From the very beginning humans were expected to expend effort to attain their goals. When G-d created Adam and Eve and placed them in the Garden of Eden, He commanded them to “Work it and to guard it” (Genesis 2; 15). Even though everything was provided for them they were expected to earn their keep.
In our Torah reading it is surprising to find that Yitzchak seems to make no effort to find himself a wife, but relies on his father to appoint someone as matchmaker for him. Furthermore, when Eliezer, Avraham’s servant, arrives in Padan Aram he also makes no effort to find the suitable match, but tells G-d to show him the object of his quest. Comparing his actions with those of Ya’akov, when he arrives in Padan Aram, highlight the failure of Eliezer to make an effort to find Yitzchak’s prospective bride. Ya’akov arrives (ibid. 29), and ascertains that he has reached his destination, then begins asking questions about Lavan and his family, to try and find who his bride should be. When he sees Rachel he realises that she is to be his partner without having to make tests for her. Eliezer on the other hand simply tethers his camels, and tells G-d to do the rest.
Though we are supposed to have faith and trust in G-d, total reliance on Him is an abdication of responsibility, and a failure to take up his role as a partner in the activity going on around us. In fact the Midrash (Bereishis Rabba 60) criticises Eliezer for his request, which is described as improper.
Eliezer is described by the Torah as Damesek (Genesis 15; 2), which the Talmud (Yoma 28b) understands as a contraction of the phrase Doleh U’Mashkeh, ‘drawing water and giving to drink’. This describes his relationship with Avraham, that Eliezer is able to take the Torah which Avraham teaches, and disseminate it to the masses. However, the one thing that Eliezer is unable to do is initiate creative thought, or transmit his own teachings. He seems to be totally incapable of acting on his own.
Halachically we say that a non-Jewish slave does not own anything, anything he has belongs to his master. Eliezer seems to have taken that to the extreme that even his thoughts are not his own. In fact the Midrash (Bereishis Rabba 59; 8) tells us that he even looked like Avraham - he had completely lost any independent identity.
This is why Avraham sent Eliezer to find a wife for Yitzchak. He was faced with a dilemma. Yitzchak was not permitted to leave the Land of Israel, for only a wife who would be prepared to leave her family and customs, and come to Israel (as Avraham and Sarah had done) would be a suitable matriarch for the new nation. He could not take a wife from the local population, because Avraham knew that the continuation of the nation would be through the children of Terach. However, he had to find a wife to ensure the promised continuation of the fledgling Jewish nation. Though we are normally expected to do everything that we can to help ourselves, and may not rely solely on G-d, when faced with the impossible we have no option but to place our trust solely in G-d.
Having reached that point, any action that we would take could only be counterproductive. Before setting out on his journey, Eliezer checks whether there is any ‘backup’ plan for finding Yitzchak a wife. “Perhaps this woman shall not wish to follow me to this land...? Avraham answered him ... G-d will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son from there”. (Genesis 24; 5-7). Upon realising that there is no option but to rely on G-d, Eliezer does precisely that. Perhaps this is the reason that Avraham did not embark on this journey himself, but sent his trusted servant. Maybe he was concerned lest his personal emotional involvement prevent him from seeing the hand of G-d as clearly.
Yitzchak himself epitomised total trust and faith in G-d. Though Avraham was faced with a true test of his faith when G-d told him to offer his son on Mount Moriah, Yitzchak had already reached a level of faith where his only concern was that perhaps he would involuntarily flinch as the knife was placed on his throat, and invalidate the offering. In a sense he remained bound on the altar for the rest of his life, so totally dependent upon G-d that he had no need to be personally involved in planing his own future.
This total dependence and reliance on G-d is a high level to aspire to, which is not attained by most. The Talmud (Brachot 35b) records an argument between Rabbi Yishmael, who says that the verse “This Torah shall not depart from you mouth day or night” (Joshua 1; 8) only applies when one is not involved in earning a livelihood. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai maintains that if a person acts in accordance with G-d’s wishes, their work will be done for them by others. Abaye concludes “Many people acted in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, and they succeeded. There were those who followed Rabbi Shimon’s opinion, and they did not succeed.”
Showing posts with label chaye sarah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chaye sarah. Show all posts
Monday, October 29, 2007
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Chaye Sarah Summary
Sarah dies in Kiryat Arba at the age of one hundred and twenty seven. After Avraham finishes mourning for her, he buys the cave of Machpela from Efron the Hittite, and buries her there.
Avraham sends his servant, Eliezer, to find a wife for Yitzhak (Isaac) in Haran. Eliezer prays to G-d for guidance and Rivka (Rebecca) arrives, showing through her actions that she is the woman he is seeking. After giving Eliezer and his camels water, she invites them back to her father’s house. Eliezer bargains with her family to be able to take her back to Yitzhak as a wife and Rivka agrees to go with him. Rivka meets Yitzhak and he brings her into his mother’s tent and takes her as his wife.
Avraham remarries and has six more sons, but gives everything to Yitzhak, while sending away his other sons with gifts. Avraham dies at the age of one hundred and seventy five and Yitzhak and Yishmael bury him in the cave of Machpela. The Parsha ends by detailing the generations of Yishmael.
Avraham sends his servant, Eliezer, to find a wife for Yitzhak (Isaac) in Haran. Eliezer prays to G-d for guidance and Rivka (Rebecca) arrives, showing through her actions that she is the woman he is seeking. After giving Eliezer and his camels water, she invites them back to her father’s house. Eliezer bargains with her family to be able to take her back to Yitzhak as a wife and Rivka agrees to go with him. Rivka meets Yitzhak and he brings her into his mother’s tent and takes her as his wife.
Avraham remarries and has six more sons, but gives everything to Yitzhak, while sending away his other sons with gifts. Avraham dies at the age of one hundred and seventy five and Yitzhak and Yishmael bury him in the cave of Machpela. The Parsha ends by detailing the generations of Yishmael.
Parshat Chaye Sarah 3
From the very beginning humans were expected to expend effort to attain their goals. When G-d created Adam and Eve and placed them in the Garden of Eden, He commanded them to “Work it and to guard it” (Genesis 2; 15). Even though everything was provided for them they were expected to earn their keep.
In our Torah reading it is surprising to find that Yitzchak seems to make no effort to find himself a wife, but relies on his father to appoint someone as matchmaker for him. Furthermore, when Eliezer, Avraham’s servant, arrives in Padan Aram he also makes no effort to find the suitable match, but tells G-d to show him the object of his quest. Comparing his actions with those of Ya’akov, when he arrives in Padan Aram, highlight the failure of Eliezer to make an effort to find Yitzchak’s prospective bride. Ya’akov arrives (ibid. 29), and ascertains that he has reached his destination, then begins asking questions about Lavan and his family, to try and find who his bride should be. When he sees Rachel he realises that she is to be his partner without having to make tests for her. Eliezer on the other hand simply tethers his camels, and tells G-d to do the rest.
Though we are supposed to have faith and trust in G-d, total reliance on Him is an abdication of responsibility, and a failure to take up his role as a partner in the activity going on around us. In fact the Midrash (Bereishis Rabba 60) criticises Eliezer for his request, which is described as improper.
Eliezer is described by the Torah as Damesek (Genesis 15; 2), which the Talmud (Yoma 28b) understands as a contraction of the phrase Doleh U’Mashkeh, ‘drawing water and giving to drink’. This describes his relationship with Avraham, that Eliezer is able to take the Torah which Avraham teaches, and disseminate it to the masses. However, the one thing that Eliezer is unable to do is initiate creative thought, or transmit his own teachings. He seems to be totally incapable of acting on his own.
Halachically we say that a non-Jewish slave does not own anything, anything he has belongs to his master. Eliezer seems to have taken that to the extreme that even his thoughts are not his own. In fact the Midrash (Bereishis Rabba 59; 8) tells us that he even looked like Avraham - he had completely lost any independent identity.
This is why Avraham sent Eliezer to find a wife for Yitzchak. He was faced with a dilemma. Yitzchak was not permitted to leave the Land of Israel, for only a wife who would be prepared to leave her family and customs, and come to Israel (as Avraham and Sarah had done) would be a suitable matriarch for the new nation. He could not take a wife from the local population, because Avraham knew that the continuation of the nation would be through the children of Terach. However, he had to find a wife to ensure the promised continuation of the fledgling Jewish nation. Though we are normally expected to do everything that we can to help ourselves, and may not rely solely on G-d, when faced with the impossible we have no option but to place our trust solely in G-d.
Having reached that point, any action that we would take could only be counterproductive. Before setting out on his journey, Eliezer checks whether there is any ‘backup’ plan for finding Yitzchak a wife. “Perhaps this woman shall not wish to follow me to this land...? Avraham answered him ... G-d will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son from there”. (Genesis 24; 5-7). Upon realising that there is no option but to rely on G-d, Eliezer does precisely that. Perhaps this is the reason that Avraham did not embark on this journey himself, but sent his trusted servant. Maybe he was concerned lest his personal emotional involvement prevent him from seeing the hand of G-d as clearly.
Yitzchak himself epitomised total trust and faith in G-d. Though Avraham was faced with a true test of his faith when G-d told him to offer his son on Mount Moriah, Yitzchak had already reached a level of faith where his only concern was that perhaps he would involuntarily flinch as the knife was placed on his throat, and invalidate the offering. In a sense he remained bound on the altar for the rest of his life, so totally dependent upon G-d that he had no need to be personally involved in planing his own future.
This total dependence and reliance on G-d is a high level to aspire to, which is not attained by most. The Talmud (Brachot 35b) records an argument between Rabbi Yishmael, who says that the verse “This Torah shall not depart from you mouth day or night” (Joshua 1; 8) only applies when one is not involved in earning a livelihood. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai maintains that if a person acts in accordance with G-d’s wishes, their work will be done for them by others. Abaye concludes “Many people acted in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, and they succeeded. There were those who followed Rabbi Shimon’s opinion, and they did not succeed.”
In our Torah reading it is surprising to find that Yitzchak seems to make no effort to find himself a wife, but relies on his father to appoint someone as matchmaker for him. Furthermore, when Eliezer, Avraham’s servant, arrives in Padan Aram he also makes no effort to find the suitable match, but tells G-d to show him the object of his quest. Comparing his actions with those of Ya’akov, when he arrives in Padan Aram, highlight the failure of Eliezer to make an effort to find Yitzchak’s prospective bride. Ya’akov arrives (ibid. 29), and ascertains that he has reached his destination, then begins asking questions about Lavan and his family, to try and find who his bride should be. When he sees Rachel he realises that she is to be his partner without having to make tests for her. Eliezer on the other hand simply tethers his camels, and tells G-d to do the rest.
Though we are supposed to have faith and trust in G-d, total reliance on Him is an abdication of responsibility, and a failure to take up his role as a partner in the activity going on around us. In fact the Midrash (Bereishis Rabba 60) criticises Eliezer for his request, which is described as improper.
Eliezer is described by the Torah as Damesek (Genesis 15; 2), which the Talmud (Yoma 28b) understands as a contraction of the phrase Doleh U’Mashkeh, ‘drawing water and giving to drink’. This describes his relationship with Avraham, that Eliezer is able to take the Torah which Avraham teaches, and disseminate it to the masses. However, the one thing that Eliezer is unable to do is initiate creative thought, or transmit his own teachings. He seems to be totally incapable of acting on his own.
Halachically we say that a non-Jewish slave does not own anything, anything he has belongs to his master. Eliezer seems to have taken that to the extreme that even his thoughts are not his own. In fact the Midrash (Bereishis Rabba 59; 8) tells us that he even looked like Avraham - he had completely lost any independent identity.
This is why Avraham sent Eliezer to find a wife for Yitzchak. He was faced with a dilemma. Yitzchak was not permitted to leave the Land of Israel, for only a wife who would be prepared to leave her family and customs, and come to Israel (as Avraham and Sarah had done) would be a suitable matriarch for the new nation. He could not take a wife from the local population, because Avraham knew that the continuation of the nation would be through the children of Terach. However, he had to find a wife to ensure the promised continuation of the fledgling Jewish nation. Though we are normally expected to do everything that we can to help ourselves, and may not rely solely on G-d, when faced with the impossible we have no option but to place our trust solely in G-d.
Having reached that point, any action that we would take could only be counterproductive. Before setting out on his journey, Eliezer checks whether there is any ‘backup’ plan for finding Yitzchak a wife. “Perhaps this woman shall not wish to follow me to this land...? Avraham answered him ... G-d will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son from there”. (Genesis 24; 5-7). Upon realising that there is no option but to rely on G-d, Eliezer does precisely that. Perhaps this is the reason that Avraham did not embark on this journey himself, but sent his trusted servant. Maybe he was concerned lest his personal emotional involvement prevent him from seeing the hand of G-d as clearly.
Yitzchak himself epitomised total trust and faith in G-d. Though Avraham was faced with a true test of his faith when G-d told him to offer his son on Mount Moriah, Yitzchak had already reached a level of faith where his only concern was that perhaps he would involuntarily flinch as the knife was placed on his throat, and invalidate the offering. In a sense he remained bound on the altar for the rest of his life, so totally dependent upon G-d that he had no need to be personally involved in planing his own future.
This total dependence and reliance on G-d is a high level to aspire to, which is not attained by most. The Talmud (Brachot 35b) records an argument between Rabbi Yishmael, who says that the verse “This Torah shall not depart from you mouth day or night” (Joshua 1; 8) only applies when one is not involved in earning a livelihood. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai maintains that if a person acts in accordance with G-d’s wishes, their work will be done for them by others. Abaye concludes “Many people acted in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, and they succeeded. There were those who followed Rabbi Shimon’s opinion, and they did not succeed.”
Parshat Chaye Sarah 2
In this week’s Torah reading Avraham sends his servant Eliezer to find a wife for his son Yitzchak. What is surprising is that the Torah not only relates the events surrounding Eliezer’s journey, but also repeats the whole story almost verbatim when Eliezer tells Rivka’s family what has happened. The Torah is normally concerned not to waste a single letter, and yet here we find whole paragraphs seemingly for no purpose.
Rashi addresses this question with his comment (Genesis 24; 42) “Rabbi Acha said: The speech of the servants of the forefathers is dearer to G-d than the Torah of their children, because we see that the section of Eliezer is repeated in the Torah, whereas many of the essential laws are [not even written in the Torah explicitly but are] only hinted at.” Rashi points out that this whole section appears to be redundant, but how are we to understand the answer? Why should G-d choose to prefer the story of Eliezer over the laws that will govern our lives?
Indeed this implies a more fundamental issue, namely, what is the purpose and function of the Bible? Is it a historical narrative or is it a code of law? Rashi’s very first comment on the Torah is: Rabbi Yitzchak said “The Torah should have begun with [the verse] ‘This month will be for you the first month’ (Exodus 12; 2), which was the first commandment given to the Jews....” In other words it would have made more sense for the Torah to have been purely a book of law, and not have included all the stories of creation and the patriarchs. Rashi’s answers that though these sections contain no legal codes, nevertheless we can learn from them moral and ethical behaviour, based on G-d’s creation of the world, and the actions of the forefathers.
Rabbi Aharon Kotler zt”l (Mishnas Aharon p. 132) explains why Eliezer’s search for a wife for Yitzchak deserves more space in the Torah than many of the laws and commandments. He explains that the principles by which Halacha can be deduced and derived from the text of the Torah were handed down by G-d to Moshe at Mount Sinai. Therefore even when there are few words explicitly in the text, it is a comparatively simple exercise to apply the hermeneutic principles and learn the details of each Halacha.
However there is another area of law which is more complicated, that is referred to by the Rabbis as Hilchot Derech Eretz (literally: laws of the way of the world). This is the way in which a person relates and interacts with his or her surroundings, and how they behave with other people. This is the part of Halacha which cannot be derived from merely reading books, or applying principles, but depends upon insight into human nature and the ways of the world. It requires years of serving experienced Rabbis (Shimush Talmidei Chachamim) and gaining a feel for reality. This is where the dry laws become real life, and turns the Torah into a relevant code for daily living. These laws are much harder to understand, they depend on the background of the person involved, and the details of the situation. No two decisions should ever be the same, reflecting the infinite variety of experience and life. It is these concepts which we can glimpse through the story of Eliezer and the repetition of his tale.
The Talmud (Avoda Zara 25a) alludes to this in understanding Yehoshua’s words “Is it not written in the Book of Yashar” (Joshua 10; 13). It explains that this refers to the book of Genesis, the book of Avraham, Yitzchak and Ya’akov who were the Yasharim (upright) of the world. They were upright in their actions and character traits, and from them we can learn how to relate to our environment and to other people.
From this story of Eliezer we learn the concepts of faith and trust in G-d. We also see that someone who sets out to do perform G-d’s will receives special help from heaven. Furthermore, we can derive the special qualities of the mothers of the nation, and also see the attributes that should be sought after in a spouse. From Eliezer’s encounter with Lavan and Bethuel we see how to interact with people who do not have the same goals and values as us. We see Eliezer’s modesty, and learn that we should not present ourselves as anything other than we are.
Eliezer himself also gained a clearer understanding of his own biases and personal prejudices from retelling the story and reviewing what happened. When he set out he asked Avraham what he should do if the prospective wife refused to return to Canaan to marry Yitzchak. Later he realises that he was hoping that his own daughter would be a suitable match for Yitzchak, and was looking for an excuse to avoid finding him another candidate. We too can learn from here that reflecting and reviewing our action can often lead to a better understanding of who we are, and what motives underlie our actions.
This is why the conversations of the servants of the forefathers are dearer than the laws of the children, for from their actions and words we can learn how to apply the rest of the laws. Hilchot Derech Eretz brings the religion alive. Without it none of the laws are worth much, as they have no application in our lives.
Rashi addresses this question with his comment (Genesis 24; 42) “Rabbi Acha said: The speech of the servants of the forefathers is dearer to G-d than the Torah of their children, because we see that the section of Eliezer is repeated in the Torah, whereas many of the essential laws are [not even written in the Torah explicitly but are] only hinted at.” Rashi points out that this whole section appears to be redundant, but how are we to understand the answer? Why should G-d choose to prefer the story of Eliezer over the laws that will govern our lives?
Indeed this implies a more fundamental issue, namely, what is the purpose and function of the Bible? Is it a historical narrative or is it a code of law? Rashi’s very first comment on the Torah is: Rabbi Yitzchak said “The Torah should have begun with [the verse] ‘This month will be for you the first month’ (Exodus 12; 2), which was the first commandment given to the Jews....” In other words it would have made more sense for the Torah to have been purely a book of law, and not have included all the stories of creation and the patriarchs. Rashi’s answers that though these sections contain no legal codes, nevertheless we can learn from them moral and ethical behaviour, based on G-d’s creation of the world, and the actions of the forefathers.
Rabbi Aharon Kotler zt”l (Mishnas Aharon p. 132) explains why Eliezer’s search for a wife for Yitzchak deserves more space in the Torah than many of the laws and commandments. He explains that the principles by which Halacha can be deduced and derived from the text of the Torah were handed down by G-d to Moshe at Mount Sinai. Therefore even when there are few words explicitly in the text, it is a comparatively simple exercise to apply the hermeneutic principles and learn the details of each Halacha.
However there is another area of law which is more complicated, that is referred to by the Rabbis as Hilchot Derech Eretz (literally: laws of the way of the world). This is the way in which a person relates and interacts with his or her surroundings, and how they behave with other people. This is the part of Halacha which cannot be derived from merely reading books, or applying principles, but depends upon insight into human nature and the ways of the world. It requires years of serving experienced Rabbis (Shimush Talmidei Chachamim) and gaining a feel for reality. This is where the dry laws become real life, and turns the Torah into a relevant code for daily living. These laws are much harder to understand, they depend on the background of the person involved, and the details of the situation. No two decisions should ever be the same, reflecting the infinite variety of experience and life. It is these concepts which we can glimpse through the story of Eliezer and the repetition of his tale.
The Talmud (Avoda Zara 25a) alludes to this in understanding Yehoshua’s words “Is it not written in the Book of Yashar” (Joshua 10; 13). It explains that this refers to the book of Genesis, the book of Avraham, Yitzchak and Ya’akov who were the Yasharim (upright) of the world. They were upright in their actions and character traits, and from them we can learn how to relate to our environment and to other people.
From this story of Eliezer we learn the concepts of faith and trust in G-d. We also see that someone who sets out to do perform G-d’s will receives special help from heaven. Furthermore, we can derive the special qualities of the mothers of the nation, and also see the attributes that should be sought after in a spouse. From Eliezer’s encounter with Lavan and Bethuel we see how to interact with people who do not have the same goals and values as us. We see Eliezer’s modesty, and learn that we should not present ourselves as anything other than we are.
Eliezer himself also gained a clearer understanding of his own biases and personal prejudices from retelling the story and reviewing what happened. When he set out he asked Avraham what he should do if the prospective wife refused to return to Canaan to marry Yitzchak. Later he realises that he was hoping that his own daughter would be a suitable match for Yitzchak, and was looking for an excuse to avoid finding him another candidate. We too can learn from here that reflecting and reviewing our action can often lead to a better understanding of who we are, and what motives underlie our actions.
This is why the conversations of the servants of the forefathers are dearer than the laws of the children, for from their actions and words we can learn how to apply the rest of the laws. Hilchot Derech Eretz brings the religion alive. Without it none of the laws are worth much, as they have no application in our lives.
Parshat Chaye Sarah
The Torah describes Yitzhak meeting Rivka for the first time. After meeting her and being introduced to her “Yizchak brought her into the tent [of] Sarah his mother”. Actually, the Torah doesn’t add in the word “of”. In fact, Rashi1 explains that Yitzchak brought her into the tent and she became Sarah his mother. If we look at the Targum we can understand this better. He translates this verse as “Yitzchak brought her into the tent, and looked and saw that her actions were as proper as those of Sarah”. The Midrash (Bereishit Rabba, 60: 16)explains how he could see immediately that Rivka shared the same admirable qualities of Sarah; while Sarah was alive there was a candle lit that would last from one Erev Shabbat (Friday afternoon) to the next, and a special blessing on the bread, and a cloud (of G-d’s presence) hovered above the tent. When Sarah died these three blessings ceased, but as soon as Rivka entered her tent they resumed. Yitzchak could perceive through these blessings that she was as equally righteous as his mother had been. What was so special about these three blessings that they were testimony to the righteousness of the matriarchs?
The Ba’al HaTurim, in his commentary on the word “her tent”, points out that this same word, HaOhela, appears eight other times in the Bible. He explains that these eight times hint to the eight places that the Divine Presence rested, first in the tabernacle in the desert, then in Gilgal (when they first entered Israel), then in Shilo, Nov, Givon, the First Temple in Jerusalem, the Second Temple after the destruction of the First, and in the future when the Messiah arrives. What is the connection between the tent of Sarah and Rivka, and the sites where the Shechina dwelled?
The answer to both of these questions is hinted at by the Ramban (Nachmanides), in his commentary to the beginning of Shemot, the book of Exodus. In his opening comments he discusses the main theme of the book as being one of redemption. But he stresses that being freed from the physical shackles of slavery in Egypt is only a partial redemption. Full redemption from the spiritual bonds is only achieved once the Jews have returned to the spiritual level of their forefathers. This occurred only once they had received the Torah at Mount Sinai and constructed the Mishkan (Tabernacle). This is the reason that Shemot concludes with “The Cloud of Glory covering the tent of meeting, and the glory of the L-rd filled he Mishkan”.
In other words, the Mishkan and later the Temple were only a means to return to the spiritual level achieved by Sarah and Rivka in their homes. The cloud of glory which covered the Tabernacle, and the Temple in Jerusalem, was the same cloud that was constantly present above the tent of Sarah and Rivka. In fact the other two blessings, the candle that remained constantly lit and the bread which remained fresh, were also paralleled in the Mishkan and the Temple, with the Menorah which was lit every night and the showbread which was placed in the Sanctuary and remained fresh from one Shabbat to the next.
This explains the Ba’al HaTurim’s comment that “HaOhela” refers to the eight sites where the Shechina dwelt, because the tent of Sarah was actually the first such place which was the paradigm for all future sites. The degree to which the patriarchs were able to make G-d’s presence felt in this world, through their homes and family relationships, was the ultimate goal which we later required the Temple to achieve. This is why they merited to be buried in Chevron, in the cave which Avraham purchased in which to bury Sarah. Chevron comes form the root Chibur, connection. Sarah and Avraham, and later Rivka and Yitzchak, and Leah and Ya’akov, were the ones who brought G-d into this world, connecting the spiritual worlds where the Shechina dwells with our own physical world.
We find many laws and customs to do with the home that parallel activities performed in the Temple. What we must realise is that in fact it is really the other way round. The Temple and its services were only a means of reaching the levels of spirituality found in the homes of our matriarchs. When we say that the focus of Judaism is not in the Temple or in the Synagogue but in the home, we are expressing this same idea, that all of the rituals and ceremonies are only a lesser substitute for the spirituality and Divine Presence that can be achieved in the home.
The Ba’al HaTurim, in his commentary on the word “her tent”, points out that this same word, HaOhela, appears eight other times in the Bible. He explains that these eight times hint to the eight places that the Divine Presence rested, first in the tabernacle in the desert, then in Gilgal (when they first entered Israel), then in Shilo, Nov, Givon, the First Temple in Jerusalem, the Second Temple after the destruction of the First, and in the future when the Messiah arrives. What is the connection between the tent of Sarah and Rivka, and the sites where the Shechina dwelled?
The answer to both of these questions is hinted at by the Ramban (Nachmanides), in his commentary to the beginning of Shemot, the book of Exodus. In his opening comments he discusses the main theme of the book as being one of redemption. But he stresses that being freed from the physical shackles of slavery in Egypt is only a partial redemption. Full redemption from the spiritual bonds is only achieved once the Jews have returned to the spiritual level of their forefathers. This occurred only once they had received the Torah at Mount Sinai and constructed the Mishkan (Tabernacle). This is the reason that Shemot concludes with “The Cloud of Glory covering the tent of meeting, and the glory of the L-rd filled he Mishkan”.
In other words, the Mishkan and later the Temple were only a means to return to the spiritual level achieved by Sarah and Rivka in their homes. The cloud of glory which covered the Tabernacle, and the Temple in Jerusalem, was the same cloud that was constantly present above the tent of Sarah and Rivka. In fact the other two blessings, the candle that remained constantly lit and the bread which remained fresh, were also paralleled in the Mishkan and the Temple, with the Menorah which was lit every night and the showbread which was placed in the Sanctuary and remained fresh from one Shabbat to the next.
This explains the Ba’al HaTurim’s comment that “HaOhela” refers to the eight sites where the Shechina dwelt, because the tent of Sarah was actually the first such place which was the paradigm for all future sites. The degree to which the patriarchs were able to make G-d’s presence felt in this world, through their homes and family relationships, was the ultimate goal which we later required the Temple to achieve. This is why they merited to be buried in Chevron, in the cave which Avraham purchased in which to bury Sarah. Chevron comes form the root Chibur, connection. Sarah and Avraham, and later Rivka and Yitzchak, and Leah and Ya’akov, were the ones who brought G-d into this world, connecting the spiritual worlds where the Shechina dwells with our own physical world.
We find many laws and customs to do with the home that parallel activities performed in the Temple. What we must realise is that in fact it is really the other way round. The Temple and its services were only a means of reaching the levels of spirituality found in the homes of our matriarchs. When we say that the focus of Judaism is not in the Temple or in the Synagogue but in the home, we are expressing this same idea, that all of the rituals and ceremonies are only a lesser substitute for the spirituality and Divine Presence that can be achieved in the home.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
