Fear No Fear

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

“Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread and a container of water, and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder; and gave her the child, and sent her away. She departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beersheba. The water in the container was spent, and she put the child under one of the shrubs. She went and sat down opposite him, a good way off, about a bow shot away. For she said, “Don’t let me see the death of the child.” She sat opposite him, and lifted up her voice, and wept”
(Genesis 21:14-16)

Abraham didn’t delay. God told him not to let this situation grieve him, so he didn’t. God had given him a promise that Ishmael was going to be okay. That he was going to be made into a nation. So Abraham gave them provisions and sent them off – turning them over to God’s hands. He had a promise from God and he was letting that promise dictate what he emoted. He was not letting go of that promise.

This wasn’t the last time they had contact because years later when Abraham dies, Ishmael AND Isaac bury him (Genesis 25:8-10), so the two families had some communication – which is to be expected from a beloved son. God told Abraham to send Ishmael and Hagar off, He didn’t tell Abraham to cut his son off, ignore his son, or never speak to him again.

Hagar also had a promise from God, but it was from when Ishmael was in the womb (Genesis 16:7-12). She had been told her child would become a nation. That he would have offspring. That he would live to be a man. At this time Ishmael was at least seventeen and possibly as old as twenty years old. He wasn’t a young child. But he also hadn’t married, had offspring, or really become a fully grown man. Hagar had a promise from God to hold onto, but she wasn’t holding onto it. She was letting what she saw dictate what we emoted. She had let go of her promise.

The sage Sforno writes: ‘שם על שכמה, the hose containing the water; this was in order to show that she was a slave woman. A reminder of the angel at the time having told her that she was to submit to her mistress Sarah (16,9) A righteous person of the caliber of Avraham would certainly not send away a woman and her son without provisions adequate to ensure that she can reach the next location where new provisions can be obtained. Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 53,15 understand the words ויהי אלוקים את הנער in verse 20, to mean that she had both donkeys and camels at her disposal as well as her son’s servants. If we accept that line in the Midrash at face value, the crisis which overtook Hagar and Ishmael was only that they ran out of water due to having lost their way in the desert. As soon as they found a source of water they had all the means to establish themselves economically, even in the midst of the desert. It was natural for Ishmael to settle in the desert as his mother had been told already while she was pregnant that here son would be a פרא אדם, someone preferring to live in the wilderness, not in civilised society.’

The sage Malbim writes: ‘And he got up early: It recounts the righteousness of Avraham, that he got up early in the morning to implement the commandment of God. Such that he did not give silver and gold into her hand. Rather, “he took bread,” since Sarah had said (Genesis 21:10), “drive out this maidservant.” And there is a difference between, “drive out,” and “send away”: With the sending away of slaves, it is written (Deuteronomy 15:13), “you shall not send them away empty.” For sending away is with goodness, but driving out is with a strong hand and with anger. And he gave [it] himself to Hagar, and not through an agent, since his mercy was not moved at all. He placed it on her shoulder: Such that he did not allow her to eat in his house and go afterwards; rather he placed [it] on her shoulder. And the child: After he placed [it] on her shoulder, he sent her away with the child, to show her that the main expulsion was hers, because she incited the child to laugh. And on account of her, he is also sending away the child. And he did this so that the child would not be be disgusting in her eyes. And she went and strayed: As he did not send one of his servants to show her the way; sending her without accompaniment, which was not like his way even with guests who were strangers. As he would walk with them to send them away. For he kept the commandment of God.’

The sage Rav Hirsch writes: ‘V. 14. ואת הילד belongs to ויתן אל הגר, the שם על שכמה is in parenthesis, that is why it does not say וישם על שכמה, and is expressly stressed because it wants to show the manner in which she was sent away. As a slave, and not as the wife of Abraham and the mother of his son she had to be dismissed. The conditions and the purpose of this whole dismissal inexorably demanded this — ילד, Joseph, too, was seventeen years old and was still called ילד (Gen. 37,30). In comparison to the average length of life in those days to the present time, in proportion of 120 to 70, a seventeen year old person of that time would represent one of ten to eleven years of today. V. 15.—16. Hagar’s whole behaviour is extremely characteristic and reveals the demerit, the imperfection of the Hamitic character. A Jewish mother would not have forsaken her child, even if all she could do would be to try to pacify him, even if it were only to soothe him for the millionth part of a second. To go away, just because “one can not bear to see the misery” is not sympathetic feeling for another but is the cruel egoism of a human nature which is still crude. In truly humane people the feelings of duty master the strongest emotions, make one forget one’s own painful feelings and give helpful assistance even if one can do no more than give the comfort of one’s participating presence. Hence, so deeply significant, although Hagar wept too, it was not קול הגר but את קול הנער which God heard (V.17) for, doing nothing out of egoism, but sitting and crying does not penetrate to Him. Further, ותשלך, threw the child away, תחת אחד השיחים “behind something that was growing there” (שיח is the most general name for growths related to שגה, to shoot up in the air, and hence, transferred to the inner working of the mind) quite indifferent where he falls, perhaps even amongst thorns where he could be scratched, and, through the carelessness of the mother unnecessary pain added to the tormenting thirst. All this shows how Hagar completely lost her head when overcome with her worry and behaved towards her child in a manner no Jewish mother would be guilty of. כמטחוי קשת is usually translated by bowshot, the distance of a bow shot. This word does not occur elsewhere so its meaning can only be taken from the context. This expression certainly seems peculiar to be used here, one might be inclined to think it is used having in mind the future mode of Ishmael’s life. But if we examine the grammatical form of the word מטחוי it would definitely rule out the translation “shot”; it is an active participle of the Piel, and would seem to mean the shooter rather than the shot. Now of course the bow is not shot but is the means for shooting, but we find a term quite analogous: רומי קשת shooters of the bow instead of shooters of arrows. So we believe we can take it to mean here “she retired to a distance as archers do, i.e. just as archers walk backwards from the target to the extreme point from which they can still see it, so did Hagar walk backwards from Ishmael as far as possible to avoid seeing his distress but still only so far that she could still keep an eye on the place. This would be quite in accordance with the feelings which were struggling within her, whereby the love for her child is only given as much consideration as the consideration for herself, sparing herself pain, allow.