---

Our Parashah opens: “And these are the offspring of Yitzchak son of Avraham--Avraham fathered Yitzchak.” Midrash Tanchuma explains the message of the latter phrase: The cynics of that time said, “Sarah became pregnant from Avimelech! See how many years she lived with Avraham without becoming pregnant!" Therefore, Hashem made Yitzchak’s facial features exactly like Avraham’s, so that everyone admitted that “Avraham fathered Yitzchak.”

R’ Yaakov Sakly z”l (Spain; 14th century) applies to this Midrash the verse (Mishlei 20:5), “Eitzah / counsel is like deep waters in the heart of man, and the man of understanding will draw them forth.” He writes: While Avraham believed Hashem’s promise that he would have a son, he worried deep in his heart: What will the cynics of the generation say? The “man” of understanding refers to Hashem, who saw Avraham’s fears and instructed the angel overseeing Sarah’s pregnancy to form Yitzchak in Avraham’s image.

On a Peshat level, R’ Sakly explains the quoted verse in Mishlei as follows: “Eitzah” / “counsel” refers to wisdom, as we read (Mishlei 13:10), “Wisdom is with those who take counsel.” Wisdom exists within a person in potential, but one must study and engage in scholarship to bring it out. In this way, wisdom is like “deep waters”; they exists underground, but one cannot enjoy them unless he digs a well and builds a retaining wall to keep the well from collapsing. Just as a man of understanding will succeed in drawing water out of the ground, so he will succeed in finding wisdom. (Torat Ha’minchah)

---

“The lads grew up, and Esav became one who knows hunting, a man of the field; but Yaakov was a wholesome man, dwelling in tents.” (25:27)

Rashi z”l writes: So long as they were young, they could not be distinguished by their deeds, and no one paid much attention to their characters. But when they reached the age of thirteen, one--Yaakov--went to the house of learning, while the other--Esav--went to temples of idolatry. [Until here from Rashi]

R’ Don Segal shlita (Yerushalayim and Brooklyn, N.Y.; a leading contemporary teacher of Mussar) asks: How is it possible that Yaakov and Esav suddenly turned in such drastically different directions? He answers: This is what Rashi is explaining–it happened because “so long as they were young, . . . no one paid much attention to their characters.” When a child speaks Lashon Ha’ra, for example, and adults say, “So what if he speaks Lashon Ha’ra? He’s only a child!”--the effects become evident when that child grows up.

Of course, R’ Segal continues, children must be educated on their own level, but educated they must be! Children are very receptive, like a blank slate, he adds. When King Shlomo says (Mishlei 1:8), “Do not forsake the teaching of your mother,” he is alluding to the powerful impression created by whatever a mother teaches her children when they are young. (Chovat Ha’adam Al Iggeret Ha’Ramban p.8)

---

“Yaakov simmered a stew, and Esav came in from the field, and he was exhausted.” (25:29)

Midrash Rabbah records that Esav committed three serious sins that day: murder, adultery, and theft. Hashem said, “I promised Avraham (Bereishit 15:15), ‘As for you--you shall come to your ancestors in peace; you shall be buried in good old age.’ Is it ‘good old age’ to see a grandson like this (Esav)? It is better that Avraham should die prematurely.” This, says the Midrash, is why Avraham lived only 175 years, in contrast to his son Yitzchak’s 180 years. [Until here from the Midrash]

R’ Moshe Yirmiyahu Narol Hakohen z”l (rabbi in Narol, Poland and Metz, France; died 1659) writes: When Yitzchak first planned to bless Esav, he did not know about Esav’s sins or his true nature. But where did Yitzchak get the ability to give blessings? He inherited it from Avraham, as Midrash Rabbah comments on the verse (Bereishit 12:2), “You shall be a blessing”: “Blessings are entrusted to you.” Thus, Yitzchak later said to Yaakov (28:4), “May He grant the blessing of Avraham to you.” Would it have been right for Esav to inherit the “blessing of Avraham” when Esav was the cause of Avraham’s premature death? Surely not! What did Hashem do to reassure Yitzchak after he mistakenly blessed Yaakov? Hashem caused Esav to hint to Yitzchak about his three sins by saying, three times (27:31, 34, 38), “Avi” / “my father.” The Hebrew letters of Avi (Aleph-Bet-Yud) allude to three phrases in the Torah whose initial letters are Aleph-Bet-Yud and which hint to the three sins Esav committed (see Shmot 21:31--two phrases; Shmot 22:1). (Birkat Tov)

---

“May Elokim give you of the dew of the heavens and of the fatness of the earth, and abundant grain and wine.” (27:28)

Rashi z”l writes: The Divine Name “Elokim” signifies G-d’s Attribute of Justice. Yitzchak was saying to Yaakov: May He act with justice! If you are worthy, may He give you dew, etc.; if not, let Him not give it to you.

Rashi continues: In contrast, Yitzchak said to Esav (27:39), “Behold, your dwelling shall be of the fatness of the earth and of the dew of the heavens from above.” Yitzchak did not refer to justice; he said, in effect: Whether you, Esav, are righteous or wicked, Hashem will give this to you. [Until here from Rashi]

R’ David Cohen shlita (Rosh Yeshiva of the Chevron Yeshiva in Yerushalayim) asks: Are we to understand that Yitzchak’s blessing to Yaakov was limited and that it was less than his blessing to Esav? Surely not!

R’ Cohen explains: The true subject of Yitzchak’s blessing is not dew, fatness of the earth, grain, or wine. Rather, the subject of the blessing is closeness to Hashem. Yitzchak blessed Yaakov, in effect: “May Elokim pay attention to you. May your deeds be important to Him and have the power to influence Him.” The consequence of Hashem’s noticing our deeds is that, if we are worthy, He provides dew and other material blessings, and if we are not worthy, He does not provide those things. In short, Hashem conducts the world based on our good deeds or, G-d forbid, our misdeeds. That is a blessing! It means that we have a relationship with Hashem.

In contrast, Esav was blessed with wealth and comfort in this world, regardless of his behavior. Esav’s lot, and the lot of the nations that comes from him, is wealth and comfort accompanied by the silent treatment from Hashem. That is a curse; those nations do not matter. (Of course, the people of wicked nations will be punished for their sins at some future time, but that punishment is personal; the deeds of those nations do not influence how Hashem runs the world as a whole.) (Zman Simchateinu 4:10)

---

Shabbat

“Seekers of Hashem, seed of Avraham His beloved, who delay departing from the Shabbat and rush to enter . . .” (From the Friday night Zemer Kol Mekadesh)

The Zemer is referring to the Mitzvah of Tosefet Shabbat / adding a few minutes to Shabbat both when it enters and when it departs. Many ask: Why does the Zemer mention “departing from the Shabbat” before it mentions entering the Shabbat, when the latter actually happens first?

R’ Gershon Stern z”l (1863-1936; rabbi of Marosludus, Romania) writes: Some answer that, according to Tradition, the Torah was given on Shabbat--presumably including the Mitzvah of Tosefet Shabbat. As such, the Jewish People first delayed in departing from Shabbat--i.e., at the end of the day the Torah was given. Only a week later did they enter Shabbat early. However, R’ Stern writes, this answer is not satisfactory, because the Mitzvah of observing Shabbat was given when Bnei Yisrael camped at Marah, weeks before they received the rest of the Torah, and commentaries say that the commandment at Marah included the Mitzvah of Tosefet Shabbat.

R’ Stern continues: The reason the Zemer mentions “departing from the Shabbat” before it mentions entering the Shabbat is because an (erroneous) argument could be made that Tosefet Shabbat at the end of Shabbat is a stricter requirement than at the beginning; even so, says the Zemer, not only do the Jewish People delay departing from Shabbat, they even enter it early.

R’ Stern elaborates: The basis for the argument to which the Zemer alludes is the concept of Chazakah / a Halachic presumption that a status quo is presumed to continue until we know otherwise. Here, the argument would go, we are unsure whether or not it is Shabbat during the time of day known as Bein Hashmashot--loosely translated, “twilight.” In case of doubt, the concept of Chazakah instructs us to continue the status quo. During Bein Hashmashot on Friday entering Shabbat, Chazakah would say that it is not yet Shabbat, for that was the status quo. In contrast, during Bein Hashmashot on Shabbat entering Motzai Shabbat, Chazakah would dictate that it is still Shabbat. As such, adding additional time at the end of Shabbat, when it is already Shabbat, seemingly is a stronger imperative.

R’ Stern continues: Although the author of the Zemer effectively acknowledges that there are those who make this argument (and he praises the Jewish People for accepting Shabbat early despite an argument that it might not be required), the argument itself is erroneous. This is because Chazakah applies only to determining the status of one item; for example, is a particular object Tahor / ritually pure or Tamei / impure. If we are in doubt, the item’s most recent status (Tahor or Tamei) is relevant. In contrast, just because one minute ago was or was not Shabbat has nothing to do with whether it is now Shabbat! Here, Chazakah is irrelevant. (Peninei Yalkut Ha’Gershoni: Zemirot p.130)

Find Other Issues

Hama(ayan(s archives are being rebuilt. Check back soon.