Acknowledging our shadow selves and prejudices - Lech Lcha

In striving to improve ourselves and transcend our prejudices, we invariably fall short. It is imperative to be aware of our own limitations. One can aim too high, with destructive results. My colleague Donna Jacobs Sife taught me to acknowledge any prejudicial thoughts that may arise in my mind and to deal with these rather than remain unaware of them. Let us explore the case of Sarah, the partner (1) and wife of Abraham, in how she related to Hagar, who happened to be an Egyptian woman, after her own terrible experience with Egyptians. 

 

Sarah was a prophet (2). Alongside her husband, she converted non-believers to ethical monotheism (3). Yet, she afflicted her maidservant, Hagar (4), physically - throwing shoes at her face (5) - emotionally and verbally (6), to such an extent that Hagar fled their home. Her harsh behaviour is criticized as sinful (7) and as a failure of ethics (8). Here is some more of her story.   

 

Sarah and her husband were promised children and blessings by God (9). However, instead of blessing, they faced a famine (10). To escape the famine they travelled to Egypt. On arrival there, Abaraham asked Sarah to lie about their relationship, instead she should say that she was his sister rather than his wife because he was afraid that he would be killed by the Egyptians, who would be attracted to his beautiful wife. Indeed, Abraham was left alone while Sarah was taken to the Pharaoh to become his wife. She narrowly escaped this fate (11).  

 

After this ordeal, Sarah remained childless. Yet, unlike other biblical women who appeared very distraught about this (12), Sarah seemed quite matter of fact about it. She requested that Abaham have a child with her maidservant Hagar and gave her to him to become his second wife (13). Sarah appeared to reflect a “deep sense of security and personal connection to her husband, [to such an extent that] she was willing for Abraham to have children by another woman because she felt certain that the ties between them (14)” were far deeper and spiritual.     

 

It did not quite work out so well. Hagar lost respect for Sarah when Hagar fell pregnant while Sarah remained barren (15). The tensions (16) for Sarah at this point reached boiling point. Sarah cried out bitterly to her husband. “I left the house of my birth and my father, and came with you ...I have gone in with you before ...Pharaoh King of Egypt... and I said of you, he is my brother, so that they might not kill you. ...I took Hagar the Egyptian, my handmaid, and gave her to you as a wife, ...But now my honour is cheapened and despised in her eyes. May the Lord judge between me and you, ...that we may not need the son of Hagar the Egyptian handmaid” (17).

 

Perhaps Sarah was too ambitious in taxing her “moral and spiritual powers” when she set aside her inevitable feelings of displacement as Abraham’s wife (18) and chose not to acknowledge her past trauma with other Egyptians and resultant generalised animosity she felt toward them. Sarah might have thought that she doesn’t need to bother with ‘petty little feelings’. Yet regardless of one’s greatness, “every living heart, feels” (19). On another occasion Sarah experienced a lack of faith, yet she denied this was the case because she was afraid (20). She believed that it was improper to acknowledge or “own” her doubts (21). 

 

I am writing in the shadow of the US presidential election and terrorist attacks in Europe. There is an ocean of pain, injustice and anger that needs to be acknowledged and dealt with. As always, part of the job to look inward inside ourselves. As we strive to be our best selves, let us never lose sight of our own feelings, and be alert to our unconscious biases, so that we may care for ourselves and do right by others. 

 

Notes

Image by Jo Power https://www.flickr.com/people/23623021@N02 used under Creative Commons License

1.      Steinsaltz, A. (1984), Biblical Images, Men and Women of the book. Basic Books. 

2.      Talmud, Megillah 14a

3.      Bereshit Rabba, 39:24

4.      Genesis 16:6 

5.      Bereshit Rabba, 45

6.      Radak

7.      Ramban

8.      Radak

9.      Genesis 12:2, and 12:7

10.   Genesis 12:10

11.   Genesis 12:11-19

12.   Rachel in Genesis 30:1 says give me children and if not I will die, see also Hannah in Samuel I, 1. Contrast is highlighted by Steinsaltz, A. (1984), Biblical Images, Men and Women of the book. Basic Books, p. 25

13.   Genesis 16:1-3

14.   Steinsaltz, A. (1984), Biblical Images, Men and Women of the book. Basic Books, p. 25

15.   Sacks, J. (2009), Covenant & Conversation, Genesis, p. 91

16.   Genesis 16:3-4

17.   Genesis 16:6 as translated in Targum Yonatan & Targum Yerushalmi

18.   Lebovitz, N. (Undated) New Studies Bereshit, p. 156,

19.   Ohr Hachayim, to Leviticus 9:1 

20.   Genesis 18:12-15

21.   Ohr Hachayim, to Genesis 18:15

 

Masculinity and Faith. Sara Denounced to Abraham for laughing in Vayera

Toxic masculinity is on our radar, manifesting in sexual harassment, rape, aggression and chauvinism. I wonder about the nature of non-toxic masculinity. What is it exactly? Is it realistic to have faith that men will express their masculinity in healthy ways? I don’t know how to answer my first question. The answer to my second question is to suggest that the question itself is flawed, because realism is not very useful in deciding whether to have faith in men. Faith in men requires a positive choice to believe we can get it right, despite some of the evidence.

The Torah’s teachings about the role of men often seem at odds with modern perspectives about gender roles. Perhaps the most controversial concept is the idea of a man as the “head of the household”. God declared to Eve representing all women, that “he will rule you” (1). Perhaps that was a prediction of how men would wrongly fully dominate women rather than a prescription of how things ought to be. Yet, there is some evidence that God seemed to think that men are rightfully in charge of women. When the barren Sarah laughed about a divine promise that she would bear a child at an advanced age, God complained to Abraham about his wife’s laughter (2). Is this not an expression of Abraham’s “headship” of his household?!

The passage in which God appears to speak to a husband about his wife’s alleged misbehaviour has been on my mind this whole week. It linked in my mind to the image, circulated on social media, of actor Adam Sandler putting his hand on the leg of Clare Foy, an actress sitting next to him during an interview. In the widely circulated image, Foy looks uncomfortable. (I must mention that I had not seen the rest of the tape until later, nor was I aware that Foy released a statement that: “We don’t believe anything was intended by Adam’s gesture and it has caused no offence to Claire.” Regardless of the facts in the Sandler-Foy case too many men behave in entitled ways toward women. Does this verse not imply that God regarded Abraham as Sara’s boss and therefore complained about his wife to him?!

Perhaps not. Both Abraham and Sarah both responded with laughter to God’s promise that Sarah, aged 90, and Abraham aged 100, would have a child together (4). Both of them were deserving of reprimand (5) because they doubted God’s promise based on the available evidence, of their advanced age and the impossibility that a birth could occur. God chose not to reprimand Abraham at that time because to do would detract from the celebration of a significant history altering act that Abraham was engaged in at that time. Circumcising himself which symbolised that men can constrain their sexual drive and commit to doing so as part of an overall covenant with God (6). There is a precedent that proves the principle that God would not distract from celebration of a great moment with punishment when a sin occurred around the time the Ten Commandments were given, but there was no punishment or reprimand (7).

Abraham had ample justification to be sceptical about a miraculous birth, and a covenant to transcend human frailties. This is expressed in him falling on his face (8). God hints at a reprimand by telling him “but indeed Sarah will give birth!” Have faith! (9)

Sara is keen on evidence based approach. According to one interpretation her laughter was not about God’s impossible promise, but in surprise to her body changing suddenly into a younger version of herself, losing her wrinkles and suddenly having her period. This is what upset God. This looking for evidence and only when it is presented belief follows (10). If we want our society to work, we need to believe despite some evidence to the contrary that we can make it work.

When God reprimanded Sarah, through Abraham, it was intended for both of them. For Abraham indirectly and for Sarah directly (11). In this interpretation the question about Sarah’s laughter is not about male position, but about a delicately delivered lesson about faith at a particularly tricky time. This removes one more Biblical excuse for male chauvinism. Based on available evidence, many men will continue to relate to women appallingly. However I choose to put aside that evidence and keep my faith that men can and will learn to relate to women as equals, with care and respect.

1. Genesis 3:16
2. Genesis 18:9-14
3. http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2017/10/30/claire-foy-responds-to-adam-sandler-s-constant-knee-touching_a_23260633/
4. Genesis 17:15-17
5. Midrash Hagadol, cited in Osnayim Latorah, p. 121, (thanks to Chayim Lando for drawing this to my attention) and Akedat Yitzchak 18:1
6. Akedat Yitzchak 18:1
7. Exodus 24, as explained in Vayikra Rabbah 20, cited in Akedat Yitzchak 18:1
8. Genesis 17:17 as interpreted in Akedat Yitzchak 18:1
9. Genesis 17:18-19 as interpreted in Akedat Yitzchak 18:1
10. Ohr Hachayim on Genesis 18:12-13, drawing on Midrash, Talmud, Bava Metzia, cited in Torah Shlaima p.761, 154.

Bold! - Vayera

“I was too afraid” is one of the sadder things I have heard people say to their family members when explaining why they didn’t tell their son or spouse something they thought the other would not take well. This blog post is about the merit of being bold, taking risks at a personal level as well as at the political level. The latter is front and centre for me because I am meeting with key people at both federal and state level and will be advising them to do something “courageous” in the words of “Yes Minister”.

I was sitting at my desk thinking about the Australian Curriculum Review when I received an email from one of the authors of the review, Dr. Kevin Donnelly. He suggested that I look at his recommendation number 15 as well as what he wrote regarding religion and spirituality on page 155; he also directed my attention to some harsh criticism of his suggestions. The timing could not have been better.

Recommendation 15 reads as follows: “ACARA revise the Australian Curriculum to place more emphasis on morals, values and spirituality as outlined in the Melbourne Declaration, and to better recognise the contribution of Western civilisation, our Judeo-Christian heritage, the role of economic development and industry and the democratic underpinning of the British system of government to Australia’s development”.

Recommendation 15 can be seen as simply promoting one heritage above others, without considering how this might impact on intercultural understanding.  However, thanks to Dr. Donnelly, I read this recommendation in the context of his broader writing on the subject. It is beyond the scope of this post to unpack it all. Suffice it to say that, based on the points he raised, I think it is reasonable to suggest to Governments that they boldly embrace a modified, inclusive version of this recommendation. This can foster interfaith understanding, and is standard practice in the UK and in many countries around the world.  This approach could provoke criticism on the part of people who object to either Christian or Muslim content in the curriculum. However, a group of academics and practitioners, known as “REENA”, have been engaging secularists and religious people to support the inclusion of religions and other world views in the curriculum. 

With the funeral of Gough Whitlam on our minds, it might be time to look afresh at the merits of bold government action.  

The theme of fear and courage also plays out in the Torah reading in the relationship between Sarah and Abraham, her husband. Three visitors, messengers from God, promised Abraham that Sarah would give birth to a son (1). Sarah overheard this and laughed. God complained (2) about Sarah‘s laughter and lack of faith in this divine promise, due to her advanced age (3). When confronted by Abraham, Sarah denied that she laughed because she was afraid  to tell Abraham that she doubted what he appeared to believe.   

One commentary states that “Her fear is compared to a loyal servant who fears (upsetting) his master and erred... When the master reproaches him for what he did…he can’t find the strength to admit what he did because of the great fear, so he denies it but, in the denial itself, he (implies) that it was true that he did so”. 

However, Abraham tells Sarah it is more fitting to admit that she did laugh because God wants people to acknowledge their wrongdoing (4).  Equally, that was what Abraham wanted and Sarah needed - to discuss their different initial responses to the angels’ prediction and to know that it is ok in their respectful relationship to confront difficult issues.

There are many reasons for fear. This is a call to overcome fears with courage.

Notes:

(1) Genesis 18:10
(2) I am bothered by the fact that God spoke to Abraham about Sarah, rather than talking to Sarah directly. According to one commentary, it is not God who directly accused Sarah, but one of the messengers (angels in human form), sitting inside the tent with Abraham. The angel could be seen to be addressing Sarah’s doubt, thereby completing his mission of reassuring them about the miracle of a child in their old age (Radak, Rashbam, R. Bachya. Note: the word “God”, can also be understood to mean God as represented by the angel.
(3) Genesis 18:12-15
(4) Ohr Hachayim