Genesis 21:7

Gen 21:7 And she said, Who would have said unto Abraham, that Sarah should have given children suck? for I have born [him] a son in his old age.

Ver. 7. That Sarah should have given children suck.] So she had a double blessing, - of the womb, and of the breasts. Milk she had at those years, and great store of it too: whence she is said to "give children suck," not a child only. She could have nursed another for a need, besides her own. Note, that though she were a great lady, yet she was a nurse. Let it not be niceness, but necessity that hinders any mother from so doing; lest she be found more monstrous than the "sea-monsters," that "draw out their breast, and give suck to their young". {Lam 4:3} If the child must be set out, let a fit nurse be looked after. Quidam scrofae lacte nutritus cum esset, in coeno sese identidem volutabat. {a}

{a} Sphinz Philosoph., p. 235.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Gen 21:7. Sarah should have given children suck — She says children, expecting, it seems, that, having received of God new strength, she would have more than one child. Here all mothers are taught their duty, which is to give their children suck if they be able. Not to do this is a sin against the God of nature, which no rank in life, no fortune nor business, can or will excuse.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

She accuseth herself of ingratitude, that she did not believe the Angel.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

7. Who would have said unto Abraham, that Sarah should have given children suck ? I understand the future tense to be here put for the subjunctive mood. And the meaning is, that such a thing would never have entered into the mind of any one. Whence she concludes, that God alone was the Author of it; and she now condemns herself for ingratitude because she had been so slow in giving credit to the angel who had told her of it. Now, since she speaks of children in the plural number, the Jews, according to their custom, invent the fable, that whereas a rumor was spread, that the child was supposititious, a great number of infants were brought by the neighbors, in order that Sarah, by suckling them, might prove herself a mother. As if, truly, this might not easily be known, when they saw Isaac hanging on her breast, and as if this was not a more clear and distinct proof, that the milk, pressed out by the fingers, flowed before their eyes. But the Jews are doubly foolish and infatuated, as not perceiving, that this form of expression is of exactly the same import, as if Sarah had called herself a nurse. Meanwhile, it is to be observed, that Sarah joins the office of nurse with that of mother; for the Lord does not in vain prepare nutriment for children in their mothers’ bosoms, before they are born. But those on whom he confers the honor of mothers, he, in this way, constitutes nurses; and they who deem it a hardship to nourish their own offspring, break, as far as they are able, the sacred bond of nature. If disease, or anything of that kind, is the hindrance, they have a just excuse; but for mothers voluntarily, and for their own pleasure, to avoid the trouble of nursing, and thus to make themselves only half-mothers, is a shameful corruption.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

And the child grew, and was weaned,.... He throve under the nursing of its mother, and through the blessing of God upon him; and being healthy and robust, and capable of digesting stronger food, and living upon it, he was weaned from the breast: at what age Isaac was when weaned is not certain, there being no fixed time for such an affair, but it was at the discretion of parents, and as they liked it, and the case of their children required; and in those times, when men lived to a greater age than now, they might not be weaned so early, as we find their marrying and begetting children were when they were more advanced in years. The Jewish writers are not agreed about this matter. Jarchi and Ben Melech say that Isaac was weaned twenty four months after his birth; a chronologer of theirs says (q) it was in the hundred and third year of Abraham, that is, when Isaac was three years old, which agrees with the Apocrypha:"But she bowing herself toward him, laughing the cruel tyrant to scorn, spake in her country language on this manner; O my son, have pity upon me that bare thee nine months in my womb, and gave thee such three years, and nourished thee, and brought thee up unto this age, and endured the troubles of education.'' (2 Maccabees 7:27)According to Jerom (r), it was the opinion of some of the Hebrews that he was five years old; and at this age Bishop Usher (s) places the weaning of him; for to make him ten or twelve years of age, as some of the Rabbins do (t), when this was done, is very unlikely. Philo the Jew (u) makes him to be seven years of age at this time:

and Abraham made a great feast the same day that Isaac was weaned; because he had now escaped the dangers of infancy, and had gone through or got over those disorders infants are exposed unto, and had his health confirmed, and there was great likelihood of his living and becoming a man, since now he could eat and digest more solid and substantial food; and this was great joy to Abraham, which he expressed by making a grand and sumptuous entertainment for his family, and for his neighbours, whom he might invite upon this occasion. Jarchi says, the great men of that age were at it, even Heber and Abimelech. The Jews very impertinently produce this passage, to show the obligation they lie under to make a feast at the circumcision of their infants (w); for this was not at Isaac's circumcision, but at his weaning.

(q) R. Gedaliah, Shalshalet Hakabala, fol. 2. 2. (r) Quaestion. in Genesin, fol. 68. K. tom. 3. (s) Annal. Vet Test. p. 9. (t) Pirke Eliezer, c. 30. Vid. Hieron. Quaest. ut supra. (in Genesin, fol. 68. K. tom. 3.) (u) De his Verb. Resipuit. Noe, p. 275. (w) Pirke Eliezer, c. 29. fol. 30. 1.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Gave suck; a certain proof that the child was born of her. (Menochius) --- His old age, when both the parents were far advanced in years, ver. 2. The mother being ninety at this time, would render the event most surprising. (Haydock)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

What man or woman could believe so improbable a thing? Or, who but a God could have foreseen and foretold it? She saith

children, though she had but one child, either by a usual enallage of the plural number for the singular, whereby the word sons or daughters is used when there was but one, as Gen 36:25; 46:23; Num 26:8; or presaging, that having received from God a new strength, she might have more children. By her expression she showeth all mothers what their duty is, viz. to give their children suck when they are able to do it; and that neither greatness of quality, nor multitude of business, nor other difficulties and inconveniences, will be a sufficient excuse to those that neglect it.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

And she said, Who would have said unto Abraham, lL,mi, the poetic word for rBeD, is introduced by ymi in order to express astonishment; the meaning being that what had happened was altogether out of the ordinary course of nature, was, in fact, God"s work alone (Vatablus, Calvin, Rosenm Keil, Kalisch, "Speaker"s Commentary"). Less happy are tiv ajnaggelei tw jAbraam (LXX); quis auditurum crederet Abraham quod (Vulgate); quam fidelis est ille qui dixit Abrahamo (Onkelos)that Sarah should have given children suck? Literally, Sarah suckleth sons. "Many of the greatest saints in Holy Scripture, and even our Lord himself, were nursed by their own mothers" (Wordsworth). For I have born him a son in his old age. Literally, I have born a son to his old age. The LXX incorrectly render ejn tw ghra mou.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

מי מלל לאברהם The word מי is used as an exclamation of praise alluding to the distinguished position of the Being spoken of. The sense therefore is: See, Who it is, and to what extent He keeps his promise! The Holy One, blessed be He, promises and performs!

מלל SAID — Scripture employs here an unusual expression and does not use דבר, said, because its numerical value (i. e. of מלל) is one hundred, signifying as much as: Who was it who spoke in reference to the end of one hundred years of Abraham’s life (Genesis Rabbah 53:9).

הניקה בנים שרה THAT SARAH WILL HAVE SUCKLED CHILDREN. What is the force of the word “children”, in the plural? On the feast-day princesses brought their children with them and she (Sarah) gave them suck, for these women said, “Sarah has not given birth to a son; she has brought into her house a foundling from the street” (Bava Metzia 87a).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

‘MI’ (WHO) WOULD HAVE SAID UNTO ABRAHAM. The word mi is used as an exclamation of praise and distinction. The sense of the verse is thus: “See Whom it is and to what extent He keeps His promise. He promises and performs!” Thus the language of Rashi.But we do not find the word mi used in this way in expressions of distinction and honor. Instead, we find it used only in a derogatory sense: ‘Mi’ (Who is) Abimelech, and ‘mi’ (who is) Shechem? ‘Mi’ (Who is) the son of Jesse? The correct interpretation appears to me to be that Sarah said, “G-d hath made laughter for me; and every one that heareth will laugh on account of me, filling his mouth with song and laughter for the wonder that has been done to me, for who among the hearers would have previously said to Abraham that Sarah will suckle children? There is not a person in the world who would have told him this, even merely to console him, for the possibility would never have occurred to anyone.” Onkelos’ rendition is close to this interpretation: “How faithful is He who spoke to Abraham! He has fulfilled His word that Sarah will suckle children.” That is to say, “Everyone that heareth will laugh on account of me” for there is no person who would have maintained his credulity even in the eyes of Abraham if he were to have told him this wonder.

Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Tanakh — English translation: “Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

ותאמר, she said something else reflecting her happy surprise,

מי מלל לאברהם, who would have dared foretell Avraham that Sarah would nurse babies? If G’d Himself had not been at work in this, no one would have foretold Avraham that something like this could occur.

לזקוניו, we already explained the meaning of this word in verse 2. As to Sarah speaking of בנים, children in the plural mode, although she had given birth to only one child, she assumed that if she had been able to nurse one child there would be nothing to prevent her from nursing more children if she so desired. There is an allegorical Midrash on this verse (quoted by Rashi) saying that many women did not believe that Yitzchok was drinking mother’s milk from Sarah’s breast. In order to silence their doubts or derision, Sarah offered to nurse also the children of such women.

Radak on the Tanakh — English translations: “Sefaria Community Translation” (CC0 1.0 (public-domain dedication)); “Eliyahu Munk, HaChut Hameshulash” (CC BY 4.0); “Rabbi Mike Feuer, Jerusalem Anthology” (CC BY 4.0); and “R. David Kimhi on the first book of Psalms, Translated by R.G. Finch, London, 1919” (public domain). Text via Sefaria.