THE ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT:
Abraham's Offspring from Hagar,
Versus His Offspring from Sarah

Abraham's Offspring from Hagar, Versus His Offspring from Sarah 1) The Biblical/historical background After the birth of Isaac and his weaning, his mother Sarah demanded from her husband, Abraham:
"...cast out ["divorce"] this handmaid and her son" (Gen. 21:10).
Abraham was then told: "...everything that Sarah says to you, listen to her voice..." (v. 12).

Abraham was not being told to execute automatically what her words were telling him to do, but rather to listen to her voice. He was to understand what she meant to say, and then act in accordance with this deeper understanding. Moreover, Abraham had to incorporate into this deeper understanding what he was told by the Almighty when he pleaded for Ishmael (Gen. 17:18):
"And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly..." (Gen. 17:20).

How was Abraham to bring Sarah's demand (to which he was to listen) in line with this Divine blessing, which is then repeated and rephrased in Gen. 21:13:
"And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed"?

Abraham's solution is implied in the verse which follows, which tells us that:
"...Abraham rose up early in the morning ... and sent her out..." (21:14) There is a substantial difference between "sending her out," and a divorce, casting her out. This "sending her out" implies a sending out to a mission. (Cf. when Adam, after having forfeited the Garden of Eden, was "sent out to cultivate the soil" (Gen. 3:24).

Here we need to bear in mind that Ishmael is frequently called "son of Abraham" (e.g. Gen. 25:12; 1.Chron. 1:26), and that he carried a special blessing, as mentioned. Already here, in this context, we should notice that the Hebrew term for exceedingly (in "I will multiply him exceedingly) is "b'm'eod me'od. Its gamatria (numerical value of the Hebrew characters) is 92, the same numerical value as that of the name Muhammed.

2) Kethurah
After Sarah had passed away, "Abraham took a wife, and her name was Kethurah" (Gen. 25:1). She was, according to our sages, none other than Hagar. If he had previously "divorced" her, or "cast her out," he could not have taken her now as a wife. In other words, this confirms the interpretation that she was sent out, not cast out. It also indicates that Abraham must have appreciated her and her character. Her value is already implied in her name, Kethurah, which means "incense" (Heb. ketoret).

The Torah then states: "And Abraham gave all he had unto Isaac. And unto the sons of the concubines ... Abraham gave gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his son." Ishmael is not mentioned here, probably because he had already been "sent out." What did he get from Abraham? According to Muslim tradition, Ishmael's father, Abraham, established for him the Kaaba in Mecca. (I see no reason to reject this tradition.)

3) Reviewing some commentators
Many commentators, referring to Rashi on Bereshit 21:9, hold that "Ishmael threatened to kill Isaac" when he was playing scornfully with little Isaac (Gen. 21:9). Such an interpretation seems improper to me:
a) Rashi interprets the Hebrew word metsahek (= played, in the sense of misbehaving, mocking) as engaging in idolatry, but does not say anything about killing, or threatening to kill. True, in commenting on verse 17, Rashi refers to the mistreatment of Israel by the Ishmaelites when the former were on their way to exile in Babylon. On the other hand, Rashi stresses that Ishmael in his affliction (vs. 15,16) was declared a tsaddik, righteous one, by the Lord.

Rashi, who lived in the times of the Crusades and saw the fierceness of the Catholic/Muslim wars for possession of the "Holy Land," may have foreseen that a similar war might be waged by the Ishmaelites against Israel when the Jews returned to the Land of the Fathers. He may also have had in mind the fact the earliest--and major--Caliphs were slain either in battle or in internal rivalries (except for Abu Bekr), and that the sword plays a major role in Arab culture (Cf. the flag of Saudi Arabia). Yet none of this justifies speaking about Abraham's son Ishmael as a killer from birth.

b) Ramban, in his comment on the above episode, says that "G-d saw her [Hagar's] affliction and gave her a son who was destined to be a lawless person..." This is another very harsh, even deliberate statement. It contradicts the Torah, which tells us that
*Abraham loved Ishmael, too (cf. Gen. 17:18: 21:11,26);
*Ishmael was blessed in his ways (17:20);
*"God was with the lad" (=Ishmael; 21:20) - a very rare statement in the Torah!
The Torah would not say all this about one who was "destined to be a lawless person."

We should also bear in mind that Ishmael's religion, Islam, can certainly not be described as a religion of lawlessness. True, the Torah conveys more commandments than does the Koran, but that is mainly due to Israel's vocation as the "Kingdom of Priests" among the nations (with the Land Covenant as an integral part thereof). But the Koran has its own strict precepts and ordinances, many of them tailored to mend Ishmael's Abrahamite/Hamite double nature.

c) Even more objectionable is Rav Ovadiah's recent utterance comparing the Arabs to snakes which G-d must have regretted creating! It may well have been prompted by the incitement and murderous deeds of Jihad fanatics. Nevertheless is is by no means for us humans (including learned rabbis) to tell the Almighty what He should or should not have done.

Let us remember in this context that Ishmael is one of the very few Biblical personages (besides Isaac and Solomon) whose names were ordained before their actual birth. That means there is a Divine intention expressed in these names and their bearers.

4) Afflictions upon Sarah's children?
The Ramban says, as mentioned above, that Ishmael was "destined to be a lawless person who would bring suffering on the seed of Avram/Abraham and Sarai/Sarah with all kinds of affliction." Suffering and affliction for their own sakes? Bringing suffering and afflictions upon Sarah's children to revenge on them their mother's mistake and harsh treatment of Hagar? This does not sound logical to me, and surely not at all characteristic and befitting of the G-d of Abraham, G-d of Isaac, and G-d of Jacob (known by His "13 attributes").

5) Why was Abrahan destined to have the two sons, Ishmael and Isaac? I believe that here we must delve more deeply into the question why Abraham had to have two sons, one from Hagar and one from Sarah. In other words, why did the Almighty keep Sarai/Sarah barren until Ishmael was born, causing suffering to both women?

In order to answer this question, we have to take several seemingly unrelated points into consideration:
a) If the son of promise had been born in a normal, natural way, he could not have been called Isaac (meaning: he will laugh), with all this implies. He was born in a supernatural way and given the name Isaac for the sake of different kinds of laughter:
--God-fearing people would laugh for joy and gladness in their realization that "there is nothing impossible for the Almighty" (Gen. 18:14);
--the worldly-minded and the wicked, would laugh a laughter of mocking at Isaac and what he stands for (Gen. 21:6);
--Isaac himself would in the end laugh a laughter of release and thankfulness for the final fulfillment of the Divine promises. [note: many prophecies evolved from this point, as for ex. Ps.118:26; 126:2,6]
--The playful laughter of couples in love can be found in any of these three types of laughter.

Being born in a supernatural way did not make Isaac into something or someone other-worldly. On the contrary, of all the Patriarchs he was the most earthly one: he never left the country; he harvested a hundred fold; he dug wells; his wealth increased so much that the locals (Philistines) envied him. To be sure, this earthly-ness of his was not for its own, material sake; it was guided by the Divine spirit in which he cultivated the soil, in compliance with Man's mission as ordained for him by his Maker: "...and the Lord God sent him forth to cultivate the soil" (Gen. 3:23). By the way, it is for this reason that Isaac is identified in Kabbalah with the Sephirah DIN, the Divine emanation of Law. In the Divine spirit, Isaac adhered to the Divine Law including the Law of Nature, and he mastered nature by being in harmony with it.

This fact is also pre-figured in his supernatural birth: the Divine power did make use of the laws of nature in an unexpected way: "and it ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women", (Gen. 18:11) but it did not do away with these laws. The left side of the Kabbalistic "Tree of Life" which is Form, or Law, is thus seen as expressing the laws both of the LORD and of nature, the latter including the "manner of women. They are expressed in the feminine side, the female aspect of mankind, headed by Eve, the Mother of all Life.

b) Ishmael, on the other hand, combined in himself the Divine spirit of Abraham and--through Hagar--also the heritage of Ham. The Hebrew word Ham means warm. It is the root for warmth, heat, and also for the color brown. In the genealogy of Noah's offspring, Ham is depicted as the ancestor of the Hamite peoples--usually identified as the dark-skinned peoples, or the peoples of the earth's tropical belt. In ancient times, Egypt and Babylon were their outstanding representatives.

Noah's son Yephet, with Greece, Persia, and the peoples of the North as his descendants, stands for beauty and intellect, in their positive as well as in their deceptive qualities. From S(h)em, literally "name," derive the peoples of the Semitic languages and cultures. The Torah, however, applies this term solely to the sons of Israel, as the people or bearer of the (Divine) Name. (Cf. Numb.6:27; Deut. 28:10). Adversaries are consequently called anti-Semites, even if they belong to a people of Semitic language.

The archetypal qualities represented by the three sons of Noah can be found in every human being, to some degree.

Ham, warm(th), may represent feelings in general. All of us have so-called good feelings (affection, empathy, joy, love, sympathy, etc.) as well as evil feelings (envy, greed, hate.) One of Ham's offspring, Canaan, represents the lower, or so-called evil, feelings. These lower feelings, however, are not something separate in themselves (as, for instance, intellect, which can stand on its own, even though it can be influenced by feelings). The darker emotions are part of Ham: "...and Ham is the father of Canaan" (Gen. 9:18). While Ham saw the nakedness of his father, Noah, and in his gloating informed S(h)em and Yephet (v. 22), Noah declared Canaan to be cursed (v. 25). At first glance, this seems very odd. Why did he not curse Ham the tale-bearer? Why did he pick Canaan from among Ham's sons (the other three being Cush; Mizraim [=Egypt]; and Phut)?

The word Canaan derives from Heb. can'a, low. It hints at the low, evil part of our feelings, and this specific area is cursed, not feelings altogether. (Note: Noah did not put a curse upon Canaan; rather he declared him and what he stands for to be cursed. That is, these lower, evil feelings bear in themselves the curse, and the one who is ruled by them is cursed.)

Now we begin to understand why Avram/Avraham was sent into the "land of Canaan," or to be more accurate, into the land which "was then inhabited by Canaan" (Gen. 12:6). The "tikkun ha'olam,"--the restoration of the world to its Divine order--begins with the purification of the emotions, the lifting of all feelings--including the lower ones--into the realm of the Divine; for their source is good. Lower feelings are only misdirected impulses, perhaps comparable to a mis-tuned radio.

The term "land of Canaan" is applied to the land [Hebrew eretz, which also means earth] in its corrupt state; while originally, in the language of the Torah, it is the "land of Moriah" (Gen. 22:2), that is, the land of the Divine emanation and manifestation. Consequently, Joseph termed it the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen. 40:15). The land is attached to, and belongs to, Mount Moriah, colloquially known as the Temple Mount. The land, and finally the whole earth, is to be redeemed from the lower propensities betokened by Canaan. This explains why the Canaanites could not be given another land in exchange: the lower feelings are not to rule anywhere.

The question arises: why was Abraham sent to this specific land? Why not to Babylon, Egypt, Greece, India, or any other country? The peoples living there are also not free of lower feelings. The common answer that the "land of the Moriah" is located at the hinge of the three continents (and cultures) of Africa, Asia, and Europe, is only partial. Another, not less important aspect, is the fact that Canaan/Israel comprises fertile parts (in the north and west) and wilderness (in south and east). The former gave rise to civilizations of farmers and towns, the latter to shepherds and nomads. These two different civilizations, with their divergent, often clashing interests, meet and confront here.

In a later period the sown land and the desert were the cradles of Christianity and Islam respectively, now adding "theological" arguments to the strife, and vying over the country and its capital, Jerusalem (which, significantly, is located right at the frontier between fertile lands and desert. It is Israel's ultimate mission to establish the "Peace of Jerusalem" Ps. 122:6).

This analysis leads to a deeper understanding of our earlier question, why Sarai/Sarah was kept barren by the Almighty, and why Abraham first needed to have a son from Hagar, the princess of Hamite origin. While Isaac is--so to speak--fully endowed with the Divine, it is in Ishmael --Abraham's physical, "natural" son--that the extremes of human psyche are lumped together: the Divine, Abrahamite, aspect, as well as the wide range of darker Hamite feelings.

While all of us, Israel as well as the nations, are continually in danger of falling into the trap of the lower, Canaanite, feelings; the Mizraim[Egypt] aspect of Ham is Ishmael's main pitfall. This the more so as his Egyptian mother Hagar was--according to a Midrashic tradition--a daughter of Pharaoh (Cf. Rashi on Gen. 16:1. The Pharaoh of that period should not be confused with the "new king over Egypt who knew not Joseph," Exod. 1:8). Her royal lineage may thus have given her natural feelings of superiority toward barren Sarai/Sarah (v. 4) an additional boost.

When Hagar then married Ishmael to an Egyptian woman (Gen. 21:21), his offspring gained an additional potent Egyptian component. Yet here we must remember that Ishmael inherited spiritual qualities not only from Abraham. His mother Hagar must also have been highly evolved spiritually: She conversed freely with the angels (Gen. 16:7-14; 21:17,18); and furthermore, she is the only human being in the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) who attributed a name to G-d (El Roi, God sees me), a name accepted by G-d and men (Cf. Gen. 24:63; 25:11). While the word Canaan, as we saw, derives from a root meaning "low," Mizraim derives from the root word zar --narrow, constricted, tight. This characterizes accurately the land of Mizraim (Arabic-- El-Misr. The name Egypt is a later European term): its fertile and habitable part, the Valley of the Nile, is a narrow strip between the deserts in the west and east, the high mountains in the south, and the Mediterranean Sea in the north. It can be seen as a corollary for our basic human nature, which is liable to constrict our Divine spirit.

No other country in the ancient world identified so closely with its ruler as Mizraim/Egypt did with its Pharaoh. The Nile dictated the people's rhythm of life absolutely, and Pharaoh had to implement these dictates. (Israel could not accept these dictates of nature and its representative Pharaoh as ultimate values. The social and religious values of the ancient Egyptians had been ultimately shaped by the laws of nature--dictated by sun and Nile, their ultimate gods, with Pharaoh as their representative. Israel could not accept this attitude as its ultimate values--the "13 attributes" are above them.) While in foreign affairs Pharoah occasionally had trouble with his neighbors in the west and south, characteristically his main interest and thrust was the looting of the land of Canaan (Israel). Historically, each and every superpower has needed to control Israel in order to attain and retain its position--or at least to prevent other super powers from ruling it.

Ishmael and his descendants attained, in the form of Islam, the position of a leading world power, and incorporated the Land of Israel into its realm (which it terms Dar-es-Salam--the "abode of Islam"). Just as Israel was not meant to remain under Pharaoh's rule in ancient times, in modern times--with the termination of its exile and submission under the rule of the nations--Israel is being re-established in the land of its destiny, the "Land of the Fathers." This event puts Ishmael's descendants--Islam and the Arab nations--to the test as to whether they will yield to their inherited Egyptian/Pharaonic trait, or to Abraham's heritage. Zion is the "test stone" also in this respect (Cf. Is.28:16, where the Hebrew word even bohan means test stone, not testing stone).

In perfect keeping with this, the Koran, the book of the religion of Ishmael, warns its adherents duly and repeatedly not to go in Pharaoh's way (cf. Surah 73, "Enwrapped," v. 15,ff.). The Koran even takes this one step further: it has Pharaoh, when he saw his army drowning, doing repentance, and confessing: "I believe that there is no god but He in Whom the Children of Israel believe; I am of those that surrender" (Surah "Jonah", 92). This, is not to be taken as a recommendation to postpone repentance until after the drowning of the army. Rather, it is foremost upon us, the descendants of Abraham, via Isaac as well as via Ishmael, to recognize our respective vocations for the sake of the benefit of all. It was for the sake of this end that Sarai/Sarah was kept barren till Ishmael was born.

Father Abraham foresaw the struggle in which his son Ishmael would be entangled. Therefore, when told by the Lord that in spite of his advanced age he would bear a son from Sarah, Abraham prayed (Gen. 17:18): "O that Ishmael might live before thee".

Abraham loved both his sons, Ishmael and Isaac, therefore he had to be told: "Take now thy son, thine only one whom you have loved, even Isaac..." (Gen. 22:2).The specification "even Isaac," was to tell him which of his two beloved sons he was to bring to Mt. Moriah.

Abraham did not merely pray "that Ishmael might live." He was not concerned that Ishmael would be threatened by Isaac, and would need a special prayer for protection from his brother. Abraham was concerned that Ishmael--born from Hagar, and biologically the firstborn--might try to take the whole heritage for himself, thus depriving Isaac of God's promise. Abraham's prayer that Ishmael might live before the Lord, was meant to encourage and guide Ismael to let the spiritual--Abrahamic-- inheritance prevail, that Ishmael would be alive in the Divine spirit, and consequently recognize also Isaac's call.

The two brothers and their descendants were not to fight over the inheritance, but rather"compete in good works," as the Koran, Ishmael's guide book, so aptly says.

In the spirit of our father Abraham, let us pray: "Oh, that both of us, Ishmael and Israel, might live before Thee."