Parsha Paragraphs
Rabbi Naftali Moshe Kassorla
Parshat Toldot 5779
In Father’s Footsteps
The D’var Torah for this week is dedicated in memory of:
ר׳ אלחנן יעקב זצ״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
When we attempt to glean insight into our great forefather Yitzchak Avinu, we are faced with an insurmountable wall, not just because of our own limitations in being able to fully grasp his (and the other אבות’s) spiritual greatness. But also because the Torah does not give us much material to work with.
Yitzchak’s life seems to jump from birth, to the Akeidah, to his marriage, an episode with Avimelech, and then his impending death and his desire to pass on the blessings of Avraham. This pales in comparison to the detail the Torah records for Avraham, and is doubled by the episodes of Yaakov.
Yet, when we look deeper into the Torah, we can parse out a common theme, which can perhaps be a window into the essence of Yitzchak and his life’s mission.
The parsha begins:
ואלה תולדת יצחק בן אברהם אברהם הוליד את יצחק
These are the תולדות of Yitzchak. Avraham begot Yitzchak (Bereishit 25:19)
The Torah, rather than delineate Yitzchak’s children, instead points out that Yitzchak was born to Avraham.
The word תולדות in Biblical Hebrew can have a dual meaning, and the context in which it is used often presents a challenge to the commentators to explain its usage. Literally תולדות means “the progeny” or children. Thus, if used accordingly, the next logical line would be a list of the descendants of that person. Yet, we have also seen the word תולדות used in its other form – to convey a message regarding that person or tell his history. Thus we saw previously that the Torah used תולדות in reference to Noach, only to list off his qualities – because the Torah was making a statement about his essence.
I would like to suggest that here as well, the Torah is making a statement about the character of Yitzchak and that is: Yitzchak was, both in lineage but also in ideology “בן אברהם” – the son of Avraham Avinu. He viewed himself in this capacity as the torchbearer of Avraham’s legacy. Once we establish this theme, it becomes more evident that this was the essence of Yitzchak’s life.
We see this in later in the parsha, when a famine strikes the Land:
ויהי רעב בארץ מלבד הרעב הראשון אשר היה בימי אברהם וילך יצחק אל אבימלך מלך פלשתים גררה. וירא אליו יהוה ויאמר אל תרד מצרימה שכן בארץ אשר אמר אליך.
There was a famine in the land—aside from the previous famine that had occurred in the days of Avraham—and Yitzchak went to Avimelech, king of the Plishtim, in Gerar. Hashem had appeared to him and said, “Do not go down to Egypt; stay in the land which I point out to you.” (Ibid. 26:1-2)
Why does Hashem deem it necessary to tell him not to go down? Does the Torah mention anything about him intending to go? The answer is clear: Because Yitzchak was emulating his father, and just like Avraham went down to Egypt, so too Yitzchak intended to go. Thus Hashem had to preempt by explicitly prohibiting Yitzchak from going.
We read further on:
וישב יצחק ויחפר את־בארת המים אשר חפרו בימי אברהם אביו ויסתמום פלשתים אחרי מות אברהם ויקרא להן שמות כשמת אשר־קרא להן אביו
Yitzchak dug anew the wells which had been dug in the days of his father Avraham and which the Plishtim had blocked after Avraham’s death; and he gave them the same names that his father had given them. (Ibid. 18)
Yitzchak goes back to the wells that Avraham dug and re-digs them, but not just that; he gives them the exact same names, just as his father had done. Again we see this common thread – Yitzchak was the consummate son – emulating his father in all his deeds.
Yet, with all this in mind, we have to ask a fundamental question: Each of the אבות had their own unique qualities, and infused the world and their descendants with those qualities for generations to come. It seems however, that Yitzchak was almost a carbon copy of Avraham Avinu, acting exactly as his father did. What was Yitzchak’s unique quality and what did he bring forth to the world?
As developed here in previous parshiot, we have pointed out that the greatness of Avraham Avinu was his strength in making drastic decisions which would impact him and his family for generations to come, in the pursuit of the truth. Avraham is the archetypal iconoclast1 – unafraid to stand out from the world around him, a word steeped in degenerate idol worship2.
Professor Gregory Berns, a neuroscientist and professor at Emory University and author of the book “Iconoclast: A Neuroscientist Reveals How to Think Differently” explains that human behavior is largely dictated (if unchecked) by fear. But Professor Berns explains “the ability of the successful iconoclast is to overcome those fears and actually persevere and perform under those circumstances.” He explains that a natural iconoclast is someone who isn’t deterred by the fear to be different and the natural blowback it invites.
Yet, being an iconoclast is a double-edged sword. Inasmuch as a person can stand out and be different, it is then a challenge for the iconoclast to remain the same! For some, there is a pleasure in being different and standing out. Perhaps for the special attention it illicits; it feeds into a feeling of uniqueness, even of superiority that they are more knowledgeable, more elite than the mainstream. But upon reflection, there is no value unto itself to want be different – for the sake of being different. Rather the value is to be willing to be different for the sake of the truth.
Thus, if one is constantly “going against the grain,” not due to deeply thought-out principles, then what happens when everyone is like them? The faux iconoclast inevitably feels uncomfortable and needs to change – again! Why? Because his initial change wasn’t rooted in truth, it was rooted in the simple desire to be different.
Perhaps Avraham was willing to be a renegade and set himself apart because he was a natural dissident? Who is to say that his future progeny, would not do the same! They may simply not have a fear to break away and be different, and then would perhaps act differently from Avraham himself!
The ability to maintain what Avraham accomplished is what Yitzchak brought to the table. Yitzchak, the son of the iconoclast was being the consummate son – attempting to replicate his father in all his actions. But how did he do this? Not by being different; rather by being the same, by sticking with the truth and the message that Avraham gifted the world.
With this understanding, we also gain a deeper appreciation for the choices and nature of Avraham Avinu. The fact that Yitzchak was sincere in his actions proves that Avraham did not act for the sake of being different. Rather, his choices were borne out of a discovery of truth. It is that truth which him to be different.
The challenge now was to continue to have the גבורה, the strength and will to stick to this truth. This perhaps is an aspect of the גבורת יצחק3 – to remain true to the message of Avraham and not change for the sake of change, but change for the sake of truth.
Shabbat Shalom
- Ironically the historical definition of an Iconoclast is: “destroyer of images used in religious worship, in particular” (Derived from Greek for "breaker of icons" wittier in Medieval Greek as εἰκονοκλάστης). Avraham Avinu was literally the first breaker of Idols, the supreme iconoclast.
- Perhaps we really don’t stop to fully appreciate what it meant in those days to totally disconnect oneself from his land, his tribe, and direct family members. Outside of losing the general hierarchy and position within your tribe, and the economic shared benefits that nomadic tribes had established for themselves, it also meant possibly being killed as a traitor. Leaving the ingroup was tantamount to rebelling the old order. No wonder לך לך is counted among the Ten trials that Avraham had to endure. See Eichler, Barry L, ‘Nuzi and the Bible: A Retrospective’ in: Dumu-e-dub-ba-a: Studies in Honor of Ake W. Sjoberg, ed. Hermann Behrens, Darlene Loding, and Martha T Roth, pp. 107-19, Philadelphia: University Museum, 1989 for further reading.
- עיין בזוהר חדש פרשת יתרו דף נה: ״יומא תניינא יצחק, דדרגיה גבורה, לקבליה יומא חמישאה, דאיהו הוד, דרגא דדוד״
