Rashi cites the Midrash which interprets the word,ruvk as “to teach.” This implies that Yehudah, the leader of the brothers, was sent ahead to prepare a place in which the family could study Torah. This first “yeshivah” in Egypt represents the essence of Klal Yisrael, setting the historical precedent for the primacy of learning. We are viewed as the Nation of the Book because the core of our lives is interwoven with Torah. Priority number one in every Jewish community has been the establishment of a Torah educational system. The Midrash concludes that wherever Yaakov went, he would study Torah,…
Back to Home -> 5756 ->
Chazal offer a number of interpretations for the phrase, “ben zekunim,” child of his old age. Some of the commentators define “ben zekunim” as “bar chakim,” wise son, referring to Yosef’s remarkable Torah scholarship. Rashi cites the Midrash which comments, “All that he (Yaakov) learned in the yeshivah of Shem and Ever during his fourteen years there, he transmitted to Yosef.” This statement is ambiguous. Did Yaakov teach Torah only to Yosef and not to his other sons? Yaakov provided a Torah education for each of his twelve sons, emphatically raising them all to become tzaddikim. The Midrash in Shemos…
In focusing upon the disparity between the names given to the child by his respective parents, the Ramban comments that Rachel sought to emphasize the pain and sorrow connected with his birth. In contrast, Yaakov wanted his son’s name to have an optimistic connotation. The word “oni” can be translated as “mourning” or “strength.” Yaakov sought to preserve the name that Rachel had chosen, while giving it a positive undertone. In an article written in the winter of 1943, during the height of the slaughter in Europe, Horav Eliyahu Meir Bloch, z.l., used the words of the Ramban to encourage…
We may question the manner in which we commemorate Yaakov Avinu’s miraculous triumph over Eisav’s angel. One would think that such an extraordinary achievement would be remembered through a positive act, rather than a negative one. Horav Moshe Feinstein, z.l., infers a valuable lesson from the manner of eternalizing Yaakov’s monumental success over adversity. The abstention from eating the gid ha’nasheh addresses the fact that throughout history we are confronted by difficult situations which require Hashem’s interventions which is always there. Nonetheless, we would rather not be tested with such ordeals. In our daily tefillah, we implore Hashem “Do not…
In the Midrash, Chazal teach us that the bitter tears which Eisav shed merited him the blessings for which he yearned. Horav Shmelke M’Nikolsburg, z.l., made an interesting observation based upon this Midrash. It is a wonder that the few tears shed by Eisav serve as his source for blessing. We have a halachic rule that if an impermissible food falls into a permissible food, the resultant mixture does not become forbidden if there is sixty times as much permitted food as forbidden food. This is referred to as the rule of “batel b’shishim.” Now, Bnei Yisrael have cried oceans…
Rashi explains that Avraham did not serve any bread, since Sarah had become a niddah, ritually unclean on that day. Therefore, her dough was considered to be tamei, unclean. The Talmud in Bava Metzia 87a states that Avraham Avinu was careful to eat chullin, unconsecrated food, only if it was ritually clean. Consequently, he would not give the bread that had become contaminated to his three guests. We may question the approach which caused Avraham to be so exacting with his guests. After all, according to halacha one may eat chullin that is tamei. Avraham Avinu had accepted upon himself…
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…
The parsha relating to Lot is difficult to understand. Hashem’s command of “Lech Lecha,” His imperative for Avraham to uproot himself, to leave his country and birthplace, is considered one of Avraham’s ten trials. Yet, Lot accompanied Avraham as a devoted student without being commanded to do so! He went along simply out of a profound desire to be with Avraham and to learn from him. If this is so, how did Lot suddenly transform into a greedy person, willing to throw it all away and live in the degenerate city of Sodom, just for the sake of material gain?…
The pasuk opens with an introduction to Noach’s offspring, but then continues by mentioning that Noach was a righteous man. Rashi cites the Midrash which explains that the primary progeny of the righteous are their good deeds. Children are our legacy, the chain with which we connect to our future. Children are the way we eternalize ourselves. They carry on from the point where we depart this world. So, too, are a person’s good deeds his precious legacy! He is remembered by them, as they serve to inspire others to continue in the same path upon which he tread. The…
Two serious sins were committed in this parsha, one by a father and the other by his son. A remarkable lesson can be derived from the progression of the sins and the apparent degeneration in the attitude that the father and son each demonstrated towards his transgression. When Hashem confronted Adam, the Torah relates that he “hid” from Hashem. The Targum Yonasan comments that he hid out of shame. He simply could not face Hashem after what he had done. When Hashem inquired if Adam had eaten from the Eitz Ha’Daas, Adam immediately confessed his guilt. There was no cover-up,…
