Abraham during the Akeidah is often brought as the prime example of a man with unshakeable faith. Abraham, according both scholarly and popular imaginations, is usually viewed as being enthusiastic and unhesitating in rising to fulfill of G-d's divine command to kill his son Isaac despite the command giving rise to a deep moral quandary and causing immeasurable personal loss.
In an earlier Sourcesheet, I pointed out how by contrast, some of Rashi's commentary on the Akeidah appear to show Abraham being at times reluctant and questioning, even defiant, in the face of G-d's command.
A number of commentators have picked up on this as well. One such commentator is Rabbi Isiah Horowitz in his work Shnei Luchot Habrit (R' Horowitz was born in Prague around 1565, served as Rabbi in many prominent pulpits in Europe, amongst them Frankfurt on Main, before making Aliyah in 1621.)
R' Horowitz points out that, according to Rashi's commentary in Ber. 22:5 and 22:8, Abraham appears to wish for Isaac's death to not take place, and even criticize G-d for requesting such a thing. As we will see below, R' Horowitz is deeply troubled by such a reading:
... אמנם כי דייקת שפיר, תמצא בפסוק ובדברי רז"ל שהיה אב ובנו מצדדים ליפטר ממיתה זו. אם בפסוק, כתיב (שם ח) ויאמר אברהם אלהים יראה לו השה, וזה היה תפלה ממנו שימציא הש"י שה במקומו, וסיים אח"כ, ואם לא ימציא לו הש"י שה אזי לעולה בני, מכל מקום התפלל הוא שיעשה לו הש"י נס, ושעל זה אנו אומרים (בסליחות) מי שענה לאברהם אבינו בהר המוריה הוא יעננו כי הוא נענה על תפלתו...
...If you examine the text carefully, however, you will find that both Abraham and Isaac made efforts to escape this particular death, as has been pointed out by our sages. When Abraham answers his son's question "where is the lamb for the offering? by saying: G–d will select the lamb for Himself, my son," this is to be understood as a prayer to G–d to select a different offering (22,7-8). We must read the verse as: "If G–d does not select a different lamb, then לעולה בני, "my son will be the offering." Thus we find that Abraham prayed for a miracle by G–d. Because of Abraham's prayer and the fact that G–d responded favorably, we say nowadays in our סליחות prayers that "May the One who answered Abraham at Mount Moriah, also answer our prayers."...
עוד קושיא חזקה במה שאמר (בראשית כב, ה) נלכה עד כה, ופירשו רבותינו ז"ל (ב"ר נו, ב) שאמר נראה היכן הוא (בראשית טו, ה) כה יהיה זרעך. ח"ו איך יהרהר אברהם אבינו אחר מדותיו של הקב"ה.
ובריש פרשת וארא כתב רש"י שאמר הש"י אל משה רבינו ע"ה חבל על דאבדין ולא משתכחין, על אברהם אבינו שלא הרהר אחר מדותיו של הקב"ה כו':
Another difficulty is the commentary of our sages quoted by Rashi on 22,5, where Abraham said to the lads accompanying him ואני והנער נלכה עד כה, "I and the lad will go until there." This is interpreted as a severe criticism of G–d by Abraham who queried, "I want to see where is G–d's promise of כה יהיה זרעך, thus (i.e. so numerous) will be your descendants" (Genesis 15,5). At first glance it appears as if Abraham questioned that G–d would fulfil His promise.
How do we reconcile this with G–d's reported rebuke to Moses in Exodus 6,2 describing G–d as having appeared to the patriarchs as א-ל שדי, meaning that G–d did not have any need to justify Himself, seeing that the patriarchs accepted all of G–d's commands without the slightest question (compare Shemot Rabbah 6,4). G–d's comment that He is sorry that the likes of the patriarchs no longer exist seems totally out of place in view of Rashi's interpretation of the words עד כה!
After a very long discourse on the meaning of the meal with the angels, during which Isaac's birth was announced, R' Horowitz gets to three solutions, in which R' Horowitz strives to re-frame Rashi's comments to minimize the extent of Abraham's criticism almost to the point of contextualizing the criticism out of existence. The following is an excerpt of the first solution:
... וזהו ענין עד כה שאמר אברהם אבינו אראה היכן הוא כה יהיה זרעך, לא ח"ו שדיבר אברהם אבינו כמתרעם, רק שעשה להגדיל המצוה אשר הוא עושה, כי כן ראוי להגדיל התעוררות מצוה, כמו שמצינו לרז"ל (ספרא ורש"י קדושים כ, כו) שאמרו אל יאמר אדם אי אפשי בבשר חזיר, אבל יאמר אפשי ומה אעשה ואבי שבשמים גזר עלי. כן עשה אברהם אבינו, דיבר היכן הוא עד כה, כלומר כי יש לי טענה מכח זה לפטור את עצמי, על כל זאת אני רוצה:
...We must not understand the allusion עד כה, as an implied criticism of G–d, but rather as emphasizing how far Abraham was prepared to go to comply with G–d's request to offer up his son Isaac. If Abraham would not have had to wrestle with his fatherly feelings he would not have performed the מצוה in the best possible manner, just as someone who does not eat pork because he has no desire to eat it does not get the same credit for abstaining from it as does a person who really fancies pork but restrains himself only because the Torah forbids it (compare Rashi on Parshat Kedoshim 20,26).
I don't find this answer to be very satisfying. The main problem is that this "solution" actually fails to resolve the core problem that R' Horowitz was hoping to resolve. Even if his later actions showed how far Avraham was prepared to go despite his fatherly feelings, the Midrashic interpretation of עד כה brought by Rashi clearly implies that, at least at the point in time where Avraham said עד כה, he was indeed questioning how G-d could fulfill his earlier promise, and/or declaring that he will only proceed up to the point (עד ) that was consistent with the the earlier promise of "כה". The fact that Avraham was able to subsequently overcome this reluctance at the top of Mt. Moriah does not erase the fact that the earlier complaint had occurred. In addition, by having Avraham declare his readiness to sacrifice Isaac while feeling his fatherly feeling, R' Horowitz effectively adds to Rashi's comment to introduce ideas that are plainly not in the comment as written.
The other two solutions also comes across as overly complicated and forced. I believe that an unstated assumption of R' Horowitz that lead him to what struck me as a forced reading of Rashi, aside from his desire to negate Abraham's apparent criticism, is the assumption that Avraham held a constant and unchanging attitude towards G-d's apparent command for him to kill his son that was a simultaneous mixture of enthusiasm and reluctance. However, Rashi's comments in the Akeidah episode as a whole implies the opposite, that Avraham's attitude and feelings regarding the command was not constant but rather changed drastically between enthusiasm and reluctance during the 3-day ordeal (as per my earlier Sourcesheet).
Notwithstanding the foregoing, I recommend the reader to click on the link above to read through R' Horowitz' lengthy answer. While his solutions failed to move me, his treatment reveals a virtuosic familiarity with many sources and an tremendous eye for detail in text.
I will now expand on what appears to be the primary textual source that motivated R' Horowitz to minimize or even negate Abraham's criticism of G-d during the Akeidah. R' Horowitz notes that Rashi states in his commentary that G-d rebukes Moshe for questioning His providence ("הִרְהַרְתָּ עַל מִדּוֹתַי") and laments the loss of the forefathers who had stronger, unquestioning faith (חבל על דאבדין ולא משתכחין - "woe unto those who have been lost and not found!")
R' Horowitz does not provide a specific reference for the particular comment by Rashi that he his referring to. However, after looking at a number of candidates, the most relevant one appears to be Rashi's comment in Shmot 6:1:
וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יְהוָה֙ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֔ה עַתָּ֣ה תִרְאֶ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֶֽעֱשֶׂ֖ה לְפַרְעֹ֑ה כִּ֣י בְיָ֤ד חֲזָקָה֙ יְשַׁלְּחֵ֔ם וּבְיָ֣ד חֲזָקָ֔ה יְגָרְשֵׁ֖ם מֵאַרְצֽוֹ׃ (ס)
Then the LORD said to Moses, “You shall soon see what I will do to Pharaoh: he shall let them go because of a greater might; indeed, because of a greater might he shall drive them from his land.”
In this pasuk, G-d responds to Moshe complaining that his first effort to free the Israelites from Pharoah has backfired, with Pharoah doubling the workload following Moshe's intervention. Regarding "עַתָּ֣ה תִרְאֶ֔ה", Rashi states the following:
עתה תראה וגו'. הִרְהַרְתָּ עַל מִדּוֹתַי, לֹא כְאַבְרָהָם שֶׁאָמַרְתִּי לוֹ "כִּי בְיִצְחָק יִקָּרֵא לְךָ זָרַע" (בראשית כ"א), וְאַחַר כָּךְ אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ "הַעֲלֵהוּ לְעוֹלָה" וְלֹא הִרְהֵר אַחֲרַי; לְפִיכָךְ עתה תראה. הֶעָשׂוּי לְפַרְעֹה תִּרְאֶה, וְלֹא הֶעָשׂוּי לְמַלְכֵי שִׁבְעָה אֻמּוֹת כְּשֶׁאֲבִיאֵם לָאָרֶץ (סנהדרין קי"א):
עתה תראה וגו׳ NOW THOU SHALT SEE etc. — You have criticised My methods of guiding the world. You are not like Abraham to whom I said (Genesis 21:12) “for through Isaac shall seed be raised unto thee” and to whom I afterwards said, (Gen 22:2) “bring him up as a burnt offering”, and yet he did not criticise My ways, therefore, עתה תראה NOW THOU SHALT SEE — what will now be done to Pharaoh thou shalt see, but thou shalt not see what will be done to the kings of the seven nations of Canaan when I shall bring them (the Israelites) into the Holy Land (cf. Sanhedrin 111a).
In light of the Rashi above, it is clear that R' Horowitz raises an excellent question and indeed has a compelling reason to be troubled by Rashi's comments in the Akeidah: Given Rashi's comment in Shmot 6:1, where he refers to G-d telling Moshe that Abraham did not criticise Him during the Akeidah, how are we to understand the Rashi's earlier comments in the Akeidah narrative where he indicates the opposite, that Abraham was criticising G-d?
I would like to suggest two alternative solutions, which I think (in my youthful brazenness) are simpler than the ones offered by R' Horowitz, and also serve to both maintain Rashi's internal consistency between Genesis and Exodus as well as maintain Abraham's reluctance and criticism during (at least portions of) the Akeidah. These two solutions are complementary, and point to what I believe are two key differences between Moshe's criticism and Abraham's criticism.
First solution:
While Moshe's criticism of G-d in Exodus 5:22-23 was explicitly directed at the fairness of G-d's providence, Abraham's criticism of G-d during the Akeidah as noted by Rashi was directed more narrowly to the issue of how to follow G-d given the contradiction between His promise that Abraham's legacy will be through Isaac and His command to sacrifice Isaac.
Regarding the treatment of the Israelites by Pharaoh, Moshe asks "O Lord, why did You bring harm upon this people?" and then complains that "You have not delivered Your people". Moshe is therefore directly and explicitly challenging the fairness of Divine providence, and Moshe's criticism unquestionably qualifies as "הִרְהֵר מדותי" ("questioning My providence").
By contrast, even in the comments brought by Rashi that can be read as Abraham expressing criticism of G-d, the criticism is couched in terms of the problem of G-d contradicting himself. Therefore, Abraham's expressions of "וְיִבְחַר לוֹ הַשֶּׂה וְאִם אֵין שֶׂה, לעולה בני" and "יִרְאֶה וְיִבְחַר לוֹ הַשֶּׂה וְאִם אֵין שֶׂה, לעולה בני" as brought by Rashi, which are pointed to by R' Horowitz, could be understood not as a complaint but as Abraham's (perhaps desperate?) attempt to arrive at an interpretation of God's commands that could allow him to avoid killing his son.
In addition, Abraham's statements do not explicitly refer to a theological complaint about the fairness of Divine providence.In Genesis 22:5, Rashi has Abraham asking what will become of the promise which God made to him saying “Thus (כה) shall thy seed be”, without taking what one might think to be the "obvious" next step of asking why G-d asked him to kill Isaac in the first place. Later in Genesis 22:12, Rashi has Abraham saying: “I will lay my complaint before you. Yesterday (on an earlier occasion) you told me, (Genesis 21:12) “In Isaac shall seed be called to thee”, and then again you said, (Genesis 21:2) “Take now thy son”. Now you tell me, “Lay not thy hand upon the lad”!" Here too, Abraham according to Rashi does not explicitly state which of G-d's utterances he prefers. Rashi never has Abraham complaining to G-d on matters of theodicy, to have him say, for example, "for what sin does Isaac have to die by my hands?", "how can this possibly be what a merciful G-d wants?", or "how is it fair for G-d to go back on a previous promise"?
Therefore, even if Abraham was harboring thoughts of frustration or reluctance, and even if his assertions as brought by Rashi could be understood as complaints, those assertions do not rise to the level of "הִרְהֵר אַחֲרַי" or "הִרְהֵר מדותי", which specifically refer to challenging the fairness of Divine providence.
Second Solution:
While Moshe criticised G-d directly and openly, Abraham's criticism of G-d was made in his thoughts and left unstated.
Note that G-d's criticism of Moshe, brought by Rashi in Exodus 6:1, is in response to what Moshe's open criticism of G-d explicitly reported in the immediately preceding pasukim of Exodus 5:22-23.
Then Moses returned to the LORD and said, “O Lord, why did You bring harm upon this people? Why did You send me? Ever since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Your name, he has dealt worse with this people; and still You have not delivered Your people.”
In contrast to Moshe's complaint to G-d that was explicitly reported in the mikra (biblical text), Avraham's complaint is not found in the mikra, but rather brought by Rashi in his commentary by way of a Midrash. I would like to propose that when Rashi brings a Midrash to expand a short conversation in the mikra into a longer exchange, Rashi's intention in bringing Midrashic expansion is not to assert that the expansion restores in fuller detail parts of the conversation that occurred but failed for whatever reason to be reported in the mikra. Rather, Rashi brings the expanded Midrashic conversation to provide insight into a psychological reality that was being internally experienced by Abraham during that point in the narrative.
In the particular case of the Akeidah, for example, in Ber. 22:5 which states וַאֲנִ֣י וְהַנַּ֔עַר נֵלְכָ֖ה עַד־כֹּ֑ה ("the youth and I will go over there") and Rashi brings a midrash, stating עד כה. וּמִ"אַ אֶרְאֶה הֵיכָן הוּא מַה שֶּׁאָמַר לִי הַמָּקוֹם כֹּה יִהְיֶה זַרְעֶךָ: ("עד כה (YONDER — The Midrashic explanation based upon the meaning of כה “thus” is as follows: "I will see what will happen to the promise which G-d made to me saying,“Thus (כה) shall thy seed be”". Rashi does not mean to assert here that Abraham literally said the words "אֶרְאֶה הֵיכָן הוּא מַה שֶּׁאָמַר לִי הַמָּקוֹם כֹּה יִהְיֶה זַרְעֶךָ" instead of, or even in addition to, what was written in the mikra. Rather, he brings the Midrash to illustrate what Abraham was thinking in his own mind at the point in the narrative where Abraham was telling his servants "וַאֲנִ֣י וְהַנַּ֔עַר נֵלְכָ֖ה עַד־כֹּ֑ה".
Similarly, where Abraham told Isaac" יראה לו השה בני", which Rashi expands into "יראה לו השה כְּלוֹמַר יִרְאֶה וְיִבְחַר לוֹ הַשֶּׂה וְאִם אֵין שֶׂה, לעולה בני", Rashi is not asserting that Abraham actually told Isaac יִרְאֶה וְיִבְחַר לוֹ הַשֶּׂה וְאִם אֵין שֶׂה, לעולה בני instead of יראה לו השה בני. Rather, Rashi means to say that while what Avraham told Isaac according to simple pshat was in fact "יראה לו השה בני", Rashi brings the Midrashic expansion that best illustrates what Abraham, according to Rashi's understanding, was thinking about while saying those words to Isaac.
I believe that this distinction reflects a general feature of Rashi's methodology in how he uses Midrash to expand on conversations found in the biblical text. Rashi does not bring the Midrashic expansions to provide an alternative to, or an expansion of, the verbal utterances recorded in mikra. Rather, Rashi brings Midrashic expansions to provide a "psychological pshat", a layer of hidden, unexpressed thoughts or subtext considered by the speaker during the conversation.
Therefore, according to Rashi, Abraham's reluctance and/or criticism during the Akeidah arose in his mind, but he did not express it openly. In light of the second solution discussed above, G-d's rebuke to Moshe according to Rashi in Shmot 6:1 can be paraphrased as follows: "Even though Abraham went through bouts of reluctance and even criticism of Me during the dire challenges that I placed before him, he kept his misgivings within his own mind. Unlike you, Moshe, Abraham had sufficient trust in Me to keep on following Me the best he could without feeling compelled to openly challenging My providence when he felt reluctant, even upset, in the face of great difficulty and confusion."