Part I
On the first day of Rosh Hashonoh we read the parsha
of VaHashem pokad es Soroh (Bereishis 21:1) which
relates the events surrounding the birth of Yitzchok and the
expulsion of Hogor and Yishmoel from Avrohom's house. On the
second day we read the parshas Ho'akeidoh (22:1).
The Ran, based on a gemora in Megilla (31a),
writes that we read the parshas Ho'akeidoh on the
second day, "in order to mention the Akeidoh of
Yitzchok and of the ayil, since because of that event
we blow with the shofar of a ram."
We read VaHashem pokad on the first day because Soroh
conceived on Rosh Hashonoh. On the other hand, akeidas
Yitzchok is fundamental to Rosh Hashonoh. The zichron
teru'oh as teki'as shofar is called, refers to the
bris of Avrohom Ovinu at the akeidas Yitzchok,
and it is not clear why this parsha was pushed off to
the second day. Although both days of Rosh Hashonoh are like
one yomo arichto, the fact is that the second day is
only miderabonon. My son, Rav Avrohom Yeshayohu,
pointed this out to me. It could be that since Soroh
conceived on Rosh Hashonoh it is considered an event that
occurred on Rosh Hashonoh itself, and it was therefore held
preferable to read that parsha on the first day.
"And Avrohom said to Sorai, `Here, your maidservant is in
your hand; do to her that which is good in your eyes.' And
Sorai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her"
(Bereishis 16:6). The Ramban says that Soroh Imeinu
was punished for this, as well as Avrohom for letting her do
it, in that Hogor was given a son who was pere odom,
and who will oppress the descendants of Avrohom and Soroh.
How does this fit in with the medrash quoted by Rashi
that Soroh was free of sin when she died like a twenty year
old? The Ramban also brings this droshoh of Chazal.
The question is an even greater one according to Rashi who
adds that all her years were equally good.
Chazal (Bereishis Rabboh 39:14 and quoted by Rashi)
say on the posuk (Bereishis 12:5), "And the souls that
they had made in Choron," that Avrohom had converted the men
and Soroh the ladies — the posuk credits them
with having "made" them. It says, "And Sorai the wife of
Avrohom took Hogor the Egyptian" (16:3) — she "took"
her with words of encouragement: "Fortunate are you to unite
with such a holy body."
Sorai, who was a prophetess, understood that by giving
Avrohom Hogor as a wife and bringing up Hogor's child, she
would herself fulfill her mission, and would later be able to
give birth to a holy son who would be a forefather of the
Jewish nation. About this HaKodosh Boruch Hu said,
"For I have known him to the end that he may command his
children and his household after him, that they may keep the
way of Hashem to do righteousness and justice; to the end
that Hashem may bring [through] Avrohom that which He has
spoken of him." (18:19).
Soroh thought that she would be able to influence Hogor to
become a worthy member of Avrohom's household, and that she
and her son Yishmoel would not disturb the education of the
holy offspring to whom she would give birth. However, when
Soroh saw that as soon as Hogor conceived "her mistress was
despised in her eyes," she became very worried that her son
to whom she was going to give birth would be negatively
affected by Hogor. And so Soroh "oppressed" her.
It is obvious that the "oppression" referred to here is not
to be taken in the literal sense any more than Reuven's act
regarding Bilho (Bereishis 35:22) is to be taken in
the literal sense, as Chazal say (Shabbos 55b),
"Whoever says that Reuven committed a sin is mistaken." There
was only a very distant resemblance to the literal act, and
the Torah comes to indicate the severity with which it
regards the event.
Similarly, Soroh intended to subdue her so that she would be
able to accept authority and instruction, as Chazal say,
"Throw bile at your students." Avrohom agreed with this and
told her, "Do as you see fit." However, although the aim was
a holy one, there was oppression on the part of Soroh and
Avrohom, and that is what the Ramban refers to.
To understand this we have to apply the well-known principle
of HaRav Chaim Shmulevitz zt"l, the rosh yeshiva of
Mir, that an offense bein odom lechavero is like a
burning flame and a cutting sword. Even if the offending
party has not sinned at all, he is still burned by his act
and punished for it.
Rav Chaim proves this principle from various sources. For
example, chazal say in Bereishis Rabboh (84:20) that
Binyomin caused a schism between the tribes as it says
(Bereishis 44:13), "And they tore up their clothes."
He was punished for this in the capital Shushan, as it says
(Esther 4:1), "And Mordechai tore his clothes." What does
this mean? Surely Binyomin did not take part at all in the
sale of Yosef, and later he was only a tool in the hands of
Yosef and Menasheh to cause his brothers to tear their
clothes, and he too tore his clothes. Nevertheless, since the
cup was put in his bag and he was the cause of the brothers'
grief which led them to tear their clothes, he was
punished.
Another source he also quotes is the gemora in Bovo
Kammo (117a) where Rav Kahane asked a question to R.
Yochonon and R. Yochonon asked to see Rav Kahane. He saw that
R. Kahane's lips were parted due to a physical defect and
since this was the first time that he saw him, he thought
that he was laughing at him for having refuted his Torah
lessons in the shiur. R. Yochonon felt aggrieved, as a
consequence of which Rav Kahane passed away even though Rav
Kahane did nothing to R. Yochonon. On the contrary, he only
had a physical defect. But since he was the cause of R.
Yochonon's grief, Rav Kahane suffered for the bein odom
lechavero was like a burning flame and a cutting sword:
it burns and cuts even when there is no fault.
Based on this principle we can also understand the
gemora in Bovo Basra that Boaz made 120 feasts
for his sons, as it says (Shofetim 12:9), "And he had
thirty sons, and thirty daughters he sent abroad, and thirty
daughters he brought in from abroad for his sons." He made
two feasts for each one, one in his father's house and one in
his father-in-law's, and he did not invite Monoach to any of
them saying, "Whereby will the barren mule repay me?" They
all died in his lifetime. The Rashbam (ibid.) says
that the two feasts refer to the seudas eirusin and
the seudas nisuin.
The Maharsho asks how a well-known tzaddik like Boaz
could say such a thing. He answers that tzaddikim are
accustomed not to benefit from others. If he had invited
Monoach he would have given him a present (a
shushbinus, a type of enforceable loan), but Monoach
would not have been able to reciprocate because he had no
offspring, and Monoach would not want to be the recipient of
a free gift so he would have insisted on giving something to
Boaz, but Boaz did not want that since he considered it as
taking a free gift.
The Maharsho does not explain why Boaz expressed himself in
such a way. It could be that he only thought it. And he
certainly did not say it sixty times, that is at each feast.
If so, what was the sin of Boaz according to the Maharsho,
seeing that his sole intention was to help Monoach not to
benefit from others, which is a high level in avodas
Hashem? We have to say that despite his motives, Boaz
nevertheless made Monoach suffer, and therefore at each
wedding one of his children died. How could Boaz have failed
to notice his sin? He was the godol hador and a
tzaddik as the Maharsho writes, and yet he did not
consider it necessary to invite Monoach even to the sixtieth
wedding?
We have to say that it did not occur to him that there was
anything wrong with his action and that, on the contrary, he
thought that he was fulfilling the virtue of only benefiting
from Hashem and not from flesh and blood (as the Rambam
explains at the end of Hilchos Matnos Aniyim). And yet
Chazal explain that there was a flaw in his action, because
he made Monoach suffer. (It could also be that Boaz did not
realize that Monoach was suffering.)
Avrohom and Soroh certainly knew that they were causing
anguish and that anyone making another suffer is punished for
it, but they did it lesheim Shomayim for the sake of
their son's education.
In the second parsha after the birth of Yitzchok
(Bereishis 21:9) it says, "And Soroh saw the son of
Hogor the Egyptian whom she had borne to Avrohom making fun."
Rashi (ibid.) writes that metzachek ("making
fun") includes avodoh zora, giluy arroyos and
shefichas domim. Therefore Soroh said to Avrohom,
"Cast out this maidservant and her son; for the son of this
maid servant shall not be an heir with my son, with
Yitzchok."
Soroh realized that it would not be possible to educate
Yitzchok in one house together with Yishmoel. The Torah,
which is an "inheritance of the community of Yaakov" was
designated for Yitzchok, and he was to continue the spiritual
legacy. It was not possible to bring him up in the same house
as Yishmoel and Hogor. The Torah tells us that Avrohom was
very upset on account of his son, but HaKodosh Boruch
Hu told Avrohom, "In all that Soroh says to you listen to
her, for in Yitzchok shall seed be called to you."
Chazal derived from this that Avrohom was secondary to Soroh
in prophesy (Shemos Rabboh 81:1). Immediately,
"Avrohom got up early in the morning, and took bread and a
bottle of water, and gave it to Hogor, putting it on her
shoulder, and the child, and sent her away." Rashi (ibid.)
cites the Medrash that Yishmoel was sick and could not
walk. Avrohom and Soroh certainly knew that by expelling
Hogor and Yishmoel when the latter was sick they were
committing a grievous injustice, but they did it lesheim
Shomayim, in order to safeguard the education of
Yitzchok, the father of the holy nation. It was a type of
aveiroh lishmoh.
They also must have known that for such a sin you have to pay
a heavy price, it was an act of mesirus nefesh on
their part and on the part of their descendants who would be
persecuted by the descendants of Yishmoel for all
generations. And yet they still did it, sacrificing
themselves and their descendants for the sake of Yitzchok's
education.
Since this was an aveiroh lishmoh done lesheim
Shomayim we can understand why the Medrash says
that Soroh at her petiroh was like a twenty year old,
free of sin. However, they did cause anguish to Hogor and
Yishmoel thus making a blemish in their Tzelem Elokim,
and that needed to be rectified.
End of Part I
