|
Reading the Text I Part IV: Parting with Samuel |
 |
 |
|
Written by Michael Linetsky
|
 Hannah does not go up with Elkanah for the yearly pilgrimage; she wants to wean the child before dedicating him for the rest of his life to the Temple at Shiloh. The phrasing is
specific: “all his household went up . . . but Hannah did not go” (v. 21-22) rather than "Hannah did not go up with all of her house" or "All of the house except for Hannah went up". The phrasing gives us the sense that Hannah waited until the last minute to reveal her resolution to stay behind and at the same time allowing us to experience Elkanah’s surprise when against all his expectations he discovers at the very last moment that Hannah will not come along.
Once again Hannah is described without qualification. Her actions are daring and are at variance. She is the activist who “told her husband.” Hannah’s words “he will remain there forever” reveals that Elkanah wanted her not only to take the child along to the Temple to give thanks but to leave him there in fulfillment of her promise to God. As far as Elkanah is concerned Samuel should be dedicated immediately as delaying could be taken to be a break of the promise!
Hannah uses weaning as an excuse to gain time with him and attempts to conceal her personal interest in keeping Samuel with her. Notice that although Elkanah and the narrative ascribe the action of weaning to Hannah, she herself uses the passive ‘when the child is weaned’ making no mention of herself. She also refers to Samuel coldly and impersonally as “the child” (not even ‘our child’) as if denying her obvious motives. Elkanah on the other hand may not perceive Samuel as his own son but as a son of the Priesthood. Hannah in her great passion for a child may not have given much thought to the day she would have to dedicate him.
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Subscribe
