Back to This Week's Parsha | Previous Issues
Volume I, Issue 19
Parshas Chayei Sorah
PARSHA INSIGHTS The Torah clearly states that the field of Machpelah and its cave, where Avrohom planned to bury Sorah, was purchased by Avrohom from Ephron. If Avrohom bought the field from Ephron, why does the Torah seem to suggest that Avrohom purchased the field and cave from the children of Heth by stating, "Thus, the field stood, and the cave, that was in it, as Avrohom's as a holding for a grave, from the children of Heth" (Chayei Sorah 23,20)? If Avrohom purchased the filed from the children of Heth, they obviously owned the field. However, from the text it seems that Ephron had complete ownership of the field?The Brisker Rav zt"l answers that Ephron definitely had sole ownership of the field, and Avrohom, through his purchase of the field from Ephron, acquired ownership of the field. However, although this ownership made it possible for him to bury Sorah in a field that was owned by him, as is mandated by the Gemora in Bava Basra (112a), it did not insure that the burial place would remain intact eternally. Avrohom needed to make the cave of Machpelah an "achuzas kaver" (a holding for a grave, which means a cemetery), so that the grave would never be uprooted for the communal needs of the city. Halacha dictates that if someone has a grave on his own property, the city has the right to usurp the land along with the grave, should the city feel it would benefit the community. This would eave the family of the deceased with the unpleasant and traumatic task of reburying the dead elsewhere. Avrohom's designating the cave of Machpelah as a burial place was not enough to prevent the property and grave from being seized from him by eminent domain. The only manner in which a property could become exempt from eminent domain is if it is designated by the town itself as a cemetery. Therefore, Avrohom had to gain permission from the city (the children of Heth), to designate the cave of Machpelah as a cemetery. Once the city itself designated it for that use, the permanent existence of the cave of Machpelah was guaranteed to remain a cemetery. Since it was necessary for Avrohom to acquire permission from the children of Heth in order to permanently use the land for a cemetery, Avrohom did acquire the land as a cemetery from the children of Heth, as well as acquiring the grave itself from Ephron. It can also be said that even if permission from the city to use the land as a cemetery would not be required in order to prevent the land from subsequently being taken by eminent domain, Avrohom would still have sought permission from the children of Heth to make the sight a burial place. It is clearly derech eretz for one to be concerned about how his actions may affect his fellow neighbors. It is quite possible that some of the townsfolk would not want a cemetery in their midst, and therefore, it would not be proper etiquette for Avrohom to impose his will upon them. By requesting permission from the children of Heth, Avrohom taught a lesson, that a person who walks in the ways of Hashem does not allow himself to be driven by his own need and neglect the feelings of others.
"His sons Yitzchok and Yishmoel buried him in the cave of Machpelah…" (Chayei Sorah 25,9). Rashi cites the words of Chazal that "from here we see that Yishmoel repented, and let Yitzchok walk ahead of him. This is the 'good old age' which was said about Avrohom (in the previous verse)." Yishmoel traveled on the three day journey with Avrohom and Yitzchok, as the Torah states, "and he took his two young men with him" (Vayeira 22,3). The Targum Yonason says that the two young men referred to in this verse are Yishmoel and Eliezer. Since Rashi does not cite the episode of the Yishmoel's returning to the family and accompanying Avrohom and Yitzchok on this trip to prove that Yishmoel did teshhuva, it seem that this is not sufficient proof that he did teshuva. Asks Rabbi Shimon Schwab zt"l, why is this episode not enough proof that he did teshuva? Rav Schwab answers that although Yishmoel's returning to live in Avrohom's household and travelling with him during the akeidah demonstrates that Yishmoel did return to the proper path, it does not indicate Yishmoel's motivation for his action. Perhaps his decision to repent was out of respect for his father and not a genuine desire to return to the ways of Hashem. Only after Avrohom passes on and Yishmoel does not revert to his evil ways, do we clearly know that Yishmoel's motivation for repentance was a desire to truly return to Hashem. The order of the funeral procession is the irrefutable sign that Yishmoel's teshuva was indeed a heartfelt and complete return to Hashem. The acquisition and display of humility is genuine proof of true repentance, since someone who does not fully repent will continue to be arrogant and have a desire for honor. By not insisting that he walk ahead of Yitzchok, although he was older, Yishmoel demonstrated his ability to forego his honor in recognition of Yitzchok's greatness. This clear display of Yishmoel's humility could not be attributed to Avrohom's honor, as Avrohom was no longer on this earth.. Since this verse demonstrates the complete and permanent nature of Yishmoel's teshuva, it is undeniable proof that Yishmoel returned to Hashem and thus is the proof cited by Rashi.
TABLE TALK THE DILEMMA One morning Moshe, who is normally quite punctual, is running late when the carpool arrives. Moshe hurries as fast as he can, but by the time he gets to the car, they are already ten minutes behind schedule. The driver, Levi, starts speeding in order to make up for lost time. One of the other passengers urges Levi to continue speeding; otherwise he will be late for a meeting. Moshe and the fourth passenger tell Levi to slow down, so that he won't receive a speeding ticket. As predicted, Levi is stopped by a police officer and is given a speeding ticket. After the officer leaves, Levi suggests that it would be fair to split the cost of the ticket between the four of them, since they equally pay for the other costs of travel. Moshe and the other two passengers disagree. Who is right?
(Consult your Rav for a proper halachic ruling) WHO AM I?
1. A switch sometimes is fine.
(Please send us your answer by e-mail to gkrainess@adelphia.net. The answer will appear
in next week's issue) Last week's clues and answer: Last week's clues and answer: I have the power to transform; My concepts are deep; The Sages spoke volume(s) about me; My existence emanates from the heavens - Mikvah
Sorry, no congratulations this week.
CAN YOU SAY THAT? Shimon acts toward Reuven in a certain manner; Reuven feels slighted and admonishes Shimon. Shimon defends himself by saying that Levi acted towards you in a similar manner and you did not rebuke him. Is it permissible for Shimon to have said this?
Answer: No. Even though Shimon does not mean to harm Levi, it is likely that he will cause Reuven to be angry with Levi as well.
(Apples of Gold citing Sefer Chofetz Chaim - Hilchos Rechilus)
TORAH RIDDLE Did Hashem rain down on Sodom and Gomorrah anything else besides sulfur and fire? (Please send us your answer by e-mail to gkrainess@adelphia.net. The answer will appear
in next week's issue) Last week's question and answer: Can a child conceived by a non-Jewish mother be considered a Jew, without a conversion? Yes, if the mother converts before giving birth to the child.
Congratulations to Sheera Krainess and Mr. Neil Parks
SHLOMO HaMELECH "Do not rob the poor because he is poor….For Hashem will take up their grievance; He will steal the soul from those who would steal from them" (Mishlei 22,22-23). Rashi explains that one who steals from a poor person thinks that the poor will not have the power to defend themselves. Shlomo HaMelech informs us that this is a grievous error, since Hashem will defend the poor. Rashi and Metzudas Dovid add that one who steals from a poor person is punished with death. We must understand why is the punishment of death meted out to one who steals from the poor. The Ralbag explains that since the poor person does not have many possessions, when one steals from him, he is stealing his life. Therefore, the "midah keneged midah (measure for measure punishment)" is death to the thief. Rabbeinu Yonah explains the reason for the punishment of death as follows. Since the thief steals from the poor thinking that no one will defend them, this in essence is a greater denial of Hashem. One who denies Hashem on such a level is punished with death.
THE KOLLEL FAMILY MAZEL TOV -Mr. and Mrs. Richard Warn on the Bar Mitzvah of their son, Moshe Yechezkel CONDOLENCES -Mr. Joseph Shafran on the passing of his mother COMMUNITY BULLETIN BOARD The Cedar-Green Community Kollel Friday Evening Parsha Classes will convene this week at 8:00 at the following location:*The Huntington-Green Apts.: Contact Rabbi Levi 381-1617
An early afternoon minyan for Mincha will be held in the Cedar-Center Area:
Location: The Schwartz Law Firm, 13967 Cedar Road,
(Please inform us if you wish to have a happy or solemn occasion or a community or personal event posted on the Community Bulletin Board - Thank you.) To sponsor an issue of Oneg Shabbos, please contact Leib Chaim Krainess, Director of
Kollel Development at (216) 559-0638 or gkrainess@adelphia.net. THIS WEEK'S ONEG SHABBOS IS SPONSORED BY
CEDAR-GREEN COMMUNITY KOLLEL: |
Shema Yisrael Torah Network
info@shemayisrael.co.il
http://www.shemayisrael.co.il
Jerusalem, Israel
732-370-3344