Chazal offer a number of interpretations for the phrase “in his generations.” Some commentators interpret this as praise for Noach, who was able to transcend the evil even of his generation. Indeed, had he lived in a generation in which righteousness was the way of life, he would have been even greater. Others contend that he could stand out only in his own generation, in which evil was the standard. Horav Shlomo Margolis, Shlita, feels that “b’dorosov,” “in his generations,” reflects the limited effect of Noach’s righteousness – it lasted only during his generations. He was not able to inspire…
Back to Home -> Noach ->
Chazal offer a number of interpretations for the phrase “in his generations.” Some commentators interpret this as praise for Noach, who was able to transcend the evil even of his generation. Indeed, had he lived in a generation in which righteousness was the way of life, he would have been even greater. Others contend that he could stand out only in his own generation, in which evil was the standard. Horav Shlomo Margolis, Shlita, feels that “b’dorosov,” “in his generations,” reflects the limited effect of Noach’s righteousness – it lasted only during his generations. He was not able to inspire…
Chazal offer a number of interpretations for the phrase “in his generations.” Some commentators interpret this as praise for Noach, who was able to transcend the evil even of his generation. Indeed, had he lived in a generation in which righteousness was the way of life, he would have been even greater. Others contend that he could stand out only in his own generation, in which evil was the standard. Horav Shlomo Margolis, Shlita, feels that “b’dorosov,” “in his generations,” reflects the limited effect of Noach’s righteousness – it lasted only during his generations. He was not able to inspire…
Chazal offer a number of interpretations for the phrase “in his generations.” Some commentators interpret this as praise for Noach, who was able to transcend the evil even of his generation. Indeed, had he lived in a generation in which righteousness was the way of life, he would have been even greater. Others contend that he could stand out only in his own generation, in which evil was the standard. Horav Shlomo Margolis, Shlita, feels that “b’dorosov,” “in his generations,” reflects the limited effect of Noach’s righteousness – it lasted only during his generations. He was not able to inspire…
Chazal offer a number of interpretations for the phrase “in his generations.” Some commentators interpret this as praise for Noach, who was able to transcend the evil even of his generation. Indeed, had he lived in a generation in which righteousness was the way of life, he would have been even greater. Others contend that he could stand out only in his own generation, in which evil was the standard. Horav Shlomo Margolis, Shlita, feels that “b’dorosov,” “in his generations,” reflects the limited effect of Noach’s righteousness – it lasted only during his generations. He was not able to inspire…
Chazal offer a number of interpretations for the phrase “in his generations.” Some commentators interpret this as praise for Noach, who was able to transcend the evil even of his generation. Indeed, had he lived in a generation in which righteousness was the way of life, he would have been even greater. Others contend that he could stand out only in his own generation, in which evil was the standard. Horav Shlomo Margolis, Shlita, feels that “b’dorosov,” “in his generations,” reflects the limited effect of Noach’s righteousness – it lasted only during his generations. He was not able to inspire…
Horav Tzvi Hirsh Meisels, z.l., the Veitzener Rav, cites the Midrash Hane’elam that suggests that the letters of Bereishis, “Bais, Reish, Aleph, Shin, Yud, Saf,” are an acronym for two words; bris eish, a convenant of fire. He explains the concept of a covenant forged in fire based upon the following story: Horav Meisels was the rav in the dreaded concentration camp Auschwitz. On Simchas Torah night a group of fifty young Gerer chassidim were brought to the gas chambers. Their sin was rebelling against the German government. Their act of mutiny – observing the laws of the Torah. These…
The Torah should have said, “She departed to/towards the desert of Be’er Sheva and she strayed,” for she did not stray immediately upon her entry into the desert. The sentence reads that “she departed and strayed,” implying that she did not stray only in the concrete sense: she strayed from the truth immediately upon her departure. In his commentary, Rashi suggests that Hagar shirked off the yoke of belief, exchanging it for a life of nomadic belief, straying farther and farther from the truth. We have yet to understand Rashi’s reason for saying that “straying” here does not only…
The Torah should have said, “She departed to/towards the desert of Be’er Sheva and she strayed,” for she did not stray immediately upon her entry into the desert. The sentence reads that “she departed and strayed,” implying that she did not stray only in the concrete sense: she strayed from the truth immediately upon her departure. In his commentary, Rashi suggests that Hagar shirked off the yoke of belief, exchanging it for a life of nomadic belief, straying farther and farther from the truth. We have yet to understand Rashi’s reason for saying that “straying” here does not only…
The Torah should have said, “She departed to/towards the desert of Be’er Sheva and she strayed,” for she did not stray immediately upon her entry into the desert. The sentence reads that “she departed and strayed,” implying that she did not stray only in the concrete sense: she strayed from the truth immediately upon her departure. In his commentary, Rashi suggests that Hagar shirked off the yoke of belief, exchanging it for a life of nomadic belief, straying farther and farther from the truth. We have yet to understand Rashi’s reason for saying that “straying” here does not only…
