Makes the Akedah Story So Powerful

The Real Challenge of the Akedah

Vayera, 5769

Shmuel Herzfeld

Recently the local media ran a story about Motl Brody. Motl Brody is the Chassidic boy from New York who came down to DC for medical treatment at Children’s Hospital that sadly proved to be unsuccessful. The press reported on a legal dispute that arose between Motl’s family and the hospital. After Motl lost complete function of his brain, the hospital initially wanted to remove the respirator as they argued that Motl’s brain is completely dead and therefore Motl is dead. According to published reports the family wished to maintain Motl in his current status.

When I read this story I became very emotional and I felt the need to go to the hospital. I wanted to offer the logistical support of our community in order to help the family with their daily mundane obligations. I wanted to embrace a fellow Jew. And I desired to pray in the presence of Motl.

And so on Wednesday I visited Motl, offered support to his family and friends, and prayed in his presence. The next day I was called and told that Motl was in his final moments and could we possibly arrange a minyan to daven Maariv in his presence one last time. We got the word out and our community rose to this challenge and ten men dropped everything they were doing in order to rush to children’s hospital and pray in the presence of Motl. I was unable to make the minyan, but I walked in just a few moments after the minyan had ended. I was embraced by the Chasidim who were keeping a constant vigil at Motl’s side. They were so appreciative of the fact that our community made a minyan for Motl. They thanked me because they said that Motl was able to get great merits from the prayers of the minyan. They also said that Motl could not repent in the moments before his death as he was incapacitated. In such a situation, the custom is to gather a minyan and the minyan should repent on their own in the merit of the sick person. I too, immediately resolved upon myself to do teshuvah. At that moment, although we barely knew each other we reminded each other of the rabbinic phrase, “kol Yisrael areivim zeh lazeh, all of the Jewish people are responsible for one another.” In the end, Motl passed away on Friday night, after the start of Shabbat.

I recited psalms and other prayers and by the bedside of Motl and I read also read this week’s Torah portion which contains the story of the Akedah, the near-sacrifice of Isaac.

The similarities between the Akedah and the story of Motl are clear. In both cases the parents are being called upon to perform an unbelievable sacrifice. God asked Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, and God has asked Motl’s parentsto return Motl to heaven.

The reaction of Motl’s family – a very understandable reaction – just shows us how enormous the test of Abraham actually was. Motl’s family wanted to cling to their child no matter his physical condition and no matter his prognosis for the future. On the other hand, Abraham was willing and eager to sacrifice his son and heir.

It is unimaginable to me how Abraham could have done this. How could Abraham have been willing to sacrifice Isaac? The magnitude of the test is incomprehensible.

But some commentators argue that the greatest test for Abraham was not whether or not he would listen to God and sacrifice his child. After all, if you were absolutely certain that God came and spoke to you and told you to do something, how could you not listen? Rather, the greater test was Abraham’s willingness to listen to the Angel of God when he was told NOT to sacrifice his child.

Imagine how great that test must have been! Abraham was convinced he had heard the word of God. Once he heard the call he zealously strove to fulfill the mitzvah. He woke up early in the morning, took his child, and set out for the mountains. He bound his son to the altar and lifted the knife to slaughter him and then he hears a second call, not from God, but from an angel. (Vayikra elav malakh Hashem….) Would he continue to listen to his first call or would he now listen to this second call which was not as crystal clear as the first call? Abraham really wanted to do the will of God but now he was hearing a new call. Would he be able to stop and redirect his zealousness?

As difficult as it is to be zealous for God, it can even be more difficult to temper one’s zealousness with nuance. The zealot does not want nuance. Once he has heard the word of God how could there ever be compromise.

Rashi records that Abraham really wanted to continue. In Rashi’s commentary, Abraham says to God, “Eeseh bo chavalah ve-otzi mimenu meat dam, let me please make a small wound in him and take out some blood.” Abraham desperately did not want to be shut out of his opportunity to follow the original commandment of God.

Indeed, some even argue that Abraham actually sacrificed Isaac. The verse says, Vayashav Avraham el naarav, Abraham returned to the youth. So where was Isaac? Most commentators say he was either in the Garden of Eden or studying in Yeshiva. But the important 13th century Italian work Shibbolei Haleket, indicates that Avraham had actually sacrificed Isaac and then sprinkled his ashes on MountMoriah. God then gathered up the ashes and resurrected Isaac.

These sources show us how difficult it is to pull back when we are in the throes of worshipping God. We become so passionate and zealous that we forgot to monitor closely the actual teaching of Hashem.

Religious passion naturally leads to extreme forms of devotion. But it is relatively easy to become a holy roller and a true believer. It is much harder to know how to limit oneself and not become over zealous so as to become a fanatic.

The great 19th century Chassidic rebbe, Mordehai Joseph Leiner of Izbicia sees this exact struggle as the greatest challenge of the Akedah.

This is what he writes in his classic commentary, Mei Shiloach:

The essence of the trial of Isaac lies in the fact that the prohibition of killing was clear to him, even more so slaughtering his own son. For clearly it was easy for Abraham to follow the command of the Lord with all his soul, even to sacrifice himself. Only in this case, as the Zohar states, the word came to him through a dim glass. That is, an explicit word did not reach him, and he was perplexed in his heart…. (Translated by Jerome Gellman, The Frear, the Trembling, and the Fire, 25.)

Abraham was perplexed because he had contradictory teachings from God. On the one hand he was told not to kill, and other hand Hashem was telling him to kill Yitzchak. The challenge of Abraham and the challenge of the Akedah becomes not to live a Godly life without any ambiguity or nuance, but to struggle in order to find the true word of God.

I see this challenge often with what we sometimes call the Baalei Teshuvah community. This refers to people who have decided to reevaluate their lives and live in the path of Hashem and Halakha. From my perspective, once one commits to that life the greatest challenge is not in following the path of Hashem but in doing so with nuance and without becoming overly zealous and overly rigid.

This is the challenge that faces us as we embrace an Orthodoxy that is both Orthodox and open. How can we be both? How can we be committed to tradition unambiguously and yet at the same time open to the teachings and ideas and values of our modern society?

We can do so by recognizing that ambiguity is not our enemy, fleeing from it is. The greatness of Abraham was that he struggled with this tension in order to determine the proper path.

We face these tensions over and over again in our shul. How can we be as inclusive as possible of women and yet remain equally committed to tradition? How can our shul be a place open to everyone on whatever spiritual level they might be and still remain a place deeply committed to tradition? How can our children be taught how to daven by their parents in a proper way? How can our shul continue to grow and still remain a tight-knit group?

And we face these tensions in endless numbers of issues in our daily lives as well. For example, what should be our position on abortion? Should it be absolutist or is there room for nuance? Or how about on matters like creationism and evolution?

And of course, we face this issue when dealing with end of life situations like the case of Motl Brody. Do we adopt a rigid position that might or might not conform more closely to traditional rabbinic teachings? Or do we see this as an area which needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis and informed by the great advances in medicine and science?

Some of you might know where I stand on all these specific issues and I am happy to discuss them with you at length. But that is not the point.

The point is that there was a great challenge in the Akeda of Yitzchak. But it might not be what we automatically assume it to be. The great challenge was that Abraham needed to sift through his conflicting teachings in order to find the true path. The challenge is that the call from God appeared contradictory and Abraham had to struggle with those contradictions.

This challenge is the challenge that faces us as individuals and as a community every single day. We cannot flee from our challenge towards the open arms of rigidity. Instead, we must struggle through each issue with great care and recognize that we are no less devoted to God if we do not seem as zealous as others. Zealousness should not be mistaken for passion, devotion, and dedication to God.

The lesson of Akedat Yitzchak is that we must embrace the complexities of our faith and challenge ourselves to walk in the path of Abraham by striving hard to follow the sometimes, seemingly contradictory directionsfrom Hashem.

In the merit of Motl Brody may we always rise to fulfill such challenges and understand the call from Hashem.

1