[Par-reg] for Parshat Toldot - What Mitzvot did the Avot keep

[Menachem Leibtag]

*************************************************************
        THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]
In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag
Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag
*************************************************************

                    PARSHAT TOLDOT - shiur #3

     - WHAT MITZVOT DID THE AVOT KEEP?

What mitzvot did the Avot keep?
There are those who claim that the Avot kept the entire Torah - even the
Oral Law and later Rabbinic prohibitions!  Yet many students, when hearing
this opinion, find it difficult to accept.
    In the following shiur, we analyze the pasuk that forms the source for
this opinion in an attempt to better understand the debate among the
commentators in regard to its interpretation.  Our study will also provide
us with a rare insight into how the great commentators understood the lives
of our forefathers.

INTRODUCTION
Early on in Parshat Toldot, the Torah tells us of a famine in Eretz Canaan
that caused Yitzchak to consider moving temporarily to Egypt.  However, God
intervened - instructing Yitzchak to stay in Eretz Canaan, while
re-affirming His promise to Avraham that Yitzchak would be the 'chosen son'
(see 26:1-5).
    We begin our shiur by taking special note of God's concluding remarks
to Yitzchak at that time, as they form the basis of our discussion:
"ekev asher shama Avraham b'koli va'yishmor..."
    [because Avraham listened to Me and kept:]]
"MISHMARTI, MITZVOTEI, CHUKOTEI, v'TORATEI."
     (see 26:5)

When reading this pasuk, the obvious question arises: What is the precise
meaning of each of these words that describes the variety of ways that
Avraham obeyed God?
a) SHAMA B'KOLI
b) VA'YISHMOR MISHMARTI
c) MITZVOTEI
d) CHUKOTEI
e) TOROTEI
As we should expect, each of the classical commentators contemplates this
question, but to our surprise, each commentator presents a very different
answer.
However, before we begin our study of those commentaries, let's first
consider what we should expect to find.

THREE APPROACHES
To identify the meaning of these five words (in the above pasuk), one can
take one of three basic approaches to define the meaning of each word:

1)  Look for that same word in the story of Avraham's life -
In other words, we must conduct a 'word search' for each of these phrases
in the Torah's account of the life of Avraham (from Parshat Lech L'cha thru
Chaya Sarah).  If we find the same word, then that must be what this pasuk
refers to. [If we don't we'll need to 'improvise'.]
[as will do Rashbam &  Chizkuni]

2) Look for the same word later on in Chumash -
In other words, we must search the entire Torah to find the various
categories of laws that each word refers to, and assume that what it refers
to later on in Chumash is what it refers to as well in the life of Avraham
Avinu in Sefer Breishit.
[Rashi, Ramban (l'fi Chazal)]

3) Look for the concept behind that word or phrase.
In other words, based on the meaning of each word in the Hebrew language
(and in Chumash), we identify the concept of what each word relates to.
Then we search the Torah's story of the life of Avraham Avinu to find and
event relating to that concept.
[Ibn Ezra, Ramban (l'fi ha'pshat), Radak, Seforno]

WOULDN'T IT BE NICE...
Ideally, if we found an example of each one of these phrases in the Torah's
description of Avraham's life from Parshat Lech L'cha through Chaya Sarah,
then the first approach would work best.
However, a comprehensive search finds specific examples for only some of
these words, causing most of the "parshanim" [commentators] to employ a
different approach.
    We'll discuss their various interpretations and approaches according to
the order we suggested in our introduction.

RASHBAM
Rashbam follows our first approach, as he obviously begins by searching for
each specific word within the Torah's presentation of the story Avraham
Avinu.
For the first three words, Rashbam is quite 'successful', as he quotes a
precise example for each word:
a) SHAMA B'KOLI - at the Akeyda, as the Torah states:
"...ekev asher shamata b'koli" (see 22:18)

b) MISHMARETI - to perform the mitzvah of brit milah.
    quoting from Parshat Lech L'cha:
    "v'ata et briti TISHMOR... himol kol zachar" (see 17:9)

c) MITZVOTEI - brit Milah on the  EIGHTH day
as it states at the circumcision ceremony for Yitzchak:
"And Avraham circumcised Yitzchak his son when he was eight days old -
ka'asher TZIVAH oto ha'Elokim" (see 21:4)

However, for the last two words - CHUKOTEI & TORATEI he is less successful,
for there is no 'exact match'. Therefore, Rashbam defaults to a more
general definition for "chukotei v''torotei", understanding that they refer
to all of the 'ethical' mitzvot that Avraham most certainly had kept. Even
though God did not command these mitzvot explicitly, it is quite implicit
from Chumash that God expected Avraham (and all mankind) to act in an
ethical manner (see Breishit 18:18-19!).
Note how Rashbam defines this as "ikar pshuto shel mikra":
"CHUKOTEI V'TORATEI: According to IKAR PSHUTO [simple pshat], all of the
'obvious mitzvot' [i.e. ethical laws] like stealing, adultery, coveting,
justice, and welcoming guests; these we kept BEFORE Matan Torah, but were
renewed and expounded in the covenant [of Matan Torah]." (see Rashbam 26:5)

    Even though Rashbam understands "chukotei v''torotei" as general
categories, he does bring several examples of these ethical mitzvot that
are found in specific events in Avraham's life that are described in Sefer
Breishit:
    stealing - "asher GAZLU avdei Avimelech (see 21:25!!);
adultery & coveting / Pharaoh & Avimelech taking Sarah;
justice  - w/ Melech Sdom & Shalem, after war of 5 kings;
welcoming guests - the 3 angels & story of Lot & Sdom!

CHIZKUNI - even 'better' than Rashbam
As we noted above, in his attempt to find a specific example for each word,
Rashbam is only '3' for '5'.  However, Chizkuni doesn't give up so quickly,
and attempts to identify '5' for '5'!
After quoting the same first three examples as Rashbam, Chizkuni also finds
specific examples for the words CHOK & TORAH as well, but to do so, he must
employ some 'textual' assistance from Sefer Tehilim.  What Chizkuni does is
simply ingenious, as he turns to Sefer Tehillim, to find references to the
life of Avraham Avinu where we find a word similar to "chok" and "torah".
CHUKOTEI - refers once again to BRIT MILAH, but this time for all future
generations as well, as it says in Tehilim:
"zachar l'olam brito... asher karat et Avraham... v'yamideha l'Yaakov
l'CHOK, l'Yisrael BRIT OLAM..."
    (see Tehillim 105:8-10 /or "hodu" in Psukei d'zimrah!)

Hence, the word "chukotei" in Breishit 26:5 relates to God's commandment to
Avraham a Brit Milah: "v'hayta briti b'vsarchem l'BRIT OLAM" (see 17:13)
Similarly:
TORATEI - refers to Avraham Avinu's original 'aliya' to Israel for it
states in Tehillim:
    "askilcha v'ORECHA b'derech zu TAYLECH"
    (see Tehilim 32:8)
Here we find the word "hora'ah" - which implies an instruction - in the
same pasuk that describes 'walking in the path of God' (similar to God's
command to Avraham: of  "lech l'cha..." (see 12:1-3)

This attempt by Chizkuni to identify a specific example for each word is
beautiful, however he himself admits that it may be  'stretching' pshat a
bit too much. Therefore, he concludes his pirush by suggesting that a more
simple "pshat" for "mitzvotei chukotei v'toratei" would be to include the
seven laws given to the children of Noach, which Avraham himself also kept.
[How these seven mitzvot break down according to these three categories of
"mitzvot", "chukim", and "torot" will be discussed by Radak & Ramban.]

RASHI - a similar, but opposite approach
Rashi employs a different approach (the second approach mentioned in our
introduction), claiming that whatever these words refer to later on in
Chumash, are precisely what Avraham kept in his own life time.  [See Rashi
inside.]
    Note how Rashi categorizes these different words based on their
definition later on in Chumash, and cites an example for each word from the
entire spectrum of Halacha, from the Written Law, to the Oral Law, and even
to later Rabbinic ordinations.
a) SHAMA B'KOL - when I tested him (at the Akeyda/ 22:18)
b) MISHMARTI - Rabbinic laws that protect the Torah laws
c) MITZVOTEI - the 'logical' and ethical laws of the Torah
d) CHUKOTEI - the Torah laws that have no apparent reason
e) TOROTEI - the Oral law, and "halacha l'Moshe m'Sinai

    Hence, according to Rashi, Avraham Avinu kept the entire Torah (even
though it had not been given yet), or in essence, Avraham kept the same
mitzvot that Rashi kept!
RAMBAN (according to Chazal)
As usual, Ramban begins his commentary by taking issue with Rashi's
interpretation - that the Avot kept all of the mitzvot.
    Ramban begins by questioning this very assumption. After all, if the
Avot kept the entire Torah, how did Yaakov marry two sisters, and erect a
MATZEYVA, etc.?
Ramban attempts to 'patch' Rashi's interpretation, by explaining Chazal's
statement that the Avot kept the entire Torah from a different angle.
Ramban claims that this Midrash refers to the fact that the Avot kept
SHABBAT, based on another Midrashic statement that the mitzvah of Shabbat
is equal in value to keeping all the mitzvot of the Torah.
Hence, Avraham kept the mitzvah of shabbat as well as the seven mitzvot of
Bnei Noach and brit milah.  From this 'pool' of mitzvot that Avraham kept,
Ramban explains how each word in 26:5 may relate to a specific category
within the 7 Noachide laws:
MISHMARTI - extensions of "arayot" /forbidden marriages
MITZVOTEI - not to steal or kill
CHUKOTEI - "eiver min ha'chay" - a limb from a live animal
TOROTEI - "dinim" establishing civil laws & no idol worship

[Afterward, Ramban returns to his original questions on Rashi's Midrashic
interpretation [adding a bit of 'zionism'],  explaining the Avot's
obligation to follow the ('future') laws of the Torah applied ONLY in Eretz
Yisrael.]

RAMBAN - al derech ha'pshat
Ramban concludes his commentary by suggesting a totally different
interpretation that he introduces as "al derech ha'pshat" - [following the
way of the simple meaning of the text].
    In this approach (which will follow the third approach that we
discussed in our introduction), Ramban simply follows the simple meaning of
each word in Hebrew, and applies those concepts to events in the life of
Avraham Avinu.

MISHMARTI
Most interesting is Rabman's understanding of "mishmarti".  This word stems
from the Hebrew word "li'shmor" - to guard.  [A "shomer" is a watchman or
body-guard.]  Hence, Ramban explains that "vayishmor mishmarti" relates to
how Avraham 'guarded' or 'protected' God, and that was by both preaching
and teaching monotheism, and by publicly arguing against those who preached
belief in other gods.
But where in Chumash does it say that Avraham did so?
Ramban explains that this is precisely the meaning of the phrase "va'yikra
b'shem Hashem" in relation to Avraham Avinu (see Breishit 12:8, 13:4 and
21:33].
[Note how Ramban's explanation of "va'yishmor mishmarti" reflects in many
ways Ramban's own life experiences, as he too 'stood God's guard' by
publicly arguing against those he attacked Judaism!]

MITZVOTEI - according to Ramban, implies a direct commandment, and hence
refers to when God commanded Avraham to move to Canaan ("lech l'cha" /see
12:1-3); to offer his son (at the Akeyda/ see 22:1-2) , and to 'listen to
his wife' - i.e. to send away Hagar (see 21:12).

CHUKOTEI -  Ramban explains, refers to how Avraham 'followed the ways of
God'  -  being merciful & just, and doing acts of "tzedek u'mishpat"
(social justice).  This interpretation, obviously based on Breishit 18:19,
is rather amazing, for most everyone thinks that a "chok" in the Bible
defines a law that 'doesn't make sense' (see Rashi on 26:5) - and here
Ramban applies it to the laws that make the most sense!
At the conclusion of our shiur, we'll return to explain why.

TOROTEI - Here, Ramban follows the popular understanding of the word
"torah" as referring to God's eternal laws, and hence during the time
period of Avraham, it must refer to the actual 'mitzvos' that he kept, such
as brit milah & the seven Noachide laws.

Note how Ramban's approach is most comprehensive, attempting to tackle
pshat, while taking serious consideration of the Midrash, and looking for
overall thematic significance - and consistent with his thematic
understanding of Sefer Breishit.

IBN EZRA - short and sweet
Ibn Ezra, as we would expect, also follows the third approach, looking for
the simple meaning of each word, and applying it to Avraham's own life.
    Ibn Ezra begins by understanding MISHMERETI as a general category that
includes all of the three sub-categories that follow - MITZVOTEI CHUKOTEI
v'TORATEI.
    [That solves one definition.]
    Then he suggests examples for what those three words may refer to
(based on the meaning of each word in Hebrew):

MITZVOTEI = "lech l'cha..." i.e. Avraham's ALIYA
CHUKOTEI =  following God's way of life'
    ('engraved' in his heart)
TOROTEI = by fulfilling the mitzvah of brit milah.

    Note how these last three definitions are essentially identical to
Ramban's interpretation "al derech ha'pshat". [The truth is, Ibn Ezra lived
before Ramban, and we should have brought his opinion first.]
Note as well how Ibn Ezra makes no attempt to find a 'textual' parallel for
each word in this pasuk.  Instead, he follows the concept behind the word!

RADAK - 'widening the pool'
Radak's approach is quite similar to Ibn Ezra's, for he also understands
each of these words as general categories. However, Ibn Ezra seems to limit
his examples to those mitzvot that Avraham himself was commanded, while
Radak 'widens the pool' by including ALL of the mitzvot of Bnei Noach
(assuming that Avraham was commanded to keep them). Then, within this pool
of mitzvot, Radak differentiates between "mitzvot", and "chukim" etc. based
on the definition of these categories later on in Chumash (e.g. "mitzvotei"
refers to the "mitzvot sichliyot" [the laws that man can arrive at using
his own intellect - like stealing and killing etc.].

SEFORNO
We conclude with Seforno, as his approach adds an extra dimension to our
understanding of the thematic significance of this pasuk.
    First of all, Seforno, like Ramban & Radak, follows the third approach
- and explains how these phrases relate to concepts (or general categories)
that include the "seven mitzvot of Bnei Noach".  Secondly, Seforno adds an
'extra touch' to Ramban's understanding of "mishmarti", agreeing that it
implies to 'watching God's guard', but providing us with a different
example of how Avraham accomplished this:
"He kept God's 'special guard' which was to do kindness, as the verse in
Tehillim states: ' All the ways of God are kindness and truth (25:10); and
to teach the proper way for those who had gone astray - and this he did
when he 'called out in God's Name', and kept as well mitzvotei, chukotei,
b'torotei - that God commanded Bnei Noach - and [Avraham] also beautifully
taught them and kept them - as a shining example for others to follow
[k'mofet l'rabim]"
    (see Seforno on 26:5)

Note how Seforno. like Ramban, also relates "mishmarti" to how Avraham
'called out in God's Name' - yet suggests a significantly different
interpretation.  Ramban understood how this was accomplished by what he
said ['verbally'] - i.e. by publicly defending God.  In contrast, Seforno
explains that this was accomplished by what Avraham's did, i.e. by his
actions and the example he set for others.
Note how Seforno attempts to thematically connect the very reason for why
God chose Avraham Avinu ("or la'goyim" / see Yeshayhau 42:5-6) - to
Avraham's own way of life.
[Note how Seforno takes into consideration the primary theme of Sefer
Breishit, as he attempts to understand each pasukl!]

Finally, Seforno adds an additional dimension, for he continues his
commentary by explaining how this statement relates to the events that
follow in chapter 26.
    Note how our pasuk (i.e. 26:5) does not conclude a 'parshia'; rather,
it introduces a set of stories in which Yitzchak 'runs into trouble' with
the Plishtim and Avimelech (see 26:6-33).
    Therefore,  Seforno concludes that this pasuk serves as a bit of
"musar" [rebuke/ or at least encouragement] to Yitzchak, as God explains to
Yitzchak that so far he was chosen because he was Avraham's son.
Nonetheless, God now reminds Yitzchak that Avraham was a man of action, and
'earned' his special status through his deeds - 'hinting' that Yitzchak
should also begin to be a bit more pro-active. If Avraham spent his time by
preaching and teaching God's laws - calling out in God's Name, and setting
a personal example by pursuing "tzedek u'mishpat", God now expects no less
from Yitzchak.
In this manner, Seforno explains why Yitzchak suffered so much strife with
Avimelech and his servants in the story that follows (i.e. the arguments at
"esek" & "sitnah"). However, later in this same 'parshia', we find that
Yitzchak himself finally "calls out in God's Name" (see 26:25-29). From
that time on, Yitzchak becomes successful, and develops a positive
relationship with his neighbors.  Ultimately, God is finally with Yitzchak,
but only after he fulfills his responsibilities.

CHUKIM THAT MAKE SENSE!
To conclude our study, it is important to note how Ibn Ezra, Ramban, and
Rashbam all explained the word "chukotei" - as referring to God's 'way of
life' - implying being a just an upright person, and acting with kindness
to others.
The reason why is rather simple.  The word "chok" in Hebrew implies
something set that doesn't change - like statutes (or technically speaking
something 'engraved'). In this sense, the laws of nature are referred to as
"chukim" - for they don't change (see Yirmiyahu 33:25).
Therefore, when God mentions "chukotei" - they refer to His [God's] 'way of
life' - as His ways are to be kind and to uphold justice.  In this manner,
Avraham emulated God by acting in His ways - and thus setting an example
for others to follow.
The fact that so many commentators emphasize this point as a key element in
Avraham's own life, reflects their understanding that being kind, just, and
upright must be a core value in Judiasm.
Even though there may be a controversy concerning which specific mitzvot
the Avot kept (be it 613 or 7, or 8 or 9 etc.) - everyone agrees that their
greatness lied in their 'way of life' - their moral behavior, social
justice, and their dedication towards 'making a Name for God', thus setting
a model for others to learn from.
    Certainly - a model that we ourselves must follow.
    .
shabbat shalom
menachem
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg/attachments/20161201/9bd5a477/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: toldot3.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 23767 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg/attachments/20161201/9bd5a477/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: toldot3.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 35840 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg/attachments/20161201/9bd5a477/attachment-0001.doc>