Soon after Avram's arrival in Eretz Canaan, famine forces him to leave the land and head to Egypt. Upon their approach to Egypt, Avram, recognizing the beauty of his wife Sarah and the licentiousness of the people of Mitzrayim, makes a request of Sarah. Imri na achosi at lema'an yitav li ba'avuraich v'chaysah nafshi biglalaich - please tell all who inquire that you are my sister so that they will do good to me and I will live because of you. Avram understands the life threatening danger of entering Egypt as the husband of such a beautiful woman as Sarah. The first thing on his mind should be the saving of his life. Only after that might he consider additional benefits. Yet, first Avram states lema'an yitav li - they will do good things for me - and only afterwards does he state v'chaysah nafshi - and I will live. Wouldn't the proper priority be the reverse?
Prior to the plague of the firstborn, Hashem commands Moshe Rabbeinu dabeir na b'aznei ha'am v'yishalu ish me'ais re'ehu, etc. Hashem commands Moshe to ask Bnei Yisrael to borrow possessions from the Egyptians prior to their departure. Rashi explains: ain na ela bakasha, bebakasha mimcha hizhiram al cach, etc. Hashem , as it were, beseeches Bnei Yisrael to ask the Egyptians for their possessions so that Avraham Avinu will not have a claim against Hashem in that Hashem fulfilled the part of the covenant that promised slavery and persecution but did not fulfill the part that promised exiting the slavery in Egypt with great wealth - v'acharei chen yetzu birchush gadol. Therefore, Hashem requested that Bnei Yisrael seek recompense from the Egyptians for their centuries of slavery so that they can exit with great riches and this part of the covenant can also be fulfilled.
The Gemara in Brachos states that Bnei Yisrael initially refused to comply with the request. Ulevai shenaitzai b'atzmeinu - we just want to get out of Egypt alive. We are willing to forgo any riches and any promises made if only we can be freed from Egypt. If Bnei Yisrael were willing to forgo - to be mochel- the wealth part of the covenant, why is there a concern regarding Avraham's complaint?
The Ramban tells us that the theme throughout Sefer Breishis is ma'aseh avos siman l'banim - all that happened to our Forefathers foretells what will happen in future generations. Avraham's actions were done to assure future benefit for his children. Perhaps we can say that the promise of great riches was something due Avraham's offspring and, therefore, they had the right to forgo this benefit. However, they do not have the power to forgo a benefit that belongs to Avraham and not them.
Avraham's claim was also regarding the idea of ma'aseh avos siman l'banim. Avraham specifically validated the part of the covenant that promised riches before leaving with their lives when he made this request of Sarah. In an effort to assure the fulfillment of that part of the covenant, Avraham preempted the claim of Bnei Yisrael - if only we could leave with our lives - by requesting yitav li prior to v'chaysa nafshi upon his descent to Egypt. This request personalized the claim for rechush gadol even prior to having their lives saved through the exodus from Egypt. Perhaps this connection is hinted to by use of the word NA - imri NA and dabeir NA - implying Avraham's request that foregoing the promise of riches prior to exiting Egypt is not an option.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Noach
The Torah delineates ten generations between Adam and Noach and then, later, another ten generations between Noach and Avraham. The Mishna in Pirkei Avos informs us that this shows the erech apayim - patience, restraint, and forbearance - of Hashem, who endured ten generations of evil before bringing the punishment of the flood. Similarly, Hashem endured another ten generations of evil acts until Avraham arose and notal s'char kulam - obtained the reward for all of them.
There is an interesting linguistic difference between the way the verses describe the ten generations between Adam and Noach and the terms used to describe the lives of the ten generations between Noach and Avraham. In describing the former, the Torah tells us, for example, vayechi Shes chamesh shanim u'm'as shanah vayoled es Enosh. Vayechi Shes acharei holido es Enosh sheva shanim u'shmoneh meos shanah vayoled banim ubanos. Vayihyu kol yemei Shes shteim esreh shanah u'tesha meos shanah vayamos. This formula is used to describe the lives of each of the ten generations until Noach. The formula states (a) the particular person lived a certain amount of years prior to having a son, (b) he had a son, (c) he lived a certain amount of years after that son was born and had other unnamed children, (d) the total number of years that the person lived, (e) that person died.
In describing the ten generations between Noach and Avraham, the Torah alters the formula slightly. Vayechi Ever arba u'shloshim shanah vayoled es Peleg. Vayechi Ever acharei holido es Peleg shloshim shanah v'arba meos shanah vayoled banim ubanos. The formula is mostly similar to that used for the previous ten generations. However, it leaves out the final two points: the total years lived are not mentioned nor is their any mention of death. Why the subtle change?
The generations between Noach and Avraham did, indeed, improve upon the generations between Adam and Noach. The generations between Adam and Noach had nothing to do with previous nor subsequent generations. We see no interaction between any of these generations. The Torah emphasizes this by placing each generation in its own neat package, completely enclosed and separated from the generation before and the one after. The generation lived a certain amount of years and then died, leaving no legacy. Everything about their impact on the world was contained in the years that they lived. They had no influence upon subsequent generations.
The generations between Noach and Avraham were slightly different. Although innately evil, they did interact with one another and tried to influence future generations. Unfortunately, this influence was a negative one (i.e . the generation of dispersion) but, nonetheless, there is a positive element in generational interaction on a macro level. The Torah emphasizes the difference by leaving out the total years lived and the fact that they died to inform us that their influence went beyond the years of their lives and continued even after death.
The formula describing the generations between Noach and Avraham has one exception. Describing the life of Terach, father of Avraham, the verse tells us Vayihyu yemei Terach chamesh shanim u'masayim shanah, vayomas Terach b'Charan. Terach's life follows the formula of the generations between Adam and Noach. It is placed into a neat capsule including total years and death. Why the change?
Vayomer Hashem el Avram lech lecha me'artzecha u'mimoladtcha u'mibeis avicha el ha'aretz asher areka. The command of Hashem to Avraham was to remove himself from all influences of his land, his birthplace, and even his father. A new world order needed to be instituted, one bereft of the negative influences of the previous generations, to assure the survival of future generations. Hence, Terach's influence upon Avraham needed to end. Terach needed to become like the first ten generations, having no influence on Avraham and his offspring.
Perhaps this understanding can explain the differences of the previously cited Mishna in Pirkei Avos. The Mishna states that the result of the first ten generations was v'hevi es hamabul - Hashem brought the flood. The result of the second ten generations was that Avraham natal s'char kulam - Avraham obtained the reward of all the previous generations. The generations between Adam and Noach had no redeeming qualities. Therefore, after significant forbearance, the result was utter destruction. However, the generations between Noach and Avraham had the redeeming quality of generational interaction. The interaction and influence was negative but the concept of generations influencing subsequent ones was positive. Once someone arrived who would utilize this positive concept to deliver beneficial influence, he would redeem the negative aspects of the previous generations. Avraham's essential life goal was l'ma'an asher yetzaveh es banav v'es beiso acharav - Avraham positively influenced his children and grandchildren and, therefore, was able to receive the reward of all previous generations.
(The first two parshiyos of the Torah speak of twenty generations. The next fifty two parshiyos only deal with eight generations. Interestingly, there is no recorded conversation between father and son in the Torah until Avraham and Yitzchak. Connecting to previous and future generations is the lesson Avraham teaches us to assure our legacy and our future.)
There is an interesting linguistic difference between the way the verses describe the ten generations between Adam and Noach and the terms used to describe the lives of the ten generations between Noach and Avraham. In describing the former, the Torah tells us, for example, vayechi Shes chamesh shanim u'm'as shanah vayoled es Enosh. Vayechi Shes acharei holido es Enosh sheva shanim u'shmoneh meos shanah vayoled banim ubanos. Vayihyu kol yemei Shes shteim esreh shanah u'tesha meos shanah vayamos. This formula is used to describe the lives of each of the ten generations until Noach. The formula states (a) the particular person lived a certain amount of years prior to having a son, (b) he had a son, (c) he lived a certain amount of years after that son was born and had other unnamed children, (d) the total number of years that the person lived, (e) that person died.
In describing the ten generations between Noach and Avraham, the Torah alters the formula slightly. Vayechi Ever arba u'shloshim shanah vayoled es Peleg. Vayechi Ever acharei holido es Peleg shloshim shanah v'arba meos shanah vayoled banim ubanos. The formula is mostly similar to that used for the previous ten generations. However, it leaves out the final two points: the total years lived are not mentioned nor is their any mention of death. Why the subtle change?
The generations between Noach and Avraham did, indeed, improve upon the generations between Adam and Noach. The generations between Adam and Noach had nothing to do with previous nor subsequent generations. We see no interaction between any of these generations. The Torah emphasizes this by placing each generation in its own neat package, completely enclosed and separated from the generation before and the one after. The generation lived a certain amount of years and then died, leaving no legacy. Everything about their impact on the world was contained in the years that they lived. They had no influence upon subsequent generations.
The generations between Noach and Avraham were slightly different. Although innately evil, they did interact with one another and tried to influence future generations. Unfortunately, this influence was a negative one (i.e . the generation of dispersion) but, nonetheless, there is a positive element in generational interaction on a macro level. The Torah emphasizes the difference by leaving out the total years lived and the fact that they died to inform us that their influence went beyond the years of their lives and continued even after death.
The formula describing the generations between Noach and Avraham has one exception. Describing the life of Terach, father of Avraham, the verse tells us Vayihyu yemei Terach chamesh shanim u'masayim shanah, vayomas Terach b'Charan. Terach's life follows the formula of the generations between Adam and Noach. It is placed into a neat capsule including total years and death. Why the change?
Vayomer Hashem el Avram lech lecha me'artzecha u'mimoladtcha u'mibeis avicha el ha'aretz asher areka. The command of Hashem to Avraham was to remove himself from all influences of his land, his birthplace, and even his father. A new world order needed to be instituted, one bereft of the negative influences of the previous generations, to assure the survival of future generations. Hence, Terach's influence upon Avraham needed to end. Terach needed to become like the first ten generations, having no influence on Avraham and his offspring.
Perhaps this understanding can explain the differences of the previously cited Mishna in Pirkei Avos. The Mishna states that the result of the first ten generations was v'hevi es hamabul - Hashem brought the flood. The result of the second ten generations was that Avraham natal s'char kulam - Avraham obtained the reward of all the previous generations. The generations between Adam and Noach had no redeeming qualities. Therefore, after significant forbearance, the result was utter destruction. However, the generations between Noach and Avraham had the redeeming quality of generational interaction. The interaction and influence was negative but the concept of generations influencing subsequent ones was positive. Once someone arrived who would utilize this positive concept to deliver beneficial influence, he would redeem the negative aspects of the previous generations. Avraham's essential life goal was l'ma'an asher yetzaveh es banav v'es beiso acharav - Avraham positively influenced his children and grandchildren and, therefore, was able to receive the reward of all previous generations.
(The first two parshiyos of the Torah speak of twenty generations. The next fifty two parshiyos only deal with eight generations. Interestingly, there is no recorded conversation between father and son in the Torah until Avraham and Yitzchak. Connecting to previous and future generations is the lesson Avraham teaches us to assure our legacy and our future.)
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Bereishis
The Talmud informs us that a hallmark trait of Divine reward and punishment is a concept known as midda k'negged midda - the reward or punishment is directly related to the act that caused the reward or punishment. Bereishis details the famous story of Adam and Chava eating of the Tree of Knowledge while residing in the Garden of Eden. Sins are perpetrated by both Adam and Chava, punishment is meted out, and banishment to a new life occurs. However, at first glance, it is a bit difficult to discern the midda k'negged midda connection between the sins perpetrated and the punishment received.
The Torah tells us that many trees existed in Gan Eden. Two particular ones emphasized in the verse are the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge - v'etz hachayim besoch hagan v'etz hada'as tov vara. Later, the Torah informs us of the commandment given to Adam - Vayetzav Hashem Elokim al ha'adam leimor mikol etz hagan achol tochel. U'me'etz hada'as tov vara lo tochel mimenu. Adam is commanded not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge. He is not commanded to refrain from eating of the Tree of Life. Yet the punishment given to Adam is that he will not live forever, he will need to work for a living - things that have a direct impact on life expectancy and quality. It seems that it would be more logical to deliver a punishment that impacted Adam's intelligence and knowledge as he violated the commandment of eating from the Tree of Knowledge.
Chava's sin seems to lie in the fact that she violated the same commandment as Adam and then caused her husband to sin as well. Perhaps reliance upon her husband is a punishment that adheres to the concept of midda k'negged midda, but a core component of the punishment -childbirth and rearing - seems to be disconnected from the sin, not conforming to the midda k'negged midda principle.
Aside from the question regarding the relationship between the sins and the subsequent punishments, there also seems to be a difficulty in the flow of the verses. The prelude given to us is that Adam and Chava lived in Gan Eden unabashedly naked. The story proceeds to inform us of the events and the sins, the conversation between Hashem and the respective players in the story, Hashem's questioning of Adam's knowledge of his nakedness, Adam's response, and, ultimately the punishments given to each of the players. The section then concludes with two verses that seem to be in reverse order. The verse tells us vayikra ha'Adam shem ishto Chava ki he haysah aim kol chai - Adam names his wife Chava for she is the mother of all living beings. The next verse states Vaya'as Hashem Elokim l'Adam u'l'ishto kosnos or vayalbishem - Hashem clothes Adam and Chava.
The story begins by telling us that Adam and Chava's nakedness is essential to the upcoming events. This nakedness is what is understood following consumption of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge; this nakedness is the fact that reveals the sin. Concluding the story with clothing the naked makes perfect sense. However, why does the verse that states Adam's naming Chava interrupt this flow? First the Torah should inform us that they are now clothed and then proceed to inform us of the next stage - Adam naming Chava. This verse does not seem to relate to the story at all. Yet, it is stated before the conclusion of the episode in Gan Eden!
Perhaps the punishment borne by Adam and Chava was not for the sin of violating the commandment to not eat of the Tree of Knowledge. After all, there are numerous instances in Tanach where sins occurred that were followed by repentance and forgiveness. Hashem always affords us the opportunity to repent. Repentance protects us from punishment. Indeed, the medrash explains that the reason Shaul Hamelech had the kingdom taken from him while David Hamelech retained it forever is a result of their reaction after each sinned. When confronted by Shmuel Hanavi regarding his violation of the commandment to destroy Amalek, Shaul responds by first denying he sinned and then blaming the people. In contrast, when confronted by Natan Hanavi regarding his sin with Bat-Sheva, David immediately responds chatasi - I have sinned. David's repentance enables him to keep his kingdom and be considered a model of a baal teshuva.
Here, too, Hashem gives Adam and Chava the opportunity to repent. However, after being confronted by Hashem, Adam immediately blames Chava - ha'isha asher nasata eemadi. Adam does not accept responsibility. Instead, he blames Chava. After Adam's concern about not having a mate and Hashem's gracious provision of one that was etzem me'atzamai - the perfect match, still Adam lacks appreciation for this great gift and blames his life mate for his actions.
Similarly, Chava didn't accept her responsibility. She, too, had a life mate. However, instead of accepting the blame after recognizing her actions, she chooses to entice Adam to sin as well so that she will not suffer punishment alone. It is this post-sin reaction displaying a lack of appreciation for one another that was the sin for which Adam and Chava were punished. The punishments, indeed, fit the crime.
Adam needed to learn to appreciate all that he had. He would learn to appreciate life because it would not last forever. He would learn to appreciate his possessions because he would have to work hard for them.
Chava would learn to appreciate and care for others even more than for herself. She would suffer the pain of childbirth, the difficulties of child rearing and, yet, her children would mean everything to her. She would do anything to protect them from harm to contrast her actions with Adam. Even after all the pain, she would love and cling to her family.
This is why the verse informs us of Adam's naming of Chava prior to completing the story of Gan Eden. Before receiving the blessing of clothing and the forgiveness it brought, Adam needed to show that he learned his lesson. Adam needed to show that he had a great appreciation for Chava and would work with her and for her going forward. Once Adam displays this sense of appreciation by calling her Chava because she is aim kol chai, forgiveness and blessing from Hashem can come.
The Torah tells us that many trees existed in Gan Eden. Two particular ones emphasized in the verse are the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge - v'etz hachayim besoch hagan v'etz hada'as tov vara. Later, the Torah informs us of the commandment given to Adam - Vayetzav Hashem Elokim al ha'adam leimor mikol etz hagan achol tochel. U'me'etz hada'as tov vara lo tochel mimenu. Adam is commanded not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge. He is not commanded to refrain from eating of the Tree of Life. Yet the punishment given to Adam is that he will not live forever, he will need to work for a living - things that have a direct impact on life expectancy and quality. It seems that it would be more logical to deliver a punishment that impacted Adam's intelligence and knowledge as he violated the commandment of eating from the Tree of Knowledge.
Chava's sin seems to lie in the fact that she violated the same commandment as Adam and then caused her husband to sin as well. Perhaps reliance upon her husband is a punishment that adheres to the concept of midda k'negged midda, but a core component of the punishment -childbirth and rearing - seems to be disconnected from the sin, not conforming to the midda k'negged midda principle.
Aside from the question regarding the relationship between the sins and the subsequent punishments, there also seems to be a difficulty in the flow of the verses. The prelude given to us is that Adam and Chava lived in Gan Eden unabashedly naked. The story proceeds to inform us of the events and the sins, the conversation between Hashem and the respective players in the story, Hashem's questioning of Adam's knowledge of his nakedness, Adam's response, and, ultimately the punishments given to each of the players. The section then concludes with two verses that seem to be in reverse order. The verse tells us vayikra ha'Adam shem ishto Chava ki he haysah aim kol chai - Adam names his wife Chava for she is the mother of all living beings. The next verse states Vaya'as Hashem Elokim l'Adam u'l'ishto kosnos or vayalbishem - Hashem clothes Adam and Chava.
The story begins by telling us that Adam and Chava's nakedness is essential to the upcoming events. This nakedness is what is understood following consumption of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge; this nakedness is the fact that reveals the sin. Concluding the story with clothing the naked makes perfect sense. However, why does the verse that states Adam's naming Chava interrupt this flow? First the Torah should inform us that they are now clothed and then proceed to inform us of the next stage - Adam naming Chava. This verse does not seem to relate to the story at all. Yet, it is stated before the conclusion of the episode in Gan Eden!
Perhaps the punishment borne by Adam and Chava was not for the sin of violating the commandment to not eat of the Tree of Knowledge. After all, there are numerous instances in Tanach where sins occurred that were followed by repentance and forgiveness. Hashem always affords us the opportunity to repent. Repentance protects us from punishment. Indeed, the medrash explains that the reason Shaul Hamelech had the kingdom taken from him while David Hamelech retained it forever is a result of their reaction after each sinned. When confronted by Shmuel Hanavi regarding his violation of the commandment to destroy Amalek, Shaul responds by first denying he sinned and then blaming the people. In contrast, when confronted by Natan Hanavi regarding his sin with Bat-Sheva, David immediately responds chatasi - I have sinned. David's repentance enables him to keep his kingdom and be considered a model of a baal teshuva.
Here, too, Hashem gives Adam and Chava the opportunity to repent. However, after being confronted by Hashem, Adam immediately blames Chava - ha'isha asher nasata eemadi. Adam does not accept responsibility. Instead, he blames Chava. After Adam's concern about not having a mate and Hashem's gracious provision of one that was etzem me'atzamai - the perfect match, still Adam lacks appreciation for this great gift and blames his life mate for his actions.
Similarly, Chava didn't accept her responsibility. She, too, had a life mate. However, instead of accepting the blame after recognizing her actions, she chooses to entice Adam to sin as well so that she will not suffer punishment alone. It is this post-sin reaction displaying a lack of appreciation for one another that was the sin for which Adam and Chava were punished. The punishments, indeed, fit the crime.
Adam needed to learn to appreciate all that he had. He would learn to appreciate life because it would not last forever. He would learn to appreciate his possessions because he would have to work hard for them.
Chava would learn to appreciate and care for others even more than for herself. She would suffer the pain of childbirth, the difficulties of child rearing and, yet, her children would mean everything to her. She would do anything to protect them from harm to contrast her actions with Adam. Even after all the pain, she would love and cling to her family.
This is why the verse informs us of Adam's naming of Chava prior to completing the story of Gan Eden. Before receiving the blessing of clothing and the forgiveness it brought, Adam needed to show that he learned his lesson. Adam needed to show that he had a great appreciation for Chava and would work with her and for her going forward. Once Adam displays this sense of appreciation by calling her Chava because she is aim kol chai, forgiveness and blessing from Hashem can come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)