Tents and Fields – Parshat Toldot

Printable PDF available here.

Rav Kook (Midbar Shur)

And the youths grew up, and Esav was a man who understood hunting, a man of the field, while Ya’akov was a wholesome man, dwelling in tents. (Bereishit 25:27)

Yitzchak’s spiritual power related to two areas of Divine service. One was his ability to join with the broader world and advance their welfare. The other was his posture of retreat and holding himself separate, in order to protect his innate sanctity and preserve its potency for the future.

Both of these are essential to the Torah’s ideal conception of spiritual life. And each individual must work diligently at being both engaged with the world and withdrawn from it. However, there is always a question of how to integrate these two tendencies. To a large measure, the balance a person strikes depends on his specific nature. We see this clearly with Yitzchak’s two children, each of whom was drawn to emphasize a different aspect of their father’s spiritual personality.

Esav was a hunter and a “man of the field,” while Ya’akov “dwelled in tents.” This is not simply a description of their hobbies or where they spent their time. It encapsulates the respective essence of Yitzchak’s two sons. Esav was involved in the broader world in a vigorous and active manner. In contrast, Ya’akov kept apart from the broader world and remained in his tent. It was not that Ya’akov did not care about sharing Avraham’s spiritual vision with the rest of humanity. Rather, he hoped that by turning inward and focusing on actualizing his own completeness, the rest of the world would be uplifted.

Esav could have been a part of the spiritual mission of the Avot. Except for his immediate family, the rest of humanity was mired in paganism. Esav had an awesome potential to illuminate this darkness by bringing the light of Avraham to the broader world. However, Esav squandered his potential. He became overly involved with the broader world and unmoored from the values of the “tent” where his brother tarried. As a result, he adopted values and aspirations that were incompatible with those of Yitzchak and Avraham, whose world he became estranged from.[1]

Yitzchak did not realize Esav’s true nature. However, he did know that Esav was powerful and charismatic, engaged with his contemporaries and involved in worldly activity. This is why Yitzchak loved him. After all, Yitzchak’s mission in life was to spread Avraham’s message to the broadest possible audience.[2]Esav’s power to influence his contemporaries in the ‘field’ was tremendous, and Yitzchak assumed that his influence would be a positive one.

Ya’akov, however, did realize this. He saw that Esav had squandered his kedushah, and adopted the values of the ‘field’ instead of transforming the field into a G-dly ‘tent.’ If Esav was not going to further the Divine vision in his interactions with the broader world, Ya’akov would have to assume that responsibility. He could no longer content himself with being a dweller of tents. Now, it would fell upon to advance the spiritual wellbeing of humanity. And so he insisted that Esav sell the bechorah – not because Ya’akov thought it was a good business deal or because he wanted the bechorah, but because the continuity of Avraham’s vision demanded it.

Granted, the world was not ready for Ya’akov to contend in the ‘field.’ There was much purification that had not yet been completed, and even in our day, much still remains. Like Ya’akov, we must still remain set apart, living with the broader world but not of it. Only in this way can we preserve our spiritual mission and our kedushah, and avoid losing them like Esav did. Ya’akov purchased the bechorah from Esav because he knew the right time would eventually come, and like him, we are still waiting. It has been many generations, but with every generation, we draw closer to the moment when the tent and the field will unite, when Israel and the nations will form one united body to serve G-d in purity and truth.

[1]Yishmael was expelled from Avraham’s house against his will, while Esav left willingly. Perhaps this is why the gemara in Kiddushin refers to Esav as a ישראל מומר, literally an ‘apostate.’

[2]Rav Kook’s characterization of Yitzchak is interesting, and perhaps counterintuitive. It seems like Yitzchak was the most withdrawn of the Avot, the one least interested in spreading Avraham’s message to a broader audience. וצריך עיון.

Food for Thought

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (Covenant and Conversation, 5777): On the phrase “knew how to trap”, Rashi comments “He knew how to trap and deceive his father with his mouth. He would ask him, “Father, how should one tithe salt and straw?” Consequently his father believed him to be strict in observing the commands.” Esau knew full well that salt and straw do not require tithes, but he asked so as to give the impression that he was strictly religious. And here it is Rashi’s comment on the phrase that Isaac loved him “because entrapment was in his mouth”: “there was entrapment in the mouth of Esau, who trapped his father and deceived him by his words”… So the classic answer is that Isaac loved Esau because he simply did not know who or what Esau was. But there is another possible answer: that Isaac loved Esau precisely because he did know what Esau was.

In the early twentieth century someone brought to the great Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak Kook… the following dilemma. He had given his son a good Jewish education. He had always kept the commands at home. Now however the son had drifted far from Judaism. He no longer kept the commandments. He did not even identify as a Jew. What should the father do? “Did you love him when he was religious?” asked Rav Kook. “Of course,” replied the father. “Well then,” Rav Kook replied, “Now love him even more.”

Sometimes love can do what rebuke cannot. It may be that the Torah is telling us that Isaac was anything but blind as to his elder son’s true nature. But if you have two children, one well behaved, the other liable to turn out badly, to whom should you devote greater attention? With whom should you spend more time? It may be that Isaac loved Esau not blindly but with open eyes, knowing that there would be times when his elder son would give him grief, but knowing too that the moral responsibility of parenthood demands that we do not despair of, or disown, a wayward son.

Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch (Commentary on the Torah): That Isaac’s sympathies were more inclined towards Esau, Rebecca’s to Jacob, can moreover easily be explained by the attraction of opposites. We see Isaac, risen up again from death on the altar, preferring to withdraw from the bustle of the world and to live quietly in the proximity of the desert, living at the well of Be’er l’Chai Ro’i away from the busy traffic of men. That Esau’s… active nature appealed to him, and that he perhaps saw in him a force which he had lost could be a support to the home, would be quite possible. Rebecca, on the other hand saw in Jacob’s whole being a picture of a life unfolding of which in her father’s house she had never had the remotest idea…

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (Covenant and Conversation, 5776): [Isaac] knew that Abraham had sent his son Ishmael away. He may have known how much that pained Abraham and injured Ishmael. There is a remarkable series of midrashim that suggest that Abraham visited Ishmael even after he sent him away, and others that say it was Isaac who effected the reconciliation. He was determined not to inflict the same fate on Esau.

Likewise, he knew to the very depths of his being the psychological cost on both his father and himself of the trial of the akeidah. At the beginning of the chapter of Jacob, Esau and the blessing the Torah tells us that Isaac was blind. There is a midrash that suggests that it was tears shed by the angels as they watched Abraham bind his son and lift the knife that fell into Isaac’s eyes, causing him to go blind in his old age. The trial was surely necessary, otherwise God would not have commanded it. But it left wounds, psychological scars, and it left Isaac determined not to have to sacrifice Esau, his own child. In some way, then, Isaac’s unconditional love of Esau was a tikkun for the rupture in the father-son relationship brought about by the akeidah.

Questions for Discussion

Which other figure in the book of Bereishit seems like they had potential to be an heir of Avraham, but squandered their opportunity?[*]
How do we strike being involved with/concerned for the broader non-Jewish world, without losing our distinctiveness and adopting foreign and un-Jewish values?
Rav Kook claims that Esav could have participated in the spiritual mission of the Avot, but became too involved in the ‘field’ and כאילו went off the derech. Do you find his explanation convincing? Why or why not? What are some other possible theories for why Esav was excluded?
The midrash, quoted by Rashi, says that Ya’akov “dwelling in tents” refers to tents of Torah study. How does this fit with Rav Kook’s explanation that the “tent” represents turning inward and focusing on actualizing one’s own spiritual completeness.
See Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch’s explanation above in “Food for Thought.” How does it differ from Rav Kook’s explanation? How is it similar?
What challenges from the world of Esav and the ‘field’ does the Jewish world have to contend with today? How can we meet them successfully?

[*]If you need a hint, his name starts with a lammed.

The Cave of Potential – Parshat Chayei Sarah

Printable PDF available here.

Rav Kook (Shemuot Re’iah, 5690)

The idea of kiddushin is central to the Torah’s concept of family life. One of the primary sources of kiddushin is derived from Avraham’s acquisition of ma’arat ha’Machpelah, based on a linkage between key words in each context (lit. gezeirah shavah). Our Sages (Gemara Kiddushin, 2a) teach that just as Avraham was able to acquire ma’arat ha’Machpelah by giving Ephron something of monetary value, so too one can take a woman to be his wife by giving her something of monetary value.

This linkage is intriguing, if not outright bizarre. What does Avraham’s acquisition of a burial plot in Eretz Yisrael have to do with kiddushin? What could possibly be the common thread that unites these two contexts?

The first step to resolving this puzzle is the fact that kiddushin does not generate a full marital relationship.[1]The woman becomes prohibited to all other men, but until the later stage of nisuin,[2]they are not allowed to live with each other, the man is not yet fully responsible to financially support the woman, and the two are not considered fully married for a variety of other halachic categories. Broadly speaking, kiddushin represents the idea of potential sanctity, of designation and preparation for the future fullness of married life.

The same dynamic, the same division between potential and actualization, is not limited to marriage. It governs another profound relationship – namely, the connection between the Jewish People and Eretz Yisrael. Several generations after Avraham, his descendants would enter the land under Yehoshua’s leadership and embark on a military conquest to wrest possession from the Canaanite nations. This was the conquest ‘in actuality,’ but it could not have succeeded without the spiritual groundwork laid by the Avotand Imahot. They were the first conquerors of the land – ‘in potential.’

All of Eretz Yisrael had to be imbued with the capacity for kedushah, but this type of sanctity was rooted primarily in Chevron.[3]In contrast, the manifestation of kedushah was focused in Yerushalayim. For this reason, we find that when G-d commanded Avraham, “Arise, walk through the land, its length and breadth” (Bereishit 13:17), he immediately settled in Chevron. Similarly, King David began his rulership in Chevron, and only later moved to Yerushalayim. And, as our Sages teach (Gemara Yoma, 28b), when the sacrificial service began on Yom Kippur morning, the Kohanim did not ask “Has daylight broken?” but rather “Has the sun arrived at Chevron?”

All of this highlights that Chevron is where Am Yisrael, the descendants of the Avot and Imahot, grounds itself and nurtures its potential for kedushah and its connection to the Holy Land. It cannot be any other way. Israel cannot simply march into Yerushalayim, build a Temple and ‘flip a switch’ to bring the Shechinah’s revelation.[4]That process must be grounded in our spiritual potential and historical destiny, all of which were established by those great souls whose bodies are buried in the ma’arat ha’Machpelah.

Based on this analysis, we can also explain why Sarah was the first to be buried in ma’arat ha’Machpelah. Avraham’s burial of Sarah was not just a personal tragedy, but also the foundation of Israel’s future inheritance and the first step in the sanctification of the land. Sarah’s unique sensitivity to kedushah spurred her demand that Avraham expel Yishmael, so that the “nation which dwells alone” could develop from Yitzchak. Without Yitzchak being separated from Yishmael, Eretz Yisrael could not have been separated from the rest of the world. Thus, it is Sarah who we have to thank for guaranteeing to Am Yisrael our special heritage of Eretz Yisrael.

[1]In modern times, kiddushin and nisuin are performed on the same day, at the wedding ceremony, but in Talmudic times, they were separated by a significant period of time, up to twelve months (Gemara Ketubot 48b).

[2]There are a number of different opinions on what constitutes nisuin. For example, the Ran cites a view that describes nisu’in as the bride entering the husband’s ‘domain’ for the purposes of marriage (which is the source of the contemporary ‘yichud room’ after the chupah ceremony). Other Rishonim maintain that the bride going out with her special head covering marks the beginning of nisu’in. And others claim that nisuin is when the chuppah covering is spread over the bride.

[3]Rav Kook uses this to explain the deeper meaning of why Chevon is described (Bamidbar 13:22) as being built “seven years before Zoan of Egypt.” Due to the esoteric nature of his comments and limited space for translating them to English, they are reproduced below in the Hebrew original:

ואמרו בזוהר ״צען״ לשון רברבתא (מקום שרים). אם כי המלוכה היתה במצרים, אבל מקום רברבתא היה בצען.(צוען דמרבי ביה מלכי, כלומר מחנכים ומאמנים בני המלכים, דכתיב ׳כי היו בצוען שריה.) גם דרגת חברון הוא מול צען… ולכן נקראת מצרים ״מרכבת המשנה״, כי שני המקומות ״צען ומצרים״ הם היפך הקדושה של חברון וירושלים. והיו צריכים לטהר את מצרים ע״י גלותו של יוסף, הנקרא צדיק יסוד עולם. ואמר אח״כ ״שמני אלהים לאדון לכל מצרים״ כדי להכניע אותה הטומאה.

[4]Rav Kook notes, based on the Gemara in Bava Batra (117a), that the concept of future sanctity found expression in the unusual system that Yehoshua used to divide up Eretz Yisrael. According to one opinion in the gemara, the land was deemed apportioned to the Israelites who left Egypt — even though they had died in the midbar and never made it to Eretz Yisrael. Usually, it is the living who inherit the dead — i.e., the number of living descendants determines how an inheritance is divided. But here, it was the other way around: the dead determined how the living would inherit land. In other words, we take Eretz Yisrael not by virtue of our own personhood or entitlement, but by being connected to those who came before us.

Food for Thought

Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch (Commentary on the Torah, Bereishit 23:19): The first possession which the Jewish race received of their land was a row of pairs of graves which the first Jew bought to be used for his wife and then for himself and for his son and his grandson and their respective wives. The thought of the value of the family tie which attaches the heart of husband to wife, and children to parents was henceforth inseparably connected with the Jewish land, formed henceforth the fundamental trait of the character of the Jews, and enabled them to become what they became. Perhaps the name Chevron which henceforth was added to the place also came from this. For Chevronmeans: the intimate union, the most appropriate name for the close intimacy which makes Jewish men and women grow together in unison as husband and wife, as father and mother. Centuries later, when their descendants had flourished into a great nation, no daily offering was allowed to rise from the height of Moriah in Jerusalem before the priestly herald at the turret of the Temple could see the rays of morning shining on the graves of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs at Chevron – kibud av v’em is for Jews the preliminary condition for, and the root of kavod ha’Makom.

Ramban (Bereishit 23:19):Avraham’s purchase of ma’arat ha’Machpelah teaches us the many acts of kindness that G-d did for Avraham. For ha became “a prince of G-d: in the land, even though he had come only to sojourn and he was a lone individual. Also, everyone called him “my lord,” even though he never referred to himself this way or told them that he was a prince or important person. This was a fulfilment of G-d’s promise “I will make your name great and you shall be a blessing…” Also, the Torah wanted to tell us of the place of our saintly ancestors’ burial, inasmuch as we are obliged to honor that place. However, our Rabbis say that this episode [was not a Divine kindness but rather] was one of Avraham’s tests, that he sought a place in which to bury Sarah, and [even though G-d had promised him the Land] he couldn’t find one until he purchased it. I don’t understand the explanation of Ibn Ezra, who says that this section tells us of the eminence of Israel for the living and dead, and also shows the fulfilment of G-d’s promise that Avraham would inherit the land. For what eminence do we see here? Where else was Avraham supposed to bury Sarah if not in Eretz Yisrael? He wasn’t going to take her body to another country to bury her! And G-d’s promise was about the whole of Eretz Yisrael, not just a single burial cave and its field. It is clear that the promise of the Land was only fulfilled in the future, for Avraham’s offspring.

Rav Soloveitchik (Out of the Whirlwind, pg. 32): However, Sarah was not only Abrahams mate, but his comrade as well. collaborator and co-participant in all the great plans, hopes and visions. Together they discovered G-d; together they discovered a new morality; together they joined the covenant. In a word, Sarah and Abraham started the mesorah, the tradition. Not only Abraham taught the people, but Sarah as well: Abraham would convert the men and Sarah the women (Bereishis Rabbah 39:14). Now the mother is dead and the mesorah has a father but no mother. The mesorah is incomplete… Abraham’s historical mission could not have been implemented without Sarah’s participation. Both appeared together in Jewish history. Upon Sarah’s death, Abraham lost this mission. Just as Sarah’s tent was passed to Rebecca, the House of Abraham was given to Isaac. Abraham mourned over Sarah, but also over the fact that he had to withdraw from the pesach ha’ohel, the front of the tent, into the shadows.

Questions for Discussion

Are there any areas of your life where you have untapped potential? What is one small step you can take to actualize that potential?
What are other possible connections between the establishment of a Jewish home (i.e. kiddushin) and the purchase of ma’arat ha’Machpelah? Are there other properties that the two have in common? Or perhaps one is meant to bring out a deeper understanding of the other?
Read Rav Hirsch’s comments above in “Food for Thought.” How does his explanation differ from Rav Kook’s and how is it similar?
What happens when a person tries to accomplish something ‘in actuality’ without laying the groundwork ‘in potential’?
Rav Kook states that our connection to Israel has to be rooted in spiritual foundations laid by our Avot and Imahot. What do you think that says about the feasibility of secular Zionism?
Kiddushin is related to the work kodesh/kedushah. How does the Torah’s idea of marriage create kedushah?

Sleeping Through the Night – Parshat Vayeira

Printable PDF available here.

Rav Kook (Olat Re’iah)

“And Avraham rose up early in the morning.” (Bereishit 22:3).

Evidently, Avraham slept soundly the night before the Akeidah. The peace of mind of this holy soul, of the holy father, the mighty native, did not cease. His sleep was not gone from him, because of the clear knowledge, which came to him through the word of G-d, and no feeling of darkness, negligence, or depression became intermixed in the longings of his purified heart. He passed the night in the restful and gaily holy sleep of the upright, and the time of rising arrived as usual. And the strength of G-d which turns his legs into hinds, to run as a stag and be mighty as a lion, to do the will of G-d, blessed be He, supported him, for he rose early in the morning…

This holy old man went off to this amazing task, the opposite of all the natural ways of the human soul, neither stooped nor with failed strength, but rather fully erect and girded in might. His entire journey was powered by the fullness of supremely elevated love.

Food for Thought

Rav Soloveitchik (Divrei Hashkafa, pg. 254-255): I recoil from all talk that goes round and round a single topic: that the observance of mitzvot is beneficial for digestion, for sound sleep, for family harmony, and for social position.

The religious act is fundamentally an experience of suffering. When man meets G-d, G-d demands self-sacrifice, which expresses itself in struggle with his primitive passions, in breaking his will, in accepting a transcendental “burden,” in giving up exaggerated carnal desire, in occasional withdrawal from the sweet and pleasant, in dedication to the strangely bitter, in clash with secular rule, and in his yearning for a paradoxical world that is incomprehensible to others. Offer your sacrifice! This is the fundamental command given to the man of religion. The chosen of the nation, from the moment that they revealed G-d, occupied themselves in a continual act of sacrifice.

G-d says to Avraham: “Take now your son, your only one, whom you love, Isaac, etc.” That is to say, I demand of you the greatest sacrifice. I want your son who is your only son, and also the one whom you love. Do not fool yourself to think that after you obey Me and bring your son up for a burnt-offering, I will give you another son in place of Yitzchak. When Yitzchak will be slaughtered on the altar – you will remain alone and childless. You will not have another child. You will live your life in incomparable solitude. I want your only son who is irreplaceable. Neither should you think that you will succeed to forget Yitzchak and remove him from your mind. All your life you will think about him. I am interested in your son whom you love and whom you will love forever. You will spend your nights awake, picking at your emotional wounds. Out of your sleep you will call for Yitzchak, and when you wake up you will find your tent desolate and forsaken. Your life will turn into a long chain of emotional suffering. And nevertheless, I demand this sacrifice.

Clearly the experience, which was rooted in dread and suffering, ended in ceaseless joy. When Avraham removed his son from the altar at the angel’s command, his suffering turned into everlasting gladness, his dread into perpetual happiness. The religious act begins with the sacrifice of one’s self, and ends with the finding of that self. But man cannot find himself without sacrificing himself prior to the finding.

Rav Chaim Navon (Genesis In Jewish Thought, Chapter 22]): According to the thinkers thus far mentioned, the message of the Akeida emphasizes the worship of G-d through fear and acceptance of His yoke. This is also what follows from the plain sense of Scripture, which, following the Akeida, designates Avraham as “one who fears G-d.” Those thinkers who advocate other approaches can argue, of course, that the Akeida gives expression to only one element of religious experience. Indeed, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook, whose approach to serving G-d emphasizes loving G-d and identifying with Him, refused to accept this interpretation, even partially, and even with respect to the act of the Akeida itself…

How different are Rabbi Kook’s words from those of Rabbi Soloveitchik! In contrast to the sleeplessness described by Rabbi Soloveitchik, Rabbi Kook speaks of “the restful and gaily holy sleep of the upright.” As opposed to the sacrifice emphasized by Rabbi Soloveitchik, Rabbi Kook speaks of “supremely elevated love.”

As we stated earlier, one may adopt Rabbi Kook’s theological approach without forcing this idea onto the Akeida. It would suffice to argue that whereas Avraham’s initial feeling may have been one of sacrifice, what is most important from our perspective is what happened at the end: Yitzchak’s ultimate rescue, which is the dominant element that has become impressed in the hearts of believers. It would appear that Rabbi Kook wished to go a step further, emphasizing the love that was in Avraham’s heart the entire length of the Akeida saga.

Prof. Chaim Charles Cohen (contemporary): We who want to build a Jewish State in the Land of Israel frequently are called upon to respond to crisis. We are engaged in frequent crises because we are still in a ‘revolutionary’ stage of building our homeland and state, and hastening the redemption. Rav Soloveitchik and Rav Kook describe ways of heroically coping with crisis. Sometimes, like Rav Soloveitchik’s Abraham, we cognitively and emotionally debate- within ourselves and with others-the anxieties, demands, and dilemmas of the crisis, and then we make a heroic leap of faith and commitment, and engage the crisis with all of our powers.

Or, like Rav Kook’s Abraham, we respond to the crisis by instinctively and ‘explosively’ identifying and feeling one with our People of Israel (Klal Yisrael), our G-d, and our Torah. We then heroically rush into action, like an attacking soldier in an elite fighting unit. As the adage says, for true believers there are no questions, only a plethora of answers. Total identification with our People and our G-d brings us to spiritual heights we could not achieve simply relying on our own sense of selfhood.

In my own life, I understand and identify with Rav Soloveitchik’s description of Abraham’s self-sacrifice/transformation. I was only able to make the leap of faith and become an observant Jew through a very incremental, lonely six-year internal debate of ‘trial and error’ doing of mitzvoth.

In contrast, most of my children and sons/daughters in law more spontaneously and dramatically throw themselves in spiritual self-transformation.

I did my spiritual searching in America. They did their spiritual ‘leaping to heights’ in Israel, growing up in embattled Judea and Samaria. G-d seems happy to accept both types of self-transformation and self-sacrifice. Both types of Jewish heroism are necessary.

Questions for Discussion

How does one express or develop ahavat Hashem?
What does the Torah tell us about Avraham that makes him a model of ahavat Hashem?
Which is more disconcerting – Rav Kook’s position that Avraham enthusiastically embraced the command to sacrifice Yitzchak or Rav Soloveitchik’s position that “the religious act is fundamentally an experience of suffering”? Why?
Why is ahavat Hashem important to a Jew’s spiritual life?
Rav Kook says that Avraham’s love of G-d gave him the capacity to sacrifice his son. How does this fit with what the angel says to Avraham after the Akeidah, that “Now I know that you are a fearer of G-d”?
Do you agree with Rav Kook that Avraham slept soundly the night before the Akeidah?

Of Acronyms and Patronyms – Lech L’chah

Printable PDF available here

Rav Kook (Ein Ayah, Gemara Shabbat 105a)

Gemara Shabbat 105a: Certain phrases in the Torah can be interpreted as an acronym. This is derived from the verse “Behold My covenant is with you, and you shall become the father of a multitude of nations (lit. אב המון גוים). And your name shall no longer be called Avram, but your name shall be Avraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations (lit. אב המון גוים).” The acronym is:

א– I have made you an אב (father) among nations.

ב– I have made you בחור (chosen) among nations.

ה– I have made you[1]חביב (respected) among nations

מ– I have made you מלך (a king) among nations.

ו– I have made you ותיק (distinguished) among nations.

נ– I have made you נאמן (faithful) among nations.

As faithful students of the Torah, we know that there’s more to the Written Torah than appears on the surface. Our Sages frequently darshan the text of the Torah for deeper insights. Usually, we pay more attention to what they darshan than how. We’re more focused on substance than form. However, no aspect of Torah is so small as to be insignificant or devoid of meaning. Presumably, there is some correspondence between each deeper derashah of the Torah and the ‘form’ that it comes packaged in. Thus, it is appropriate to ask why the paradigm of acronym derashot is derived from G-d’s promise to Avraham.

To answer this question, we have to define the basic property that makes an acronym unique, compared to other midot she’haTorah nidreshet ba’hen. The distinctive property of an acronym is that every single letter corresponds to a deeper reality. What looks like a word is really a series of icebergs breaking through the surface, concealing an entire world beneath.

And there is no more appropriate expression of this dynamic than G-d’s promise to Avraham in this verse. Granted, Avraham is one our Avot and we refer to him as Avraham Avinu, but his religious influence transcends the Jewish people. He touched the entire world,[2]and affected humanity’s spiritual aptitude in a way that Yitzchak and Ya’akov did not.[3]

In the above teaching, Chazal are not just playing word games. They are identifying six unique dimensions in which Avraham impacted humanity. Avraham was an Av, the source of all true notions of ethics, justice and true knowledge of G-d that humanity would develop. Every spark of holiness in humanity traces itself back to the fire that Avraham kindled.

Avraham’s teachings were also Bachur, select and distinct. Although his message would spread to hostile and impure environments, where it would be buffeted by the dregs of paganism and confused belief, Avraham’s teachings remain pure and fundamentally untainted. Furthermore, Avraham was also Chaviv, regarded with respect for the elevated and holy conception of righteousness that he introduced into the world. Avraham’s message is upright and true, and possesses a charismatic and irresistible attraction.

Avraham was also a Melekh. He did not keep his G-dly message to himself, but fought for it against a world that preferred to remain in ignorance and paganism. The power of his G-dly truth was victorious, making Avraham a king over the hearts and minds of humanity.

Additionally, Avraham was Vatik, distinguished for his deeds and character traits. He was not just a religious revolutionary, but a truly good and G-dly person. The fire that he kindled has succeeded in burning away much wickedness, in bringing humanity closer to true goodness and holy righteousness.

Finally, Avraham was Ne’eman, a man of profound and unshakeable faith. As the Torah itself testifies, “He believed in G-d, and G-d counted it as righteousness” (Bereishit 15:6).[4]Avraham’s faith was not simply about negation, about denying paganism, but promoting an affirmative conception of G-d and what He expects from His creations.

Abraham and his radical ideas kindled a nascent spark of faith among the nations. This flame continues to illuminate the paths of many nations, and in the future, it will be elevated into a purer and more refined faith in G-d.

[1]The letters הand ח are often interchangeable in midrashic interpretation.

[2]G-d promised Avraham that his descendants would be as numerous as the stars. Many commentators are bothered that the Jewish people are quite small compared to other nations. Some commentators (Rabbi Jonathan Sacks?) interpret the promise as referring to Avraham’s spiritual descendants, which indeed comprise most of the world.

[3]Indeed, we do not find that G-d ever references a “multitude of nations” in His promises to Yitzchak or Ya’akov. Rivka is told that “two nations” are in her womb. And Ya’akov is promised that “a nation and a קהל of nations” will come from him.

[4]This pasuk is actually very enigmatic, and commentators disagree whether it refers to Avraham or G-d. Rav Kook is assuming like the former.

Food for Thought

Rambam’s Letter to Ovadia the Convert: I received the question of the master Obadiah, the wise and learned proselyte, may the Lord reward him for his work, may a perfect recompense be bestowed upon him by the Lord of Israel, under whose wings he has sought cover.

You ask me if you, too, are allowed to say in the blessings and prayers you offer alone or in the congregation: “Our G-d” and “G-d of our fathers,” “You who have sanctified us through Your commandments,” “You who have separated us,” “You who have chosen us,” “You who have inherited us,” “You who have brought us out of the land of Egypt,” “You who have worked miracles to our fathers,” and more of this kind.

Yes, you may say all this in the prescribed order and not change it in the least. In the same way as every Jew by birth says his blessing and prayer, you, too, shall bless and pray alike, whether you are alone or pray in the congregation. The reason for this is, that Abraham our Father taught the people, opened their minds, and revealed to them the true faith and the unity of G-d; he rejected the idols and abolished their adoration; he brought many children under the wings of the Divine Presence; he gave them counsel and advice, and ordered his sons and the members of his household after him to keep the ways of the Lord forever…Ever since then whoever adopts Judaism and confesses the unity of the Divine Name, as it is prescribed in the Torah, is counted among the disciples of Abraham our Father, peace be with him. These men are Abraham’s household, and he it is who converted them to righteousness.

In the same way as he converted his contemporaries through his words and teaching, he converts future generations through the testament he left to his children and household after him. Thus Abraham our Father, peace be with him, is the father of his pious posterity who keep his ways, and the father of his disciples and of all proselytes who adopt Judaism.

Therefore you shall pray, “Our G-d” and “G-d of our fathers,” because Abraham, peace be with him, is your father…. since you have come under the wings of the Divine Presence and confessed the Lord, no difference exists between you and us, and all miracles done to us have been done as it were to us and to you… Do not consider your origin as inferior. While we are the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, you derive from Him through whose word the world was created. As is said by Isaiah: “One shall say, I am the Lord’s, and another shall call himself by the name of Jacob” (Is. 44:5).

Rabbeinu Asher b. Yechiel, a.k.a. Rosh, 1250-1327 (Responsum, כלל טו סימן ד): For ketubot and gittin of converts, the custom is to write “So and so, the son of Avraham.” [And even though the convert may not be a biological descendant of Avraham,] the verse says “I have made you the father of a multitude of nations.” And so Avraham is the father of all.

Questions for Discussion

In this piece, Rav Kook discusses reading parts of the Torah as an acronym. What are some other ways the Torah can be read to provide deeper lessons?
What was distinct about Avraham Avinu as compared to Yitzchak and Ya’akov?
Where in the parshah do we see Avraham having a positive impact on the society around him?
Do Christianity and Islam have anything to do with Avraham’s role as a father to a “multitude of nations”? (Take a look at the Rambam in the end of Hilchot Melachim for a fascinating perspective.)
Rav Kook claims there is a connection between the inner message of a Torah teaching and the form it is conveyed in. Do you agree? Why or why not?
Some modern thinkers like to lump Judaism, Islam and Christianity together as “Abrahamic monotheism.” Do you agree with this categorization or think it’s helpful? Why or why not?
Are Jews supposed to emulate Avraham’s role as an אב המון גוים? If so, how?

How to Leave Your Ark – Parshat Noach

Printable PDF available here.

Please share with friends and spread the word about Mareh Kohen, so we can bring Rav Kook’s teachings to a broader audience.

Based on Mussar Avicha, Chapter 2

And the Flood blotted out all beings upon the face of the earth… only Noach and those with him in the ark survived…And G-d remembered Noach and all the animals that were with him in the ark, and G-d caused a spirit to pass over the earth, and the waters subsided….And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noach opened the window of the ark that he had made, and sent forth the raven, and it went out, back and forth until the waters dried up off the earth…. And he sent forth the dove to see whether the waters had abated…

Every story in the Torah has eternal relevance and contains lessons for future generations. Sometimes, these lessons are relatively easy to find. At other times, it is challenging to extract them. One solution is to read certain stories allegorically, to insist that they aren’t intended to be taken literally. According to this approach, the straightforward meaning of the Torah isn’t always factually correct, and sometimes conceals a true, deeper meaning. Many great Torah figures (such as Maimonides) made use of allegory, but others of equal stature were uncomfortable with sacrificing the literal meaning of the Torah to uncover deeper truths.

It seems that these two approaches are polar opposites. Either the ‘inner’ meaning or the literal meaning of the Torah is true, but they cannot both be true simultaneously. However, Kabbalah offers a way out of this apparent contradiction. According to Kabbalah, G-d’s supervision of the world is structured and mediated through certain channels. These channels shape the path of the spiritual development of all humanity (much of which is described in Sefer Bereishit), but they also apply to the development of each individual soul. Understood in this light, the central narratives of Bereishit are not allegories, but expressions of a profound spiritual architecture – one that, once understood, can guide every individual to develop a deeper relationship with G-d.

According to R. Moshe Chaim Luzzatto (a.k.a. the Ramchal), Noach’s time in the ark contains many lessons in this regard. In the Ramchal’s commentary on a section of the Zohar known as Idra Rabba, he writes that Noach had to be sequestered away while the floodwaters destroyed the world. During this time of seclusion, the inner goodness of the world was re-established under Noach’s direction. As Noach fed and looked after the animals in his care, he renewed the world on a basis of kindness and purity. However, Noach was not meant to stay in the ark forever. G-d wanted the fullness of his spiritual talents to be applied to a post-mabul world as well.[1]Even so, Noach did not simply run out as soon as the earth looked dry, but used the raven and the dove as scouts. He did not disembark until it was clear to him that the world was safe for him to re-enter.[2]

A similar process applies to moral and spiritual growth. Although G-d created us yashar, with an innate yearning for holiness and a desire to live rightly, we can unthinkingly drift into self-centeredness and pursuit of pleasure. But simply deciding to change is not enough. Once the will and intellect become subjugated to the desires of the body, they lose their vigor and cannot be immediately rehabilitated. Thus, after going astray, a person must withdraw the various powers of his soul, his strengths and talents, and gather them in like lines radiating outward that are pulled back to their focal point. There is a pain that comes from this period of constraint, while the “furious waters” (lit. מים הזידונים) rage outside. The soul, which yearns for freedom and independence, must instead bear a delicate pain of inwardness and limitation.

But the period of retreat from the world is not meant as an ideal. G-d wants a person to express himself vigorously in the world of action, to allow his G-d-given talents to flower forth in holiness. G-d wants our powers to eventually leave ‘confinement,’ just as Noach eventually had to leave the ark. Eventually, one succeeds in rehabilitating his will, purifying his desires and refining his character. Now, all aspects of his personality can be allowed to express themselves in a healthy, natural way. Physical life is now more than just a challenge or a temptation. It is an opportunity to infuse everything with G-dliness, an invitation to shape the raw material of worldly living according to the Divine plan.

But in bringing this period of retreat to an end, we must proceed gradually. It is not prudent to throw oneself back into the world of action. We must be confident that our powers are truly ready to be set free. We need to ‘test the waters,’ like Noach did when he sent the raven and the dove to check whether the earth was dry. He did not send creatures that could be endangered by the floodwaters. Similarly, we must find opportunities to re-engage our powers in a calibrated and cautious way.

Like Noach, we may find that when we try to leave, matters are not yet rectified. We may have to draw our powers back inward and defer setting them free to some later time, like Noach did when he gathered the raven back into the ark. But eventually, the “land” will be completely dry. At that time, G-d will command each of us serve Him with the fulness of our talents and abilities, with an unfettered soul full of strength, courage and healthy vigor. Eventually, G-d will tell each of us, like he told Noach – “Leave the ark!”

[1]It seems that this did not go as intended. Noach appears to fall apart after the mabul, and we aren’t told about any of his accomplishments after leaving the ark.

[2]Ramchal writes that the same process happened many generations later with Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, when he spent thirteen years hiding in a cave from the Romans. Ostensibly, this was just a pragmatic choice that he made to save his life (see Gemara Shabbat דף לג). However, Ramchal writes that Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai needed this period of seclusion to purify and prepare himself for the inner light of kabbalistic teaching that would eventually be revealed to him.

Food for Thought

Rav Kook (as reported by Rabbi Dr. Benjamin Levin, Hamizrach 1903): Literature, painting, and sculpting are able to bring to fruition all the spiritual concepts engraved in the depths of the human spirit, and so long as one brush is missing, which is stored away in the depths of the spirit – which ponders and feels – but has not been realized, there is still an obligation on the purposeful worker to realize it. The matter is self-evident, that only regarding those treasuries, that when they are opened will sweeten the air of all existence, is it good and beautiful to open them. ‘From every utterance which came out of G-d’s mouth, the entire world was filled with fragrance’ (Gemara Shabbat 88b).

Zohar (Beha’alotkha 152a): Woe to the person who says that the Torah comes to give instructions and tell descriptive stories or simple tales. If this were true, even in our own time we would be able to make our own ‘Torah’ out of simple stories, and embellish them even better than the Torah’s stories… Of course this is not the case. Every word in the Torah reflects higher wisdom and higher secrets… The narratives of the Torah are only the ‘outer garments’ of the Torah. Whoever thinks that this outer clothing is in fact the Torah and there is nothing underneath is spiritually backward and has no portion in the World to Come. So it was that King David begged, “Open my eyes, that I may see wondrous things in Your Torah.” (Tehillim 119:18)

This ‘body’ of Torah is dressed in stories from this world. The fools of this world only look at this outer clothing of stories. They don’t delve into what is contained beneath the outer shell. Those who know better gaze upon the body beneath the outer shell. The wise ones, servants of the Highest King, those who stood at Mount Sinai, see through to the soul of the Torah that is truly her essence…

Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch (The Nineteen Letters, Letter 4):From the slightest mental faculty… to the strength of your hand, with which you are able to bring about changes in Creation and to which the entire realm of nature and every being within your reach are subject – all of your capabilities are but tools lent to you, which will one day appear before the throne of G-d as witnesses for or against you, testifying whether you neglected them or used them well, whether you wrought blessing with them or curse.

Dr. Gregg Stern (TheTorah.com): Philosophic allegory is essential, according to Maimonides and his followers… who believe, for example, that no biblical reference to G-d’s body or G-d’s emotions may be understood literally. In such a case, the goal of the allegorist is to vitiate the surface meaning of the biblical text and allow its deeper philosophic meaning to shine forth. More frequently, however, the philosophic interpreter uses allegory to reveal, ever so carefully and selectively, the text’s inner meaning, without harming its superficial meaning. In this context, Maimonides refers to the biblical text as “an apple of gold, encased within a silver filigree.” This suggests that the text’s external meaning is only slightly less precious and should be preserved in the process of peering through its lattices.

Questions for Discussion

Is there a special talent or aptitude you have that could make the world a more G-dly place? What can you do to bring out the potential you have in that area?
Based on what happens later in the parshah, does it seem like Noach succeeds in re-entering the world in a proper way? Why or why not?
Does the dynamic Rav Kook describes apply only to individuals, or to the Jewish people as well? If the latter, do you think we’re living in a time of retreat from worldly concerns or re-engagement with them? Why?
How often does the cycle that Rav Kook describes occur? Is there a constant process of retreating and re-engaging?
What are the spiritual dangers presented by being overly engaged in the broader world? In being overly withdrawn from the broader world?
Based on the piece above, what do you think Rav Kook would say about young people in the Orthodox community feeling constrained in their career choices to law, medicine, finance, etc.?
How do Rav Kook’s insights apply to the process of someone becoming a ba’al teshuvah?