A lot of painful things happen in the first book of the Torah. In Avram’s life alone we see successive hardships and strained relationships—with his wife, with Hagar and Ishmael, with Pharoah and Avimelech —culminating in the Binding of Isaac. Genesis can be read through many lenses: the growth of relationships between brothers, between men and women, between parents and children, and between humanity and its Creator. All of these are interesting and valuable, but I’d also like to explore how Avraham’s life can also be seen through a monetary lens that tracks how Avraham’s relationship to wealth itself changes over time.
By the end of his life, Avraham dies owning nothing – nothing physical, that is. If the text is taken literally, he leaves the world without a shekel to his name. This is because he gives gifts to the sons of his concubines and gave all that he had unto Isaac (Gen. 25:5–6).
But the text makes it clear that Avraham died a very happy and fulfilled man! This must be in part because this older Avraham has concluded that his relationships are worth far more than his possessions. So he spent money to advance those relationships. Avraham grossly overpaid for a cave for Sarah, showing that money was far less important than showing honor to his wife. When it came time to do right by Sarah’s memory, Avraham was not deterred by even a seller who was taking advantage of him as a stranger. (G. 23:4) Similarly Avraham was incredibly generous when it came time to find a bride for Isaac: it is clear in the text that money was no object when it came to achieving his goals.
This is not the same Avraham that we first meet in the Torah. The younger Avram is far more careful with his property. After the rescue of Lot he is meticulous about recovering “all the goods, and also brought back his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people” (Gen. 14:16). Even earlier, the Torah tells us he was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold (Gen. 13:2). The land could not support both him and Lot for their substance was great, so that they could not dwell together (Gen. 13:6). Neither man appears to consider simply reducing the herds—by gift, sale, or division of the animals themselves—so that the family could remain together. Possessions take precedence over relationship. The results are costly: they separate and Lot moves to Sodom. Lot ends up ruined, the father of the cursed nations of Moab and Ammon; Avram is drawn into regional wars to extract him; and Avram loses, for practical purposes, the only family he has besides Sarai.
Where did Avram’s early wealth come from? Because of a famine in Canaan, Avram leaves the land he has been promised and goes down to Egypt. He instructs Sarai to say she is his sister; she is taken into Pharaoh’s harem. Pharaoh, acting as a stand-up businessman, treated Avram well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and he-asses, and menservants, and maidservants, and she-asses, and camels (Gen. 12:16). Avram accepts the payment without protest. Only divine intervention restores Sarai to him (which is itself an implied criticism of Avram’s choices). The Torah is careful to note that Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him away, and his wife, and all that he had (Gen. 12:20). There is no suggestion that Avram offered to return the livestock, servants, or camels once the implied contract was terminated.
Later the Torah commands, When you sell property to your neighbor, or buy any from your neighbor, you shall not wrong one another. (Lev. 25:14). The Egyptian transaction is undone – but not by both parties! Pharoah returns Sarai, but Avram does not return his gains. The subsequent troubles—the separation from Lot, the wars, the long-term fracture of the family—can be read, at least in part, as the downstream cost of keeping and prioritizing that wealth.
Yet Avram’s approach to money changes over time! After the battle with the kings, Avram refuses any share of the spoils from the king of Sodom:
“I will take nothing from a thread even to a shoe-latchet, and that I will not take anything that is thine, lest thou shouldst say, I have made Avram rich” (Gen. 14:23).
This is a different stance. Avram will no longer allow another man to claim credit for his prosperity. The refusal marks a shift from the earlier willingness to accept Pharaoh’s goods. From this point forward the narrative shows Avraham repeatedly subordinating wealth to other values – Sarah’s honor, family continuity, and, ultimately, investment in the next generation. Just as we are all meant to do, Avraham grows and develops through his lifetime.
The contrast raises the question the early choices invite: if Avram had never let the size of the herds force the separation from Lot, or if he had not kept the Egyptian wealth once Sarai was restored, would the later disasters have been avoided?
The text does not directly address this counterfactual, but it certainly places the younger man’s careful accumulation and the older man’s radical generosity side by side, and leaves the reader to weigh what was gained and what was lost. It seems to me, however, that the older Avraham would have counseled his younger self to make different choices.
P.S. The biggest exception to the above progression might be the acceptance of reparations from Avimelech for also taking Sarai – a thousand pieces of silver and much else besides. But these payments are not for the initial purchase of the woman (as Pharoah had done), and are instead payments that Avimelech made not to enrich Avraham, but to restore Sarah’s dignity and reputation. See here.