PARSHAS CHAYEI SORA
Sarah died in Kiryas Arba. (23:2)
Rashi attributes the name of this city to the four giants that lived there. Horav Meir
Schwartzman, zl, in his sefer, "Meir Einei Yesharim," offers an alternative
explanation for this name. He states that Sarah Imeinu possessed four unique traits.
First, she was a good wife, who was devoted to her husband and supportive of his spiritual
endeavors, standing by his side throughout their lives together. Second, she was an
exemplary mother who supervised her son, Yitzchak, dedicating herself to his spiritual
advancement. She was devastated to observe Hagar's son, Yishmael, expose Yitzchak to the
immorality that was endemic to his life. Sarah took immediate action by demanding that
Avraham send Hagar and her son away from their home. We should note that this is the same
person who opened her home to all strangers, in order to care for their physical and
spiritual needs. Third, Sarah was involved with her community, pursuing acts of loving
kindness and charity to help those in need. We infer this from the fact that everyone left
his/her place of work to attend her funeral. Fourth, she was the spiritual Matriarch,
setting the standard for Jewish motherhood. She was the paradigm of the "eim
b'Yisrael," mother in Yisrael. She reached out to the pagan women to bring them
closer to the Shechinah. She embodied all four models: an exemplary wife, a devoted
mother, a woman of valor in her community; and the mother of Klal Yisrael. When Sarah
passed away, these four attributes died with her. Her passing left a void. The giants
implied in the name, “Kiryas Arba,” represent her characteristics.
Sarah died in Kiryas Arba...and Avraham came to eulogize Sarah and to bewail her.
(23:2) When we think about the Avos, Patriarchs, we relate to them as people outside of
the normal human dimension. This is not correct. We do not ascribe to the notion that our
leaders were angels or some kind of quasi-spiritual entities. They were human beings -
special human beings who worked to refine their unique spiritual attributes to become holy
and virtuous, to achieve purity of mind and soul. They were, however, human beings with
sensitivities and emotions over which they maintained control. This is the reason that,
one who reads the story of Sarah Imeinu's death and Avraham Avinu's search for a proper
site for her burial, should be overcome with emotion for our holy Patriarch.
Avraham and Sarah were an elderly couple who miraculously are blessed with a son. We
cannot begin to imagine the intense love that existed between these parents and their only
child. It was a terrible tragedy that this mother died before she accompanied her only
child to the chupah. Do we think about Avraham as an old, feeble father, left bereft of
his eishas chayil, woman of valor -- his eishas neurim, wife of his youth? Do we think
about their "feelings," or do we just read the parsha and assert, "Avraham
Avinu was different."
Can we imagine the old Patriarch, alone without his wife and son, who was forced to
deal with pagans in his quest to obtain a burial plot for his wife? Here was a man who was
world-renowned, but did not own a piece of land.
Do we understand Avraham Avinu's nisayon, test? Hashem wanted to see if Avraham could
manage. Did he have the fortitude to follow it through? He did - but he suffered just like
anybody else - because he was human. He felt the pain; he was broken-hearted with sorrow.
Yet, he went on. He dealt with the people and provided a meaningful funeral for his
beloved wife. He was human. He taught us how to grieve. He endured. He showed us the way.
Otherwise, why would the Torah go to such great lengths to describe his acquisition of
Sarah's burial plot? He gives us hope and the courage to go on. The Torah's narratives are
lessons in how a Jew should act.
Sarah died in Kiryas Arba...and Avraham came to eulogize Sarah and to bewail her.
(23:2) B'chi and mispeid, weeping and eulogy, are two distinct components of the grieving
process. One sheds tears; one weeps at the loss of a close one. These tears are
instinctive. They are responses to an emotional, welled- up heart, an expression of hurt
and pain. Eulogy is an intellectual appreciation, a profound understanding of the deceased
and the vacuum generated by his demise. Eulogy is thought- out; weeping is spontaneous. It
would, therefore, make sense for b'chi to precede mispeid. The Torah writes the converse
regarding Avraham; He first came to eulogize Sarah, and then to bewail her. Indeed, in
halachah we find that the first three days of Shiva are "designated" for weeping
- to let oneself go, to open up and pour out one's heart in grief and tears. The next four
days are reserved for hesped, eulogy, reflecting upon the character and accomplishments of
the deceased, the meaning of his loss and its profound effect upon the surviving family.
Why did Avraham Avinu reverse the natural order? Furthermore, how did he control his
emotions, so that his eulogy could precede his emotional expression of grief?
In his hesped on the Maharil Diskin, zl, Horav Yaakov Orenstein, zl, distinguishes
between b'chi and mispeid in the following manner: When one weeps, he weeps for himself -
his pain and sorrow at the loss of his relative. Mispeid is for the deceased. One
eulogizes the accomplishments of the departed, bemoaning how much more he could have
accomplished. We eulogize the various attributes of the deceased and reflect upon the
significant goals that he will no longer be able to achieve. Indeed, when we think about
it, eulogy should precede weeping because the loss of the deceased himself is far greater
than one's personal loss, as expressed by a display of emotion. Furthermore, the deceased
will no longer be able to serve Hashem through Torah study and mitzvah observance. Why
then are the first three days of Shiva designated for weeping? It is because we are not
supermen. We are not angels. When a tragedy occurs - one cries. His personal pain
overwhelms him. His grief springs forth and clouds his ability to think intellectually.
Only after he has let his emotions go is he ready to begin his hesped. Avraham Avinu is
the paradigm of the middah of chesed, the attribute of loving-kindness. He was able to
transcend his personal loss, his own pain, in order to focus instead upon Sarah's hesped.
He told about her virtue, her greatness, her holiness. He described death as a loss to the
world, and to Torah and mitzvos. Afterwards, he wept for himself, for his own loss -- as a
husband -- of his partner in his life's endeavor.
In an alternative explanation, Horav Eliyahu Schlessinger, Shlita, notes that when a
great person takes leave of this world, his loss engenders two types of grief. First, is
the communal loss, the pain suffered by the tzibur, the people who have looked to this
person for guidance and inspiration. This form of grief is not necessarily emotional in
nature. People speak of his greatness, how he touched their lives, what they have learned
from his life, and the effect of his passing upon the community. Another loss takes place
that we very often ignore: the loss to his family. This leader had been a husband, a
father, a brother, a son who will be sorely missed. While they will relate stories of his
virtue, they are emotionally broken as well. When they weep, they cry for the loss of
their loved one.
Sarah Imeinu was a great woman. As the first Matriarch, she set the standard through
her actions and virtues for what a wife and mother should be. She was a klal person, a
woman devoted to the community. Avraham recognized this. Avraham, however, was sensitive
to another side of Sarah: She was his wife; she was his eishes neurim, wife of his youth,
with whom he founded Klal Yisrael through their son, Yitzchak. Avraham wept for his wife,
the mother of his son. They finally had a son from whom they had such nachas. They had so
much to which to look forward - together. It was not meant to be. Sarah would not walk
Yitzchak to the chupah. Do we ever think about the personal feelings that Avraham Avinu
must have experienced? He transcended his personal b'chi, for the sake of the world. They
should hear about Sarah’s virtue and holiness. Let them be inspired by her life.
Avraham placed the public eulogy before his personal mourning. This reflected the salient
character which rendered Avraham a leader.
Avraham rose up from the presence of his dead, and spoke to the Bnei Cheis. (23:4)
Avraham Avinu mourned the passing of his wife. He was overwhelmed with grief at the
loss of his life’s partner. Amid weeping and eulogy, Avraham stopped to meet with the
people of Cheis to discuss the sale of a burial plot for his Sarah. The Torah emphasizes
that he "rose up." It is not obvious that he left the presence of the dead to
arrange Sarah's burial. Horav Yerucham Levovitz, zl, says that the Torah is teaching us a
profound lesson with the expression, "Avraham rose up." Avraham Avinu left his
mourning state to go to meet the people of the community. He "rose up." He took
himself completely out of his state of grief, wiping his tears and preparing to meet the
people. He was going "outside." Out of respect for the people he "put on a
new face" and relegated his grief to privacy. He exerted incredible self-control over
his emotions due to kavod habrios, respect for human beings.
The Torah is not stressing Avraham's physical departure from his home. It is calling
attention to an emotional parting, an uplifting of one's character and spirit. Avraham
Avinu put his grief aside, delaying his own pain and sorrow. Why? What was so
overwhelmingly important that it took precedence over Avraham Avinu's aveilus, mourning?
It was kavod habrios, respect for people. It was not proper kavod to speak to others with
tears running down his face. He had to change clothes, transform his appearance, psyche
himself up to meet a group of pagan businessmen. This was Avraham Avinu - and that is why
he was a Patriarch. The fortitude to transcend personal grief out of respect and deference
to others is a character trait imbued in us by Avraham Avinu.
Why did Avraham do this? Is kavod habrios so significant that one must drop everything
- even personal grief - out of respect to others? Avraham did. Thus, it is expected of us.
Why? Avraham Avinu loved Hashem and, by extension, His creations - regardless of their
background and religious persuasion. This love carried on 365 days a year throughout his
periods of joy and grief. He would not impose his personal "mood" upon others.
People were created b'tzelem Elokim, in the image of G-d. Unless they defaced that image,
they deserved his respect.
How different is Avraham's attitude and behavior from ours? The average person brings
his "mood" wherever he goes. If one has a conflict or problem at home, he brings
it to the office, classroom or bais medrash. After all, if things are not well in my
personal life, why should not everyone around me also suffer with me? Why should I be the
only one who is going through a stressful period? Avraham Avinu taught us that this is not
the way a Jew is to act. We respect others; we care about others; we are sensitive to
their feelings. Avraham Avinu was different physically and spiritually from the pagan
populace that surrounded him. He was referred to as "Nesi Elokim," a Prince of
G-d. His respect for human beings earned him the respect that he received. It might serve
us well to emulate his relationship with Hashem and his fellow man.
And Yitzchak brought her (Rivkah) into the tent of Sarah his mother. (24:67)
Rashi says that Rivkah manifests a similarity to Sarah, Yitzchak's mother. When Sarah
was alive, a lamp burned from erev Shabbos to erev Shabbos; a blessing was to be found in
the dough, and a cloud hung over her tent. When she died, these three phenomena
"departed" with her. When Rivkah entered the tent as Yitzchak's wife, they
all returned. Sarah Imeinu set the standard for the Jewish home. What were these qualities
that set the paradigm for the Jewish home?
There is another home, the Mishkan, the place where the Shechinah reposes in the midst
of Klal Yisrael. Chazal cite three supernatural phenomena that were present in the
Mishkan: First, the Ner Maaravi, western-most lamp of the Menorah, burned continuously,
outlasting all the other six lights; second, the Lechem Ha'Panim, twelve loaves of
shewbread which were placed weekly upon the Shulchan, Table, remained fresh and warm all
week. A special brachah, blessing, rested on the bread, in that even a small piece of it
gave a Kohen incredible satisfaction; third, the Divine Cloud of Glory rested over the
Mishkan.
The Shem Mishmuel notes the parallel between the miracles that took place in Sarah's
tent and those occurring in the Mishkan. The light that burned from Shabbos reflects the
type of Shabbos, its quality and holiness, experienced by the Avos. Indeed, its influence
carried on into the following week. Each Shabbos they added to the holiness they had
absorbed the previous week. In this manner, they increased their spiritual ascendency
every week. This correlates with the Ner Ha'maaravi which continued to burn even after its
"companion" lights had expired. Each day the lights were lit from the Ner
Ha'maaravi, transferring the previous day's light to the day ahead. This symbolizes
ascending a spiritual ladder - every day - beginning each day where one has left off the
previous day, integrating yesterday's holiness with today's.
The Lechem Ha'Panim, which remained warm and fresh from week to week, and which
satisfied the eater even in small quantities, signifies Hashem's ability to provide food
for the entire world. The warm, fresh bread was alive with the Divine blessing, indicating
that Hashem will spread His beneficence throughout the world. This brachah, blessing, was
present in the Mishkan where Klal Yisrael expressed their service to the Almighty with
vigor and life, holding dear the moments spent in the Mishkan infused with Divine
blessing. In essence, this was typical of Sarah's life - alive - never complacent or stale
in her avodas Hashem, service to the Almighty. This was indicated in her dough, as well as
in the Mishkan.
Last, the Cloud of Glory that descended upon the Mishkan manifests Hashem’s
presence to Klal Yisrael in an almost perceptible sense. This was probably the same Divine
Presence that descended upon Sarah's tent. Sarah Imeinu's home was a microcosm of the
Mishkan. Her home was the hallmark of what a Jewish home should be - styled after the
Mishkan, the place where the Shechinah resposes. Indeed, every Jewish home should be
prepared for the Shechinah's Presence.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1. Who "said much" and "did not even a little"?
2. To what do the two bracelets that Eliezer gave to Rivkah allude?
3. In whom does a daughter confide?
4. Whom did Eliezer originally have in mind for Yitzchak to marry?
5. Who was Eliezer's father?
6. What is the difference between a wife and a pilegesh?
Answers:
1. Efron. First, he was willing to give away the Meoras Ha'Machpelah for nothing.
Later, he took the payment of four hundred large shekalim for it.
2. The two Luchos.
3.Her mother.
4. His daughter.
5. The Midrash says that he was Canaan's son, while Targum Yonasan relates that he was
Nimrod's son.
6. A wife receives a kesubah, while a pilegesh does’t.
TORAH THOUGHTS ON THE PARSHA
Sponsored by
Mr. and Mrs. Dovid Lipins
in memory of
reb Haim Zev b"r Yizchak z"l
and his wife
Miriam bat Michael a"h
Hechtenthal
