Was Avraham the victim of a hoax, or a prank?
Imagine the following scenario: a wealthy but busy philanthropist seeks to make a personal donation to a particularly needy recipient. He tasks his assistant with finding the perfect candidate. A short time later, it seems he has succeeded wonderfully. He returns accompanied by an individual who appears completely penniless, bedraggled, and starving, dressed in rags. The philanthropist, delighted at the opportunity, immediately turns over a large sum of money to the visitor, who displays tears of gratitude. The philanthropist feels a tremendous sense of gratification at his accomplishment.
However, a little while after that, he looks at his window and sees his assistant, talking to the same individual, who no longer presents the same image: now he is well dressed, appears well-taken care of, and leaves in an expensive car. Demanding an explanation, the philanthropist is told that the recipient is actually an actor, who in reality is quite wealthy and has no need for the donation. Nonetheless, the assistant assumes his employer should have no objection. He sought the satisfaction of having made a donation, and he received what he was looking for. What could be the problem?
It would seem to go without saying that the philanthropist would not accept this explanation, and would likely be furious. His good intentions have been subverted; the money he had reserved for a needy recipient instead went to an imposter. Presumably, the assistant will soon be out of a job.
And yet the forefather Avraham seems to have undergone a very similar experience, and nonetheless, he has no complaints. In the beginning of Parahat VaYera, (Gen. ch. 18), Abraham receives three visitors, upon whom he bestows lavish hospitality. On the day of this encounter, he was initially without guests, a situation orchestrated by God to allow him to convalesce in peace after his circumcision. However, Avraham burned with passion for acts of kindness towards others (chesed), and was more disturbed to be without guests than he would be by the burden of attending to them. Accordingly, God summoned the three “travelers” to serve as guests and thus alleviate Avraham's discomfort. The plan seems hollow, however; the travelers were actually angels, without any human need for hospitality. Thus, Avraham's efforts on their behalf would seem to be comparable to the one who unknowingly lavishes charity on an individual who is not in need. What was the value in providing a counterfeit chesed opportunity?
Nonetheless, Avraham is grateful for the experience, and an insight into his persona explains why. The mandate to treat others with kindness, a fundamental value of the Torah, is directed by two parallel commandments. One is the Golden Rule, “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev. 19:18), which, among other responsibilities, obligates service to those in need. The second is imitatio Dei, the obligation to follow in God’s path (Deut 28:9). The Rabbis explain that this seemingly daunting task is accomplished primarily through engaging in acts of kindess; just as God tends to the needs of humans, so must those who would seek to emulate him (Sotah 14a, and elsewhere). It is this principle that was discovered by Abraham.
Avraham represented chesed as a character trait, one he internalized and bequeathed to his descendants as an immutable hallmark. In the development of the personality that would set the template for the Jewish people, every expression of kindness was precious, every opportunity to hone the charitable instinct was an investment in the foundation of a nation reflective of God’s message on Earth. (See R. Yosef Yashar, Levush Yosef to Gen. 18:1; R. Meir Ben Shoshan, Nachalat Ya’akov al Ha-Torah (pp.13-18); and R. Aharon Miasnik, Minchat Aharon, Genesis, pp. 164-165 and 167-170.).
It was worthwhile for Avraham to go through the motions of hospitality, even without an actually needy recipient, so that he could continue to strengthen and develop this trait within himself. Abraham’s behavior also demonstrated the differences between imitatio Dei and “Love your neighbor” in another way. One would fulfill the obligation of “Love your neighbor” by merely accommodating the needs that are presented, in a manner that is standard and satisfactory. Avraham modeled not only the active seeking out of opportunities for chesed, but also performance of chesed in an extraordinary manner, realizing that every degree of involvement in interpersonal kindness contributed to the perfection of his God-like personality. (See R. Eliyahu Meir Bloch, Peninei Da’at, Gen. 18:1, and Zikhron Eliyahu, pp. 200-204; R. Yitzchak Sorotzkin, Rinat Yitzchak II, Gen. 18:1; R. Natan Tzvi Finkel, Or Ha-Tzafun, pp. 95-100; and R. Chaim Freidlander, Siftei Chaim: Midot Ve-Avodat Hashem I, pp. 281-286.)
This approach is consistent with a position Maimonides advocates in the disbursement of charitable funds. Commenting on the mishnaic phrase, “everything is judged by the “rov” (multitude) of actions” (Avot 3:15), he asserts that
the higher levels will not be attained by an individual through the magnitude of an action but rather through a multitude of actions; for example, when an individual gives a thousand gold coins to a needy person, and to another person gives nothing, he will not acquire the quality of generosity through this one action as much as one who donates a thousand gold coins in a thousand instances, and gave every coin in the spirit of generosity, because the latter repeated the act of generosity a thousand times and achieved a strong acquisition, while the former aroused his soul to do good once and then ceased; and thus the phrase, all according to the multitude (rov) of the action and not magnitude (godel) of the action.
Others, such as the Maharal of Prague (Netivot Olam, Netiv Ha-Tzedakah, ch. 4 ) and R. Yaakov Emden (Lechem Shamayim on Avot 3:15), adopted a different perspective, emphasizing quality (or other factors) over quantity; Maimonides’ position, however, appears to have exerted a greater influence on the halakhic literature.
In fact, elsewhere in his writings, Maimonides presents Avraham as a model of this path:
How should one regulate oneself with these temperaments so that one is directed by them? One should do, and repeat, and do a third time, actions which one does according to the intermediate temperaments and always go back over them, until such actions are easy for one to do and will not be troublesome for one, and until such temperaments are fixed in one's soul. This way is known as the way of the Lord, for the reasons that the Creator has been called by them and that they are the intermediate characteristics which we are obligated to adopt. This is what Avraham taught his descendants, as it is written, “For I know him, that he will command his children” (Gen. 18:19). One who goes in this way will bring upon himself good and blessings, as it is written, “...that the Lord may bring upon Avraham that which He has spoken of him” (ibid.). (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot De’ot 1:7)
This approach has been validated by scientific experimentation as well. Abigail Marsh writes in her book Fear Factor: How One Emotion Connects Altruists, Psychopaths, and Everyone In-Between ( p. 250-251 “That the reinforcing nature of altruism can ultimately make it self-sustaining is entirely consistent with the neuroscience literature. The deep-seated emotional urge to care may be a vital springboard for altruism, but once altruistic behavior has taken root, it can self-perpetuate through sheer force of habit... The importance of practice also helps explain why the techniques that have been empirically demonstrated to increase the capacity for altruism usually boil down to increasing opportunities for practicing it.”
This creates new possibilities for the modern era. If Abraham could perfect his character through “practicing” kindness on angels with no actual human needs, could the same be done through interacting with artificial intelligence, robots, or other advances in technology? [One must distinguish between the chesed of Avraham when he thought he was performing chesed for real people as opposed to where one knows that it is a machine].
Marsh actually discusses this possibility: “One recent tantalizing study found that a virtual reality experience that provides people with superhero like powers to help others may increase pro-social behavior back in the real world (or at least the laboratory).” Similarly, in his book, The War For Kindness: Building Empathy in a Fractured World, Jamil Zaki discusses how interventions including virtual reality have been effective in enhancing empathy (pp.152-155).
Of course, there is a risk here as well; engaging with a human-like entity that has no actual human sensitivities can complicate relationships with actual humans, an issue taken up at length by Sherry Turkle in her writings (such as Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other) and by Eve Herold in her book Robots and People Who Love Them: Holding Onto Our Humanity in an Age of Social Robots. Herold writes (pp. 201-205):
“reflecting our emotions back to us, robots could enhance our emotional health and intelligence. They can make us more aware of our emotions by immersing us in a feedback loop with ourselves.... but we also need to balance the helpful services of robots with the risk of narcissism. Technology is leading us further and further into an echo chamber that continuously reflects our own interests, feelings, thoughts, and desires.... people who are able to act out dysfunctional behaviors with uncomplaining robots will suffer no consequences and have little motivation to learn healthier behaviors… It's the demanding nature of human relations that challenges us to grow socially and emotionally, to transcend our limitations, to be effective in the world, and to have a satisfying and fulfilling life. Today's robots simply don't provide these benefits the way humans do.”
Finding the balance between these possibilities would be crucial in properly engaging with such technology. A daunting task, but it starts with an overwhelming love for people and a genuine desire to help them. To that end, the Jewish nation has an advantage: it was founded by someone chosen by God because he made that the cornerstone of his life, message, and legacy.
Rabbi Daniel Feldman
