Since Isaiah's suffering servant is clearly anthropomorphic (and not a sacrificial animal), Isaiah 53 appears (retrospectively no doubt), to parallel the Akedah, since once again we see a righteous person (the suffering servant) being subject, ala Isaac, to a divinely-authorized (53:10) human sacrifice. In fact, when Isaac queries Abraham about why they've no sacrificial animal, Abraham famously responds that God will provide himself the "lamb" (ala Isaiah 53:7) for the offering. It’s almost as though Abraham’s statement presciently, rather than retrospectively, peers forward to Isaiah 53.
To say Abraham presciently peers forward to Isaiah 53, which is where the "arm of the Lord" (called a "lamb" in 53:7) is sacrificed by God (53:10), implies something the Jewish sages, to include the kabbalists, are wont to forego having to entertain since the idea of God's "arm" being made flesh would not only
divest Christological symbols of their Catholic garb (Wolfson), but would tend to make the divestiture pointless since Judaism could appear to be swallowed up in the
potential attractiveness of Christianity to Jews, and perhaps even to the kabbalists themselves (Green):
The first designation, given by Malchizedek, the "king of justice" (who is Shem, son of Noah), is "Salem," an allusion to peace. Later, Abraham will call this same place ה׳ יראה HASHEM manifests Himself there (22:14). But God did not want to vex Shem the righteous nor Abram the righteous, so He combined the two names and called the city ירושלים (Bereishis Rabbah 56). So constituted "Jerusalem" means, according to the Kabbalists, the place of "the perfect fear of God," since יראה (will appear), and יראה (fear) are homonyms. But the author of the ס׳ שלייה, R' Isaiah Horowitz, points out that if the early name given by Abram precedes that given by Shem, although Shem came first, it is because Jerusalem must designate the city where the Divine Majesty "will manifest Itself to the full" in the messianic era. . . Jerusalem means the city of the "Divine revelation par excellence."
Rabbi Elie Munk, Call of the Torah, Bereishis 14:15-17.
Rabbi Munk's statement references
Bereishis Rabbah 56 to the effect that "Jeru-salem" comes from Shem calling it "peace" שלום while Abraham calls it "
yireh" or "
jeru," i.e., "will appear" יראה. The writers of
Bereishis Rabbah are aware that there's a slight problem with the place being called "Jeru" "Salem" יראה–שלים, since Shem comes before Abraham (such that it should seemingly be "Salem" "Jeru"). Why is Abraham's statement "
Hashem will appear," placed before Shem's word of "
peace"?
If our offerings had no symbolic meaning; if the offering of this ram had not been intended to express, in symbolic terms, a devotion far more exalted and meaningful in life than would have been expressed by the actual slaying of Yitzchak ---then how blasphemous, how absurd, would it have been to offer up that ram תחת בנו! To offer up, instead of the most cherished being, for whom one would gladly have suffered death oneself ten times over, an animal that one happens to encounter in the wilderness, an animal that does not even have the value of being one's personal property! To what may this be compared? Someone generously gives you a million dollars, and you pick up a pin you happen to see on the ground and say: "Please accept this pin in exchange!"
The Hirsch Chumash, Bere**** 22:13-14.
There's a direct connection between Rabbi Hirsch's statement in his
Chumash (quoted above) and the reason why Abraham's statement "
will appear" ("
yireh," or "
jeru") comes before Shem's statement of "peace" ("
shalom," or "
salem"). Exegeted carefully, "
Jeru-Salem" should be thought of as the
korban offering of the lamb (Isaiah 53:7), i.e., the seeing of Hashem ה׳ יראה, followed by the "peace" offering of the ram. In other words, when Abraham aborts the symbolic sacrifice of Isaac as a
korban offering he names the place of this aborted offering "
Hashem will be seen" (in the place of Isaac's symbolic sacrifice):
And Abraham called the name of that site "Hashem Yireh" [ה׳ יראה], as it is said this day, on the mountain HASHEM will be seen.
Genesis 22:14 (as translated by Rabbi Munk).
The Hebrew of Genesis 22:13 doesn't say Abraham offered up the ram as a
korban sacrifice. The Hebrew word is עלה, which is a general word for an offering. Furthermore, the Hebrew doesn't say he offered the ram "instead" of Isaac (as it's translated in English). The word is תחת, which means
in the same place that Isaac was to be offered. A peace offering comes after the
korban offering and is offered in the same place.
Though Rabbi Hirsch is aware of the fact that the ram is not a substitute for the
korban sacrifice of Isaac, he wouldn’t be too forthcoming about that in light of the fact of Abraham specifically telling Isaac that the Lord will provide himself the
korban offering (prior to the offering of the ram as a peace offering), since that would directly link Abraham naming the place "
Hashem will be seen," with the sacrifice of the
korban offering.
The Lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; And all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God.
Isaiah 52:10.
Rabbi Munk concedes that "Jeru-salem" hearkens back to Genesis 22:14 where, when Isaac's sacrifice is aborted, Abraham names the place of the aborting ה׳ יראה "
Hashem manifests himself there" (Genesis 22:14). At the very moment Isaac's sacrifice becomes a mere symbol of something greater (when it is itself aborted), Abraham peers forward through the corridors of time to both the Passover lamb (the
korban peshat), and also the sacrificial lamb in Isaiah chapter 53:7 (whom Isaiah labels the "arm of the Lord"). As Rabbi Hirsch accurately reports, the sacrifice of the ram isn’t an “instead of” sacrifice as the lesser exegetes and translators assume. It’s clearly a peace offering related to the
korban offering Isaac’s faux-sacrifice symbolizes.
John
