Vayerah - 5773

One of the recurring themes in the Ramban’s commentary to Sefer Bereshis is the concept of “Ma’aseh Avos Siman L’Banim,” that the events that occurred in the lives of the Avos foreshadow later episodes that occur to the Jewish nation as a whole.

For example, in the Ramban’s analysis, the story of Avraham’s descent to Egypt and his return to Eretz Yisrael (Parshas Lech Lecha) corresponds in virtually every detail to the story of the Egyptian exile. In Parshas Toldos we will read the story of Yitzchak’s relocation to the land of the Pelishtim to escape from famine; Ramban writes that this episode corresponds to the story of Babylonian exile which followed the destruction of the first Bais Hamikdosh.

What is the connection between the land of the Pelishtim and Babylonia? Explains the Ramban: Just as the land of the Pelishtim was a place in which Avraham had lived (as described in this week’s Parsha), and Yitzchak in moving to that land was actually returning to an ancestral home, likewise Babylonia was the original home of Avraham and the Jews exiled there were returning to the place from which they had come. (See Pesachim 87b where Babylonia is called “Bais Iman” – the Jews’ mother’s home.

One may ask: Either Avraham or Yitzchak could have experienced exile twice as portents of Egypt and Babylonia. Why was it necessary that these two historical events should have been foretold in the lives of different Avos?

The roles of Avraham and Yitzchak in the development of the Jewish people were very different. Avraham was a revolutionary. He made a clean break with his own past (see Rambam, Hilchos Avodah Zara, Chapter 1, Halacha 3) and sparked a world-shattering religious upheaval thereby establishing the foundations of a nation that would stand apart in opposition to the entire world. Yitzchak, on the other hand, was the first born Jew. His role was to consolidate and secure the achievements of Avraham, giving the Jewish enterprise stability and permanence.

(A hint to this distinction: Rav Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak, Succos Ch. 5, observes that whereas Avraham’s name was changed from the original Avram, Yitzchak kept his original name throughout his life. Avraham was transformational; Yitzchok was consistent from beginning to end.)

The Egyptian exile was a formative experience of the Jewish people. In Egypt we developed from a family into a nation. Our encounter with the depravity of the Egyptians resulted in a polarization through which our innate sense of morality was reinforced and strengthened. (See Maharal, Gevuros Hashem, Chapter 4.) It also marked a break with our past and thus is appropriately alluded to in the experiences of Avraham Avinu.

The Babylonian exile was the “mid-course correction” in the history of the Jewish people. Over the centuries, we had drifted away from the ideals that were first established by Avraham Avinu; the exile was the consequence of a slide into idolatry and the associated sins of murder and incest. In other words, it was caused by our failure to sustain the revolution of Avraham Avinu. As a consequence it was necessary to return “to our roots” in Babylonia, the very place where Avraham Avinu waged his first battles against the idols of Nimrod and Terach.

Babylonia was not a venue for radical transformation. It was a place for restoration of that which should never have lapsed. It therefore relates to the role of Yitzchok which is the stable continuation of Avraham’s works. For this reason the Babylonian exile is alluded to specifically in the experiences of Yitzchok.