Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> Bereishis ->


זה ספר תולדות אדם

This is the account of the descendants of Adam. (5:1)

The Midrash (cited by Yalkut Shemoni Bereishis 5:41) relates that Hashem passed all forthcoming generations before Adam HaRishon. When Adam saw that David Hamelech had been allotted only three hours of life, he asked, “Hashem, is there no remedy for this? (Is there not some way to lengthen David’s life?)” Hashem replied, “This is, indeed, what I had in mind (accept the three hours without question). Adam then asked, “How many years of life have I been allotted?” Hashem replied, “One thousand years.” Adam asked, “May I give a gift?” Hashem said, “Yes.” Adam then bequeathed seventy years of his…

Continue Reading

“He filled him with G-dly spirit, with wisdom, insight and knowledge… He gave him the ability to teach.” (35:31,34)

In his commentary on this pasuk, the Ibn Ezra places great emphasis upon Betzalel’s unique ability to teach and train others in the skills required for creating the Mishkan, its holy vessels, and the priestly vestments.  Many great scholars are replete with wisdom and understanding, but they lack the ability to properly convey their remarkable scholarship to others. Rather than viewing the teaching profession as a vocation which borders on mediocrity, Ibn Ezra extolls the virtue of those who are able to teach and do so. Horav A.H. Leibovitz, Shlita, notes that Betzalel is lauded for conveying mundane knowledge to…

Continue Reading

“And he (Yaakov) sent Yehudah ahead of him to Yosef, to prepare ahead of him in Goshen.” (46:28)

In citing the Midrash which interprets the word, ruvk as “to teach,” Rashi uses a word which lends ambiguity to his statement. He says “to prepare for him a House of Study.” Why does Rashi add the word “for him?” He should have simply said to make a House of Study. Why is it necessary to emphasize that it was “for him”? When Horav Eliyahu Meir Bloch, z.l., came to these shores together with Horav Chaim Mordechai Katz, z.l., to rebuild Yeshivas Telz, he used this Rashi as the source for maintaining the yeshivah in the same character and form…

Continue Reading

“Now let Pharaoh seek out a discerning and wise man and set him over the land of Egypt.” (41:33)

After successfully interpreting Pharaoh’s dreams, Yosef offered his unsolicited advice. He counseled Pharaoh to appoint a unique individual who possessed an acute mind and an uncanny ability to organize the entire country during the seven years of plenty. Horav Eliyahu Lopian, z.l., questions the need to appoint someone who is unusually perceptive. This is an undertaking for an individual who is endowed with excellent organizational and administrative skills, not someone who is astute. He responds that it takes one who is especially gifted to “see” the years of hunger at the very moment that he and everyone else are enjoying…

Continue Reading

“So you shall say unto my master Eisav, ‘So says your servant Yaakov, I have sojourned with Lavan and stayed until now.” (32:5)

Rashi explains that the numerical equivalent of the word h,rd is 613, which corresponds to the number of mitzvos in the Torah. Yaakov was proudly relating to Eisav that during his stay with Lavan he kept the entire Torah.  His sojourn in the harmful environment of the crooked Lavan had no adverse spiritual effect upon him. A number of issues regarding Yaakov’s dialogue with Eisav should be addressed. First, what did Yaakov imply with his assertion, “And (I) stayed until now”? Did he owe Eisav an excuse for returning so late? Is Eisav his “brother’s keeper” that he must be…

Continue Reading

“And there came the fugitive and told Avram, the Ivri.” (14:13)

The Radak explains that Avram was called “Ivri,” since he was the descendant of Ever. Presenting an alternative approach, the Midrash contends that he was called Ivri in recognition of his position vis-a-vis the rest of the world. The word “rcg” means “the other side.” This suggests that Avraham was on one side of the moral/spiritual divide, while the rest of the world was on the other side. Although Avraham had many disciples, he remained essentially alone. His beliefs and moral rectitude precluded his integration into the pagan society which reigned at the time. The concept of “being alone” in…

Continue Reading

“You shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heavens.” (25:19)

What is the meaning of the “remembrance of Amalek”? Is it not sufficient simply to destroy Amalek?  Horav S.R.  Hirsch z.l. explains that it is not Amalek who is so threatening to the future of humanity. Rather, “zecher Amalek,” the remembrance of Amalek, the glorifying of Amalek’s memory, is the prime danger. As long as in the annals of history the murderers and plunderers are venerated as heroes, as long as these heinous criminals are not buried into oblivion, their names will gradually be “cleansed.” With each successive generation individuals will arise who seek to glorify these “great warriors.” These…

Continue Reading

“And Korach took… and they all rose up in the face of Moshe and Aharon men of renown. And they assembled against Moshe and Aharon and said to them, ‘you take too much upon you… seeing that all the congregation is holy. And Hashem is in their midst, wherefore do you lift yourselves up above the congregation of Hashem?'” (16:1,2,3)

Korach’s criticism of Moshe seemed to be a reaction to Aharon’s assuming the role of Kohen Gadol. Thus, the two main personalities involved in this machlokes, strife, were Korach and Moshe. Korach was the classic scoundrel, evil throughout. An irate man may inflict damage upon an individual person, but others may nonetheless benignly attempt to understand the source of his anger and correct him. What makes a scoundrel such as Korach contemptible is his blatant hypocrisy. He hides his evil behind a sham of piety.  He unabashedly claims noble motives for his despicable act.  Indeed, he impudently attempts to enlist…

Continue Reading

“And Moshe said Aharon, what did these people do to you that you have brought upon it great sin?” (32:21)

The extent of Aharon’s involvement in the sin of the Golden Calf is ambiguous. Moshe seems to blame him for “causing” the calf to be created. Indeed, before his own death, Moshe recounts how he prayed on Aharon’s behalf to effect forgiveness for him.  Moshe’s prayers were only partially answered; Aharon lost two of his four sons. On the other hand, in contrast, we note that Aharon was appointed to the venerable position of Kohen Gadol. He was privileged to enter into the Kodshei Ha’Kodoshim, Holy of Holies in order to attain penance for Klal Yisrael. This notion seems to…

Continue Reading

“And Yosef said to his brothers: I am Yosef; is my father still alive?” (45:3)

Yosef saw that Yehudah was adamant in his position and that he had reached the limits of his patience. The Midrash compares Yosef’s submission to an athlete who, upon accepting impending defeat, surrenders to avoid greater embarrassment. Indeed, the Midrash lauds Yosef’s wisdom in making this decision.  This idea is bemusing. What great wisdom is indicated by Yosef’s surrender in the face of imminent defeat? Yehudah and his brothers would have destroyed everything had he not permitted Binyamin to leave! Horav Henoch Lebowitz, Shlita, suggests an important lesson in human nature to be derived from this pasuk. An amazing sense…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!