Yakov's Journey

There are several Divrei Torah this week, click here to see the rest

"וַיֵּצֵא יַעֲקֹב מִבְּאֵר שָׁבַע וַיֵּלֶךְ חָרָנָה - And Jacob left Beer sheba, and he went to Charan"

Why would Yakov leave the kedusha of Eretz Yisroel and go to Charan? A place devoid of spirituality and ruchnius? Furthermore we know where Yakov lived, so why does the Torah stress that he left Be'er Sheva. If he went on a journey, presumably he started at home.

The Sfas Emes explains that Yakov's departure was a preparation for Klal Yisroel's eventual exiles in Chutz La'aretz. Yakov therefore voluntarily traveled to a place where Hashem's presence was more 'nistar', or less visible to show his descendants that even in the darkest of places, the torch of our faith can shine brightly, an example of Maaseh Avos Siman LeBonim.

Furthermore, Yakov Avinu showed us how we can keep our faith throughout our struggles and hardships. Be'er Sheva. the place he left, represents complete spirituality. A be'er is a well of water. Water is the life force of all creatures and figuratively represents the spiritual life force, the connection to G-d that sustains everything around us. Sheva means seven, representing the seventh day of the week - Shabbos.

Shabbos is a time that we distance ourselves from the mundane and unimportant things that occupy our lives. It is a time when we can elevate ourselves to higher spiritual levels. Eating and sleeping are things that we do every day that seem to be the polar opposite of spirituality. Yet on Shabbos they take on a new dimension as a part of oneg Shabbos and allow us to bring spirituality and a higher purpose into the physical aspects of our lives. Thus Be'er Sheva figuratively represents a place where the spiritual source of life and its connection to the physical world are apparent.

Yakov our ancestor showed us how to travel through the darkness. We must always remeber where we came from and do our best to connect to our spiritual source. We may find ourselves in places where G-d seems remote and we do not see his hand guiding events around us. Yet, we have the capacity to serve Him through simple actions and even thoughts. A kind word or deed, a brocho on what we eat, brings G-d into our lives and give us a spiritual lift in even our darkest of hours.

*my thanks to MD Tokayer of http://sfasemes.blogspot.com/ for helping to bring the Sfas Emes to light

What Goes Around...

There are several Divrei Torah this week, click here to see the rest

The Pasuk says " ....עֵד הַגַּל הַזֶּה - This pile (of stones) shall be a witness..." (31:52)

Many Midrashim mention that Yaakov thrust a sword in to the wall as a second witness. The Da'as Zkeinim mentions this and then points out that Bilam ben Be'or's downfall was with these two, a wall and a sword. Why is this relevant?

He quotes a Gemara in Sanhedrin (105.) that "תנא הוא בעור הוא כושן רשעתים הוא לבן הארמי - Be'or is the same person as Lavan the Aramean and Kushan Reshasaim (an evil king in judges)", both of whom were mockers and scoffers who caused great difficulties for the Jews. Bilam was Lavan's son.

Bilam was damaged by a wall, (Numbers 22:25) as it says "וַתִּלְחַץ אֶת-רֶגֶל בִּלְעָם, אֶל-הַקִּיר - and his foot was crushed against the wall", and killed by the sword (ibid. 31:8) "וְאֵת בִּלְעָם בֶּן-בְּעוֹר, הָרְגוּ בֶּחָרֶב - also Bilam son of Be'or was slain by the sword".

There is a terrifying story in the Gemara quoted by Rashi and Tosfos (Taanis 8.) that a young boy found a girl who'd fallen into a deep pit, and promised to rescue her on the condition that she marry him. She consented, and they made the pit she was in and a passing animal witnesses. He rescued her and they went their seperate ways, and years later he married another woman, who bore him two sons. Unfortunately, one died falling into a pit, and another was killed by this animal. The woman asked why these bizarre misfortunes had befallen them, and he remembered the witnesses and his vow. His wife told him to divorce her and find this girl, which he did.

This is similar to the case of Bilam in that the witnesses came back to "remind" them of their duties, a clear demonstration of measure for measure.

Perhaps we can suggest an additional point to ponder: when Yakov entered Lavan's house, he clearly did not have sons, as otherwise why would he send his daughters to tend the sheep, surely a man's job? (We see this too by Yisro's daughters) Yet in this week's Sedra he clearly has sons (31:1). Lavan only had daughters until the blessing that Yakov brought with him gave him sons, and his own son broke his vow that nothing should befall his daughters.

These are a fulfilment of the Pasuk "יַד הָעֵדִים תִּהְיֶה בּוֹ בָרִאשֹׁנָה לַהֲמִיתוֹ - The hand of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death".

Scary stuff! But it is Geshmack to see how all the psukim are inter-connected!

United We Stand

This week features a gem from R' Shamshon Ostropolier, but this is a contentious point, and has also been attributed to the Vilna Gaon and various Sephardic Baalei Drasha.

The Pasuk says " וַיִּיקַץ יַעֲקֹב, מִשְּׁנָתוֹ, וַיֹּאמֶר, אָכֵן יֵשׁ יְהוָה בַּמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה; וְאָנֹכִי, לֹא יָדָעְתִּי - And Yakov awakened from his sleep, and he said, "I now know the Lord is in this place, and I did not know before." (28:16)

Clearly this means something else, and R' Shamshon Ostropolier obliges us. He explains that we know from Sefer Yechezkel there are 4 images on the Kisei HaKavod(G-d's Holy Throne), a lion, an eagle, a cherub and a man.

He then explains that אָכֵן is Roshei Teivos Aryeh (lion), Cruv (cherub, the angel that appeared on the Aron) and Nesher (eagle), and אָנֹכִי is Roshei Teivos Aryeh, Nesher, Cruv, and Yakov. This is what he was really saying; ""אָכֵן" I already knew were on the Kisei HaKavod, but after I saw the Kisei Hakavod in my dream, I saw "אָנֹכִי" with the additional yud, for Yakov ie that my face was the fourth, fitting enough to be on the Kisei HaKavod, לֹא יָדָעְתִּי".

I heard a very interesting explanation on how he saw himself as fitting from when he woke up and not before. There is machlokes how many stones Yakov took as the pasuk does not say how many. Pirkei D'Rebi Eliezer says that Yakov took 12 stones to put around his head. Before, all the stones were seperate and individual, and Yakov/Yisroel was not fit to be on the Kisei HaKavod. But once he woke up and saw they had combined to make 1 stone, then he was fitting to be on the Kisei Hakavod, and that's why he didn't know before. We can apply this to ourselves by saying that the 12 stones is a metaphor for the 12 Tribes, and clearly from this we can see that divided we are not fit to be on the Kisei HaKavod, but united, we are.

Why did G-d "relent" to Isaac and Rivka's prayers?

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 !

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!

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 !

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!