The Profound Word

Parashat Vayetze 5770
The Profound Word
Howard S. Joseph

http://TheProfoundWord.com

The New Jacob: Out of the Tents

We now meet the new Jacob. He has emerged from the tents of his youth into the rough world, thrust into it by his mother and the forces of circumstance. He is now in mortal conflict with Esau and must leave his home, family and country. He actually reverses Abraham’s call and returns to the family homeland. There he will have to deal with the difficult Uncle Laban, not an easy man at all.
We cannot imagine that anyone emerged from last week’s story at all happy. Everyone involved is now in new states of tension and distress. Esau has lost. Isaac and Rebecca have seen their family shattered. Jacob’s innocent tent life is gone. He will have to re-make his life. What will it look like? What ideals will prevail? What dreams will be fulfilled? How will he go about continuing the covenantal destiny of Abraham that has been thrust upon him? Can he impact on the world as did his grandfather and be a blessing to others, leading them to the truth? The rest of the book of Genesis will focus on Jacob and his family as they try to continue the covenantal destiny.
Neziv believes that Jacob was determined to re-create a life of peace and security. He would strive for harmonious relations with all those with whom he may come into contact no matter how challenging that might be. In a world of deceit and conflict he would make this attempt. He would then return in peace to his father’s home and the land promised to his family.
Along the way stones enter the story. They are just lying around waiting for some momentous action. Eventually they are gathered and made into monuments, testifying to a critical moment along the way towards the ultimate process. People and places are transformed.
“This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.” [28:17]
“He named the place Beth El, but Luz was originally the name of the city.” [28:19]

Neziv sees special meaning in these verses suggested by unique terms.
“He named the place Beth El”- where he erected the monument. Luz was its name but the open space [where he slept] was near Luz. Eventually the spot was built and developed itself and called Beth El. [HD]

Neziv now focuses on three issues:
1.Jacob’s choice of the word ‘Beth’ from the Hebrew ‘Bayit’ = house.
2. The Torah’s use of an extra word. Usually a place name is described: vayikrah shem hamakom…. Here the extra Hebrew word appears ‘et’ shem hamakom…. The English translation is unaffected.
3.. Jacob considers the place to be the ‘gate’ [shaar] to Heaven. Why that description?

[HRD]
This is the simple meaning. However, our Sages in Tractate Pesahim said that Jacob called the Temple on Mt. Moriah – Beth El.
It seems the Sages understood a second meaning in these verses:
“[He was frightened, and he said,] How awesome is this place! [This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven." ] This place – Mt. Moriah, for he dreamed of the ladder standing on Mt. Moriah. He was speaking of that vision as explained in various midrashim.
If we examine carefully the phrase ‘en ze ki im bet Elohim…’ [here translated 'This is none other than the house of God'] – the simple meaning is insufficient for it is a phrase that usually diminishes the value of a place [i. e., 'it is only....'], meaning it is not as great as I originally thought. But here it really is the opposite for Jacob never expected to find a holy place at all….
Also, the word ‘et’ is unnecessary ….
So, we have to understand that there is a second meaning here: he considered Mt. Moriah as a unique Providential place. Abraham had called it a ‘mountain’ because he saw it as a place that provided protection when fighting God’s enemies. Isaac called it a ‘field’ – sadeh – for he saw it as a source of Providence for sustenance [parnassah, symbolized as a lush field]. Jacob too saw it a source of protection but not in the manner of Abraham. It is, rather, a Bet Elohim, which points to the quality of peace, or [harmony] [shalom], for the protection of his descendants while living among the nations can only come about through peace, just as Jacob himself was exceptionally protected through this quality in regards to Laban and Esau.

Now he addresses the phrase ‘gate of heaven’:

If he had said ‘petah’, opening, the simile would be more restrictive, as it would be opened only to those allowed into the house. By using the word gate, shaar, [maybe suggestive of the gate to a city?where many different kinds of people can enter - hsj], he shows that [in his vision]? it is open to every one. [It is available to all- hsj.]

Providence regarding … peace is given to all who act kindly [with gemilut hasadim] so that this gate is open to all nations as well as to Israel. For Abraham, the Providence came as result of commitment to Torah; for Isaac, as a commitment to the unique worship service in the Temple…. Jacob saw the Temple as a house – Bet, bayit – and that is how he understood it. He did not have this dream while studying Torah in the academy of Shem and Ever. It was here in a place empty of the the sanctity of Torah study. The purpose of the dream was to teach him that his unique contribution would be to promote Providence through peace….
For this reason Jacob excelled from now on in acts of kindness and preservation of harmony as we will see in all matters.. This is the ‘vision of Jacob’, – eyn Yaakov- to live securely through the preservation of harmony and tranquility. From him we must learn to keep this quality during our exile for we are like him wandering in exile. Now we understand the double significance of the extra word ‘et’.
Furthermore, we now understand the phrase ‘He was frightened, and he said’ [or, thought]: he realized that it was his responsibility to pursue peace for himself and descendants. Only in this way can they be protected among the nations, and not through the way of Abraham who saw the mountain as a symbol of warfare. He thus thought somewhat anxiously that this is none other than a house of God, a house that symbolizes harmony.

Neziv returns to these themes very often. However, the main points are very clear:
Jacob must chart a new way, his own path of leadership based on his own experience. The covenant will not survive if it is always in tension with everyone.
In doing so he can help others achieve peace through the promotion of kindness, a universal value open to all. All peoples can enter the gate of Heaven through kindness. Kindness can transform a barren field of stones into a gateway to Heaven with a monument to point the way.
If he can achieve this he will have added his own unique contribution to the Ancestral legacy. He will indeed become one of the Founding Fathers of the way begun by Abraham.

It is to these tasks that Jacob will devote himself for the rest of his life. When he arrives in Haran he lifts a huge stone from a well to help the Rachel water her flocks. In Haran he suffers all kinds of deception and abuse at the hands of his uncle. His reactions are accepting and never hostile. At the end, rather than confront Laban he chooses to leave. It is Laban who chases him and heaps further abuse on Jacob by claiming that all Jacob has – his wives, his children, his possessions – really belong to Laban. Yet Jacob is willing to make a treaty with Laban.
We see another example of this at the end of the parashah. Jacob pauses a moment before the final treaty with Laban.
31:45-46. Jacob took a stone and set it up as a monument. Jacob said to his brothers, “Gather stones,” and they took stones and made a pile, and they ate there by the pile.
Neziv comments in HD:
Rashi has already explained that ‘brothers here refer to his children and not like in some other places to his followers or kinsmen….
But why didn’t Jacob simply demand from his servants to do this? Why ‘brothers’?
The answer is that this is an example of Jacob’s pursuit of harmony and security with others [i. e., he treats them with a sense of dignity and equality sharing in the event rather than demanding through his parental or family authority - hsj].
All this even though Laban had troubled him so much… Nevertheless, Jacob ignored this. He wished to pursue peace and make an effort to bring his heart closer. Furthermore, he wanted to teach his children this wonderful quality, so he asked them to gather the stones for the purpose of making peace with Laban. If he had said ‘my children, gather stones’ they would have done so at their father’s behest but would not have learned this wonderful moral lesson and would have thought that they are doing it to obey their father….

Again stones. Again a monument. Again the pursuit of peace and
harmony through kindness. This is the new Jacob who will soon have a new name: Israel. This is Jacob who has accepted the profound and frightening implications of his leadership role: he will become a man of peace. Profound words for all of us once again.

Shabbat Shalom

Parashat Toledot 5770
The Profound Word
Howard S. Joseph
http://TheProfoundWord.com

Measure for Measure

Are our Ancestors, the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, to be looked as models of perfection? What would that even mean to us? Must we justify everything they did as perfect? Or can we recognize their failings – their sins- even when trying to overcome them? Or maybe their greatness is that they are portrayed as in the thick of difficult social, familial and moral situations in which they strive for resolution according to some lofty principles yet recognize their shortcomings?

This week’s parashah raises these and many other questions. Patriarchs and Matriarchs are  certainly not presented as on some lofty pedestal. It’s hard to tell that the ‘good guys’ are such while the supposed ‘bad guy’ seems to be the innocent victim of foolishness and deceit.

While Neziv addresses some of these questions he presents a very naturalistic ethics that he carries throughout the Torah: our good or bad deeds have consequences in the way our lives work out. Good deeds can bring good circumstances and bad deeds bad circumstances; all is measure for measure. There is no mystery here. This is the orderly way in which God created the world – the principle of ‘din’ as seen in Bereishit. We are all part of it. The processes of cause and effect dominate life. The Torah is given to help guide us through the myriad decisions that life demands.

Neziv focuses on two Midrash Rabbah texts:

1. WHEN ESAU HEARD THE WORDS OF HIS FATHER, HE CRIED WITH AN EXCEEDING GREAT AND BITTER CRY.   (27, 34). R. Hanina said: Whoever maintains that the Holy One, blessed be He, is lax [in dispensing justice], may his bowels become lax! He is merely long-suffering, but [ultimately] collects His due. Jacob made Esau break out into a cry but once, and where was he punished for it? In Shushan, the castle, as it says, And he [Mordecai] cried with a loud and bitter cry,…. (Esther 4, 1). [Soncino Translation]

2. AND FETCH ME FROM THENCE TWO GOOD KIDS OF THE GOATS. (27,9) GOOD?: R. Berekiah commented in R. Helbo’s name: They are good for thee and good for thy descendants. Good for thee, since thou wilt receive the blessings through them; and good for thy descendants, who will be pardoned through them on the Day of Atonement, as it is written, For on this day shall atonement be made for you, etc. (Lev. 16, 30).2

Rebecca asks Jacob to bring her two goats to be prepared for Isaac. He then proceeds with the ruse. When Esau later brings Isaac his own preparations the ruse is discovered. Esau bursts out into his bitter cry. Neziv is interested in that the midrash ignores Isaac’s distress reported just before Esau’s:  Isaac shuddered a great shudder. Why is Jacob punished for hurting his brother but not his father? The latter might seem to be of equal or even greater severity? And what has all this to do with any concern for the future Yom Kippur celebrations? Is there some permanent failure that must be atoned for forever so that it becomes institutionalized in the annual Temple ceremonies of the holiest day of the year?

Neziv comments at length in HRD at 27,9:

“… these are the two goats of Yom HaKippurim, one for Hashem and one for Azazel [the one marched out and left to die in the wilderness.] This is quite amazing [peleh]. What connection do these two goats have to Yom HaKippurim?

This is the explanation: We must know that all evil qualities in the world are part of the creation, that Hashem also created them, as it says, ‘He created light and evil….’ Therefore, we must say that even in them there is some good. This is similar to a dangerous poison which can definitely be used occasionally to help the sick. Yet we still call it poison – sam hamavet – because usually it is death causing. Also, when we wish to use it for a medicine we require the exceeding care of a physician. Only very little can be used and great care taken not to use too much which is dangerous. So, too, evil qualities can be put to good use at a particular moment. But we have to make sure to do this only with the advice of an expert master and very sparingly so as not to do more than necessary.

So the time had come for Jacob to utilize the qualities of lying and deceit. This becomes ‘a sin for a sacred purpose’ – averah lishmah – which can be  a great thing in its proper moment just as a mitzvah itself. Similarly, the two goats: one is for a holy purpose, for Hashem; the other is destined, as it were, to the powers of uncleanness, God forbid, which can defile us. However, in its proper moment and according to the command of God, it too is a mitzvah similar to the goat that is for Hashem [brought to the Temple.] This teaches us that even the unclean powers are rooted in the Blessed One….

This was Rebecca’s intention when she told Jacob to bring two goats. They are similar to the two goats of Yom HaKippurim: one for Hashem and one for Azazel. They are both equal in their mitzvah respect even though one is destined for the holiness of the Temple and the other for the opposite. So, too, Jacob’s two actions: The first is correct in obeying his mother’s request; the second is incorrect through the lying by which he deceived his father. But both are ultimately considered in the category of mitzvah for they served to bring the blessings [rightfully to Jacob.]“

Now Neziv addresses the difference between Esau’s and Isaac’s distress.

“… When engaging in an averah lishmah – an evil deed for a sacred purpose – one must be exceedingly careful not to have any personal pleasure from it, unlike the case of doing a mitzvah in which the doer may benefit but the mitzvah is unaffected by it and remains a mitzvah. An averah lishmah is different: the pleasure one receives is itself a sin….

Here Jacob had no pleasure in hurting his father, and certainly was sad about it, but he couldn’t avoid it. However, in regard to Esau’s cry Jacob was happy and therefore was ultimately punished, for he had caused this by an averah lishmah from which he was forbidden to derive any pleasure.”

Neziv then refers us forward to Exodus 32,27 [HRD] where he has more to say on the subject. The contest is the aftermath of the Golden Calf episode. The Levites are charged with killing those who celebrated with the calf. This is, of course, a very dangerous moment. Unbridled killing can run amok destroying innocent and guilty together. Maybe too old grudges will be settled under the cover of the moment. Doing this for the sake of Heaven is a risky proposition.

“From here we learn that one who chases the wicked who is really guilty, it is important that the pursuer not be one who hates him and desires ill for him. Pursuit is a dangerous activity and if the pursuit comes for personal pleasure as well, then the pursuer will not be considered innocent. [He then refers us back to our Genesis section.]…. for regarding Isaac’s trembling Jacob definitely felt regret but it was unavoidable, but Esau’s pain gave Jacob pleasure and he was therefore punished, even though the essential issue of deceiving Esau was proper and necessary.

Support for this position can be seen on Midrash Kohelet on the verse -God will seek the pursued’. This is explained : even when a righteous person pursues the wicked. In other words, if the pursuer has some selfish pleasure in this he will be punished for it.”

This Biblical verse gives Neziv his ultimate support for his position.

**************

The theme of not benefiting from a deed for the sake of Heaven is extensively documented. Abraham refuses compensation after helping defeat foreign invaders. So, too, in a war for the purpose of destroying idolatry one cannot use the spoils. Simon and Levi take the spoils of Shekhem. Saul makes this error and thinks he can justify it by sacrificing some captured cattle to God to help appease Samuel. In the Book of Esther, the battle against the Persians is won but we are told that the Jews did not take spoils. The war is for the sake of Heaven and not for personal gain.

Talmudic sources examine the actions of Yael who seduced the evil Sisera in order to kill him. It is concluded that despite sexual intercourse with him she derived no pleasure for he was so thoroughly despicable. She was focused on rescuing the nation – a great mitzvah.

Esther too is questioned. Considered an already married woman how could she have let herself be taken by the king as a wife? Esther was forced into this, was totally passive with the king, and succeeded in rescuing the whole nation which was under the king’s control. Seen in this light the concept of averah lishmah is a great concern in Biblical and Rabbinic literature. It is obviously a real problem for real people and a major challenge for those who would be righteous.

**************

Engaging in an averah lishmah or a mitzvah that comes through a sin is truly a wild card, almost a no-win situation. The greatest among us have tried it and failed to some degree. The consequences may take generations to unfold but there will be consequences. Cause and effect, measure for measure will prevail. Short term gain may be had at long term expense.

The world is a complex of good and bad qualities that are mingled together in creation. The original chaos is ordered but still exists and can rear its head when aroused. Our control is limited. Do not play with fire. You might find yourself like the second goat being marched out into the wilderness to eventually lie broken after being pushed form a cliff. Yom Kippur’s central Temple celebration reminds us to avoid these rationalization and temptations that our sin can lead to good.

Neziv sees the Ancestors as caught up in the thick webs of life, striving to find the proper way forward. Rebecca and Jacob feared the covenant would be lost and God’s promise to Rebecca would remain unfulfilled. Who knows? Maybe another way would be found. Maybe Isaac had other ideas that would work to preserve the covenant into the future. How would Esau turn out if given a chance?

These are the profound words for this week.

Shabbat Shalom

****************

Postscript

Rebecca and Isaac

Neziv sees the foreshadowing of the problems of Toledot already at the end of Hayyei Sarah. As Rebecca approaches Canaan with the servant she unknowingly sees Isaac praying in the fields. He sees the camel caravan approaching. When she sees him she falls off of the camel.

Neziv in HD:

She saw him – while still standing in prayer and looking awesome as an angel….

And she fell from the camel – out of fear and awe. However, she still did not know who had caused this fear. If she had not been sitting on the same camel with him but rather behind him and then saw the servant conversing with the man in a normal manner – her fear would have subsided so that when she learned his identity she would have had already calmed down. But she was sitting with him on the camel and during her moment of fear she asked the servant who he was. Who is this austere and fearsome man who terrifies me? – as said in Bereishit Rabbah – [I could not find this reference -hsj] When she was told that this was her husband she then ‘took the veil and covered herself.’This was done out of great fear and shame as if she understood that she was not fitting to be his wife. From this moment on fear was implanted in her heart and she was never with Isaac as Sarah was with Abraham or Rachel with Jacob. For when they had any issues to discuss they did not hesitate to speak to them. But not Rebecca.

This is all an introduction to the story to come in Toledot for Isaac and Rebecca had conflicting outlooks. Rebecca could not speak openly to Isaac to convince him clearly that she knew the truth about Esau: that he was a fraud. And, of course, during the time of the blessings…. If Rebecca had been with Isaac as were Sarah and Rachel with their husbands these [intrigues ] would not have occurred.

So many questions. Who was Isaac? Why did he appear so fearsome to Rebecca? Was this a result of the Akedah experience which transformed him into an other-worldly angelic type or an austere and imposing personality? Did Rebecca and her family even know of the Akedah? Would they have agreed to the marriage under these circumstances? Why really was Isaac not marriageable to the local Canaanite population many of whom were Abraham’s allies and friends? It seems that the impact of the terror of the Akedah lies behind many of these issues. Terror and Holocaust survivors bear awful scars. They have trouble trusting and communicating especially discussing the traumatic events they believe no one can understand. Was this the cause of Isaac’s imposing presence?

And where was Isaac during the burial and mourning for his mother? Rebecca brings him comfort for the loss of his mother and he loves her. But does she love him in the same way? Can she? Later we learn that she loves Jacob. But, can this asymmetrical marriage succeed? After all, we learned early in Genesis that God wanted a wife to be an ‘ezer kenegdo’, a companion to Adam. Neziv there explained that the man needs her help in all aspects of life each man according to his specific situation. Rebecca already felt that she may not be able to do this for the awesome man she is married to and now meeting for the first time. She enters married life in fear and shame ? not a wholesome beginning.

However, she is committed to the venture and to making sure that the blessing and mission of Abraham will continue into the future. But as we see she cannot communicate with Isaac, sharing her feelings and concerns. Nor does she try to understand what is going on in his mind. Does he really intend to give Esau the blessing of Abraham or just an ordinary blessing? Without attempting to find out she proceeds with her planned deception.

Parashat Hayyei Sarah 5770
The Profound Word
Howard S. Joseph
http://TheProfoundWord.com

Abraham’s Other Family

In memory of Elliot Khadoury at his Sheloshim

Throughout the telling of the Abraham, Sarah and Isaac story the Torah weaves another tale: Abraham’s other family. This one contains Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael. It is clear that Sarah has great problems with Hagar and Ishmael. She senses Hagar’s condescension towards her and she fears a malevolent influence upon Isaac hanging around the older and wild Ishmael. As we read last week, this leads to the other family being banished to a place called Be’er Lahai Roi. It is not a happy tale.

The story is told with a great deal of ambiguity. Is this banishment solely a result of an impetuous Sarah overly protecting the son of her old age? What are Abraham’s true feelings on the matter?

When Sarah tells Abraham to send her away he is puzzled.

But the matter greatly displeased Abraham, concerning his son.?And God said to Abraham, “Be not displeased concerning the lad and concerning your handmaid; whatever Sarah tells you, hearken to her voice, for in Isaac will be called your seed. [Gen?21:11-12]

Neziv makes two important points on these verses.

“Concerning his son: For Sarah said ’she and?her son’ implying that Sarah wanted Abraham to treat Ishmael according to the status of his mother whom she considered a servant; her son would follow her status and not follow the father’s rank. However, Abraham knew this not to be the case at all for she had been freed [by Sarah] and Abraham took her as a [full] wife; that is why the Torah mentions throughout ‘his son’.”

However, Abraham knew that Isaac was to be the bearer of the covenant. Isaac had to be protected and trained for his mission. Sarah’s concerns had merit. What should he do?

Then he treats the phrase, ‘whatever Sarah tells you, hearken to her voice’:

God does not say ’shema lekolah, which means to follow her words,…, but shema bekolah which means to analyze and understand her words [i. e., after analysis you will decide what to do - hsj]

After analysis, Abraham indeed agrees with Sarah. Therefore, it is not her decision alone. Abraham has accepted her main contention that although he considers Ishmael as a son, the issue here is greater: who will inherit the mission, destiny and vision of Abraham. The banishment is his responsibility as well as Sarah’s. If Hagar and Ishmael can cause a subversion of that destiny then they have no place in Abraham’s home.

But Ishmael is not out of the picture. As Abraham’s son,

“But also the son of the handmaid I will make into a nation, because he is your seed.” [13]

The story is quiet for a while. Isaac matures. The Akedah. Finally, Sarah dies. Abraham searches for a wife for Isaac. Rebecca emerges as the next matriarch and Isaac is comforted over the loss of his mother.

As this happens, the ‘other family’ plot returns. As Rebecca arrives in Canaan, she meets Isaac coming from Be’r Lahai Roi. The Sages interpret this to mean that he went to bring Hagar back to re-marry his father! [Gen?24:62]

After Isaac’s wedding, chapter?25?begins:

And Abraham took another wife and her name was Keturah.

Here Rashi brings the midrash [Gen. Rabbah?61:4]?This is Hagar.

Hagar is back! A reconciliation process is happening. Now, what about Ishmael? Did Isaac look for his older brother when he went for Hagar? Maybe. But we have to wait a while to see the results.? We have to wait for Abraham’s death to realize that there was a reconciliation.

Abraham expired and died in a good old age, old and satisfied, and he was gathered to his people. ? Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the Cave of Makhpelah in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which faces Mamre. [8-9]

Rashi again cites the?Sages view of this as another sign of reconciliation:

(Gen. Rabbah?30:4,?38:12) From here [we may deduce] that Ishmael repented and let Isaac go before him, and that is the meaning of ?a good old age? which is stated regarding Abraham. [In?15:15?Abraham is promised that he will be buried in 'good old age.]

In other words, Abraham lived to see the return of Ishmael. That was his ‘good old age’.? However, the return was made according to the vision of Sarah and Abraham that Isaac must be the leader of the family. So, Isaac’s name before Ishmael suggests that Ishmael had accepted his secondary role to Isaac.

Furthermore, after Abraham’s death we are told:

Now it came to pass after Abraham’s death, that God blessed his son Isaac, and Isaac dwelt near Be’er Lahai Roi. [11]

Isaac and Ishmael are living near each other.

Finally, we are told the following in verse?12:

These are the generations of Ishmael the son of Abraham….

Neziv takes this opportunity to reiterate Ishmael’s place in Abraham’s view:

I have already explained that Scripture is precise in many places? that for Abraham [Ishmael] was considered a son and not the child of a servant. But as far as Sarah and her son were concerned he was considered to be in the rank of the son of a servant.

I am not sure if this is correct about Isaac’s perception of Ishmael based on what we saw above. It would seem to me that Isaac was indeed searching to reconnect with his brother Ishmael albeit on the new terms now that the covenant was securely in his hands for the future. He may have come to share Abraham’s view that indeed Ishmael was a true son. [The addition of 'benah',? her son, could be a printing error.]

Interestingly, when Ishmael’s death is described, similar phrases are used to the deaths of the righteous ancestors:

... and he expired and died and was gathered to his people. [17]

His people indeed.

Some profound words for this week.

Shabbat Shalom

Parashat Vayerah 5770
The Profound Word
Howard S. Joseph

http://TheProfoundWord.com

The Last Trial

Gen 22:1. And it came to pass after these things, that God tested Abraham….

When is a test not a test? Abraham is near the end of his career as the focus of the Biblical story. What could be the purpose of ‘testing’ him?
The Hebrew word is ‘nisa’ which has multiple meanings. It can suggest ‘nisayon’ -? a trial or test. Or it can suggest ‘to lift’, to raise as a banner or flag or sign – a ‘nes’. [Also used for miracle - a sign.]
The question is what does it mean here.
The context of Neziv’s? discussion is a Mishnah teaching in Pirkei Avot – the Ethics of the Fathers, ch. 5:3
With ten tests our father Abraham was tested and he withstood them all–in order to make known how great was our father Abraham’s love [for God].
So we see first of all that this was not a test to find out if Abraham was worthy but a test to give the opportunity to demonstrate Abraham’s worthiness to the world.
Secondly, we see that this test is the only one mentioned of the ten tests. None of the other events in Abraham’s life are preceded by this notation – God tested Abraham.
Neziv learns from this that we are, therefore, supposed to understand this event according to both meanings of ‘nes’: a test as well as an event that raises Abraham into a special figure, someone who has great love for God.
So, his focus in this verse is on three questions:
1. What is the meaning of testing? What kind of test is this?
2. How does this test provide the result that God wishes – to make known to the world something about Abraham?
3. What is the impact on Abraham? What is the information about Abraham that will be made known? In what way is this event both a test and a raising of Abraham on a banner to symbolize a major issue?
The multiple meanings of ‘nes’ is already commented upon in Genesis Rabbah [77] which links the word to a verse in Psalms [60:4]:? But for those who fear you, you have raised a banner….
Neziv comments:
“thus the Sages explained that through this event He lifted the power of Father Abraham and raised him to the pinnacle of the spiritual greatness of the Israelite nation as will be explained.”

Neziv again goes to Gen. Rabbah [32] where the different possible kinds of tests are mentioned:

“Our Sages modeled the issue and meaning of testing in three ways.
1. As in when the purchaser of a pot hits it to find out its strength.
2.When one has good flax when beats it often and the more you beat it the more it improves. But it has to start off as good flax otherwise the beating has no effect.
3. One? increases the burden on a good donkey? to determine exactly how much he can carry….
A righteous [tzaddik] person may be tested in one of these three manners….

“From this Midrash we learn that the the test here is not like that of the pot for this would have no impact on elevating Abraham at all. Rather it is like the good flax example, for just as the beating of it actualizes it’s good potential so to the tzadik whose whose righteousness is in potential, still it requires some act to help actualize that inner potential. Then it becomes easy for he himself to bring out the potential in the future.
So the Blessed Holy One [HKBH] elevated Abraham to prepare for the Akedah to slaughter his beloved son so that? Abraham and his descendants would be prepared to lovingly martyr themselves to sanctify the name of Hashem. This act of Abraham was for the purpose [of setting an example] for his descendants, the Israelite nation….”
Neziv continues the discussion on verse 17 – ‘I will bless you…”
“Abraham’s descendants are blessed here with the commandment of Kiddush Hashem -martyrdom -? as found in Sanhedrin [74b]: ‘Israel is commanded on Kiddush Hashem and the nations of the world are not.’ It is understood that this is an honor to Israel for it shows our closeness as children of God…. So, God? commands His children which are his lot in the world and the bearers of his kingship to give themselves for His Name and Glory…. Thus, Abraham merited through this event that his descendants would achieve the spiritual greatness required to willingly give themselves for Kiddush Hashem….”

There are lots of issues to think about in this discussion, some of them very painful and difficult. Neziv is locating the history of Jewish martyrdom right here in the Akedah story. It is the principal locus of the spiritual power to give oneself totally and ultimately, something that Jews had to do too often.
But how did the lesson get transmitted? After all, only Isaac was present?

The internal lesson for Israel is thus transmitted through Isaac and his descendants. But going back to the Pirkei Avot teaching of ‘in order to make known how great was our father Abraham’s love [for God]‘,? was Isaac the only intended recipient of this knowledge? If others were also intended to know about it how did it become diffused? Certainly Abraham was not going to brag about this event.

To answer this question we have to refer to another classic commentator from the Middle Ages, Rabbi David Kimhi known as Radak [1160 ? 1235.]

Radak asks this very question – how would the world know about this event: “for even if Abraham told people they would not believe it?”
Radak follows a line of reasoning similar to Neziv concerning the ‘nes’ question. Then he makes a remarkable declaration:
“The truth is that this trial was to show the world Abraham’s total love for God and was not just for those generations but for the generations to come who believe in the Torah written by Moses our teacher, a’h, from the mouth of God, and all its stories, so that they will see the extent of his love for God and learn from him to love God with all their hearts and all their souls….

In truth, before the Torah and its stories were written this great event was passed on internally from Isaac to Jacob and his children. After the Torah was written for Jacob’s family this matter became famous in the world. Some believed it and some did not.

Today, many years after the abolishing? of idol worship [i. e., through the advent of Christianity and Islam -hsj] most of the world believes in Moses’ Torah and its stories except that they disagree with us about the commandments which they understand symbolically. So now that most of the world believes in this great story, it is a tremendous testimony to our Father Abraham who loved God totally and completely. And it is proper for people to learn from his way of loving God.”

For Radak, the advent of major new faiths that learn from Abraham the proper love of God – and many other things from our Torah – is a major providential consequence intended from the beginning.

More profound words for this week.

Shabbat Shalom