Tag Archives: kings

VaYechi – Unfinished Business

Parshat VaYechi describes the last will and testament of Yaakov to his sons. He blesses each of them, according to their specific talents and the future that he foresees for them.

וַיִּקְרְבוּ יְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לָמוּת
The time of Yisrael’s death drew near… (Breishit 47:29)

The Haftarah of VaYechi describes the last will and testament of King David to his son, the newly crowned King Shlomo. David does not bless Shlomo; instead, he asks Shlomo to dispense justice to people whom he had been unable to punish in his lifetime.

וַיִּקְרְבוּ יְמֵי דָוִד לָמוּת
The time of David’s death drew near… (Melachim I 2:1)

It appears that Yaakov leaves his sons with closure while David leaves Shlomo with all his unfinished business. However, the comparison of the two bequests show us that what both fathers had in common at their death, that they each bequeathed to their children, was the gift of perspective.

The first, and most difficult realization that David shares with Shlomo is his realization that Yoav had been guilty of murder. Yoav was David’s kinsman and his closest companion throughout his life; he was also the general of the armies of Israel and David’s right hand man. Years ago, soon after Shaul’s death but before David was crowned as the king of Israel, Shaul’s former general Avner had come to make a treaty with David. Yoav asked to speak with him in private, and stabbed him in the gut. Yoav defended his action by saying that he was protecting David and the nascent kingdom, that he was sure that Avner would betray David. At the time, David believed him, and disciplined him only for making it look like David assassinates his enemies, but he did not judge it as a murder.

More recently, however, after the civil war started by Avshalom, in a gesture to reunite the nation, David had offered Avshalom’s general, Amasa, to serve as his own general, displacing Yoav. When Yoav heard this, he met up with Amasa, and under the guise of greeting him, stabbed him in the gut.
At that time, David was too vulnerable politically and militarily to lose Yoav. He was also still grieving for his son Avshalom, who had been killed in the civil war; the thought of losing Yoav must have been intolerable. He was not in a position to execute him, or even to judge him with a clear mind.

But now, “the time of David’s death drew near, ” and he sees clearly that Yoav must pay for his crimes. David is also worried about his son’s future as the King of Israel. He now believes that Yoav’s loyalty to the crown takes second place to his own agenda, and he cannot leave Shlomo with a wild card in his cabinet. His goal is to bequeath to Shlomo a strong uncontested monarchy, and that means that he has to tell him to beware of Yoav.

Yaakov, too, uses the time of saying goodbye to his sons to take care of unfinished business. Some of the blessings that he gives his children bring up issues that had long been buried:

רְאוּבֵן בְּכֹרִי אַתָּה כֹּחִי וְרֵאשִׁית אוֹנִי יֶתֶר שְׂאֵת וְיֶתֶר עָז: פַּחַז כַּמַּיִם אַל תּוֹתַר כִּי עָלִיתָ מִשְׁכְּבֵי אָבִיךָ אָז חִלַּלְתָּ יְצוּעִי עָלָה:
Reuven, you are my first-born, my strength, and the first of my might. Ahead in dignity, ahead in power. Unstable as water, you shall not have extra. For you went up on your father’s bed, thus you profaned, having gone up on my couch. (Breishit 49:3,4)

In his blessing to Reuven, Yaakov accuses him of having “gone up on his father’s bed”. This is a reference to a story that happened back in VaYishlach:

וַיְהִי בִּשְׁכֹּן יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּאָרֶץ הַהִוא וַיֵּלֶךְ רְאוּבֵן וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֶת בִּלְהָה פִּילֶגֶשׁ אָבִיו וַיִּשְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל פ
וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי יַעֲקֹב שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר:
When Yisrael was living in that land, Reuven went and slept with Bilha, his father’s concubine. Yisrael heard….. The sons of Yaakov were twelve.
(Breishit 35:22)

Soon after Rachel’s death, Reuven is recorded as sleeping with Rachel’s maid, his father’s concubine. The verse says that Yaakov heard, but does not record any reaction. It then points out that Yaakov had twelve sons. The implication is that Yaakov did nothing. He did not punish Reuven and he certainly did not exile him from the family. Perhaps, as the verse implies, he did not even say anything to Reuven.

But now, “the time of Yisrael’s death drew near…”, and Yaakov is ready to have this conversation. The Midrash explains why Yaakov had waited until right before his death.

מפני ארבעה דברים אין מוכיחין את האדם אלא סמוך למיתה, כדי שלא יהא מוכיחו וחוזר ומוכיחו ושלא יהא חברו רואהו ומתבייש ממנו, ושלא יהא בלבו עליו, ושלא יהיו המוכיחין מתוכחין, שהתוכחה מביאה לידי שלום, …וכן אתה מוצא ביעקב ויקרא יעקב אל בניו ראובן אומר לך מפני מה לא הוכחתיך כל השנים הללו כדי שלא תניחני ותדבק בעשו אחי
There are four reasons why one doesn’t rebuke a person until one is near death: so that he will not repeat his rebuke again and again; so that his friend will not be ashamed when he sees him; so that he will not carry a grudge against him; and so that the rebuke does not degenerate into an argument, as the rebuke is meant to bring peace… So we see with Yaakov, Yaakov called his sons, and said, Reuven, do you know why I did not rebuke you all these years? So that you wouldn’t leave me and go to my brother, Esav. (Midrash Yalkut Shimoni Yehoshua 34)

The reason that Yaakov did not react immediately when Reuven sinned was that he was afraid of alienating him. Reuven knew that he had done wrong, he did not need his father to explain that to him or to prevent him from doing it again. But if Yaakov were to have words with Reuven then, he would have been so ashamed that he could not look him in the eye. Eventually, Reuven might have found it easier to just leave the family. Perhaps he would even have started seeing himself as a sinner, and feel more comfortable with Esav, who had lower expectations, at least in this area of morality.

But now that Yaakov is about to die, he is not afraid of his son being ashamed to look him in the eye, or of leaving the family. Enough time has passed to give them all some perspective. Yaakov can now tell him that his actions did not go unnoticed, and that they have consequences, and that those consequences are in proportion to the ultimate effect of the deed. Reuven may have made a mistake, but it did not turn him into a sinner. He may not get the double portion of the first-born nor the leadership of the nation, but neither is he excluded from the Jewish People.

Yaakov’s words to Shimon and Levi are much harsher:

שִׁמְעוֹן וְלֵוִי אַחִים כְּלֵי חָמָס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶם: בְּסֹדָם אַל תָּבֹא נַפְשִׁי בִּקְהָלָם אַל תֵּחַד כְּבֹדִי כִּי בְאַפָּם הָרְגוּ אִישׁ וּבִרְצֹנָם עִקְּרוּ שׁוֹר: אָרוּר אַפָּם כִּי עָז וְעֶבְרָתָם כִּי קָשָׁתָה אֲחַלְּקֵם בְּיַעֲקֹב וַאֲפִיצֵם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל:
Shimon and Levi are brothers; instruments of crime are their swords. Let my soul not enter their conspiracies, let my honor not be included in their gang. For in their anger, they killed a man, by their will, they uprooted an ox. Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce; their fury, for it is cruel. I will disperse them in Yaakov, scatter them in Yisrael. (Breishit 49:5-7)

In this “blessing”, Yaakov denounces Shimon and Levi’s actions in Shechem. When they went to rescue Dina, who had been abducted and raped, they did not limit themselves to getting her out, not even to killing only those who had actually hurt her. They went and killed all the men in the entire town. At the time, Yaakov did protest, but he accepted their reason that they were protecting the honor of their sister and of the family.

Also in this “blessing”, Yaakov makes veiled references to their role in the sale of Yosef (“the ox” is the symbol of Yosef). Perhaps it is only now, after years in Egypt, that Yaakov puts together what may have happened to Yosef, and that it was not a coincidence that the first thing that Yosef did when he saw his brothers again was to separate Shimon from Levi. Now that the nature of their character is clear to Yaakov, he distances himself from their potential for fierce, destructive, anger. They must not be allowed to gang up, or they would destroy the entire nation.

The approach of death had given Yaakov, as well as David, the ability to see things with a sharper, clearer perspective. From this vantage point, they could see the long-term consequences of earlier events, and they could also see what the future would need. Ultimately, taking care of their unfinished business brought closure, as well as blessing, to the sons of Yaakov and to the son of David.


PDF for printing, 3 pages A4

Copyright © Kira Sirote
In memory of my parents, Peter & Nella Rozenberg, z”l
לעילוי נשמת אבי מורי פנחס בן נתן נטע ואמי מורתי חנה בת זעליג ז”ל

Leave a Comment

Filed under Connections, Sefer Breishit, VaYechi

Shabbat HaChodesh – New Year for Kings

Shabbat HaChodesh is the fourth and last of the special Shabbatot, the Shabbat immediately preceding Rosh Chodesh Nissan.

On Shabbat HaChodesh we read Parshat HaChodesh, the very first commandment that G-d gave to all of Israel as a nation[1]:

(א) וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֶל מֹשֶׁה וְאֶל אַהֲרֹן בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם לֵאמֹר:

(ב) הַחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה לָכֶם רֹאשׁ חֳדָשִׁים רִאשׁוֹן הוּא לָכֶם לְחָדְשֵׁי הַשָּׁנָה:

1) Hashem said to Moshe and to Aharon, in the Land of Egypt, as follows:
2) This month will be for you the first of months, it will be the first for you among the months of the year.  (Shemot 12)

Not only was this the first commandment that Israel was given as a nation, it is this commandment that made Israel a nation in the first place. In the ancient world, what distinguished a nation from a bunch of tribes was that nations had kings. The Jewish People in exile were still just a large family, a dozen tribes. By giving us commandments, G-d made Himself our king, and made us a nation.

The 1st of Nissan is associated with kings in Halacha. When listing the various new years in our calendar, the Mishna states:

ארבעה ראשי שנים הם באחד בניסן ראש השנה למלכים ולרגלים :

There are four new years: 1st of Nissan is the new year for kings and for holidays (Mishna, Rosh Hashana 1:1)

What is a “new year for kings?” In the times of the Tanach, people would date their documents based on the reign of the current king, eg: “in the 2nd year of the King Yehoshafat.” The year was incremented not on the date of the coronation of that king, but rather on the 1st of Nissan. Let’s say King Yehoshafat had been crowned during Adar; starting with the 1st of Nissan of that year, we would start dating our documents as the 2nd year to his reign, even though he had only been king for a month.

The “coronation date” of the Jewish People is not the coronation date of a particular human king, like all other nations. Instead, it is the date that we accepted G-d as our king and became a nation, the date when G-d gave us our first commandment: the 1st of Nissan.

The Haftarah of HaChodesh describes the dedication ceremony of the final Temple, which begins on the 1st of Nissan[2]. It talks about the offerings that will be made on that day, in particular, by the leader of the Jewish People, whom Yechezkel calls “nassi.”[3] Surprisingly, the Haftarah begins a few verses before the description of the dedication ceremony, and ends a few verses later. Those extra verses refer to a seemingly unrelated topic: the laws that limit the power of the leader of the Jewish People.

This “nassi” has an important role, especially in the dedication of the final Temple: he must collect the taxes, and he must represent the people in bringing their offerings. He is shown respect: certain gates are opened especially for him, and he is allowed to use certain passages that others are not. But the Haftarah states explicitly that these privileges are only given to him when he is actively representing the nation. When he comes to the Temple as a private person, as an individual, he does not get any special treatment.

The Haftarah goes out of its way to point out that the leader of Israel, whether he be called “king”, or “nassi”, is given power only to the extent that he serves the nation. He represents them, he organizes them, he leads them, but he does not truly rule them. It is not his authority that defines them as a nation. Their years are not dated from the beginning of his reign, but from the beginning of G-d’s reign – the date of the first commandment given to Israel.

The nation of Israel may have many new years, but we have only One King.


PDF for printing, 2 pages
Copyright © Kira Sirote
In memory of my father, Peter Rozenberg, z”l
לעילוי נשמת אבי מורי פנחס בן נתן נטע ז”ל



[1] Avraham’s commandment of Brit Milah was given to him as an individual and the head of a family.

[2] The Mishkan’s dedication ceremony was also on the 1st of the 1st.

[3] “Nassi”, which is used in modern Hebrew to mean president. It is sometimes translated as “prince”, but a prince in English connotes the child of a king. It literally means,  “one who is raised”, as in “his highness”, or in the case of the Jewish People, “first among equals”. Which is why I went with “president”.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Connections, Shabbat HaChodesh, Special Shabbatot

VaYeira – This time next year

In the Haftarah of VaYeira Elisha wishes to show his appreciation to the Lady of Shunam for her outstanding hospitality. When he finds out that she is childless, he promises her a son.

וַיֹּאמֶר וּמֶה לַעֲשׂוֹת לָהּ? וַיֹּאמֶר גֵּיחֲזִי אֲבָל בֵּן אֵין לָהּ וְאִישָׁהּ זָקֵן:
וַיֹּאמֶר קְרָא לָהּ – וַיִּקְרָא לָהּ וַתַּעֲמֹד בַּפָּתַח:
וַיֹּאמֶר לַמּוֹעֵד הַזֶּה כָּעֵת חַיָּה אַתְּ חֹבֶקֶת בֵּן !
וַתֹּאמֶר אַל אֲדֹנִי אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים , אַל תְּכַזֵּב בְּשִׁפְחָתֶךָ:
וַתַּהַר הָאִשָּׁה וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן לַמּוֹעֵד הַזֶּה כָּעֵת חַיָּה אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֵלֶיהָ אֱלִישָׁע וַיֹּאמֶר שׁוֹב אָשׁוּב אֵלֶיךָ כָּעֵת חַיָּה וְהִנֵּה בֵן לְשָׂרָה אִשְׁתֶּךָ . וְשָׂרָה שֹׁמַעַת פֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל וְהוּא אַחֲרָיו:
14) He said, “But what should be done for her?” Gehazi said, “But she doesn’t have a son, and her husband is old.”
15) He said, “Call her”. He called her, and she stood by the entrance.
16) He said, “At this season at the time of births, you will be hugging a son.” She said, “Don’t, my lord, Man of G-d! Don’t disillusion your servant.”
17) The woman became pregnant, and gave birth to a son, at this season at the time of births, about which Elisha had spoken to her. (Melachim II 4 14-17)

In the Parsha, the angels come to Avraham and Sarah and promise her a son:

וְאַבְרָהָם וְשָׂרָה זְקֵנִים בָּאִים בַּיָּמִים חָדַל לִהְיוֹת לְשָׂרָה אֹרַח כַּנָּשִׁים:
וַתִּצְחַק שָׂרָה בְּקִרְבָּהּ לֵאמֹר אַחֲרֵי בְלֹתִי הָיְתָה לִּי עֶדְנָה וַאדֹנִי זָקֵן:
וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֶל אַבְרָהָם לָמָּה זֶּה צָחֲקָה שָׂרָה לֵאמֹר הַאַף אֻמְנָם אֵלֵד וַאֲנִי זָקַנְתִּי:
הֲיִפָּלֵא מֵה’ דָּבָר לַמּוֹעֵד אָשׁוּב אֵלֶיךָ כָּעֵת חַיָּה וּלְשָׂרָה בֵן
…וַתַּהַר וַתֵּלֶד שָׂרָה לְאַבְרָהָם בֵּן לִזְקֻנָיו לַמּוֹעֵד אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר אֹתוֹ אֱלֹהִים
10) He said, “I will come back to you at the time of births and your wife Sarah will have a son. Sarah was listening through the entrance of the tent, which was behind him.
11) Avraham and Sarah were old, getting on in years; the way of women had stopped for Sarah.
12) Sarah laughed inside, saying, “After all this time that I didn’t have joy, and my lord is old.”
13) Hashem said to Avraham, “Why did Sarah laugh saying, how could I give birth, when I have gotten old?”
14) Can anything be too difficult for Hashem? I will come back at this season at the time of births, and Sarah will have a son.
21:2) She became pregnant; Sarah gave birth to Avraham’s son, in his old age, at the season about which G-d had spoken. (Breishit 18 10-14, 21:2)

The two stories share so many phrases, it looks almost like the prophet writing the Haftarah copied them verbatim from the Parsha. The parallels are numerous: an act of hospitality resulting in the blessing of childbirth, the husband accused of being too old, the scepticism of the mother, and the happy event coming about as foretold. So that we don’t miss the thematic similarities, the Haftarah re-uses the memorable phrase, “at this season at the time of births”, which is not found anywhere else in all of Tanach. It is clear that the prophet is trying to draw our attention to the parallels between the two stories. Once we focus on the similarities, the information flows both ways: not only can we apply what we know of the Parsha to the Haftarah, but we can also apply what we are told in the Haftarah to the Parsha.

To begin with, the way that the Lady of Shunam phrases her reaction to the happy news can help us understand Sarah’s reaction as well. When told that she will have a child “this time next year” – not sometime in the future, but this very year – Sarah laughs, prompting us to ask, along with the angel, “Why did Sarah laugh?” Did she doubt G-d’s abilities? Did she lose faith in the promise given to Avraham decades earlier?

The Lady of Shunam is more explicit. Her reply is, “Do not disillusion me.” She voices her fear of being toyed with, of raising her hopes in vain. It is not that she doesn’t believe the prophet or doesn’t believe that G-d can accomplish what he promised. She simply cannot afford to be disappointed yet again.

If we assume that the two women share similar feelings, then Sarah’s laughter is not derisive, it is defensive. How many years has she waited to see the prophecy to Avraham fulfilled? The Torah gives us the numbers: Avraham was 75 when G-d told them they would have children; he is now 99. 24 years, 12 months a year, 288 months of disappointment, until finally, as the Torah tells us, there are no more months. Now some random stranger comes and says, “this time next year.” To hope again is unbearable. Sarah does not laugh at G-d or at G-d’s promise. Sarah laughs to protect herself.

But this time, the blessing is not for “some day,” this time, it comes with a timestamp: “in this season at the time of births.” This time, it does come to pass, right on time, just as promised. What has changed for Sarah? What was it that made it possible for this very concrete promise to be made? The same promise is made to the Lady of Shunam, and that too, comes to pass. What made it possible for Elisha to make her that promise?

The two identical promises of childbirth are preceded by similar acts of outstanding hospitality.

As the Parsha begins, Avraham sits and waits for passersby. For Avraham and Sarah, hospitality is not a response to circumstance, but rather something to be pursued proactively. It is an opportunity for kindness that they do not allow to pass them by.

Avraham says modestly, “Let me bring you some water, and a bit of bread while you rest up”. Then he, together with Sarah, make them a gourmet meal.

The Lady of Shunam is truly a child of Avraham and Sarah. It is obvious to her that when the prophet comes to town and needs a place to stay, she will not allow the opportunity to pass her by. And just like Avraham, when she takes her hospitality to the next level, she does not advertise her intention. She just does it, quietly and simply, making sure that all of the prophet’s needs are met, providing a bed, a table, and a lamp. The Haftarah describes how touched and impressed Elisha was at her thoughtfulness.

We see also in both stories that hospitality is a joint effort. Both the Parsha and the Torah go out of their way to point out how both spouses were involved in the preparations. Avraham is seen calling out to Sarah to bake bread, and the Lady of Shunam is heard telling her husband of her plans for their attic.

In both cases, the reward is a child “at this season, at the time of births.”

If this story only happened once, in the case of Avraham and Sarah, we might not draw the connection between hospitality and childbirth. Avraham and Sarah have many other achievements to their credit. Moreover, G-d had already promised them a child. There would be no reason to assume that it was their act of hospitality that tipped the scales and made it possible for this promise to come to pass now. But when it happens again in the Haftarah, that a promise to have a child is fulfilled in the context of hospitality, then we need to look at it as not just a correlation but a cause.

We know that G-d judges “middah k’negged middah” (measure for measure). The reward that He chooses is not independent of the action; rather, the deed and the reward are two sides of the same coin. If the reward for hospitality is a raising a child, then they are also two sides of the same coin.

Is not raising a child a form of hospitality itself? A helpless stranger, he is a guest first in his mother’s own body. All his needs anticipated and provided for, with the cooperation of both parents. until he ultimately goes his own way. Are not children passersby who stop over in our house for a limited time?

So when the Lady of Shunam prepared a room in her home for the prophet’s use, anticipating his needs and providing for them, Elisha felt that the best way to repay her is with a child whose needs she would have to anticipate and provide for.

When Sarah made food for three complete strangers on a moment’s notice, the best way to repay her was with a child for her to nurse.

Thus it is specifically an act of hospitality that can transform a promise of “some day” to one of “this time next year.”


PDF for Printing, 3 pages A4

Copyright © Kira Sirote
In memory of my father, Peter Rozenberg, z”l
לעילוי נשמת אבי מורי פנחס בן נתן נטע ז”ל

Leave a Comment

Filed under Sefer Breishit, VaYeira