Eventually Abraham and Sarah’s prayers are answered, and Sarah fulfills a prophecy by giving birth to a son, Isaac, named for his mother’s laughter at the thought that they would have a child in their advanced age. When Isaac was weaned, Abraham made a great feast and all the notables attended. Suddenly Sarah saw Hagar’s son metzakhek, laughing.
As we said above, Rashi is harsh with him. He translates the word metzakhek differently, to suggest that Ishmael committed the sins of idolatry, sexual acts, and murder. He is not as harsh as he will be with Esau, but enough to make us frown.
• • •
And this, in the same spirit:
And Sarah said to Abraham: “Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.”
Rashi: from Sarah’s answer it is clear that the two boys quarreled over the inheritance. Ishmael claimed this right, being the eldest. Sometimes they also went out into the fields where Ishmael shot arrows at Isaac.
This isn’t in the text? There must be a Midrash hinting at it, and we can trust Rashi: he’ll find it.
Rashi is fond of Sarah, the matriarch. When God tells Abraham to “hearken unto her voice,” in other words, to obey her, Rashi attributes prophetic virtues to her.
As for Abraham, he grants Sarah’s request, and sends Ishmael away in the wilderness with his mother. Abraham gives them bread and water. But no money, says Rashi. Because of whom? Because of the son who probably took the wrong path in life. As for Hagar, in leaving Abraham and Sarah’s house, she returned to her native customs.
However, in the end, God will take pity on them. An angel called to Hagar, “God hath heard the voice (and sobs) of the lad where he is.” And Hagar saw a well of water in front of her.
Rashi: the point is he is judged according to his present deeds. For the angels in heaven refuse to have pity on Ishmael, saying: God of the universe, how can you save someone from dying of thirst when in the future his descendants will kill Abraham’s descendants by making them die of thirst? And God replies: man is not judged for his future deeds but for his present ones.
“And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham.”
In this passage, one of the most moving and meaningful in the Scriptures, Rashi feels he must dwell on many verses and words. In his opening remarks, he wonders after “what things”? The answer—or rather answers—are in the Midrash. Some of our Teachers, he explains, say this: after Satan’s words accusing Abraham of ingratitude. Never in any of the feasts that Abraham held in honor of his son did he consider sacrificing a single bull or ram to You. God answered Satan: everything he did, he did for his son; yet if I were to ask him to sacrifice that son, he would.
And another version: “After the words the two brothers exchanged. Ishmael said with pride: (I am worthier than you) for I was thirteen when I was circumcised. Isaac answered him: Are you trying to impress me with just one organ of your body? If God asks me, ‘Sacrifice your entire self,’ I would do it.”
Strange, there was a High Priest named Ishmael, and a sage too. And there was no Rabbi Esau among our great teachers or servants of the Lord.
• • •
And God said (to Abraham): “Take now thy son.”
Rashi corrects the meaning of this verse to stress the complicity between God and his faithful ally and messenger: God requests that Abraham submit to this last trial so that people will not say that the previous ones had no value.
It’s worth noting the method that Rashi employs, which the rabbis of the Talmud also used; he takes a biblical statement by God but breaks it up with other statements, not actually found in the Bible, that subtly shift or elucidate the meaning of God’s words, as if God were in fact responding to challenges or questions from Abraham. In the Bible, the verse has God saying simply: “Take they son, thy only son, whom thou lovest, Isaac.” Rashi breaks the request apart:
Take now thy son.
Rashi: Abraham replied: I have two sons. “Thine only son,” said God. “Each one is the only son for his mother,” said Abraham. “The one whom thou lovest,” said God. “I love both of them,” said Abraham. “Isaac,” said God. Rashi is surprised by the length of this dialogue: why didn’t God tell him everything right away? So as not to upset him and cause him to lose his mind. And also so he would love the commandment; and could be rewarded for every word spoken. And this is why the father and son spend three days on the road. So people won’t say that Abraham acted in a fit of insanity.
Let us appreciate Rashi’s boldness: in this moment of sublime tragedy, the deeply human Abraham could have become insane.
“And Abraham took the wood … and laid it upon Isaac his son. And he took the fire in his hand and a knife; and they went both of them together.”
Putting all the weight of the unquestionably traumatic experience on Abraham, Rashi says: “Abraham, who knew he was going to slay his son, walked with the same willingness and joy as Isaac who knew nothing.”
In the Midrashic literature there are a great many legends dealing with this walk and giving the son his own role to play. It is odd that Rashi is so sparing in his commentaries here.
But he will be less so in the following passage.
“And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said [Rashi: with tenderness], Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here I am. And he [the angel] said, ‘Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God.’”
The text is clear, precise, concise. Outwardly Abraham accepts everything in silence. But Rashi is not satisfied. He who usually likes simplicity and brevity at all times suddenly brings up a dialogue from the Midrash, cited by Rabbi Abba, between Abraham and God: “Abraham says: I would like to talk to you. Yesterday you told me that Isaac would be my descendant; then you told me to take my son (sacrifice him to you) and now you tell me not to lay a hand upon the lad!” In other words: how can God say one thing and its opposite? And behold God answers him and his answer is simply astounding. “I don’t change my commands;” it is you who have misunderstood me! I asked you to (take your son) and climb up (the mountain) with him. I didn’t ask you to slay him!”
What! The whole episode concerning Isaac’s near sacrifice would be based on a mere misunderstanding!
There are other legends, other exchanges in the Midrash, depicting Abraham as tenacious and determined to obtain from God more promises, both old and new, for his descendants. But Rashi, for unexplained reasons, hardly touches on these.
“And Sarah died.”
Rashi feels the need to comment on how close the Akedah (the sacrifice of Isaac) is to the death of his mother: it is when she learned of the event that her soul left her.
Here again, the Midrash elaborates on this at greater length, stressing the part played by Satan. Why doesn’t Rashi use it? Could it be that this episode troubles him more deeply than others?
Isaac of course survives his ordeal and his father sends an emissary to bring back a bride for him from the land of Abraham’s family:
Then Laban and Bethuel answered (to Eliezer, Abraham’s envoy).
Laban has a bad reputation with Rashi:
“Laban was ungodly: he had the arrogance to speak before his father.” The same applies to Bethuel: a negative individual. When Rebecca’s brother and mother answer and give their consent, letting her go to marry Isaac, Rashi asks: but where was Bethuel? And he replies: an angel killed him because he tried to prevent the marriage.
A historical precedent for the supporters of women’s rights: before Rebecca’s departure, her brother and mother ask her whether she agrees. She replies with just one word, “Eikkh”: “I will go.” Rashi: the meaning here is I will go even if you are opposed to it.
Rashi: we can deduce from this that we have no right to force a woman to marry someone; we need her consent.
An odd story of malicious gossip: even the first patriarch wasn’t spared. The text firs
t:
And these are the generations of Isaac, Abraham’s son: Abraham begat Isaac.
Rashi wonders: why this repetition? His answer: having mentioned Isaac, Abraham’s son, the following statement was necessary. For there were gossipers who said that since Sarah was childless during the years when she lived with Abraham, Isaac’s father was really King Elimelekh and not Abraham. What did God do? He gave Isaac the same facial features as Abraham. So when they saw the striking resemblance, everyone could see that Isaac was Abraham’s son.
Isaac and Rebecca go on to have their own sons, twins Jacob and Esau who are at odds even before they leave the womb. In discussing Rashi’s suspicious attitude toward Ishmael, we also mentioned his contempt for Esau. Let us point out another instance:
At a certain point in the narrative about Isaac and Rebecca, the text says that Esau was forty years old when he married Judith, the daughter of Beeri the Hittite and Base-math the daughter of Elon the Hittite. Rashi seizes the opportunity to add this: Esau looked like a boar. When a boar lies down, he stretches out his legs as if to show how pure he is…. For forty years, Esau stole women from their husbands and tortured them. So his father said to him: I married when I was forty, do the same.
• • •
In Isaac’s old age, he prepares to bless his firstborn, favorite son, Esau. But Rebecca has other plans, and sends Jacob in Esau’s stead. Did Jacob lie to his blind father by impersonating Esau? No, says Rashi, always prepared to defend Jacob against his brother. When Jacob says to his father, “I am Esau, thy firstborn,” Rashi changes the punctuation and the meaning of the words: “I am who I am (the one who brings you your favorite food), and Esau is thy firstborn.” And when Isaac asks him, “Are you my son Esau?” he doesn’t answer, “I am he,” but “It is I.” There again, for Rashi, Jacob doesn’t lie and never will.
Rashi goes very far: when Isaac, “trembling very exceedingly,” says to Esau, “thy brother came ‘be-mirmah’ and hath taken away thy blessing,” he translates the word be-mirmah, meaning “with cunning,” as be-hokhmah, meaning “with wisdom and intelligence.”
Rebecca was told that Esau was “proposing to kill Jacob.” Told by whom? Whom could Esau have possibly confided in? In his mother? Surely not. In his father? Surely not again. Rashi has a ready answer: “it is the Holy Spirit that told her everything.” Even He is against Esau.
• • •
Jacob’s entire life is a series of miracles. Even a small, ordinary detail partakes of the supernatural.
Jacob left Beersheba and went toward Haran. (At a certain place), he saw “the sun was set; and took of the stones of that place, and put them for his pillows.” Rashi: one stone said, the Righteous Man will rest his head on me, and the other said, no, on me. So God fused them and made them into one, which He placed under Jacob’s head. And that’s when he fell asleep. And in a dream he saw the ladder with its top touching heaven. But where was the ladder placed? On Mount Moriah where the Temple will later be built. But … geographically isn’t this impossible? The spot where Jacob was lying was far away? Easy: on that night, Mount Moriah was uprooted and transported to the spot where Jacob was resting.
One more miracle.
Let us return to the wicked Laban. When he meets Jacob, his future son-in-law, he embraces him. What could be more natural? No, says Rashi: “He embraces him so he could go through his pockets, which he thought were full of gold coins.” Laban embraces him also “to see if he has precious pearls in his mouth,” says Rashi.
“And Jacob loved Rachel; and said (to Laban), I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.”
Rashi’s commentary:
Why so many details? Because Jacob felt that Laban was an inveterate liar. He said to him: I will serve for Rachel, but if you think you can tell me that we’re referring to another Rachel, off the street,” let me be specific: “thy daughter.” And in case you say you’ll change her name to Leah and Leah’s to Rachel, let me say to you right away: “your younger daughter, the youngest.” But, adds Rashi, in spite of all these precautions, Laban betrayed him.
On the night of the wedding, Laban brought Leah to Jacob, who became aware of Laban’s betrayal when he woke up.
Rashi: actually, all night long Jacob was convinced his bride was Rachel. As a precaution, he had given her a secret sign of recognition. But when Rachel realized what was happening, she revealed the secret to her older sister so she wouldn’t be put to shame.
Marvelous Rachel, Rashi says: when, with the years, she became jealous of her sister, she envied her for her good deeds.
Jacob continues to serve Laban, and marries Rachel as well. He becomes rich, and leaves Laban’s household, returning to the land where his angry brother Esau abides.
And Jacob sent messengers to his brother whose arrival he feared. He said to them: “Thus shall ye speak unto my lord Esau; Thy servant Jacob saith thus, I have sojourned with Laban.”
Rashi: I didn’t become a lord or an important dignitary but a stranger. You have no reason to hate me: the blessings I received from our father did not come to pass. And also this: I lived in Laban’s house and learned nothing from his evil deeds.
Praise for Jacob:
Having learned that Esau was coming to meet him with four hundred men, Jacob was greatly afraid.
Rashi: faced with this imminent conflict, Jacob felt a double fear: the fear of being killed and/or of killing others.
Jacob’s prayer: “Deliver me … from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau.” Rashi’s commentary: deliver me from my brother who doesn’t behave like a brother but like Esau, the ungodly one.
Another miracle: Jacob, on his journey, wrestles with an angel. After their morning duel, the angel asks Jacob what his name is, and Jacob tells him. “Thy name shall be called no more Jacob,” says the angel, “but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.”
Rashi dwells on just two words: “No more Jacob (You are no longer Jacob) for you didn’t obtain blessings through cheating but openly and with dignity.”
The two enemy brothers finally meet. “And Esau ran to meet him (Jacob) and embraced him … and they wept.” In the biblical text, there are two small dots on the word embraced.
In his commentary, Rashi, suddenly charitable toward Esau, says that faced with Jacob’s humility, Esau could not help feeling compassionate. Still, he cites another source according to which he would not have been wholeheartedly compassionate.
Jacob introduces his family to his brother. First the handmaids, then Leah with her children, then Joseph and Rachel. Rashi is surprised: why not Rachel and Joseph? Commentary: Joseph said to himself that his mother was a great beauty; she might attract the attention of the impious one. I had better step in between them.
“So Esau returned that day on his way unto Seir.” Rashi wonders why the verb is in the singular. Because he was alone. One after the other, the four hundred men who had been with him, deserted him.
As for Jacob, he comes out of the ordeal, arriving in Shechem “whole.” Rashi’s commentary: “whole in his healed body, whole in his wealth, and whole in his faith.” Odd: here Rashi does not mention his family.
• • •
Dina, Jacob’s only daughter, is raped by Prince Hamor’s son Shechem. Hamor tries to make up for the misdeed and proposes to the victim’s brothers and their father Jacob that the two youths marry. After a long discussion, Dina’s brothers suggest be-mirmah, with cunning (like Jacob with Isaac), that they could come to an arrangement providing all the men in the tribe get circumcised.
Once again, as in the first instance, Rashi translates the word as “wisdom or intelligence.”
On the third day after the operation, when the men opposite were most sore, Jacob’s sons, Simeon and Levi, attack the city and kill all the males.
Like Jacob later, Rashi does not justify their act of revenge. He says: why does the text mention that they were Jacob’s sons? Because
they were. But they behaved as though they were not: they did not seek his advice.
“And Jacob dwelt… in the land of Canaan. These are the generations of Jacob. Joseph, being seventeen years old …” The proximity if not the continuity of these two verses arouses Rashi’s interest. Several commentaries. Let us cite two:
The aim of the text is to emphasize the great resemblance between Jacob and Joseph. First of all, physically. But also in another way: they had the same destiny. One was hated, the other too. One had a brother who tried to kill him, the other too.
The text also aims to show that, at this stage of his life, Jacob wished to live peacefully and then the story of Joseph befell him. It is as though the Holy One, Blessed be He, had said: really, all these Righteous Men, is it not sufficient for them that they will have their share in the world to come, that they wish to live peacefully in this one too?
As though Rashi, here, wished to explain the suffering of Israel in exile….
“And he is a lad (or adolescent).”
Rashi’s commentary: Joseph behaves like an immature adolescent. He dresses his hair, touches up his eyes; he does everything to look handsome.
Rashi’s portrait of Joseph is not attractive. Admittedly he keeps company with the servant girls’ children, but he has no hesitation about undermining the existence of Leah’s children. He tells their father unpleasant things about them: that they eat meat carved out of the flesh of living animals, that they mistreat the servant girls’ children, call them slaves, and engage in all kinds of sexual acts.
He will be punished for these three things.
• • •
And the brothers, annoyed by Joseph’s grandiose dreams, decided to kill him: “and we shall see what will become of his dreams.”
Rashi: Rabbi Yitzhak said: the verse must be divided in half. The part dealing with the decision belongs to the brothers; the last part to the Holy Spirit. It is God who says; do what you wish, and we’ll see what will become of it.