Avraham and The Binding by Phillip Ratner
After the destruction of Sedom, Abraham migrated to the Negev, to Gerar. He left the place where his tent stood for years, where he built an altar and hosted the angels, and went to the land of the Philistines. It is likely that he did this out of fear, preferring not to stay by the dangerous zone – and thereby he showed a rather limited trust in the divine providence and punishment.
Upon his arrival to Gerar, Abraham again resorted to the suspect security measure that he used earlier, in Egypt, and presented his wife as his sister. “And Avimelekh king of Gerar sent – vayishla? – and took Sarah” (20:2) – much before the sending away of Ishmael there were sent the envoys to take the wife (or sister) of Abraham. God immediately came to Avimelekh in a vision of the night and warned him from taking a married woman, “Therefore Avimelekh rose early in the morning, and called all his servants, and told all these things in their ears, and the men were sore afraid – vayir’u”. The rising early in the morning to fulfill a divine command, which characterized Abraham, also characterized Avimelekh, the king of “the land of the Philistines”. The order between seeing and hearing of revelations is interesting here: the Philistine sees a vision of God, he rises early in the morning, pronounces (mashmi’a – which has to do with shmi’?h – hearing) and then the listeners become afraid – it is like a chain that leads from a divine vision to awe – or the reverse.
Also the monetary compensation that Avimelekh gave Abraham was meant to allay “the evil eye”
Abraham’s claim:“And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife” (20:12), alludes to a known situation in the ancient east, where priests used to marry their sisters, as a means for safeguarding fertility.
But instead of bringing fertility and a blessing upon himself or to the land of the Philistines which he entered, Abraham was childless, his wife barren, and together they brought to bareness in Avimelekh’s household “For the Lord had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Avimelekh, because of Sarah Abraham’s wife” (20:18).
Thus, we understand by implication that the sojourn of Abraham in Gerar and the sojourn of Sarah in the house of Avimelekh were by no means short. There had to elapse enough time until the Philistines would notice that the house of the king was inflicted by bareness, a process that must have taken at least half a year.
From the text there can be gleaned the possibility that Yi??aq-Isaac was Avimelekh’s son. Rashi noted (on Gen. 21:2) in the name of Rabbi Yudan and warns about hasty conclusions – “For Sarah conceived, and bore Avraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him” – this teaches us that he was born after nine months, so to leave no place for slanderers. The scriptures makes it clear that the cessation of fertility in the house of Avimelekh included the king himself: “and God healed avimelekh, and his wife….”.
The connections with the Philistines are not, therefore, incestuous relationship, but the connection of a covenant that was made on the brink of such relationship, probably instead of such unholy relations. All the same, the relationship with the Philistines (Palestinians) is born in sin: it was tainted by almost incest and amplified by the weakness of Abraham, which opened the door to enter a covenant with the king of the Philistines as told in the sequel of the Parashah.
The third act of the drama is that Abraham makes a covenant with the king of “The Land of the Philistines”, a covenant that contradicts the promise that the Lord gave to Abraham, but which is long-lasting, and from then on the destinies of the children of Abraham and the Philistines mixed, for good and bad, till this day.
The Sending Away of Ishmael – Expulsion or Mission?
When Yi??aq-Isaac was born, his mother Sarah arose to protect him, and as soon as she saw Yishma’el mocking (in Hebrew me?a?eq, from ?e?ok – laughter), she demanded of Abraham “Cast out this bondwoman and her son, for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, Yi??aq” (21:10). In the past, Sarah already was stricken with laughter and was afraid of its expression: “Then Sarah denied, saying, I laughed not; for she was afraid. And he said, No; but thou didst laugh” (18:15). On this occasion, again it is laughter, the laughter of Yishma’el-Ishmael (God will hear), that is a hindrance for her, and she is again afraid.
The demand of Sarah was for casting out, expulsion, – for a total act that cannot be retracted. This was difficult and seemed bad – “And the thing was very grievous in Avraham’s eyes (judgmental viewing) because of his son”. But Elohim-God (which is, as already noted, the measure of judgment) demanded of him complete submission (Islam) to Sarah “in all that Sarah has said to thee, hearken to her voice”. Abraham was commanded on discipline, but when he proceeded to enact that which he had to, he hurried to do it in a more loving manner – “And Avraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away” (vayeshal?eha). Not expulsion but sending – shilua? – and perhaps even mission – shli?ut.
Yishma’el was not sent to get perish in the desert, but to contend, to survive and to wander. He is one who marked the trail before the wanderings of the children of Israel for forty years in the desert, and before the wanderings of the Israelites for about two thousand years in “the desert of the nations” (midbar ha’Umot).
It is instructive that the four hundred years period of sojourn and exile “Know surely that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years” (Gen. 15:13) starts with the sending of Ishmael and ends with “when Par’oh had sent the people” – beshala? Par’oh et ha’?m (Exodus 13:17).
The saving of Yishma’el is well connected to parashat vayera and the special seeing of the whole. Yishma’el gained his first lesson of desert survival through the grace of God, when the eyes of Hagar opened: “And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink” (21:19), and immediately in the sequel it is told “And God was with the lad, and he grew…” Yi??aq, the tent dweller, who had missed the lesson, bequeathed the contention with the desert to his grandchildren who went down to Egypt.
Is it not the case that, contrary to the express demand of Sarah for the casting out of Yishma’el, what really transpired was the intention of Abraham for sending Yishma’el? Was Yishma’el sent on a mission from God?
Yishma’el and the hints for the Tikkun of ?am-Kena’an
Yishma’el is the son of Hagar the Egyptian, from the race of ?am, the father of Kena’an-Canaan. Her marriage to Abraham, the Semite-Hebrew, is the beginning of the chain of the Restoration – Tiqun – of the relationships among the three races of humankind, relations that were damaged after the curse of No’a? to ?am “Cursed be Kena’an, a servant of servants shall he be to his brethren. And He said, Blessed be the Lord-YHWH God of Shem, and Kena’?n shall be his servant. God-Elohim shall enlarge Yefet, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, and Kena’?n shall be his servant” (Gen. 9:25-29). Hagar the Egyptian was a servant to Sarah, the Semite lady. When she gained the status of a wife, she rebelled against Sarah. “And Saray Avram’s wife took Hagar, her maid, the Mitzrian, after Avram had dwelt ten years in the land of Kena’an, and gave her to her husband Avram for a wife. And he went in to Hagar, and she conceived, and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes” (Gen. 16:3-4). This led to an open conflict, to the tormenting of Hagar by Saray, and to the flight of Hagar to the desert. “And the angel of the Lord-YHWH said to her, Return to thy mistress, and submit (Islam) thyself to her hands. And the angel of the Lord-YHWH said to her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude. And the angel of the Lord-YHWH said to her, Behold, thou art with a child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Yishm?’el, because the Lord-YHWH has heard (sham?) thy affliction” (16:9-11). In these words of the angel, their solemn style, the repetition of “And the angel of the Lord-YHWH said to her” thrice, and in their message, there is a preamble to the story of the children of Israel in Egypt and their affliction under the Egyptians. It is a sort of “measure for measure” for the tormenting of Hagar and the injustice in the expulsion of Yishma’el.
The contention derives from understandable master-slave relationship between the lady and her maid. Only after two generations, among the wives of Jacob-Ya’aqov, there is found an amicable solution for similar relationship.
When we reach this part, we shall also examine the extent of potential integration of “Yishma’el” within the community of “Yisra’el”.[2]
The Figure of Yishma’el According to the Revealed Torah
Already in parashat Lekh-Lekha, when Hagar was tormented in the hands of Saray and escaped to the desert, she was given the message: “Behold, thou art with a child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Yishma’el, because the Lord-YHWH has heard thy affliction. And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren” (16:11-12).
In the making of the Covenant (when Abraham was 99 years old, and Yishma’el 13) of circumcision, the Elohim promised Abraham a son from Sarah, and Abraham laughed and then “Abraham said to God, O that Yishma’el might live before thee” (17:18). God then re-affirmed his promised, requested to call the son of Sarah by the name of Yi??aq, and then continued to treat the future of Yishma’el: “And as for Yishma’el I have heard thee (ul’Yishma’el shma’?tikha – a word play); Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation” (17:20). This is almost the same blessing that was made to Adam upon their formation: “And God blessed them, and God said to them, Be fruitful, and multiply, replenish the earth, and subdue it” (Gen. 1:28). Namely, there is a parallel between Adam and Yishma’el, the fertile “pere Adam” (wild man).
In parashat Vayera Sarah saw “the son of the bondwoman” (Yishma’el) laughing (metza?ek) during the feast of weaning Yi??aq and demanded to cast him away. God commanded Abraham to obey to Sarah, but added a consolation along with the draconian measure: “And also the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed” (21:13). And again, when the young Ishmael was in mortal danger and his mother thought that he would not survive, the angel of the Lord and reaffirmed “for I will make him a great nation” (21:18).
In the next parashah – ?aye Sarah – Ishmael is mentioned again briefly: “Then Avraham expired, and died in a good old age, and old man, and full of years; and he was gathered to his people. And his sons Yi??aq and Yishma’el buried him in the cave of Makhpelah” (25:8-9). It is also worth noting that after the burial Yi??aq-Isaac returned to dwell “with the well of la?ay ro’i” – exactly at the spot where Hagar became informed of the anticipated birth of Yishma’el. The parashah ends with the list of the chronicles of Yishma’el, all his twelve princely sons and then “And these are the years of the life of Yishma’el, a hundred and thirty seven years; and he expired and died; and was gathered to his people. And they dwelt from Havilah to Shur, that is before Mitzrayim (Egypt), as thou goest toward Ashshur (Assyria); and he dwelt in the presence of all his brethren” (25:17-18). The wording about the death of Ishmael is identical to that of the death of Abraham, with all the characteristics of death of saints. And even if Ishmael did not live as long as Abraham (175), he still lived longer that Sarah (127).
The scriptural description of Ishmael is a positive one. The “wild man” – pere Adam – becomes a fertile man – Adam Poreh. He shares in the burial of the common father and raises princes as a dignified nobleman.
In the time of the Sages, when the Jewish attitude to Esau already turned negative (a topic to which we shall return in the parashot of vaYe?e and vaYishla?), the attitude towards Ishmael was still positive. This attitude is evident from this that the name “Yishma’el” was popular respected and endeared. In the first century C.E. there was a high priest called Yishma’el, and in the second century there were two Tana’im (authors of the Mishnah) with that name. Especially famous was Rabbi Yishma’el, “the couple” (Ben Zugo) of the great Rabbi Aqivah, and whose teachings are quoted in many places in the Mishnah, including the beginning of Torat Kohanim (the Torah of the Priests) with the 13 methods according to which the Torah is to be studied. It was only after the appearance of Muhammad, the Islamic conquests and the life of Jews in “The Exile of Yishma’el”, that the attitude to Yishma’el became a negative one and the later legends and Midrashim (such as Midrash haZohar) started to regard him as a devilish figure.
The Regard to Ishmael among Modern Authors
Before we analyze the changes and development that the figure of Ishmael underwent in the Qur’an and following the Islam, we may recall the approach of modern authors who employed the Biblical image of Ishmael, that of the wanderer. Thus in Melville’s great American epos “Moby Dick”, Ishmael is the person who grows tired of living on the land in the puritanical-Biblical society of New England, and goes down the seas in search of the great whale, which we can see as a symbol of the unconscious (see also legends and Midrahim about the Great Whales – haTaninim haGdolim). In the book of Daniel Quinne “Ishmael”, the hero is an intelligent male Gorilla, who teaches humankind the ecological ethics that is required to save the destructive modern industrial society. In both cases – Ishmael is the antithesis to the degenerate Western Culture.
The Figure of Ishmael in the Qur’an
The Torah dealt very briefly with the figure of Ishmael, and left an open place to elaborate, which was eventually taken up by Muhammad.
The Qur’an refers to Ishmael many times, but in most of them he does not appear as a person on his own, but is listed among the issue of Abraham or among all the prophets of God. These Suras were written, as far as we know, in the beginning of the Medina period, when Muhammad used to orient his prayers towards Jerusalem, like the Jews, and hoped that the Jews would join him and recognize his prophecy as their own religion. Ishmael-Isma’il was mentioned at that period as a legitimate prophet, but not more than that – there is no mention of any special teaching of Ishmael, and he seems to have no seniority in the religion of Abraham.
In his important book “Fusus al-?ikam” – “The Wisdom of the Prophets” – the great Sufi philosopher Ibn Al-Arabi tried to characterize the teachings of the different prophets that are mentioned in the Qur’an. It seems that he leaned only on these first Suras and all he had to remark on the prophecy of Ishmael was that he had, as did any genuine prophet, his own unique prophetic inspiration, through the unique root of his soul.
In the 2nd Sura, Al-Bakara – “The Cow” the Qur’an however gives two roles for Ishmael together with his father Abraham: both as the builders of the foundations of the “House” (the Temple of the Qa’aba in Mecca): “And when Ibrahim built the foundations of the House with Isma’il: Our Lord accept this from us… ” (Sura 2, 127); yet a few lines earlier (Sura 2, 119-121) it is written: “We (Allah) contracted with Ibrahim and Isma’il: ‘purify My House for those who circle it, and those who stay there, and those who prostrate”. This implies that Ishmael, with Abraham, may not have been the founder of the sacred center of Islam in Mecca, but had marked the role for Mohammad to return and purify it from the idolatry that clung to it in the course of the generations.
It should be noted that the Qur’an does not mention “The Binding of Ishmael”. There is a mention of Abraham, who was commanded to sacrifice his son and the son who agreed to this (Sura 37, 99), but the name of the son is not expressed in the Qur’an. The Moslem commentators were divided over the identity of the son who was bound. In the commentary of Ibn-Arabi (see above), for example, it is entirely clear that the son that was bound was Isaac-Is?aq.
The Development of the Figure of Ishmael in Islamic Legend.
Since this second Sura formed an opening for Moslems to get interested in Ishmael and his life, there came the Moslem legend, the ?adith, to add lines to his figure. These lines were borrowed from the Jewish sources and Midrashim, and include the three visits of Abraham from afar to see Ishmael. In the first two visits, Ishmael was not at his home and Abraham did not stay to wait for him (according to the Jewish Midrash, Abraham promised to Sara not to dismount his camel), but he left for Ishmael hints regarding his wives. Ishmael obeyed his father’s hints, divorced his first wife and endeared his second. In Abraham’s third visit, adds the Moslem legend, the father and son proceeded to build together the temple of Mecca. (This threefold pattern accords with the pattern we find throughout the Book of Genesis, and we shall return to it, for example (in parashat Toldot), as relating to the three wells of Yi??aq-Isaac and their allusions to the Temple of Jerusalem).
Thus Ishmael was “resurrected” by Muhammad, who imprinted in the Arab Mind their being the scions of Ishmael and Abraham. Even though the sacred center for Islam was fixed at Mecca, the ancient shrine of the Arabs, also Jerusalem became a sacred city also for Islam.
In the generation after Muhammad, when the Moslems conquered the Land of Israel, and liberated Jerusalem from the Byzantine rule and allowed Jews to return and live in Jerusalem – there came the recognition of the possibility, even the need, to build also a Moslem shrine on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. During the time of the Caliph Abd al-Malik and later Umayyad Caliphs, whose capital was in Damascus, there were built two structures, first the Dome of the Rock and later the El-Aqsa Mosque – of which only the latter is a mosque, oriented to Mecca. The Dome of the Rock stayed oriented to itself, to a certain rock on the Temple Mount, that the Islamic ? adith eventually connected with the visionary “Night Journey” – al-Isra’ – of the prophet, but also recognized as the Foundation Rock and the place of sacrifice of Abraham’s son.
We shall return to discuss this sacred place below, in dealing with the ?qedah. We shall only note here that through the agency of this place and this edifice, the Moslems and the Jews became bound-together in Jerusalem, in a binding that cannot be easily undone.
“And it came to pass after these things”, the ?qedah
The Eleventh Trial: In the ?qedah, the Binding of the younger son, Yi??aq-Isaac there is a repetition and intensification of the sending away of the firstborn son – Yishma’el-Ishmael. “And it came to pass after these things, that God-Elohim did test Abraham”. After the experiences with the people of Sodom, after the sending away of Hagar and Ishmael and after the covenant with the Philistines – there arose a need for this awesome trial.
The story of the ?qedah, which is so extremely terse, is surely immense and exalted, but also very difficult to deal with. The majority of Biblical commentators preferred to ignore and not to contend with it. But in our days, the meaning of the Binding is so palpable, that there is an existential need to understand it anew. [surplus 1]
The trial of the ?qedah, namely the very agreement to yield the natural heir opens, in principle, the possibility of seeking an alternative heir to Abraham, not necessarily on a biological basis. Already before, at the covenant of divisions (Brit ben haBetarim), Abraham conceived of the possibility that the steward of his house, Eli’ezer of Dammeseq, will inherit him (Gen. 15:2-3). But, as noted, in the course of preparations for the ?qedah-Binding, Abraham became “bound” in a nexus of connections to those who would beget neighboring peoples: to his nephew were born sons-grandsons who would develop into the ?mmonites and Moabites (in today’s terms: Jordanian Arabs), he had a biological son (from Hagar) from whom would issue twelve princes (the Arabs in general), and he had just made a covenant, one that came instead of relation by marriage, with the Philistines (or the Palestinians, in today’s terms). The saving of Yi??aq-Isaac at the end of this trial, would give the seniority to him and his sons, but it does not cancel the additional possibilities that became conceivable in the course of this experiment.
Chapter 22 – The ?qedah:
The story of the ?qedah – the Binding of Isaac-Yi??aq is the eternal story of the Jews. In the course of history it became evident that it was this terrible tale that became a source of pride and strength for the Jewish soul [surplus 2]
“And it came to pass after these things”
The verse “And it came to pass after these things….” relates apparently to immediate occurrences, in the near domain of the protagonists. There are three chapters that are near the Act of the ?qedah: 1) a chapter about the arrival of Abraham and Sarah to Gerar and Abraham’s self-presentation as Sarah’s brother, 2) a chapter about the birth of Isaac/Yi??aq and the sending away of Ishmael/Yishma’el, and 3) a chapter about the covenant with Avimelekh.
As we saw, none of these chapters presents Abraham in a very positive manner. He had no confidence, in himself or in the divine promises; he was forced to get entangled in lies; instead of waiting patiently to the day he would inherit the land he made a covenant with the people of the land he is supposed to inherit; and he betrayed his firstborn son – albeit with divine sanction – and drove him out of his house, which could cost the son his life.
The experience/trial of the ?qedah can definitely be explained as an attempt to atone for any of these things, in which Abraham failed. He was afraid that Avimelekh would kill him because of his wife – and was sent to kill his own son, his bone and his flesh. He did not rely on the Lord’s promise that the land would be his for inheritance – and was sent to tour the land, to an unknown destination. He sent his firstborn from home away to the wasteland – and experienced the sacrifice of his younger son “On one of the mountains”.
Yet “And it came to pass after these things”, is also after all that was told till here, from the creation of the world to the circumcision of Abraham and the covenant with him.
Moreover, the words “and it came to pass after these things” alludes – as we try to show for all the chapters – also to the future, after all comes to pass.
Abraham and Isaac searched, together, after the place from where will start – in time, “after these things” – the three-day journey.
For Abraham and Isaac had no means to actualize what was drawn through their journey. They were nomads in the land. They still had to wait for other times, to progeny who would acquire sovereignty of the place, who would form a kingdom. They were required to only prepare the settings for those who would follow them. Therefore “Then of the third day Avraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off”. Only David – who conquered the city with Mount Moriah – could have started the actual journey. Accordingly, the end of these three days, which count as three thousand years of history, is calculated to occur in our generation, as we shall still show.
“And God did test Abraham” – veha’Elohim nisa et Avraham
The Hebrew word for “tested” – nisa – has to do with Nes – sign, the setting up of a sign and a model for coming generations, through a drama that touches the most basic human urges and feelings: fear of death, father-son relationship, and submission to God – whatever may be his name.
The one that does the testing is “Elohim”, the name that is given in the first Genesis story – the name of Law and Judgment. Even the tense of the story is past tense, such as in the first sentence of Genesis: “and God/Elohim did test Avraham”, parallel to “Bereshit Elohim/God created”. But also here there is immediately a return to the eternal and prophetic inverted time: “vayomer elav…” – and He would say to him.
In the course of the exceedingly terse account of the ?qedah – an account without a single superfluous word, but on the contrary: there is created the feeling that there is something lacking in the account, that it is given merely by allusions, through codes of extreme brevity – the name Elohim appears five times and the name of YHWH five times. In the language of the Qabbalah – five judgments and five mercies, which together comprise “a whole countenance” (Par?uf Shalem) of epiphany, of the revelation of “YHWH Elohim”.
And indeed, Judgment and Mercy are intertwined in this story all mixed up. It is likely that even Abraham – the one who was being tested – was unable to separate between them. He could not figure out the real intention, the essence of the test.
Abraham had already been required in the past to give up on his fatherly feelings, in the course of the sending away of Ishmael. Whatever the trial at Moriah might be, it is undoubtedly also connected with the sending of Ishmael. Abraham gave up on Ishmael/Yishma’el, and now he was called to give up on Isaac/Yi??aq, “to bring him up in offering”.
“Take now thy Son”. The relationship of Father and Child is the most basic there are in the psyche. In the psyche of each of us there dwell figures of The Father and The Mother (and woo to those who lack them, or that these figures inside them are problematic, and torment the other parts of the psyche). The image of the parent in the psyche is the first image that we carry with us, along with its beliefs, and these largely determine our identities (be it benign or tormented). In the psyche of each one of us there is also engraved the figure of the Child/Son. Also in common psychological schemes – and especially in “Transactional Analysis (TA) – there is a representation of figures of “Parent” (Father) and “Child” (Son) in the psyche, and the need for an additional and connecting figure – the “Adult”. In schools that appreciate creativity and also built-in in Christianity, there is an emphasis upon childhood and a sense of “The Miraculous Child”. [surplus 3]
“Thy only son… whom thou lovest”.
This is actually the only sentence in the scriptures that attribute love to Abraham. Even though the Qabbalah regards Abraham as personifying the side/principle of ?esed – Love and Mercy – he does not appear in the scriptures as a great lover. It is actually Yi??aq/Isaac – who is regarded in the Qabbalah as representing the side/principle of valor and Judgement – he loved his wife so much, that he was comforted with her from his mother’s death. And half of the life story of Jacob – the representative of the Sefirah of Tif’eret – is determined by his love to Ra?el/Rachel.
The sages maintain: “The Patriarchs are the Merkavah” (assembly/ chariot), namely, they serve as a system assembled or built from different sides or components with different character, that only with the help of this assembly/vehicle is it possible to overcome the perennial conflict that characterizes the relation among two sides.
According to the Book of Zohar, Abraham is (as noted) the representative of the side of ?esed and Love (the Right side), and Yi??aq/Isaac – the side of rigor (the Left side). (Jacob would come later representing the mediation between these two – the Middle Pillar – Tif’eret). But in the Act of the ?qedah, it seems that the two sides switch the roles between them: Abraham discovers the aspect of Rigor-Gevurah within Mercy-?esed, and overcomes even his natural love (what loving father would sacrifice his own son?), whereas Yi??aq/Isaac discovers the aspect of Mercy-?esed in Rigor-Gevurah (what hero would agree to be tied up and slaughtered without resistance?) and agrees to take the greatest risk, even from his compassion over his father.
In the ?qedah there is thus formed the connection, which allows the formation of a true Merkavah. There forms the connection between the two lines, which might have been parallel lines that never meet.
“Thy only son Yi??aq”. Almost none of the traditional commentator has paid attention to the fact that the name of the protagonist was determined beforehand by God (17:19), and that thereby there was alluded a deep significance to the story of the ?qedah. [surplus 4]
“And get thee…” – ve’Lekh-Lekha. The story of Abraham started with the words “Get thee out – Lekh-Lekha – of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, to the land that I will show thee” (12:1). After all the things recounted in the two parashot, after ten trials, there comes again the command: “Take now thy son, thy only son, Yi??aq, whom thou lovest and get thee – Lekh-Lekha – into the land of Moriah” (22:2). It is exactly the same words that specify the beginning of the journey and its peak. The first trial was to disengage from the intimate connection that existed and was still present: “get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house”. Now, in the parashah with which we are dealing, the test is to disengage from the most intimate family connection with what is and shall be. This is a giving up of the immortality afforded by nature,[3] which is granted by procreation, in order to cling to the primary cause, to the revelation to his offspring of HaWaYaH-Being as parent. In that state of consciousness, from the space of conscious Being, it is possible to recognize that our spiritual essence derives not from the order of nature, but from our being “Sons-of-YaH”.
“To the Land of Moriah”- Mori-YaH (YaH is my Teacher). This is the land of the hidden deity. YH – ?? – the first two letters of the Name of YHWH, are considered as signifying the three supernal, hidden, Sefirot: the top “barb” of the Y’od (kutso shel Yod) signifies the Sefirah of Keter (Crown); the Y’od (?) signifies the Sefirah of ?okhmah (Wisdom); and the first H’e (?), the higher one, signifies the Sefirah of Binah (Understanding). This even though the root of the word Moriah has to do with Instruction – hora’ah – and Vision – re’iyah, these have still to become revealed. The question that is raised is how to turn the hidden into the revealed – until “as it is said to this day, “In the mount the Lord-YHWH will appear”.[4]
Mount Moriah is the place where the divinity – YaH – gives a visual teaching. The content of the lessen – the play – will become apparent in the sequel of the Parashah. Until its ending in the verse: “In this mount the Lord will appear” (22:14). We shall learn what the land of Moriah and its mountain were destined for. Thus the commend: “get thee into the land of Moria…. and there bring him up – veha’?lehu – for ascent/offering – ?lah” means an act of Pilgrimage – ?liyah laRegel – literally “festive Ascent”.
The mountain chosen at the Land of moriah is near the Gi?on spring, the source of water, and thus of life, to the “city of Shalem” (?r shalem) – the domicile of “Malki-?edeq, king of shalem” and “priest of the most high God” (El-?lyon) – the city that would eventually become the city of david and the Temple of Solomon. The Gi?on appears in the second creation story as one of the four rivers that issue from the river that goes out of ?den (even though it is told that “it encompasses the whole land of Kush”). Abraham, with his two young men and Yi??aq went for three days looking for the place that the Lord has chosen. They joined thereby the quest of all humankind,
It is fair to claim that this extremely terse story contains a repetition of the two stories of creation, that of the creation and that of the Garden of ?den, as well as the story of humankind and the story of Abraham until then.
The very binding of Yi??aq to the altar on mount Moriah for a surgery-like operation parallels the sleep that the Lord God caused to fall upon Adam, in order to “saw off” from his side a mate (Gen. 2:21), so that she could be placed in front of him and build a whole interpersonal consciousness. According to the tradition, all these events – the formation of Adam and his mate – took place on the same hill – Mount Moriah. Therefore the perennial apocalyptic human dream – parallel to the dream of the return to Eden, concerns the return to the site at which Adam was formed.
According to the Zohar, Mount Moriah was Abraham’s destination even before he knew his God. He searched for the world’s central point, held by the spiritual power that controls all the directions (see appendix 3-B), because from that point was the world founded and on this spot was Adam was formed. When setting on his journey, Abraham still did not know the place, but the experiences would bring him to his destination. There he would find the strongest and most significant force in the world and would have to contend with it. For this end he would have to sacrifice all his natural-human inclinations, including the love of a father to his son.
“Get thee to the Land of Moriah and offer him there”. “Moriah” has several meanings – it can mean Awe – Mora, it can mean Instruction or Instructor – Moreh, and can mean special sight – Mar’eh – and all these meanings have been experienced there at the ?qedah. Moreover, the whole command contains a major ambiguity that Abraham could not unravel.
Ve’ha’?lehu sham l’?lah: “And offer him there as Burnt Offering” or “raise him Up there as an offering”?
At first it seemed that at last the revelation that Abraham had yearned for at last arrived. The words of the first revelation sounded again – Lekh Lekha. In the very same language that God addressed him with promises years ago. The beloved son of the promise is named in sweet words by God. But then, all of a sudden, fell the terrible blow. What should Abraham do with “your son, your only son Yi??aq whom thou lovest”? Apparently “and offer him as burnt offering”.
The willingness of Abraham is of the same kind as that of Rabbi Akiva who in the torment of his deadly tortures was glad for having the opportunity of fulfilling the commandment of Qiddush haShem (the giving up of one’s soul completely, “for the sanctification of God’s Name”).
But Abraham was not commanded to slaughter his son but to raise him up. “Ha’?la’ah le?lah” can well be raising along the (fifth dimensional) spiritual axis of Nefesh – Ru’a ?- Neshamah – ?aya – Ye?idah. He was like the prophet Jonah, who prophesied in the exact words God commanded him (Jonah 3:2): “Another forty days, and Ninve shall be overturned” (?d arb?’im yom v’Ninveh ne’hepakhet). He brought its citizens to repent and did not realize that it was not through physical destruction, but through the rectification of the spirit, that the city was indeed overturned.
It is only from the end of the story that we can learn that Abraham did not understand what he was precisely asked/commanded. Abraham was commanded, literally “Ve’ha’alehu sham le’?lah”, which literally means “raise him up as ?lah” – as (she – the soul) who ascends; and Yi??aq/Isaac would indeed ascend up and up – but in the steps of the soul.
But apparently without the terrible seriousness, without the mortal danger and the agreement to kill and to be killed, there may not occur the raising of the Animal Soul – nefesh haBehemit – the natural selfish and territorial soul, and its transmutation to the spirit of the completed man. This accords with the verse of Ecclesiastes (3:21): “Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upwards, and the spirit of the beast goes downward to the earth”. In terms of the Kabbalah (which does not see it as a question but as a statement), this has to do with the transformation of the Son – BeN (recall that BeN = 52, same as Behemah – beast, and corresponding with the expanded Name of YHWH – Yod Hh Ww Hh) into an Adult – AdaM (recalling that AdaM = MaH = 45, corresponding with Name of YHWH with the expansion of Yod He Waw He), that only through their union it is possible to attain the formation of the whole Ben-Adam (“Son of Man”).
Abraham did not understand also the meaning of the word le’?lah that is formed from the meaning of getting bound to the ?l – “the Yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven” (?l Malkhut Shamayim), in the yoke of the heavenly vehicle/assembly – the Merkavah – that ascends and descends between earth and heaven. And in our generation, in the Zionist Israel, we are supposed to know the command of ?liyah – ascent – without animal sacrifices, but we also do not comprehend the spiritual ?liyah-Ascent that is needed for the future.
“And the Elohim tested Abraham” – and the Role of Yi??aq in the ?qedah:
Not just the Torah, but also many commentators have extolled the greatness of Abraham in that trial. But only few have considered the trial of Yi??aq/Isaac. For in truth there were two main actors in this plot: Abraham and Yi??aq/Isaac.
Had Isaac been a small child, it would be justified not to dwell on his part. Indeed, from the face of the text it might be claimed that he was a child, so small and light that the old Abraham could lift him and place him upon the altar. But this is contradicted by the narrative that states implicitly that Isaac was stronger than Abraham as he had to carry the wood on his back up the hill. “And Avraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Yi??aq his son” (Gen. 22:6). This means that Isaac/Yi??aq was a strong youth, and thus it would have been difficult to force him into something. He could have put a stop to the trial at any moment, even at the course of the binding, if he would have wanted to. His participation through the whole procedure must have been a conscious one.
The Midrash (Yalkut Shim’oni, vayera, 22) claims that Yi??aq asked his father to tie him down, so that the basic instinct of the will to live would not rise and spoil the experiment. Midrash Genesis Raba[5] goes further, and asserts that Yi??aq was thirty-seven years old then (and Abraham thus 137 years old),[6] namely that the ?qedah occurred close to the death of Sarah, which is mentioned following it, and that the death of Sarah was caused by the shock from hearing about the ?qedah. There is a certain confirmation to this in that after parashat ha’?qedah the life of Sarah is being summed up, and that Abraham – the father – was required to handle the matchmaking for Yi??aq, and he sent Eli’ezer Haran. Another clue is implied in the sacrifice of the ram – Ayil – instead of Yi??aq. The gematria for AYiL (41) is the same as for EM – Mother.
At any rate, we are trying here to examine the story of the ?qedah from the point of view of Yi??aq:
Yi??aq was the preferred heir, the pampered son of the first lady. He was destined to inherit – without any effort of his own – the exclusive world rights of representing the One God for all humankind. The valor of Yi??aq in the course of the ?qedah is in his very agreement to give up on these rights, or, at least, to ask himself whether he is really interested in them. Moreover: this is the great opportunity for him to try and test, by himself, whether this God answers his pondering and is fit to be his God whom he represents, and whether he himself is of any interest to the universal divinity, or whether he was chosen only for functional reasons, being the son of Abraham.
Namely: Yi??aq chose willingly to take part in the ?qedah, and while the action of “And God did try Abraham” was continuing, Yi??aq did test YHWH by choice. Namely, he chose the complete valor – Gevurah – and when the decisive moment came, and his father was proceeding to do that which he understood from the divine command that he must do, Yi??aq was able to see in his own eyes the divine intervention for his sake. From here on, the salvation of YHWH was no longer a rumor from his fathers, but the experience of his life and its essence. He could now observe his father (who in this act lost his central role in the guidance of future history ande transferred it to him), and his surroundings, all in the a –temporal comprehensive vision of was-is-will-be (which we’ll explain presently) – and laugh.
For the creator gave to Yi??aq the examining tool already before he was born: He gave him the name Yi??aq, and thereby He gave him a role: a role of laughter and play (Mis?ak, related word to Yi??aq) the place for the test was at Mount Moriah, in the course of the ?qedah. There, Yi??aq had to play according to the rules laid by his father: not to resist, allowing his father to continue the story of his complex relationship with his God, but also to create independently by himself – through humor – a distinct and genuine relationship with the Master of the Universe, and Yi??aq stood the test.
After the ?qedah was accomplished, Abraham and Isaac-Yi??aq no longer returned together, so that in effect Yi??aq lost – through the ?qedah – both his father and his mother, but had gained an additional, divine, soul from the Master of the Universe Himself, who gave him a new life and an extra immortal soul. The ?qedah was therefore necessary so that from now on his hope would not be fixed on his natural father, who was ready to slaughter him, but from “his father in heaven”.
In the relationship of father and son there can occur many emotional complexes. There are precedents for killing of the father by his sons, and also to the killing of offspring and their sacrifice by their fathers. It would be facile to explain away “The Mysteries if the ?qedah” as a part and parcel of the rituals which were prevalent then in Kena’an/Canaan, such as the sacrifice to the Molekh.
But the sacrifice to the Molekh was considered in the Biblical conception, as one of the most heinous abominations, that whoever committed it should be executed by stoning.
Our exegesis of the parashah dwells upon its name – vayera. There is in the Torah another parashah with a close name – re’eh – in which there are given very severe judgments against human sacrifices: “Take heed to thyself… that thou inquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? Even so will I do likewise. Thou shalt not do to the Lord/YHWH thy God; for every abomination to the Lord/YHWH, which He hates, have they done to their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods” (Deuteronomy 12:3-31).
Yifta?– who hastily made a vow “Whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of ‘Ammon, shall surely be the Lord’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering” (Judges 11:31) – was held in scorn and pity.
So assuming that this is the a-priori attitude of the Torah to human sacrifices – it should be assumed that the conclusion of the drama is embedded in it from the beginning: the moral of the ?qedat Yi??aq – the Binding of Isaac – is in its happy ending and the implication from it on the annulment of human sacrifices from there onward.
Moreover: we have already claimed that Yi??aq/Isaac was aware about the ?qedah, and chose to take a part in it – not as the object, the one being tried, but as the actor, the one who puts his God on trial.
It can be claimed, by the same token, that Yi??aq/Isaac would have rather chosen death, than to worship a god who demands human sacrifices. Only a divine plan that its basic rules include an angel who sends his hand to stop the knife – would allow him to identify with it. Yi??aq/Isaac – according to this conception – exhibits the perspective of Gevurah (valor/judgement), through the very passivity which he assumes.
Only the role of Abraham remains hazy, and in light of this perspective, he looks a bit mocked, as Yifta?. [surplus 5]
The participants were going to “The Land of Moriah” – the land of the heavenly Moreh/teacher: Malki-?edek/ Melkisedec priest of the most high God – to “one of the mountains which I will show thee”. The Temple Mount is not the highest mount in the Jerusalem area, on the contrary – it is surrounded by higher mounts, encircle it and form together with it a kind of an amphitheatre. This image has a special significance: the Temple Mount serves as the stage for that amphitheatre.
“Then on the third day Avraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off.” [Surplus 6]
The third day of the journey to the land of Moriah parallels the third day of the works of Genesis. In Abraham starts the third millennium of the six thousand years of This world/ ?lam haZeh. On the Third Day of Genesis were uttered to divine utterances and two important creations were made (or, in light of the introduction, would be made, as translated hence): 1) The appearance of the Earth – “And God would say, let the waters under the heaven be gathered together to one place, and let the dry land appear, and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth” (Gen. 1:9-10). 2) The creation of plants – “And God would say, Let the earth bring forth grass, herb yielding seed and fruit tree yielding fruit after its kind whose seed is in itself, upon the earth; and so it was. And the earth would bring forth grass, herb yielding seed after its kind, and tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself: and God would see that it was good” (Gen. 1:13). At the dawn of the Third Millennium, on the third day of the journey of Abraham to the Land (Hebrew Ere?, the same as “Earth”) of the Moriah there was revealed to him from afar the Sacred Place (Maqom) of the Earth, and in the sequel (as we shall show) the father and son together planted the Tree of Life therein.
The Third Day did not end with this, but on the contrary: there the father and son, together, fulfilled the divine Will, as well as they understood it, and passed the two stages. The first is the revelation (theophany) of the Sacred Place – Maqom – for which Abraham toiled for decades, since he was commanded “Lekh-Lekha – Go thee, … to the land/Eretz which I will show thee”. The Midrash sees the rock at Moount Moriah as the first point where the dry land appeared in the Acts of Creation (and we have shown that, in fact, the center point of the world’s continents is in the Land of Israel). Now the precise spot is going to be determined unequivocally “And Abraham would call the name of the Maqom/Holy Place YHWH/the Lord will See”. Symbolically, water corresponds to the emotions, and especially Love, the side of Mercy/ ?esed represented usually by Abraham. But in the ?qedah he has to reveal in his soul the point that is dry from any moisture of emotion, “and let the dry land appear”, the place for the rule of the Dinim/Judgements, and to sacrifice his only son.
The external, geographical, point which Abraham was seeking al his days also parallels the inner point of Judgment and complete obedience in his soul. But the rectification of the (waste-land, dried) earth is in growing the plants “and no plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet grown; for the Lord God/YHWH Elohim had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not yet man/Adam to till the ground/Adamah” (Gen. 2:5). It was (would be) at that Sacred Place that Abraham (as priest, the Man of ?esed that is compared to Water) and Yi??aq/Isaac (as sacrifice, from the side of Judgement that is compared to Fire) were required to perform the holy ritual, which would bring to the fall of the Rain (from “the Water above the Heavens”) and to the growth of “The plant of the field” with the work of “man/Adam to till the ground/Adamah”.
In the course of the ?qedah Abraham and Yi??aq placed and planted together – face-to-face – the Tree of Life.
The Midrash tells that the wood that Abraham broke up early in the morning were from the trunks of the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge. These would have been, then, pieces of dead wood. But the flame that would hold to them would give in them vitality, even if for a brief moment.
Abraham thus took the fire and the knife (ma’akhelet, from ekhol – “eat”), and the wood pieces were placed on Isaac’s back, and there they were on the way of the Tree of Life. The angel who stands at the gate of the Garden of Eden and blocks the entrance since the time of the Expulsion from there, also stopped the hand of Abraham – but it did not block the vision of Yi??aq.
“Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes and saw the place (Maqom) afar off”
Here comes the major motif of Parashat vaYera to join the story of the ?qedah. What did Abraham see there? According to the Midrash (Bereshit Raba, 52:a-b), Abraham “saw a cloud bound to the mountain” – and Yi??aq saw that cloud as well. Actually, this is a very realistic notion, because the Temple Mount itself is lower than the mounts around it, and cannot be seen from afar, but “a cloud bound/tied to the mountain” can indeed be seen from afar. But what kind of a cloud is this and what kind of vision from afar is it? What is discussed, I submit, is also a vision in another dimension – that of time. Here Abraham was granted some of that miraculous vision that we shall elaborate upon in connection to Yi??aq. He saw the signs of the the Temples that for him were in the far future, but for us were already in the past. From these Temples there arose a cloud of smoke from the exterior altar, but also from their interior as the testimony of the divine cloud of Glory about the divine dwelling.
It is written at the conclusion of the Book of Exodus that, right after the dedication of the desert Tabernacle: “Then the cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle. And Moshe was not able to enter the Tent of Meeting, because the cloud rested on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. And when the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the children of Yisra’el went onward in all their journeys. But if the cloud were not taken up, they journeyed not till the day that it was taken up. For the cloud of the Lord was upon the tabernacle by day, and fire was on it by night, in the sight of all the house of Yisra’el, throughout all their journeys” (Exodus 40:35-38). And likewise happened on the dedication of the Temple of Solomon: “And it came to pass, when the priests were come out of the holy place, that the cloud filled the house of the Lord, so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord had filled the house of the Lord” (I Kings 8:10-12). The cloud that is bound to the Temple is the “Kavod” (Glory) – the epiphany of what a mortal person may perceive in the divinity, which is also similar to the pillar of cloud during the Exodus (13:21-22; 14:19) and the cloud that descended upon Mount ?orev at the giving of the Torah (19:16).
Yet all these are not the ultimate intention of this clue, because the clouds of glory of the (for us) past temples were not really “bound to the Mountain”. But here, in the ?qedah – literally “Binding” – there is hinted the case of the future temple and the cloud that is tied and bound to it permanently, which the prophet told about: “And the Lord will create upon every establishment place of Mount ?iyyon and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shinning of a flaming fire by night, for upon all the glory shall there be a canopy” (Isaiah 4:5). In our times, this is already a practical possibility, and the present technical manner to make such a show over the Temple Mount is to form a transparent envelope that hovers over the Temple Mount and tied to the mountain by strings (whether from pillars of still, like the new bridge in the entrance to Jerusalem, or buoyed by a giant blimp), which would contain a cloud that allows a holographic projection within the cloud. In my opinion, both Ezekiel’s vision of the Chariot (Merkavah) and his Temple vision are shows within such a cloud, and this is the way to realize the vision of the Temple in our times.[7]
Abraham did not actually see more than a cloud in the distance, but in the sequel we shall see how Yi??aq had a close look at the cloud of glory bound to the mountain.
“And Avraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Yi??aq his son”. The Midrash called Yalqut Shim’ony for Genesis 22 brings an amazing saying about this verse: “And Avraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Yi??aq his son – like one who takes his cross over his shoulder”. It is as if the midrash hints at the parallel ,which is the established view in Christianity (where Isaac is seen as the “Type”, prefiguring Jesus) between the binding of Isaac and the crucifixion of Jesus. In our interpretation the parallel is more complete: “Yi??aq” has to do with ??oq – Laughter, as we shall soon show, and Yeshu’? (Jesus) has to do with Sha’?shu’? – Ecstatic Rapture.
“And they went both of them together” – this is the secret of the difference between the story of the ?qedah and pagan myths of father sacrificing his son.[8]
And they came to the Holy Place (Maqom) God had told him of
We have already mentioned above the pattern of the assembly/Merkavah of the Patriarchs, which is the interior of the divine “Chariot”/throne described by the prophet Ezekiel.[9] There are four living beings that comprise the “Chariot/Assembly of Ezekiel’s Vision: 1) the Lion – representing the side of Mercy and Abraham; 2) The Bull (an animal that is to be sacrificed at the Temple) – representing the side of Judgment/Din and Yi??aq; 3) the Eagle – the Splendour/Tif’eret and apparently Jacob/Israel; 4) The Man (the speaking creature), representing the Kingship/Malkhut and David – the poet-king, who completed the Merkavah/Assembly and took upon himself to procure the earthly site for the decent of the Chariot/Merkabvah – the site of the Temple first fixed by Yi??aq and Abraham.
According to the legends of the Sages, the Temple sacrifices were eaten by “A fire formed like a Lion” (Yoma, 21b). In the heavenly temple, the high priest who makes the sacrifices is the archangel Mikha’el/Michael (?agigah 12b). The archangel Michael is also associated with the side of Mercy, and therefore along with Abraham, and both are identified with the priesthood, and the priests were serving the sacrificing in the temple. In the act of the ?qedah, Abraham thus marks the holy place – Ha’Maqom – where the sacrifices would later be performed.
According to our research (see appendix on Solomon’s temples), King Solomon, who acted upon the legacy of Abraham, has built four temples/altars in Jerusalem – to YHWH, to His Asherah, to Milkom-Molekh and to Kemosh/?emosh. If we add the initial letters of the deities of the different temples of Solomon:
YHWH
ASherah- AShtoret (the holy letter Shin, of the Name Shaday
Milkom-Molekh
?emosh
The name thereby derived is “Yisma?” – “will rejoice” – which has the same meaning as Yi??aq – “will laugh” (meaning: this is the place/Maqom of Yi??aq – the place of the ?qedah); and in a different letter-order – MaShY’a?-Messiah! [surplus 7]
“And Avraham built an altar there”: The building of the altar and the setting of the wood in an appropriate system constituted the building of a “mini-temple” – Mikdash Me’?t: a seed for the building of the Temple in the future. What did the altar look like? What gave form to the drama?
Yi??aq carried the wood on his back, but not the stones of the altar. It is therefore evident that the altar was built “from the stones of the Maqom/Place”, as was built by Jacob/Ya’?qov (Gen 28:11), and also Elijah/Eliyahu (I Kings 18:31-32). Again, it must have been Yi??aq/Isaac, and not the aging father, who picked the stones at the Temple Mount and perhaps even hewed them, carried them and set them in place – and then Abraham built with them the altar.
Counting on the basic sacred forms in the religion of Yi??aq and the religion of Yishma’?l – it is easy to assume that also the altar upon which Isaac/Yi??aq was sacrificed was built out of twelve stones, like the altar of the Lord/YHWH that Elijah renovated at Mount Karmel (Carmel; I Kings 18:31), and that it was in the form of a cube – like the Holy of holies that would be eventually constructed at the very same site, like the Ka’?ba at Mecca, which the Qur’an attributes its building to Abraham, like the overall outline of the Temple of Solomon (which was all within a cube of one hundred by one hundred by one hundred cubits), like the cubes of the phylacteries (the sages assume that even God wears phylacteries – Talmud Bavli, Berakhot 6a).
The erection of the cubical altar made of twelve stones at Mount Moriah was the fixing of the Tefilin/phylacteries through which the Holy One becomes tied to the designated land, the known land. This is “The Knowledge of the Earth” – yedi’?t ha’Are? – of God, according to the secret of “And the Adam knew ?avah his wife”. The building of the altar is the setting of the foundation stones of the entire Temple System.)
“Vaya’?rokh – and laid the wood in order”. (The Hebrew word for laying the wood in order is ?rokh, a word related to ?rekh – value. The same verb is used for “editing” – which is laying the text (or movie shots) together in a good order that brings out their inherent value. A related word is ma’?rekhet – system, the assembly of parts not haphazardly but to allow a result, a value added from the particular assembly.)
Nowadays, “Systems Theory” serves as basis for our whole technological culture. But already in the times of Abraham, there was a tremendous importance to ?rikhah – editing – through intended ordering, namely for forming a ma’?rekhet – system. Also in the discussions of our sages of blessed memory, there is much importance to the concept of ma’?rakhah in the very context in which it appears in this parashah – the ma’?rakhah/system of rituals at the Temple, and especially the setting of the wood upon the altar.
A midrash of the sages, that the woods that Abraham was setting in order were of the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge, thus carries many meanings. The problem of how to approach these enchanted trees, what is the value of the parts that, set together, comprise the living ensemble of “Trees of Knowledge”, is actually the very first problem which Adam/ humankind encountered right from the Beginning (Bereshit) the system f the Trees of the Garden of Eden. The conundrum is the evaluation (ha’?rakhah) – from which Tree to eat and from which not, and also (as we showed the opinion of Mequbalim) the question of when is it advisable to taste of the Tree of Knowledge. If Adam/humankind would have waited three “hours”, until the entry of the Shabbat, he (we) could eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge in purity/Toharah. Compared with the impatience of the first Adam, Abraham was trained for patience – and the three-day journey to Mount Moriyyah becomes restitution for the lost three hours of Adam. [surplus 8]
“and bound Yi??aq his son, and laid him on the altar above the wood”. According to Yalkut Shim’oni, “what is ‘above’? This instructs that he made the altar aligned towards the Throne of Glory”. And the Midrash adds: “the eyes of Abraham upon the eyes of Yi??aq and the eyes of Yi??aq towards the highest heaven”.
Vya’?qod: The original Hebrew word for “he (would) bound” is “Vya’?qod”. This is the first, and the major, instance where the scriptures use the concept of ?qedah. The other instance will be about the sheep of Jacob being ?qudim, Nequdim uBrudim – “streaked, speckled and grizzled” (Gen. 31:12). And even though the simple translation sees the Aqudim as having a certain skin appearance, we shall refer them also to the root ?’Q’D’ – of binding.
The ?qedah/Binding is primarily the binding of the individual/ya?id – “your only son (ye?idkha)”. But we have seen that there already entered this act a whole set-up of connections and bonds of the Children of Yi??aq: with those of Yishma’el /Ishmael (who also claim inheritance from Abraham), with those of the daughters of Lot (from whom issued the grandmother of King David, the founder and builder of Jerusalem) and of Pleshet (Palestine, those who made a covenant with Abraham through their king Abimelekh), and the “chariot” (Merkavah/assembly) formed at this occasion from the Fathers and carries upon itself throughout history also this load. It is thus possible to say that the special vision that Yi??aq/Isaac gained upon the altar, the very special sight of “vayera”, is the seeing of the Holy/Whole that includes the restoration for the whole system, a “Yir’u-Shalem” (seeing holistically) of the whole Creative-Healing (Bri’ah-Bri’ut) ensemble.
“Mima’?l la??im – Upon/Above the Wood”. Here starts the motif of the Ascent of Yi??aq/Isaac. Just as the timbers are placed over the altar, Yi??aq/Isaac is tied and bound over the timbers. The formation of fire that arose from the cuts of the Tree of Life could generate the dynamic-energetic pattern of the Tree of Life, upon which the soul of Yi??aq/Isaac would rise upward and upward (much like the angel rose to heaven from the altar in the epiphany to Samson’s parents – Judges 13:20).
According to Rashi (the leading Torah commentator): “When (Yi??aq) was bound upon the altar and his father wanted to slaughter him, at that moment the skies opened to him (and the ministering angels were looking and were crying and their tears fell down upon his eyes, and therefore his eyesight got dimmed).
The midrashim[10] tell that by the power of the Primordial Light of Genesis that was created on the First Day (before the sun and moon were created) it was possible to observe from one end of the world to the next (namely observe a four- or even five-dimensional sight), and this light was hidden (because of the transgressors) and is kept for the virtuous. To the extent that Yi??aq could observe with this light, he could have observed everything that was-is-will be happening from the formation of Adam till the end of the sixth millennium, and thereby find that his memory has not been erased. [surplus 9]
“And Avraham stretched out his hand, and took the knife to slaughter his son”: According to Yalqut shim’oni: “Rabbi hudah says, when the knife reached his throat, the over soul (Neshamah) of Yi??aq flew up and left him”, that is, flew up to heaven. From the testimonies of contemporaries who experienced a clinical death and were saved, or who faced a mortal danger, we learn that the emotional intensity changes completely during those moments. The light changes, and a whole life course is replayed in the brain of the dying person.
The glint upon the polished knife, lifted over the throat of Yi??aq, comes reflected to him from all sides, as a conductor’s baton over an astounding choir of all the angels of heaven, who maintain the Song of the Entire Creation. He is now (in the language of the ARI’zl) within the lofty world called “?lam ha’ ?qudim” and from there pass into “the skull of Adam Qadmon” – at the source of all the lights – observing the sparks of the neuron-like lifelines, of himself and of all creatures, acting as the processes of thought and development of the “brain” of the whole Creation.
Yi??aq is thus (still) lying on the altar at Mount Moriah, his body tied – ?qud – and his oversoul at ?lam ha’?qudim and he is gazing at the root of all the worlds. He sees the movements of history that would come; he sees the Holy of Holies that would rise up upon the Rock that he is laid on, and also the present Dome of the Rock, with its signs and symbols. He also sees that he and his brother Yishma’el – are one figure, and all the separation attempts that his father and mother and the lords of history which came later could not severe the connection between them.
According to a midrash (bereshit Raba section B 7), already at the creation God has envisioned the Temple built and destroyed and rebuilt – this vision has to do with the first light with which it is possible to observe from the beginning of the world to its conclusion, and the rebuilding of the Temple is connected to the prophecy “arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee” (Isaiah 60:1). The miraculous vision is of Yi??aq-Isaac who also observed and envisioned the Temple “built and destroyed and rebuilt”, the two temples that were built and destroyed and the ultimate Temple, which will be sustained. According to Rashi and the Tosafot, “the future temple that we anticipate to be built and perfected will be revealed and come from the skies”.[11] This implies that Yi??aq-Isaac who observes the cloud and sees how the future heavenly temple of light (which we shall presently describe). If so, then evidently our father Yi??aq-Isaac who was bound upon the Foundation Stone (Even haShetiyah) of the Jerusalem Temple watching the passages of history over the Temple Mount, could not help but see the shrine of the Dome of the Rock, which has been standing there, as well known, for over thirteen centuries.
The golden dome of the Dome o the Rock represents, as written explicitly in a ring of suras (verses) from the Qur’an, the divine Throne of Glory. Yi??aq-Isaac could see us, the contemporary “Israelites”, as his faithful children who are following and manage to get entangled unwittingly, like that ram, and enter his own ?qedah. Yi??aq (whose name literally means “who will laugh”) “has the last laugh” seeing how through the experience of the binding, the ?qedah, Temple Mount (see below) we shall be able to realize the temple that he saw in the vision and to bind through it all of Israel together and all of humankind. The laughter is because we have not realized what lies in front of our eyes and serves as the most famous symbolic structure in Jerusalem – the possibility that the Dome of the Rock is not a stumbling stone but the corner stone of the built House of God and a throne of Glory for the perfected Temple of Light in the skies of Jerusalem, which would shine from within the “cloud tied to the Mount”.
And he laughs.
There is a marked resemblance between the motifs of the decorations of the soffit of the Dome of the Rock and the descriptions of the figures of the godhead in the Idra Zuta (one of the most mystical parts) of the Zohar. The scene of the dome of the Rock can be comprehended as a view of the Garden of Eden that is watered and nurtured from these divine configurations. It is hard to conceive of a more fabulous and apt place for representing “The Earthly Paradise” than the lower part of the Dome of the Rock. Its mosaics represent wondrous vegetation and are among the finest in the world.
But the glory of this shrine – the dome – forms a very sophisticated image of “the Heavenly Paradise”, the magnificent place where, according to the Talmud (Bavly Berakhot 17a): “the righteous sit with their diadems on their heads enjoying the radiance of the Shekhinah (the Divine Presence)”. The figure on the soffit of the dome may be the world’s finest rendering of “The Sacred Wisdom” (Hagia Sophia), as it appeared over the generations to secret societies and circles of esoteric philosophers, of Sufi freemasons[12] and Mequbalim.
The geometrical and numerological codes support this claim. The 32 paths between the 32 figures may represent “The Thirty-two Paths of Wisdom” of Sefer Ye?irah and the Idra Zutra. The figures and the curved spaces between them form a matrix of 160 units – as is the Gematria value of ?elem (??? – the Divine, and full human, image) and of ?? (?? – a Tree).
Yi??aq-Isaac, with the knife on his throat, sees the stone of contention that is likely to develop on the Temple Mount and how the resolution and reconciliation depend on this very stone, and has a great laugh.
Laugh? Could Yi??aq-Isaac really laugh at the ?qedah? He must have felt a dark awe falling on him, worse than that which fell upon his father Abraham at the covenant between the pieces. He could experience, in full consciousness, how his beloved father lifts the knife upon him with the intention of slaughtering him. Can there be anything more frightening than this?
Yet when through an enormous and terrible vision, the soul of Yi??aq was prompted to ascend to heaven via the pattern on the soffit, it could experience the divine reality for itself and to discover that because of his sacrifice his memory would not be erased but on the contrary, that both hhis memory and the Place would become supremely important till the end of days – all that remained was to laugh.
About the Future Torah of Yi??aq
A priori, most people are tied and subjected to their culture, with whatever mistakes and follies it contains. When Yi??aq/Isaac was tied, he was still subject to the religion of his parents, but when he trusted his spirit to the Lord he remained subjected only to the divinity, beyond any grasp.
In the scriptures there are enfolded three kinds of Torah, of Master-Teachings: 1) The Torah of Abraham the Hebrew – Avraham ha’?vri – which is written in the past tense – ?var; 2) The Torah of Yisra’el-Israel which we hold, which is written in a future tense that is inverted into past; and 3) The Torah of Yi??aq, the Future Torah to Come – which is the Torah of the Messiah. This is a Torah that converts past into future and converts “The Fear of Isaac” (Pa?ad Yi??aq) into “The (future) Laughter of Israel”. All the three are the Torah of the divinity who Was, Is and Will Be – HaYaH, HoWeH WeYiHiYeH the triune aspect of the single YHWH.
In various Midrashim there are views expressed concerning future Torah innovations and even about the Torah of the Future. There is, In Isaiah, a verse that received quite startling Midrashim of this type – “Look down from heaven and see; from the habitation of Thy holiness and of Thy Glory… Thou art our father, though Avraham be ignorant of us, and Yisra’el acknowledges us not; thou, O Lord/YHWH art our father, our redeemer; thy name is from everlasting” (Isaiah 63:15-16). The simple meaning is that we cannot trust upon the merit of our fathers but only upon our Father in Heaven. But in fact, only two of the three Fathers are mentioned, and Yi??aq/Isaac is not mentioned at all. In the Talmud (Bavly, Tractate Shabbat 89b Mishnah 2) this verse is interpreted in a manner that designates Yi??aq/Isaac as the sole patriarch for the future nation: “In the future, the Lord will say to Abraham: Your children have sinned to me… and Abraham said: Master of the Universe, let them be obliterated for the sanctification of thy Name…. Then (God) said to Yi??aq: thy children have sinned to me, he said in front (or God): Master of the Universe, are these (only) my children and not yours? … they (the angels) started saying: “Because you (Yi??aq) are our father”. The Hasidic Midrash (Torah Ohr for Parashat vaYe?e) claims, by following this teaching, that in the Time to Come we shall not receive our inspiration and our Torah from Abraham and Ya’?qov/Jacob, but only from Yi??aq – and that the main characteristic of the Torah of Yi??aq has to do with his name, which was given him by the Lord himself, a Torah of Laughter – Tz?ok – and delights in future tense (and which may apparently be taught through the medium of world-wide net games).
This is how “the Alte Rebbe”, the author of the Tanya (founder of ?abad) explains:
“For “Avi” (my father) comes (to tell) about Yi??aq, as it is said “for thou art our Father”, that in the Time of Come (le’?tid la’Vo) it will be said about Yi??aq “Thou art our father”. For Yi??aq is of the language of laughter and delight, as it is said “God has made laughter for me, so that all that hear will laugh – Yi??aq – with me (Gen. 21:6; note that on this occasion Sarah’s laughter is not cynical but with delight), and it is in future (tense) language, that there will be revealed the quality of the superior delight which is above (ta’?nug ha’?lyon), and this arrives through the quality of the discretions (Berurim) below (made by men), the quality of forcing and of transmuting from darkness into light”.
The section above is taken from the discussion of the Alte Rebbe on parahat Toldot. In Parashat va’Ye?e he adds about the same issue:
And the quality of this delight will be revealed specifically in the future… and then will be revealed the quality of the Superior delight (?neg ha’?lyon) which is the quality of infinity, which is the quality of the Seventh Day, a day that is all Shabbat and rest for the ever-living, that is the quality of the revelation of the Superior Delight, which, as is known, is made of the discernments made below during the six thousand years.
The concepts of the Qabbalah connect Yi??aq to the Torah of the future in yet another way as well. Yi??aq/Isaac is the tied son – ha’Ben ha’Ne’?qad – namely, the one who first reaches the regime of ?lam ha’?qudim:
According to the teachings of the ARI’zl, after the Infinite contracted, there formed a spherical void space around the point of contraction, which is “The Skull of the Primordial Adam” (Gulgolet Adam Qadmon). From thence there came lights, and were gathered in a vessel that ranges from the mouth of this Primordial Adam and to his navel. This domain is called ?lam ha’?qudim, and in it there are the roots of all the worlds that would be formed, and there formed the letters of the divine utterances, which issue from the mouth of the Primordial Adam and generate (in Hebrew, me?olelot, meaning also “dance”) heaven and earth. This is a world where all is held simultaneously (in other words, a “super-hologram” or “Block Universe”, or “multi-dimensional hyperspace”), in which are included together what Was, Is and Will Be. According to the Mequbal RaM?aL (in “The 138 Gates of Wisdom”, gate 49) “the regime of ?qudim” (hanhagat ?lam ha’?qudim) is that of the seventh millennium.
Repair of Qayin and Hevel by the legacy of Yi??aq and Yishma’el
Two humans: Qayin/Cain – the inheritor of matter, and Hevel/Ebel – the inheritor of spirit/wind – Ru’a? – have fought over the inheritance onto death. The war over inheritance of the children of Abraham was fought indirectly, through the intervention of the mothers. Sarah demanded the whole estate for her son, Yi??aq/Isaac. But God has made a redress beforehand, and since the birth of Ishmael has separated the estates to two and contracted the estate on which Sarah would insist – to merely the Land of Kena’an, which Abraham had marked and measured through his journeys.
In the covenant (Brit bein haBetarim) Avram was promised an enormous estate: “To thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Mitzrayim/Egypt to the great river, the river Perat/Euphrates” (15:18), whereas after the birth of Yishma’el/Ishmael when Abraham was called to change his name and circumcise, God promised him only “And I will give to thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land in which thou dost sojourn, all the land of Kena’an” (17:8).
In order to clarify the difference between the two inheritances, the scriptures add with the sending away of Yishma’el: “for in Yi??aq shall thy seed be called” (21:13). In the term – to thee and to thy seed – the intention is to Yi??aq. But also of Yishma’el “will I make a nation, because he is thy seed” (21:13). Not for thee, not in one mind as thee, not your spiritual heir, just “thy seed”, plainly. What was said in the beginning of the process, at the first covenant, concerning certain future heirs who were not yet born – is now related to Yishma’el.
And indeed, the physical inheritance of Yishma’el is incomparably greater than that of Yi??aq: it includes the whole Arabian Peninsula, Ashur/ Assyria – namely Syria – and trans-Jordan.
Four thousand years later, all of the children of Abraham are still tied to this story and compete over the inheritance – yerushah – of Jerusalem – Yerushalayim. What story in the world has attained so much life? The story of Abraham by himself is not all that interesting. But the story of Abraham and his Son – the story of the ?qedah – is an unforgettable dramatic peak, and the added actors, the crucified Jesus and the heaven- Ascending Muhammad, add to it much spice.
Abraham and Yi??aq Planting the Tree of Life
Abraham, and especially Yi??aq, reach equanimity, to indifference between life and death. Both, and especially Yi??aq, give up their soul and put all their trust in the hand of the Lord. Abraham sacrificed his humanity, the love of a father to his son. He did it so to complete his soul, set around his oversoul/Neshamah that was handed to God. Yi??aq gave up both his soul/Nefesh and his spirit/Ru’a? and released his oversoul/ Neshamah that lifted and flew up even before he was touched by the knife. The divine request from Abraham – veha’?lehu le’?lah – “raise him up as offering” – was fulfilled anyway, even without him stretching his hand to the boy, and therefore there was no more need to perform the physical sacrifice.
Abraham did not comprehend that the son has already risen up in offering, without physical destruction. On the contrary Yi??aq – that without his cooperation the trial would not have been realized – must have understood. Any resistance on his part would have detained the ascent of his Neshamah. Through the ?qedah there was realized the separation between “the spirit of man goes upwards, and the spirit of the beast goes downward to the earth” (Ecclesiastes 3:21).
Only the cooperation between the father and son allowed the attainment of the final goal: the placement of the Tree of Life. Abraham, the representative of the side of ?esed/Mercy, put on valor then; and Yi??aq, from the side of the Gevurah/Valor, put on ?esed/Mercy through the ?qedah. [surplus 10]
But there are also later versions to the story: the Moslem version and the Christian. The Koran hints (though does not say so explicitly) that the bound son was Ishmael, who is also mentioned as partner to Abraham in the restoration of the shrine in Mecca. Christianity got itself based upon the exegesis of Paul of Tarsus, claiming that through the crucifixion of Jesus, God Himself bound His Only Son, and sacrificed him for the benefit of all humankind (to redress “the original sin” of Adam, as noted). The three religions are supported – therefore – on three Bindings.
“And (he) took two of his young men with him, and Yi??aq his son”
The identity of the two young men who accompany the journey is potentially quite meaningful. Abraham is “the father of many nations” (17:5). It is thus that the Midrash (Pirke deRabbi Eli’ezer 30) states that the two who accompanied the journey to the land of Moriah – in addition to Yi??aq/Isaac – were Ishmael and Eli’ezer. With their agency, there could join the journey to Mount Moriah, and to the messianic quest, also the Moslems and the Christians. The connection between Ishmael and the Moslems is quite well known (see above the discussion of Ishmael). But the connection between the steward of the house of Abraham – Eli’ezer of Dammeseq – to Christianity requires special explanation.
We may just note that Paul-Saul of Tarsus, the creator and designer of the Christian religion – as we know it – went to Dammeseq/Damascus to persecute the Christians. On his way to Damascus he received his revelation, and in Damascus he joined with the Christians.
Also among the Dead Sea sect, from which the ancient Christian Church undoubtedly drew some of its principles, Dameseq/Damascus had religious significance, and one of their own scrolls, which specifies the conduct of their community, was called “The Dameseq Scroll”.[13]
The Co-?qedah in Jerusalem: Struggle over Abraham’s inheritance
The goal of the journey and its destination was Mount Moriah – namely Jerusalem – whose Hebrew name – Yerushalayim – contains in it the concept of Inheritance – Yerushah. There is a conflict among the three companions about inheritance – who would be declared as the inheritor of the divine covenant that was acquired by Abraham.
In a different time sequence than of the journey in the Torah – to which there went Abraham, Yi??aq and the two young men, but Abraham and Yi??aq left the party, who had to wait – the historical monotheistic move was started by the children of Yi??aq, and only later there joined them the children of Eli’ezer – the Christians – and the children of Ishmael – the Moslems.
Abraham and Sarah ad received nine divine promises about the inheritance of the land and about a divine blessing:
1. “I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing” (12:2).
2. “To thy seed will I give this land” (12:7).
3. “Lift up now thy eyes, and look from the place where thou art, northward, and southwards, and eastwards, and westwards. For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed forever. And I will make thy seed (numerous) as the dust of the earth; so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall the seed also be numbered. Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it, for I will give it to thee” (13:14-17).
4. “This (Eli’?zer) shall not be thy heir, but he that shall come forth out of thy own bowels shall be thy heir…. Look now towards heaven, and count the stars, if thou be able to number them; and He said to him, So shall thy seed be” (15: 4-5).
5. “I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur-Kasdim, to give thee this land to inherit it” (15:7).
6. “In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Avraham, saying, To thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Mitsrayim to the great river, the river Perat. The Qeni, and the Qenizzi, and the Qadmoni, and the ?itti, and the Perizzi, and the Refa’im, and the Emori, and the Kena’ani, and the Girgashi, and the Yevusi” (15:18-21).
7. “As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Avram, but thy name shall be Avraham, for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceedingly fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee, And I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee in their generations for everlasting covenant, to be a God to thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land in which thou dost sojourn, all the land of Kena’an, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God” (17:4-9).
There are also specific personal promises included in these promises: Ishmael will be rewarded for being the son of Abraham, but the major inheritor was Yi??aq.
8. “Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Yi??aq, and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. And as for Yishma’el I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. But my covenant shall I establish with Yi??aq, whom Sarah shall bear to thee at this time next year” (17:19-21).
9. “for in Yi??aq shall thy seed be called. And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed” (21:12-13).
These nine promises were given before the ?qedah, whereas after the ?qedah there was given a tenth promise: “By Myself have I sworn, says the Lord-YHWH, because thou hast not withheld thy son, thy only son. That I will exceedingly bless thee, and will exceedingly multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of its enemies; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice”; and thy seed shall possess the gate of its enemies; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice” (22:17-18).
The tenth blessing, the last given to Abraham – after the explicit trial of the ?qedah – actually elucidates the problem inherent in all the nine former blessings and promises. It is natural that a man wants to bequeath all his rights and properties to his sons from him – his biological seed. But at times the inheritors are not worthy, and receive something through the merit of their fathers and not through their own merit, namely: not for their own compliance with the terms of the covenant. But in this one case, the blessing is the consequence of an appropriate performance.
We may conclude, as we started, with the “three days journey” as it applies to us “after those things”
Abraham Isaac and Jacob, who were not the actual masters of the Land of Israel had to wait for the kingdom of David to establish the Kingdom and the Temple, planting the Tree of Life in a way. Our three (millennial) days journey started with the division of the kingdom of Israel and the worship in the Temple declined until its destruction and the experiential point of the sacrifices became forgotten. Then started the harrowing journey, the course of three thousand years in (renewed) quest for Moriah – the instruction in and understanding of the Torah in its interiority. The prophets were the first to set on the journey, while the Temple was still in existence and the Holy Spirit was plentiful in Israel. After the prophets there came the sages and the Mequbalim, and the journey is still on, the search is amplifying till we shall find the Messianic Torah at Mount Moriah. [Surplus 11]
The ?qedah and the Law of the Jubilee
The terse and compact structure of the story of the ?qedah is a masterpiece of secrets and hints that relate, among other things, to the reasons (Te’?mim – “Tastes”) of some of the important commandments in the Torah. Among others, we see a hint about the law of the Jubilee/Yovel.
Both Yi??aq and Yishm?’el suffered because of the struggle over inheritance of earthly properties, because of the decision of Sarah that “the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, with Yi??aq”. The whole socioeconomic regime of the ancient Middle East was based on inheritance rulings and conflicts over inheritance, and this, as we have already seen, is the strife that accompanies all the Genesis stories. The story of the ?qedah, on the other hand, is the story of the Great Renunciation. Abraham received many promises that “for in Yi??aq shall thy seed be called” – and in the ?qedah he was called to give up on everything.
The laws of the Torah offer a wonderful socioeconomic order – the law of the Jubilees – according to which all of Israel would agree to give up – once each fifty years – on the slaves and on the land estates that was acquired by them and their fathers and perhaps even their grandparents, for the sake of justice and equal sharing, so that there will be no paupers and destitute among Israel. This is difficult and goes against the natural inclination and the human greed – to acquire properties (in Hebrew Qinyan (related to the figure of Qayin/Cain) and to bestow them (lehaqnot) to our progeny, our self and flesh.
The Law of the Jubilee has a characteristic structure – of seven seven-year cycles, followed by the divine release of the enslaved people and lost estates. Remarkably, also the Story of the ?qedah, in chapter 22 of Genesis, there is embedded a structure of seven sevens (heptads):
7 addresses of God or his angel to Abraham
7 mentions of Yi??aq/Isaac by God
7 mentions of Yi??aq/Isaac as “Ben” – Son.
7 Activities by Abraham until he saw the mountain.
7 Activities by Abraham on the way to the mountain.
7 Activities of Abraham in the act of the ?qedah
7 Activities of Abraham after the ?qedah.
Following is the text that relates to the ?qedah, where each heptad is colored in the same color as listed above:
“And it came to pass after these things, that God did test Avraham, and said to him, Avraham: and he said, Here I am! And He said, Take now thy son, thy only son Yi??aq, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriyyah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Yi??aq his son, and broke up the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went to the place of which God had told him. Then on the third day Avraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off. And Avraham said to his young men, stay here with the donkey; and I and the lad will go up yonder and prostrate ourselves, and come again to you. And Avraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Yi??aq his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and the knife, and they went both of them together. And Yi??aq spoke to Avraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here I am, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? And Avraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together. And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Avraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Yi??aq his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. And Avraham stretched out his hand, and took the knife to slaughter his son. And an angel of the Lord/YHWH called him out of heaven, and said, Avraham, Avraham and he said, Here I am. And He said, Lay not thy hand upon the lad, neither do anything to him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thy only son from me. And Avraham lifted up his eyes, and looked and behold behind him a ram caught in the thicket by his horns: and Avraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in place of his son. And Avraham called the name of that place YHWH-Yir’eh; as it is said to this day, In the mount the Lord/YHWH will appear. And the angel of the Lord/YHWH called to Avraham out of heaven the second time, and said, By myself have I sworn, says the Lord/YHWH, because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thy only son; that I will exceedingly bless thee, and I will exceedingly multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice. So Avraham returned to his young men, and they rose up and went together to Be’er Sheva; and Avraham dwelt at Be’er Sheva”.
So the structure of the seven sevens is found enfolded within this short passage. Among these seven sevens, there are 7 addresses from God, 14 mentions of god relating to Isaac- Yi??aq and other mentions of him as “son” (Ben) and there are 28 activities performed by Abraham – a numerical structure that we have already seen in the first two verses of Genesis (7 words in the 1s verse, 14 in the 2nd and 28 letters in the 1st).
We may add that the Yovel/Jubilee is announced by blowing “The Horn of the Yovel”, which is a Shofar – a ram’s horn – that is also a souvenir of the ram that was sacrificed in place of Yi??aq. But the Yovel can only be enacted when all the Tribes of Israel are settled in their places.
The Family of Nahor – a Possible Resolution
The very dramatic Parahat vayera ends with a section that looks, on the face of it, as marginal and unconnected, as something that had to be reported for the sake of historical update and was stuck by the editor at the end of the drama. But we shall show that both in this parashah, and in parashat vayishla? that comes later, the short ending paragraph is used to give a hint about the far future – or past, which completely changes the immediate understanding of the parashah.
“And it came to pass after these things, that it was told Avraham, saying, Behold Milkah, she also has born children to thy brother Na?or”. After all the dramas of infertility, the marrying of the bondwoman before the lady, the birth of one natural son and the flaring of jealousy between the women, the giving of the wife to the foreign ruler, the birth of the son of the lady, the sending out of the firstborn son and at last the giving away of the young son – after all these dramatic entanglements, there appears another possibility. In the family of Na?or, Abraham’s own brother, his flesh and blood, things transpired in a different way. There were born twelve sons – the ideal number for a confederate covenant – which the family of Abraham would gain only in another two generations of struggles, and these twelve are divided to two types: eight sons to Milkah, the official first wife, and four more sons to the concubine Re’umah.
The clue is that the status of Milkah was like the status of Sarah (the meanings of the two names are almost identical, one “Queen” and one “Ruler”, and they testify to the senior status of their bearers). From this we also get the clue that the status of Re’umah at Na?or’s house was the status that should have been granted to Hagar at Abraham’s house. It is possible to assume that Milkah did not react as Sarah and did not say, “the sons of the bondwoman will not inherit with my sons”. When there are two sons, the contrast is very marked, but when there are a dozen, the contrasts actually lessen, and it becomes easier to settle the different problem of inheritance.
The ancient law of inheritance was that the firstborn inherited twice the share of any of the other children. In the case of Yi??aq and Yishma’el, it is obvious that such a possibility – a double inheritance to the son of the bondwoman was inconceivable. But in the case of the children of Na?or there came another possibility: the children of the official wife, as a unit, are considered firstborns, and the children of the concubine are considered, again as a unit, as junior. Had Sarah been willing to accept such an arrangement, that Yi??aq would inherit twice the portion of Yishm?’el, there might perhaps have arose no conflict between the two.
The fact is, that this kind of arrangement is the arrangement that was accepted in Abraham’s family, after two generations – in the family of Jacob. There we shall find the two sisters, the grand daughters of Na?or, Ra?el/Rachel and Le’ah, both in the status of the official wife, the senior, and they had together eight sons, the number of sons of their grandmother Milkah, and facing them two maid-wives who together have four sons. The ratio between the sons of the official wives and the sons of the bondwomen is of two-to-one, namely of senior and junior status, and this is the ratio that is considered right and which was destined to serve as basis for the estates of the Twelve Tribes of Israel.
The future vision which is hinted at this passage, a vision which will become clarified in the sequel, is that all those nations with whom Abraham connected and became bound with – the Hagarite-Ishmaelites, Philistines, Ammonites and Moabites (and perhaps even Aramites) might have been capable of being tied together to Israel in a dynamic covenant of twelve tribes, which gives seniority to the original Tribes of Israel, but allows an expansion, of up to an additional third, at each Jubilee.
[1] It is possible to claim nowadays that since Abraham himself has made a covenant with the Philistines, this has some bearing on the relationship of Israelis and Palestinians.
[3] As noted, the gematria of “the nature” – HaTeVA – is 86, which is the same as of “ELoHIM’ – God.
[4] And indeed, the Gematria value of “The Moriah” – ????? – is 260, which is ten times the Gematriah of the name of YHWH. This is a situation of detailing and exposure of the Sefirot, where each Sefirah contains in it the ten Sefirot – namely “a complete configuration” – Par?uf.
[5] Genesis Raba 56 paragraph 5; also Pirke derabbi Eliezer chapter 30. As explained by Rashi and Iqar sifte Hakhamim, the sages associated the death of Sarah with the Binding of Isaac.
[6] Ibn Ezra sees this age specification as based not on reason, but a sacred transmission that pertains to the secret of the act.
[7] See Yitzhaq Hayut-Man: “From Tel Aviv to the Temple – The Restoration of Israel According to the Book of Ezekiel”. A chapter in the book of Benjamin Lau (ed): “a Nation Alone” (Am levadad), Yedi’ot Aharonot, Judaism here and Now series, 2006. For a similar vision in recently found Gnostic literature see Epilogue of Yitzhaq Hayut-Man: “The Truth about Judas – Mysteries of the Judas Code Revealed”.
[8] See Harold Fish: “Remembered Future – Literature, Myth and History”. Bialik Institute 1984, chapter about the Binding of Isaac.
[9] In the Zohar (part 2 page 46:b) all these elements are brought together: The Patriarchs and King David are seen as the Merkavah, and also as the components of the Pillar of Cloud and of Fire that guided the Israelites out of Egypt.
[10] Bereshit Raba 11, 12, 42; Shmot Raba 35; vaYiqra Raba 11; Bamidbar Raba 13; Midrah Esther introduction; Midrash Ruth introduction; Tanhuma shemini 9.
[11] Rashi’s commentary to Sukkah 41a and repeated in short ?also in Rosh hashanah 30a.
[12] The term “Sufi Freemasons” was used by famous Sufi writer, the late Idris Shah, in his book “The Sufis” to designate the builders of the Dom eof the Rock. He claimed that all the secrets of the Sufis were coded in the proportions and decorations of the Dome of the Rock.
[13] There may be a significance in that in Hebrew, the letters of Dammeseq (????) are the same as the letters of Miqdash (????) the Temple – and that community saw themselves as a Temple
