Lech Lecha 5772

Chazal tell us that Avraham Aveinu was given ten tests and passed them all (Avos 5:3). There is a matter of debate among the commentators as to how the tests are to be listed.  Rambam only includes those tests that are related in the Chumash text itself, whereas Rabbeinu Yonah includes the Midrashic account of Avraham’s threatened execution by Nimrod. In any case, the abduction of Sarah to Pharoah’s palace is certainly one of the ten. (According to Rambam it is the third; according to Rabbeinu Yonah it is the fourth.) We should therefore assume, based on the above citation, that here as well Avraham passed the test and is to be commended for his actions.

Surprisingly, Ramban tells us in his commentary (12:10) that Avraham sinned greatly in proposing that Sarah represent herself as Avraham’s sister. If going to Egypt entailed a danger to Avraham that could only be prevented by placing Sarah at risk, Avraham should have placed his trust in Hashem and opted to remain in Eretz Yisrael despite the famine. Even more surprisingly, Ramban, invoking the concept that the punishment rightfully takes place where the offence was committed, tells us that the subsequent enslavement of the Children of Israel in Egypt was a consequence of this sin! (See Maharal, Gevuros Hashem Chapter 9, for a critique of Ramban’s comments.)

How can we reconcile Ramban’s words with Chazal’s statement that Avraham passed all ten tests?

When a person is given a test, it is important to identify what exactly is being tested. Let us say a person is given a difficult challenge. He is unable to perform the task, yet he maintains his mental equilibrium despite his frustration. Did he pass or did he fail? It really depends on what was being tested. If the exercise was meant to be a test of his ability to perform the task, we would say that he failed. On the other hand, if it was meant to be a test of his ability to cope with frustration, we would say that he passed with flying colors.

Returning to our question: What exactly was Hashem testing for in the various tests he administered to Avraham? Let us offer the following suggestion: Over the years, Hashem made many promises to bestow kindness and bounty on Avraham. The initial move to Eretz Yisrael was to be for Avraham’s benefit (See Rashi 12:1); only there would he be blessed with wealth, children, and fame. Yet, at every juncture Avraham faced misery and crisis. He could have doubted Hashem’s good intentions or even Hashem’s ability to make good on His promises. Nevertheless, Avraham never wavered in his faith and trust. In this sense, he certainly passed all the tests.

But there is still another issue which remains to be explored.

Generally, even those of perfect faith find themselves working for a living, seeing the doctor, and looking both ways before crossing the street. Bitachon, trust in Hashem, is usually coupled with hishtadlus, human effort. But where hishtadlus is not a reasonable option, then the only alternative is pure bitachon. Of course, the proverbial $64,000 question is to know exactly when to apply which rule of thumb.

This was the calculus which Avraham faced in coming to Egypt. On the one hand, his plan to have Sarah conceal her true identity could be a life-saving hishtadlus. On the other hand, it may be a non-viable option – the risk to Sarah being too great – and accordingly this would be a scenario that calls for pure bitachon. Ramban’s position is that in this weighing of alternatives Avraham was at fault and that there were terrible consequences for this failure. This failure, however, does not detract from the purity of Avraham’s faith. He did pass the test.