Black and Jewish women consider Hagar

BLACK AND JEWISH WOMEN

CONSIDER HAGAR1

This paper is written in honor of Clark Williamson, a mentor and friend.

Living in a post-modern age, we are acutely aware of how the social location of the reader or interpreter of a text influences the interpretation of it. It is impossible to read a text with complete objectivity. Our status, culture, and place in history are brought to bear on our reading of a text whether we are conscious of it or not. Just how much of an influence does the social location of the reader have on the interpretation of a text? This question has not been thoroughly researched, and will not be by me. However, I offer the following observations.

The latter half of the twentieth century witnessed the emergence of women educated to the highest levels of biblical studies. At the same time, Christian and Jewish scholars became more aware of the work that each was doing. We read the same text but from significantly different historical and theological backgrounds. I wondered whether African-American and Jewish women scholars would differ in their readings of the Hagar texts of Genesis 16 and 21. Jewish women typically look to Sarah as their ancestor and, perhaps, role model. African-American women have identified with Hagar, Sarah's maid. I expected that Jewish women would defend the actions of Sarah, and African-American women would sympathize with Hagar. I discovered that the outcome was more complex than that. The African-American women did not agree with each other in their reading of Hagar, and the Jewish women exhibited considerable diversity in their reading of the texts. Because this is a short essay, attention will be directed to only a few of the many studies of Hagar that are available.

Hagar's story is central to two chapters in Genesis (16, 21). It is alluded to in a third (25). Genesis 16 focuses on Sarai2 and her servant, Hagar. The narrator tells the first half of the story from Sarai's point of view and sympathizes with her. However, in the second half of the story, beginning at verse 10, Sarai disappears and the spotlight is on Hagar and her soon to be born son, Ishmael. Chapter 21 reports the birth of Sarai's son, Isaac, and the expulsion of Hagar and her son. Again the first part of the story is told from the point of view of Sarai and Abram. The second part is Hagar's story. The summary provided below is by me, an African-American woman.

In the narrative of chapter 16, Sarai is past the age of menopause and has not borne a child. She gives her servant, Hagar, to her husband, Abram, as a wife so that she may bear a child for Sarai.

Consider the following translations of Gn 16:5 which describe from Sarai's point of view Hagar's opinion of her after she became pregnant:

KJV: "I was despised in her eyes."

NIV: "she despises me."

NRSV: "she looked on me with contempt."

NAB: "she has been looking on me with disdain."

All of these statements prepare the reader to dislike Hagar. Not only because Sarai says these things about Hagar, but also because the narrator agrees with her (16:4). The point of view of the narrator in a biblical story is understood to be an accurate interpretation of what is going on. The reader, therefore, sympathizes with Sarai and judges Hagar to indeed be an uppity servant who thinks she is better than her mistress. Sarai and the storyteller already agree; the translators support them by choosing harsher English words than the Hebrew warrants. The Jewish Publication Society dissents with the milder translation, "I am lowered in her esteem." To be "lowered in her esteem" is a far cry from being despised or disdained. Yet, this is a more accurate translation of the Hebrew vaeqal beeneha (16:4). Sarai, of course, does not know what Hagar is thinking. She is making a judgment, not based on what Hagar thinks of her but on what she thinks Hagar is thinking of her. We hear nothing from Hagar. Within the story, the reader has no way of judging whether or not Sarai's judgment of Hagar's thinking is accurate except that the narrator agrees that Hagar no longer holds Sarai in high esteem.

The storyteller does not address the question of why Hagar's attitude or opinion about Sarai has changed other than that it is connected to her ability to conceive. Verse 4 reads, "she saw that she conceived and her mistress was lightly esteemed in her eyes" (my translation). Prior to this, Hagar is described as Sarai's shi/hah, a female slave or servant, who is given to Abram to be a wife for the purpose of bearing a child for Sarai. The child that Hagar is carrying does not belong to her. The child belongs to Sarai. She must give the child that she conceives and bears to another woman, not by choice but because she is a servant who has no control over the use of her own womb. The most common cause of death of women in premodern times was child bearing. Hagar's life is being placed on the line for a child that will not be hers.

When Sarai, with Abram's blessing, mistreats Hagar (16:5-6), she has the strength and dignity to leave the situation.

What happens next is another place where translators and interpreters misread the story. When God's messenger meets Hagar by the well, what transpires is in the context of a blessing not a curse,3 and should be read as such. She is told to return because she cannot survive in the wilderness on her own, and survive she must for the sake of the future, her own and that of her unborn child. Using the annunciation formula, the divine messenger informs her that she will bear a son and become the mother of a multitude. The son will be a pere adam, "wild ass" of a man (as opposed to a domesticated ass), which means that he will not be dependent upon his family for survival. The next phrase reads, "his hand will be with everyone and the hand of everyone with (or against) him" (16:12b, c). Hagar's son will settle in the presence of his kin (16:12d). Astonished by God's compassion and understanding of her situation (16:11d), Hagar names God, El Roi.

Two African-American women scholars, Wilma Bailey and Renita Weems (among many others), have studied the character Hagar in this story, and they come to very different conclusions. In a 1994 article entitled "Hagar: A Model for an Anabaptist Feminist," Bailey most often uses the terminology "maidservant" to describe Hagar's position though she uses the word "slave" at least once.4 She notices that Hagar never refers to herself as a maidservant, though Abram, Sarai, and the narrator do.5 Bailey reads Hagar's statement that she is running away from her mistress as "bold" because a runaway servant is usually not going to admit it. Bailey interprets Hagar's return as a matter of survival. She must "play the role of the humble servant" until the time is right. She must "choose to survive rather than die in the wilderness."6 Bailey thinks that the writer may have intended to suggest that Hagar told Abram about her encounter with the angel and he "did what she told him the angel said to do."7 She highlights the references to Hagar supporting her son and choosing a wife for him.8 She sees in Hagar "power, skills, strength and drive."9 Hagar, Bailey writes, had "her own inner strength on her side.10

In a book chapter entitled "A Mistress, A Maid, and No Mercy,"11 Renita Weems examines the relationship between Sarah and Hagar. She concludes that this is a tale of "ethnic prejudice exacerbated by economic and social exploitation."12 Because Weems is not doing a character study of Hagar but a treatment of the relationship between Sarah and Hagar, she on-fits most of the latter half of chapter 16, which covers Hagar's encounter with God. Weems, most often, describes Hagar as a "slavewoman" though she twice uses the term "concubine," a word that does not actually appear in this text (though it does appear in 25:6, where Abraham gives gifts to the sons of his concubines). She further describes Hagar as a "defenseless slave"13 who has a "pathetic sense of herself."14 When Hagar becomes pregnant, Weems opines that she is perhaps coming to a "sense of self worth," "purpose and direction."15 She then berates Hagar for being a "passive victim" who "participated in her own exploitation."16 Of the text where Hagar refers to Sarah as her mistress (16:8), Weems writes, "Hagar did not even have the strength to define herself."17 She was sent back because "she continued to see herself as a slave."18 Weems admires Hagar for initially leaving an abusive situation but she is disappointed that she returns.19

Although Bailey and Weems are both African-American women, they have read Hagar in very different ways. Weems understands her to be a victim. Bailey understands her to be a survivor.

The Jewish women cited below also vary in their perspectives on Hagar.

Susan Niditch comments about Hagar in the chapter on Genesis that she wrote for the Women's Bible Commentary. Niditch is sympathetic to Hagar and calls her blessed, but she is, perhaps, a bit more sympathetic to Sarah. Niditch writes, "Childless wives were humiliated and taunted by co-wives (see Gn 16:4)."20 She cites Hagar as an example though the nature of the offense of Hagar (if there was one) is not spelled out that clearly in the text. Niditch refers to Hagar as "a victim sensing a new power. . . ."21 In this statement, she comes close to Weems's interpretation. Staying close to the text, Niditch writes, "Sarah afflicts Hagar."22 Referring to chapter 21 where Hagar and her son are banished from the household of Abraham and Sarah, Niditch notes that Sarah's words show "contempt for the upstarts, the upstarts that she herself had created."23 She also writes, "the voice of Sarah, the matriarch and the voice of God are one."24 While Niditch says that "Abraham cares not at all about the maid he has bedded. . the text indicates that is not the case. When God says, "Do not be dis-tressed over the boy or your slave ..."25 (21:12), the writer seems to be suggesting that God understands Abraham's concern to be not just for the boy but the maid as well. Niditch correctly observes that at least part of the story "is being told from Hagar and Ishmael's point of view." She also notes, "The author works hard to rationalize and justify the emotions and actions of Abraham and Sarah (21:12-13)."26 Niditch sympathizes with the plight of Hagar and Ishmael and refers to them as "the blessed mother and child."27

Avivah Gottlieb Zornberg, in Genesis: The Beginning of Desire, gives scant attention to Hagar but what she says is sympathetic. She refers to a midrashic tradition that claims that Abraham took Hagar back after the death of Sarah. She finds that "Abraham reaffirms his life's urge to integrate and include."28 This contrasts with "Sarah's legacy of discrimination. . ."29

Tikva Frymer-Kensky, in In the Wake of the Goddesses,30 briefly mentions Hagar in an endnote where she is listed among lesser-known women who should be remembered.31. The list includes Israelite and non-Israelite women who appear in biblical narratives. Sarah, she writes, treats Hagar "oppressively."32

Perhaps the most original reading of Hagar comes from Savina Teubal in her 1990 book, Hagar the Egyptian.33 Teubal presents the original thesis that Sarah had a position similar to that of a naditu priestess,34 and Hagar was her companion.35 She insists that Hagar was neither a slave nor a concubine based upon her understanding of the words shifhah and mishpahah (family).36 She suggests that Hagar may have been an Egyptian princess37 who was adopted by Sarah.38 Teubal interprets Hagar's attitude toward Sarah after she conceives as one of "contempt."39 Noting that Hagar never protests, she concludes, "It could very well have been an honor to bear the heir of a priestess."40

Teubal understands the "desert matriarch"41 story of Gn 16:10-14 to belong to another tradition that did not originally name Hagar as the matriarch. It is the desert matriarch who receives the promises from God and the name of the child. The desert matriarch is also the one to whom the angel appears in Genesis 21.42 The Hagar and desert matriarch stories were fused.43

In general, the Jewish women give much more attention to Sarah44 than Hagar, but when they do give attention to Hagar they are generally sympathetic. They acknowledge Sarah's mistreatment but they also suggest (with most biblical translators) that Hagar did something to cause Sarah to respond as she did. Teubal differs because she sees Hagar in a very different position in terms of her relationship to Sarah.

The African-American women both feel a kinship to Hagar, and yet they interpret her actions in very different ways.

Perhaps the most striking learning in this brief study is that although texts are read to some extent from the social location of the reader, a shared social location does not necessarily lead to a similar interpretation of a text. Social location is only one factor influencing interpretations of a text; scholarship, method, and our personal experiences are others. It may be that differences within a particular social location are as prevalent as those between social locations.

1Black and Jewish are not mutually exclusive terms. A person can be both Black and Jewish. This paper will separate the two for heuristic reasons. The thoughts of Black women who are not Jewish will be compared to Jewish women who are not Black.

2Sarah is another form of this name.

3For a detailed discussion of the language and meaning of the text, please see Wilma Ann Bailey, "Hagar: A Model of an Anabaptist Feminist?," The Mennonite Quarterly Review 68, no. 2 (April 1994): 219-228.

4Ibid., 222.

5Ibid., 221.

6bid., 223.

7Ibid., 224.

8Bailey, 226.

9Ibid.

10Ibid., 227.

11Renita J. Weems, Just A Sister Away: A Womanist Vision of Women's Relationships in the Bible (San Diego: LuraMedia, 1988).

12Ibid., 2.

13Ibid., 5.

14Ibid., 12.

15Ibid., 5.

16Ibid., 12.

17Ibid.

18Ibid., 13.

19Ibid., 12.

20 Susan Niditch, "Genesis," in The Women's Bible Commentary, ed. Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H Ringe (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1992), 17.

21Ibid.

22Ibid.

23Ibid., 18.

24Ibid.

25Tanach: The Holy Scriptures (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1988), 30 (emphasis added).

26Niditch, 18.

271bid.

28Avivah Gottlieb Zornberg, Genesis: The Beginning of Desire (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1995), 136.

29 Ibid.

30Tikva Frymer-Kensky, In the Wake of the Goddesses (New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1992).

31Ibid., 254 n. 2.

32Ibid., 274 n. 34.

33 Savina J. Teubal, Hagar the Egyptian: The Lost Tradition of the Matriarchs (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1990).

34Ibid., xv.

35Ibid., 62.

36Ibid.

37Ibid., 46.

38Teubal, 133.

39Ibid., 77.

40Ibid., 81.

41Ibid., 141 ff.

42Ibid., 151-152.

43Ibid., 161.

44I have not included their treatments of Sarah except for a few places where it is necessary in the examination of Hagar.

Wilma Ann Bailey

Associate Professor of Hebrew and Aramaic Scripture Christian Theological Seminary

Copyright Christian Theological Seminary Winter 2002
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved