USING THE GOOD FOR THE GOOD - VAYEIRA

VAYEIRA - USING THE GOOD FOR THE GOOD

The Parsha begins with the story of Avraham Avinu’s incredible chesed with the three Malachim. This is immediately followed by an account of the Malachim’s descent into Sodom and its subsequent destruction. Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l points out a very interesting factor in the juxtaposition of these two incidents; both have a great emphasis on hachnasas orchim (hosting guests) . The story of Avraham is the classic demonstration of the attitude a person should have towards hachnasas orchim and the optimum way of providing for guests. We see how Avraham ignores his own ill health and spares no effort in making his guests feel completely welcome. Immediately following this, the Torah takes us to the city of Sodom and demonstrates their complete antipathy for the very same mitzva of hachnasas orchim. We see how Lot’s life is threatened by the people of Sodom because he dare provide food and shelter for visiting strangers. What is the significance of the Torah’s emphasis of the stark contrast between Avraham and the people of Sodom?

Rav Kamenetsky suggests an answer based on the other aspect of the Sodom story. Hashem tells Avraham about his plans to destroy Sodom because of their complete disregard for their fellow man. Avraham reacts with unlimited concern for these evil people and speaks to Hashem in such a forceful tone that he must first request that Hashem not be angry with him for speaking with such frankness. Rav Kamenetsky explains that the Torah is showing us an aspect of Avraham’s incredible level of bein adam lechaveiro. He writes that normally when a person excels in one area or character trait, he is particularly makpid (strict) on other people’s behavior in that same area. Consequently, he tends to judge them very harshly for their perceived failings in that area. He gives the example of a person who is careful to eat bread for Seudas Shlishis. He tends to view those who only eat fruit for their Seudas Shlishis very judgmentally. The Torah juxtaposes its account of Avraham’s greatness in hachnasas orchim with Sodom’s abject standing in the very same area, and then shows how, nonetheless, Avraham pleaded that Hashem treat Sodom with mercy. This shows that Avraham did not fall subject to the yetser hara to be more strict when judging others in an area of one’s own strengths. Despite the great gulf in his chesed and that of Sodom he showed great concern for their wellbeing.

We see from Rav Kamenetsky’s idea that it is not easy to look favorably on others’ weaknesses in one’s own area of strength. Why this is such a difficult undertaking? When a person excels in one area of midos he will find it very hard to understand how other people can be less zahir in the same field. For example, if a person is particularly punctual he finds it very hard to comprehend how people can consistently come late. It is very clear to him that being late shows lack of consideration for other people’s time. His avoda is to recognize that everybody has different strengths and that there may well be areas in which he is far weaker than others. Moreover, he should remember the Mishna in Avos that tells us; “do not to judge your fellow until you stand in his place.” This teaches us that each person’s character traits are based on his unique life circumstances and that we can never accurately judge other people because we do not know how we would behave if we were in their situation. By internalizing this teaching a person can come to a recognition that each person has their own set of strengths and weaknesses based on numerous factors and therefore it is wrong to become frustrated with others’ weaknesses in his own areas of strength.

We find another example of Avraham’s greatness with regard to interacting with people on a lower level than himself. At the beginning of the Parsha the Torah goes to great lengths in describing the lavish meal that Avraham provided to the visitors, describing the delicious delicacies that he served. Rav Yissachar Frand Shlita points out that Avraham himself surely had little interest in indulging himself with such food. Nonetheless he did not impose his own level of prishus (separation from the physical world) on his guests and spared no effort in providing them with a lavish meal.

Rav Frand describes how one of our greatest recent Gedolim excelled in the area of not imposing their own high standards on other people; in the refrigerator in the home of Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l there were a number of food condiments such as pleasant tasting sauces. It is clear that Rav Feinstein himself did not place great importance on adding such sauces to make his food taste more pleasant - he lived in a far higher plane of existence where such physical pleasures were meaningless. Nonetheless he did not expect other people to aspire to his own high levels.

There are a number of ways in which a person can impose his own standards on others in a negative way. For example, a person may be very neat and tidy, this is obviously a very good trait and enables a person to live with seder. However, it is likely that at some point in his life this tidy person will be in situation where he shares accommodation with other people, such as a spouse, children, or a roommate. It is often the case that these other people do not strive for or attain the same level of cleanliness in the home. In such a scenario, the tidy person may become frustrated with them and demand that they clean the house according to his own high standards. This is an example of imposing one’s own way of doing things on other people and seems to be an unfair way of dealing with people. Rather, an excessively tidy person should accept that other people cannot keep the home tidy to the same extent. If the tidy person finds he cannot function properly in such a situation then he should take it upon himself to maintain the cleanliness of the home to his high standards.

There is much discussion about the great kindness of Avraham Avinu. Rav Kamenetsky teaches us another aspect of his excellent bein adam lechaveiro - that he did not impose his own high standards on other people and did not treat them in a strict way. May we all be zocheh to utilize our good midos only for the good.

A NEW LEVEL OF EXISTENCE - LECH LECHA

“And Hashem said to Avraham, go for yourself from your land, from your relatives, and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you, And I will make of you a great nation. I will bless you, and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. ” The first command ever made to the father of Klal Yisroel, Avraham Avinu, was to leave his surroundings and to begin a new nation that would be the Am Hashem. The Ramban writes that everything that happened in the life of the Avos is a portent for the future of Klal Yisroel, and their behavior teaches us how we should conduct our lives. This concept seems to pose a difficulty: How does the command of ’lech lecha’ apply to all of us, Avraham was alone in his belief in G-d, and therefore it was necessary for him to leave everything behind and form a new nation. But nowadays there are many Jews who accept the Torah and who live in observant societies - given this fact it seems that the command of ’lech lecha’ does not really apply to us!

On deeper analysis it is clear that the command of ‘lech lecha’ is still very relevant to all of us. Hashem’s command to Avraham was deeper than simply an instruction to leave his surroundings. We are given a hint to this by Rashi; He explains why Hashem promised Avraham fame, money and descendants as a consequence of leaving Charan. “Because traveling causes three things, less [likelihood of having] children, less [likelihood of acquiring] money and less [likelihood of having] fame. Therefore he needed these three brachos.. children, money and fame. ” The simple understanding of this is that Hashem was compensating Avraham for a course of behavior that would normally cause damage to a person. However, it seems that there is a deeper message implicit in this instruction. Hashem was hinting to him that if he undertook the challenge of ’lech lecha’ then he would no longer be subject to the normal laws of nature (derech hateva), rather he would live according to a whole new mode of existence - ‘ beyond derech hateva’. Consequently, even though traveling should, b’derech hateva cause loss of wealth, fame and children, Avraham would not be subject to that system of cause and effect. Instead he would live on a whole different level of existence and would benefit in all these areas.

This idea is also alluded to by the Medrash Tanchuma quoted by Rashi in the first passuk in the parsha where Hashem promises Avraham that “I will make known your teva in the world. ” Why couldn’t the Medrash have simply stated, “I will make you known in the world”, what is the significance of the word, ‘teva‘ here? We can answer with this yesod; that Hashem was promising Avraham that he would live on a whole new level of teva that was hitherto unknown in the world. Avraham would have the merit to share this new form of existence with the world, teaching them a whole new approach to life. Derech drush it is also possible that this message was alluded to in the very words, “lech lecha.” The gematria of “lecha” is 50; 49 is a multiple of 7 that represents this world, whilst 8 represents beyond this world. 49 also represents this world, as is seen in the 49 levels of tuma and tahara, whilst 50 represents beyond that, as epitomized by the fact that the 50th day after Yetsias Mitzrayim was the day of Matan Torah - the occasion where the world took on a whole new level of supernatural existence. Hashem was telling Avraham, ’go to the level of 50’, a new level of existence, beyond teva.

Hashem promised Avraham that if he would live according to a metaphysical reality then he would no longer be bound by the physical reality of cause and effect that drives teva. Indeed, after Avraham successfully passes this test Hashem reveals to him at the Bris Bein Habesarim that he will live according to a different set of rules: The passuk says that He took Avraham outside, Rashi explains that Hashem was telling him to leave the confines of the mazalos, and live on a new level of existence, and that is how he and Sarah could have children even though their mazal was to never procreate . The Zohar says that this promise would only be fulfilled on condition that Avraham and his descendants be osek in Torah and mitzovs. Keeping Torah and mitzvos is the expression of living beyond derech hateva.

A person who lives according to Torah and mitzvos is, automatically living according to a different set of rules from the rest of the world. For example, in many areas of business, the busiest day is Shabbos; a person who lives according to the normal laws of cause and effect will never give up that day’s business in order to observe Shabbos. Only a person who recognizes that the Torah prescribes a different mode of cause and effect, can confidently close his business on Shabbos with the assurance that his parnasa will not suffer as a consequence. Another example of this is found in the Gemara in Bava Metsia . The Gemara discusses a certain scenario where somebody has lent his friend an item and there is now disagreement as to the value of the item. The Gemara concludes that the borrower must take a shevua to validate his claim, whereas the lender is not required to swear. Why is the borrower required to swear whilst the lender is not? The Gemara answers that the borrower trusts the lender because he is wealthy, and that the cause of his wealth is surely the fact that he is honest and trustworthy, because if this was not the case, then “they would not have given him wealth from shamayim .” It is pashut to the Gemara that honesty is the cause of wealth - if we were to ask the average person what is the cause of wealth, honesty would surely be one of the least likely answers he would suggest! According to derech hateva, honesty is not the key to wealth, indeed, many people believe that dishonesty will provide them with money. But, Klal Yisroel lives according to a completely different mode of existence, where shemiras hamitzvos and exemplary midos are the cause of success.

This has been a pattern throughout history; The Jewish people have always been faced with the challenge of living according to the ‘laws of the goyim’ or the ‘laws of Klal Yisroel’. Unfortunately this has proved a most difficult challenge to overcome. The meraglim, for example, fell prey to the tendency to approach the world according to the laws of nature. When they saw the giant inhabitants of the land they felt that it was impossible to overcome them. Their mistake was that they did not accept that if they trusted in Hashem then He would override all the laws of nature for them just as He did at Yetsias Mitzrayim and Krias Yam Suf. This principle is fundamental to the spiritual level of a Jew. It is possible to strive to observe the Torah and yet live, to some degree, according to the regular laws of teva just like the goyim. A person can easily fall into the trap of believing that the amount of time he works is the main factor in determining his financial situation. Consequently, he may increase his work hours at the expense of his learning schedule or spending precious time with his family . There is a frightening consequence to such conduct. Hashem acts mida ceneged mida with us, if we show that we do not trust in Him, rather we rely on our own efforts, then, Hashem hides Himself and we are left more to the laws of nature. This explains why a common pattern of history has been that when the Jewish people turn away from Hashem, He consequently turns away from us, and as a result we are left unprotected from the wrath of the goyim.

Another area of Avodas Hashem in which this concept applies greatly is a recognition that spiritual , and not physical, factors are the sole cause of success or failure. This attitude was epitomized by our Gedolim. Rav Moshe Aharon Stern, zt”l, Mashgiach of Kamenitz Yeshivah, was once walking behind Rav Elyah Lopian zt”l and Rav Chatzkel Levenstein zt”l; so he hurried to be close enough behind them to hear what these two tzadikkim discuss between themselves. Reb Chatzkel noticed that Reb Elyah had a bandage over one eye and asked him what happened. Reb Elyah responded that he must have looked at something forbidden and it damaged his eye. Inspired by the question and response, Reb Moshe Aharon stepped closer to hear Reb Chatzkel’s response. To his surprise, he did not respond, he simply accepted Reb Elyah’s explanation as a point of fact, not noting anything novel or particularly righteous in Reb Elyah’s explanation. Reb Moshe Aharon explained that Reb Elyah understood that when Reb Chatzkel inquired about his eye, he was not asking about the physical condition of the eye, but the spiritual reason behind the injury. Reb Elyah understood that this was the only point of Reb Chatzkel’s question and responded accordingly . These Gedolim understood that spiritual factors were responsible for the cause-and-effect in their lives, they lived with a deep recognition that a Jew’s reality is not defined by the same laws as those of goyim. We asked how the command of ’lech lecha’ is relevant to us today. The answer is that lech lecha was not merely a command to Avraham to leave his evil surroundings, it was a call for him to live according to a different set of rules, defined by the spiritual world, and his reward would be that Hashem would in turn treat him beyond the regular set of laws that define the physical world. This lesson is very much relevant to all of us. The Sfas Emes asks, why Hashem only said lech lecha to Avraham Avinu and not to the rest of the world. He answers by bringing a Zohar that Hashem says lech lecha to everyone, but only Avraham responded to it. In the world today Hashem says lech lecha - the goyim ignore it but we cannot; and our reward for responding to is that we will rise above the limits of this world.

AVRAHAM’S SECOND TEST - LECH LECHA

“There was a famine in the land, and Abram descended to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the land. ”

The Parsha begins with Hashem instructing Avraham Avinu to uproot his whole life, leave his nation, society, and family, and go on a journey to an unknown destination. Soon after passing this test and traveling to Eretz Yisroel, Avraham endures a terrible famine and is forced to leave for Eretz Mitzrayim. Chazal and the Rishonim write that this famine constituted one of the ten tests that Avraham had to pass in order to achieve his full potential . What was the exact nature of the test? Rashi says, “in order to test him if he would question the words of HaKadosh Baruch Hu - Hashem told him to go to the land of Canaan and now He caused him to leave! ”

According to Rashi the main aspect of the test was not the challenge of having no food, but that Avraham was unable to fulfill Hashem’s instructions of ’lech lecha’. Hashem had told him to go to the land of Eretz Yisroel and there he would be able to fulfill his spiritual potential, and yet he was immediately met with a tremendous obstacle which forced him to take a course of action which seemed to contradict the whole tachlis of his mission. He believed that his task was to be in Eretz Yisroel and yet he was forced to leave as soon as he arrived there! He could have wondered why he was forced to seemingly abandon his spiritual journey but he did not become frustrated and did not question Hashem in any way. He recognized that he did not truly understand how his journey of ‘lech lecha’ should proceed - that was in Hashem’s hands. He could only do his hishtadlus and accept that anything beyond his control was from Hashem and there was no need to be discouraged. He knew that the famine came from Hashem and that Hashem must have some reasoning behind the plan. Indeed, in hindsight, the events that took place there and the challenges that he faced, do seem to have had many benefits .

The Ramban writes that all the experiences of the Avos are a simun for his descendants. We also face the challenges that he faced and the way that he dealt with those challenges will give us the ability to withstand them in our own lives. Accordingly, the test of the famine is very relevant to all our lives. A person may embark on a spiritual journey based on his understanding of Ratson Hashem. This may involve a major life change such as moving country, or changing ones career, getting married, having children or even a smaller commitment to spiritual growth in learning or mitzvos. Regardless of the form that the ‘journey’ takes, a person will likely have his expectations of the challenges that he will face and how he needs to overcome them. However, very often, he will be met with unforeseen difficulties or obstacles that seem to contradict his whole plan. At that point, there will be a strong inclination to become frustrated that he is unable to grow in the way that he desires.

What is the reason that a person becomes frustrated when his efforts to grow do not work out as he planned? He feels that he knows what would be the ideal way for him to reach his potential - by taking this course of action he will become a better person. Therefore, when he is placed in a situation where his planned course of action his impossible, he feels frustrated because it prevents him from attaining his goal. The mistake he is making is that he feels he knows how he will best reach his potential. Instead he should recognize that only Hashem knows what circumstances a person should face in his life and that whatever obstacles he faces are only there for his growth. He may have thought that such an obstacle was not ideal for his growth, however, evidently Hashem knew otherwise.

My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita gives a common example of this kind of nisayon. A yeshiva bachur or Avreich hopes to begin a new ’zman’ of learning free of outside disturbances that will adversely effect his ability to learn. Talmud Torah is the ultimate way of connecting to Hashem and growing as a person and therefore he hopes he will be able to invest all his energies into the learning. However, on occasion, it may occur that unavoidable distractions do arise, such as the need to attend a family wedding abroad, or health issues. At this point, the person may feel frustrated that he is unable to grow in the way that he wants to - he may see these disturbances as nuisances that prevent him from connecting to Hashem. The mistake being made here is that he thinks he knows the best way for him to grow and that annoying distractions are preventing him from doing so. Instead, he should learn from Avraham Avinu and recognize that these ‘nuisances’ emanate from Hashem and evidently they offer the exact challenge that he needs at this moment. Then he can avoid the harmful attitude of frustration and focus on facing this challenge with simcha and bitachon.

Avraham Avinu’s tests teach vital lessons that apply to our everyday life. May we all be zocheh to emulate his behavior in reacting to challenges.

LECH LECHA - BRIS MILA

The Parsha ends with the command for Avraham to perform bris mila. The Sefer Hachinuch notes a unique aspect of this mitzvo. There are a significant number of negative mitzvos for which transgression incurs the onesh (punishment) of kares. However, there are only two positive mitzvos for which the punishment is kares for one who fails to observe them; bris Mila and Korban Pesach (known as the Pascal lamb), the offering that is given in Temple times on the festival of Pesach. What is the significance of these two mitzvos that makes them unique in this aspect?

In order to answer this question, it is first necessary to explain why negative mitzvos are more associated with kares than positive mitzvos. In a relationship between two people such as marriage, there are certain actions that can damage the relationship but not cause it to be completely destroyed. However, there are things that are so serious that they could indeed end the relationship. Similarly, committing a sin causes a breach in the relationship between a person and HaShem. The significance of the breach is determined by the seriousness of the sin. There are some sins which damage the relationship to such a degree that they cause irrevocable harm. These often incur the onesh of kares.

In contrast, neglecting to perform a positive mitzvo can damage a relationship in that it prevents possible ways of increasing one's closeness to HaShem. However, it is very difficult to envisage how a lack of positive actions can irrevocably damage one's relationship with HaShem. This explains why failure to carry out most positive mitzvos does not incur kares. What makes bris mila and korban Pesach different? In order to begin a marriage a person must undertake a commitment to join in unity with his wife. Without such a commitment there is no genuine relationship - one can do all kinds of nice deeds but, in the Torah's eyes, they are not married until they perform the wedding ceremony prescribed by the Torah. In a similar way, a person needs to make a commitment to HaShem to undertake his relationship with HaShem. Without such a commitment he cannot begin to have a true relationship. Bris mila and korban Pesach are both types of covenants with HaShem, whereby a Jew commits to keeping the Torah.

This connection is demonstrated by a verse in Yechezkel. The Prophet reminds the Jewish people of the time that they were helpless slaves in Egypt, and how HaShem brought them out. He does this through an analogy of a stranded baby being saved. The verse states "And I passed over you and I saw you covered in blood, and I said to you, "by your blood you shall live, by your blood you shall live." The Rabbis explain that these two mentions of blood, refer to the blood of bris mila and korban Pesach. Through the merit of these two mitzvos, the Jews were redeemed from slavery and brought to Sinai to receive the Torah. It seems that it is no coincidence that it was these two mitzvos that HaShem commanded the people to perform. They represented the people's willingness to commit to becoming the Am HaShem .

Another connection between these two mitzvos is that there are two occasions when Eliyahu HaNavi visits the Jewish people; at a bris mila and on Seder night, the night when we remember the korban Pesach. This is because Eliyahu, exasperated at the Jewish people's continued sinning, declared that there was no hope for them. In response, HaShem ordered him to visit every bris mila which would show that, no matter how much the people may sin they still keep the covenant between them and HaShem. Similarly, Eliyahu comes at Seder night, to see the Jewish people celebrate their birth as a nation.

The question remains, why is it necessary for there to be two mitzvos that involve the basic commitment to doing HaShem's will, why wouldn't it be sufficient for one mitzvo to fulfill this role? The answer is that the two mitzvos represent different aspects of a commitment. Bris mila was first commanded to a single individual, Avraham Avinu, to form his the covenant with HaShem. Thus, bris mila represents a person's commitment to his individual relationship with HaShem and all that entails. The korban Pesach represents our commitment to HaShem as part of the Jewish people. The laws of the korban Pesach emphasize the importance of fulfilling the mitzvo in groups, stressing the national aspect of the mitzvo. Accordingly, it is necessary to have two forms of covenants; one between the individual and HaShem, and one between a person as a member of the Jewish people, and HaShem.

This understanding can help us explain an unusual law pertaining to the korban Pesach. It is forbidden for an uncircumcised Jew to participate in the korban Pesach. Why is this the case - the fact that a person does not keep one mitzvo, in no way exempts him from keeping the other mitzvos! The answer is that a person cannot genuinely commit to HaShem as part of a nation when has had made no such commitment on an individual basis.

This teaches us an essential lesson. Many people identify strongly as Jews, and as part of the Jewish people. They commit to the state of Israel, and would willingly give up time and effort, and perhaps even risk their lives, for the Jewish people. They stand up to defend Israel when it comes under verbal attack from the numerous anti-Semitic forces in the world. However, on an individual basis, there is far less commitment. One may identify as being part of the Jewish nation, but he must also strive to commit to his individual relationship with HaShem. The exact way in which to apply this lesson varies according to each person, however, in a general sense, it seems that everyone should see in what way he can increase his personal commitment to his relationship with HaShem. It could involve speaking to HaShem , learning more of His Torah, striving to keep more aspects of Shabbos or kosher food, and so on. The main point is to try something. It is vital to remember that HaShem WANTS a relationship with each and every individual, in his own right. May we all merit to strengthen our covenant with Hashem.

DEPTH AND SUPERFICIALITY - NOACH

The Parsha ends with a very short account of the early life of Avraham Avinu. It outlines his family, including his brother, Haran, and how he met an untimely death. The Torah briefly tells us that Haran died in front of his father. The Medrash provides the details to the background of this tragedy. It discusses how Avraham rejected the rampant idol worship of his time and came to belief in one G-d. He destroyed the idols in his father, Terach’s store, and as a result, Terach handed him over to King Nimrod. Nimrod tried to force him to worship idols and when he refused, Nimrod had him thrown into a fire. Haran was an onlooker to all this and knew that he would be forced to side either with Avraham or Nimrod. Before Avraham was thrown into the fire, Haran took a very practical approach – if Avraham would survive, then Haran would join him, but if he would die, then he would side with Nimrod. When Avraham emerged unscathed from the fire, Haran accordingly declared his support for Avraham. As a result, he was thrown into the fire and was killed.
The Medrash points out that his death was somewhat unusual in that only his internal organs were destroyed, implying that his external body was left undamaged. What is the significance of this unusual death? The answer is given that on an external level, Haran was righteous, in that he made himself out to be of the same ilk as Avraham, however, internally, he was totally insincere in his beliefs. Accordingly, his insides were destroyed because they were lacking merit. However, his exterior was unharmed because it appeared righteous.
This explanation provides us with an example of the principle that it is possible to observe Torah and Mitzvos on two different levels – internally or externally. Internal observance means that a person imbues himself with the attitudes espoused by the Torah – his outlook and life goals are solely defined by the Torah. External observance means that a person may observe all the Mitzvos, however, his deep-seated desires and aspirations are not in tune with doing ratson HaShem (HaShem’s will), rather, other factors drive him. Haran proved himself to be someone whose adherence to belief in one G-d was purely superficial, therefore, he was only protected on a superficial level. Avraham, in contrast, held a deep internal commitment to fulfilling ratson HaShem on all levels, as a result he was fully protected from Nimrod’s fire.
Haran’s trait of externality was emulated by his son, Lot. On a superficial level, Lot observed the Torah, however, many of his actions demonstrated that internally, he was lacking a true desire to follow Avraham’s ways. He was more interested in satisfying his desire for financial success and immorality. The extent to which Lot represents a dichotomy between his internal and external nature is borne out by Chazal in Parsha Lech Lecha. Having settled in Eretz Yisroel, Lot’s shepherds begin to justify grazing their animals on the land of the inhabitants. Avraham’s shepherds protested his, correctly arguing that it constituted thievery, and as a result, a dispute broke out. At that point, Avraham requested that they separate, arguing that they were ‘brothers’ . The obvious problem with this argument is that they were not brothers, Avraham was Lot’s uncle. Moreover, what was the rationale of his argument that they were brothers? The Medrash explains that Avraham was saying that they were like brothers in that they were extremely similar in appearance. Accordingly, Avraham was concerned that people would see Lot grazing other people’s land with his animals and think it was Avraham. We see from here that on a superficial level, Lot was very similar to Avraham, indeed he must have appeared to be a very righteous person, yet internally, he resembled his father, Haran.
Haran had another child, Sarah Imeinu. It seems that she succeeded in avoiding the failing of her father and brother, and became someone whose external observance was matched by internal righteousness. In our Parsha, she is called by a second name, that of Yiskah. The Gemara offers two reasons for this name. One is that she saw with ruach Hakodesh, the other is that everyone would gaze at her beauty. It seems that these two explanations complement each other. The beauty she possessed was not merely of a physical nature, rather it was a spiritual beauty. This emanated from her high spiritual level, which was demonstrated by the fact that she had ruach Hakodesh. Thus, her external beauty was a result of her internal righteousness. In this way, we see that she was able to emulate Avraham in matching her external observance with internal sincerity.
There are many lessons that can be derived from the failings of Haran and Lot, and the greatness of Avraham and Sarah. As Haran demonstrated, it is very easy to be a ‘superficial tzaddik’, it is not hard to dress in a certain way and perform certain actions that make a person look ‘righteous’. However, such externality is very dangerous in that it can cause a person to be a mere shell of an Eved HaShem (one who serves HaShem), whilst on the inside, he is anything but an Eved HaShem. The Prophet, Yeshaya, informs us of the seriousness of this failing: He describes how HaShem will punish Klal Yisroel, “because this people approached [Me] with it mouth and honored me with its lips, but its heart was far from me…”
Moreover, emphasis on externalities can actually hinder one’s internal gowth. One of the methods of the yetser hara is to make a person who wants to grow focus on external changes, whilst distracting him from internal growth. My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits describes a secular person who had a tendency to violence. He became ‘observant’, dramatically changing his dress code and external actions, however, he retained his internal tendency to violence. Now he channeled it in a different, ‘frum’ way, by throwing stones at people whom he disagreed with, but he did not change his true self. In a less dramatic fashion, this pitfall can affect all people who try to improve their Avodas HaShem and overemphasize external changes at the expense of true growth. It is essential that a person make a cheshbon hanefesh of the balance between his external and internal Avodas HaShem. May we all merit to emulate Avraham and Sarah and internalize what we believe in.

ESCAPE OR REBUILD? - NOACH

“And Noach, the man of the earth, debased himself and planted a vineyard. And he drank of the wine and became drunk, and he uncovered himself within his tent. ” When the flood had ended and Noach returned to the earth, he faced the daunting task of starting the world anew. He began by planting a vineyard which had terrible consequences. Chazal strongly criticize Noach’s decision to first plant a vineyard. Wine can cause man great simcha and can help him to feel closer to Hashem, however Noach should have begun planting something that was more immediately necessary for the rebuilding of the world .

The difficulty about this incident is that Noach was a very great tzaddik, and it is impossible to approach his mistake here in a superficial way. The commentaries strive to explain Noach’s reasoning in planting the vineyard . The Yalkut Shimoni explains that when Noach drank from the wine he felt great simcha . Based on this, Rav Meir Rubman zt”l in his sefer, Zichron Meir, explains that when Noach returned to dry land he was met by incredible destruction, the whole world that he had lived in was completely destroyed and every living creature dead. He naturally felt devastated and disheartened by this shocking scene. He knew that such feelings were not conducive to bringing spirituality to this new world, because the shechina can only be present amidst the simcha of doing Hashem’s will . Knowing that wine has the ability to gladden a person he decided to plant a vineyard, and use the wine that he would drink as a means to bring the shechina down to earth.

This explanation, however, poses a new difficulty - if his intentions were noble then how could such a kilkul arise out of his actions? Rav Simcha Wasserman zt”l explains that there were other, less noble intentions, effecting Noach’s decision of how to begin the new world. Facing such incredible pain, Noach felt the need to distract himself from the terrible situation he now faced, and as a consequence he chose to plant a vineyard, whose wine offered a way to escape the terrible pain he felt . This choice was considered a failing for someone of Noach’s great stature and accordingly, it had damaging results. Chazal criticize him and say that, when facing a destroyed world he should have first focused on rebuilding, rather than escaping. Rav Wasserman points out that Chazal do not say that Noach did not commit a terrible sin here, rather he did something that was ‘chol’, (from the lashon of ‘vayachel’ used to describe Noach’s mistake) lacking in holiness and greatness.

About sixty years ago, many people faced an incredibly great nisayon. The Holocaust destroyed millions of lives, and whole communities were uprooted; many people lost all their families. Facing this catastrophe, there was surely a very strong inclination to ‘escape’ on some level. However, certain individuals rimmediately undertook to rebuild the Jewish people. Great people such as the Ponevezher Rav zt”l and the Klausenberger Rebbe zt”l lost their families in the Holocaust and yet somehow embarked upon the immense challenge of rebuilding. Rav Yissachar Frand Shlita offers another, moving example of someone who avoided the temptation to escape in the post-Holocaust world. Rav Joseph Rosenberg zt”l. He found himself in USA after the war, and noticed that there was one particular mitzva which had been completely neglected - Shatnez. He single-handedly created Shatnez checking laboratories and for several decades checked hundreds of thousands of garments for Shatnez. He faced more than one churban. One, the Holocuast, was physical in nature, and one was a spiritual churban - the loss of one mitzva.

Baruch Hashem, in this generation we do not have to contend with destruction comparable to that of the Flood or the Holocaust. However, we also face churban on a number of levels. In a national sense, we know that Klal Yisroel is met with the greatest spiritual churban in its history, with countless Jews intermarrying every day. It has been estimated that more people have been lost to Judaism in the past 60 years than were lost in the Holocaust! This churban is less apparent and shocking than the Holocaust but the damage it is causing is immense. Every observant Jew is forced to face this churban whenever he leaves his community and is surrounded by secular people. There are many different avenues that a person can take to help secular Jews but most important is the decision not to escape the problem and say ‘shalom aliyich nafsi’.

On a more personal level, we all know people who are faced with their own individual churbans. There are people who cannot provide a parnasa for their families, people who suffer fromterrible health problems, young men and women who cannot find shidduchim, divorced or widowed people who feel alone and helpless, the list is endless. When we encounter any of these people we also have the choice of escape or build. Rav Frand argues that it is not enough to merely feel bad for them, and to say, ‘nebuch’. We must strive to help in any way that we can. For example, if someone loses his job, then we can try to use our contacts to see if we can help him find new employment. Or If someone cannot find a shidduch then we can spend a small amount of time thinking if we know any suitable prospective partner.

Of course, through the course of our lives most of us are faced with tragedies or catastrophes of some sort. These traumatic events are very challenging and there is the natural temptation to want to escape the pain of the situation. However, a sign of greatness is to make a concerted effort to rebuild and move ahead with our lives. In one emotive shiur before Yom Kippur, Rav Frand suggests that people ask themselves four fundamental questions about their spiritual level. One of them is the question that the ‘rav hachovel’ (the head sailor) asked Yonah - there was a terrible storm threatening to destroy the whole ship and amidst this turmoil the sailors found Yonah asleep. The rav hachovel asked Yonah, “Why are you sleeping, rise up and call to your G-d.. ” The rav hachovel was telling Yonah, how can you sleep through such a situation as this, do something! So too, Rav Frand exhorts us to ask ourselves, why are we sleeping through the tumultuous events that surround us. May we all be zocheh to strive to rebuild and not escape when we face challenge and pain.

NOACH AND AVRAHAM - PARSHAS NOACH

“These are the offspring of Noach, Noach was a righteous man, perfect in his generations; Noach walked with G-d.” Noach was the greatest person in his time, the only one who deserved to be spared from the flood. And yet Noach is unfavorably compared to Avraham Avinu by the Rabbis in a number of places. What is the difference between these two great men?

Rashi brings a Midrash that contrasts Avraham and Noach. With regard to Noach, the Torah says “Noach walked with G-d.” This means that he needed help in his Avodas Hashem. But to Avraham, HaShem says “Walk before me.” This means that Avraham could strengthen himself on his own. The commentaries explain that Avraham was pro-active and self-motivated. He did not need external events to stimulate him to serve HaShem and do kindness. Noach needed external circumstances to push him forward in his righteousness.

Rav Eliyahu Dessler zt"l expands on this idea. He writes that Noach is called “ish tzaddik" (man of righteousness), whilst Avraham is “ish chessed" (man of kindness). Noach performed incredible acts of kindness in the ark, feeding hundreds of animals for several months. However, says Rav Dessler that this was only tzedek,(the right thing to do), meaning that he fulfilled his obligation. It did not stem from an overflowing desire to give, but was rather a reaction to the needs of others. Avraham, in contrast, did not perform kindness out of obligation, but because of a burning desire to give. This divergence between Noach and Avraham is not restricted to kindness in the physical realm, but also extends into the spiritual realm. The Seforno writes that Noach did rebuke the people in his generation but he did not go any further. “He did not teach them to know G-d and how to go in his ways.” Consequently, he did not possess enough merit to save the generation. In contrast Avraham went far beyond the call of duty to teach the world to know Hashem.

The commentaries also discuss why Noach’s great descendants, Shem and Ever, did not merit to attain Avraham’s greatness. The Rambam describes how Avraham fought against the idolatry prevalent in his times. “He began to call out in a loud voice to the whole world and taught them that there is one G-d in the world and it is He that one should serve… He would continually call out and gather the people from city to city and from kingdom to kingdom until he reached there, as it says, “and he called out in the name of Hashem the eternal G-d. And when the people would gather and ask him what he was preaching, he would teach to every one of them, each according to his ability, until he would bring them to the true way, until tens of thousands of people gathered to follow him.” The Raavad writes on this Rambam, “I am astonished, for Shem and ever were there at this time. how could they not protest [against the idolatry that surrounded them. The Kesef Mishnah answers, “Shem and Ever were teaching the way of Hashem to their students, but they did not rouse themselves to call and teach in the way that Avraham did. Because of this he rose to a higher level than they did.”

This seems difficult to understand. We know that Shem and Ever had a yeshivah in which they taught Torah for a very long time. Why then are they considered on a lower level than Avraham Avinu, to the extent that he is the spiritual father of the Jewish people, but they are not? We can answer this question with Rav Dessler’s principle. There are two ways to give. A person can be re-active, waiting for people who want to learn Torah and grow in their Yiddishkeit, or one can be pro-active, seeking out people who would not otherwise want to learn Torah or develop any kind of relationship with Hashem. Noach, Shem and Ever were limited to the first type of giving. This is a high level, but, as Rav Dessler explains, it does not qualify as true kindness. Avraham, however, was pro-active. He did not wait for people to come to him. He sought out people who did not even know that they were lacking anything and taught them about Hashem. This is true chessed. This is what caused Avraham to rise to a higher level than Noach, Shem and Ever.

Why would a person reach the level of reactive kindness but fail to progress to the higher level of giving pro-actively? The clue to this can be found in Noach’s name. We know that a person’s name teaches us about his essence. The word, 'noach' means 'comfortable'. It is not easy to take responsibility for something without first being called upon to do it. The negative inclination (yetser hara) will find numerous excuses to avoid taking on a challenging endeavor when the genuine reason for doing so is desire for comfort.

The great author of The Chovos Levavos reveals to us that he was subject to this very challenge. He writes in the introduction that after planning to write the sefer he changed his mind, citing a number of reasons. “I thought my powers too limited and my mind too weak to grasp the ideas. Furthermore, I do not possess an elegant style in Arabic, in which the book would have been written… I feared that I would be undertaking a task which would succeed [only] in exposing my shortcomings…Therefore I decided to drop my plans and revoke my decision.” However, he recognized that perhaps his motives were not completely pure. “I began to suspect that I had chosen the comfortable option, looking for peace and quiet. I feared that what had motivated the cancellation of the project had been the desire for self-gratification, which had driven me to seek ease and comfort, to opt for inactivity and sit idly by.” To the eternal benefit of Klal Yisroel he decided to write the Sefer and it is difficult to imagine Klal Yisroel being bereft of its spiritual guidance. The reasons that he initially cited in support of his decision not to write the sefer seem fair and logical. But he recognized that, on his level, they were tainted by a desire for comfort. We too have plausible reasons why we choose to ignore opportunities to help Klal Yisroel. But we must be extremely careful to make sure that we are not in fact just being lazy. Imagine how many great works or bold initiatives may never have reached fruition because of this yetser hara.

Another hindrance to pro-activity is misplaced bitachon. A person may have the hashkafa that Hashem will send him his tachlis on a plate. History proves that the great builders in Torah did not have this attitude. They looked at the problems in the world and decided to take action to rectify them without waiting to be told to do so. People such as Rav Aharon Kotler, the Ponevezher Rav and Rebbetsin Sarah Shenirer emulated Avraham Avinu and took the initiave to build Torah institutions. These institutions reinforced Torah, and enabled us to survive the spitirual onslaught of the Enlightenment and the physical onslaught of the Holocaust.

A less well-known example of a proactive builder is Joseph Rosenberg. He lived in the post- -Holocaust generation. He saw a world in which one particular mitzvo was largely ignored - the mitzvo of Shatnes. He single-handedly created Shatnes checking observatories and for several decades checked hundreds of thousands of garments for Shatnes. What was the key to his greatness? It was not necessarily his knowledge of Torah but it was his willingness to pro-actively go out and fix a problem he saw in Klal Yisroel .

In our generation, one does not have to look far to find opportunities to improve the word in some form. But he must not wait to be asked to step forward. If he does wait, the opportunity may never materialize. Hashem may want us to open our eyes and take action without being prompted to do so. As we have seen, there are people who have already done so, showing us that it is possible.

Noach was a great man but he is not the progenitor of the Chosen People. He did kindness, but only after he was instructed to. He rebuked the people, but only after Hashem had told him to do soas a reactive person, who needed external circumstance to arouse him to action. By contrast, Avraham Avinu did not need to be motivated to serve Hashem. He did not wait for people to come to him in order to teach them Torah. He reached the level of true chessed through great effort. It is incumbent upon us, his descendants, to emulate him and seek and pursue opportunities to make a difference to Klal Yisroel.