Can Getting Into a Lull Improve One’s Marriage and Family? It Depends…

Parshat Vayetze 

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

After watching her sister give birth to 4 sons, presumably over a span of around 4 years, Rachel has had enough. She comes to Yaakov, jealous of her sister (30:1) and demands that he give her children. “Give me children, and if not, I am dead.” 

This is not the arguments of yesteryear – of Sarah realizing she is infertile, and offering her maid to Avraham so he can have the child he desires. And who knows what will otherwise come of her generosity and her sacrifice? Even after he DOES have Yishmael with Hagar, we don’t hear a sound from Sarah about herself until after the Bris Milah, which prompted some of the Rabbis to suggest it wasn’t as much infertility as much as Sarah was not going to have a child until such time as Avraham was circumcised. 

A Father's Love, a Mother's Love

Parshat Toldot

by Rabbi Avi Billet

The verse tells us that “Yitzchak loved Eisav because he ציד בפיו and Rivkah loves Yaakov.” [I purposely did not translate tzayid b’fiv because it has many possible meanings] Note that the love for Eisav is expressed in the past tense, while for Yaakov is expressed in the present tense. 

 Rashi’s explanation of their love being connected to the boys’ spiritual pursuits (or in Eisav’s case, his fake spiritual pursuits) is based on several Midrashim (Midrash Aggadah, Pesikta, etc.). The Shla’h notes that the love for Eisav seems to be of the contingent basis – it was attached to the things Eisav did for Yitzchak (trapping, cooking). We know from Pirkei Avos that a love which is “תלויה בדבר” (dependent on something) only lasts while that “something” is still present. If that “something” is gone, the love is gone. This is what Yitzchak seems to have had for Eisav, while Rivkah’s love for Yaakov seems to be contingent on nothing, so it is ever-present, if not ever-growing. [Midrashim, Chizkuni] 

The Human Nature of Human Nature

Parshat Chayei Sarah

by Rabbi Avi Billet

After Rivkah runs to tell her mother of her encounter with Avraham’s servant, while she is prominently wearing the jewelry he gave her, her brother Lavan runs out to the man. (24:28-29). 

The narrative then puts in what might be viewed as a parenthetical comment – “And it was when he saw the nose ring and the bracelets on his sister’s arms, and when he heard what Rivkah said ‘This is what the man said to me…’ that he came to the man, who was standing over his camels at the spring. (העין)” (24:30) 

Avraham's Role During the Destruction of Sodom

 Parshat Vayera

by Rabbi Avi Billet

When one reads through the text of chapters 18 and 19, part of the text focuses on Avraham’s experience, while the remainder of the narrative looks at Lot and his family. Once the angels depart from Avraham, God tells Avraham about what He’s going to do to Sodom, and their conversation over the numbers of righteous people in Sodom ensues. When that dialogue ends at the end of chapter 18, we are told that “God left, and Avraham returned to his place.” 

 The next chapter focuses on Lot’s experience all the way through his wife turning around (and “being a stand of salt”), and then there is an interlude of 3 verses about Avraham before it returns to Lot’s escape from the destruction of his home town.

 (כז) וַיַּשְׁכֵּ֥ם אַבְרָהָ֖ם בַּבֹּ֑קֶר אֶל־הַ֨מָּק֔וֹם אֲשֶׁר־עָ֥מַד שָׁ֖ם אֶת־פְּנֵ֥י יְקֹוָֽק:

 (כח) וַיַּשְׁקֵ֗ף עַל־פְּנֵ֤י סְדֹם֙ וַעֲמֹרָ֔ה וְעַֽל־כָּל־פְּנֵ֖י אֶ֣רֶץ הַכִּכָּ֑ר וַיַּ֗רְא וְהִנֵּ֤ה עָלָה֙ קִיטֹ֣ר הָאָ֔רֶץ כְּקִיטֹ֖ר הַכִּבְשָֽׁן:

 (כט) וַיְהִ֗י בְּשַׁחֵ֤ת אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶת־עָרֵ֣י הַכִּכָּ֔ר וַיִּזְכֹּ֥ר אֱלֹהִ֖ים אֶת־אַבְרָהָ֑ם וַיְשַׁלַּ֤ח אֶת־לוֹט֙ מִתּ֣וֹךְ הַהֲפֵכָ֔ה בַּהֲפֹךְ֙ אֶת־הֶ֣עָרִ֔ים אֲשֶׁר־יָשַׁ֥ב בָּהֵ֖ן לֽוֹט: 

“Avraham got up early in the morning, [returning] to the place where he had received the presence of God (י-ק-ו-ק). And he looked upon Sodom and the enter plain, and he saw that behold the fire of the land appeared like the fire of a furnace. And so it was when God (א-לקים) was destroying the cities of the plain, and God (א-לקים) remembered Avraham and sent Lot out of the overturning of the cities.” (19:27-29) 

Then the narrative returns to Lot’s disturbing experience with his daughters in a cave, bringing the chapter to its conclusion. This is followed by “And Avraham traveled from there to the Negev, to settle between Kadesh and Shur, in the land of Gerar.” 

Putting Sarah in Danger - an Exploration

Parshat Lekh Lekha

by Rabbi Avi Billet

After arriving in Canaan, Avraham is faced with a test of famine. On his own, absent instruction from God, he chooses to go to Egypt to find food, a move which in many ways sets the precedent for how his descendants would go down to Egypt (on account of a famine) and how they would leave (with wealth given to them by the Egyptians). 

 One question that is addressed by many commentators is “How does Avraham justify his taking Sarai with him? He is putting her in mortal danger!” 

Noting that one is not supposed to rely on miracles (a theme many touch upon), Netziv writes that Avraham was relying on Divine promises. He had been told “Those who curse you I will curse,” which should serve as a protection from harm, but he only realized close to Egypt that that might only refer to possible enemies living in Canaan. And so while he hoped that God would protect Sarah, their proximity to Egypt made it too late for him to leave her or bring her back to Canaan. The Zohar (at the end of Parshat Tazria) notes that Avraham saw an angel accompanying him to protect them, and so when Avraham asks her to say “you are my sister” למען ייטב לי בעבורך (in order that he should be good to me on your account), he was referring to that angel, not his hopes for how “Egypt” might treat him. Avraham never had a fear in Canaan, because he was allied with Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre - people he could see - who provided protection from any of these kinds of shenanigans. 

Defining Mabul (and Bavel) – What Works for Humanity and What Does Not

Parshat Noach 

by Rabbi Avi Billet

You may have heard this one: What type of cake was served on Noah’s Ark? Mabul cake (Ice cream? Mabul ice cream… What kid’s game? Mabuls, etc….) 

The Torah’s word for the flood is מבול (Mabul), hence the play on words for those who drop their “r”s when saying words like “marble” and “Canarsie” and “mother, father, sister, brother, daughter.” 

Where does the word מבול come from – what is it’s “root” (שרש) that gives it its format? As it turns out, the answer is not so simple. 

 In his Haksav V’hakabbalah, Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenberg lays out the following, which will be summarized afterwards with bullet points.

The Blame Game

Parshat Bereshit 

by Rabbi Avi Billet

No matter how one views the term “original sin,” it is quite clear that the first sin the Torah depicts is the violation of the only command given to Man. “Eat of every tree. But of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil you shall not eat, for on the day that you eat from you shall become mortal.” (2:16-17) 

Early in chapter 3, through the enticement of the Nachash (the Garden of Eden serpent, who can walk and talk), the woman eats from the tree, and then gives of its fruit to her husband, in clear violation of that one command. 

When God rhetorically asks about the deed, “Have you eaten from the tree regarding which I had commanded you not to eat from?” the answer should have been Yes, because after all, God already knows the answer. But instead, the man says “The woman that You gave me… she gave me the fruit and I ate it.” And when God turns to the woman, her response is, “The snake enticed me and I ate.” God doesn’t ask the snake for his excuse, but He goes and issues His judgment to the snake first, then to the woman, then to the man. 

 In other words, those who can point their finger to a person (or a snake) go ahead and do so, instead of looking in the mirror and taking ownership of their own actions. It's a Blame Game 101.