You'll find we've already written a Dvar Torah that explains a Pasuk in Toldos, located here
This Dvar Torah blew me away. When it was clear that they would be unable to have children, Isaac and Rivka prayed, and the Pasuk (21:25) says:
'וַיֶּעְתַּר יִצְחָק לַיהוָה לְנֹכַח אִשְׁתּוֹ, כִּי עֲקָרָה הִו וַיֵּעָתֶר לוֹ ה - "And Isaac entreated the Lord for his wife, because she was barren; and He relented to him"
A gentleman once told R' Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld a short Dvar Torah on this. Why does the Pasuk say "and He relented to him". Does this not seems an odd way of saying that G-d heard and heeded his prayer?
The gentleman explained that there is a tradition that all the Patriarchs were meant to live until the age of 180. Yet Avraham died aged 175 (25:2). We can work this out: Avraham was 99 when he circumcised himself, 100 at Isaac's birth, 137 at the Akeida, at which point Isaac was obviously 37. Isaac was 40 at his marriage, and 60 at the birth of Yaakov and Esau (25:26) making Avraham 160 at their birth. Esau first murdered aged 15, making Avraham 175. There is a Rashi that Avraham would live to see Yishmael repent (25:9), but die before Esau killed someone for the first time (25:30). If he died aged 175, where are the missing 5 years?
The gentleman said to R' Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld that 'וַיֵּעָתֶר לוֹ ה is the answer. There was never any doubt that Isaac would have children, his father had been promised "nations", certainly Isaac would have children then, and Rivka would certainly be their mother as she was the one deemed worthy, as evidenced by the miracles Eliezer witnessed. וַיֵּעָתֶר לוֹ ה can be interpreted to mean that G-d did not want to give them children just yet, He simply wanted them to wait a bit longer so Avraham would not live to see his grandson become a murderer.
When R' Yosef Chaim heard this, he jumped up and exclaimed that this vort was Emess, because 'וַיֵּעָתֶר לוֹ ה is Gematria (numerical value) 748 (686+36+26), which is the same Gematria as חמש שנים - five years - 748, which represents G-d relenting to their prayers to have children at the expense of חמש שנים from Avraham Avinu's life.
R'Yosef Chaim also said that we say " רְצוֹן-יְרֵאָיו יַעֲשֶׂה; וְאֶת-שַׁוְעָתָם יִשְׁמַע, וְיוֹשִׁיעֵם - He will fulfil the desire of them that fear Him; He also will hear their cry, and will save them ". Isn't this in the wrong order? Doesn't Hashem fulfil their desires to placate their cries? R' Yosef Chaim explains that the prayers of a devout person are able to change what is meant to happen to people, which explains fulfilling their desires. But people don't know what's best for them, and sometimes suffer as a consequence of getting what they desire. The pasuk teaches that Hashem will even repair this later cry of suffering that is of their own doing.
Geshmack !
Sunday, 15 November 2009
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
What did Avraham buy?
This week is in keeping with the theme of the past few weeks, demonstrating the level of intricacy and detail in the Torah. This week's is courtesy of the Vilna Gaon.
The Pasuk says Avraham " וַיִּשְׁמַע אַבְרָהָם, אֶל-עֶפְרוֹן, וַיִּשְׁקֹל אַבְרָהָם לְעֶפְרֹן, אֶת-הַכֶּסֶף אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר "בְּאָזְנֵי בְנֵי-חֵת--אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שֶׁקֶל כֶּסֶף, עֹבֵר לַסֹּחֵר -" And Abraham listened to Ephron; and Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver, which he had named in the hearing of the children of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, current money with the merchant." (Gen. 23:16)
How much did he get for 400 shekels? Why are we told about all the specifics in the story, such as the price/negotiations, surely they don't really matter? You'll have to bear with me, as this answer is all literally over the place.
We will go on a tangent for a second, to Kesubos 17, where we are told that since the Torah was given to 600,000 adult men, this is the appropriate amount of people to have at a funeral. The Vilna Gaon proves that the land Avraham bought has this capacity.
First, I need to prove to you how much a se'ah is. A se'ah is a measurement of land size. The perimeter of the Mishkan courtyard was 100x50 amos (cubits - roughly 60 centimetres). It is known sometimes as "Beis Se'asayim", or 2 se'ah. The Mishkan was 100x50. A se'ah is therefore half of this, 50x50 amos. The amount of amos in a se'ah is 50x50, = 2500 square amos.
I now need to explain how much a kur is. It is also a meausrement of land, and is 30 times the size of a se'ah. 30x2500 amos = 1 kur = 75,000 square amos.
In Succah 7 the Gemara informs us that the amount of space a person occupies will standing is 1 square ama. If we are going to say that Avraham purchased land that could hold 600,000 people, it would need to be at least 600,000 square amos.
There is a Gemara in Erchin 25, that explains that when people want to retract donations to the Temple fund (hekdesh), they must pay a fee to redeem the item. The price set by the Gemara for land donations is 50 shkalim per kur.
Avrhaham Avinu spent 400 shkalim, which at the Gemara's price mean he bought 8 kur of land from Efron. We said that a kur is 75,000 square amos. 8 kur = 8x75,000 amos = 600,000 square amos.
This proves there was enough room on the land for 600,000 people to attend the funeral in keeping with the Gemara, but moreover, it further shows there is not a spare word in the Torah, the details of the narrative including the price were not written purely for the story's sake.
(This also proves how lucky we are to have the decimal system! :) )
If you thought this was Geshmack , leave a comment below!
The Pasuk says Avraham " וַיִּשְׁמַע אַבְרָהָם, אֶל-עֶפְרוֹן, וַיִּשְׁקֹל אַבְרָהָם לְעֶפְרֹן, אֶת-הַכֶּסֶף אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר "בְּאָזְנֵי בְנֵי-חֵת--אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שֶׁקֶל כֶּסֶף, עֹבֵר לַסֹּחֵר -" And Abraham listened to Ephron; and Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver, which he had named in the hearing of the children of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, current money with the merchant." (Gen. 23:16)
How much did he get for 400 shekels? Why are we told about all the specifics in the story, such as the price/negotiations, surely they don't really matter? You'll have to bear with me, as this answer is all literally over the place.
We will go on a tangent for a second, to Kesubos 17, where we are told that since the Torah was given to 600,000 adult men, this is the appropriate amount of people to have at a funeral. The Vilna Gaon proves that the land Avraham bought has this capacity.
First, I need to prove to you how much a se'ah is. A se'ah is a measurement of land size. The perimeter of the Mishkan courtyard was 100x50 amos (cubits - roughly 60 centimetres). It is known sometimes as "Beis Se'asayim", or 2 se'ah. The Mishkan was 100x50. A se'ah is therefore half of this, 50x50 amos. The amount of amos in a se'ah is 50x50, = 2500 square amos.
I now need to explain how much a kur is. It is also a meausrement of land, and is 30 times the size of a se'ah. 30x2500 amos = 1 kur = 75,000 square amos.
In Succah 7 the Gemara informs us that the amount of space a person occupies will standing is 1 square ama. If we are going to say that Avraham purchased land that could hold 600,000 people, it would need to be at least 600,000 square amos.
There is a Gemara in Erchin 25, that explains that when people want to retract donations to the Temple fund (hekdesh), they must pay a fee to redeem the item. The price set by the Gemara for land donations is 50 shkalim per kur.
Avrhaham Avinu spent 400 shkalim, which at the Gemara's price mean he bought 8 kur of land from Efron. We said that a kur is 75,000 square amos. 8 kur = 8x75,000 amos = 600,000 square amos.
This proves there was enough room on the land for 600,000 people to attend the funeral in keeping with the Gemara, but moreover, it further shows there is not a spare word in the Torah, the details of the narrative including the price were not written purely for the story's sake.
(This also proves how lucky we are to have the decimal system! :) )
If you thought this was Geshmack , leave a comment below!
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
Out of Context
וַיַּעַן אַבְרָהָם וַיֹּאמַר הִנֵּה נָא הוֹאַלְתִּי לְדַבֵּר אֶל אֲדֹנָי וְאָנֹכִי עָפָר וָאֵפֶר - And Abraham answered and said, "Behold now I have commenced to speak to the Lord, although I am dust and ashes."
Rava in Tractate Chulin 88b says that the reward for saying this was that his children would earn the Mitzvah of the ashes of the Para Adumah (Red Heifer) and dust of the Sotah (a woman brought to the Temple accused of adultery was forced to drink a concoction which had dust from the foot of the Altar in it).
Beyond the obvious yet superficial connection of dust/dust, ash/ash, how are Sotah and Para Adumah a relevant reward to Afar v'Efer?
The legendary Dubner Maggid gives a Mashul as only the Dubner Maggid can; there was an upstanding member of society who made a wedding for his son, and all the people and Gedolim were invited. There was the top table for the family, and next to it, another for the Gedolim. The greatest rabbi invited shows up, wishes Mazal Tov, but feels unworthy of sitting in the prescence of the other rabbis, and quietly sits in the corner somewhere. The host feels that the rabbi is not being accorded due respect, and he requested that the whole table of rabbis move to the table in the corner to join this great rabbi. He manipulated the context to make the supposedly unworthy corner into one worthy of having the great rabbi sit there.
This explains the Pshat of the Dubner Maggid, that Hashem took what Avraham said, and changed the context from dust and ash with all their negative connotations, to dust and ash as Mitzvos, the essence of the Torah, the absolute opposite of dust and ash.
A slightly different Pshat was suggested by the Beis HaLevi: Dust of the earth has no past, but tremendous future; it can grow plant life, which itself is alive, can then sustain other life etc, whereas ash has no future whatsoever, but in the past was part of a living thing. Avraham meant Afar V'Efer to be that he had no past, like earth, and and no future, like ash.
Says the Beis HaLevi, Hashem inverted this, by giving the Mitzvah of Sotah, which cleans the woman's past, and Para Adumah which purifies the persons future. Genius, no?
Geshmack !
Rava in Tractate Chulin 88b says that the reward for saying this was that his children would earn the Mitzvah of the ashes of the Para Adumah (Red Heifer) and dust of the Sotah (a woman brought to the Temple accused of adultery was forced to drink a concoction which had dust from the foot of the Altar in it).
Beyond the obvious yet superficial connection of dust/dust, ash/ash, how are Sotah and Para Adumah a relevant reward to Afar v'Efer?
The legendary Dubner Maggid gives a Mashul as only the Dubner Maggid can; there was an upstanding member of society who made a wedding for his son, and all the people and Gedolim were invited. There was the top table for the family, and next to it, another for the Gedolim. The greatest rabbi invited shows up, wishes Mazal Tov, but feels unworthy of sitting in the prescence of the other rabbis, and quietly sits in the corner somewhere. The host feels that the rabbi is not being accorded due respect, and he requested that the whole table of rabbis move to the table in the corner to join this great rabbi. He manipulated the context to make the supposedly unworthy corner into one worthy of having the great rabbi sit there.
This explains the Pshat of the Dubner Maggid, that Hashem took what Avraham said, and changed the context from dust and ash with all their negative connotations, to dust and ash as Mitzvos, the essence of the Torah, the absolute opposite of dust and ash.
A slightly different Pshat was suggested by the Beis HaLevi: Dust of the earth has no past, but tremendous future; it can grow plant life, which itself is alive, can then sustain other life etc, whereas ash has no future whatsoever, but in the past was part of a living thing. Avraham meant Afar V'Efer to be that he had no past, like earth, and and no future, like ash.
Says the Beis HaLevi, Hashem inverted this, by giving the Mitzvah of Sotah, which cleans the woman's past, and Para Adumah which purifies the persons future. Genius, no?
Geshmack !
Monday, 2 November 2009
Breaking the chain
In some ways, quite a simple one , that some may have heard before, but worth repeating as it shows meaning on every level that חז''ל set out for us...
There is an interesting debut appearance in this week's sedra - in 19:16 - a שלשלת (Shalsheles), a rare cantor's note. It is only to make 3 further appearances in chumash - in Chayei Sarah - 24:12, in Vayeshev 39:8 and in Tzav 8:23 So what is its significance?
Let's see in what contexts it appears...
In next week's sedra, Chayei Sarah, we find that Eliezer, Avraham's most trusted servant, is charged with finding a wife for Yitzchak. He is not allowed to take a wife from Canaan. The Midrash tells us that Eliezer had a daughter and it could have been in his mind that he might 'just not have found' a suitable wife outside Canaan. This could have left the path open for his daughter (although Rashi does point out that Avraham' friends Anar, Eshkol and Mamreh were next in line). Nevertheless, Eliezer overcomes any personal attachments and davens that 'ה should heed his master's request. This triumph over his own desires is signified by the Shalsheles on the word ויאמר - the opening word of his prayer.
In Vayeshev we see the tremendous personal struggle that Jospeh had to overcome. Indeed, by running out and leaving his coat behind, in the hands of his master's wife, it got him into more trouble in some ways. But on a personal level, he could not afford to be in the house a moment longer, refusing his master's wife's advances. That very word - וימאן (and he refused), has a שלשלת on it, denoting the breaking of his own potential negative desires.
As for the final appearance - in Tzav - the Midrash tells us that Moshe Rabbenu was the Kohen Gadol until the end of the Miluim, the first week of the Mishkan's use, at which point he had to hand over the position to his brother Aharon(according to various sources, because he argued at the burning bush). It must have been hard for him. Yet he overcame any personal desires and handed over the baton wholeheartedly. His final act as High Priest was וישחט...no surprises about the musical note on this word, at the point of his breaking with his own emotions...
Looking back at our Sedra, we see from Rashi that the Pasuk tells us that the angels had to grab hold of Lot because he was tarrying...leaving behind all his possessions. The first word of the Pasuk, which means he hesitated, contains a שלשלת - he overcame his physical desire for wealth and grabbed reality with both hands...literally.
It is no accident that Shalsheles actually means a chain. Furthermore, if you listen to its sound, it is elongated (3x a פזר - Pazer, another musicla note - which is long already), yet comes to an abrupt end, thus breaking the chain. See how wise Chazal are, even when ascribing the musical notes to the words...
מתוק מדבש!
Btw - obviously, you have 4 opportunities to use this Dvar Torah!
Geshmack!
There is an interesting debut appearance in this week's sedra - in 19:16 - a שלשלת (Shalsheles), a rare cantor's note. It is only to make 3 further appearances in chumash - in Chayei Sarah - 24:12, in Vayeshev 39:8 and in Tzav 8:23 So what is its significance?
Let's see in what contexts it appears...
In next week's sedra, Chayei Sarah, we find that Eliezer, Avraham's most trusted servant, is charged with finding a wife for Yitzchak. He is not allowed to take a wife from Canaan. The Midrash tells us that Eliezer had a daughter and it could have been in his mind that he might 'just not have found' a suitable wife outside Canaan. This could have left the path open for his daughter (although Rashi does point out that Avraham' friends Anar, Eshkol and Mamreh were next in line). Nevertheless, Eliezer overcomes any personal attachments and davens that 'ה should heed his master's request. This triumph over his own desires is signified by the Shalsheles on the word ויאמר - the opening word of his prayer.
In Vayeshev we see the tremendous personal struggle that Jospeh had to overcome. Indeed, by running out and leaving his coat behind, in the hands of his master's wife, it got him into more trouble in some ways. But on a personal level, he could not afford to be in the house a moment longer, refusing his master's wife's advances. That very word - וימאן (and he refused), has a שלשלת on it, denoting the breaking of his own potential negative desires.
As for the final appearance - in Tzav - the Midrash tells us that Moshe Rabbenu was the Kohen Gadol until the end of the Miluim, the first week of the Mishkan's use, at which point he had to hand over the position to his brother Aharon(according to various sources, because he argued at the burning bush). It must have been hard for him. Yet he overcame any personal desires and handed over the baton wholeheartedly. His final act as High Priest was וישחט...no surprises about the musical note on this word, at the point of his breaking with his own emotions...
Looking back at our Sedra, we see from Rashi that the Pasuk tells us that the angels had to grab hold of Lot because he was tarrying...leaving behind all his possessions. The first word of the Pasuk, which means he hesitated, contains a שלשלת - he overcame his physical desire for wealth and grabbed reality with both hands...literally.
It is no accident that Shalsheles actually means a chain. Furthermore, if you listen to its sound, it is elongated (3x a פזר - Pazer, another musicla note - which is long already), yet comes to an abrupt end, thus breaking the chain. See how wise Chazal are, even when ascribing the musical notes to the words...
מתוק מדבש!
Btw - obviously, you have 4 opportunities to use this Dvar Torah!
Geshmack!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
