THETEXT

i"yx

THERELEVANTPRINCIPLE

DIRECTIONS IN RASHIA weekly d’var Torah with special emphasis on understanding and utilizing

the fundamental principles that guided Rashi

Parashas Chayei Sarah Most of this week’s Parasha is taken up with Eliezer’s trip to Haranto find a wife for Yitzchak. From the beginning of the Parasha until

Pasuk 33, the Torah presents the story, in great detail, from the third-personpoint-of-view (“Avraham was old,” “the servant said to him,” etc.). Beginningwith Pasuk 34, Eliezer retells the story, in all its details, as a first-person narrativeto Besuel and his family (“I am Abraham’s servant,” “I came this day to the well”etc.

{an weqt} mFwO©d i¥p§t¦l zFa¨ i¥c§a©r l¤W ozgi¦U dti `g£ i¦A©x x©n¨i¥tEB d¥A§x©d§e ,dxFY©a dlEt§M x¤f¤ri¦l¡ l¤W dW §x©R i¥x£d¤W ,mi¦pA l¤W ozxFY¦n dfi¦n§x¦A `N¤ Ep§Y¦p Ÿl dxFz

[Why does the Torah repeat Eliezer’s story in complete detail?] Said Rabbi Acha:The conversation of the servants of the Patriarchs is more beautiful to Hashemthan the Torah of their descendents, for we see that the Parasha of Eliezer isdoubled in the Torah, and yet many basic principles of the Torah [i.e., mitsvos]were given only through a hint.

Although some disagree, many commentators insist that Rashi doesnot explain one verse according to a particular Midrash, and thenexplain a later verse according to another Midrash that contradictsand disagrees with the first one. In Devek Tov, a classicsupercommentary on Rashi, the author rejects the idea that Rashi

would quote contradictory Midrashim, and writes: “The mind cannot accept thatRashi, the divine teacher, whose entire goal is to explain the Torah in such a waythat there are no doubts, and to show the Torah’s beauty, and to benefit us byreconciling the texts [would quote contradictory Midrashim].”

A corrolary of this is that we must “hold Rashi accountable” for his words; i.e., ifhe establishes a general principle, we must constantly check to see if this principleholds true throughout the Torah.

1

THE QUESTION

AN ANSWER

Rashi establishes here a principle that only narratives about the Avosare important enough in the eyes of Hashem to be repeated in theTorah in detail; “the Torah of their children,” however--meaning the

Mitsvos--are not repeated in detail, and in fact are often not presented directly atall, but rather by hint only.

This is difficult to understand, because we do find some Mitvos that are repeated indetail. Most notably, the instructions for making the Mishkan and the BigdeiKehuna are presented in great detail in Parashayos T’ruma and T’tsaveh, and thenare repeated in detail in Parashayos Vayakhel and Pekudei!

Rabeinu Bechaye [14th-century commentator] explains that the Avoswere especially beloved because daM §xO ©d m ¥d m ¥d--they were a“chariot for the Shechina,” the holy presence of Hashem. Just as a

chariot exists only to serve the one who rides on it, the Avos subjugated themselvestotally to Hashem, and thus merited that Hashem’s presence rested and “rode” onthem. Furthermore, this zelhazd (subjugation) extended even to their familiesand servants, such as Eliezer, the servant of Avraham (see Tanya, Chap. 39).

According to this, we can understand why the parashayos dealing with theconstruction of the Mishkan are repeated, similar to the parasha of Eliezer. Textsdealing with the Avos are repeated because the Avos were “chariots for theShechina”; obviously, the Mishkan was also a “chariot for the Shechina”--itsfunction was to serve as a resting-place for the Shechina in this world.

In fact, there is another similarity between these two parashayos. The four longtexts that describe the construction of the Mishkan end with a description of howthis edifice accomplished its purpose of bringing the Shechina down to rest upon it:

{dl:n zeny} o«M §W ¦O ©dÎz ¤ ­¥ln 'd cFa §kE o®pr«¤d ei­lr o¬©kW The cloud abode on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.

2

CONCLUSION

Similarly, the parasha of Eliezer ends with Rivka being brought back to EretzCanaan and marrying Yitzchak:

{fq:ck ziy`xa}F¬lÎi ¦d §Y©e d ²w §a ¦xÎz ¤ g ¯©T¦I ©e F ½O ¦ d´xU Ædl¡dŸ¸ d w Àg §v¦i d´¤ ¦a§i ©e 'ebe d­X ¦ §l

And Isaac brought her to his mother Sarah’s tent, and took Rebecca, and she became his wife...

Rashi explains that when Rivka entered Sarah’s tent as Yitzchak’s wife, she"inherited” the greatness of Sarah and merited to three miracles that had been theexclusive accomplishments of Sarah:

xEWw opr§e dQ¦rA diEv§n dkx§aE zA©W a¤x¤r§l zA©W a¤x¤r¥n wElC x¥p did z¤n¤I©w dxV¤W o©n§f lM¤WEx§fg dw§a¦x z`A¤W§kE ,Ew§qR dz¥O¤X¦nE ,l¤dŸ d l©r

As long as Sarah was alive, a lamp stayed lit from Friday to Friday, and a blessingwas found in the dough, and a cloud hovered over the tent; after she died, these

ceased; when Rivka arrived, these things returned.

The cloud hovering over the tent was the Shechina, the presence of Hashem (seeGur Aryeh). Just as the text about the Mishkan concludes with the Shechina, so toodoes the text about Eliezer and Rivka.

The two texts--one about Eliezer and Rivka, the other about theMishkan--are both about bringing the Shechina into this world,

and thus both are repeated by the Torah in all their details.

3