Parshat Vayishlach 5778 - A Blessed Life: A Tribute to Rabbi Elchonon Zomber ז״ל

Parsha Paragraphs

Rabbi Naftali Kassorla

Parshat Vayishlach 5778

A Blessed Life: A Tribute to Rabbi Elchonon Zomber ז״ל

The D’var Torah for this week is dedicated in memory of:
ר׳ אלחנן יעקב ז״ל בן מורי וחמי ר׳ שמואל פנחס

If you are interested in sponsoring a D’var Torah in honor or in memory of someone, or for any occasion,
please email: ParshaParagraphs@gmail.com

In this week's parsha we are riveted with the Torah’s description of the tense encounter between Yaakov with Eisav; it is the first time they have met after Yaakov “tricked” Eisav, in receiving the blessing from their father, Yitzchak. Eisav, who was waiting for Yitzchak’s death in order exact his revenge upon Yaakov, collects a massive army and approaches Yaakov’s encampment. In his fear and anticipation of this showdown, Yaakov prepares accordingly and places his children and wives in separate camps, ensuring that in the worst-case scenario, there will at least be some survivors. In order to steer Eisav away from his rage, Yaakov also prepares gifts for him – a large quantity of animals.

Finally they meet. In a showing of deference to Eisav, Yaakov is completely self-effacing, bowing towards his older brother. Seeing all this, Eisav (as Rashi explains) is overcome with mercy and runs towards Yaakov to embrace him, even kissing him. Despite Eisav’s supposed mollification, Yaakov's attempts to appease Eisav further. He entreats Eisav to take the gifts that he had prepared for him, exclaiming: קח נא את ברכתי (“Please accept my blessings”) (Bereishit 33:11). Interestingly, Yaakov uses the word ברכתי as opposed to מתנתי or מנחתי – which would be more fitting for the context. Even more curious, is that the Torah previously used the word מנחתי when specifically referring to these gifts (Ibid. 32:14). Rashi, seemingly bothered by this change, explains that in fact ברכתי does mean מנחתי. But still, why change now? What is the significance of Yaakov using the word ברכתי here when speaking with Eisav, instead of מנחתי?

I believe that Yaakov was trying to convey a message to Eisav. By using the word ברכתי, Yaakov was actively, if only subtly, trying to reference the blessing. In confronting Yaakov, Eisav is faced with the tremendous ברכות that G-d has bestowed upon his brother; Eisav sees firsthand Yaakov's great riches, a clear culmination of the blessings of Avraham and Yitzchak, which Eisav felt he was supposed to receive.

If we are to establish that  Yaakov intended to refer to his blessings – how can Yaakov seemingly offer them up to Eisav? Did Yaakov not go to great lengths to receive it in place of Eisav? How could he, in a sense, “give it back” now?

With this we arrive at the crux of Yaakov’s message: the value of the blessing was not materialistic; it was not merely a blessing for riches nor honor. The blessing of Avraham and Yitzchak are so much greater than that. They are a mission – a way of life filled with purpose and of meaning for ourselves and for others. The wealth that the ברכות offered was just a means to fulfill a holy mission for the world, not the ends. By referring to the cattle as ברכתי, Yaakov was saying, “Eisav – if you perceive the blessing so superficially as to think that it is just a life of riches, then yes – take it.” In no uncertain terms was Yaakov giving the blessing away; rather he was communicating to Eisav a very direct and clear lesson of the true purpose of blessings: to live and promote a G-dly life, in the service of others.

This message is very powerful for myself and my family, especially now. This Friday will mark the second Yahrtzeit of my beloved brother-in-law, Rabbi Elchonon Zomber זצ״ל. There is no one I can think of who embodied this message as well as Elchonon. He lived a life of meaning and of giving, above and beyond one of mere superficiality. He dedicated himself to a path of true purpose: Teaching – both Torah and lehavdil Mathematics. Anyone who had the honor to meet him immediately sensed how “blessed” he was with incredible talents, a genius mind, a personable and warm demeanor; all talents he could have used to maximize his own status and pocketbook in the competitive world. Yet he chose to devote himself to something much higher, much deeper, and ultimately more impactful upon myriads of people. Nothing gave Elchonon more fulfillment than seeing his students grow, mature and gain a sense of confidence when they succeeded – sometimes against all odds – and he cherished being a part of that process. He once remarked to me that seeing the glint in a student's eye when, after much effort, he finally understood a concept, was more of a rush for him then going skydiving (and we all know how much he loved that!). For the student didn't just learn a new math formula; he gained a deeper and more authentic appreciation of his capabilities – true growth. It is no wonder that even his math students called him Rebbe.

The impact of his untimely death on our own lives is truly immeasurable, yet we take solace in the fact that, despite his short life, the impact he had on others around him will reverberate for years to come. And we all have the opportunity to emulate his ways, to become better people and help others become better as well, creating an everlasting merit for his נשמה.

יהי זכרו ברוך

Shabbat Shalom

Parshat Vayeitzei 5778 - One Word, a World of Difference

Parsha Paragraphs

Rabbi Naftali Kassorla

Parshat Vayeitzei 5778

One Word, a World of Difference

The D’var Torah for this week is dedicated by R’ Reuven and Shera Gaisin in memory of:
הרב בנימין בייניש בן הרב שלום זצ"ל

If you are interested in sponsoring a D’var Torah in honor or in memory of someone, or for any occasion,
please email: ParshaParagraphs@gmail.com

In this week's parsha we learn about Yaakov leaving his family, the work he did for Lavan, and the children his wives bore – building the future nation of the Jewish People.

Yaakov, fulfilling the command of his father and mother, finally reaches Lavan. Lavan excitedly runs out to greet Yaakov, for he recalls how when Eliezer visited the family on his mission, he arrived with a wealth of gifts. Lavan expects that Yaakov will follow suit.

However, as the Midrash tells us, Yaakov gave all his money to Eisav’s son Eliphaz. Eliphaz pursued Yaakov because he had been commanded by his father to kill Yaakov, but Yaakov was wisely able to convince Eliphaz to instead rob him of all his money, since a poor man is likened to a dead man (Nedarim 64b), and therefore fulfilling his father's directive. Thus Yaakov, upon his arrival to Charan, comes with nothing.

Yaakov recounts all this to Lavan, who was apparently dismayed to learn that Yaakov indeed had no gifts for him. Still, he welcomes Yaakov into his home saying: ״אך עצמי ובשרי״ – “Nevertheless, you are my bone and flesh” (Bereishit 29:14). Both the statement and the act are seemingly a great חסד on the part of Lavan – taking a destitute man into his home is no small feat, and receiving nothing for it in return. And Lavan doesn’t just invite him in arbitrarily; he does so on the account of familial ties, displaying a sense of love and brotherhood.

Yet, surprisingly, when we look towards our great Sages to give color and meaning to the interactions and motives of our forefathers, we see this episode in an entirely different light.

Rashi, quoting the Midrash Rabbah, tells us what was really going on beneath Lavan’s words: “‘I have no reason to bring you into the house since you have nothing in your hand, אך (nevertheless), because we are family, I will care for you a month of days.’ And so he [Lavan] did, but even that was not without charge, for Yaakov would graze [Lavan’s] flocks”.

This Chazal is truly astounding. In adding depth to what Lavan said, it changes the entire tone and intention of what was, on the surface, a good deed! How did Chazal extract this interpretation out of what Lavan said? What is it that they saw in Lavan’s words which altered the content so drastically?

The Mizrachi (one of the preeminent commentaries on Rashi) points to Lavan’s use of אך – a word which indicates an exclusion i.e. that Lavan “capped” his offer to house Yaakov. He was really limiting the chesed, saying that because he was receiving nothing, he had no reason to care for Yaakov. Rather only because Yaakov was family would Lavan care for him.

All Lavan really needed to say when welcoming Yaakov in was: אתה עצמי ובשרי - For your are my bone and flesh. This would have connoted to Yaakov that despite his having nothing, the ties of family obligated Lavan to care for him. Yet Lavan doesn't do that;  he adds אך. Two letters – one word – that changed everything. It seems that Lavan intended not merely to set up a scenario where he could “get something” out of Yaakov. He sent Yaakov a message: “You owe me.” He wanted to make Yaakov feel guilty.

Two letters, one word, small enough to slip right in, but big enough to destroy any semblance of a good deed. Lavan needed to make Yaakov feel guilty for not bringing anything, to make him feel like a burden, and create a debt that should be repaid. This is the antithesis of חסד; it is actually an evil act, and Chazal picked up on this subtle piece which made all the difference.

Lavan is known as the epitome of treachery, as we say in the Haggadah ובקש לבן לעקור את הכל. Nonetheless, it would be foolish to think that this type of act is limited solely to Lavan. For how often do we respond the same way – adding in a word, a pause, or something as subtle as a change in tone when we agree to do something? When asked for a favor or an errand, do we hesitantly reply: “Oy...yeah sure… I’ll do it”? How often do we recall to our friends the great act of חסד we did for them, telling them how hard or how expensive it was, supposedly without asking for anything in return? “You don’t even realize what I went through to…” Sure, we’d like to justify these statements as a showing of how much we care for the other person and the great lengths to which we would go to make them happy...but we all know that this is a falsity; deep down we want recognition for the thing we did, and that’s our “payment.”

Through further introspection, a person of sensitivity can objectively realize that all this serves to accomplish is making the recipient feel guilty for not just taking, but for even asking in the first place. We know how much those little exchanges can poison a positive relationship, and yet still we fall into this negative pattern of behavior. As givers, we should do for others without creating any feeling of guilt or debt, and that will be the greatest gift we can give – a true חסד.

Nobody wants to feel like they are a burden, and because of that, it is incumbent upon us (the givers) to give in way that not only strengthens, but also eases the feelings of the receiver.

We are familiar with the famous idea of Rav Eliyahu Dessler, that אהבה contains the lashon הב – which means to give. The implication here is that relationships are fostered through the process of giving and investment in another. But giving to another can only build the relationship when one gives in a way of drawing the person closer, not pushing them away. Lavan used the opportunity to push away, to extract something out of Yaakov, for his own personal gain.

My friend Rabbi Tuvia Epstein Shlit”a pointed out to me an incredible הערה, this low level act of kindness of Lavan is amazingly contrasted with what we have seen in the previous parshiot. Avraham welcomed in the travelling angels posing as men, offering them only water and bread, yet provided them with a full meal. But even more so, he was self-effacing when inviting them: ויאמר אם נא מצאתי חן בעיניך אל נא תעבור מעל עבדיך (And he said, ‘My Lord, if I find favor in your eyes, please pass not away from your servant’). Note how Avraham places the focus on their presence as a kindness to him, that it is his honor and pleasure to service them, in no way making the travellers feel that Avraham was doing them a favor!

This is how chesed should be done, not with guilting, not by self aggrandizement, rather simply focusing on others, their needs, their feelings, and their comfort. And the more focused we are on this goal, the more we can be aware of the subtle messages we are sending, and be sensitive to avoid any action which will detract from the great opportunity to do a complete chesed. We should be blessed in our endeavors in attempting to inculcate this lesson.

Shabbat Shalom

Parshat Toldot 5778: Heartfelt Desires

Parsha Paragraphs

Rabbi Naftali Kassorla

Parshat Toldot 5778

Heartfelt Desires

The D’var Torah for this week is dedicated in honor of:
הרב הגאון ידיד נפשי ר׳ יצחק בן רחל שליט״א ורעייתו מינא רחל בת אידה חיה תח׳
יהי רצון שימלא הקב״ה כל משאלות לבכם לטובה מתוך נחת שמחה ושפע

If you are interested in sponsoring a D’var Torah in honor or in memory of someone, or for any occasion, please email: ParshaParagraphs@gmail.com

In this week’s parsha we are told of the barrenness of Rivka and Yitzchak, and their beseeching G-d to grant them a child.

The pasuk says: ויעתר יצחק לה׳ - “Yitzchak entreated Hashem opposite his wife” (Bereishit 25:21). Rashi explains that Yitzchak and Rivka would stand in opposite corners of the room and pray. Yitzchak would pray on Rivka’s behalf, and she would pray for herself as well. Directly after this, in the same verse, the Torah tells us, “And Hashem allowed Himself to be entreated by Yitzchak, and his wife Rivka conceived.” Their prayers were answered.

When reading the pasuk, from the very fact the Torah puts both the prayer and its answer in one pasuk implies that Hashem answered them very swiftly, thus showing us the direct and immediate correlation between the two: That prayer was the key to their being blessed with a child.

The Gemara in Yevamot (64a) asks a very famous and emotionally packed question: This was not the first time or the last time one of our אמהות was stricken with being עקרות. Why did Hashem allow our patriarchs and matriarchs to have children only after many years of heartfelt prayer? The Gemara gives its answer which has become famous to many: מפני שהקב״ה   מתאוה לתפילתן של צדיקים - “For Hashem desires the prayers of the righteous.”

This answer is deep and contains within it many concepts, with much ink spilled expounding upon it. However when we look at the original source, the Midrash Tanchuma, we are faced with a tremendous peculiarity. The Midrash asks the same question as the Gemara but adds a new dimension to the answer.  Speaking from Hashem’s perspective, it tells us that Hashem made a reckoning saying, “They [the אבות] have wealth, they have the respect of the world, if I give them children they will never pray to me” and the Midrash concludes, “We see from here that Hashem desires the prayers of Tzadikim.”

This Midrash is startling, to say the least. Are we not talking about the אבות הקדושים, whose lives were completely focused on the enhancement of G-d’s glory in this world, the very people who created the concept of a daily prayer. Can it be that they, of all people, would not pray to Hashem? How can we understand that Hashem could entertain the possibility that the Avot would not pray to Him?

From here we can truly gain a deeper understanding of prayer. תפילה, as we too often assume, is not just a compilation of praises to G-d. Rather the animating aspect of prayer is that it is a time for us to connect and recognize The Power which runs our universe, nourishes our souls, and comforts our hearts. However, that recognition and connection can only come from a place of total self-abnegation. Only when we realize that we are so dependent upon His grace for everything we have in life, can we really connect to Him. But how can one truly feel this way if he lacks absolutely nothing? When we lack something tremendously important and we recognize that only Hashem can give it to us, we are more able to pray with a realization of our reliance upon Him and to forge a real bond with Him. This is the prayer which Hashem desires.

With this in mind, we can answer our initial question: Of course the אבות would have prayed to Hashem even if they had children right away, but perhaps their prayer would have been lacking this deeper awareness – the awareness of man’s utter dependence on G-d for his every need. Perhaps had they prayed without feeling this existential lack it (on their level) would not have been a tefillah which one casts all of his burdens, hopes, and dreams onto Hashem, and allows His providence to control his life.תפילה לעני (Tehillim 102)– the tefillah of a pauper, of one who is lacking, one who “pours forth his plea”, is not the same as the tefillah of one who has everything.

Specifically out of G-d’s love and desire to draw the the אבות closer, He desired that they pray this deeper tefilla, for He desires the ultimate relationship that it will create.

May we merit having a true connection with Hashem in times of good and bad, and may we all be able to recognize that whatever we lack in life is a symbol of G-d’s love and His desire for a deeper relationship with us.

Shabbat Shalom

Parshat Chayei Sarah 5778: Words Unspoken

Parsha Paragraphs

Rabbi Naftali Kassorla

Parshat Chayei Sarah 5778

Words Unspoken

The D’var Torah for this week is dedicated in honor of:
הרב הגאון ידיד נפשי ר׳ יצחק בן רחל שליט״א ורעייתו מינא רחל בת אידה חיה תח׳
יהי רצון שימלא הקב״ה כל משאלות לבכם לטובה מתוך נחת שמחה ושפע

If you are interested in sponsoring a D’var Torah in honor or in memory of someone, or for any occasion, please email: ParshaParagraphs@gmail.com

This week’s parsha tells us of Eliezer’s mission: to find a wife for Yitzchak, his master Avraham Avinu’s son. Avraham has Eliezer swear to complete this task, not taking a girl from the Canaanite nations, and bring home the bride.

Officially, all Eliezer needed to do was seek out Betuel and Lavan and pick out the girl for Yitzchak and head home. Yet he doesn’t do that. Instead, he sets up a test of sorts: “Behold I am standing by the spring water...let it be that the maiden to whom I shall say ‘Please tip over your jug so I may drink’, and who replies ‘Drink, and I will even water your camels,’ her will you have designated for Your servant, for Yitzchak... ” (Bereishit 24:13-14). Eliezer requested that the sign be for the girl to offer to water to him and his camels.

The Malbim explains that the intent of Eliezer's request was to glean understanding of Rivka’s character traits. He preferred a girl with modesty and simplicity, the kind of person who would rather draw water herself, and not through her servants, despite her family's wealth. (1*)

As mentioned previously, Eliezer asks G-d that Rivka should respond, “Drink, and I will even water your camels.” (Ibid. 14) The Sforno explains that Eliezer wanted to see that her actions go above and beyond his request, and she will offer all that is needed. Eliezer stipulates that together with offering to give him a drink, she should also offer to give the camels a drink, even though he doesn’t explicitly ask for that.

However, in the actual playing-out of this episode (ibid. 18), when giving Eliezer a drink, Rivka does not mention a word about watering the camels. She speaks only of bringing water for Eliezer. Only after Eliezer finished drinking does Rivka proceed to draw water for the camels too. (2*)

Rav Moshe Feinstein זצ״ל (Darash Moshe) gives a fascinating insight into what these actions demonstrate about Rivka. Says Rav Moshe, it is only human nature that when doing a kindness for another we overstate or promise more than asked for. This is not necessarily out of haughtiness, rather it stems out of the desire to make the other person feel comfortable in asking ask for more, to assure them that they are dealing with a giving person who wants to fill their needs entirely.

However, Rav Moshe explains, Rivka’s trait of חסד was so refined that it was second-nature to her that another's needs should be provided for. That Eliezer’s camels had to be watered was so obvious, she didn’t even consider it a חסד at all, and thus saw no need to even verbalize her intentions – of course she would do it! Chesed was so much the core of her personality that it went even deeper than second-nature; it was her essence.

This idea from Rav Moshe leads us towards an incredible lesson: If one doesn’t even think to mention his actions, it shows that the trait of kindness is ingrained in his very fiber. Thus the unspoken acts of kindness, the innate traits, are sometimes greater than the outspoken and verbalized ones.

In a certain sense Rivka’s act didn't need to be “verbalized” – and perhaps if it was, it would have cheapened it. This need to verbalize and publicize our good deeds and stringencies is known as “virtue signaling”, a negative and haughty trait. People engaged in this type of showiness tend to bloviate, serving no purpose other than to make them feel good about themselves, for they have now shown others how virtuous they are. This only naturally leads to a feeling of superiority, so that when acts of kindness do get performed, it's not because they are ingrained in us. Instead, it is a robotic mirroring of chesed, of what we (or others) perceive to be kindness. Inevitably, this “kindness” will be misapplied – because it’s merely a synthetic knock-off of the real thing.

I heard a good line several weeks ago which recently became very popular that illustrates this idea perfectly: “Empty barrels make the most noise”. Generally, the less תוכן (substance) a person has, the louder one tends to be.

Rav Eliyahu Dessler once quipped that a person can become a בעל גאווה (very haughty) by working on his עניוות (humility). Meaning that by working on humility, one can also start looking down on others for “not being as humble as me”, which would ironically defeat the purpose of his efforts. This type of self-improvement is empty and self-serving. And when manifested in this way, even his humility is filled with haughtiness.

This lesson of the ingrained trait of חסד is beautifully contrasted with last week’s episode of Lot and the Angels in Sodom. Lot welcomes the angels, as guests to his home. Upon hearing of them, the people of the city attempt to break down his door and attack Lot’s guests. Lot, in a futile attempt to stave the gang off, offers his daughters to them. On the one hand, he risked his life to save his guests, mirroring Avraham’s trait of kindness. Yet on the other hand, unfathomably, he offered his own daughters as meat to the rabid mob of Sodomites. How could he act in such a contradictory manner? Protecting his guests, while serving up his own children?!

In light of what we discussed above, the Alter of Slabodka explains (3*) that Lot’s חסד was  superficial, which he only mimicked from growing up in the house of Avraham. His חסד appeared virtuous on  the surface, but never went beyond the surface level. It was not ingrained in him in a deep way, and therefore it is no wonder that it was horribly misapplied. This led him to protect his guests at all costs, while sacrificing his own children! Chesed – or any trait for that matter – that is not really processed into our character, is only skin-deep.

The greatness of Rivka was that her kindness was not a virtue, or an ideal to be “spoken about,” rather it was a reality, it was her life. Does one need an announcement every time they breath? Of course not! For Rivka, doing acts of kindness was equally as natural and a concrete part of her personality as was her name. This is what Eliezer was looking for in a spouse for the son of Avraham – the paragon of kindness, the archetype of inculcating and infusing that kindness into his עבודת השם.

This is the level of character that we strive for: to have chesed become ingrained in our essence and a part of both our conscious and subconscious. And though we may not be at this level yet, we should not despair or minimize our deeds We should grow strong in our resolve and be blessed in our efforts in this endeavor.

Shabbat Shalom

---

1* The Malbim assumes her family was rich. I couldn’t find a proof for that assumption.

2* Interestingly, when Eliezer recounts the story to Rivka’s family, he tells it over as if she fulfilled his initial request, and that she initially offered both him and the camels a drink.

3*  See the Alter of Slabodka’s explanation of an astounding Midrash which states that the reason Lot was saved from Sodom was due to the merit for not revealing to the Egyptians that Sarah was really the wife of Avraham. He asks: Why wasn’t he saved from destruction on account of his הכנסת אורחים (hospitality) to the angels that visited his home? What is special about not “ratting out” Avraham? Seemingly that isn’t even an act at all! The Alter explains that Lot did הכנסת אורחים by habit, while not revealing the secret about Avraham was a true display of loyalty. Lot lived in the house of Avraham, and so his bringing in the angels was a mere replica of Avraham’s acquired trait of hospitality. However, the struggle to not report on Avraham was his own acquisition. The Torah values the struggle and ultimate acquiring of a trait, much more than an act done by rote.

Parshat Vayeira 5778: Mistaken Identity

Parsha Paragraphs

Rabbi Naftali Kassorla

Parshat Vayeira 5778

Mistaken Identity

The D’var Torah for this week is dedicated in memory of:

ר׳ אלחנן יעקב ז״ל בן מורי וחמי ר׳ שמואל פנחס

If you are interested in sponsoring a D’var Torah in honor or in memory of someone, or for any occasion, please email: ParshaParagraphs@gmail.com

Our parsha this week begins: וירא אליו ה׳ “Hashem, appeared to him in the plains of Mamre” (Bereishit 18:1). Rashi comments that G-d's appearance was for the purpose of ביקור חולים, visiting Avraham who was ill, following his circumcision. Interestingly, the Torah does not name who is actually being visited by G-d.

Rav Yaakov Kenizel, in his commentary on Rashi, notes this difficulty in the text; how does Rashi know that G-d’s intention was to visit Avraham because he is ill? He explains that Rashi knew from the fact that the Torah does not identify Avraham that our parsha must be a continuation of the previous parsha which concluded with Avraham performing a circumcision on himself. Therefore there was no need to explicitly identify Avraham. (Thus, it must be that G-d was appearing to  Avraham, and it was done with the intention of visiting the sick.)

Why does the Torah not formally identify Avraham? Why must we rely on such an obscure inference which determines to whom G-d is appearing?

Perhaps there is a deeper message hidden here. As we know, G-d comes to visit Avraham in his pain. After Avraham undertook the arduous mitzvah of ברית מילה, Hashem comes to “perform” the mitzvah of ביקור חולים – visiting the sick, so to speak. The Midrash explains that in order to curtail the burden upon Avraham, G-d even made the day hotter. This would prevent people from travelling and passing by his tent, lest Avraham extend himself to tend to them.

All this was with the intention of alleviating the strain on Avraham. We all understand that when a person is sick, they are not “themselves”; they don't look their best, and they are not “at their best.” This is true, whether due to a serious illness (G-d forbid), or because of something as simple as a mild headache or toothache. Unfortunately, it is easy to judge or conclude that their behavior, when in pain, is indicative of their true nature, when in truth, it certainly is not.

This idea is born out in a vivid and difficult memory. I knew someone who throughout his life was to me a paragon of sensitivity and menschlichkeit. Unfortunately, he was stricken with terrible illness to which he ultimately succumbed. I watched painfully as this great man, over the time he received treatments, became bloated and immobile. He lost his hair, and due to his incredible pain, he would lose his temper as well. It was almost as though he was a different person. This person who I adored for so many years and admired for his care and sensitivity to his spouse, was now irritable and moody towards her. It felt so incongruent – how could this happen? How could a person undergo such a drastic change? Was this who he really was deep down? How could all those years of sterling character traits vanish in such a short amount of time? I struggled to make sense of what I was witnessing.

That was until I learned this parsha. Then I understood this important lesson in ביקור חולים, and basic, general empathy. In not identifying Avraham by name, the Torah teaches us that when in pain, a person is not necessarily “himself”; that pain and difficulty can take over a person, and become an impediment to him being the person who he really is. The self is buried under the difficulties that they are bearing. And we, the onlookers, must understand that this isn’t representative of their true, best version of themselves.

However, our message does not end there. When we look further we see that this episode is a testament to the tremendous trait of חסד (kindness) that Avraham possessed. For despite his deep pain, he so desired to perform the mitzvah of הכנסת אורחים (hospitality) and we see, both in the written Torah and in the Midrashim, the great effort that he exerted towards it.

As mentioned previously, G-d made the day hotter to stop travellers, lest Avraham over-exert himself in serving guests. Yet the Midrash says that when G-d saw how dejected Avraham became, He sent the Angels to Avraham’s tent. Why, after all of this, does Hashem “relent” and send the Angels? Wouldn’t this still run into the issue of inconveniencing and even hurting Avraham? What changed?

Again, this portion only bespeaks the great praise of Avraham, who lived on this high spiritual level and was able to overcome his pain. For us, it is not so easy. He was clearly experiencing greater pain by not having guests than by the physical pain he endured from the Brit Milah. Thus in the end, G-d did send the angels to him. But we are not Avraham Avinu, and we do not expect that of ourselves – all the more so of others! What we can do though, is strive to better understand the pain and empathize with those who find themselves in these difficult situations.

This should serve for us as a lesson in empathy and love for others around us. May we continually grow to be the best version of ourselves.

Shabbat Shalom