Hamaayan / The Torah Spring Edited by Shlomo Katz Vayeitzei Volume 21, No. 7 11 Kislev 5767 December 2, 2006 Today's Learning: Ketubot 13:9-10 O.C. 677:7-679:1 Daf Yomi (Bavli): Beitzah 36 Daf Yomi (Yerushalmi): Shabbat 30 This week's parashah describes Yaakov's flight from Eretz Yisrael, his 20 years in Lavan's home, and his return to Eretz Yisrael. On the verse in our parashah (Bereishit 31:3), "Hashem said to Yaakov, `Return to the land of your fathers and to your native land, and I will be with you'," Midrash Rabbah comments: "It is written (Tehilim 142:6), `I have cried to You, Hashem; I have said, "You are my refuge, my portion in the land of the living".' Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish in the name of [the sage] Bar Kapparah learned from here (Yishayah 42:5): `He gives a soul to the people upon it, and a spirit to those who walk on it.' The Holy One, blessed is He, said to Yaakov, `You said, "My portion in the land of the living" - return to the land of your fathers. Your father awaits you, your mother awaits you, and I Myself await you'." What is this midrash teaching? R' Yitzchak Ze'ev Yadler z"l (Yerushalayim; late 19th century) explains: The author of the midrash is wondering - how could Hashem command Yaakov to return to Eretz Yisrael? Returning to the Holy Land was a mitzvah, both because being in the Land is itself a mitzvah and because going home would enable Yaakov to honor his parents. Didn't Hashem's direct command deprive Yaakov of his free will to perform, or not perform, those mitzvot? The midrash answers this question by stating that Yaakov had already cried out to Hashem, "You are my refuge, my portion in the land of the living," i.e., Eretz Yisrael. Since Hashem was merely instructing Yaakov to do what he had already expressed a burning desire to do, it did not deprive Yaakov of his free will. R' Yadler continues: Hashem said, `I Myself await you." When Yaakov left Eretz Yisrael, Hashem told him (Bereishit 28:15), "I am with you; I will guard you wherever you go." This implies that Hashem would be with Yaakov only when Yaakov needed guarding. Now Hashem told him (31:3), "Return to the land of your fathers and to your native land, and I will be with you" - unconditionally. (Tiferet Zion) ******** "Then Yaakov took a vow, saying, `If Elokim will be with me, will guard me on this way that I am going; will give me bread to eat and clothes to wear . . .'" (28:20) R' Shlomo Kluger z"l (rabbi of Brody, Galicia; died 1869) writes: Many commentaries have asked - why did Yaakov say, "If Elokim will be with me," after Hashem already said (in verse 15), "Behold, I am with you"? He answers: Verse 13 says, "Behold! Hashem was standing over him, and He said, `I am Hashem . . .'" G-d appeared to Yaakov via the four letter Divine Name which we pronounce "Hashem." That Name refers to the Divine Attribute of chessed / kindness. Yaakov, however, was not satisfied with the promise that Hashem would be with him, i.e., that Hashem's kindness would accompany Yaakov. Yaakov wanted to deserve G- d's presence. Thus, Yaakov said, "If Elokim" - a reference to the Divine Attribute of din / justice - "will be with me." R' Kluger adds: This explains why Yaakov concluded his vow (verse 22), "Whatever You will give me, I shall tithe to You [for charity]." Specifically through the mitzvah of tzedakah, one can deserve G-d's kindness [because we deserve to be treated by G-d as we treat others]. (Imrei Shefer) ******** "She conceived again, and bore a son and declared, `This time let me gratefully praise Hashem;' therefore she called his name Yehuda." (Bereishit 29:35) Midrash Rabbah notes that Leah and her descendants - Yehuda, David and Daniel - excelled in the trait of giving thanks and acknowledgment. In contrast, Rachel and her descendants - Binyamin, Shaul and Esther - excelled in the trait of silence. The midrash states: "Rachel grabbed hold of the implement of silence." R' Shlomo Wolbe z"l (preeminent educator and mussar figure in Israel; died 2005) asks: Why does the midrash refer to silence as an "implement"? Isn't silence actually the absence of the implement or tool of speech? He explains: Silence is not just the absence of speech; it is itself a tool for serving Hashem and accomplishing good. The Gemara (Megillah 13b) states that Rachel's descendant Esther followed in her ancestress' footsteps when she remained silent and hid her lineage from Achashveirosh, just as Rachel stayed silent and did not warn her fiance, Yaakov, when he was about to be tricked into marrying Leah. It was Esther's silence that allowed her to be in a position to save her people from annihilation. What is the proper use of these two tools - speech and silence? The Gemara (Berachot 6b) states, "Rav Papa said, `The reward that is given for visiting a mourner is for the silence that occurs there.' Rav Ashi said, `The reward that is given for attending a wedding is for the speech that occurs there'." R' Wolbe explains: Our Sages say, "How does one [sing and] dance in front of a bride? One says, `A bride - beautiful and full of favor'." In the other words, the purpose of attending a wedding is to bring joy to the bride and groom by increasing their love for each other. Only the power of speech can accomplish this. More generally, R' Wolbe says, the power of speech was created so that it can bring people together. In contrast, silence was created as a tool for accepting din / G- d's judgment. When one is a mourner, he is experiencing din. Though he has many questions, there are no answers that mere mortals can understand. Thus the Torah (Vaykira 10:3) records after Aharon lost his two oldest sons, "And Aharon was silent." (Ma'amarei Yemei Ratzon p.411) ******** From the Haftarah . . . "And now they continue to sin, and they made themselves molten idols from their silver . . . Therefore they shall be like the morning cloud and like the early dew that passes on, like chaff storming away from the threshing floor and smoke out of the skylight." (Hoshea 13:2-3) R' Shmuel Laniado z"l (see below) asks: It is understandable that the punishment of sinners would be likened to "chaff storming away from the threshing floor and smoke out of the skylight." But "the morning cloud" and "the early dew" are pleasant images. Are those appropriate metaphors for punishment or suffering? R' Laniado answers: The verses are teaching that Hashem does not deprive any person of his just reward for his good deeds. Even an idol worshiper is rewarded for his few good deeds - "like the morning cloud and like the early dew" - before he is punished for his sins. This interpretation finds support from a verse earlier in Hoshea which describes the half-hearted good deeds of a sinful people: "Your kindness is like a morning cloud and like the dew that departs in early morning." It also is supported by the absence of a conjunction ("and") between the phrase, " like the early dew that passes on," and the apparently separate phrase, "like chaff storming away . . ." Clearly these are two distinct thoughts - the first referring to reward, and the second referring to punishment. R' Laniado adds: The description of the punishment for sin - "like chaff storming away from the threshing floor and smoke out of the skylight" - alludes to the two forms of damage that sin itself causes. Specifically, it causes harm to the earthly realms - "like chaff storming away from the threshing floor" - and it causes harm in the Heavenly realms - "[like] smoke out of the skylight." (Kli Yakar) ******** R' Shmuel Laniado z"l ("Ba'al Ha'keilim") R' Shmuel Laniado was the Chief Rabbi of Allepo, Syria and the author of major commentaries on many books of Tanach. He was born in Aleppo in the early 1500s, a descendant of Spanish Jews. As a young man, R' Laniado traveled to Tzfat to study under R' Yosef Karo, author of the Shulchan Aruch. When the community of Aleppo asked R' Karo to recommend a rabbi for them, he chose his student R' Laniado. R' Karo explained: "I am sending you someone who is equal to me." Most of R' Laniado's written works have the word "kli" / "vessel" in the title, hence the author's nickname, "Ba'al Ha'keilim" / "Master of the Vessels." These works include Kli Chemdah on chumash, Kli Yakar on the Early Prophets and the twelve Minor Prophets (not to be confused with the popular Kli Yakar on chumash by R' Ephraim of Lunschitz), Kli Paz on Yishayahu, and others. All of these titles were intended to recall a miracle that happened to the author when he was traveling to Aleppo to assume the rabbinate. R' Laniado made part of the journey by sea. Another passenger, who was transporting what he said were barrels of salted fish, died suddenly. The captain of the ship did not want the barrels and offered to sell them to R' Laniado, who then purchased them. Arriving in Aleppo, R' Laniado opened the barrels and discovered that they were full of jewels. This new-found wealth enabled R' Laniado to live comfortably in Allepo as well as to perform much charity. [Ed. note: Without more details, we can only speculate as to why R' Laniado would not have been obligated by halachah to attempt to return the jewels to the deceased's heirs or to safe-keep them until Eliyahu Hanavi would come to reveal the owner's identity.] Many of R' Laniado's works survive in manuscript and still have not been published. In general, the style of his works is to quote and discuss the comments of his predecessors, including some that have never been published elsewhere, and then to offer his own insights. R' Laniado passed away in 1605. (Source: Aleppo-City of Scholars, p.260)