Chasidut su Genesi 24:76
Noam Elimelech
And Hashem appeared to him etc (Genesis 18:1) - we have to explain first the verse "And Avraham was old, entered in days" (Genesis 24:1). Behold, the upper worlds are called "days" and the tzadik in their kedusha reaches up to the upper worlds, and this is "Avraham was old/zaken" as in "this one acquired wisdom"/Zeh Kanah chochmah" (Sifra, Kedoshim 7:12); "entered in days" meaning, until he reached the upper worlds, and so too about King David, peace be upon him, it was said "And David was old, entered in days etc" (I Kings 1:1) and this is "He asked from You life; You granted him many days" (Ps. 21:5). That behold regarding the tzadik, the life they have in this world is not his, rather, it is as a borrowed thing for one hour, and because of this the tzadik goes and strengthens themself always in holiness, since the tzadik always thinks that lest today it will be the day of returning what was borrowed, and this is "he asked from You life", meaning, meaning, the tzadik who thinks that life is only borrowed from You, therefore "You granted him many days", through this the tzadik merits many days, which are the life in the world to come.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Flames of Faith
I will make you swear by God, the God of heaven and earth, that you will not take a wife for my son from among the daughters of the Canaanites in whose midst I dwell. But you should go into my country and to my relatives and take a wife for my son for Isaac (Gen. 24:3-4).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Tzav VeZeruz
If you desire to serve the Divine and raise yourself to a higher consciousness, don't stand at your seventieth birthday the same person you were at your Bar Mitzvah. Rather, do this. Every year, set yourself a goal. Imagine yourself: if your name is Reuben, for example, imagine what kind of Reuben you will be next year, what will his achievements, his engagement and his qualities be? This imaginary Reuben will be a way to measure yourself, always checking how far you are from reaching him. Are your daily worship and your self-development at a pace that will allow you to become that Reuben next year? And if the next year arrives, and you measure yourself and have not reached even to the level of Reuben's shoes, let it be in your eyes as if you have (G-d forbid G-d forbid!) not achieved a long life. Because only last year's Reuben, or the one of ten years ago, is alive, and not this year's Reuben. This is the meaning of the verse "And Abraham was old, full of days" (Genesis 24:1) - Today's Abraham was there today, and not yesterday's.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bnei Yissaschar
And you will understand through this what our Sages taught about the faithful servant of Abraham, our father, that he was the very first of those connected to us, and the blessed Holy One raised him higher than the constellations (see Gen. 15:5 with Rashi). The verse “his servant, the elder of his household” (Gen. 24:2), they explain with, “he one in charge of my household is Dammesek Eliezer!” (Gen. 15:2), meaning that he draws [doleh] and gives drink [mashke] to others from his master’s Torah (Yoma 28b).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,1. “and Avraham had become old, while G’d had blessed him in everything.” According to the Talmud Baba Metzia 87 the concept of ”old age,” was unknown to mankind until Avraham’s being described here in such terms. [According to the Talmud, the statement refers to external features of elderly people stamping them as having lived for many years. This was why up until then anyone looking at Avraham or Yitzchok could not be sure whether he was looking at the father or the son. Ed.]
[If I understand the Talmud correctly, what is meant is that when the Torah had described Adam as having begotten a son in his own image (Genesis 5,3) as opposed to his first two sons, the resemblance between fathers and sons continued unabated until the time when Avraham was described as having aged. Ed.]
The point the Talmud makes is that beneficial largesse provided from the celestial regions for the lower regions of the universe manifests itself in one of two ways. It may be measured in terms familiar to us in this part of the universe, or it may be described in terms of concepts applicable in the celestial regions, seeing that these two domains each have their own set of rules. When this beneficial largesse originates directly in the celestial spheres close to the Creator, it had not become subject to limitations applicable in the parts of the world we live in. [As an example, we may distinguish between nourishment provided by G’d through the earth giving its yield, when such nourishment is subject to limitations that apply on our planet, whereas when G’d fed the Jewish people with manna, such limitations did not apply, as the manna originated directly in one of the seven layers of heaven. Ed.] This latter method of benefiting from G’d’s largesse is reserved exclusively for the Jewish people. The Jewish people have become privy to this (on occasion) due to their having clung to their Creator with such devotion.
The other nations sharing this planet with us, receive whatever largesse G’d provides for them only through “nature,” which “processes” such gifts from G’d before it reaches its recipients. This is what is meant when the Torah wrote in Genesis 25,12-15 ואלה תולדות ישמעאל שנים עשר נשיאים לאומתם, “and this is the line of Ishmael, son of Avraham……12 chieftains, etc.” The word: לאומתם is derived from אמה, “mother;” when a mother measures her son she uses measuring devices used in our parts of the universe. The Torah (Genesis 25,13, and again in verse 16) adds: בשמותם לתולדותם and בחצריהם ובטירותם, “by their names, in the order of their births, and by their villages and their encampments;” these words describe the parameters within which they were privy to G’d’s benevolent largesse. The contrast with which the Torah describes a similar description of the development of the Jewish people can be seen in the words למשפחותם לבית אבותם, “according to their family, their respective father’s house”. The word אבותם in this instance is derived from אבה, as in לא אבה יבמי, “he did not want to perform levirate marriage with me.” (Deuteronomy 25.7) The word אבה is a synonym for רצון, “will, desire.” The widow describes that her brother-in-law does not wish to fulfill the will of heaven in maintaining his deceased brother’s name alive.
Let us illustrate by an example more familiar to all of us. A potter intends to create a vase of a certain shape and colour. Before setting out to shape the clay he has a definite image of the finished product in his mind’s eye. This image is known as מחשבה, or אב הפעולה, “the father of the finished product.” The רצון, the will to create a vase, is called אב, father, as it precedes even the sculptor’s vision of the final shape and colour of the product is about to embark on creating. The eventual product is known as בני בנים, euphemism for “grandchildren.” [In relation to the רצון the initial will to create something. Ed.]
Israel’s drawing down G’d’s largesse to itself is somewhat similar. The process begins with this celestial largesse entering the domain of the physical universe, גבולין. [A domain defined by borders both dimensionally and directionally. Ed.] The various shapes and forms this largesse assumes once it has entered our part of the universe is known as בני בנים, “grandchildren.” The original רצון, G’d’s intention to provide this largesse, is called זקן, “an old man.”
When Solomon in Proverbs 17,6 speaks about עטרת זקנים בני בנים, loosely translated as “grandchildren are the crown of their elders,” the meaning of this line on a deeper level, is: “the largesse that has been received by Israelites as a result of G’d’s benevolence, is rooted in the will of G’d,” i.e. from this רצון to the world known as בני בנים.
[If I understand the Talmud correctly, what is meant is that when the Torah had described Adam as having begotten a son in his own image (Genesis 5,3) as opposed to his first two sons, the resemblance between fathers and sons continued unabated until the time when Avraham was described as having aged. Ed.]
The point the Talmud makes is that beneficial largesse provided from the celestial regions for the lower regions of the universe manifests itself in one of two ways. It may be measured in terms familiar to us in this part of the universe, or it may be described in terms of concepts applicable in the celestial regions, seeing that these two domains each have their own set of rules. When this beneficial largesse originates directly in the celestial spheres close to the Creator, it had not become subject to limitations applicable in the parts of the world we live in. [As an example, we may distinguish between nourishment provided by G’d through the earth giving its yield, when such nourishment is subject to limitations that apply on our planet, whereas when G’d fed the Jewish people with manna, such limitations did not apply, as the manna originated directly in one of the seven layers of heaven. Ed.] This latter method of benefiting from G’d’s largesse is reserved exclusively for the Jewish people. The Jewish people have become privy to this (on occasion) due to their having clung to their Creator with such devotion.
The other nations sharing this planet with us, receive whatever largesse G’d provides for them only through “nature,” which “processes” such gifts from G’d before it reaches its recipients. This is what is meant when the Torah wrote in Genesis 25,12-15 ואלה תולדות ישמעאל שנים עשר נשיאים לאומתם, “and this is the line of Ishmael, son of Avraham……12 chieftains, etc.” The word: לאומתם is derived from אמה, “mother;” when a mother measures her son she uses measuring devices used in our parts of the universe. The Torah (Genesis 25,13, and again in verse 16) adds: בשמותם לתולדותם and בחצריהם ובטירותם, “by their names, in the order of their births, and by their villages and their encampments;” these words describe the parameters within which they were privy to G’d’s benevolent largesse. The contrast with which the Torah describes a similar description of the development of the Jewish people can be seen in the words למשפחותם לבית אבותם, “according to their family, their respective father’s house”. The word אבותם in this instance is derived from אבה, as in לא אבה יבמי, “he did not want to perform levirate marriage with me.” (Deuteronomy 25.7) The word אבה is a synonym for רצון, “will, desire.” The widow describes that her brother-in-law does not wish to fulfill the will of heaven in maintaining his deceased brother’s name alive.
Let us illustrate by an example more familiar to all of us. A potter intends to create a vase of a certain shape and colour. Before setting out to shape the clay he has a definite image of the finished product in his mind’s eye. This image is known as מחשבה, or אב הפעולה, “the father of the finished product.” The רצון, the will to create a vase, is called אב, father, as it precedes even the sculptor’s vision of the final shape and colour of the product is about to embark on creating. The eventual product is known as בני בנים, euphemism for “grandchildren.” [In relation to the רצון the initial will to create something. Ed.]
Israel’s drawing down G’d’s largesse to itself is somewhat similar. The process begins with this celestial largesse entering the domain of the physical universe, גבולין. [A domain defined by borders both dimensionally and directionally. Ed.] The various shapes and forms this largesse assumes once it has entered our part of the universe is known as בני בנים, “grandchildren.” The original רצון, G’d’s intention to provide this largesse, is called זקן, “an old man.”
When Solomon in Proverbs 17,6 speaks about עטרת זקנים בני בנים, loosely translated as “grandchildren are the crown of their elders,” the meaning of this line on a deeper level, is: “the largesse that has been received by Israelites as a result of G’d’s benevolence, is rooted in the will of G’d,” i.e. from this רצון to the world known as בני בנים.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Me'or Einayim
Noah walked with God (Gen. 6:9) Rashi explained: “But regarding Abraham it says, [Walk before me (Gen. 17:1)], Before whom I have walked (Gen. 24:40); Noah needed assistance to support him, but Abraham strengthened himself with his righteousness and walked independently.” But this is difficult to understand as well, for does the verse not say [Noah was a] completely righteous [man] (Gen. 6:9)? And if [Rashi’s comment is correct,] then he is not “complete” since he lacks the level of Abraham!
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,7. “do not bring my son back there under any circumstances.!” We find that G’d confirmed Avraham’s attittude concerning Yitzchok not leaving the soil of The Holy Land, when He said to Yitzchok (Genesis 26,2) אל תרד מצרימה, שכון בארץ..גור בארץ הזאת, “do not go down to Egypt; reside in the Land…even if you have to be a transient in this land!”
We have a standing rule according to which it is permissible to be afraid of something or someone bigger than oneself, whereas it is forbidden to be afraid of someone smaller than oneself. In other words, whereas it is permissible to be afraid of G’d, it is not permissible to be afraid of anyone other than G’d. This is why all manner of idol worship is prohibited.
The attribute of love enables one to love those who are “smaller” than we are, notably the members of our household who depend on us. When we keep this rule in mind we will be able to understand a story in the Talmud Kiddushin 57 where it is related that Shimon ben Ammasuni undertook to explain the meaning of each word את in the Torah, proving that the word invariably includes something that the Torah had not spelled out specifically. However, when he came to the line (Deuteronomy 6,13) את ה' אלוקיך תירא, “you are to revere the Lord your G’d,” he was stymied, not knowing what the word את in that line could possibly add, as it is forbidden to revere anyone other than the Lord. His students asked him if he thought that all the explanations that he had found for the other times that the word את occurs should be disregarded? He replied that “just as the Torah promises a reward for explaining its intricacies, so it rewards those who refrain from offering explanations that are not appropriate.” In the meantime, Rabbi Akiva who had heard of Shimon ben Ammasuni’s dilemma, said that even this את added an additional meaning to the verse in which it appeared, suggesting that the Torah scholars deserve to be revered also. Rabbi Akiva was able to offer this explanation since Torah scholars are “greater” than the ordinary people consulting them, so that they fit the principle that it is allowed to revere, be in awe of, people that are greater than oneself. This is a basic difference between the attribute of reverence, יראה, and the attribute of אהבה, love. While it is in order to say: “I am afraid of you,” to someone more powerful than oneself, a king for instance, it is not in order to say to such a king: “I love you.” It is, however, permissible to say to such a king: “I love to be in your house,” “I love to serve you,” etc.
The above distinction explains why Shimon ben Amassuni had not found a problem with the word את in Deuteronomy 6,5 where the Torah writes: ואהבת את ה' אלוקיך, “you shall love the Lord your G’d.” He understood this verse as not applying to G’d’s essence, but to attributes of G’d, attributes worth emulating because they make Him lovable. This is also why Rabbi Akiva was able to resolve his difficulty when he suggested that reverence for Torah scholars, who are an extension of G’d from Whom they received their knowledge and stature, therefore qualify for a portion of reverence that is due to their Master. Seeing that the Torah scholar is a servant of G’d, he too is entitled to some of his Master’s reflected glory.
Avraham’s major attribute was אהבה, his love for people. This attribute included even in their concerns with matters that did not involve their relations to the Creator. This being so, G’d did not object to his descending to Egypt, leaving the soil of the Holy Land. His son Yitzchok’s primary attribute was יראה, reverence for the Essence of G’d; i.e. he concentrated all his faculties on how to serve G’d. This being so, it would have interfered with his basic character were he to leave the sacred soil of the land of Israel for even a short period.
We have a standing rule according to which it is permissible to be afraid of something or someone bigger than oneself, whereas it is forbidden to be afraid of someone smaller than oneself. In other words, whereas it is permissible to be afraid of G’d, it is not permissible to be afraid of anyone other than G’d. This is why all manner of idol worship is prohibited.
The attribute of love enables one to love those who are “smaller” than we are, notably the members of our household who depend on us. When we keep this rule in mind we will be able to understand a story in the Talmud Kiddushin 57 where it is related that Shimon ben Ammasuni undertook to explain the meaning of each word את in the Torah, proving that the word invariably includes something that the Torah had not spelled out specifically. However, when he came to the line (Deuteronomy 6,13) את ה' אלוקיך תירא, “you are to revere the Lord your G’d,” he was stymied, not knowing what the word את in that line could possibly add, as it is forbidden to revere anyone other than the Lord. His students asked him if he thought that all the explanations that he had found for the other times that the word את occurs should be disregarded? He replied that “just as the Torah promises a reward for explaining its intricacies, so it rewards those who refrain from offering explanations that are not appropriate.” In the meantime, Rabbi Akiva who had heard of Shimon ben Ammasuni’s dilemma, said that even this את added an additional meaning to the verse in which it appeared, suggesting that the Torah scholars deserve to be revered also. Rabbi Akiva was able to offer this explanation since Torah scholars are “greater” than the ordinary people consulting them, so that they fit the principle that it is allowed to revere, be in awe of, people that are greater than oneself. This is a basic difference between the attribute of reverence, יראה, and the attribute of אהבה, love. While it is in order to say: “I am afraid of you,” to someone more powerful than oneself, a king for instance, it is not in order to say to such a king: “I love you.” It is, however, permissible to say to such a king: “I love to be in your house,” “I love to serve you,” etc.
The above distinction explains why Shimon ben Amassuni had not found a problem with the word את in Deuteronomy 6,5 where the Torah writes: ואהבת את ה' אלוקיך, “you shall love the Lord your G’d.” He understood this verse as not applying to G’d’s essence, but to attributes of G’d, attributes worth emulating because they make Him lovable. This is also why Rabbi Akiva was able to resolve his difficulty when he suggested that reverence for Torah scholars, who are an extension of G’d from Whom they received their knowledge and stature, therefore qualify for a portion of reverence that is due to their Master. Seeing that the Torah scholar is a servant of G’d, he too is entitled to some of his Master’s reflected glory.
Avraham’s major attribute was אהבה, his love for people. This attribute included even in their concerns with matters that did not involve their relations to the Creator. This being so, G’d did not object to his descending to Egypt, leaving the soil of the Holy Land. His son Yitzchok’s primary attribute was יראה, reverence for the Essence of G’d; i.e. he concentrated all his faculties on how to serve G’d. This being so, it would have interfered with his basic character were he to leave the sacred soil of the land of Israel for even a short period.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,13-15. “Here I am standing at the well…and the daughters of the residents of the town are coming out… and through her I will know that You have performed a loving kindness for my master.” “and behold Rivkah who had been born for Bethuel son of Milkah, was coming out, etc.”
When looking at the precision with which the Torah describes every detail surrounding this encounter, we must ask ourselves what need there was for Eliezer to refer to the other daughters of Aram Naharayim at all? What part did they play in the story? Furthermore, why did the Torah write the word ילדה with a dot in the letter ל, suggesting that the birth of Rivkah was connected to a cause other than Bethuel merely impregnating his wife with his semen? The vowel kubutz under the letter י, instead of the vowel kametz, also adds to the impression that there were external factors involved in Rivkah’s birth. [The reader will note that when Rivkah identified herself to Eliezer in verse 24, she only used the word ילדה in an active mode with the vowel kametz, when she referred to her grandmother Milkah having born her father for Nachor. Ed.]
According to the approach that we have followed in explaining these verses in terms of G’d’s largesse and how it is transmitted to our part of the universe to the righteous, none of these nuances are difficult. We have explained that Avraham’s spiritual level in this world was one that enabled him to elevate mankind by stages to higher spiritual levels, i.e. bringing them closer to their Creator. He did this by opening channels of G’d’s largesse to flow directly, without detours, to the society within which he was active. Eliezer, Avraham’s servant was well aware that the local population of Aram Naharayim consisted of wicked people. In order to examine whether the young lady who was to become Yitzchok’s wife belonged to the wicked part of this population, he had to devise a special scheme. If he were to find among the virgins that came forth from the town to draw water one who distinguished herself by the characteristic of loving kindness, i.e. the same characteristic that distinguished his master Avraham, he felt certain that such a girl must have had her roots in Avraham’s family. She must have been blessed with such an attribute through the activities of Avraham on this earth. When he described himself as “standing at the well,” he positioned himself in such a manner that he had a chance to test the girls concerning their characteristics such as offering help beyond the absolute minimum to an unknown stranger such as himself. Such a girl, by definition, was destined to continue to be active practicing the virtues for which Avraham his master was famous.
The words: והנה רבקה יוצאת אשר ילדה לבתואל, are to alert us that from the generous attitude displayed by Rivkah it became manifest that a contributing factor to her birth had been the benevolent influence Avraham had exerted on the people of his time, and especially on members of his family. A girl who would voluntarily exert herself on behalf of a stranger’s camels would demonstrate the attribute of חסד, loving concern for others, that characterized Avraham and his deceased wife, Sarah.
When looking at the precision with which the Torah describes every detail surrounding this encounter, we must ask ourselves what need there was for Eliezer to refer to the other daughters of Aram Naharayim at all? What part did they play in the story? Furthermore, why did the Torah write the word ילדה with a dot in the letter ל, suggesting that the birth of Rivkah was connected to a cause other than Bethuel merely impregnating his wife with his semen? The vowel kubutz under the letter י, instead of the vowel kametz, also adds to the impression that there were external factors involved in Rivkah’s birth. [The reader will note that when Rivkah identified herself to Eliezer in verse 24, she only used the word ילדה in an active mode with the vowel kametz, when she referred to her grandmother Milkah having born her father for Nachor. Ed.]
According to the approach that we have followed in explaining these verses in terms of G’d’s largesse and how it is transmitted to our part of the universe to the righteous, none of these nuances are difficult. We have explained that Avraham’s spiritual level in this world was one that enabled him to elevate mankind by stages to higher spiritual levels, i.e. bringing them closer to their Creator. He did this by opening channels of G’d’s largesse to flow directly, without detours, to the society within which he was active. Eliezer, Avraham’s servant was well aware that the local population of Aram Naharayim consisted of wicked people. In order to examine whether the young lady who was to become Yitzchok’s wife belonged to the wicked part of this population, he had to devise a special scheme. If he were to find among the virgins that came forth from the town to draw water one who distinguished herself by the characteristic of loving kindness, i.e. the same characteristic that distinguished his master Avraham, he felt certain that such a girl must have had her roots in Avraham’s family. She must have been blessed with such an attribute through the activities of Avraham on this earth. When he described himself as “standing at the well,” he positioned himself in such a manner that he had a chance to test the girls concerning their characteristics such as offering help beyond the absolute minimum to an unknown stranger such as himself. Such a girl, by definition, was destined to continue to be active practicing the virtues for which Avraham his master was famous.
The words: והנה רבקה יוצאת אשר ילדה לבתואל, are to alert us that from the generous attitude displayed by Rivkah it became manifest that a contributing factor to her birth had been the benevolent influence Avraham had exerted on the people of his time, and especially on members of his family. A girl who would voluntarily exert herself on behalf of a stranger’s camels would demonstrate the attribute of חסד, loving concern for others, that characterized Avraham and his deceased wife, Sarah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
והנה רבקה יוצאת אשר ילדה לבתואל, “and behold, here Rivkah who had been born for Betuel was coming forth.” She had been born for Betuel, due to beneficial, though indirect, input by Avraham. Betuel was not the originator of Rivkah, but merely a vessel used by G’d as an intermediary. [There is no other verse in the Bible where the expression אשר ילדה, “who she bore,” is not connected to the mother who bore that child. Ed.] The Torah alludes to Avraham’s role in that “birth” by using the vowel kubutz, which implies “external influence.” The reason why Eliezer immediately gave Rivkah jewelry even before enquiring who she was, shows that he realized that her attribute of חסד had revealed that she had much in common with his master Avraham, and that there must be a biological link between her and Avraham. This is also what Rashi had in mind when he wrote: (verse 23) “after he had given her the bracelets, because he was certain of his master Avraham’s merits.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,14. “and through her I shall know that You have done a kindness with my master.” These words of Eliezer have been explained in the Zohar where the author states that in the time of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai even small children possessed some special wisdom that enabled them to know what other adults do not know. [The children being innocent. Ed.] They were endowed with this superior wisdom as part of the spiritual rays radiating from the saintly personality of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai is quoted as an example of the influence exerted on his environment by every righteous person, each one in varying degrees according to his spiritual stature. They are to be perceived as a microcosm of Hashem, Who as the macrocosm, disseminates spiritual influence throughout His universe through His very existence.
There is no question but that Avraham’s major attribute was חסד and that he had a profound influence on his immediate environment, not only recognized but paid tribute to, by the people of Kiryat Arba, when they described him as a “prince of G’d” in their midst. (Genesis 23,6) Avraham personified on earth, what the Creator personifies in the entire universe, i.e. the dispensing of largesse.
The expression ילדה is not appropriate for males, as they only הוליד, beget, plant seed, but do not bring it to gestation. The proper meaning of the word “yuldah” as it appears here suggests an immaculate birth, a birth that had not been preceded by insemination. Seeing that this is a difficult process for us to grasp, the idea that Avraham’s good deeds “spilled over” even to people such as Betuel, is meant to set our mind at rest over the fact that Rivkah, with a father such as Betuel, and a brother such as Lavan, could have been such a righteous matriarch as she clearly was.
During the meal, Eliezer recounts what had occurred at the well, and anyone who has read the Torah’s report of what transpired is aware that Eliezer rewrote some of this “history,” i.e. the sequence of events. Rashi points this out (in his commentary on Genesis 24,47) implying that during the meal, in the presence of Betuel, Eliezer could not bring himself to imply that this man had been endowed with part of Avraham’s soul. [Perhaps the fact that if even a Betuel could exclaim that this match had been made in heaven (Genesis 24,50) is the best support for our author’s theory that some of Avraham’s spirit had spilled over even into the soul of a Betuel. Ed.]
There is no question but that Avraham’s major attribute was חסד and that he had a profound influence on his immediate environment, not only recognized but paid tribute to, by the people of Kiryat Arba, when they described him as a “prince of G’d” in their midst. (Genesis 23,6) Avraham personified on earth, what the Creator personifies in the entire universe, i.e. the dispensing of largesse.
The expression ילדה is not appropriate for males, as they only הוליד, beget, plant seed, but do not bring it to gestation. The proper meaning of the word “yuldah” as it appears here suggests an immaculate birth, a birth that had not been preceded by insemination. Seeing that this is a difficult process for us to grasp, the idea that Avraham’s good deeds “spilled over” even to people such as Betuel, is meant to set our mind at rest over the fact that Rivkah, with a father such as Betuel, and a brother such as Lavan, could have been such a righteous matriarch as she clearly was.
During the meal, Eliezer recounts what had occurred at the well, and anyone who has read the Torah’s report of what transpired is aware that Eliezer rewrote some of this “history,” i.e. the sequence of events. Rashi points this out (in his commentary on Genesis 24,47) implying that during the meal, in the presence of Betuel, Eliezer could not bring himself to imply that this man had been endowed with part of Avraham’s soul. [Perhaps the fact that if even a Betuel could exclaim that this match had been made in heaven (Genesis 24,50) is the best support for our author’s theory that some of Avraham’s spirit had spilled over even into the soul of a Betuel. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,14. “and through her I shall know that You have done a kindness with my master.” These words of Eliezer have been explained in the Zohar where the author states that in the time of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai even small children possessed some special wisdom that enabled them to know what other adults do not know. [The children being innocent. Ed.] They were endowed with this superior wisdom as part of the spiritual rays radiating from the saintly personality of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai is quoted as an example of the influence exerted on his environment by every righteous person, each one in varying degrees according to his spiritual stature. They are to be perceived as a microcosm of Hashem, Who as the macrocosm, disseminates spiritual influence throughout His universe through His very existence.
There is no question but that Avraham’s major attribute was חסד and that he had a profound influence on his immediate environment, not only recognized but paid tribute to, by the people of Kiryat Arba, when they described him as a “prince of G’d” in their midst. (Genesis 23,6) Avraham personified on earth, what the Creator personifies in the entire universe, i.e. the dispensing of largesse.
The expression ילדה is not appropriate for males, as they only הוליד, beget, plant seed, but do not bring it to gestation. The proper meaning of the word “yuldah” as it appears here suggests an immaculate birth, a birth that had not been preceded by insemination. Seeing that this is a difficult process for us to grasp, the idea that Avraham’s good deeds “spilled over” even to people such as Betuel, is meant to set our mind at rest over the fact that Rivkah, with a father such as Betuel, and a brother such as Lavan, could have been such a righteous matriarch as she clearly was.
During the meal, Eliezer recounts what had occurred at the well, and anyone who has read the Torah’s report of what transpired is aware that Eliezer rewrote some of this “history,” i.e. the sequence of events. Rashi points this out (in his commentary on Genesis 24,47) implying that during the meal, in the presence of Betuel, Eliezer could not bring himself to imply that this man had been endowed with part of Avraham’s soul. [Perhaps the fact that if even a Betuel could exclaim that this match had been made in heaven (Genesis 24,50) is the best support for our author’s theory that some of Avraham’s spirit had spilled over even into the soul of a Betuel. Ed.]
There is no question but that Avraham’s major attribute was חסד and that he had a profound influence on his immediate environment, not only recognized but paid tribute to, by the people of Kiryat Arba, when they described him as a “prince of G’d” in their midst. (Genesis 23,6) Avraham personified on earth, what the Creator personifies in the entire universe, i.e. the dispensing of largesse.
The expression ילדה is not appropriate for males, as they only הוליד, beget, plant seed, but do not bring it to gestation. The proper meaning of the word “yuldah” as it appears here suggests an immaculate birth, a birth that had not been preceded by insemination. Seeing that this is a difficult process for us to grasp, the idea that Avraham’s good deeds “spilled over” even to people such as Betuel, is meant to set our mind at rest over the fact that Rivkah, with a father such as Betuel, and a brother such as Lavan, could have been such a righteous matriarch as she clearly was.
During the meal, Eliezer recounts what had occurred at the well, and anyone who has read the Torah’s report of what transpired is aware that Eliezer rewrote some of this “history,” i.e. the sequence of events. Rashi points this out (in his commentary on Genesis 24,47) implying that during the meal, in the presence of Betuel, Eliezer could not bring himself to imply that this man had been endowed with part of Avraham’s soul. [Perhaps the fact that if even a Betuel could exclaim that this match had been made in heaven (Genesis 24,50) is the best support for our author’s theory that some of Avraham’s spirit had spilled over even into the soul of a Betuel. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,14. “and through her I shall know that You have done a kindness with my master.” These words of Eliezer have been explained in the Zohar where the author states that in the time of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai even small children possessed some special wisdom that enabled them to know what other adults do not know. [The children being innocent. Ed.] They were endowed with this superior wisdom as part of the spiritual rays radiating from the saintly personality of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai is quoted as an example of the influence exerted on his environment by every righteous person, each one in varying degrees according to his spiritual stature. They are to be perceived as a microcosm of Hashem, Who as the macrocosm, disseminates spiritual influence throughout His universe through His very existence.
There is no question but that Avraham’s major attribute was חסד and that he had a profound influence on his immediate environment, not only recognized but paid tribute to, by the people of Kiryat Arba, when they described him as a “prince of G’d” in their midst. (Genesis 23,6) Avraham personified on earth, what the Creator personifies in the entire universe, i.e. the dispensing of largesse.
The expression ילדה is not appropriate for males, as they only הוליד, beget, plant seed, but do not bring it to gestation. The proper meaning of the word “yuldah” as it appears here suggests an immaculate birth, a birth that had not been preceded by insemination. Seeing that this is a difficult process for us to grasp, the idea that Avraham’s good deeds “spilled over” even to people such as Betuel, is meant to set our mind at rest over the fact that Rivkah, with a father such as Betuel, and a brother such as Lavan, could have been such a righteous matriarch as she clearly was.
During the meal, Eliezer recounts what had occurred at the well, and anyone who has read the Torah’s report of what transpired is aware that Eliezer rewrote some of this “history,” i.e. the sequence of events. Rashi points this out (in his commentary on Genesis 24,47) implying that during the meal, in the presence of Betuel, Eliezer could not bring himself to imply that this man had been endowed with part of Avraham’s soul. [Perhaps the fact that if even a Betuel could exclaim that this match had been made in heaven (Genesis 24,50) is the best support for our author’s theory that some of Avraham’s spirit had spilled over even into the soul of a Betuel. Ed.]
There is no question but that Avraham’s major attribute was חסד and that he had a profound influence on his immediate environment, not only recognized but paid tribute to, by the people of Kiryat Arba, when they described him as a “prince of G’d” in their midst. (Genesis 23,6) Avraham personified on earth, what the Creator personifies in the entire universe, i.e. the dispensing of largesse.
The expression ילדה is not appropriate for males, as they only הוליד, beget, plant seed, but do not bring it to gestation. The proper meaning of the word “yuldah” as it appears here suggests an immaculate birth, a birth that had not been preceded by insemination. Seeing that this is a difficult process for us to grasp, the idea that Avraham’s good deeds “spilled over” even to people such as Betuel, is meant to set our mind at rest over the fact that Rivkah, with a father such as Betuel, and a brother such as Lavan, could have been such a righteous matriarch as she clearly was.
During the meal, Eliezer recounts what had occurred at the well, and anyone who has read the Torah’s report of what transpired is aware that Eliezer rewrote some of this “history,” i.e. the sequence of events. Rashi points this out (in his commentary on Genesis 24,47) implying that during the meal, in the presence of Betuel, Eliezer could not bring himself to imply that this man had been endowed with part of Avraham’s soul. [Perhaps the fact that if even a Betuel could exclaim that this match had been made in heaven (Genesis 24,50) is the best support for our author’s theory that some of Avraham’s spirit had spilled over even into the soul of a Betuel. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,28. “when I was already on the way, Hashem guided me to the house of my master’s brothers.” It is noteworthy that the word בדרך, “on the way,” is written with the vowel patach, instead of the semi vowel sheva that we would have expected. The former refers to a “definitive path, way, one that was commonly known.” Surely no highway led from Kiryat Arba to Aram Naharayim! We must assume therefore that what Eliezer meant to convey by choosing this word בדרך, is not the route that led from Kiryat Arba to Aram Naharayim, but the feeling that he progressed with unnatural speed to his goal, or as the sages in Bereshit rabbah 60,6 say that Eliezer covered a two week journey in a single day, so that he realized that this miracle was proof that his mission would succeed. It was clear to him therefore that the house that he was taken to must be the house of Avraham’s family.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Me'or Einayim
[Now Abraham was old, well advanced in days;] and the LORD had blessed Abraham in all things (Gen. 24:1), and it is stated in the Midrash, “By what merit? By the merit of tithing” (Midrash Tanhuma [Warsaw ed.] Hayyey Sarah #4). For it is known that regarding the mitzvah of tithing it is said, [Bring the full tithes into the storehouse…] and thereby put me to the test, [says the LORD of hosts,] if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need (Malakhi 3:10).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,33. “I will not eat until after I have said what I have come here to say.” Eliezer betrothed Rivkah in his capacity as Yitzchok’s representative. It is a rule that on the day of his wedding, the groom is not allowed to eat until after he has wed the bride. [Nowadays both groom and bride fast until after the ceremony. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
An alternate approach to the paragraph commencing with: וירא והנה באר בשדה, “he looked, and here there was a well in the field, etc.;” The Talmud Pessachim 88 draws attention to Avraham, Yitzchok, and Yaakov each using a different simile when trying to condense their concept of G’d. Avraham saw G’d in terms of a הר, “mountain,” i.e. something far above our level towering above man. Yitzchok perceived him as שדה, a field, covering huge expanses of earth, but sharing earth with man. Yaakov perceived Him as בית, i.e. an intimate term, viewing G’d as if He were at home with human beings. A major difference between Yaakov’s concept of G’d and that of his forefathers, is that the former did not view G’d as being “at home” permanently on earth, whereas Yaakov did perceive Him as constantly accompanying man, much as a house is the symbol of a permanent presence. [The scriptural verses this is based on are: Genesis 22,14 בהר ה' יראה, “on the Mountain of Hashem, He may be seen.” Genesis 24,63 ויצא יצחק לשוח בשדה, “Yitzchok went out into the field to meditate.” In Genesis 28,19 the Torah quotes Yaakov as naming the site ביתאל, “house of the Lord”. Yaakov felt that the time had come when G’d could have a permanent home on earth. However, this had been a vision brought about by his dream/prophetic insight. After awakening he realized that down on earth, where greed, envy and jealousy were still prevalent, to wit the huge rock making the water of the well inaccessible accept when all the interested parties were assembled simultaneously, that the time was not yet ripe for G’d to feel at home in such an environment. By removing the rock, Yaakov wanted to demonstrate to the shepherds that a better future could be in store for mankind. I have reworded the thought expressed by the author somewhat, and have omitted the comparison to the portion of קן צפור in Deut. 22,6. Ed.]
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis (24,12) We need to examine why Betuel and family at first agreed to Rivkah’s becoming Yitzchok’s bride, (verse 50) but apparently changed their minds subsequently. (Verse 55). We must remember that both Lavan and Betuel, even when appearing to agree, had evil intentions. (see Rashi, according to whom they planned to assassinate Eliezer) Their principal motivation was to prevent Yitzchok from having children that would grow to maturity and survive. (Gittin 64) The Talmud there discusses the subject of a betrothal by means of an emissary, in the absence of a face to face meeting between bride and groom. According to the halachah, as long as the emissary is still on the way, i.e. has not returned from his mission, the sender (Yitzchok) is not allowed to marry any other woman. The reason for this is that he might, unwittingly marry someone forbidden to him for reasons of incest. (In the event that his emissary had already carried out his mission) For this reason, Rivkah’s family first expressed their willingness, so that Yitzchok was “married,” and then by killing him hoped to prevent him from returning to his sender and announcing that he had completed his mission.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,63. “Yitzchok took a walk to meditate in the open field;” It is a rule that people who practice submissiveness, (in the sense of humility) are liable to become depressed, due to the constant awareness that they cannot act freely in accordance with their desires, as they constantly defer to the wishes of others. When a person reserves his submissiveness vis a vis his Creator, by serving Him exclusively, he thereby attaches himself to the source of Joy. It follows that instead of becoming morose and depressed, he will walk through life in a spirit of happiness and joy. Our verse alludes to this psychological phenomenon, the word לשוח, being an alternate for שמחה, joy. Yitzchok’s taking a stroll was intended to fill his heart with joy. In the field he would be able to communicate with his Creator, i.e. with Holiness. Becoming associated with Holiness would engender feelings of joy within him.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Another aspect of why the Torah tells us that Yitzchok chose to stroll in the field, is provided by the additional detail of the time of day when this occurred, i.e. shortly before sunset, i.e. לפנות ערב. Our sages (Pessachim 119) give some examples of how G’d’s viewing matters differs from the way His creatures, human beings, view the same matters. Example: When one of G’d’s creatures suffers a defeat, he reacts by being saddened and becoming depressed. G’d, on the other hand, is overjoyed when one of His creatures prevails in a discussion with Him. When G’d had originally suggested that Moses become a substitute for the Jewish people whom He intended to destroy after the episode with the golden calf, and Moses pointed out to him that this would not be a good idea, as the chances of a new Jewish people with only one founding father, himself, being better than the previous Jewish people who had three founding fathers were very slim, G’d was overjoyed to accept Moses’ argument as superior to His own. (Compare psalms 4,1 where David alludes to this) The Midrash (Tanchuma Ki Tavo 1) takes this thought even further by generalizing that ”G’d issues decrees and the righteous on earth cancel these decrees.”
When G’d was guiding His universe before having created man, He did so all by Himself. He did not need to take into consideration how His creatures would view His actions, i.e. His will reigned supreme. Once He had created free willed human beings, He had to seriously consider how the righteous among them would view His actions. Our sages allude to this when they said: (Bereshit Rabbah 19,7 עקר שכינה בתחתונים, (loosely translated) “G’d’s presence is occupied primarily with His creatures in the ‘lower’ part of the universe,” [i.e. He has to justify Himself to the righteous people on earth. Ed.]
This principle of G’d’s involvement in man’s pursuits not merely being restricted to viewing it from the celestial regions, is documented in Exodus 19,20 וירד ה' על הר סיני, “Hashem descended on Mount Sinai., etc.” What was the reason that G’d saw fit to leave the lofty spheres of heaven? He prepared to act in accordance with what the צדיקים, the righteous expected from Him. Being able to set the minds of His righteous at rest is the greatest satisfaction that G’d, their Creator, can experience.
In our portion, this is alluded to when the Torah describes Yitzchok as meditating in “the field,” or, [in the words of our sages ] “Avraham viewed G’d as ‘a mountain;’ Yitzchok viewed Him as a ‘field,’ whereas Yaakov viewed Him as a ‘house;’ this is why he promised to build a “house for Him.” The tzaddikim learned to become progressively more familiar with G’d. [The anecdotes about our author that are appended to his commentary on the Torah, reflect the fact that the author was no exception to this rule. Ed.] Being able to feel close to G’d, i.e. on the field, enabled Yitzchok, whose very name symbolized joy, laughter, to become more intimate with his Creator. The word שדה is also known as חקל, “(as in חקלאות the pursuit of agriculture.) [The author describes the righteous as being described as שדה חקל, but I have not been able to find the source for this.
When G’d was guiding His universe before having created man, He did so all by Himself. He did not need to take into consideration how His creatures would view His actions, i.e. His will reigned supreme. Once He had created free willed human beings, He had to seriously consider how the righteous among them would view His actions. Our sages allude to this when they said: (Bereshit Rabbah 19,7 עקר שכינה בתחתונים, (loosely translated) “G’d’s presence is occupied primarily with His creatures in the ‘lower’ part of the universe,” [i.e. He has to justify Himself to the righteous people on earth. Ed.]
This principle of G’d’s involvement in man’s pursuits not merely being restricted to viewing it from the celestial regions, is documented in Exodus 19,20 וירד ה' על הר סיני, “Hashem descended on Mount Sinai., etc.” What was the reason that G’d saw fit to leave the lofty spheres of heaven? He prepared to act in accordance with what the צדיקים, the righteous expected from Him. Being able to set the minds of His righteous at rest is the greatest satisfaction that G’d, their Creator, can experience.
In our portion, this is alluded to when the Torah describes Yitzchok as meditating in “the field,” or, [in the words of our sages ] “Avraham viewed G’d as ‘a mountain;’ Yitzchok viewed Him as a ‘field,’ whereas Yaakov viewed Him as a ‘house;’ this is why he promised to build a “house for Him.” The tzaddikim learned to become progressively more familiar with G’d. [The anecdotes about our author that are appended to his commentary on the Torah, reflect the fact that the author was no exception to this rule. Ed.] Being able to feel close to G’d, i.e. on the field, enabled Yitzchok, whose very name symbolized joy, laughter, to become more intimate with his Creator. The word שדה is also known as חקל, “(as in חקלאות the pursuit of agriculture.) [The author describes the righteous as being described as שדה חקל, but I have not been able to find the source for this.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
[There follows a paragraph that I have not been able to follow completely, so that I am not able to translate into English without possibly misrepresenting the author’s meaning. Ed.]
An alternate approach to the verse: “Yitzchok went for a stroll in the field close to evening, when he raised his eyes and beheld camels approaching” The Talmud (B’rachot 26), when commenting on this line says that Avraham, (compare Genesis 19,26) composed the daily morning prayer, the word ויעמוד “he stood,” meaning that he stood engaged in prayer, whereas Yitzchok composed the daily afternoon prayer, מנחה. According to the Talmud, the word שיחה when used in the Torah always refers to prayer, תפלה. [It does not occur again in the Torah, although it does occur in psalms 102,1.Ed.] Yaakov, the third of the patriarchs, introduced the evening prayer, מעריב. This is based on Genesis 28,11 ויפגע במקום וילן שם כי בא השמש, “he met G’d there as the sun was about to set and spent the night there.” [The word המקום, meaning G’d, is not unusual. Ed.] We need to examine why a prayer is called מנחה, “gift.” The morning prayer being called שחרית, is easy to understand as the word שחר means morning, when the sun begins to shine. Calling the evening prayer מעריב is also easy to understand as it is offered in the evening, ערב. But naming the afternoon prayer מנחה appears somewhat difficult. Tossaphot Yom Tov, already recognized this anomaly and answers it by referring to the period when it is recited as מנוחת השמש, “when the sun rests.”
I propose a different explanation. I believe the root of the word מנחה is simply “gift,” not “rest.” This prayer is presented at a time, when man does not think that he has to either thank the Lord for having awoken well from his sleep, or after having completed the day’s chores without problems and entrusting our soul to G’d once more when we lie down, confident that He will restore it to us in the morning. Neither of these considerations motivates us to devote time to prayer in the middle of our daily activities. If we take time out to pray during the day nonetheless, G’d may consider this as a gift from us to Him.
An alternate approach to the verse: “Yitzchok went for a stroll in the field close to evening, when he raised his eyes and beheld camels approaching” The Talmud (B’rachot 26), when commenting on this line says that Avraham, (compare Genesis 19,26) composed the daily morning prayer, the word ויעמוד “he stood,” meaning that he stood engaged in prayer, whereas Yitzchok composed the daily afternoon prayer, מנחה. According to the Talmud, the word שיחה when used in the Torah always refers to prayer, תפלה. [It does not occur again in the Torah, although it does occur in psalms 102,1.Ed.] Yaakov, the third of the patriarchs, introduced the evening prayer, מעריב. This is based on Genesis 28,11 ויפגע במקום וילן שם כי בא השמש, “he met G’d there as the sun was about to set and spent the night there.” [The word המקום, meaning G’d, is not unusual. Ed.] We need to examine why a prayer is called מנחה, “gift.” The morning prayer being called שחרית, is easy to understand as the word שחר means morning, when the sun begins to shine. Calling the evening prayer מעריב is also easy to understand as it is offered in the evening, ערב. But naming the afternoon prayer מנחה appears somewhat difficult. Tossaphot Yom Tov, already recognized this anomaly and answers it by referring to the period when it is recited as מנוחת השמש, “when the sun rests.”
I propose a different explanation. I believe the root of the word מנחה is simply “gift,” not “rest.” This prayer is presented at a time, when man does not think that he has to either thank the Lord for having awoken well from his sleep, or after having completed the day’s chores without problems and entrusting our soul to G’d once more when we lie down, confident that He will restore it to us in the morning. Neither of these considerations motivates us to devote time to prayer in the middle of our daily activities. If we take time out to pray during the day nonetheless, G’d may consider this as a gift from us to Him.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Kedushat Levi
Genesis 24,67. “Yitzchok brought Rivkah into the tent of his mother Sarah, and he wed her and she became his wife and he loved her.” We need to examine what the Torah meant by Yitzchok loving Rivkah that is so extraordinary that it has to be spelled out here.
A husband can love his wife on two different levels. He may love her, i.e. be physically attracted to her as she enables him to satisfy his biological urges. If this is his “love,” it is not love at all, but is merely love of his self. There are husbands who do not love their wives because they are instruments of fulfilling their physical desires, but because their wives enable them to perform their Creator’s will better and more profoundly. This is the true meaning of “someone loving his wife.” The Torah testifies that Yitzchok’s love for Rivkah was of the latter category.
A husband can love his wife on two different levels. He may love her, i.e. be physically attracted to her as she enables him to satisfy his biological urges. If this is his “love,” it is not love at all, but is merely love of his self. There are husbands who do not love their wives because they are instruments of fulfilling their physical desires, but because their wives enable them to perform their Creator’s will better and more profoundly. This is the true meaning of “someone loving his wife.” The Torah testifies that Yitzchok’s love for Rivkah was of the latter category.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy