Every year, when we read the Akeda, the attempted sacrifice of
Isaac as a test of Abraham’s loyalty to G-d [the Torah’s opinion—
not mine], we have so many questions. So this year, I offer a
collage of interesting insights from our Sages on a very
interesting question that is actually raised in our High Holy
Day prayerbook.
You will recall that on Rosh Hashana, the Musaf amida
is divided into three sections: Malchuyot (the Kingship of G-d),
Zichronot (How G-d remembers promises), and Shofarot (the
sounding of the shofar in Jewish history). The Zichronot section
mentions the Akeda in which “Abraham our patriarch conquered his
quality of mercy and brought his son forward as an offering.”
But, interestingly enough, just before the final bracha, there
appears the phrase “v’et Akedat Yitzchak l’zaro ha’yom
b’rachamim tizkor” – “and remember today the Akeda of Isaac for
the sake of his descendants.” So the question is very simple:
what special merit does Isaac’s role bear when the Torah, and
the rest of the Zichronot prayer emphasizes the role of Abraham?
This is a very important theological question. The
Brisker Rav offers a very interesting answer: Abraham’s merit
is by far the greater, yet we as descendants can only depend on
the merit of Isaac. This is a very strange answer from one of
the most logical of our commentaries—by a Litvak to boot! What
does the Brisker Rav mean to tell us by this insight?
In his commentary, the Brisker credits Abraham
with “selflessness to fulfill the Divine command” and Yitzchak
with “eagerness to be offered.” He then argues that Abraham’s
deed was greater, perhaps because (as Rabbi Horowitz had
observed 100 years before) the active fulfillment of a
commandment is superior to its passive fulfillment. That is,
Abraham had many things to do in order to make the command
reality, while Isaac’s passivity was the rock upon which the
fulfillment of the commandment depended. This being the case,
how can the Brisker then state, in apparent refutation of his
own Litvak logic, that the descendants of Isaac will gain merit
by specifically recalling his actions on Rosh Hashana?
The answer may well be that the Brisker, though he did
not wish to say so openly, agreed with the position of Rabbi
Shimshon Rafael Hirsch of Germany who lived just before him.
Hirsch wrote categorically (in German mind you which the Brisker
read fluently) that the Akeda was designed to teach that human
sacrifice was abhorrent to the Divine. Why not write this
openly? Think of the situation in Russia at the time the Brisker
wrote his commentary in the first decade of the 20th century.
There the belief that the Jews were the murderers of Jesus was
everywhere among the peasantry. Indeed, the Beiles Trial proved
that belief in the blood libel was alive and well in Russia in
the 20th century. Knowing this, it is possible that the Brisker
dared not write openly of Abraham’s merit when it was associated
with blood and sacrifices.
But, as to the question asked at the beginning: why
recall the merit of the son over that of the father? All the
traditional answers are problematic, Rabbi Sacks, sees the Akeda
as a series of parallel bonds of trust: one between God and
Abraham, one between Abraham and Isaac, and one between God and
Isaac. Each of these bonds is “non exclusionary” and thus one
does not depend on the other. We will consider this in great
detail next year at Rosh Hashana. Abraham being commanded to
offer Isaac is a completely independent issue from Isaac’s
following his father obediently.
I have purposely left us with much to think about and
already begun pointing us towards next year, may we all be there
together. After we finish Bereishit, we will will go backwards
a bit to Lech Lecha and we will encounter G-d and Abraham
afresh. May we never stop learning.