The Case against God: Midrash as P’shat

Introduction

A major role of classical midrash was to revitalize the Bible as an ongoing revelation, so as to make palpable the intimate connection between God and creation. It also served to validate an emerging rabbinic ethos and, at one and the same time, assimilate and filter the influences of competing cultures. D’rash, rabbinic interpretation and reinterpretation, is not as a rule regarded as a medium of p’shat, the “plain sense” of the biblical text. Yet, there is often more to midrash than a reinventing of Scripture, a launching pad, a pretext, an asmakhta, or an artifice for legitimizing rabbinic license. This article will attempt to demonstrate that there are instances where an ostensibly midrashic departure from the “plain” or “literal” meaning of a biblical narrative can be understood as a viable, alternative understanding of the p’shat. The midrash to be discussed can indeed be viewed as a feasible option to cues latent in the text, not mere fanciful departures from the words of Scripture. Abraham’s defense of the five sinful cities epitomized by Sodom, as recorded in chapter 18 of Genesis, is a representative example. Entering an order of existence where Scripture and rabbinic interpretation consort, we take flight in that exhilarating “shuttle space” between the text and the interpreter to uncover a less travelled road to midrashic exegesis. Notwithstanding or in any way diminishing the import of an external agenda relating to contemporary issues and concerns, the midrashist is, not infrequently, engaged in the subtleties and discreet intentions of the biblical text.

Biblical Text: Its “Plain” Sense

On the surface, the tone of Abraham’s approach to God in this passage can be seem as conciliatory; the confrontation, while intrepid, as cautious and respectful. One could interpret Abraham’s case as a form of inquiry:

Will You sweep away the innocent along with the guilty?

What if there should be fifty innocent within the city, will You then wipe out the place and not forgive it for the sake of the innocent fifty who are in it?

Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?

—Genesis 18:23–25

Behind the rhetorical question Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly? is Abraham’s assumption of God’s just nature. The query may be viewed as one of astonishment and disbelief. Abraham is troubled by the juxtaposition of what he believes to be true of God and what appears to him to be the unjust act of destroying the innocent together with the guilty.

In addition to this approach of inquiry, Abraham addresses God with great deference, bordering on the obsequious: ḥalilah, “far be it from You” (verse 25) is repeated twice in the same verse, cutting the boldness of the question. Further, hinneih na, “Dare I venture, if I may, to speak to the Eternal, I who am but dust and ashes” (verse 27). The phrase hinneih na, “Dare I venture, if I may,” also appears twice in the narrative. Finally, the phrase al na, “Let not the Eternal be angry if I speak but this last time” (verse 32), speaks to the same attitude, and the same wording (al na) is also found in verse 30. In this portrayal, Abraham is a polite, if persistent, advocate of the condemned cities, attempting with deferential tact to exact as many concessions as possible from God, with the objective of annulling the severe decree. Having been assured divine pardon if there be as few as ten innocent among the guilty, he rests his case.¹

In this reading of the “plain sense” of the text, Abraham’s manner is one of restraint: he questions but does not presume, he is assertive but not aggressive, tenacious but respectful. He knows before whom he stands.

The depiction of God appears to be one of passive compliance with the efforts of Abraham. The seesaw movement of plea and assent completed, there is no further interaction between the parties. Abraham appears satisfied with (or at least resigned to) the concessions he has received and understands...