Rashi explains that Leah Imeinu wept copious tears in prayer to Hashem that she not have to marry Eisav. People would say that Rivkah Imeinu had two sons and her brother, Lavan, had two daughters. It made sense that the older daughter, Leah, would wed the older son, Eisav; and the younger daughter, Rachel, would marry Yaakov. The prospect of having to spend the rest of her life with the evil Eisav is enough to make anyone cry. As a result, Leah’s eyes became tender. Targum Onkelos interprets rackos as ya’in, beauty. Was Rashi unaware of Onkelos’ commentary? Furthermore, Chazal (Megillah 3A) teach that Onkelos’ translation of the Torah was based upon what he heard from Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua. If so, how could Rashi’s translation differ from the Talmud?
In his commentary to Succah 36A, the Chasam Sofer presents these questions as a springboard for an innovative exposition concerning true beauty. Rashi and Onkelos do not disagree. Indeed, as a result of Leah’s weeping, her eyebrows fell off. Under normal circumstances, this alters a woman’s physical appearance, except in Leah’s case. Although the tears caused her eyebrows to fall off, that was the essential reason for her beauty. He explains that nothing is more beautiful than eyes that have sustained a major transformation due to the copious tears that a woman has shed. Tears that are spent in prayer so as not to fall into the hands of such a rasha bring out the true inner beauty of a person. True beauty is not defined by physical appearance, but by one’s character and spiritual depth. Leah’s tears, driven by a deep yearning for righteousness and holiness, transformed her physical features, but, in doing so, caused her inner beauty to shine through. A person is defined by her character, values and actions-not by her outward appearance. Soft eyes, which are the result of spiritual yearning, bespeak beauty at its apex.
As a result of this exposition, the Chasam Sofer issues a chidush, innovative ruling, concerning an esrog that was used by a large group. (In those days esrogim were hard to come by. Thus, only people of means could afford an esrog, which they shared with the community.) As a result of everyone touching the esrog, its color and outward appearance was altered. According to halachah (Orach Chaim 648:12), an esrog whose color has changed is pasul, invalid for use during the seven days of Succos. Nonetheless, the Chasam Sofer ruled that an esrog whose color changes were the result of numerous people using it to make a b’rachah has achieved the pinnacle of hidden beauty, enhancement of the mitzvah.
In a similar ruling, the Noda b’Yehudah writes about the prohibition against cutting hair ie, haircut, shaving during Chol Ha’moed, Intermediary Days of the Festival of Pesach or Shavous. Chazal were concerned that a person would delay his haircut or shave until Chol Ha’moed, thereby entering into Yom Tov in a state of untidiness. The Noda b’Yehudah asks: Since it is prohibited to cut hair during Chol Ha’moed, a person may very well enter into the last days of Yom Tov in an unshaven state. Why is there no dispensation as a result of his state of untidiness? He should be able to cut his hair out of respect for the last days of Yom Tov. He explains that, since he has entered the Yom Tov in an unshaven state only because he is following the ruling of Chazal, he can display no greater sign of respect.
When we align our actions with the wisdom and guidance of Chazal, we show where our priorities lie. Spiritual values not only trump physical appearance, they redefine the meaning of beauty. The prohibition against cutting hair during Chol Ha’moed is an expression of our spiritual dedication and a commitment to honor the sanctity of Yom Tov. Can anything be more beautiful than that?
