Fear No Fear

(All scripture from the World English Bible, ebible.org, all rights reserved)

“Therefore she said to Abraham, “Cast out this servant and her son! For the son of this servant will not be heir with my son, Isaac.” The thing was very grievous in Abraham’s sight on account of his son.”
(Genesis 21:10-11)

Now that they had the child of the promise (Isaac), things were different. Ishmael was a LOVED son, but he wasn’t the son of the promise. He was the result of Abraham and Sarah not trusting God. He was the expression of their previous lack of trust. Isaac was the expression of their trust. There was a HUGE difference between them – which was not their fault. But it DID change how everyone saw the situation.

Sarah was unwilling for her son – the son of her flesh – be treated by the son of her maidservant in any way that she didn’t think was proper, right, and good. She must have seen it as an extension of the way Hagar had treated her when she first got pregnant (Genesis 16:1-5). Sarah refused to stand for this and demanded that the child and her mother be sent away.

There was real sorrow in this situation for Abraham, Hagar, and Ishmael. They were all being hurt by this. This is one reason why we are called to be obedient to God’s Word. When we live according to His Word, we have blessing and good things. When we act according to our OWN thinking, there is always sorrow attached – no matter how good it seems at first. So much sorrow and evil could be avoided if we just obeyed. If we simply listened, held onto His Word, and didn’t move off of it. It isn’t easy, but it is simple and God WILL help us with it IF we chose to rely on Him.

The sage Rashi writes: ‘עם בני עם יצחק WITH MY SON, WITH ISAAC —For since this is my son, even though he were not as good as Isaac really is, or if he were as good a man as Isaac really is, even though he were not my son, this one (Ishmael) is not deserving of inheriting with him: how much less is he deserving of inheriting with my son, with Isaac — with one who possesses both these qualities (of being my son and of being the good man Isaac) (Genesis Rabbah 53:11). על אדות בנו ON ACCOUNT OF HIS SON — because he heard that he had taken to degenerate ways (Exodus Rabbah 1:1). The real meaning, however, is because she (Sarah) had told him to send him away.’

The sage Malbim writes: ‘Questions: Why did Sarah request that he should drive out Yishmael; and, in particular, what was the sin of the maidservant? And why did God agree to this, on account of, “for it is through Yitzchak that your seed will be called” (Genesis 21:12); and why should he drive him out because of this? That which is written, “and she sat across from him” (Genesis 21:16) twice. That which is written (Genesis 21:17), “there where he is,” has no explanation. And she saw: And then at the time of the banquet, Sarah saw that Yishmael was laughing and scorning about this banquet. But it did not explain what [the cause of] the laughter was, but only hinted [by] that which was written, “that she had born to Avraham” – that he said, like the mockers of the generation, that Sarah got pregnant from Avimelekh and that only he was born from Avraham. And Sarah recognized that his mother had incited him to this laughter, since that which the son of Sarah was preferred to her son was bad in her eyes. And based on that, it called him, “the son of Hagar the Egyptian,” and did not call him by the name, Yishmael. It was because she saw that his mother had incited him to [do] this. And she said: That is why she requested that he drive out the maidservant, who incited him, and also drive out her son with her. Since she thinks that he should inherit equally with Yitzchak – or that he has an advantage over Yitzchak, according to her mockery. But the truth is that he will not inherit, from the perspective that he is the son of the maidservant; as the offspring of a maidservant is [considered to have a status] like her. And he would not inherit with him, from the perspective that [Yitzchak] was his son, the son of the lady; and from the perspective that he was Yitzchak, who was born by a miracle and is the heart and the treasure.’

The sage Rav Hirsch writes: ‘V. 10. גרש is not simply at a distance, but a dismissing, a discarding, by which all connection with the home ceases. Thus, אשה גרושה מאישה. (גרש, related to ירש to force out of possession, hence also תירש, the juice pressed out of the fruit; קרש, the boards of the wall preventing access). This sounds harsh but is entirely due to the conditions. If the house of Abraham and his son Isaac are not to have to fear the influence of Hagar and Ishmael, after the death of the parents, and, after all, Ishmael was the elder son, then both of them must be sent away in such a way that it is clear what their real relation to that house actually was, viz: as a slave and son of a slave, according, also a slave. Afterwards Abraham could, as indeed actually happened, provide generously for them in accordance with his prosperous position and the dictates of his heart. Not for nothing does Sarah repeatedly use the term: האמה הזאת, this maidservant. Not that altogether in principle no son of a slave should carry on as a co-bearer of the tradition of the house. For she herself had quite expressly had the intention, quite on her own initiative, of forming such an arrangement. But she had found this handmaid totally unfit for such a relationship hence: גרש בן האמה הזאת ,לא יירש בן האמה הזאת וגו׳ I had hoped אבנה ממנה, that Hagar’s son would become my son, that I would be able to bring him up for you. But Hagar’s nature spoilt that.’

The Torah: A Women’s Commentary writes: ‘“The son of this slave girl is not going to share in the inheritance.” Sarah raises inheritance as the issue, stressing meanwhile that Hagar is a slave. In 17:19, God had earmarked Isaac to receive the covenantal promise, and perhaps Sarah is acting with that knowledge. Ancient law collections from Mesopotamia address inheritance in similar cases, illustrating ancient customs that may lie in the background of this story. In the collection of Lipit Ishtar, the status of the second wife determines whether or not her son inherits. In the collection of Hammurabi, a child of a slave inherits only if the father claims him. The sons of Zilpah and Bilhah—women of a status similar to Hagar—do later inherit along with the children of the primary wives, Leah and Rachel. Perhaps Sarah objects to such an arrangement because her son is so young and she may not be around to protect him.’