Hamaayan / The Torah Spring Edited by Shlomo Katz Chayei Sarah "Chevron vs. Yerushalayim" Volume 25, No. 5 22 Marcheshvan 5771 October 30, 2010 Sponsored by the Parness family in memory of Max Parness a"h Rabbi and Mrs. Sam Vogel on the yahrzeit of his father Aharon Yehuda ben Yisroel a"h Today's Learning: Tanach: Shoftim 13-14 Mishnah: Kilayim 7:5-6 Halachah: O.C. 559:9-560:1 Daf Yomi (Bavli): Horiot 2 Daf Yomi (Yerushalmi): Ma'asrot 16 "Sarah died in Kiryat Arba which is Chevron. . ." (23:2) R' Moshe Wolfson shlita (mashgiach ruchani in Yeshiva Torah Vodaas in Brooklyn, N.Y.) quotes kabbalists who write that our prayers ascend to Heaven through Chevron. In addition, the Zohar writes that the Cave of Machpelah is so called because it is the "double" of Yerushalayim. What does this mean? If, in fact, our prayers ascend to Heaven through Chevron, why do we not face toward that city when we pray? R' Wolfson explains: The holiness of both Yerushalayim and Chevron finds expression in relation to the Patriarchs. Har Ha'moriah in Yerushalayim is where each of the Patriarchs prayed at a critical point in his life. Chevron is where each of the Patriarchs is buried. The difference between them is that, in Yerushalayim, each of the Patriarchs acted in the open, whereas, in Chevron, each of the Patriarchs is hidden. Thus, Yerushalayim represents our "open" relationship with Hashem-- therefore, the Bet Hamikdash, with its glorious revelation of the Shechinah, was there. Chevron, on the other hand, represents the concealed aspect of our relationship with G-d. Even when the Bet Hamikdash does not exist and Hashem is hidden, our relationship lives on because we are descendants of the Patriarchs who "hidden" in Chevron. Likewise, our Matriarch Leah is buried in Chevron, for, compared to Rachel, she is represents (in kabbalah) the hidden worlds [as demonstrated, for example, by the fact that she had to marry Yaakov in an indirect manner]. Our Sages teach that the three daily prayers were instituted by the Patriarchs. Thus, when we pray, we are in a sense praying with them. On an open level, we pray toward Yerushalayim, where the Patriarchs also prayed. However, when the Bet Hamikdash lies in ruins, our prayers ascend through Chevron, i.e., through our connection to the Patriarchs that can never be severed. But, we cannot physically face toward Chevron, for Chevron represents a hidden connection, not an open connection to which one can point. Interestingly, the word "Chevron" shares a root with "chibur" / "connection." (Zion Ve'arehah p.82) * * * * * * * * R' Chaim Palagi z"l (Izmir, Turkey; 1788-1868) writes: One should seek ways to merit [to have a connection to] Eretz Yisrael, especially to be buried there. Thus we find [in our parashah] that Avraham took great pains and gave a fortune of money to Efron for Me'arat Ha'machpelah as a burial place for Sarah. Yaakov also gave a fortune of money to his brother Esav--all the wealth that Yaakov had earned in Lavan's house--for the right to be buried in the Me'arat Ha'machpelah with his wife Leah. Therefore, writes R' Palagi, we should follow in our Patriarchs' ways and spend a large amount of money, if necessary, to be buried in Eretz Yisrael. [Others disagree, however. For example, R' Elazar Menachem Shach z"l (1898-2001; rosh yeshiva of the Ponovezh Yeshiva in Bnei Brak) cites the Chafetz Chaim z"l (died 1933) who reportedly was asked whether it was preferable to incur costs to bury one's relative in Eretz Yisrael or to donate the same amount of money to a yeshiva. The Chafetz Chaim reportedly replied, "Only before the Torah was given was Avraham justified in spending so much money on a burial place. Today, supporting Torah study takes precedence." (Rosh Amanah)] R' Palagi continues: There are a number of levels on which we can relate to the kedushah / holiness of Eretz Yisrael. The highest level of interaction is to live in Eretz Yisrael; next, is to walk four cubits [6-8 feet] there; last, is to be buried there. This is alluded to in the verse (Tehilim 24:3), "Who may ascend to the mountain of Hashem, and who yakum / may stand in the place of His sanctity?" "Yakum" is an acronym for "yeshivah" / sitting, "kevurah" / burial, "u'mahalach" / and walking. Who will merit all three? The next verse answers, "One with clean hands and a pure heart." R' Palagi notes further: The gematria of "Eretz Yisrael" (832) equals the gematria of "Tet lev" / "give heart." Earlier commentaries wrote that this means one should take to heart the importance of living in Eretz Yisrael. "In my humble opinion," R' Palagi writes, "this alludes to a person's obligation to purify his heart before entering Eretz Yisrael." (Tochachat Mussar) ******** "Avraham heeded Efron, and Avraham weighed out to Efron the price which he had mentioned in the hearing of the Hittites--four hundred silver shekels in negotiable currency. And Efron's field, which was in Machpelah, facing Mamre, the field and the cave within it and all the trees in the field, within all its surrounding boundaries, [passed to Avraham]." (23:16-17) The Gemara (Kiddushin 2a) derives from a gezeirah shavah / similar terminology in two verses that, just as the transaction between Avraham and Efron was consummated by the transfer of cash, so a marriage can be consummated by the transfer of cash (or a cash equivalent such as a ring). What lesson can we learn from the Torah's choice to equate marriage with Avraham's purchase of the Me'arat Ha'machpelah? R' Mendel Bluming shlita (rabbi in Potomac, MD) suggested the following answer: Efron believed he was receiving 400 shekels for a worthless rocky field. Avraham believed he had paid a bargain price for the right to be buried in the same plot as Adam and Chava. Thus, each participant in the transaction was convinced that he had received the better part of the bargain. By equating this transaction to marriage, said R' Bluming, the Torah is teaching that this should be the attitude of the participants to a marriage as well. (Heard from R' Bluming, 18 Tammuz 5770) Another explanation: R' Moshe Wolfson shlita (see above) explains: By relating marriage to Avraham's quest to find a place where he and Sarah could share their eternal rest, the Torah is teaching that marriage is not just a joining of two bodies. Rather, it is the joining of two souls for eternity. This explains also why the passage in our parashah immediately following the burial of Sarah is the story of a search for a wife for Yitzchak. (Zion Ve'arehah p.89) ******** "Avraham was old, coming along in days, and Hashem had blessed Avraham with everything." (24:1) R' Menachem Mendel Schneerson z"l (1902-1994; Lubavitcher Rebbe) writes in the name of R' Schneur Zalman of Liadi z"l (1745-1812; first Lubavitcher Rebbe): The phrase, "coming along in days," means that there was no day in Avraham's life on which he did not perform good deeds. This teaches that one must take care to study Torah and perform mitzvot every single day. But why? asks R' Schneerson. If I fail to do a mitzvah or study Torah today, why can't I make it up by doing or learning twice as much tomorrow? He explains: At first glance, there can be no connection between this, physical world and the spiritual world. However, through Torah study and performance of mitzvot we can, in fact, purify and elevate this mundane world. One dimension of this physical world is "time," and the most noticeable unit of time is the day. Therefore, one must take care to sanctify every single day individually by studying Torah and performing mitzvot on that day. Otherwise, the opportunity to sanctify that particular aspect of this world will be lost forever. (Beurim Ve'ha'arot Le'tzavat Ha'Rivash) ******** "Then the servant took ten camels of his master's camels and set out with all the bounty of his master in his hand and made his way to Aram Naharaim to the city of Nachor." (24:10) What is added by the phrase, "of his master's camels"? Rashi z"l explains: This teaches that Avraham's camels were readily recognizable because they always went out muzzled to prevent them from grazing on private property. R' Yitzchak Ze'ev Yadler z"l (1843-1917; Yerushalayim) offers an alternative explanation: The servant (Eliezer) took with him the ten camels that had accompanied Avraham throughout his travels. "Traveling" was Avraham's primary mitzvah--at times for the purpose of spreading monotheism, at times for the purpose of acquiring Eretz Yisrael, and at times to accompany wayfarers. Eliezer hoped that, by taking these camels, which served as a reminder of Avraham's good deeds, he (Eliezer) would experience miracles on his journey (as in fact happened). (Tiferet Zion Al Ha'Torah) ******** "The man [Eliezer] entered the house and `opened' the camels." (24:32) Rashi z"l interprets: He unmuzzled the camels, which had been muzzled so they would not graze on private property. Midrash Rabbah comments, however: If the donkey of Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair [a sage of the Mishnah] could sense right and wrong, as related in the Talmud, certainly Avraham Avinu's camels could [and therefore did not need muzzles]! Rather, our verse means that Eliezer removed their saddles and bridles. What is the point of contention between these two interpretations? R' Yissachar Dov Rokeach z"l (1851-1926; his yahrzeit is today) explains: There is a disagreement in the Gemara whether one can acquire land by walking on it. According to the opinion that one can do so, Avraham had already acquired Eretz Yisrael by traveling throughout the Land, and his camels were permitted to graze anywhere. However, he did not want them to graze on land that he had not paid for in order not to incite the enmity of his neighbors, so he muzzled them. Since, halachically, they were permitted to graze, he could not "trust" them without muzzles. On the other hand, according to the opinion that one cannot acquire land by walking on it, Avraham had not acquired Eretz Yisrael, and his camels were not permitted to graze. Nevertheless, he did not have to muzzle them since they could sense right and wrong. Therefore, our verse can only mean that Eliezer removed their saddles and bridles. (Sefer Maharid)