1
2
A Ma’ayanot Yeshiva High School Student
Publication ‫טללי אורות‬
Parshat VaYeira
Fighting For Justice
Liat Clark (’15)
Back in Parashat Noach, Rashi relates the famous comparison between Noach and Avraham; the wording in the pasuk that Noach was a perfect man “in his generations” leads some of Chazal to say that had Noach found himself in the generation of Avraham, he would have been considered “a nothing.” The rabbis that explain “in his generations” to be a negative reflection on Noach, particularly in comparison to Avraham, must have had reason for choosing specifically Avraham with whom to contrast Noach’s righteousness. The simple explanation would be that Avraham was historically the closest tzadik to Noach, and therefore the comparison was made between the two of them. On a deeper level, however, the question remains: what about their experiences and episodes invites comparison? When the malachim get up to leave after speaking with Avraham in perek 18 of Bereishit, they look out toward Sdom, and God says, “Shall I hide from Avraham that which I am doing?” (18:17) For a second time, God seems to confirm His plans of large-­‐‑scale destruction with man. Just a few perakim earlier, only ten generations elapsing in that time, Hashem goes to Noach and divulges His plan to destroy the earth and the people inhabiting it, because they had “filled it with violence and destruction” (6:13). The notion that God could need man’s permission to carry out His plans is laughable; there must, therefore, be a purpose behind God’s consulting with man. It is, in fact, the reactions to God’s consultations that can shed light on the intentions behind God’s speaking with man first. When God informs Noach of his plan to bring the Flood, the pasuk writes, “Noach did according to all that God commanded him, so he did” (6:22). God again tells Noach, in the next perek, that the flood is coming and he should ascend onto the ark with his family and the animals; once again, the response is, “Noach did according to all that God had commanded him” (7:5). Noach has been warned of the destruction of all of mankind, twice, and his reaction is simply quiet acceptance. How is it possible that Noach has no protest?! How can it be that Noach does not try to defend his fellow man, ask for God’s mercy, or fight for the survival of his neighbors? Avraham’s reaction is exactly the opposite of Noach’s. For just one city, Avraham begs and negotiates with God, protesting what he sees and hopes is injustice that can be changed. Avraham had virtually no responsibility to any of the people in Sdom and Amorrah, yet he fights vehemently for their survival, in the hopes that there are even ten righteous men within the city, “be-­‐‑toch ha-­‐‑ir.” Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch picks up on the extraneous language of “be-­‐‑toch,” within the city. Would it not have been perfectly sufficient to write “ba-­‐‑ir,” in the city? The emphasis on “be-­‐‑toch” speaks to Avraham’s view on leadership and the meaning of being a tzadik. According to Rav Hirsch, Avraham’s idea of a righteous man “is to be found ‘in the midst of the city’ and in lively connection with everything and everybody. He never leaves off admonishing, teaching, warning, bettering wherever and however he can. He takes everybody and everything to heart, never despairs, and is never tired of trying, however distant the hopes of success may be. Those are the righteous ones who he presumes must be “be-­‐‑toch ha-­‐‑ir” who would feel grief and pain at the death of each individual of these thousands” (The Penta Teuch, p.24-­‐‑25). This ideal of a tzadik who works for his community, to improve them and influence them, is in stark contrast with the “ish tzadik” that Noach is labeled and portrayed as in perakim 6 and 7. Perhaps it is this exact contrast that Chazal wish to highlight in their comparison of Noach and Avraham. Chazal, the great rabbis and leaders of the Jewish people, wish to comment on the meaning of righteousness and the nature of true leadership required in the Jewish community: to feel civic responsibility, to feel connected and responsible for the people around him, and to work tirelessly to improve 1
3
Parshat Vayeira and affect the community. J udgement: N ow or later?
Shoshana Skydell (’16)
Included in this week'ʹs Parsha is the episode of Avraham and Sarah'ʹs infertility and desperate desire to have a child. Since they are not able to conceive, Sarah urges Avraham to marry Hagar, her Egyptian maid, so that Hagar could bear a child for him. After some time, Hagar gets pregnant, gives birth, and names her child Yishmael. Fourteen years after Yishmael is born, Sarah finally becomes pregnant and gives birth to a boy, whom she names Yitzchak. Although ambiguous in the text, Yishmael is claimed to have been “sporting” with Yitzchak, resulting in Sarah’s request to banish Hagar and Yishmael out of the house. Avraham adheres to his wife, gives Hagar and Yishmael provisions, and sends them out of the house. Upon finishing his water in the desert, Yishmael feels faint and davens to Hashem. Beresheit 21:17, “And Hashem heard the lad'ʹs voice, and an angel of Hashem called to Hagar from heaven, and said to her, 'ʹWhat is troubling you, Hagar? Fear not, for Hashem has heard the lad'ʹs voice in the place where he is'ʹ”. Rashi explains the strange words, “where he is”, to mean that Yishmael was judged based on his actions at that very moment. In Masechet Rosh Hashanah 16b, it says, “A person is judged only based on his deeds of that moment”. This can help explain the words of Rashi; the moment that Yishmael calls out to Hashem, Yishmael was righteous. Hashem therefore spares his life and provides from him a well. Even though Yishmael and his descendants become wicked in the future, Hashem only judged Yishmael in the moment of his desperation. Rashi provides a Midrash, which states that the angels in heaven were telling Hashem to let Yishmael die of thirst because harm that his descendant will inflict on the Jewish nation in the future. However, Hashem explains to the angels that a person is not judged by what he will do in the future, but rather by his actions at that exact time. At that moment, Yishmael was a tzaddik, so Hashem spared his life. This seems to contradict Rashi’s explaination on the concept of ‘Ben Sorer Umoreh,’ or the ‘wayward son,’ in Parshat Devarim 21:18. He comments that because the son eats and drinks excessively he should therefore be killed in his youth because he may come to steal and murder in the future. Rashi’s explanation in Devarim directly contradicts his commentary on Parshat Vayeira, stating that a person can only be judged by his actions in that moment they are performed. One way to reconcile these two explanations of Rashi is by marking a distinction between the concept of'ʹBen Sorer Umoreh'ʹ and Yishmael’s survival that would allow for contradictory explanations. The difference between these two situations is that the rebellious son exhibits his wild behavior already from a young age. While he may not be a murderer or theif yet, his actions clearly indicate that he has the potential to become one. Yishmael, on the other hand, had not done anything wrong yet and was screaming words of Teshuva to Hashem. Therefore, even though both boys will lead to destruction in the future, only the wayward and rebellious son is judged and killed. An important lesson that can be learned from this week'ʹs Parsha is that you should never say that it is okay to sin now because you will be a better person tomorrow. You must always try to your best, because Hashem judges you based on your everyday actions and not by knowing that you aspire to eventually become a better person. Live every moment as if it is your last. He Who Opens the Eyes of the
Blind
Tova Sklar (15’)
When Hashem tells Avraham that he must tell Hagar his maidservant to leave his home, Avraham packs provisions for Hagar and her son, Yishmael, and banishes them. While Hagar and Yishmael are travelling in the desert, and their supply of water depletes, Hagar abandons her son by one of the bushes and distances herself from him so that she does not have to witness her son’s death from thirst. An angel of G-­‐‑d calls out to Hagar and tells her not to worry because Hashem has heard the cries of Yishmael, and he will become a great nation. Hashem then reveals a well to Hagar, saving Yishmael from dying. In the following perek, Hashem tells Avraham to sacrifice Yitzchak-­‐‑ his favorite son. Avraham follows the request of Hashem and takes Yitzchak with him on a three-­‐‑day journey to the place that Hashem had told him. Avraham then builds the alter with the wood that he brought with him and binds Yitzchak to it to sacrifice him. As Avraham is about to kill his child, an angel calls out to Avraham saying that he should not touch Yitzchak with the knife. Avraham sees a ram stuck in thorns and sacrifices that to Hashem in place of his son. The angel subsequently tells Avraham that Yitzchak’s children will prosper as well and will become a great nation. These stories are similar in that they both include a parent who must witness the near-­‐‑death of his or her child. As the child is about to die in each story, G-­‐‑d shows 2
3
Parshat Vayeira the parent a solution that will save the son from dying, and the parent is told that his or her son’s descendants will become a great nation. Aside from the obvious difference between the contexts of these stories, Avraham and Hagar took distinct approaches from one another in their situations. When Hagar saw her solution that would save her dying son, it is written, “Vayipkach Elokim et eineha”-­‐‑“Then G-­‐‑d opened her eyes and she perceived a well of water (Bereishit 21:19). This term of “pokeach,” “open” in reference to vision is used elsewhere in the Torah, the first time being by the sins of Adam and Chava. After Adam and Chava wrongfully eat from the tree of knowledge, it states, “Vatepakachna einei shnehem v’yedu ki arumim hem” (Bereishit 3:7). Adam and Chava were always unclothed-­‐‑
they just never realized it until that moment. Sforno writes that this act of paying attention to something or coming to the recognition of something is referred to as pekichat ayin, or an eye opening experience. This type of eye-­‐‑opening refers to a new idea that is being revealed, and not something’s actual, miraculous appearance for the first time. We can apply this type of “eye opening” to the stories of Avraham and Hagar. The well that Hashem allowed Hagar to see was always there, although did not merit seeing it on her own. This verse does not state that Hashem miraculously created a new well for Hagar, leading Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim Perek 2 chelek 1 to conclude that this well was there the whole time Hagar was in the desert. From here, the Midrash Rabbah also derives that all men are blind to what is right in front of them until Hashem opens their eyes. However, this is not the case for Avraham. When he was searching for his “solution” that would prevent him from killing his son it is written, “Vayisa avraham et einav viHinei ayil achar ne’echaz baSvach biKarnav.” “And Avraham lifted his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a arm caught in the thicket by his horns.” Avraham did not need Hashem to open his eyes, because he already had so much faith in G-­‐‑d and merited viewing the obvious solution that would prevent him from killing his son on his own. This is why the pasuk describes Avraham as actively lifting his own eyes, and not as having his eye opened for him. The Chidushei Harim, quoted in the Torah Treasury, writes that what motivated Avraham to sacrifice his son in the first place was his recognition that “haneshamah lach vehaguf pa’alach”-­‐‑literally translating to, “the soul is Yours (Hashem’s) and the body is Your (Hashem’s) craftwork.” Avraham was never blind, in the sense that it was natural for him to see Hashem in his life, and he therefore did not need Hashem to reveal the ram to him by opening his eyes. Hashem, however, had to foster that idea upon Hagar and did so when He opened her eyes and made the well that supposedly was always visible to her. By removing her “blindness,” Hashem taught her the lesson that man could spend his lifetime searching for bread, although in the end it is G-­‐‑d that will ultimately supply all his needs, and that everything comes from Him. It is easier for most of us to relate to the experience of Hagar than of Avraham, because Avraham’s level of faith is nearly incomprehensible to us. Therefore every morning we say in bircat hashachar the bracha of pokeach ivrim, praising G-­‐‑d for opening the eyes of the blind. Not only are we thanking Hashem for physically opening our eyes, but we are praising him for constantly revealing to us our needs. The solutions to all problems in life are right in front of all of us. When we daven to Hashem asking for something, we are not asking for a miraculous creation; what we are really doing is asking for Hashem to open up our eyes and make the apparent and obvious visible to us. Vaye-­‐‑
Tamar Schwartz ('ʹ16) This is a Test...
Tamar Schwartz (’16)
One of the most pivotal moments in Jewish History, as exhibited by its continuous mention and its constantly being lent as reference, is Akeidat Yitzchak. This event takes place at the end of this week'ʹs parsha. When looking at the first pasuk in Vayeira, perek 22, we immediately are told, "ʺV'ʹhaelokim nisah et Avraham"ʺ, and Hashem tested Avraham. The question that stands out, not only from this one pasuk, but from the entire story is: Why is the Akeidah considered a test for Avraham only?! Surely, it was agonizing for Avraham to give up his beloved son, Yitzchak as a sacrifice, but why was it any more of a “test"ʺ for him than it was for Yitzchak? Why does Yitzchak not get credit for allowing himself to be sacrificed!? In fact, the midrash tells us that Yitzchak was 37 years old at the time of the Akeidah! A 37-­‐‑year-­‐‑old man certainly has complete control over his body, so should we not be praising Yitzchak for his unbelievably submissiveness to G-­‐‑d?! The Alshich suggests a beautiful answer to this question. He writes that Avraham and Yitzchak had inherently different personalities. Avraham represented 4
5
Parshat Vayeira chesed, and Yitzchak, din. Therefore, the Akeidah was simple, natural, and supposedly "ʺeasy"ʺ for Yitzchak to do. However, Avraham, who possessed a different characteristic of chesed had a harder time fulfilling the task of the Akeidah because it was against his nature to harm a person, let alone his own son. Therefore, the Alshich says that the Akeidah was a test specifically for Avraham and his characteristics, just as Hashem tests every person according to his natural inclinations. Furthermore, the Ramban also uses this pasuk to derive meaning behind Avraham'ʹs unique test, as well as the general nature of "ʺtests"ʺ. The Ramban points out that Hashem tests people with their benefit in mind. He would never give a difficult task to a person who would clearly not succeed in it. A challenge that a person is faced with is one that was designed for him to succeed in. In a similar vein, Mrs. Batya Weinberg points out that Hashem gave the unique mitzvah of eishet yifat to'ʹar to B'ʹnei Yisrael because He Knew it would be an unrealistic goal to command them to abstain from taking women during war. It would have been impossible for the men of B'ʹnei Yisrael to fulfill a commandment like that. Therefore, Hashem instituted the mitzvah of eishet yifat to'ʹar, (specific laws of taking a woman home from war) in an effort to make their commandments more manageable and their tests more achievable. So too, with any other challenges or tests that we are faced with, we must recognize that the opportunity is there only because we have the ability and power to complete it successfully. Shlomo Katz quotes Rav Bachya'ʹs interpretation on the pasuk in Mishlei 17:3 that writes, "ʺA refining pot is for silver and a crucible is for gold, but Hashem tests hearts"ʺ. He explains that the pasuk is instructing man to purify himself in his most powerful and central organ, the heart. When the pasuk states "ʺHashem tests hearts"ʺ, Rav Bachya explains that Hashem gives tests to bring out man'ʹs potential and sanctify G-­‐‑d'ʹs name. Therefore, Shlomo Katz cites our earlier example of Avraham'ʹs test at Akeidat Yitzchak, explaining that Hashem knew Avraham would be capable of completing the task, and He specifically gave it to him in order to bring out the sacrificial qualities in Avraham that were highlighted by his performance of that particular commandment. We would not have known about that capability had it not been for the test. In an article on Aish.com, Sara Yocheved Rigler eloquently puts, "ʺGod doesn'ʹt give us a test we cannot pass. When we fail our tests, it'ʹs usually because we didn'ʹt recognize the situation as a test in the first place. If only we would see a neon sign flashing in front of our mind'ʹs eye, "ʺTHIS IS A TEST"ʺ all of us could have the patience, forgiveness, kindness.....to pass the test."ʺ The article sends a vehement call to action. If we were able to recognize our tests in the moment, rather than hours or days later, how much more would we succeed. If our tests are tailored perfectly for us, shouldn'ʹt we see the opportunities and jump to them? The truth is however, that as humans, we really will never know what kinds of tests Hashem will throw at us at a given moment. Therefore, it is imperative that whenever faced with a challenge, we maintain our awareness that we are being tested for our own benefit, and we determine the outcome. May we all be constantly aware of our uniquely tailored tests, and may we Be'ʹezrat Hashem, pass all of our tests with flying colors. [Many of the ideas in the D'ʹvar Torah are from a shiur by Mrs. Shani Warman] Editors-­‐‑
in-­‐‑chief: Moreet Levine & Tova Sklar Staff Editors: Miriam Blum, Pammy Brenner, T’chaylet Handel, Noya Hanoch, Sarah Hiller, Rachel Nordlicht, Associate editors: Elisheva Cohen & Chana T. Fisch Eliana Koehler, Kira Paley, Yocheved Sadek, Ariana Samet, Arielle Weinberger Managing Coordinator: Sara Shelling Staff Writers: A vigayil Altman, Tehilla Azar, Miriam Blum, Liat Clark, Elisheva Cohen, Leora Feder, Chana T. Layout editors: Ariana Brody & Elisheva Taragin Fisch, Shana Gershbaum, T’chaylet Handel, Noya Hanoch, Leah Herschmann, Eliana Koehler, Rachel Production Manager: Shira Gelb Leiser, Dafna Levine, Nina Miller, Yocheved Sadek, Ariana Samet, Tamar Schwartz, Chava Segal, Ahuva Distribution Managers: Davida Respler & Tamar Weber Shafier, Rinat Shelly, Hannah Siegal, Shoshana Skydell, Arielle Weinberger, Lila Wiener, Dani Wind Faculty Advisor: Mrs. Kahan