Timey Wimey And Marriage

One of the favorite topics of the Rogatchover is that of time.  One of his major themes in time is that of פעולה נמשכת, he defines certain events not as onetime events, rather as that of a constant occurrence.  One example of this theme is found in this week's parsha.  The Gemorah (Chullin 91b) cited in Rashi (28:3) says that Hashem folded all of Eretz Yisroel under Yaakov's body.  Obviously, this is a great miracle, but what was the necessity of it?  And why was Yaakov told the promise of inheriting Eretz Yisroel now, in his sleep?  The Rogatchover explains that by laying on top of Eretz Yisroel he was doing a kinyan chazaka. The Gemorah in Babba Bathrah says that one who lays out mats and sleeps on them in a hefker pierce of land it is considered a chazake and s/he acquires the land.  Stones aren’t usually used as bedding, so in was the act of lying upon them that turns them into sheets, i.e. a פעולה נמשכת of using them is required to make the chazaka.  Therefore, as long as Yaakov was lying on the stones it was categorized as a chazaka.  Hence, at this time Hashem folded all of Eretz Yisroel under him so that his kinyan would extend on the entirety of Eretz Yisroel. 

Another area where the Rogatchover has this same idea is in regard to נישואין.  He explains many issues based upon his principle that the chalos of נישואין isn’t a onetime event, rather it is a chalos every second.  There is a story where Rav Chaim expressed his disdain for this chiddush by responding mazal tov, if it’s a constant chalos you should need a constant mazal tov and the Rogatchover responded the mazal tov is also a פעולה נמשכת.  

It seems from The Rogatchover that a פעולה נמשכת is required when the chalos or event is something that is unique and doesn’t fit in the regular rubric of live.  It is something superimposed upon the regular order and therefore require a constant “push” to keep it going.    

The Rishonim ask if the Avos fulfilled the entire Torah, how did Yaakov marry two sisters which is an ervah?  The Ramban (Yevamos 98a) answers that arious that come via marriage don’t exist by a ben noach for they don’t have eishus.  A relationship did exist between Jacob and his spouses, but it was significantly different from a matrimonial relationship for such relationships became acknowledged only at Sinai.  There is no concept of a cheftah of eishus without kiddushin v’chupa and such a chalos is a chiddush haTorah that wasn’t in play yet.  Based upon this Ramban, the Briskor Rav answers a question of the Rosh.  The Rosh asks if the blessings on kiddushin is a blessing on the mitzvah of kiddushin, why do we say אשר אסור לנו הארוסות which seems to be an unnecessary intro. unrelated to the mitzvah, do we mention in the bracho of shechita that it permits aver min hachai? The Brisker Rav explains that the blessing is referring to in-law relationships which are forbidden only via the marriage about to be performed. The issur on in-laws makes up the cheftza of kiddushin just as much as the designation to the spouse.  It is the issur caused by kiddushin that reflects the sanctity of Klal Yisroel conferred upon our ancestors at Sinai, it is indeed noteworthy in the beracha of the kiddushin. 

Of course, this Ramban is taking a different approach than that he writes in his commentary to Toldos (26:5) that Yaakov married sisters because the Avos only kept the Torah in Eretz Yisroel, not outside, וצ"ע.

Based upon the Briskor Rav we understand that the concept of marriage is not a natural maaseh kinyan, it is unique and therefore we can understand why it  requires a constant chalos to keep it going.  However, I am aware that I'm conflating kiddushin and nissuin as apposed to the Rogatchover who differentiates between the two.  Though, if my understanding of peulah hanimsheches is correct, in light of the Briskor Rov, this would seem to be the conclusion.  I think the way out would be that true kiddushin isn't a regular kinyan and only has an effect because of a chiddush haTorah, but after the chiddush it becomes part of the regular laws of kinyanim.  On the other hand, nissuin isn't a kinyan, rather it is a means of creating a bond between husband and wife. 

Of course, the world in totality requires a constant pumping of life source from Hashem and is at best a פעולה נמשכת so in that case everything should have to be a פעולה נמשכת to keep going, but clearly that is not the assumption here.  As to why that is, I don't know, and thinking about it makes my head explode. 

The derush that emerges from the Rogatchover is that a marriage is not a one time event of creating a bond between husband and wife, it is something that requires constant strengthening and renewal. 

The Maariv Man

Rashi (28:21) brings from Chazal that Yaakov was mesakan maariv.  The meforshim say that the prayer of maariv shows us that even in the greatest darkness Hashem is still guiding us.  This seems to parallel the live of Yaakov which was spent in golus in the house of Lavan and then in Mitzraim. However, if that is the case why is it Yaakov that calls the Beis Hamikdash a permanent house (Pesachim 88a) which corresponds to the third Beis Hamikdash (see Maharsha ad loc. and Alshich on our parsha) if he is the symbol of the golus life?  

Chassidus explains the idea of maariv being a resush is not that it’s a lower quality than the other prayers but rather that it’s of too great of a power to become an obligatory act.  The darkness that exists at the time of the prayer isn’t a darkness of lack of sight but rather it’s a light which is so great to see.   The time of maariv is the time to contemplate that there is a great light behind this darkness which we are striving to reach.  That great light is the third Beis Hamikdash.  The prayer of maariv corresponds to the fats of the korban which burned throughout the night completely consuming the korban (Berochos 26b) which represents the complete eradication of all evil in the times of Moshiach.  (See Emunos Etechah that elaborates further on this idea.)

This can be the explanation of the debate in the mishna at the end of the first perek of Berochos if we mention yetzios metzriam at night.  Originally the thought process was that the night is the time of the golus.  True, eventually it will be recognized as a time that will bring forth great light through our service of Hashem in the golus but that hasn’t happened yet.  In the time of golus we can’t have an appreciation for the geulah.  Then Rabbi Elezar ben Azaryah was appointed nasi and he invited even those who’s inside wasn’t as pure as their outside into the beis midrash (see Berochos 28a.)  He had the ability to see even in those who weren’t perfect that they too can help bring the geulah.  Rabbi Elazar focused on the ability of the person to bring the geulah even into the imperfection of his personal golus.  That is why on the day he was appointed nasi it was accepted that we mention the exodus from Egypt even at night.  We focus on the light that exists behind the cloak of the dark golus and don’t wait until that light is revealed. (Based off Sicha of the Rebbe on Shemos 1992 see there for more elucidation.)

Lavan: The Yiddishe Mamma

At the end of the parsha when Lavan finally lets Yaakov depart, the Torah describes the goodbye of Lavan.  וינשק לבניו ולבנותיו ויברך אתהם.  Why do we need to know the goodbye blessings of Lavan?  The Sforno explains that a beracha given with full intent and feeling has more chance of being fulfilled than just a random beracho.  The father of Rachel and Leah, Lavan wholeheartedly wanted his children to be prosperous and successful and was giving them a blessing with all his heart.  The Torah records his beracha in order to teach us this lesson.  It is a beracho given with great feeling that stands the chance of being fulfilled.  It is well known the story of the mother of the Teferes Shmuel on the Rosh that his mother was illiterate but poured her heart out when she lit candles in Russian that her son should be a talmid chacham (the story is cited in Daas Moshe in Teruma.)
Many people travel all over for berachos but maybe we should be maintaining a healthy relationship with those that truly care for out goodness i.e. our parents and obtain blessings from them as well.  

Toras Hagalus V'Geulah

Rashi says before trekking to Charan, Yaakov spent 14 years learning in Yeshivos Shem V'Ever.  Why did Yaakov take time off before fulfilling his parent's command to leave?  Yaakov already spent his whole life learning from his father and grandfather, it wasn't like his was insisting to first spend some years in yeshiva before going to college?  It is well known the idea of Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky that the Avos knew that the years of golus would start from Yaakov and he had to be prepared for it.  The Torah of the Avos was Torah of Eretz Yisroel, Torah when conditions of world Jewry are proper.  Shem V'Ever lived through the Mabul and Dor Haplageh, they knew the Toras hagalus, how to live when the world is anti-God.  Yaakov's learning by Shem V'Ever wasn't a delay in fulfilling the command of his parents, it was part of it.  Without being prepared for golus, Yaakov couldn't embark on his journey.   There is a Rabbi with some interesting views that believes now that we have the State of Israel we must stop with the Torah of golus and start learning the Torah of Geulah.  Of course the question is, what is the Torah of geulah?

The Chosen Nation

As I wasn't paying attention to this morning's laining, I noticed that the possuk gives a reason for why Yitzchak loved Esav, כי ציד בפיו, but the Torah doesn't say why Rivka loved Yaakov.  Why is there no reason mentioned?  The miforshim give different interpretations why Rivka loved Yaakov most going along the lines that she realized his tzidkus or other's saying as opposed to Esav, who went out hunting, Yaakov remained near his mother.  However, why the omission in the Torah?  I like the Kli Yakar that says that the love of Yitzchak was dependent on כי ציד בפיו and therefore, didn't last but the love of Rivka wasn't dependent on anything and therefore lasted forever.  This reminded me of the haftorah in which we read ואהב את יעקב ואת עשו שנאתי.  The hatred of Esav and love of Yaakov is ontological, it isn't dependent on anything.  The love Rivka had for Yaakov is a משל for the love that Hashem has for us, it is above reason.  Some people don't understand this, see here https://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2016/05/es-eisav-saneisi.html.
The Ramban asks why are we introduced to Avrohom through a commandment of God for him to leave his land, where is the intro. to explain why God is speaking to Avrohom?  Where is the description like we find by Noach,'איש צדיק וכו?  The Maharal in Netzach Yisroel chapter 11(in Mercaz Harav it is known as the Maharal הידוע and Rav Tzvi Yehudah said if one learns Lech Lecha but doesn't know the Maharal, he hasn't learnt Lech Lecha,) explains that the reason Avrohom is chosen isn't bound by his actions.  Even if the later generations don't have the good actions of Avrohom, they are still chosen.  I was thinking about this on Thursday when my coworker, Ahn wished me a good Shabbos as I was leaving.  He asked "you're not going to tell me good Shabbos?"  I said "Shabbos was only given to the Jews, I am a member of the chosen nation, not you."  It hit me at that point that I will always remain a member of the Chosen Nation no matter what I do, but he won't. 
Nice derush of the Ben Eish Chai on 'ותלך לדרוש את ה, that Rivka went to darshen the es, which es would win out, that of the es Yaakov or the es Eisev.
Completely unrelated, I was wondering why Rashi in Acherei Mos (18:4) gives three examples of chukim; shatnez, eating pig and the red heifer but in this week's parsha, 26:5 he omits the example of the red heifer and only says the other two?   

The Pleasant Smell Of Rebellion

The Baal Haturim in parshas Noach points out that there are only two times the word וירח is used in the Torah.  One is the possuk (Noach 8:21) וירח ה' את ריח הניחוח and the second time is in this week's parsha וירח את ריח בגדיו.  The Baal Haturim says that is how Chazal (misrash rabbeh) derive that  Yitzchak must have smelled a pleasant smell (even though one mould think a field doesn't smell good.)  The midrash says the pleasant smell was from those  that rebel against Hashem, בגדיו related to the word בוגדיו and then repented.  The midrash brings stories of those that were great sinners and then repented.  The question is Yaakov was a great tzaddik, why is it the merit of the sinners that Yitzchak smells?  And what is the connection between the words בוגדיו and בגדים?  Rav Levi Yitzchak (Noach) brings from his father that the pleasant smell comes from those that have a tremendous yetzer harah but overcome it.  He then cites the Maggid on the verse ישראל אשר בך אתפאר (Yishiayeh 49:3) that אתפאר is related to wearing a garment like in the verse the ויתפרו עלה תאנה.  Therefore, the garments that 'Hashem wears' are from those that have a battle to fight against the yetzer harah (and possibly even lost many battles) but still come out on the side of Hashem.  That is why the midrash relates the garments of Yaakov to those that rebel against Hashem.
What does it mean those that have a struggle with the yetzer harah are the garments of Hashem?  Possibly (at least on a very basic level,) the intent is that garments are what give honor to a person, they are called machbeduseh.  Those that give the most glory and honor to Hashem are those that have a struggle to follow the will of Hashem but are successful at the end.
We could understand the midrash the opposite way.  The point is to say that even those that are sinners still deserve a blessing.  Esav's sins are part of his very essence, he is defined as a sinner.  On the other hand, the sins of Yisroel don't take away from his pure essence.  The sins of Yisroel are compared to a garment that one can put on and shed at ease.  See the Maharal in derush for Shabbos Shuva that elaborates on this point.  This isn't just a little derash on the words but Chazal are highlighting the essence of the difference between Yaakov and Esav.     

To Bring Out The Potential

It is quite interesting that all the Torah records in great detail all the events regarding Yitzchak's digging of wells.  Why is this the hallmark of Yitzchak?  Why is it that only in regard to Yitzchak that he has a special blessing that his field produced extra crops?  The first time we find Yitzchak praying (in last week's parsha) the Torah uses the terminology of שיחה.  Why is that language used to describe his prayer?
The power of Yitzchak was in the middah of gevurah.  The ability of gevurah is to bring out the potential that exists within the person.  The language of שיחה, explains Rav Kook (in his commentary to Berochos 26b) is related to the word שיחים, grass and vegetation.  The growth of vegetation is the outgrowth of the potential put into the ground.  Similarly, the prayer service of mincha instituted by Yitzchak, comes at the end of the day when generally the daily troubles are coming to an end and the bottled up holy emotions within a person can come to the surface.
It is this ability to bring out potential that is represented by Yitzchak's digging of the wells.  When one digs a well they bring out the water stream that exists underground to come above ground.  Besides the physical digging of the wells the Torah is describing the entire avodah of Yitzchak which was to bring to fruition all the abilities that a person already has within himself.
That's why it is specifically Yitzchak who we are told about that he had a special bracha in the growth of his field for it is Yitzchak who had this ability to bring out the potential of the field to fruition (based upon intro. to Otzar Mifarsha Hatalmud on Challah by Rav Yonason David.)