Toldos - Indiscretions of the righteous

Facing a famine in the land of Canaan, our forefather Isaac moves to the land of Gerar. Fearing that the local townsmen might slaughter him in order to seize his wife Rebecca, he comes up with a familiar ruse – he tells people that she is his sister (26:7). This masquerade, however, ends quite differently than did Abraham’s strikingly similar deception in the same place, six decades earlier.  This time, none of the locals attempt to take hold of Rebecca by force and, after some time, the king of the Philistines: “looked out at the window and saw and behold Isaac was sporting with Rebecca, his wife.” (26:8). The King figured out that Isaac and Rebecca were indeed married and called out Isaac on the ruse.

What are we to make of this explicit reference to the patriarch Isaac sporting (the word in Hebrew, MiSaChayk- has various connotations of joking, playing, and/or physical intimacy)?  How are we to understand that a man noted by numerous commentators for his reserve and quiet dignity is seen by a stranger as sporting with his wife? And what is this sporting?

Writing in the 16^th century in Safed, Rabbi Moshe Alshich suggested that we understand this instance of MiSaChayk as follows: after some time in Gerar, Isaac let his guard down and the king saw Isaac give Rebecca a gentle caress. The king knew that a righteous man like Isaac would only intimately touch his wife. I find this answer quite plausible, as it conforms with both the meaning of the word and the known character of the biblical personality.

VaYeira - Argue with God?

Something about this week’s parsha really bothers me. How can Abraham be so bold as to challenge God, when he’s told of the prospective destruction of a Sodom & Gemorrah (18:23) – a region of wicked people - yet say nothing when God asks him to sacrifice Isaac (22:2)!  Yes, it was noble for Abraham to inquire if the complete destruction of two cities was necessary. But, in the later instance, human sacrifice would have been the antithesis of the faith Abraham had been preaching for decades and the seeming negation of God’s promises to Abraham that he’d have a son to inherit him. Abraham is vocal in the first situation and silent in the second, more personal matter. I find this seeming inconsistency quite disconcerting.

Responding to this dilemma, my ‘neighbor’ in the early morning weekday prayer service Rabbi Shlomo Ziegler suggests that in the first instance God was consulting with Abraham (so to speak) whereas in the second situation he posed a direct command. Rabbi Ziegler suggests that we are not given license to broadly question God’s judgment when presented with a command. Rabbi Ziegler offered another possible answer – Abraham learned in the first instance that, even if questioned, God’s reasoning is well founded and his decisions are final.  So he did not bother to challenge God the second time.

Though I see truth in both answers, the question still vexes me.