, and is only a pain to those around her. We say she is wrong, but she might act on this by taking her life. The Schizophrenic man believes that the voice he heard was that of God, telling him to burn all of his possessions and wait naked for him under the Bloor Street Viaduct at one o'clock, when he will be taken to heaven on a comet…We say he is wrong too. But are we sure?
But what if everybody heard voices or wanted to kill themselves? This would be defined as the statistical "norm" or even the social "norm". It's a good thing we don't confuse those two. Otherwise, we'd have lots of people thinking that some things are "normal" just because "everybody is doing it". Then we'd have lots of clearly maladaptive behaviours becoming almost acceptable in our society: things like:
drinking yourself into a stupor at parties,
or being unethical in business,
or using drugs to enhance your athletic performance
or cheating on your spouse…
Hey, wait a minute…
IV. How Would This Story Play Out In Your Home Today?
So how would each of us shape up in such a test?
Can we think of anything that might motivate us to kill our favourite child? I mean the one we love, not those other ones. And you kids out there…What would have to be "in it" for you to go willingly to your death (as Isaac appears to have), when you can't even seem to think of a good reason to clean your rooms? So, given the price Abraham is asked to pay, what's "in it" for him?
In my opinion, an intimate relationship is one where a person exposes him or herself to another person in atmosphere of absolute trust. It is the greatest gift that can be shared by two people. Sometimes this is a physical exposure, but most of the time the exposure is emotional or spiritual. For Abraham, the reward for his Faith was to achieve emotional and spiritual intimacy with his God…the ability to trust absolutely in God.
V. Science: Proof And The Importance of Questioning in Modern Society
Again I ask: How do we measure up to Abraham? Do we trust, unconditionally? Well, how do we react when someone says: "Trust me…" the politician who promised "I won't raise taxes"… but did or the newlywed who vowed "I do, for better and for worse"… but only meant "for better" Or do we say: "I'd like to trust you, but prove it first". Take the very existence of God as a starter.
How do you feel about this statement?
I‘m a very spiritual person. I don't really follow the dogma of organized religion. I believe in a force that is greater than all of us, But I don't see that force as a traditional or biblical God – that is, a man with a beard, sitting at a desk and making decisions for me and about me."
If this is you, then would your "greater force" ever "speak to you", let alone ask you to kill your child? Whether you call it God or not, does this "force" encourage questioning, or does it simply expect FAITH, and unwavering obedience? And how does our society view "unwavering obedience"? Would we revere Abraham today? How do we look upon fundamentalist, "faith-based" societies where questioning is not encouraged? How do they compare with our own approach, where curiosity, critical thinking, science, the need to question, and the need to know are what we seem to revere? Not just in our secular educational institutions, but also in our legislatures, and our businesses, and our homes and on our psychiatrists' couches.
VI. The Importance Of Questioning In Judaism
I think it is very "Jewish" to question (though some of you would no doubt question that). I think that most of us see it as a good thing that we treasure learning. We prize the taking in of new information and trying to turn it into knowledge. We listen to the views of others. We are willing to question our beliefs and mould them into new ones. We continually seek more satisfying answers to the questions that perplex us. Moreover, it may be too simplistic to identify the relative permissibility of questioning as the definition of the various branches of Judaism: i.e., "Humanists question, but the orthodox don't."
After all, what do the famous rabbis in the yeshivas do all day? They disagree…they seem to argue. We read that… Renowned scholars from far and wide came to sit at the
feet of the great rabbi… "I see it this way…", says the first Rabbi. The second Rabbi proposes an alternative explanation. The third Rabbi found this approach inadequate.
So even the most orthodox of Jews seem to hold holy the process of questioning, and not following the simple "Nike-like" directive: "Just Do It".
VI. Ethics
So, where does this leave us? What can learn from this portion of the Torah? We learn that we have a choice in the Faith we cling to: We can have faith in the literal word of the text if we need that
security, or
We can have faith in doing, of our own free will, what we consider to be the right thing, the ethical thing.
And we learn that the value of our acts may lie as much in the sincerity of our intentions to do them as it does as in actually carrying them to completion.
SHANA TOVA
Sermons and Divrei Torah
Additional Resources
Elul: Period of Preparation
Yamim Noraim: Days of Awe
Rosh Hashanah: Introduction
Shofar Symbolism
The Custom of Tashlich
Yom Kippur: Introduction
G'mar Chatima Tova...
