Explaining Sarah’s Absence: Why Sarah is not Mentioned at the Akeidah

Michael Wolff

Introduction

Genesis 23 tells of the death of Sarah, the first and founding matriarch of the Jewish people. Sarah is the only one of the four matriarchs whose age is recorded at her death.^[1] S. R. Hirsch in his commentary on 23:1 notes that Sarah receives a special honor in that the years of Sarah’s life are framed between the words “Hayyei Sarah” (“the life of Sarah”) at the beginning and end of the verse. No patriarch, not even Moses, receives this honor. Only Sarah, as the first of the matriarchs, receives all the honors and acknowledgements due to her. Jo Ann Davidson notes: “In the sparse historical style characteristic of the Genesis narrator, it is remarkable that an entire chapter (Gen. 23) is devoted to Sarah’s death and burial.”^[2]

Sarah receives this honor, understandably, because she is a strong personality, independent, and an equal partner with Abraham. They function as a team, two people working in harmony.^[3] “The narrator (of Genesis) seems intent that Sarah be regarded as just as critical to the divine covenant as Abraham. The reader finds the unwavering indication that it will be Sarah’s offspring who will fulfill the covenant promise—even when Abraham contends with God that he already has a son, Ishmael (Gen. 17:18-19; cf. Isa. 51:1-2).”^[4]

The main difficulty of the Akeidah, the Binding of Isaac (Gen.22), in relation to Sarah is to understand why she is not mentioned in the narrative. Since rabbinic tradition considers the Akeidah as the final test of Abraham’s faith in G-d, one could ask, if Sarah is an equal partner to Abraham, then why is she not tested as well? The question that then logically follows is: did she know about the test or not? Did Abraham tell her what G-d had asked him to do? The book of Genesis records other instances where Abraham consults with Sarah. When Abraham and Sarah descend to Egypt because of a famine, he asks her permission to say that she is his sister (Gen. 12:11-13). He marries Hagar because Sarah tells him to (Gen. 16:2). G-d tells Abraham to listen to Sarah when he is upset because she wants Hagar sent away (Gen. 21: 10-13).

Various Explanations

Although some classical commentaries, notably Ibn Ezra, omit any connection of Sarah’s death to the Akeidah, the rabbinic tradition does link them. It applies a principle of exegesis termed semikhut, which considers the adjacency in the sequence of the events to conclude that Sarah’s death is a direct consequence of the Akeidah. The consensus is that when Sarah hears about the possible death of her son, she dies from the shock of the notification. As the text avoids any indication that Abraham consulted with her, this Midrashic tradition suggests that Sarah did not know that Abraham had taken Isaac to be offered as a sacrifice. Why else would the shock cause her demise?

Midrash Tanhuma (Va-yeira 22) has Abraham not only failing to consult with Sarah but even deceiving her:

While they were eating, he said to her: “You know that, when I was a child of three, I already knew my Creator, yet this child is growing up and still has had no instruction. There is a place a short distance away where children are being taught, I will take him there.” She answered: “Go in peace.”

The work Midrash Aggadah, on Genesis 22:10, says that Abraham told Sarah that he was taking Isaac to the yeshiva of Eber to teach him Torah. A second midrash in Midrash Tanhuma (Va-yeira 23) adopts the more popular assumption that Sarah might not have known at all what was happening. This midrash has Isaac, immediately before Abraham is going to cut him with the knife, warning Abraham not to tell Sarah what happened: “Isaac said to him: ‘Father, do not tell my mother about this while she is standing at the edge of a pit or a roof lest she hurl herself down and die.’” According to this midrash, Satan tells Sarah, and she dies from shock because she was previously unaware of what was going to take place.

Louis Ginzberg, in his book Legends of the Bible, which is a condensation of his great work Legends of the Jews, brings an entirely different midrash. Ginzberg’s version has Satan coming to Sarah in the guise of an old man who tells Sarah that Abraham built an altar and offered Isaac as a sacrifice to G-d. Sarah weeps for Isaac but also consoles herself by saying that, if she had known about it in advance, she would have accepted the test:

Sarah lifted up her voice and cried bitterly, saying: “O my son, Isaac, my son, O that I had this day died instead of thee! After that I have reared thee and brought thee up, my joy is turned into mourning over thee. In my longing for a child, I cried and prayed, till I bore thee at ninety. Now hast thou served this day for the knife and fire. But I console myself, it being the word of God, and thou didst perform the command of thy G-d, for who can transgress the word of our God, in whose hands is the soul of every living creature? Thou art just, O Lord our God, for all Thy works are good and righteous, for I also rejoice with the word which Thou didst command, and while mine eye weepeth bitterly, my heart rejoiceth.”^[5]

Ginzberg’s version then has Sarah going in search of Isaac in the hope that he was not sacrificed. Satan, again in the guise of an old man, meets her in Hebron. He tells her that Isaac is alive. Upon hearing the news, Sarah dies from sheer joy.

S.R. Hirsch, in his commentary on Genesis 23:2, discusses why Sarah died in Hebron. He theorizes that Abraham, perhaps, sent Sarah there to avoid her receiving news about the death of Isaac.

Why is Sarah not included in the Akeidah Test?

Postulating Sarah’s death as caused by the Akeidah, however, does not explain why she was not included in the test. It merely links the two events but does not justify the omission. Understanding the concept of a test of God can provide some answers.

Nachmanides (Ramban) writes in his commentary on Genesis 22:1 that the test is for the tested and not for the tester. The one being tested needs to realize what he is capable of. Ramban considers this as actualizing one’s potential. God knows in advance what the result will be but wants Abraham and, possibly, Isaac to know what faith they are capable of. Sarah does not need to be tested.

As midrashim often function as a medium to answer difficulties in the Biblical text itself,^[6] different midrashim also provide possible answers. Rashi on Genesis 22:1 cites the Midrash Bereishit Rabbah 55:4 saying that G-d tests Abraham, not Sarah, to respond to the accusations of Satan that Abraham lacks faith. Abraham alone is on trial. The Midrash Tanhuma on the same verse uses the metaphor of a flax merchant who only strikes the flax when it is hard so that it does not shatter and a potter who only strikes the pots that will not break. The midrash teaches that G-d tests only the person who would pass the test, thus realizing their potential. This implies that Sarah is not mentioned either because she would not have tolerated the Akeidah’s test of faith or would have died as a result. Abraham, therefore, out of concern for his wife, does not tell her or include her.

Interestingly, the approach of early Christian literature is quite different. David Eastman presents an analysis of a fifth century CE Syriac homily attributed to an author known as Ephrem.^[7] According to this homily, Abraham avoids telling Sarah about the Akeidah because he is fearful that she would accompany him on the trip.^[8] The homily contains extensive dialogue in Sarah’s voice where she talks about her devotion to G-d and her willingness to offer her son to G-d. Eastman writes, “I would argue that the author is asserting that women’s piety must remain under patriarchal control.”^[9]

Dalia Marx, a modern Israeli scholar, presents a different concept of the role of women in the religious tradition.^[10] She writes about how modern Israeli authors offer a different depiction of women than the biblical narrative. The women are strong and also willing to sacrifice themselves to build their family.^[11] Sarah is an example of self-sacrifice because she gives her maidservant Hagar as a wife to Abraham. Marx writes, however, “That being said, it seems that women are almost always identified with the attributes of grief and loss.”^[12]

These varied responses to the question of Sarah’s absence at the Akeidah reflect different understandings of the woman’s role in the Jewish religious tradition. Gila Fine, in her book The Madwoman in the Rabbi’s Attic, which does not explicitly address Sarah, has a fascinating discussion about stereotyping and distinct gender roles. In her chapter on the role of the woman called “Ima Shalom,” Fine describes the “doctrine of separate spheres” as follows: “public and private, outdoors and indoors, conflict and support, general principles and individual emotion – these are precisely the differences between the male domain of the outside world and the female domain of the home.”^[13] Fine says that the rabbis of the Talmud differentiate between male public roles and female private, family-based roles.^[14] She also states that Rabbinic doctrine “posit[s] a distinction between worldly matters and heavenly matters; even if women are to be included in the worldly sphere of politics, they must be kept out of the heavenly sphere of religion.”^[15] If one assumes that the rabbinic tradition derives from the Torah, then Fine’s observations about gender roles help explain why Sarah is not present at the Akeidah. It is not within her role or domain to be there.

The Syriac Christian approach, however, does not make this differentiation in roles. It focuses more on hierarchy or patriarchy. This is why the Ephrem homily portrays Sarah with an active, participatory role in the Akeidah, although Abraham does not allow her to lead. 

Marx writes: “In classical as well as in modern literature, the story of the Akeidah serves as a core for examining either the relationship between God and the believer, or male-oriented father-child relationships.”^[16] Fine would probably agree with this statement.

Conclusion:

Sarah functions as an equal partner with Abraham in the establishment of the Jewish people.

But they have separate roles. Sarah takes responsibility for the aspect of family in the private sphere. Abraham assumes responsibility for the public, religious, ritual domain of worship and service to G-d. As the test of faith of the Akeidah lies within this public religious area, Sarah, accordingly, is not mentioned. Her death, however, can be linked to the news of the event, because it involves her only child, the heir of the Jewish people. She could not bear losing him. Isaac is her family and her future.

The Tanakh, in other instances, blurs the gender distinction between masculine and feminine, public and private roles. The stories of Deborah and Esther serve as excellent examples. Deborah is a prophetess and an acknowledged leader of the Jewish people (Judges 4:4-5).^[17] Her role is in the public eye. Esther, also, as Ahashveirosh’s queen, is a public figure. Although both women also utilize styles of leadership that may be indicative of typically feminine behavior, a complete analysis is beyond the scope of this article. Sarah, however, as the paradigm of the Jewish matriarch, clearly exemplifies the rabbinic concept of role differentiation.

[1] Jo Ann Davidson, “Genesis Matriarchs Engage Feminism,” Andrews University Seminary Studies 40, no. 2 (2002): 169–78, 170. Rebecca’s death is not mentioned at all, but, according to Rashi’s commentary, only hinted at. Rachel’s death in childbirth is discussed without mentioning her age (Genesis 35: 16-20). Jacob tells his sons that he buried Leah in the Cave of Machpelah (Genesis 49:31).

[2] Davidson, “Genesis Matriarchs Engage Feminism,” 170

[3] Adin Steinsaltz, Biblical Images, Second Edition (Jason Aronson Inc., 1994): 21.

[4] Davidson, “Genesis Matriarchs Engage Feminism,” 171.

[5] Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Bible, Second Edition (JPS, 1975): 136.

[6] Zvi Ron, “When Midrash Goes Too Far,” Tradition 46, no. 4 (2013): .28.

[7] David L. Eastman, “The Matriarch as Model: Sarah, the Cult of the Saints, and Social Control in a Syriac Homily of Pseudo Ephrem,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 21, no. 2 (2013): 241–59.

[8] Ibid. 253.

[9] Ibid. 258.

[10] Dalia Marx, “‘Where Was Sarah?’ Depictions of Mothers and Motherhood in Modern Israeli Poetry on the Binding of Isaac,” in Mothers in the Jewish Cultural Imagination, ed. Marjorie Lehman, Jane L. Kanarek, and Simon J. Bronner, (January 1, 2017), https://www.academia.edu/34435812/_Where_Was_Sarah_Depictions_of_Mothers_and_Motherhood_in_Modern_Israeli_Poetry_on_the_Binding_of_Isaac.

[11]  Ibid. 256.

[12]  Ibid. 259.

[13] Gila Fine, The Madwoman in the Rabbi’s Attic, First Edition (Maggid Books, 2024); 196.

[14] Ibid.  196.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Marx,“‘Where Was Sarah’ Depictions of Mothers and Motherhood in Modern Israeli Poetry on the Binding of Isaac,” 255.

[17] Steinsaltz, op. cit. 116.