ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף בראשית 16:6

The severity of Yishmael’s expulsion is underscored by the harsh manner in which he is sent out and by the fact that he almost dies along the journey. Short of resorting to midrashic explanations that are most likely allegorical,⁷This is the approach of Rashi, who equates laughing with all types of grievous sins. Yet even Rashi displays his ambivalence about this position a few verses later, pointing out that such a caricature of Yishmael does not really fit in with the simple reading of the text. it is hard to justify Sarah’s response to Yishmael’s behavior. Indeed, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai objected to such explanations in this context, pointing out the extreme unlikelihood of serious misbehavior by someone under the direct influence of Avraham, who is notably one of the most charismatic individuals presented in the Torah.⁸Tosefta, Sota 6:3. R. Avraham ibn Ezra goes even further by telling us that Yishmael actually did nothing at all to deserve being sent away. Rather, ibn Ezra posits, he was just acting his age – which reminded Sarah that this son of Hagar was older than her own son Yitzchak and therefore a threat to his inheritance.⁹See also Seforno and Ramban, who also feel that the expulsion is mostly due to competition for Avraham’s inheritance. While they understand Yishmael’s laughter as directed at Yitzchak, it still does not seem to justify Sarah’s response. Yet even without such a suggestion, it is easy to understand Avraham’s strong disagreement with Sarah’s request to expel Yishmael. Moreover, it would follow that Avraham had every reason to believe that God would back him up in his disagreement. What is much harder to understand, then, is the fact that God sides with Sarah, telling Avraham to listen to her.¹⁰This is especially difficult to understand according to Ramban and those who follow his approach of criticizing Sarah for her earlier harsh treatment of Yishmael’s mother Hagar (Bereshit 16:6). It would seem that Yishmael had done much less than Hagar to deserve such a punishment. While some commentators suggest other answers to this problem (see, for example, R. Chaim Chavel’s supercommentary on Ramban regarding this point), it may well be that this very contrast is meant to tempt Avraham to question God, in the same way as the dissonance between God’s request that he sacrifice Yitzchak and His promise that Yitzchak will continue Avraham’s lineage was set up as a Divine test (see Bereshit Rabba 56:8).

ויתן לי בן, someone who will look after me in my old age., seeing he has been born on my knees, i.e. will be raised by me. When Yaakov’s senior wives, Rachel and Leah made such statements, they thereby signaled their agreement to freeing their handmaids who had possessed slave status up until then. They did this by referring to the sons of the handmaids as בנים, children, rather than as עבדים, slaves. If their mothers had been slaves, the children would have to be viewed and treated as slaves. We have proof of this from Exodus 21,4 האשה וילדיה תהיה לאדוניה, “the woman and her children will belong to her master.” This is the reason why these matriarchs did no longer have the mothers of the handmaids’ sons perform menial tasks for them as they did before these women were given to Yaakov to have children with. This was quite different from when Avraham had said to Sarah that Hagar, mother of Ishmael was “in your hand, do to her what you like,” i.e. she continued in her status as slave. They are always listed as בני יעקב, and participate fully in the inheritance, as opposed to a slave who cannot inherit as anything given to him automatically belongs to his master. In the case of Ishmael, the Torah had made sure by saying כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע “for your (Avraham’s) seed will be perpetuated through Yitzchok, that we would understand that Ishmael was not Avraham’s heir. (21,12)

But also the son of the maidservant, etc. for he is your seed: On his own, he is certainly your seed. And, if so, Sarah was right concerning the inheritance that was relevant to Yitzchak. But regarding Yishmael on his own - in that which does not relate to Yitzchak your son - he is certainly your seed. And see what I have written above on Genesis 16:6. And that is the exactitude of Sarah's expression, "with my son, with Yitzchak" (Genesis 21:10). But had Sarah's intention been to say that Yishmael not be considered a son to Avraham, but rather a son of the maidservant - if so, Yishmael would not inherit even if Yitzchak had not been born at all. Rather she certainly conceded that Yishmael was considered a son. But he was not considered a son, 'with her son, with Yitzchak,' because that was the stipulation - that regarding Sarah, Hagar would be like a maidservant, and as I wrote there.