@@@@@@
What’s The Idea Behind Sacrifice?
Avraham was about to sacrifice his son, Yitzchak. He had been commanded to. Hashem sent an angel to stop him – it was but a test. Avraham looked up, saw a ram caught by his horns in a thicket, “…and sacrificed it as an Olah in place of his son”.
Avraham had been not sacrificed his son. He sacrificed the ram. Is one in place of the other?? Do they connect?
Chazal say that Yitzchak’s ashes are piled in front of Hashem. What ashes – didn’t Yitzchak return home unscathed!?
A korban is not simply a gift to Hashem. Rather it is a proxy, a representative of self. It is as if one has sacrificed himself, via proxy. It is the ultimate surrender to Hashem, done in virtualization.
This is the concept of sacrifice-korban in Jewish thought. [Rabbi SR Hirsch]
***
@@@@@@
Dying To Give
Avraham waited outside his tent in the heat of the day. He sought guests. Why? No one needed help. He ought to relax. Did he need being needed?
Perhaps he wanted the mitzvah of welcoming guests. Hashem sent him those visitors to grant him a mitzvah.
But did he gain a mitzvah? Is the mitzvah simply inviting guests, or is it rather providing for someone’s lack? If two rich neighbors want to fulfill hachnasas orchim, however there are no poor people in their neighborhood, or they don’t want beggars tracking mud on their shiny floors, can inviting each other over for lunch be considered hospitality?
I should think not! The neighbors weren’t lacking lunch in the first place, and don’t need the lunch invitation? So Avraham providing breakfast to angels is no mitzvah. So what was the point?
Perhaps Avraham had developed the need to do well to others, the need to give. This drove him to seek guests even when there apparently were none to be found: he was so good that he was dying to give!
We need to be the same – to WANT to give. To be so overflowing with goodness that we need to find it expression by benefiting others.
***
@@@@@@
Rising To The Challenge
Lot did not want to flee into the highlands because Avraham lived there, and compared with Avraham, Lot would be considered wicked. He rather fled to Tzoar, for by living far from Avraham he would not be compared with him. (Rashi)
How does this work? Why would his definition change when he came near Avraham; isn’t a person judged on his own merits?
Sometimes a person maintains a level of observance and clings to it – stubbornly – in face of all obstacles. Yet he will not grow in observance, even provided with the opportunity. (Crazy, isn’t it? Yet I have seen people like this!)
Perhaps Lot was of this type. Lot indeed was a tzaddik where he was, keeping his morality among the degradation of S’dom, but coming to Avraham meant that he must grow spiritually. He wasn’t ready to do that.
Another suggestion was that ‘Tzaddik’ is that individual or group representing Hashem’s interests. Those are ‘Hashem’s men’, and are treated by Hashem accordingly. In S’dom Lot represented Hashem. He was saved in that merit. In Avraham’s town he did not represent Him. Indeed, it’s all relative.
Many of us have the opportunity of being a tzaddik – representing Judaism to our community. We need not compare with the great of Israel, rather only with our communities.’!
***
@@@@@@
Laughter All Around
What does ‘Yitzchak’ mean?
(Probably it was not to remind everyone how Sarah laughed; that would hardly be considerate!)
Rashi explains Tzchok as Happiness (‘….Hashem made me a Simcha and all who hear will be happy for me’), so it follows that Yitzchak means ‘He will gladden’.
Who will he make happy? His parents!
Avraham wished to capture the feeling he had when his son was born; this child is our happiness!! He put it into his name, so that he would be constantly reminded of this!
When little Yitzchak’l jumped on the sofa with his muddy shoes, when he spilled orange juice on their tent, Avraham only needed to call Yitzchak by name to be reminded how his little boy is a happiness to him.
And we need to remind ourselves of that too. Children are a pain, to be sure, but they are a great happiness. Never forget that for an instant!!!
***
@@@@@@
Celestial Mathematics
Avraham pleaded for Sodom’s salvation. He asked that Hashem spare the five cities because of fifty tzaddikkim, then forty-five, forty, thirty, twenty and ten. Why didn’t he ask for nine? Rashi explains that he already asked when he asked for forty-five, which translates to nine tzaddikim per city.
However, even after Avraham asked for fifty, which is ten per city, he continued to ask for four, three, two and one cities. So when asking for nine, why didn’t he ask for thirty-six, twenty-seven, eighteen and nine too? (See m’forshim)
Another question: on one hand, Avraham already asked for nine per city, and there weren’t. Why did he go on to ask for forty, thirty, twenty and ten? (See Ramban)
Perhaps the answer is that although nine meant a group of nine in each city, however Avraham’s ask of forty, thirty, twenty and ten meant that in all the five cities – put together – there was this many. So even after Avraham asked for a group of nine he was still able to ask for forty in all.
Why was the nine a specific group, not the forty? Perhaps, the real number needed was ten. However, nine, (especially when coupled with Hashem), is just about ten. Hashem could look aside from the slight discrepancy and regard nine as the ten required.
(Proof to this line of thought is Avraham’s response to hearing there was no fifty tzaddikim. He asked for forty-five and said to Hashem “Because of five [missing] You will destroy the city?!” This is astounding: of course, He will! Isn’t the line drawn somewhere?!! The answer is that Avraham was not really lowering the price. The price was still ten. Avraham was saying, “Certainly You can view these nine as a full ten. Are You going to spoil it because of a discrepancy?”
So we see that this was the drift: about-ten is also ten.)
However, Hashem could only see nine as ten, because it is only missing one. There was no way Hashem would consider forty-five as fifty: that means adding five!
In order for this to work Avraham first considered the forty-five as distinct groups, each corresponding to a specific city (perhaps they needed to be within the city proper too,) were they to be effective.
So forty-five was really five separate groups of nine. That’s why Avraham didn’t ask again for nine, because that was included in the forty-five. However when working with full tens they could be gathered from all the cities together. That is why Avraham asked for forty, because even though there was no fifty to save all the cities, forty could still save four of them.
***
@@@@@@
Pray For Yourself!
When Hagar threw down Yishmael and sat weeping near him, an angel said to her ‘Fear not; Hashem has heard the youth’s voice where he is’. Why ‘the youth’s voice’ and not her voice?
Rashi answers that man’s prayer for himself is heard quicker than anyone else’s.
Why? Perhaps ones own prayers are more sincere; no-one else cares as much as him for himself.
Another suggestion is that illness’ purpose is to make the sufferer repent. His own prayer means that the message got through. Therefore Hashem responds quickly.
In addition, a person’s actions work for himself inherently. If I buy something, naturally it goes to me. I could buy it for a friend, and it will belong to him, but that would take conscious direction. Man’s actions work for himself naturally, and therefore are much more effective than the efforts of another.
The reason be it as it may, remember: no one can pray for you like yourself. People pay so that a famous tzaddik can pay for him, yet even MORE powerful is one’s own prayer. Wow!
***
@@@@@@
The Danger Of Being A Sheeple
Avimelech challenged Hashem ‘Do you [and Hashem] punish righteous people too?’
He was being held to task for stealing Sarah. He claimed he did not know that she was married. Hashem told him that He was aware that Avimelech had sinned with a purity of heart and hand, and that is why He prevented him from touching her. ‘But’, He warned, ‘if you do not give her back, you and all your household will die’.
Chazal comment about this story that this teaches us that a Ben Noach dies for not having studied. What does this mean to us?
Avimelech had done something absolutely terrible; he kidnapped a woman to enjoy her. Married or not, this is thoroughly wicked. However it was normal behavior for a king in those times. He was doing something common, ad accepted.
Also something that anyone with a morsel of morality knew was just wrong.
Chazal mean that a Ben Noach is killed for not learning; i.e for not thinking!
For going along with current popular mores to do the wrong thing!
Well, what about us….??
***
@@@@@@
Whodunnit?
The Gemarah tells that in reward for Avraham bringing his guests water the Jewish Nation in the desert merited the Well. On the other hand it seems clear that the Well was in the merit of Miriam, upon whose death it temporarily ceased, until it received another source of power. Which was it?
Perhaps it was in the merit of both. Or that Avraham set up the program, but Miriam funded it… (Maharsha Baba Metzia 86B)
The concept here is that Avraham was certainly righteous. But so was Yitzchak, so was Leah and so on. None merited the Well. Only the specific action of bringing water to guests – not general merit – caused the Well. Only Avraham did that.
Perhaps the dynamic was that providing for angels, celestial beings, is Hashem’s province. When Avraham did Hashem’s work for Him, He was obliged to repay Avraham with a new other-worldly water source, the Well.
Miriam provided the context for the water; Hashem brought the Well to provide her water. Incidentally the entire nation benefited.
So the two are not in conflict at all; Avraham created the impetus and Miriam the context.