You First

Parshas Lech Lecha focuses of course on events in the life of Avrohom Avinu. Under the rubric of Maseh Avos Siman L’Banim, we know that these Pessukim are not mere stories or historical record but are meant to teach us lessons that are applicable to our own lives. Each exchange or conversation that is recorded in the Torah should be viewed through this lens as well: we must ask why the Torah included a specific discussion, and what we are to take from it.

There are a number of Pessukim in the middle of the Parsha that are dedicated to the war between the four kings and kings. The four kings attacked the five, and eventually kidnapped Lot, which led to Avraham’s involvement in the conflict. He came to the rescue of the five kings and helped them vanquish their attackers, in a war that the Divrei Chazal indicate included an element of Nes Galuy. After the four kings were chased out of the area, Avraham returned the possessions that they had looted from Sedom and freed lot from captivity before turning around to go back home.

Before he was able to leave the area, Avraham Avinu was approached by two people: Melech Sedom Malkitzedek Melech Shalem. We learn from the Pessukim later on that Melech Sedom came out because he wished to reward Avraham for his efforts, but Malki-Tzedek was not involved in the war, and so it seems that he must have had a different purpose in mind. The Passuk tells us: “U’Malki-Tzedek Melech Shalem Hotzi Lechem V’Yayin V’Hu Kohen L’Kel Elyon.” Malki-Tzedek brought out bread and wine, which the Meforshei HaPshat explain was meant to give sustenance to the battle-weary victors. The fact that he was a “Kohen L’Kel Elyon” seems to be unrelated to this more practical purpose, but the next Pessukim indicate that Malki-Tzedek exercised his capacity as a Kohen as well by issuing a Bracha: “Baruch Avraham L’Kel Elyon Konei Shamayim V’Aretz U’Baruch Kel Elyon Asher Magen Tzarecha B’Yadecha.” The Pessukim then turn to the discussion between Avraham and Melech Sedom and no further mention of Malki-Tzedek is made, leading one to perhaps assume that the interaction between Avraham and Melech Shalem was incidental and of little impact.

A look at the Divrei Chazal, however, reveal that this is anything but true.

Before discussing the actions and words of Malki-Tzedek, it is first important to establish his identity. Rashi here cites a Medrash Agaddah that tells us that in fact this person was Shem ben Noach, and Malki-Tzedek was a title indicating his righteousness. As we know, Shem was the son of Noach from whom Avraham descended and, though he is not spoken about at length in the Pessukim, he appears throughout Chazal in the role of one of the Tzaddikim who lived at the time.

Rashi also brings another Medrash that indicates a deeper meaning to Shem’s gift of Lechem and Yayin: “Ramaz Lo Al HaMEnachos V’Al HaNechasim SheYakrivu Sham Banav.” Being that Shalem, the site of Shem’s kingdom, was in what would later be called Yerushalayim, Shem meant to send Avraham a message about his future progeny, who would bring Korbanos Mincha, represented by Lechem, and Nesachim, represented by Yayin, in that location.

The Re’am, one of the key Meforshim on Rashi itself, asks an interesting question on this Medrash: if he meant to be Meramez to the future Avodah of Avraham’s children, why didn’t Shem bring out meat to represent the actual Korbanos? Why did he bring only Lechem and Yayin, which represent secondary Korbanos, so to speak?

Before turning to a possible answer to this question, let us first examine the second part of the interaction recorded by the Pessukim: the Bracha given by Shem.

The Passuk notes that Shem was “Kohen L’Kel Elyon” and Sforno writes that it was therefore appropriate that he give a Bracha, just as Kohanim in our time do. It appears from Chazal, however, that the Bracha he gave may had an unintended consequence.

The Gemarah in Nedarim tells us that just as Shem was a Kohen, all of his offspring were meant to be as well, but his Bracha did not allow this to happen: “Kivan SheHikdim Birchas Avraham L’Birchas Hamakom Hotzi M’Avraham.” When Shem first gave Avraham a Bracha, “Baruch Avraham L’Kel Elyon”, and only after mentioned Hashem, “U’Baruch Kel Elyon”, the Kehunah was taken from his children. The Gemarah then indicates that Avarham himself was sensitive to the format of Shem’s Bracha, asking him why he put the Eved before the Adon, a comment which was the impetus to give the Kehuna to Avraham’s children.

This Gemarah is very difficult to understand. Shem seems to have been one of the leaders of the generation at the time—for example, when Rivka faced the challenge of “Vayisrotzitzu Habanim B’Kirba” it was the guidance of Shem that she sought, and he was able to accurately explain the phenomenon. Why then would he make the mistake of being Makdim the Bracha of Avraham to the Bracha of Hashem? Why wasn’t he, like Avraham, sensitive to the possible Pegiah in the Kavod of Hashem?

We must also understand the severe punishment he received for his words. Shem was Avraham’s direct ancestor, thought a number of generations removed, yet we are not seen as Bnei Shem but Bnei Avraham. One assumes, however, that if the descendants of Shem had been Kohanim, his name would be associated with them as well. In losing the Kehuna for his children, then, Shem also lost an opportunity for his name to be eternally connected with Avodas Hashem. Why was it that this momentary lapse, which allowed the Tzaddik to give Avraham the Bracha before the Ribbono Shel Olam, enough to have such ramifications?

Perhaps we can answer these questions, and better understand these Pessukim, if we better understand a key difference between Avraham and Noach, the father of Shem.

As we know, there is a Machlokes amongst Chazal about the Tzidkus of Noach, to wit: would Noach have been considered a Tzaddik if compared to Avraham, or was he only a Tzaddik as compared to those in his time. There are two Pessukim, each one applicable to one of these great men, which are very similar, but may help draw the necessary contrast. At the beginning of last week’s Parsha, the Passuk says: “Es HaElokim Hishalech Noach”, Noach walked with Hashem. Later on in this week’s PArsha, the Torah tells us that Hashem said to Avraham: “Hishalech Lifanei V’heye Samim”. In giving the Tzivuy of Bris Milah, Hashem told Avraham to walk “before” Him, so to speak.

The Shefa Chaim of Sanz explains the distinction between these two Pessukim, and really the Mehalechim of Avraham and Noach.

A person, he explains, is created much like an animal: at his core, he really cares only for himself and his every move and decision in life is essentially motivated by selfish reasoning. Even to one who is an Erliche Yid, and is Shomer Torah U’Mitzvos to the best of his abilities, is subject to this mindset. For example, a person wants to eat to satisfy his own hunger, and to have physical strength, and so he makes a Bracha for this is what allows him to eat.

A true Tzaddik, however, is able to overcome this natural tendency and place Hashem first: he eats in order to be able to make a Bracha, he builds a home in order to be Mekayem the Mitzvah of Mezuzah. This Madreigah is one of L’Malah Min HaTeva, and really is a type of Mesiras Nefesh, as the Tzaddik replaces his natural, human, urges with a Sheifah for Avodas Hashem.

A regular person, who follows his natural tendencies, leads a life of reactive Avodas Hashem: he does whatever Mitzvos are called for in the situation he places himself in. he first decides what is best for himself, and his relationship with Hashem is the molded to those circumstances. When, however, one reaches the Madreigah of Mesiras Nefesh that we described, he walks before Hashem, so to speak. Every step he takes is in order to prepare a path for the Ribbono Shel Olam. When a king walks, his servants go before him, clearing the way so that he can pass undisturbed. So to, a true Tzaddik walks in front of Hahsem, so to speak, creating a path that will ensure Kiyum HaMitzvos and Deveykus B’Hashem.

Avraham and Noach were different, explains the Shefa Chaim, in their willingness to be Moser Nefesh to be Mechazek those around them. Chazal tell us that Noach wished to affect change in his Dor, to steer them off their illicit path, but he feared for his life and so his activities were restrained. Avraham, however, was willing to do whatever he could to bring people Tachas Kanfei HaShechina, even at the risk of his own life. In doing so he displayed a willingness and ability to act L’Malah Min Hateva and be Moser Nefesh for the Ribono Shel Olam. It was Avraham who therefore received the Tzivuy of “Hishalech Lifanei V’heye Samim” for it was he, and his progeny, who had the capacity be Moser Nefesh, to walk “before” Hashem, leading a life that placed the Ratzon Haborei above all else.

The Shefa Chaim uses this concept to explain the words “Es HaElokim Hishalech Noach” as well. The word Elokim is the same Gematria as “HaTeva”, and the Shem Elokus thus represents Teva as opposed to the Shem Adnus, which represents an existence of L’Malah Min Hateva. When the Passuk tells us that Noach walked “Es Haelokim” it is attesting to the fact that Noach lived an existence of Teva, with all that embodies. His Tzidkus was therefore not on the level of Avrohoms who could exist L’Malah Min Hateva and therefore walk Lifnei Hashem .

Perhaps this is the difference between Shem and Avraham as well. If Shem carried on the legacy of his father, Tzidkus in the Derech HaTeva, he may not have been sensitive to the implication of placing the Bracha of Avraham before that of Hashem. Only Avraham, whose whole life was devoted to placing the needs of the Ribbono Shel Olam before his own, would notice that it was inappropriate to mention the Eved before the Adon.

While this might not detract from the Tzidkus of Shem on the whole, it certainly disqualified those who followed in his footsteps, his descendants other than those of Avraham, from being Kohanim. Only those who have a chance at living a life of Mesiras Nefesh could be Zoche to that level of Avodah.

Interestingly, Avos D’Rebbi Nosson lists those who were born Mahul, and includes Shem ben Noach. Shem was therefore not at all connected to the Mitzvah of Milah, which is the paradigm of Mesiras Nefesh as indicated by its Tzivuy: “Hishalech Lifanei V’heye Samim”. Certainly someone who could not do this Mitzvah would be unable to live by its ideal, and this may help us understand how Shem’s mistake came about.

This may also explain why Shem brought our Lechem and Yayin to represent Menachos and Nesachim, but not meat to represent actual Korbanos. A Korban represents the corporal existence of its owner and in this way represents a level of Mesiras Nefesh. A Korban Mincha or Nesachim, however, are only the possesions of its owner and do not rise to the same level of Mesiras Nefesh. Shem, who, even in his Tzidkus, lived a life of Teva would therefore relate more to these secondary Korbanos than those that are closely related to Mesiras Nefesh made possible by an existence of “L’Malah Min Hateva”.

As members of the Am Hanivchar, as those who proudly wear the badge of “Bnei Avraham”, we must live up to the ideals of our forefather. We must seek ways to embody the ideal of “Hishalech Lifanei V’heye Samim”, rising above our Teva to place the needs of the Ribbono Shel Olam before our own. in this way we will be worthy of our birthright, and Zoche to all the Brachos of the Kel Elyon.