THE BINDING OF ISAAC - THE NON-EVENT THAT CHANGED THE WORLD

The Binding of Isaac story (the Akeida) is familiar to most Bible readers. Yet its very familiarity can leave the impression that this is a simple, straightforward tale. Yet this is far from being the case. As for many of the stories in Genesis, this account is multidimensional, and its nineteen sentences contain layer upon layer of profound ideas.

 

Many of the stories in Genesis have their own unique style and message. This account is a polemic against child sacrifice. It also demonstrates the limits of trust in God, and it proposes a new meaning for animal sacrifice. These points are highlighted by contrasts between the two aspects of God, Elohim and YHWH.

​

This story is also a jewel of literary composition. The literary format of Torah stories has not often been emphasized by traditional Jewish orthodox exegetes. However, its appreciation can add considerably to the understanding of the messages the text is conveying. Following this literary analysis, we will look at some of the philosophical issues arising from this account.

​

The essentials of the story are as follows: As a test, Elohim calls upon Abraham to sacrifice his precious son Isaac. Just as the knife is about to be plunged into Isaac’s body, YHWH calls out to Abraham to desist from killing his son and admits that this was a test of Abraham’s fear of Elohim. Abraham is promised blessings for his descendants. The participants in this drama then depart from the scene.

 

The account reads as follows:

​

(1) After these things, Elohim tested Abraham, and said to him, "Abraham!" and he said, "Here I am." (2) He said, "Please, take your son, your only one, whom you love, Yitzchak, and go forth to the land of Moriah, and raise him up as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will tell you." (3) Abraham rose early in the morning, saddled his donkey, took his two servant-boys with him, and his son Isaac. He split the wood for the offering and rose and went to the place that Elohim had told him. (4) On the third day, Abraham lifted his eyes and saw the place from afar. (5) Abraham said to his servant-boys: "Sit here with the donkey, and let me and the boy walk on there. Let us worship and return to you." (6) Avraham took the wood for the offering and placed it on his son, Isaac, and he took the fire and the knife in his hand, and the two of them walked together. (7) Isaac said to his father, Abraham, and said, "My father?" He said, "Here I am, my son." And he said, "Here are the fire and the wood, but where is the sheep for the offering?" (8) Abraham said, "Elohim will see to the sheep for the offering Himself, my son." And the two of them walked together. (9) They came to the place that Elohim had told him and Abraham built an altar there, arranged the wood, bound his son Isaac, and placed him on the altar above the wood. (10) Avraham stretched forth his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son. (11) An angel of YHWH called out to him from the heavens and said, "Abraham! Abraham!" and he said, "Here I am." (12) He said, "Do not stretch forth your hand against the boy and do not do anything to him! Because now I know that you are Elohim-fearing and you did not withhold your son, your only one, from me." (13) Abraham lifted his eyes and saw, and there was a ram, after it was caught in the thicket by its horns. Abraham went and took the ram, and he raised it as an offering instead of his son. (14) Avraham named that place "YHWY Yireh" as is said today, "On the mountain of YHWH, He will be seen." (15) The angel of YHWH called to Abraham a second time from the heavens. (16) He said, "By Myself, I swear",⁠ declares Hashem, "that because you did this thing and did not withhold your son, your only one, (17) I will surely bless you and greatly multiply your offspring as the stars of the heavens and as the sand on the shore of the sea. Your offspring will inherit the gates of their enemies. (18) The nations of the earth will be blessed through your offspring because you have listened to My voice." (19) Abraham returned to his servant-boys and they rose and went together to Beersheba; and Abraham dwelled in Beersheba (Genesis 22:1-19)

 

The beginning of the narrative is built around a three-fold repetition of a group of three consecutive sentences having a similar format. Each group consists of an exclamation by Elohim calling on Abraham by name, or in the case of Isaac calling his father, followed by Abraham’s immediate reply hineini (הִנֵּנִי), best translated as I am fully here for you! There then follows a request by God, or a question by Isaac. Following this is immediate action by Abraham expressed through a string of five to six verbs. 

 

The first of this triad opens up the story in verses 1 to 3 of this chapter:

 

Elohim says: “Abraham!”

 

Abraham replies: “Here I am” (hineini) (הִנֵּנִי).

 

Elohim then requests from Abraham that he offer up Isaac as a sacrifice with the following words:

 

Please, take your son, your only one, whom you love, Yitzchak, and go for yourself to the land of Moriah, and raise him up as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will tell you.

In response, Abraham arises early, saddles his donkey, chops the wood for the sacrifice, and proceeds to the place to which he will be directed (Genesis 22:1-4).

 

It is noteworthy that the first sentence bears some resemblance to the very first call that Abraham received from YHWH while still in Mesopotamia:

 

YHWH said to Abram, “Go for yourself (lech lecho) from your land, from your birthplace and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you” (ibid 12:1).

 

Here, also, he was to “go for himself” and was to proceed to a place that would be revealed to him as he proceeded on his journey.1

 

In the chapter “YHWH’s promises to Abraham and the Covenant between the Pieces” I suggested, following Cassuto, that this phrasing means — go alone, or at least with those close to you, and make a clean break from your present ideas or situation.16

​

Rashi explains that the multiple verbs emphasize Abraham’s devotion in carrying out this mission. He arises “early in the morning” rather than tardily, and he himself saddles his donkey, gets the wood, and chops it, rather than subordinating these tasks to his servants as would be befitting his status.2  

 

Elohim does not hide the fact that this would be an excruciating test for Abraham. Abraham was called upon to sacrifice the son he loves, the one for whom he had waited many years, and the one on whom the future of his legacy depends. God twice emphasizes to Abraham that Isaac was his “only one.” Ishmael was expelled from the home many years previously, so Isaac is indeed the only son at home. This phrase is also mentioned again when God acknowledges that he has passed the test: “since you have not withheld your son, your only one (et yechidcha) from Me” (Genesis 22:12).  

 

No emotions are displayed or described for any of the participants throughout the story. Doubtless, many thoughts were going through their minds, yet the text deliberately downplayed them so that the reader has to fill in these gaps for him or herself. Nevertheless, emotions are hinted at textually. The word “his son” is repeated eight times, when the Bible could equally well have said Isaac. Abraham could have acceded to God’s request by blocking from his mind the notion that Isaac still belonged to him. Isaac now belonged to God. However, this is not the way Abraham was thinking. Isaac still existed in his mind as his “son.” It is via these subtle textual additions that the drama is built up.

 

The second of the three-sentence triad occurs in the middle of the story and it maintains the tension between Abraham’s love for his precious son versus his desire to fulfill God’s request by killing him. 

 

Isaac says: “Father!” 



Abraham is as much available for Isaac as he is for God and he immediately answers him: “Here I am, my son.” 

 

Isaac questions the whereabouts of the lamb for the sacrifice. In reply to his question, Isaac receives an ambiguous answer — “Elohim will see (yireh lo) (יִרְאֶה לּו)” the lamb for the offering, my son” (Genesis 22:8).  

 

The words “Elohim yireh lo” mean literally “Elohim will see to Himself.” However, more to its meaning in this instance is “God will see and take appropriate action” or “God will provide.” 

 

It is very likely that at this stage Isaac has suspicions that he is the sacrifice. Despite this, there is no hint in the text of Isaac objecting in any way. As at the beginning of the story, he goes “together” with his father such was the bond between them (ibid 22:6).3

 

After arriving at the designated place, Abraham builds the altar, arranges the wood, binds Isaac, places Isaac on the altar, stretches out his hand, and takes the knife. (Genesis 22:7-10)

 

The story reaches its climax with the third group of the triad. YHWH calls out to Abraham twice “Abraham, Abraham!” reflecting the urgency of the situation:  

 

Abraham replies: “Here I am” (hineini).  

 

God tells him: “Do not do anything to your son. . . “.

 

In response to this, Abraham raises his eyes, sees a ram, goes to the ram, takes it, and offers the ram instead of his son (Genesis 22:11-13).

 

After offering up the ram, Abraham immortalizes the significance of this moment and gives a name to “that place” in a way connected to the word seeing. Different implications of this verb have occupied a prominent place in this narrative, in that Abraham has seen on two occasions and God is presumed to have seen in one. Hence:

 

And Abraham called the name of that place “YHWH will see” (YHWH yireh) (יִרְאֶ֑ה), as it is said to this day, on the mountain YHWH will be seen (behar YHWH yeroeh) (ה׳  יֵרָאֶה  בְּהַר) (Genesis 22:14).

 

But what did God see to or provide?  The first of the seeings could have been the location of the mountain for the sacrifice on Mount Moriah: 

 

On the third day Abraham raised his eyes and he saw (vayar) (וַיַּ֥רְא) the place (hamokom) from afar (Genesis 22:4).

 

However, it is not only Abraham who is seeing during this story but God is also seeing. As discussed, when Isaac questions his father as to the nature of the offering, Abraham tells him:

​

Elohim will see for Himself (yire lo) (יִרְאֶה לּו) the lamb for the offering, my son,” and the two of them went together.” (Genesis 22:8)  

 

The third seeing is when God calls upon Abraham to desist from killing his son, and Abraham experiences yet another “seeing” — this time a ram:

 

And Abraham raised his eyes and he saw (vayar) (וַיַּרְא֙) — and behold a ram after it was caught in the thicket by its horns, and Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as an offering instead of his son. (Genesis 22:13).

 

Moreover. a popular saying recognizes a further dimension to God’s “seeing”.  

 

….. as it is said this day: on the mountain YHWH will be seen (yera’eh) (יֵרָאֶֽה) (Genesis 22:14).

 

Most likely the sighting is Mount Moriah. According to a verse in the Book of Chronicles, this is in Jerusalem.4  Alternatively, it could be in Beth El.

 

Nevertheless, the way this sentence is written endows it with a certain timelessness, and the verse may well be telling us that God will be seen in whatever place of worship He chooses to attach His name to.5

 

So far, we have translated this phrase as “on the mountain, God will be seen.” However, it is also possible to read it as “on the mountain of God, will be seen,” with the implied subject of the “will be seen” being not God but the Jewish people. The Jewish people are instructed to appear before God three times a year, and the Torah uses the very same word “to be seen” (yero’e) (יֵרָאֶה):

 

R' Samson Raphael Hirsch explains matters in this way:

​

Even when we, and where we, do not see, God sees, freely and willingly have we to subordinate our own judgment to His. . . .   Thrice yearly, he will be seen (יֵרָאֶה) (yeroeh), every son of Abraham and Isaac must be seen on this mount and not empty handed, with mere inner passing devotion, but with the sacrificing dedication of the whole of his being as expressed in olat re’iyah (a sacrifice of seeing).6 

 

God and the Jewish people are involved in a mutual pursuit of “seeing.” The Jewish people show themselves on one particular mountain and look for Him, while He provides for their material and spiritual needs.

 

Finally, in the very last sentence of the Akeida story as they wend their way home, Abraham and Isaac are still “together” as they were at the beginning of the story. There are no recriminations.  

 

Abraham returned to the young men, and they stood up and went together (yachdov) to Beersheba, and Abraham dwelled in Beersheba. (Genesis 22:19) 

 

 

How could a moral God command Abraham to do an immoral act?

 

There is a fundamental question that bothers many people — how could God, the model for all morality, command Abraham to perform an immoral act, to kill his own son? And then, moreover, to proceed to reward Abraham for agreeing to do this evil act! 

 

Two interrelated answers are suggested. As I and others have shown, many of the early stories in Genesis were written as polemics against prevailing pagan concepts. Similarly, the Akeida story is a polemic against child sacrifice. This polemic is highlighted by playing off the two names of God against each other. Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his son by the aspect of God Elohim, but it was an angel of YHWH who ordered Abraham to desist from this murder:

 

An angel of YHWH called out to him from the heavens and said, "Abraham! Abraham!" and he said, "Here I am." He said, "Do not stretch forth your hand against the boy and do not do anything to him! Because now I know that you are Elohim-fearing and you did not withhold your son, your only one, from me" (ibid 22:11-12).

 

At this time in history, child sacrifice was not uncommon in Canaan. Not only was it not an immoral act, but it was considered the height of religious devotion.

 

Even from a monotheistic perspective, it could be argued that since God is the source of all fertility, it was not unreasonable for Him to request the return of a gift of a son. This could even have been Abraham’s rationalization for following through with God’s request.  

 

Child sacrifice was not routinely practiced in Egypt and Mesopotamia, the main centers of ancient civilization. Paganism in those countries promoted the interests of the ruling class, and killing their own children was not part of this self-interest. Both these countries were also well-endowed with water for drinking and agriculture from their main rivers, and there was no need to appease the gods for agricultural bounty. The situation was quite different in Canaan, where farmers were dependent on the vagaries of the weather for successful harvests, and this was thought to be controlled by the gods.

 

Unlike the gods associated with natural elements such as the sun, storms, or crops, Molech was an ancient Canaanite deity whose perceived power was tied to the granting of favor, protection, and possibly prosperity for those who participated in his worship. The purpose of child sacrifice was to appease Molech by offering that which was most precious to a person — his own child. 

 

From the book of Jeremiah. it is apparent that a favored place for child sacrifice in the southern kingdom of Judah during First Temple times was the Valley of Ben Hinnom, a valley just outside the walls of the present Old City of Jerusalem. (It is from the name of Ben Hinnom’s Valley and the gruesome acts performed there that the name Gehinnom (or hell) is derived). As Jeremiah explains:

 

And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, nor did it come into My heart. Therefore behold, the days are coming," says the Lord, "when it will no more be called Tophet, or the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter; for they will bury in Tophet until there is no room” (Jeremiah 7:31-32). 

 

Based on a compilation of biblical, later Jewish and Christian sources. John Gill, an 18th-century Baptist theologian and commentator wrote on his commentary to these verses:

:​

Tophet is Molech, which was made of brass; and they heated him from his lower parts; and his hands being stretched out, and made hot, they put the child between his hands, and it was burnt; when it vehemently cried out; but the priests beat a drum, that the father might not hear the voice of his son, and his heart might not be moved. 

 

The extent to which these rites penetrated into the southern Israelite kingdom in late Biblical times is seen from this passage in Ezekiel: 

​

And you took your sons and your daughters whom you bore to Me and sacrificed them as food to the idols. Was your prostitution not enough? You slaughtered my children and made them pass through (the fire) to the idols (Ezekiel 16:20-21).

 

The Book of Kings relates that this rite was even practiced by the monarchs of the Northern Israelite kingdom:

 

He (Ahaz) walked in the ways of the kings of Israel and also he passed his son through fire following the detestable ways of the nations the Lord had driven out before the Israelites (2 Kings 16:3). 

 

The Torah’s attitude to this practice was unequivocal — child sacrifice is absolutely forbidden: 

 

Do not give any of your children to be passed through [the fire] to Molech for you must not profane the name of your God. I am YHWH” (Leviticus 18:21).  

  

Not surprisingly, child sacrifice in the Valley of Ben Hinnom was an immediate target during periods of religious reform in the Southern Kingdom:

​

He (King Josiah) desecrated Topheth, which was in the Valley of Ben Hinnom, so no one could use it to sacrifice his son or daughter in the fire to Molech (2 Kings 23:10).

 

It is possible that “the passing through the fire to Molech” did not necessarily entail certain death, but was more in the way of a devotional trial. Nevertheless, it did run the risk of death if the child misstepped.7 The following sentences, though, describes certain death during child sacrifice:

 

You must not worship YHWH your God in their way, because in worshipping their gods they do all kinds of detestable things the Lord hates. They even burn their sons and daughters in the fire as sacrifices to their gods (Deuteronomy 12:31.)  

 

Back to our story. Note that it is Elohim who asked Abraham to sacrifice his son. This is the aspect of the One God Who displays justice more than love. One might imagine that Elohim takes into consideration the ways of the nations and would be more accepting of child sacrifice. This is mistaken. Nevertheless, it is YHWH Who stops this murder. This is the aspect of the God Who displays love as well as justice, to Whom all sacrifices are offered, and Who is involved in an intimate relationship with Abraham.

 

 

Why was Abraham tested?

 

The opening sentence of the Akeida story informs us that this trial was intended as a “test.” Much has been written by Jewish exegetes and philosophers as to what exactly this test was meant to accomplish.

 

Two general approaches are found. One is that this test was for Abraham’s benefit, to bring his potentiality to actuality. Nachmanides explains:

 

But the Tester, blessed is He, commands the tested party to perform a certain act in order to bring forth the matter of that person’s righteousness from the potential to the actual, so that he should have the reward of having done a good deed and not only the reward of a good heart.8  

 

A number of places in the Torah seem to support Nachmanides’ approach, although within the context of the Jewish people rather than one individual being tested.9

 

In Deuteronomy, Moses relates the hardships the Jewish people endured during their forty years of wandering in the wilderness and explains that these were tests of their commitment: 

 

So as to cause you hardship to test you, to know that which was in your hearts whether you would keep His commandments or not (Deuteronomy 8:12).

 

and

 

 so as to cause you hardship, so as to test you, to do you good at your latter end (Deuteronomy 8:16).

 

The notion that testing is for self-improvement is also discussed in a midrash, there being an assumption that the test is only for those who are guaranteed to pass it:

 

It is written: “God examines the righteous one, but He despises the wicked and lover of injustice” (Psalms 11:5). Rabbi Yonasan said: the flax maker, when his flax is inferior, does not beat it too much, because it would break if he did so, but when his flax is of superior quality he beats it a great deal. And why does he do this. Because as he beats it, it progressively improves in quality. So too the Holy One, blessed is He, does not test the wicked. And why is this? Because He knows they will not withstand the test.10  

 

A second approach is that this test was not for Abraham’s self-improvement, but to provide an example to the entire world. Midrash Rabba notes that the verb to test has the same derivation as the word “nes” (נס), meaning a flagpole, banner or miracle:

 

Rabbi Yose HaGelili said: "This means that God elevated Abraham like the banner (nes) on the masthead of a ship.”11 

 

Maimonides is in agreement with this second approach. He has difficulty with the notion that God would deliberately subject an individual to hardship to improve him, since this seems to negate His attribute of justice. He therefore proposes a reasoning in line with that of Rabbi Yose Hagelili:  

​

The doctrine of trials is open to great objections; it is in fact more exposed to objections than any other thing taught in Scripture. . . .  People have generally the notion that trials consist in afflictions and mishaps sent by God to man, not as punishment for past sins, but as giving opportunity for great reward. The principle taught in Scripture is exactly the reverse; for it is said: “He is God of faithfulness, and there is no iniquity in Him (Deuteronomy 32:4). . . . The teaching of our Sages, although some of them approve of this general belief, is on the whole against it.  For they say: “There is no death without sin, and no sin without affliction.”12 

 

He continues:

 

The sole object of all the trials mentioned in Scripture is to teach man what he ought to do or believe; so that the event which forms the actual trial is not the end desired; it is but an example for our instruction and guidance. . . . The account of Abraham our father binding his son ……  shows us the extent and limit of the fear of God.”12

 

The purpose of the Binding of Isaac was not to improve Abraham, but to teach humanity through Abraham’s example the extent to which a person should extend himself in the fear of God

 

There could be one further answer that has not found favor with most Jewish sages, and this is that God does not know the future with certainty. Hence, this was a genuine test. This is why the angel of YHWH says:

 

for now I know (ata yodati) that you are God-fearing (yirei Elokim) (Genesis 22:12).13 

 

Prior to the outcome of this test, God was not absolutely sure that Abraham’s devotion to Him would override his devotion to his son. Admittedly, God could have strongly suspected this based on His familiarity with Abraham’s past actions. Now, this has been convincingly demonstrated to everyone.

 

This does, however, raise the deeper issue — is it is possible that God does not know in advance the result of man’s choices?

 

This issue is discussed by Maimonides in his Mishneh Torah with respect to repentance, and in which he explains that God knows the future despite everyone having free will:

 

One might ask since God knows everything that will occur before it comes to pass, does He or does He not know whether a person will be righteous or wicked?  If He knows that he will be righteous, [it appears] impossible for him not to be righteous. However, if one would say that despite His knowledge that he would be righteous, it is possible for him to be wicked, then His knowledge would be incomplete. . . .  we do not have the potential to conceive how God knows all the creations and deeds.  However, this is known without any doubt: That man’s actions are in his hand and God does not lead him or decree that he do anything.14 

 

But can there be such a thing as free will if the outcome is known? Does this not suggest a deterministic world? For Maimonides, a question like this has no answer since no one can determine God’s ways. 

 

Most Rabbinic opinion is in agreement with Maimonides that God has perfect foreknowledge, although there are a few Torah scholars who disagree. However, it can be argued that God not knowing with certainty the results of the test of the Akeida is most compatible with the plain meaning of the text. God’s estimation of the probability that Abraham would pass the test was almost akin to a certainty, but this could never override Abraham’s free will. It is because of this small uncertainty that God could legitimately “test” Abraham by asking him to sacrifice his son. In this way, Abraham’s actions became an example of the appropriate extent of the fear of Elohim. 

 

 

Do not Abraham’s actions display love of Elohim rather than fear of Elohim?

 

The Akeida is the ultimate demonstration of Abraham’s “fear of Elohim”:  

​

And He (the Angel of YHWH) said: “Do not stretch out your hand against the lad nor do anything to him for now I know that you are an Elohim-fearing person (יְרֵא אֱלֹהִים) (yerei Elohim) since you have not withheld your son, your only one, from Me” (Genesis 22:12).

 

Abraham’s offering of his son was completely selfless. He had a choice — to either ignore Elohim’s request for the sake of the love of his son, or to sacrifice his son and sabotage the very future God had planned for him and his descendants because of his fear of God. 

 

But would not Abraham’s actions be better described as love of God set against the love of his child?

 

However, love of Elohim is never described in the Torah. Elohim does not seek love. As a transcendent God, He is too remote to have this type of relationship. What Elohim requires is obedience to a moral code so that the material state of the world can continue to flourish.

 

The notion of fear of Elohim occurs a number of times in the Pentateuch, even in relation to pagans. For example, in the chapter before the Akeida, Abraham arrives in the land of the Philistines and is concerned that the king Abimelech will kill him so that he can take his beautiful wife Sarah into his royal harem. Abraham therefore decides to tell everyone that Sarah is his sister rather than his wife and he states the reason for doing this:   

​

And Abraham said: “Because I said, there is but no fear of God in this place and they will slay me because of my wife” (Genesis 20:11).

 

There is no indication from the Bible that Abimelech was a monotheist. How then could he be God-fearing?  

 

The expression “fearing of Elohim” appears to mean solely that a person acknowledges a moral direction to the world, whether this be due to a single Higher Power or multiple higher powers   

 

Abraham felt the presence of Elohim in the universe, recognized that there is a moral direction to the world, and was passionate about fulfilling Elohim’s every request. By contrast, YHWH desires both fear and love. Abraham doubtless felt and displayed love of YHWH. However, love of YHWH is not the topic of the Akeida, which is about Abraham’s fulfillment of a directive of Elohim, the God of general providence and the God concerned with the universal aspects of mankind.15

 

How to concurrently achieve the love and fear of God is described by Maimonides:  

 

What is the path to attain love and fear of Him? When a person contemplates His wondrous and great deeds and creations and appreciates His infinite wisdom that surpasses all comparison, he will immediately love, praise, and glorify Him, yearning with tremendous desire to know God’s name, as David stated: “My soul thirsts for Elohim, for the living God.” (Psalms 42:3). When he continues to reflect on these matters, he will immediately recoil in awe and fear, appreciating how he is a tiny, lowly and dark creature, standing with his flimsy, limited, wisdom before He who is of perfect knowledge.16  

 

Maimonides makes no differentiation between YHWH and Elohim, and the second sentence of this passage would more appropriately be about love and praise of YHWH.

 

In sum, via the Akeida we learn how far Abraham was able to extend himself in fearing and obeying Elohim, to the extent that Abraham was prepared to sabotage the very future that God had promised him. From YHWH’s retracting this request we learn that murdering one’s own can never be a means of drawing close to God.

 

 

Animal sacrifice

 

A new idea in the history of religion is found in the Akeida account in relation to sacrifices. 

 

In pagan times, the burnt meat of a sacrifice was considered to be food for the gods and thereby a means of appeasing them.

 

This is nicely illustrated in the Gilgamesh myth when Utnapishtim exits his boat and offers a sacrifice on the occasion of his delivery from the flood: 

​

The gods smelled the odor, the gods smelled the sweet odor and they gathered together like flies over the sacrifice (Gilgamesh, tablet XI).

 

During the duration of the flood the gods had been without food. They now gathered around Utnapishtim’s sacrifice like flies because of their hunger!

 

By contrast, the Akeida story teaches that the purpose of an animal sacrifice is not appeasement of the Deity, but a vicarious form of self-sacrifice. The devotion attending this should be on a par with sacrificing oneself or one's child. 

 

In the Binding of Isaac story an olah animal sacrifice is offered by Abraham “instead of his son.” In an olah sacrifice the entire animal goes up in flames to God. In effect, Abraham is now offering up the blood and flesh of an animal in lieu of the blood and flesh of his son. With one notable exception, sacrifices are offered exclusively to YHWH and not to Elohim.17

 

Nachmanides explains matters in this way: 

​

All the acts are performed in order that when they are done, a person should realize that he has sinned against God with his body and his soul, and that “his” blood should really be spilled and “his” body burned, were it not for the loving-kindness of the Creator, Who took from him a substitute and a ransom, namely this offering, so that its blood should be in place of his blood, its life in place of his life, and that the chief limbs of the offering should be in place of the chief parts of his body.18

 

Support for this idea comes from the laying of hands on the sacrifice. The leaning of hands on the animal’s head are first steps in an individual’s animal sacrifice and serve to transfer the persona of the individual offering the sacrifice onto the animal.19

 

Nevertheless, the expression a “pleasing odor” to God from a sacrifice is frequently found in the Torah, as in pagan mythology. However, it now has the meaning of the offering being pleasing to God. There is no thought that God is smelling the offering before eating it:

​

The Lord spoke to Moses saying: “Command the Israelite people and say to them: Be punctilious in presenting to Me at stated times the offering of food due Me, as offerings by fire of pleasing odor to Me in its appointed time …….  as a perpetual olah every day, two yearly lambs without blemish…..  It is the continual olah that was done at Mt. Sinai, for a satisfying aroma, a fire offering to God” (Numbers 28:1-6). 

 

 

The ultimate blessing for the Jewish people

 

As a result of Abraham’s devotion, God, through His aspect of YHWH, makes a new promise to Abraham in this the last of seven blessings bestowed on Abraham:

​

The angel of YHWH called to Abraham a second time from heaven, and said: “By Myself I swear,” declared YHWH, “that since you have done this thing and have not withheld your son, your only one, that I shall increase your offspring like the stars of the heavens and like the sand on the seashore; and your offspring shall inherit the gates of its enemy; and all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves (vehitborachu) (וְהִתְבָּרְכוּ) through your seed, because you have listened to My voice” (Genesis 22:15-18).

 

It is helpful to review the previous four promises made to Abraham by YHWH in order to appreciate what God is adding here. (The two blessings made by Elohim in the Covenant of Circumcision have been discussed previously):

​

Blessing #1.  And YHWH said to Abram: “Get yourself from your country, from your relatives, and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you.  And I will make of you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curse you I will curse; and all the families of the earth shall be blessed (venivrachu) (וְנִבְרְכ֣וּ) through you” (Genesis 12:1-3).

 

Blessing #2. YHWH appeared to Abram and said: “To your offspring I will give this land” (ibid 12:7).

 

Blessing #3. YHWH said to Abram after Lot had parted from him. . . .. “For all the land that you see, to you I will give it, and to your descendants forever. I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth so that if one can count the dust of the earth, then your offspring too can be counted” (Genesis 13:14-16).

 

Blessing #4. Then Abram said: “See, to me you have given no offspring; and see, my steward is my heir. . . . “  That one will not inherit you ….. And He (YHWH) took him outside and said: “Gaze, now, towards the heavens, and count the stars if you are able to count them” And He said to him; “So shall your offspring be!” (Genesis 15:3-5).

 

In contrast to these earlier promises, God swears an oath — “By Myself I swear,” declared YHWH. Is there a difference between a promise and an oath made by God?  Commentators suggest that whereas a promise is conditional and depends on the behavior of Abraham’s offspring, an oath is non-conditional and pertains forever.20 Whether or not one accepts this explanation, this oath is clearly an intensification of God’s commitment and mention of this oath is recorded in other places in the Torah.21

 

This seventh blessing is directed in its entirety to Abraham’s offspring, whereas the previous promises were directed at Abraham. During the Akeida, the very notion that Abraham would have offspring who would perpetuate themselves was hanging in the balance. This issue has now been resolved and God addresses Himself directly to the future of the countless offspring who will arise from this one son. 

 

That they will increase like the stars in the heaven and the sand by the seashore has been promised previously. Now, in addition, they will achieve victory over their enemies. There is the implication here that they will experience struggles periodically throughout their history.  

 

YHWH also promises that all the nations of the earth “through your seed will bless themselves (vehitborachu) (וְהִתְבָּרְכוּ)” using the reflexive form of the verb. Previously, God had promised that all the nations of the world would be blessed because of Abraham (Genesis 12:3 above). Now, as Radak explains, the nations will pray to God: “Bless us as you have blessed the offspring of Abraham.”22 

 

In sum, only nineteen sentences long, the Akeida is one of the great treatises of religious writing. It is multi-dimensional and contains within it a store of fundamental ideas. 

​

• It taught the Jewish people (and by extension the world) the extent to which a human being should extend himself in the fear of God.

 

• It taught the Jewish people about the non-permissibility of human sacrifice.

 

• It taught the Jewish people the ideal of family togetherness for the sake of maintaining the covenant.

 

• It introduced the Jewish people to new ideas about animal sacrifice.

 

• It taught the Jewish people that God Himself will choose His portal to heaven and will support the continuation of His agenda on His holy mountain.

 

• It taught the Jewish people that they will need to struggle to maintain their religious beliefs, but they will be victorious.

 

• It taught the Jewish people that the values they espouse would be a source of inspiration to the rest of the world.

 

The Akeida was not only a test for Abraham. It is a test for everyone who reads this story and who needs to ask — In what way do I measure up to Abraham in my fear of Elohim and devotion to His moral code?  

 

 

References  

 

1. Cassuto suggests that the meaning of these words is to go alone, or at least with those close to you, and make a break from your present situation. First Paragraph. The Lord’s Command and Promises, Chapter XII in Commentary on the Book of Genesis, Part Two, from Noah to Abraham by Umberto Cassuto, p310. The Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 1977. Examples given by Cassuto include: “Then Moses let his father-in-law depart, and he went his way (vayelech lo) to his own country (Exodus 18:27). When Joshua instructs the tribes whose home is in Transjordan to take leave of the other tribes and return to their tribal possession he says: “and now turn and go on your way (lechu lachem) in the land where your possession lies” (Joshua 22:4). R’ Hirsch and R’ Joseph Solveitchik have similar explanations to those of Cassuto. (Chumash with commentary based on the teachings of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik. Sefer Bereishis, p72, OU Press). Nachmanides, on the other hand, assigns no particular significance to this form of the verb and assumes it to be common idiomatic Hebrew usage. 

2. Rashi to Genesis 22:3. Rashi based on Bereishis Rabbah 55:7 notes that Abraham himself saddled the donkey instead of ordering a servant to do these things for his love of God changed how he would normally act.

3. Contrary to what I have written, Rashi sees in the expression of togetherness that Isaac was not yet aware of the possibility that he was to be the sacrifice. Rashi to Genesis 22:8.

4. The tradition regarding the location of Mount Moriah is first recorded in the Book of Chronicles.  Mount Moriah is where God “appeared” to King David, the mountain on which David bought the threshing floor, and where Solomon built his temple: “And Solomon commenced to build the House of the Lord in Jerusalem on Mount Moriah (הַמֹּרִיָּה), where He had appeared to his father David, which he had prepared in David’s place, in the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.” (II Chronicles 3:1). 

5. Rashi to Genesis 22:14.

6. Commentary to the Torah by R’ Samson Raphael Hirsch to Genesis 22:14.

7. According to Maimonides, the child was made to pass between bonfires (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Idolatry 6:3). Nachmanides suggests that the child was intentionally burnt to death.

8. Nachmanides, Commentary to the Torah to Genesis 22:1.

9. Of Divine Tests and a Knowing Heart by Chanoch Waxman in Torah Metzion. New Readings in Tanach. Devorim,  p131. Maggid Books, Koren Publishers, Jerusalem, Israel, First edition 2012. 

10. Midrash Rabba 55:2.

11. Midrash Rabba 55:6.

12. The Object of Trials, chapter 24 in The Guide for the Perplexed by Moses Maimonides. Translation by M. Friedlander p 304. 2nd edition, Dover Publications Inc, New York. 

13. Maimonides interprets the words “now I known” to mean “now it has become known.” The words “ata yodati” (עַתָּהיָדַעְתִּי) are actually in the past test. Hence, their literal meaning is “now I have known.” However, the word “ata” (עַתָּה) usually has the meaning of “now,” which places its meaning in the present tense. The Kli Yakar suggests it can also have the meaning of “behold!” as for example in the following sentence: “And now/behold what does YHWH your God require of you but to fear. . . .” (Deuteronomy 10.12). Clearly, the requirement to fear God was present even before Moses uttered these words. It could be suggested, therefore, that its meaning is “Behold, I have known.” Nevertheless, the words “ata yodati” (עַתָּהיָדַעְתִּי) would seem to be an idiom in the sense of “now I have come to the realization.” There are numerous examples in the Torah of its use in the present tense in this way, see for example Exodus 36:7. 

14. Maimonides Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Teshuvah 5:5.

15. This explanation is at variance with the Talmud (BT Sota 31A), which does regard Abraham’s fear of God as stemming from love. The Talmud states: “It was taught in a Baraisa: R’ Meir says: The expression fearing of God is stated regarding Job and the expression fear of God is stated regarding Abraham. Just as the expression fearing of God that is stated regarding Abraham refers to a fear stemming from love, so too the expression fearing of God that is stated regarding Job refers to a fear stemming from love.  And regarding Abraham himself, from where do we know that his fear of God actually stemmed from love? For it is written: “But you, Israel, …the offspring of Abraham who loved me.” (Isaiah 41:8).

16. Maimonides’ Sefer Hamitzvot, mitzvah #4. As is sometimes the case with Jewish philosophical literature, this psalm makes no differentiation between the names of God.

17. Lecture 3 More about the Divine names in The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch by Umberto Cassuto, p41, Shalem Press, Jerusalem and New York, 2008.  The one exception to this rule is when Yithro, the father-in-law of Moses, offers sacrifices to Elohim. Cassuto assumes that Yithro was not Jewish. He therefore had a different more universal conception of God than did Moses. In other words, this was the first inter-faith type of sacrifice ever described! There is, on the other hand, a rabbinic tradition that Yithro converted to Judaism, which would contradict this explanation. 

18. Nachmanides’ Commentary to the Torah to Leviticus 1:9.

19.  Leviticus 1:4, 3:2,8,13, 4:4,15,24,29,33

20. See the Commentaries to the Torah of R’ Samson Raphael Hirsch and Nachmanides on Genesis 22:16 

21. Mention of God’s oath is found in Exodus 32:13 and Deuteronomy 26:15.

22. This is the explanation of the Radak. See the interpretation of Rashi for ibid 18:8 for “they will be blessed.” Onkelos and Rashi do not differentiate between the hitpa’el (reflexive) and the niphal (passive) while Ibn Ezra and the Radak do.