In Breishit, the Torah presents us with two completely opposite reactions by Abraham when faced with two similar situations. The first is when God tells him that he is going to destroy the city of Sodom and Abraham argues with Him. Abraham questions him: “Should not the Judge of all the earth do what is right?” (Breishit 18:25). Abraham seems to be appealing to a moral principle generally accepted by men. He questioned God’s intentions without using “biblical quotes” or the commentary of some wise man. He did so with that intuitive sense of justice and love that neither man nor God could violate, and he also did so with humility and love for God: “And I dare to speak to my Lord, I who am only dust and ashes” (Breishit 18:27).

The second is when God asks Abraham to take his son Isaac to Moriah, to offer him as a sacrifice for Him. Without giving him any further explanation, much less justification, God orders Abraham to sacrifice his son, which also implies the cancellation of the promise that Abraham would be the father of a large people. After the incident in Sodom, one would have expected Abraham to beg God not to end the life of his son. But he does not do so, he does not ask for an explanation, much less a justification. His response is total submission and unconditional surrender.

The God of Abraham therefore takes two different forms in the book of Genesis. On the one hand, a God who demands total surrender to his commandments and on the other, a God who invites criticism and independent moral judgment. These two paradigms have permeated religious life and the interpretation of texts throughout Jewish history. For many teachers, from the time of the Talmud to the present day, the sacrifice of Isaac, the Akedah, has been the paradigm of their life and religious thought. For them, the survival and continuity of Jewish tradition requires unconditional surrender and total loyalty. To comply with God, one must be willing to sacrifice one’s own intellectual capacity and intuition, one must give up everything one knows and holds dear as a human being, in deference and obedience to the word of God.

More conservative circles within Judaism claim that the Akedah paradigm is their response to those who question religious practice and seek change, since according to them, religious life would lose credibility if submission and surrender were less than total. The belief that if you change one thing, everything falls apart, is derived from Abraham’s silence in the Akedah account.

But the other paradigm, that of Sodom, gives us another message: “Bring your own moral intuition, your subjective sense of dignity and justice, and use it to understand the reality of God.” Not only does this not threaten or undermine religious conscience, but on the contrary, it is necessary to understand the validity and applicability of the divine commandments. What do you choose: Sodom or the Akedah?

By Marcos Gojman

Bibliography: A Heart of Many Rooms, by David Hartman.