Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> Toldos ->


“And Yitzchak trembled a very great trembling.” (27:33)

That Yitzchak “trembled a very great trembling” is a powerful statement. The phrase implies an exceptional incident taking place which serves as a foreshadowing of the future. Pesikta D’Rav Kahana states that Yitzchak suddenly became aware of Eisav’s deception. The presence of Gehinnom — which Yitzchak felt when Eisav entered the room — caused Yitzchak to realize that he had erred terribly all these years.  Had Rivkah not manipulated the course of events, maneuvering Yaakov to enter before Eisav, who knows what the disastrous outcome might have been? Indeed, the entire history of Klal Yisrael would have been severely altered….

Continue Reading

“And Hashem said, ‘Nevertheless, your wife Sarah will bear you a son and you should name him Yitzchak.'” (17:19)

The name Yitzchak does not mean, “he who laughs,” or “he who rejoices”, it means “he who causes laughter,” who brings a smile to the lips of his parents. Also, the word generally denotes an ironic form of laughter, brought about by something utterly ridiculous or inconceivable.  Indeed, the fact that Yitzchak is given his name simply to “commemorate” the laughter his forthcoming birth provoked, is especially significant. Horav S.R. Hirsch, z.l., in raising these issues, comes to the following conclusion. To expect a 100-year-old man and a 90-year-old woman, who had never before had children, to give birth to…

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

“Noach walked (served) with Hashem.” (6:9)

Regarding Avraham Avinu, the Torah states, “Walk before me.” Rashi distinguishes between Noach’s and Avraham’s spiritual plateaus. Avraham was strong enough to walk alone, whereas Noach needed the support of the Almighty. The Midrash presents a parable from which we can gain a better insight into understanding Noach’s spiritual essence. A father who walks with his little child, while the youngster is still unsteady and learning to walk, must lend his total support to prevent his son from falling. As the child grows older, he is weaned from his father’s support. Noach, ostensibly, did not have the spiritual stamina to…

Continue Reading

“For Hashem’s portion is His people, Yaakov his measured inheritance.” (32:9)

Klal Yisrael became a nation while still in the desert — without a land to live in. Hashem did not permit His people to grow as a nation under the influence of the land of Egypt and its inhabitants. “For Hashem’s portion is His people.” This people was to be and remain “the people of Hashem.” Horav S.R.  Hirsch z.l.  explains that common nations are linked to the soil of their land in the same manner that Am Yisrael is linked to Hashem.  Other nations view their land as the foundation of their national existence.  It serves as the home…

Continue Reading

“Remember the days of old, consider the years of each generation.” (32:7)

The concept of history encompasses the perception that all events in the human experience are part of one long continuum.  The Chumash begins with the story of Brias Ha’olam, creation, since that is the “genesis” of all historical events. Hashem is the G-d of creation and the G-d of history.  He is the moral power whose Divine action guides world events. The Jewish “historian” sees Hashem’s Hand reflected in every aspect of history.  He sees the continuous revelation of Hashem’s plan spanning the abyss of time.  Everything has meaning.  No right goes unrewarded, and no wrong goes without its due…

Continue Reading

“And the Egyptians dealt ill with us and afflicted us.” (26:6)

Most commentators translate the word osanu as lanu, to/with us, referring to the harsh treatment to which we were subjected at the hands of the Egyptians.  Horav Mordechai Gifter, Shlita, suggests that the literal meaning is a more propitious definition. When the Egyptian leadership sought to enslave and ultimately destroy the Jewish people, they realized it would be difficult to convince the average Egyptian citizen to participate in this blatant anti- semitism.  They understood that first they must perform a successful campaign of vicious character assassination against the Jewish people. This negative propaganda would veil their virulent hatred of the…

Continue Reading

“Morning (tomorrow) and Hashem will make known who is his.” (16:5)

The Midrash questions Moshe’s choice of the word morning, instead of the more usual, tomorrow. They comment that Moshe told Korach, “Hashem sets boundaries in this world which you can not undo. As Hashem has separated day from night, so has He separated Bnei Yisrael from the gentile nations. Similarly, He has separated Aharon from His people. When you will be able to reverse the distinction set by Hashem between day and night, then you will also be able to reverse the separation between Aharon and the rest of Bnei Yisrael. In this vein, referring to the pasuk, and it…

Continue Reading

“And they (the meraglim) spread an evil report of the land which they had spied out… the land through which we have passed to spy it out is a land that eats up its inhabitants.” (13:32)

Rashi explains the meaning of “a land which eats up its inhabitants.” Wherever the meraglim went, they found the inhabitants burying their dead. They did not realize, however, that this was part of Hashem’s plan to protect them. If the people were occupied with their mourning, they could pay no attention to the strangers. If so, did the meraglim really lie? They did not fabricate any reports which they did not actually witness. Indeed, they related to Moshe and Klal Yisrael only what they personally saw. Why, then, were they punished? The Kotzker Rebbe z.l. explains that “true” and “false”…

Continue Reading

“And the sons of Aharon, Nadav and Avihu, each took his pan… and they offered before Hashem a strange fire.” (10:1)

Nadav and Avihu brought a “strange fire” on the mizbayach, an offering that Hashem had not commanded them to bring. This violation resulted in their immediate death. The Yalkut Shimoni points out that this erroneous offering was the result of their not consulting with Moshe or with each other. This criticism seems questionable. Indeed, they should have consulted with their Rebbe, Moshe prior to offering the fire, but why were they censured for not consulting one another? Indeed, if such erudite and righteous men as Nadav and Avihu reached the same conclusion independently, it would seem obvious that consulting each…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!