Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> Chayei Sarah ->


ויען לבן ובתואל ויאמרו מד' יצא הדבר

Then Lavan and Besuel answered, and said, “The matter stemmed from Hashem.” (24:50)

In the Talmud Moed Kattan 18b, Chazal view this response (although it came from Lavan and Besuel) as a clear indication that Hashem pre-ordains man’s proper mate.  Otherwise, the Torah would not have recorded these words. Any true, believing Jew is acutely aware of Hashem’s management of the marriage process. One who does not see Hashem’s guiding hand in this process either suffers from some form of myopia or, worse, lacks the capability to discern the events that take place in life. Much has been derived from this parsha concerning the manner and approach one should take towards shidduchim, matrimonial…

Continue Reading

וידעתם כי אני ד'

That you may know that I am Hashem. (10:2)

We live in an era which may be characterized as “inexplicable.” When we look around the world and we open our minds to confront reality, it is obvious that Klal Yisrael – both as a nation in general and the individual Jew in particular – is not winning a popularity contest.  Indeed, this is the way it was in Egypt. The Egyptians despised the Jews. Yet, they were not prepared to let us leave their country. “Good riddance” was not enough for them. Their deep-rooted hatred for us and for everything that we represented stoked their desire to keep us…

Continue Reading

וידי משה כבדים ויקחו אבן וישמו תחתיו וישב עליה

Moshe’s hands grew heavy, so they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it. (17:12)

Moshe Rabbeinu’s hands grew heavy from fatigue. Therefore, Aharon HaKohen and Chur supported his arms. Moshe sat on a stone, rather than on a pillow, because he was not about to sit on a soft pillow while his people were in danger and suffering. The Talmud Brachos 54a enumerates a list of places in which miracles occurred, stating that if one were to see any of these places, he would be required to offer praise to Hashem. One of these places is the stone upon which Moshe sat. The Maharsha wonders why the stone upon which Moshe sat retains such…

Continue Reading

וירא אלקים את כל אשר עשה והנה טוב מאד

And G-d saw all that He had made, and behold it was very good. (1:31)

The Midrash interprets tov, good, meod, very (good), in a novel manner: “And behold it was very good” – tov is a reference to the Malach Ha’Chaim, Angel of life, or life per se. Meod, very (good), is a reference to the Malach Ha’Maves, Angel of death. Clearly, Chazal’s choice of the term “very” good to denote death begs elucidation. How can we understand death as being “very good” when life is only “good”? Horav Eliezer Sorotzkin, zl, posits that herein lies the secret of simchas ha’chaim, joy of life. When a person goes through life acquiescing to whatever Hashem…

Continue Reading

ויהי ערב ויהי בוקר

And there was evening, and there was morning. (1:5)

The commentators discuss the essence of choshech, darkness: Was it nothing more than an absence of light; or was choshech a creation in the same sense as light? G-d created darkness. If we view darkness as the absence of light, we can understand why darkness preceded light. There was no light – hence, it was dark. According to the Gaon, zl, m’Vilna, who contends that darkness is a creation (I have no idea how to describe the void that “existed” prior to the creation of darkness), why did it precede light? They were both equal entities. Indeed, creating light first…

Continue Reading

ואם תלכו עמי קרי ולא תאבו לשמע לי

If you behave casually (happenstance) with Me and refuse to heed Me. (26:21)

The word keri, translated as “happenstance,” is used quite often in the Tochechah, Rebuke. Following the text, we observe that chastisement and further punishment are meted out to Klal Yisrael because they behave toward Hashem with happenstance. Thus, Hashem responds by acting toward us in a like manner. The Rambam defines keri as denying Hashem’s role, His orchestration of events. When we view what takes place in the world in general, and around us in particular, as random occurrences, we are acting with happenstance toward Hashem. The Ramban calls ignoring Hashgachah Pratis, Divine Providence, “A path of cruelty.” Horav Noach…

Continue Reading

אם בחקתי תלכו

If you will follow My decrees. (26:3)

So much has been written concerning the meaning of this pasuk. I would like to submit my understanding. The word teileichu is translated here as “to follow.” It also means to walk/go. Together, these meanings imply that we are to walk/go forward using Hashem’s decrees as our GPS, our moral compass, to provide our sense of direction. In other words, a Jew does not “lead,” he follows – Hashem. Having said that, we might take this idea a bit further; chukim are mitzvos whose reasons defy human rationale. There are reasons for these mitzvos, but these reasons are Divine. Hashem…

Continue Reading

והיו לי הלוים

And the Leviim shall be Mine. (3:12)

Chazal (Midrash Rabbah 1:10) refer to Shevet Levi as neemanei aretz, trusted ones of the land. Their stalwartness in not flinching when they had to take a position that was far from favorable earned them the approval and trust of Hashem. Klal Yisrael, however, did not make the correct choice             when Moshe Rabbeinu called out Mi l’Hashem elai, “Who is for Hashem – to me!” This occurred during the chet ha’eigel, sin of the Golden Calf, when the erev rav, members of the mixed multitude, rebelled against Hashem. Moshe quelled the mutiny, and it became time to take decisive…

Continue Reading

וירא בלק בן צפור את אשר עשה ישראל לאמורי... ובלק בן צפור מלך למואב בעת ההיא

Balak ben Tzipor saw all that Yisrael had done to the Emori… Balak ben Tzipor was King of Moav at the time. (22:2,4)

The sequence of the pasuk is enigmatic. Why does the Torah mention Balak’s position as King of Moav only after relating what he saw concerning the Jewish People’s destruction of the Emori? Would it not be more realistic to state, that “Balak, King of Moav, saw all that Yisrael had done to the Emori”? The Alter, zl, m’Kelm, explains that the answer to our question lies in the words, “Balak ben Tzipor was King of Moav”. Why was he appointed king? It is not as if his lineage warranted his succession to the throne. Balak was a nobody. Yet, he…

Continue Reading

דם יחשב לאיש ההוא דם שפך ונכרת האיש ההוא מקרב עמו

It shall be considered as bloodshed for that man, he has shed blood, and that man shall be cut off from the midst of his people. (17:4)

After Noach saved the animals during the Flood, Hashem permitted man to partake of animals for food. If a man slaughters a consecrated animal outside of the Bais Hamikdash, the process is referred to as shchutei chutz, slaughtering “outside”. This act of slaughtering reverts to pre-Noach days and is deemed tantamount to committing bloodshed. There is no death penalty, because the individual did not take a human life; on a cosmic level, however, he did spill blood – which is an offense punishable by Heaven. Horav Ezra Barzal, zl, quotes Rashi who compares this spilling of blood to human killing….

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!