RISE, WALK THROUGH THE LAND, THROUGH ITS LENGTH AND ITS BREADTH FOR I WILL GIVE IT TO YOU.

(Bereishit 13:17)

 

We learned: R. Elazer said in the name of R. Yosi: Once I entered Alexandria, Egypt. There I found an old man, who said to me: "Come and I will show you what my fathers did to your fathers; they drowned some of them in the sea; some they slew by the sword; some they crushed at the construction sites".

Our Rabbi Moses was punished on this account, for it says: It has been worse for this people since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Your name (Shemot 5). The Holy One, Blessed Be He said to him: Woe for those lost and not recovered! How many times did I reveal myself to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Shaddai, and they did not question Me or ask Me What is Your name?

I said to Abraham: Rise, walk through the land, through its length and its breadth for I will give it to you (Bereishit 13). He sought a place to bury Sarah, and did not find one before purchasing it at great expense, 400 silver shekels, yet he did not doubt Me.

I told Isaac: Dwell in this land and I shall be with you and bless you (Bereishit 26). His servants sought water to drink, but did not find it until they entered a quarrel, as is written: The shepherds of Gerar quarreled with the shepherds of Isaac saying, "The water is ours" (Bereishit 26) yet he did not question Me.

I said to Jacob: The land upon which you lie, I will give to you (Bereishit 28). He wished to set up his tent, but did not find a place until he paid one hundred ksita, yet he did not question, he did not ask What is Your name?

However, at the start you asked: What is Your name? And now you say You have not saved Your people (Shemot 5). Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh - you shall see the war against Pharaoh, but you will not see the war against the thirty-one kings [i.e., the conquest of the Land].

(Sanhedrin 111a).

 

 

The Right to Inherit does not Grant You Rights to Property which is not Yours!

Shlomo Fox

Micah ends his prophecy with the verse: Give truth to Jacob, loving-kindness to Abraham, which You swore to our forefathers from days of yore." (Micah 7:20)

Abraham is called Ethan, as we read in Psalms: A maskil of Ethan the Ezrahi.. The kindnesses of the Lord I shall sing forever; to generation after generation I shall make known Your faithfulness, with my mouth. For I said, "Forever will it be built with kindness; as the heavens, with which You will establish Your faithfulness."

Some say that the root of the name Ethan is the Aramaic it - there is; Abraham is the one who said "There is" a sovereign in the castle, that the world is ruled by the attribute of loving-kindness.

In the circumcision ceremony, the father recites the blessing "... Who commanded us to enter him into the covenant of our father Abraham" - enter him into the covenant of loving-kindness. Circumcision is not only a physical covenant, but also a covenant demanding that one behaves with loving - kindness.

It is said regarding the consolation of mourners: "He told him [Resh Lakish told his spokesman, Yehudah bar Nahmani, when they came to console R. Hiyya bar Abba, whose son had died]: Get up and address those who console the mourners. He began speaking: Our brothers who exercise loving-kindness, sons of those who exercise loving-kindness, who hold fast to the covenant of our Father Abraham, for it is said: I have come to know him in order that he command his sons [and his family after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is just and right] (Bereishit 18:9); our brothers, the Master of Compensation shall compensate you, Blessed are You, who makes compensation." (Ketuvot 8b).

Rabbi Hutner said (in Pahad Yitzhak, Sukkot 5712): "Special qualities imply special duties"; Abraham's virtue of loving-kindness obligates all who enter into his covenant.

In our parasha, God repeatedly promises the Land to Abraham's seed.

And the Lord said to Abram, "Go forth from your land and from your birthplace and from your father's house, to the land that I will show you... And the Lord appeared to Abram, and He said, "To your seed I will give this land." (Bereishit 12:7; also - 12: 13, 15; 17:15; 18:17, 18)

Although the land is promised to him, when the king of Sodom offers the vanquished kings' property to Abram, he does not take the booty but rather gives it to his allies: And the king of Sodom said to Abram, "Give me the souls, and the possessions take for yourself. And Abram said to the king of Sodom, "I raise my hand to the Lord, the Most High God, Who possesses heaven and earth. Neither from a thread to a shoe strap, nor will I take from whatever is yours, that you should not say, 'I have made Abram wealthy.' Exclusive of what the lads ate, and the share of the men who went with me; Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre they shall take their share" (Bereishit 14: 21-24).

Abram receives God's promise that his seed will go forth with great possessions after being exiled to a land that is not theirs for four hundred years: And he said, "0 Lord God, how will I know that I will inherit it?"...And He said to Abram, "You shall surely know that your seed will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and oppress them, for four hundred years. And also the nation that they will serve will I judge, and afterwards they will go forth with great possessions (Bereishit 15: 8, 13-14).

The quarrel between Abram's herdsmen and Lot's herdsmen looks like a conflict over pasture-lands, and it brings about a separation.

And there was a quarrel between the herdsmen of Abram's cattle and between the herdsmen of Lot's cattle, and the Canaanites and the Perizzites were then dwelling in the land. And Abram said to Lot, "Please let there be no quarrel between me and between you and between my herdsmen and between your herdsmen, for we are kinsmen. Is not all the land before you? Please part from me; if [you go] left, I will go right, and if [you go] right, I will go left" (Bereishit 13:7-9).

Abraham separates from Lot, apparently ending the connection between them. However, Midrash Tanhuma (Lekh Lekha) notes Abraham's humility - the moment he hears of his nephew's distress, he immediately sets out to his aid: And Abram heard that his kinsman had been taken captive, and he armed his trained men, those born in his house, three hundred and eighteen, and he pursued [them] until Dan (Bereishit 14:14).

 

What was the quarrel about?

Bereishit Rabbah (40:7) explains:

And there was a quarrel between the herdsmen of Abram's cattle and between the herdsmen of Lot's cattle -

R. Brekhiah said in the name of R. Yudah: Abraham's animals would go out muzzled, but Lot's would go out unmuzzled.

Abraham's herdsmen asked them [Lot's herdsmen]: Is theft allowed?

Lot's herdsmen told them: The Holy One blessed be He said to Abraham: To your seed I will give this land (Bereishit 12:7), but Abraham is a sterile mule - he does not produce children. Lot is his heir, and we are eating that which belongs to us!

The Holy One blessed be He told them: This is what I said to Abraham: To your seed I will give this land - when? When the Seven Nations are removed from it. [Now it says], and the Canaanites and the Perizzites were then dwelling in the land, etc.. Now they have rights in the land.

Abraham instructed his shepherds to avoid letting the animals graze in pastures that belonged to others, while Lot's herdsmen were sure that, as Abraham's sole heirs, the Land and everything in it was their inheritance.

Rabbi Y. ibn Shu'ib (Spain 1280-1340) adds to this and explains that the quarrel between Abram and Lot led to the conquest of parts of the Land by other nations.

The NeTziV Mi'Volozhin sharpens this point In his commentary, Ha'Amek Davar:

And there was a quarrel. The quarrel between the herdsmen was a disgraceful incident, and it caused desecration of the Name. In Sifri on parashat Ki Tetze we learn: If there be a quarrel between men, etc. If the guilty one is to be flogged. Peace does not arise from a quarrel, and so it says And there was a quarrel between the herdsmen, etc. Who caused Lot to leave the righteous man [Abraham]? This says that it was the quarrel [which cased him to leave]... And so it was in the case of Lot, that the herdsmen uttered words not worthy of being heard. The meaning of the Sifri's dictum, "Peace does not arise from a quarrel" is that it [the things said in a quarrel] are not like [proper] criticism, for criticism brings peace and love. Not so with the quarrel: and the Canaanites and the Perizzites were then dwelling in the land. It involved desecration of the Name, since they knew the greatness of Abraham and his house, and how they were sanctified to the Lord's Name. It got to the point where Abraham could not take any more, and so Lot left Abraham.

Here the NeTziV is true to the line he took in the introduction to his commentary on Bereishit. There he said that Bereishit is called Sefer HaYashar ["The Straight Book"] in reference to the way the Patriarchs related to the nations of the world: they were honest and went beyond the strict demands of justice. That is why, as soon as the nations of the world became aware of it, the quarrel between Abraham and Lot was perceived as a case of desecration of the Name.

A different tack is attributed to Rabbi Bunem of Pishcha: Abraham separated from Lot because he feared his negative influence.

The Talmud discusses how it was that Abram dared to go to war against the kings who had captured Lot. Weren't his fighters wary? How did he prepare his troops? Was their victory a miracle or did it result from their devotion to their cause?

Nedarim 32a states:

and he armed his trained men, those born in his house - Rav said: He armed them with Torah. Shemuel said: He loaded them with gold. (Midrash Tanhuma explains: He took silver and gold, and loaded them with it. He told them, "You know that we are going to battle; we are going to save lives. Do not set your eyes upon wealth, if [you want to battle] for the sake of silver and gold, here it is").

 three hundred and eighteen - R. Ami bar Abba said: Eliezer was worth all of them together. Some say: [The name] "Eliezer" is numerologically equivalent [to 318].

So - we have seen various explanations; the preparations included Torah study or the distribution of wealth, or pep-talks, or the distribution of arms, and there is also an opinion that most of the fighters left for home, except for Abraham's devoted servant, Eliezer.

 

From Aggadah to Halakhah

In the course of discussing the laws of sukkah, the Talmud (Sukkah 31a) mentions an incident that illustrates the law stating that the use of stolen skhakh [the material used to cover a sukkah] does not invalidate a sukkah, since the thief is only required to return the monetary value of the branches used for skhakh, and is not required to take down the sukkah:

Our rabbis taught: A stolen sukkah, and one who sets up a sukkah in the public domain, R. Eliezer disqualifies [such a sukkah], but the Sages say it is usable... However, if he stole branches and used them as cover - all agree that he only has to pay the value of he branches...

That old woman appeared before Rav Nahman.

She told him: The Exilarch and all the sages in Exilarch's house are sitting in a stolen sukkah!

She shouted, but Rav Nahman paid her no attention.

She told him: A women whose father has three hundred and eighteen servants cries out before you and you pay no attention to her!?

Rav Nahman told them: She bleats, but she has no claim beyond the cost of the branches, that is why the sukkah is not considered stolen, but rather usable.

Why did the Exilarch ignore the old woman and say, "She bleats"?

How does that make theft permissible? What does the woman mean to say by mentioning her father's wealth? Why did the Exilarch's men steal branches? And, in connection with our discussion: Why did Rav Nahman and the sages of the house of the Exilarch behave like Lot's herdsmen, who did not use muzzles?

Besides offering a technical halakhic explanation, the author of the commentary Arukh la'Ner [R. Yaakov Etlinger (1798-1871), a leader of Orthodox Jewry in Germany] explains that the servants which the woman had claimed worked in her father's house were none other than the servants of our Father Abraham. It is known that before going to battle, he "loaded them with money" so that they would not be anxious to take other people's property. If so, the woman is asking "Why didn't the Exilarch do so, instead leaving his servants to steal?" It might be said that the halakhah expresses "How great is the power of the possibility of repentance!"

In this spirit, the law allows for repentance, allowing the thief to repent without returning the branches themselves, but rather only their monetary equivalent. None the less, it is difficult to understand why scholars behaved in this fashion. Why did they act like Lot's shepherds - "For the land is ours"?

The Rebbi from Slonim (Netivot Shalom, Va'yeitze) distinguishes between three different levels of blessing received by Abraham: star, sand, and dust:

And He took him outside, and He said, "Please look heavenward and count the stars, if you are able to count them." And He said to him, "So will be your seed." (Bereishit 15:5)

That I will surely bless you, and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens and as the sand that is on the seashore, and your descendants will inherit the cities of their enemies. (Bereishit 22:17)

And I will make your seed like the dust of the earth, so that if a man will be able to count the dust of the earth, so will your seed be counted. (Bereishit 13:16)

The stars of heaven symbolize great individual servants of God who are unassociated with each other; each shines alone, and they remain disunited.

The sand that is on the seashore holds back the sea's waves which threaten to flood all of creation. Each individual grain of sand is insignificant; it is only their unity which grants them the tremendous strength needed to protect all of creation from the waves. So it is with Israel; the power of the individual is as slight as a grain of sand, but when the grains are united, the power of their unity protects creation.

The dust of the earth enjoys the quality of adherence, and that power contains the power of growth. This distinguishes it from the stars of heaven and from the sand that is on the seashore; these two enjoy certain virtues, but the lack the power of growth, and all of creation persists thanks to the power of growth belonging to the dust of the earth.

We ask to be called the children of Abraham, and that pretension obliges us to behave as did Abraham and his herdsmen. If we receive the blessing of being like the stars of heaven or the sand that is on the seashore, our function lacks any connection or duty towards the other. However, if we are blessed with being like the dust of the earth that brings growth and fruitfulness, then that blessing obliges us to behave in a manner that will not cause thorns and thistles or wormwood and hemlock to grow; certainly not to let crab grass take over, as Nogah Reuveni said: Ezrah means crabgrass, as the Psalm (37:35) states: I saw a wicked man, powerful, well-rooted as an ezrah who is fresh. It is our duty and merit to care for the other and his property.

May the way of Abraham - father to many nations - the quality of loving-kindness - guide us; may we maintain his ways and his instructions to his herdsmen. The land is promised to us on the condition that we unite and judge ourselves and our neighbors with loving kindness, and act in loving kindness.

Shlomo Fox teaches at Hebrew Union College, at Beit Shmuel, and at Kolot. He is he educational director of the IDF project of Beit Morasha.

 

Thoughts of Remembrance and Reflection

The significance and character of memory change with the years. The shock and mourning of the days immediately following Rabin's murder are unlike the longer-term residues which that difficult event left in Israeli society and its influence on the years following the murder.

On the one hand, the murder sharpened feelings of enmity and alienation that existed between rival ideological groups. On the other hand, there were also serious attempts at dialogue between groups and individuals who sensed the dangers threatening Israeli society. Those attempts gave rise to batei midrash and discussion groups that brought together people holding different world views.

Since then, Israeli society has found itself exposed to murderous terror attacks, to disappointment with governmental corruption and failed diplomatic moves, to the disengagement and the second Lebanese war. All of these seriously challenged the solidarity between different parts of the nation, as well as challenging faith in the leadership. The assassination became a kind of sign warning of the loss of innocence, the loss of our way, and of the dangers involved in violent and antidemocratic struggle.

Is there, none the less, a reason to remember and mark the date of the murder? What is the significance of the memory of the murder in 5767?

I think that the story of the quarrel between Abram's herdsmen and Lot's herdsmen can serve to clearly delineate the options available to Israeli society.

The quarrel over values between the herdsmen of Abraham's school and the herdsmen of Lot's house was solved through the separation of the two "brothers" from each other, but it is well known how sadly Lot's experience in Sodom ended.

It could be that when there is no agreement regarding the way to go forward, the option of separation is preferable to the "liquidation" of the rival, but it also does not represent the final realization of the Zionist dream. Apparently, we must take on the challenge of finding room for bitter ideological rivals within a single society.

Yevamot 14b describes the disagreements on crucial points of law between the House of Shamai and the House of Hillel, and describes it thusly:

Even though the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel disagreed regarding the cases of tzarot, of sisters, of an old bill of divorce, of a possibly married woman, of one who stays in an inn with his divorced wife, of money and its equivalent, of a penny and its equivalent [all of these are cases involving laws of marriage and divorce], the House of Shamai did not avoid marrying women from the House of Hillel, and vice-versa. This teaches you that they treated each other with affection and neighborliness, to fulfill that which is said: Love truth and peace (Zechariah 8).

I think that the way to lend relevant and constructive significance to the memory of the murder is by being attentive and respectful to ideological rivals, by resolving through democratic means those issues which require resolution, while always struggling for truth and peace.

Pinchas Leiser

Editor

 

 

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel $700
• English edition distributed via email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

In Israel, checks made out to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem 91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for local donations.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made through:

New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD, Great Britain

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS UNDER $100.

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite 607, New York, New York 10017 USA

All contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project.

 

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an imperative.

5,000 copies of a 4 page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom's educational forums draw people of different backgrounds, secular and religious, who are keen to deepen their Jewish knowledge and to hear an alternative religious standpoint on the subjects of peace and social issues.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom fills an ideological vacuum in Israel’s society. Committed both to Jewish tradition and observance, and to the furthering of peace and coexistence, the movement is in a unique position to engage in dialogue with the secular left and the religious right, with Israeli Arabs and with Palestinians.