Chaye Sarah: kicha kicha

Chaye Sarah, the legacy  story of Sarah nd Avraham, contains one of the most fundamental and curious principles in the Talmud. It is  usually stated in Hebrew as kicha kicha m'sedei Efron: acquisition, acquisition from the fields of Efron.  It means that there is an analogy between marriage and the acquisition of land. The contractual details involved in the purchase  of land  are required in the marriage contract. 

In our time, this sounds offensive. It sounds like the bride, like a piece of property,  is purchased. That is a reading that implies the archaic, mysogenous  nature of the tradition.  I t is not wrong, it is merely angry and useless. A more respectful reading looks to the stories in this weeks parsha, where the phrase directs us.

The longest story in the parsha is the wining  of Rivkah as a wife for Yitzchok. This story involves Avraham's servant, Eliezer developing an algorithm for identifying the appropriate bride.  One of the sugnificant conditions  in the process is the requirement that she volunteer her water fetching  services beyond the request, that she provides work without (immediate) monetary compensation. He could be looking for an act of kindness, or an act that is an extension of credit , believing that compenstion would come later.  Regardless, it is not the behavior of an econ (a being driven by acquisitiveness).  One of the requirements of the bride is that she is not driven by money. 

When the conditions are fulfilled, Eliezer bestows riches upon her.  He does not buy her, he gives her presents. He does the same with her family.  Ultimately Rivkah is the one who chooses to go with Eliezer to meek Yitzchok, whom she finds so startling, that he knocks her off her camel. 

When Avraham acquires the land for the family burial plot, there is a strong implication that  he could take the land without payment ( What is property 400 Shekels between you and  me? says Efron) It is from this story that we learn about the marriage contract.  People can live together without contractual relationships, they can have arrangements, just as Avraham could have buried Sara without payment.  The story tells us that is not our tradition.  The formal contract, the public announcement is how we marry. 

My father in law A"H  made many formal contracts that turned legacies into forces for good. 

Vayerah: Rescue

The idea of rescue is prominent in Vayerah.  At the beginning of the parsha, Avraham negotiates to rescue Sodom. He explores the nature of Gd and the nature of justice. 

כג  וַיִּגַּשׁ אַבְרָהָם, וַיֹּאמַר:  הַאַף תִּסְפֶּה, צַדִּיק עִם-רָשָׁע.

23 And Abraham drew near, and said: 'Wilt Thou indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked?

Of course, eventually everyone: righteous, wicked, nebish, everyone,  dies -  presumably with the consent of Gd.  Being swept away, that may be something different.  Leaving nothing behind, no legacy.


Although Avraham does not mention Lot, Lot is rescued for Avrahams sake. But maybe Lot has some merit, too.  Lot also negotiates for the rescue of Tzoar, citing his own weakness as part of the reason for the rescue.

Gd rescues Ishmael.  Ishmael's exile demonstrates how special Isaac is. Avraham, who had argued for the rescue of Sodom is willing to send Ishmael into the wilderness for the sake of Isaaac's improvement. Has the birth of Isaac changed Avraham's character? Is there now something more important than the categorical imperative?  Like Lot, Ishmael is saved..

The Akeida is the culmination of  rescues. What is really important to Avraham: his biological future? his emotional tie to his offspring? the will of Gd?   Avraham demonstrates his willingness to give all for Gd.  Avraham realizes that he cannot, ever, rescue anyone.  Only the Most Powerful can rescue ( a logical deduction)  and , fortunately,   that is just what happens.

And who can be compared to You, King, who brings death and restores life, and causes deliverance to spring forth!

Lech Lecha: Sophie's Choice

Lech Lecha: Sophie's Choice

There are 2 lecha parshioth: Lech Lecha and Shlach Lecha.  A Rashi on  the phrase Shlach Lecha says 

שלח לך: לדעתך, אני איני מצוה לך, אם תרצה שלח, לפי שבאו ישראל ואמרו 

Send for yourself: According to your own understanding. I am not commanding you, but if you wish, you may send. Since the Israelites had come [to Moses] 

The first Rashi in  Lech Lehca : 

וַ
Go forth: Heb. לֶךְ לְךָ, lit. go to you, for your benefit and for your good, and there I will make you into a great nation, but here, you will not merit to have children. Moreover, I will make your character known in the world. — [from Rosh Hashanah 16b, Tan.]		לך לך: להנאתך ולטובתך, ושם אעשך לגוי גדול, וכאן אי אתה זוכה לבנים. ועוד שאודיע טבעך בעולם:

Although the consequences are different,  censure for Moshe and praise for Avra(ha)m, there is no contradiction.  Lecha means that the actor was convinced to  act, for good or for ill. There was some (illusion of ) choice.  Gd did not do the sending or going.  

In the covenant between the parts, Gd tells Avra(ha)m that  it was Gd that took Avra(ha)m out of Ur Casdim.  Thus, Gd is taking responsibility for migrations that were instigated by Avra(ha)m's father.  I think that this reveals that Avra(ha)m's travel into Canaan was  his own choice. (this is a Talmudic style argument)

Once in Canaan, confronted with a famine,  Avra(ha)m seems to have 3 choices: starve, die, or compromise his wife.   That choice becomes a model for the slaves freed from Egypt and scores of generations of persecuted Jews through the ages: take back the captured wife. 

After all his troubles, it seems that Avra(ha)m has earned the right to ask Gd for an heir. How strange that Avra(ha)m is answered with a prophecy that these precious, promised descendants will be slaves for 400 years!  Does the prophecy of ill add credence to the doubtful prophecy of good?  

Ishmael is the new plan, adoption. Avra(ha)m and Sarai will adopt a slave child  and raise him Orthodox,  Great plan, nurture overcomes  nature.  But his mother, Hagar,  is too attached to the child. Note the parallels with Moshe, the adopted child of (the daughter of) Pharaoh. 

Perhaps the Lecha implies adventure.  Just do it.  But, in the end you know there will be some impossible choices. 

Noach:: subjugation

Noach:: subjugation

Noach lived in a world filled with חָמָס , translated by JPS as violence. 

 I think the word conveys a sense of passion, heat, חָם , 

Noach's second  son.  

 The son that raped his drunken, sleeping father after their rescue from the flood . 

 Who,  because he demeaned his father, is cursed to be a demeaned slave of slaves. 

He could not subjugate his passion, he is forever enthralled.. 

The deluge changes everything.  The antedeluvian world is open to the pornographic imagination. 

What emerges is the world of rules and hierarchy. 

Since Noach rescued the (land) animals, his descendants are their eternal masters. Noach is credited with the invention of the plow, the yoke that subjugates the animal, makes its life precious for the work it can do before it is slaughtered and eaten 

The hierarchy of man seems to devolve from heterogeneity and the probability of error. People are different,one brother makes an error, the righteous one becomes his king.  Subjugation leads to rebellion and thus we build the world, dispersed from Babel