Transcript

ואלה תולדות יצחק בן אברהם אברהם הוליד את יצחק. Let's observe at the beginning of Toldot,

אמר הכתוב ואלה תולדות יצחק בן אברהם של עשו ויעקב בניו האמורים למטה והזכיר הכתוב איך היתה הולדתם. אברהם הוליד את יצחק,

Lashon Rashi, al yedei shekatuv Yitzchak ben Avraham ואלה תולדות יצחק בן אברהם. So why does the Pasuk have to then say a second time

אברהם הוליד את יצחק? הוזקק לומר אברהם הוליד את יצחק לפי שהיו ליצני הדור אומרים

me'Avimelech nisabrah Sarah. Lachach, to dispel that slander, צר הקדוש ברוך הוא קלסתר פניו דומה לאברהם. Yitzchak Avinu looked just like Avraham Avinu, שיאמרו הכל אברהם הוליד את יצחק. So it's interesting, Rashi characterizes those who said me'Avimelech nisabrah Sarah as litzanei hador. Earlier the Rav points out in Parshas Vayeira, so מי מלל לאברהם היניקה בנים שרה. So Rashi says that what what is היניקה בנים לשון רבים? That Sarah Imeinu nursed not only not only Yitzchak Avinu, but nursed many other babies because people said אסופי הביאו מן השוק, that the baby was they adopted a baby, they found a baby that had been abandoned and wasn't their child. So by the fact that Sarah Imeinu was able to nurse, so that dispelled it. But there Rashi doesn't characterize the people who said that as litzanim.

ומהו בנים לשון רבים ביום המשתה הביאו השרות בניהן עמהן והניקה אותם שהיו אומרות לא ילדה שרה אלא אסופי הביאו מן השוק.

But they're not they're not branded as litzanei hador. So the Rav explained as follows. He said those who thought that אסופי הביאו מן השוק was maybe understandable skepticism, that after so many years of not having a child, that all of a sudden Sarah and Avraham Avinu had a child. It takah was miraculous. So they they didn't believe in miracles, so they were looking to explain it in natural terms, so אסופי הביאו מן השוק. But those to whom Rashi whom Rashi refers to at the beginning of Parshas Toldot, those who said no, it's takah the child is Sarah's child, but the father is Avimelech not Avraham Avinu, so that wasn't just skepticism. No, that was that was rishus because Avraham Avinu, he had already fathered Yishmael, so it was known that Avraham Avinu could have children. The miracle was that now Sarah Imeinu אחרי בלותי היתה לי עדנה. The miracle was that now that Sarah Imeinu could have could have a child. To concede that the child that the mother was Sarah Imeinu, but to deny the paternity was just because they didn't want Avraham Avinu to have someone who would continue his way. They didn't want Avraham Avinu to have a yoresh, someone who would who would transmit and perpetuate the the belief system and the lifestyle that he represented. That wasn't stam, that was a litzanus. That was a calculated cynicism which was intended to to try to prevent the emergence of Knesses Yisrael. That's why Rashi refers to those as litzanim. ורבי אברהם אמר עוד שפעם הוליד גידל וריבה. He raised him. The first תולדות יצחק בן אברהם refers to the fact of paternity. But then אברהם הוליד את יצחק, that holed implies not only that that he fathered Yitzchak in the sense of conception, but that he fathered him in the sense of of raising him. כמו ילדו על ברכי יוסף. What does it mean ילדו על ברכי יוסף? It means that Yosef was involved in their upbringing. כמו שאמר וישלח על יצחק בנו. You know it's interesting, I don't know that the Ibn Ezra has this in mind, but what he says correlates. The Gemara says at the end of the third perek in Bava Basra that what's the lashon? Miyom or something שפשטה מלכות הרשעה על ישראל referring to the Roman Empire, ואינה מנחת אותנו ליכנס לישוע הבן או לשבוע הבן. So

דין הוא שנגזר על עצמנו שלא לישא אשה ושלא להוליד בנים.

However, it's אין רוב הציבור יכול לעמוד בה. That the persecution and of the Roman Empire was so harsh in terms of preventing giving a proper chinuch to children, that

דין הוא שנגזר על עצמנו שלא לישא אשה ושלא להוליד בנים.

So Tosfos asks a kasha, how can you have a gezeira de-rabbanan that would okay a mitzva de-oraisa of peru u-revu? So Tosfos says shema what the Gemara means is again, the Gemara says the only reason that such a gezeira wasn't made is אין רוב הציבור יכול לעמוד בה, which is a precondition for any gezeiras chachamim. But Tosfos says what about the mitzva of peru u-revu? It would okay the mitzva of peru u-revu? Tosfos says shema it means those who already have ben u-vas. That not to be married and have more children beyond what the basic מצוות פריה ורביה requires. But Tosfos says shema, and the reason Tosfos says shema is that's not the mashma'us in the Gemara. It's not the simple mashma'us. The simple mashma'us in the Gemara is even if they didn't. So what's the alternative? When Tosfos says shema, what's the alternative understanding in the Gemara? So lakhora is as follows. The Gemara in Berachos earlier in Berachos in the first perek, the Gemara says that מי כחכם ומי יודע פשר דבר that HaKadosh Baruch Hu made shalom between Chizkiyahu and Yeshayahu. There was a standoff, that Chizkiyahu says Yeshayahu should come to me, I'm the melech, and Yeshayahu says Chizkiyahu should come to me, I'm the navi. Again, neither one was interested in his personal kavod but rather the office as it were, the position. So what did HaKadosh Baruch Hu do? He made Chizkiyahu sick and Yeshayahu went for bikkur cholim. And what's more, Yeshayahu came to deliver a nevua that צו לביתך כי מת תמות, that give your tzava'a, Yeshayahu tells Chizkiyahu HaMelech you should give a tzava'a to your household because you're going to die. So it's now or never. And why is he going to die? במאי דלא עסקת בפריה ורביה. You didn't look to fulfill the mitzva of peru u-revu. So Chizkiyahu HaMelech says in his defense that חזאי דנפיק מינאי בנין דלא מעלי. No, I saw be-ruach ha-kodesh that I would have a descendant, Menashe, who's going to be a big rasha. So that's why I wasn't osek be-peru u-revu. So Yeshayahu HaNavi answers him בהדי כבשי דרחמנא למה לך? Why are you messing around with HaKadosh Baruch Hu's secrets?

מאי דמפקדת איבעי לך למעבד ומאי דניחא קמי קודשא בריך הוא לעביד.

You're supposed to do what you're commanded to do and HaKadosh Baruch Hu will exercise His hashgacha as He sees fit. So lakhora yitachen that the pshat in the Gemara is like this. The pshat in the Gemara is that Chizkiyahu was really assuming two things. Number one, he was assuming that if he would have a ben rasha he wouldn't be mekayem mitzva of peru u-revu anyway. And B, he thought that he could act on his inside information as it were, he could act on his ruach ha-kodesh to make that determination. And Yeshayahu is only pushing back at assumption number two. Yeshayahu was telling him you can't when it comes to you can't pasken shailos על פי רוח הקודש. You can't, that's not relevant to paskening a shaila. You have to pasken a shaila al pi nigleh. al pi nigleh you're m'chuyav pru u'revu. You should be osek b'pru u'revu to be m'kayem the mitzvah. What's going to happen? The Ribono Shel Olam runs the world. Whatever's supposed to happen will happen. But in terms of the halacha that if only you could know, rachmana litzlan, that the son was going to be a rasha, that you weren't going to be m'kayem the mitzvah of pru u'revu, so Chizkiyahu wasn't wrong on that. Yeshayahu didn't push back at him. Oh, so that's the pshat in Gemara Bava Basra. The pshat in Gemara Bava Basra is that Tosafos ask a kasha: how could it be that נגזר על עצמינו שלא לישא אשה ולא להוליד בנים is because they felt that the gezeiros were just so, so overwhelming that they didn't see how they could raise the children to be yerei shamayim. They didn't see how they'd be able to raise them to continue in the messorah. And the mitzvah of pru u'revu is not just to father children, it's not just to bring into the world children, biological children. No, it's to bring them into the world and raise them. The raising them is an integral part of the mitzvah. So that's what they held. We're not going to be m'kayem the mitzvah anyway. אותה דינה שנגזר על עצמינו. It sort of gives a panim chadashos to the Gemara in Sanhedrin that Rashi quotes in Parshas Bamidbar ואלה תולדות אהרן ומשה and then the Torah only mentions the sons of Aharon. So how is it introduced as ואלה תולדות אהרן ומשה? Because Moshe Rabbeinu taught them Torah. So

כל המלמד את בן חבירו תורה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו ילדו.

So again, it remains מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו. It's still a ke'ilu, but you understand the ke'ilu with more of a, lichora, with more of an oneg. No, that the melamed Torah is an integral part of the mitzvah. And if anything, that's the gemar mitzvah, right? Because that's what determines that the child born will continue the messorah, which is what the mitzvah of pru u'revu is. So the Ibn Ezra's havana in אברהם הוליד את יצחק again, there isn't anything to, you know, there's no basis for, you know, implying, for inferring that any of this is part of the Ibn Ezra's kavana, but the Ibn Ezra aligns very well with this, that his understanding of holid in this context, again, it correlates, it runs parallel to this havana in the mitzvah of pru u'revu. V'anachnu b'einai the Ramban has a third understanding of what it means eileh toldos:

כי חזר עתה והחל באב היחס כמנהג הכתוב לחזור באנשי המעלה אל ראש היחס.

Whenever you have a person of distinction, so you trace back to the beginning of his lineage. So אלה תולדות יצחק בן אברהם identifies Yitzchak. אברהם הוליד את יצחק is there because the Torah is about to tell us about the birth of Yaakov Avinu, Yaakov and Esav, but in terms of what triggers the אברהם הוליד את יצחק, the birth of Yaakov Avinu, so you trace when you have an ish hama'alah, when you have a great person, so you trace him back to the beginning of his distinguished ancestry, of his lineage. And the Ramban proceeds to give other examples of that:

כמנהג הכתוב לחזור באנשי המעלה אל ראש היחס וכן בדברי הימים כתב בני שם עילם ואשור וארפכשד ולוד וארם וארפכשד ילד את שלח וכאשר השלים חזר ואמר שם ארפכשד שלח עד אברהם אברהם הוא אברהם וכן ביחס בנימין חזר למפרע והחל

etc.

אף כאן אברהם הוליד את יצחק ויצחק הוליד את יעקב כאשר יזכיר וחזר לספר זה בעבור שאמר ואלה תולדות ישמעאל בן אברהם שאם אמר גם כן ואלה תולדות יצחק בן אברהם בלבד הנה השוה שניהם ביחס ובמעלה ואף כי הקדים הבכור. ועוד שהיה ראוי שיתחיל באברהם ויאמר ואלה תולדות אברהם אבל לא רצה לעשות כן שלא ימנה ישמעאל ובני קטורה לכן חזר והשלים מאברהם הוליד את יצחק לומר כי הוא לבדו תולדתו וכאילו לא הוליד אחר יחשב כמו שנאמר כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע.

There is biological ancestry. So biologically, so Yishmael and the Bnei Keturah are descendants and then their descendants l'dorei doros are biological descendants of Avraham Avinu. That, that is incontrovertible. But what the Ramban says is the fact that there's biological ancestry isn't to be confused with any kind of spiritual ancestry. One can be a biological descendant and have no spiritual connection ke-hu zeh. And that's by saying that אברהם הוליד את יצחק meaning that, that the bond was not only biological but the bond was spiritual as well. It's sort of the other side of the coin. Yishmael's relationship to Avraham Avinu is the other side of the coin of, right, famously the, the Rambam paskens like the view in the Tosefta that a ger, a ger is mevi bikkurim. Not only is a ger chayav b'havas bikkurim, he's chayav b'chol mitzvos, but but he's also chayav b'mikra bikkurim. Ai, how can he say

אשר נשבע לאבותינו לתת לנו? הגדתי היום לה' אלהיך כי באתי אל הארץ אשר נשבע ה' לאבותינו לתת לנו.

But it's not true that Hakadosh Baruch Hu promised to give Eretz Yisrael to the alte zeide of the ger. So the answer is no, the Yerushalmi presents it that it's really a machlokes tannaim. This machlokes tannaim isn't in the Mishna but the Yerushalmi quotes that it's a machlokes tannaim. No, the gezeiras hakasuv of when Hakadosh Baruch Hu changes Avraham Avinu's name from Avram to Avraham: כי אב המון גוים נתתיך. So what does it mean כי אב המון גוים נתתיך? No, the gerim are the children of Avraham Avinu. What does it mean they're the children of Avraham Avinu? That's the other side of this coin, right? A person can be a biological descendant but not be a spiritual descendant. A person can be a spiritual descendant even though genetically he's not a, a biological descendant. Okay, maybe just very briefly the Ramban later here in Parshas Toldos, this is one of the places where he has his famous presentation about Eretz Yisrael and the special relationship of mitzvos to Eretz Yisrael that Chazal darshen on

עקב אשר שמע אברהם בקולי וישמור משמרתי מצותי חקותי ותורותי

that Avraham Avinu kept kol ha-Torah kullah. So then the question being if Avraham Avinu kept kol ha-Torah kullah, so how did Yaakov Avinu marry shtei achayos etc? So the Ramban says that the Avos only kept kol ha-Torah kullah in Eretz Yisrael alone. That's the Ramban's answer. V'hanireh elai, this is the Ramban on pasuk hei in

פרק כ"ו פסוק ה': והנראה אלי מדעת רבותינו שלמד אברהם אבינו התורה כולה ברוח הקודש ועסק בה ובטעמי מצותיה וסודותיה ושמר אותה כולה כמי שאינו מצווה ועושה ושמירתו אותה היתה בארץ בלבד ויעקב בחוצה לארץ נשא שתי אחיות וכן עמרם כי המצות משפט אלהי הארץ הם אף על פי שהוזהרנו בחובת הגוף בכל מקום.

Even though once nitnah Torah, so other than mitzvos hatluyos ba-aretz, so anything all everything else is characterized as chovas haguf, so chayav in all those mitzvos even chutz la-aretz. But that ribbuy as it were notwithstanding: כי המצות משפט אלהי הארץ הם. Okay, so whatever this means on a deep level, question is... What does it mean or does it translate l'halacha, let's say bizman hazeh? Does it translate l'halacha? So Rav Neibenzahl has in the back of the Mishnah Berurah with the He'oros of Rav Neibenzahl in the back of Chelek Shishi, so then there's a few unrelated Mishnah Berurah He'oros from Rav Neibenzahl. And one of them I have there is a fascinating safek, fascinating safek. It's a common occurrence. Let's say you're flying to Eretz Yisrael. And the timing of the flight, if you take an evening flight, so then you're going to daven Shacharis on the plane. Okay, so you put on tefillin and you daven Shacharis on the plane. This time of year shkia's very early, but let's say shkia's a little later that makes it more common. And then you're going to land in the afternoon before shkia in Eretz Yisrael. So Rav Neibenzahl clears a safek, I think he leaves it as a safek l'dina. He says maybe qualitatively מעשה המצוה בחוץ לארץ is not the same as מעשה המצוה בארץ ישראל and maybe once you land in Eretz Yisrael the hanachas tefillin of chutz la'aretz doesn't patur you and you should put on tefillin again. I later saw someone else but I can't remember, I later saw someone else who was also mechavein to this point, but I don't remember who, I don't remember where I saw it. But in Rav Neibenzahl it's in the back of his Mishnah Berurah. So he takeh treats it as a safek l'dina again based on this Ramban, that maybe what the Ramban is saying, the fact that כי המצוה משפט אלהי הארץ היא, that the ikkar place for kiyum hamitzvos is in Eretz Yisrael. So maybe that there's the impression of that remains halacha l'ma'aseh even after the Torah then tells us that again the Ramban returns to this in Parshas Eikev for instance. After the Torah then tells us that all mitzvos which are chovas haguf are chayiv min haTorah b'chutz la'aretz as well, but maybe it's not the same. Maybe qualitatively it's not the same, not the same chiyuv. So it would not just be hanachas tefillin, it would be let's say sometimes people do for the other nafka mina would be that sometimes there are other tzdadim that need to be evaluated in terms of this hanhaga as well. But sometimes let's say if you take an afternoon flight, so then you'll land in the morning. So sometimes people for whatever commitments they have or they want to jumpstart the day, so they'll daven on the plane so that when they land they can, you know, just begin begin their day in Eretz Yisrael as opposed to first needing to daven Shacharis. So then there too you'll have again not only about the hanachas tefillin, you'll have it about davening Shacharis, that maybe the Shacharis in the plane, maybe a person then he when he lands and it's still zman Shacharis in Eretz Yisrael, it could be that now there's a different the eichus of the chiyuv is different and the eichus of a Shacharis in Eretz Yisrael is different. So it could be that again it's also, you know, presumably on the ground is a little bit more conducive to davening than on the airplane. So there are other tzdadim that need to be factored in there as well. But even leaving those aside, it could be that this eitzah doesn't really accomplish anything according to one side of Rav Neibenzahl's safek as a person would just be chozer u'mischayev in Shacharis when he lands anyway.