Return To TorahWeb.org Homepage
As the akeidah episode reaches its climax, Avraham's response and character is succinctly appraised:"ki atah yadaati ki yerei Elokim atah velo chasachta et bincha et yehidcha mimeni." Numerous mefarshim struggle with the implication that Avraham's extraordinary conduct in confronting this challenge revealed something previously unknown to the omniscient Hashem. Indeed, the very purpose of this test of commitment is problematic, as the mefarshim note. Different suggestions and solutions have been proposed. I would like to briefly examine the Ramban's approach and its possible expansion.
The Ramban addresses this difficulty in the very beginning of the episode (22:1), noting that while individuals are possessed of free will, Hashem's omniscience precludes any surprises or revelations. He concludes that a Divine test benefits the righteous man who is given the opportunity to earn greater reward by converting the capacity, commitment and potential for spiritual achievement into practice. At the conclusion of the akeidah (22:12), the Ramban revisits this theme and interprets "ki atah yadaati" in this light as referring to the fact that Avraham's authentic character and his mastery of yirat Shamayim become knowable or demonstrable by virtue of having been concretely objectified by his actions. Moreover, this conversion of conviction and character into deed qualified him for greater reward, a primary objective of the nisayon, as previously noted.
However, this reading of "atah yadaati" remains linguistically difficult, and the goal- if limited to enhancing spiritual credit alone - seems to be surprisingly narrow, especially given the evident import of the akeidah experience, both as presented in the Torah and as generally projected by Chazal. Perhaps we may advance the Ramban's approach a further step by expanding briefly on the halachic perspective on abstract convictions and concrete observance, on the potential for spirituality and its actualization.
While mandated beliefs, core values, and abstract principles are central in Yahadut, the singular feature of Torah life is the embedding of these concepts and convictions in halachic norms, intended to be enacted in the concrete world. While the precise relationship of Talmud-abstract study and religious ideas and ideals- and maaseh- performance of the mizvot and the details of Jewish law- is complex and subject to debate (see Bava Kama 17a etc.), the relationship between them is certainly complementary and mutually enhancing. According to the Ramban himself (see his commentary to Kan Tzippor- parshat Li Teitzei, in contrast with Rambam's view cited there), this idea is reflected in the rabbinic statement that mizvot were given "letzaref et ha-beriyot"- to refine man's conduct and to facilitate the inculcation of proper beliefs, and values. Throughout his work, the author of Sefer haChinuch develops the insight that is the basis of halachic law, that actions profoundly affect thought, values and convictions, anticipating the psychology of behaviorism by many centuries. Presumably, the objectification of values by means of norms is not merely an effective agent of internalization, but also a precondition to profound and transformative impact, as it helps to redefine and reprogram the religious personality. It is true that machshavah tovah Hakadosh Baruch Hu metzaref le-maaseh, but the actually implementation is always more impressive and effective. Thus, the actualization of potential is pivotal not only regarding reward, but in the very quality of the religious conviction or commitment itself.
Authentic religious experience generally entails a transformative component that requires or at least is facilitated and enhanced by concretization. If this is true generally, it is particularly so with respect to the elusive, yet indispensable attainment of yirat Shamayim. Yirat Shamayim is measured and intensified by its concrete application to real world situations. Yirat Shamayim tests and regulates the very capacity and aspiration of Yahadut to achieve sanctity and spirituality specifically in the framework of the material world. It provides an approach to inevitable challenges, dictates priorities, and determines boundaries that protect halachic and spiritual integrity. The very notion of yirat Shamayim implies a concrete interface, precluding pure conviction, abstraction or potentiality.
Avraham Avinu's own experiences and interactions, also chronicled in these parshiyot, demonstrate how difficult it is to maintain a posture of authentic and deeply rooted yirat Shamayim in real life situations, notwithstanding the projection of such commitments. He criticized Avimelech (20:11) on this basis - "ki amarti rak ein yirat Elokim bamakom hazeh vaharaguni al devar ishti"- despite Avimelech's eloquent articulation of lofty principles of morality and fear of sin (20:9-10). Avraham's encounter with Avimelech undoubtedly further sensitized him to the difficulty of practicing yirat Shamayim, reinforcing the need to internalize this critical aspiration, the foundation of other values and norms (including the basis for Torah wisdom - reishit hachmah yirat Hashem). In any case, yirat Shamayim by its nature cannot be relegated to the abstract or hypothetical plane.
The akeidah especially tested the concreteness of Avraham's commitment to yirat shamayim by challenging previous convictions, standards and values. [The Ramban cites a view that Har Hamoriyah references the theme of yirat Shamayim.] The fact that he responded with alacrity and enthusiasm -zerizut ("vayashkem Avraham baboker", and see Ramban on "vayevaka atzei olah" - 22:3) - embracing the challenge with ahavat Hashem (see Radak) and absolute faith and trust, notwithstanding his inability to reconcile the conflicting Divine imperatives, undoubtedly reinforced and elevated his own capacity for yirat Shamayim. He not only actualized his potential, but, thereby, he also significantly enhanced and even transformed his relationship with Hashem. From this perspective, "attah yadaati ki yerei Elokim atah" signifies not merely the objective evidence of what always existed in potential, but, in its actualization, also constituted an important added dimension of Avraham's development as an oved Hashem, a unique religious personality.
Perhaps for this reason the Torah speaks not only of Avraham's accomplishments in the realm of yirat Shamayim, but of his personal attainment as a (gavra)"yarei Elokim", a religious personality that is defined by the transformational internalization of this critical quality. The transition from potentiality to actuality propelled Avraham to a different stature as an oved Hashem. His increased and enhanced reward results not only from the concreteness of his actions, but the impact of that concreteness on the quality and character of his achievement. Even Divine omniscience and foreknowledge did not preclude the assessment: "atah yadaati ki yerei Elokim atah".