4

G-d appears and speaks to her through malochim in Genesis 16 & 21. Has G-d ever interacted with a woman in two separate episodes except her? Notably too she is the first in the written Torah who has angels appear to her.

She’s the only one to give a name to G-d. Except if you count e.g Avraham Avinu in Gen. 21:33 or Yaakov Avinu in 33:20, similarly Moshe Rabbeinu in Exo. 17:15, but even then she retains the distinction of naming G-d in the face of His angels.

It is intersting Sarah is counted as a prophetess but the Rabbis imply her encounter with the divine was less, shall we say, enthusiastic, than Hagar’s.

“She called the name of the Lord Who spoke to her: You are the God who sees me” — Rabbi Yehuda bar Simon and Rabbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rabbi Elazar bar Shimon: The Holy One blessed be He never deigned to speak with a woman except for that righteous woman [Sarah], and that, too, was out of necessity. Rabbi Abba said in the name of Rabbi Beiri: See how much He spoke in a roundabout manner with her: “No, but you did laugh” (Genesis 18:15). But is it not written [here]: “She called the name of the Lord who spoke to her”?

— Bereshit Rabbah

3

1 Answer 1

7

There are different approaches to this. The Rambam takes the following (MN 2:42):

וממה שהקדמנוהו מצורך ההזמנה לנבואה, וממה שזכרנו בשתוף שם ׳מלאך׳ תדע ש׳הגר המצרית׳ אינה נביאה, ולא ׳מנוח ואשתו׳ נביאים – כי זה הדיבור אשר שמעוהו או שעלה בדעתם, הוא כדמות ׳בת קול׳ אשר יזכרוה ה׳חכמים׳ תמיד, והוא ענין אחד ילוה לאיש שאינו מזומן, ואמנם יטעה בזה שיתוף השם; והוא העיקר הדוחה רוב הספקות אשר ב׳תורה׳.

From what we have set forth before regarding the necessity of preparation for prophecy and from what we have mentioned regarding the equivocality of the term angel [malakh], you should know that Hagar the Egyptian was not a prophetess and that Manoah and his wife were no prophets. For the words that they heard or that occurred to their mind were similar to the voices [bath-qol], which the Sages constantly mention. This is a state that accompanies an individual who is not prepared for prophecy. It is only the equivocality of the term that occasions errors as to this - this being the principle that removes most of the difficulties found in the Torah.

He asserts that the term מלאך [malakh] can be used homonymously to indicate different meanings. In this case Hagar is apprehending a bath-qol, which the Torah refers here to as a מלאך.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .