A Quick Torah Thought

 1. For me, there is a stark difference between Eliezer meeting Rivka and Yaakov meeting Rachel. When Eliezer first meets Rivka, the Torah notes Rivka's beauty; that is not the case upon Yaakov's initial encounter with Rachel. Only when it comes to attaining her as a wife does the verse state that she was beautiful, in comparison to Leah, "whose eyes were weak." Why is there a difference regarding the timing of the mention in the narrative about the beauty of Rivka as opposed to Rachel.  2. Why is there no discourse mentioned in the text between Yaakov and Leah regarding the taking of Zilpah, as opposed to Bilha? Did Yaakov automatically agree to take Zilpah into his household, whereas for Bilha that was not the case? 3. Why is Yissachar called as such? Leah names his as such for Hashem rewarding her for giving Zilpah to Yaakov. What's so commendable about that act? And why didn't Leah name one of Zilpah's children that, as opposed to waiting for the fifth...

 I had the privilege of asking Rabbi Moshe Shapira Z"L the following question: "Given that we say that the place of a ba'al teshuva supersedes that of a Jew who had been righteous from birth, why is it that Yitzhak's prayer for a child is answered, whereas Rivka's is not?"  The answer he gave in his weekly lecture at Pitchei Olam was even more astounding. "You didn't understand what's written," he said. "It says that Rivka prayed that in Yitzhak's merit they have a child. Yitzhak prayed that in Rivka's merit they be blessed with a child. It was not Rivka's prayer that was answered, but rather Yitzhak's, for Rivka's merit was greater than Yitzhak's."  I remember that answer so clearly, so lucidly. For in fact the verse states, "lenochach ishto," facing his wife, and Rashi expounds that each was in their own respective corner, and that Yitzhak - whose righteous wife not only faced him, but was the pr...

 In media studies, there's something called salience. In a word, people who specialize in a certain field or arena, view life through that lens. A doctor might look at the medical aspects of things that on the face of it have little resemblance to anything medical. The same goes for lawyers, teachers, translators. A salesman will focus on the bargaining implications in a story where the topic is at best secondary, if not wholly unrelated. On a personal note, I studied business for my first degree, and so, whether I like it or not, I find myself primed to look for the business implications in an encounter when they seemingly play second fiddle to the more central, primary topic at hand.  And so, if we were to look at the bargaining implications and the business import of Avraham's purchase of Ephron's field, and the negotiations involved in Eliezer's deal-making with Lot, it would seem that there's a certain commonality. Both got the raw end of the deal. Not in the p...

 Lot is saved because Hashem had mercy on Avraham, that Avraham would be too forlorn about the death of Lot that it would cause undue pain to Avraham. As for Sarah Imenu, who dies after hearing that Yitzhak had been bound, why was mercy on Avraham not shown in that instance? Certainly, more mercy should have been forthcoming towards Avraham vis a vis the pain he would experience on learning of Sarah's death than Lot's.  Hashem, who allows his name to be erased in the case of a woman accused of licentiousness, does so to preserve shalom bayit, peace in the home. If that is the case, why is it that Hashem tells Avraham that Sarah laughed, setting up a showdown between them, wherein Sarah denies having laughed and Avraham reasserts that she had done so?  A brief nice idea I heard from Rabbi Adiel Levi, with whom I teach at Yeshivat Maarava, is that when Avraham brought the supplies needed for the binding and slaughter of Isaac, though Avraham had Isaac carry the wood, he cou...