The Binding of Isaac (Genesis 22) contains Jewish destiny in its totality, just as the flame is contained by the single spark by which it comes to life. First, I tried to understand the father, Abraham. Then, the son, Isaac: submissive, a poet, a dreamer; then the mother, Sarah, who was closest to her son, and who, according the Midrash, paid with her life. The first Akedah lecture at 92Y took place in 1969 (hence this one is titled “revisited”) and was likely influenced by world events, including the era of campus rebellion. Philosophy (especially Kierkegaard) and art (especially Rembrandt drawings) have pondered the story deeply. But for us everything’s in the text and its Talmudic and Midrashic commentaries. At the first reading, the story seems simple and logical: a human being’s faith may and even must be tested. Yet the story has all the characteristics of a great happy ending. Then why do we feel anguish? Rereading it reveals problems with each figure. The Midrash considers multiple possibilities for God testing Abraham and for Isaac’s own remarkable response. On top of that, the Akedah follows Abraham’s plea to save Sodom, and thus the Akedah may be seen as a punishment for Abraham challenging God’s verdict. Finally, the Midrash believes Abraham did not know the outcome; Professor Wiesel believes he did. Abraham couldn’t believe God would allow it to go to the end. He thereby turns the tables and makes of the Akedah a two way test. And how did Isaac manage to avoid bitterness and anger? Though the lecture title speaks of revisiting the Akedah--have we really ever left it?