ACTUALIZING AVRAHAM'S HUMANISM: PRAYOR PAY!
Doesthe following Midrash, BR 49:4, to Bereshis 18:19, undermine - or at leastsignificantly challenge - our image of Avraham Avinu as the Paradigm of Chesed(loving-kindness)? The verse reads as follows:
* For I [God] have known him, to the end that he will command his childrenand his household after him that they may keep the way of Hashem, to engage inacts of righteousness/charity [tzedakah][and justice [mishpat]…*
Here is the Midrash (freely translated):
R. ‘Azariah said in R. Judah's name: First [Avraham would treat his guestswith tzedakah and subsequently [at times] he would treat themwith mishpat. How is this to be understood? Abraham used to receive wayfarers. After they had eaten and drunk he would sayto them, “Bless God”!
“What shall we say?” they asked.
“Blessed be the God of the Universe of whose bounty we have partaken,” hereplied.
If one consented to recite grace, he would [be allowed to] eat, drink, anddepart. But if one refused, Avraham would demand, “Pay me what you owe me!”
“How much do I owe you?’ he would reply.
Avraham would respond: “One container of wine costs ten follerin, a litra ofmeat costs ten follerin; a roll of bread costs ten follerin. For who will giveyou wine, or meat, or bread in the middle of the desert?!
When the guest saw the difficulty Avraham was making for him, he would say,“Blessed be the God of the Universe of whose bounty we have eaten.”
Hence, tzedakah is written first and then mishpat.* ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************* I would like to suggest that this Midrash is illustrating the concept thatentitlement (= expecting to receive without feeling obligated to give anythingin return) negates human dignity, the intrinsic worth of the individual. “I am willing to take from the other, but I have nothing to give in return.”More universally: “I find myself nourished by the world external to myself, butthat world will do very well without my contributions; it has no need for me tonourish it in return.”
Entitlement also alienates the individual from the world, because allrelationships are based upon the reality of mutual need.
The aforementioned Midrash thus touches upon the intersection betweentheological and humanistic realities which the religious personality mustconstantly confront and consider. Who heals the patient - the physician or God?Who provides relief and nourishment to the weary desert traveler - Avraham orGod?
Avraham, according to Rabbinic tradition, is devoted to teaching every person,that, in order to embrace the full reality of his existence, he must learn toview his life in its broadest context, namely, that context which places God inthe center. At the same time, however, every person must appreciate theimmediate context of his existence, which includes his human benefactors:
“Avrahamfed me, but God has enabled him to feedme.”
Avraham’s demand for remuneration from his God-denying guests does not reflectan abandonment of loving-kindness. Quite the contrary: Once his guest hasdeclared his alienation from God, Avraham’s must salvage as his guest’sdignity to the greatest extent possible.He thus strives to rescue that person’s residual dignity by re-channelling hisefforts exclusively onto the adam-la’chavero (interpersonal)realm. By demanding payment for the food, Avraham conveys to him that, as aperson of intrinsic worth in human society, he is expected not merely to be arecipient but to be a giver as well.
Avraham thus teaches us, in this midrashic portrait, that:
[1] We are living a life of fundamental self-deception unless we acknowledgeour total dependence upon Hashem for creating us and for continuing to sustainus.
[2] To refuse to acknowledge God is to to deny our intrinsic, ontologicalworth. Our existence becomes nothing more than a random happenstance. Nothingis ultimately expected of us by the Creator-of-All. Our lives are thusultimately bereft of all ontological value.
[3] We must conceptualize the previous point in the opposite direction as well:a person who accepts the idea that every individual is endowed with infiniteontological worth must accept its logical corollary, namely, that there existsa Creator-of-all Who has brought him into this world and sustains him -precisely because he has the potential to enhance Hashem's world withaccomplishments - that are exclusively his own.
******************************************************************************************************************************************************************** One final point: A subtext here is the intrinsic connection which must existbetween humility and self-esteem. The point is not merely that these twoqualities are able to co-exist within the same person,but rather that they must co-exist, as they aredependent upon each other. A person’s humble acknowledgement of indebtedness toGod presupposes that God saw enough worth in him to warrant creating andsustaining him. That worth is actualized as the individual strives to nurture andenable the world exclusive of himself.
*
*בראשית רבה (וילנא) פרשת וירא פרשה מט סימן ד
ד [יח, יט] כי ידעתיולמען אשר יצוה, רבי יודן בשם רבי אלכסנדרי זו הובריא, ורבנן אמרי זו ביקור חולים,ר' עזריה בשם ר"י מתחלה צדק לבסוף משפט, הא כיצד אברהם היה מקבל את העובריםואת השבים, משהיו אוכלים ושותים אמר להם ברכו, אמרו ליה מה נאמר, א"ל אמרוברוך אל עולם שאכלנו משלו, אם מקבל עליו ובריך הוה אכיל ושתי ואזיל, ואי לא הוהמקבל עליה ובריך, הוה א"ל הב מה דעלך, ואמר מה אית לך עלי, הוה א"ל חדקסיט דחמר בעשרה פולרין, וחד ליטרא דקופר בי' פולרין, וחד עיגול דריפתא בי'פולרין, מאן יהיב לך חמרא במדברא, מאן יהיב לך קופר במדברא, מאן יהיב לך עיגולאבמדברא, מן דהוה חמי ההיא עקתא דהוה עקי ליה הוה אמר ברוך אל עולם שאכלנו משלוהה"ד לכתחלה צדקה ולבסוף משפט, למען הביא ה' על אברהם וגו', תני ר"ש בןיוחאי אומר כל מי שיש לו בן יגע בתורה כאילו לא מת, שנאמר למען הביא ה' על אברהםאת אשר דבר אליו לא נאמר אלא את אשר דבר ה' עליו.