Closed Door Session

During the weeks that we Lein the Parshios of the Avos HaKedoshim, one of the goals is to allow their stories to affect us on a personal level. The Haftoros selected by Chazal for these weeks can often be a guide to this end, their Pessukim acting not only an extension of those of the Parsha, but also something of an explanation. If we learn these Haftoros properly, then, we may find that they shed light on the themes and lessons to which we can relate.

The Haftorah for Parshas Vayera is taken from Sefer Melachim and relates two stories that happened in the time of Elisha, the Talmid of Eliyahu Hanavi.

The first story is about a Nes that the Navi performed. A woman, identified only as Isha Achas M’Nishei Bnei Haneviim approached Elisha and cried that her husband had died and left her with debt. Unable to repay her creditors, her two sons were at risk of being sold as Avadim and she approached Elisha to request help. Elisha asks the Isha Achas what she has in her home, and she responds: “Ain L’Shifchasecha Kol Babayis Ki Im Asuch Shemen.” Elisha then tells her to borrow other Kelim from neighbors and to take the lone oil jug and begin pouring from the jug into the empty vessels. The Passuk tells us that the Isha followed the instructions of the Navi, and oil came out of the Asuch Shemen until there were no more empty Kelim, at which point it stopped. When she reported this to Elisha he instructed the Isha Achas to then sell the oil to repay the debts.

The Navi then tells us that Elisha would be hosted on his travels by a woman referred to as the Isha Hashunamis. Elisha wished to repay his hostess for her kindness, but because she refused to make a request of him he was unsure how to do so. Then, Gechazi, his assistant, informed Elisha that the women had no sons. Elisha calls the woman before him and promises her a son, a guarantee that was fulfilled in short order. The Pessukim go on to tell us that the young boy was later Niftar. The Isha Hashumanis informed Elisha of the tragedy and he was able to perform Techias Hamesim and bring him back to life.

The connection between the Parsha and the Haftorah seems to hinge on this second story, with many apparent links. For example, the Hachnasas Orchim of the Isha Hashunamis are reminiscent of Avrohom’s Chassadim, and her childlessness of Sara Imenu’s plight. Even the words that the Navi uses to promise her a son are borrowed from our Parsha: “Lamoed Hazeh K’Es Chaya.” The sudden passing of the child, and his eventual recovery are somewhat similar to Akeidas Yitzchok in that a long-awaited child is at risk.

The Haftorah is not limited to this story, however, and so we must of course ask why the first story, which does not necessarily seem connected to Parshas Vayera, is included. In fact, even the two stories do not seem to be related to one another, save the fact that they both speak about Nissim that Elisha was involved in. Perhaps, however, if we better understand how the two stories are connected, we can better understand how they indeed form a complete Haftorah.

The truth is that if we take a closer look at the Pessukim that tell these two stories, something of a common thread emerges.

When Elisha speaks to the Isha Achas in the first story, he gives her very detailed instructions about how to carry out the Nes she requires. After she gathers the Kelim from her neighbors, the Navi tells her: “U’Basa V’Sagart HaDeles Ba’adech U’Baad Banaich”. She should return to her home, and close the door behind her and her sons. Later the Navi tells us that she completed this step in the process: “Vatelech M’Ito VaTisgor HaDeles”. There seems to be a simple question to be asked on these Pessukim: why did Elisha have to tell her to close the door to her house, an action which is second nature to most people, and why did the Navi need to tell us that she did so?

Rashi explains that this was in fact an integral part of the process: “Kavod HaNes Hu Lavo B’Hetzna”. There is an aspect of Kavod, when it comes to Nissim, that dictates that they take place in private. By closing the door, then, the Isha Achas created an environment in which the Nes that she was about to preform, could take place. This was certainly a noteworthy instruction, then.

This concept repeats itself in the story of the Isha HaShunamis, as well, perhaps more than once.

Upon realizing that her son had passed away, the Isha runs to find Elisha, who follows her home so he may attempt to revive her son. The Passuk there tells us that when Elisha came to the home and saw the deceased boy lying on a bed: “VaYavo VaYisgor HaDeles”, he came and closed the door. Rashi does not comment on these words, but we can safely assume that his earlier words apply here as well: Elishia closed the door, because “Kavod HaNes Hu Lavo B’Hetzna”.

We find another, though less overt, example of this concept earlier in the story as well.

The Pessukim tell us that the boy had been in the fields with his father when he began to feel unwell. He complained to his father, who instructed one of his workers to bring the boy to his mother. The Isha cradled the ill boy in her lap for some time before he passed away, and then put him on the Navi’s bed and closed the door, so that she could go find Elisha and beg him to perform a miracle. She asked her husband to send a servant and a donkey to take her to the Navi, and her husband was surprised, asking her: “Madua At Holeches Elav HaYom Lo Chodesh V’Lo Shabbos.” It was the usual practice to visit a Navi on Rosh Chodesh or Shabbos, but that day was neither, so the man was confused about his wife’s decision to go. Her response to this question was just “Shalom.” The Isha Shunamis did not address her husband’s rather valid question, only bidding him farewell—certainly an interesting response as such a fraught time.

The Mincha Ketana explains that the Isha responded with only one word so that her husband would not sense that she was tense and upset, for that would lead him to investigate the condition of their son. The Isha was concerned that, were he to do so, he would become upset and emit a “Tzeaka Gedolah U’Mara”, a cry of anguish. This would publicize the tragedy, forestalling the possibility of a Nes, “Ki Ain Kavod L’Nes L’Hisparsem”.

There is yet another time in this story that the concept of “Ki Ain Kavod L’Nes L’Hisparsem” arises, though with the opposite effect.

When the Isha initially reaches Elisha, and tells him what has happened, Elisha instructs his Talmid, Gechazi, to run ahead and place Elisha’s staff upon the child. Gechazi does so, but it has no affect. Rashi here explains why: in instructing his Talmid, Elisha told him not to speak to anyone about his mission. The reason for this directive was “Ki Ain Kavod L’Nes L’Hisparsem”, but Gechazi did not observe his master’s words, and so his actions were ineffective.

The theme of “Ki Ain Kavod L’Nes L’Hisparsem” clearly runs through our Haftorah. This concept links the two otherwise disparate stories, and of course teaching us an important lesson, but also raises some questions. First, why is it important for us to learn this lesson, that a Nes must not be publicized, this week? How is this concept related to our Parsha? Second, why is this true: what does it mean that “Ki Ain Kavod L’Nes L’Hisparsem”? Based on the actions of Gechazi a lack of Pirsum would seem like an integral part of the Nes—if this condition is not present, the Nes cannot occur—why?

More pressing that these questions, however, is that the essence of Nissim seems to be Pirsum. We know that there are many Halachos that hinge on the concept of Pirsumei Nissa, the publicization of a Nes, and the word “Nes” itself means to raise for all to see. In fact, it seems that sometimes the Nes itself occurs in a way that people will be able to witness it.

The Gemara in Tanis tells the story of R’ Chanina who saw that his daughter was sad one Erev Shabbos. He asked why, and was told that she had lit vinegar rather than oil for the Shabbos licht. R’ Chanina responded to her that there was no need to be sad because “Mi Sheyomar L’Shemen V’Yadlik Hu Yomar L’Chometz V’Yadlik”. Hashem can make the vinegar burn, just as he made oil burn. The Gemara concludes that indeed, the candles burned the whole Shabbos until they were used to light the Havdala candle.

The Maharsha, there, points out that the vinegar candles could have gone out on Friday night, just as ones lit from oil would have. He explains that they didn’t, so that people could witness the Nes throughout Shabbos.

This is but one example of a Nes that was done in a way that was specifically not B’Tzina, but rather publicly visible. How can we understand the distinction? When is Tznius a necessary element of the Nes, as we see in the two stories in our Haftorah, and when is Pirsum more desirable?

Perhaps we can answer this question, and better understand the concept of Ki Ain Kavod L’Nes L’Hisparsem based on the way R’ Yerucham Levovitz speaks about Nissim in general.

The Ramban, at the end of Parshas Bo, famously writes that the purpose of Nissim Gedolim is to make us think about the small Nissim that are contastanly afoot, and for us to understand that “B’Chol Devareinu U’Mikreinu Shekulam Nissim Ain Bahem Teva U’Minhago Sel Olam.” These most fundamental words are often understood to mean that when we realize that Hashem makes Nissim Geluyim it causes us to realize that the Hashgacha Elyona controls all, even that which we see as Teva. R’ Yerucham, in Daas Torah on Parshas Tazriah, offers a slightly different approach.

There are certain things, explains the Mashgiach, that we believe that we understand. For example, most people understand the chemical and physical properties of water with a high level of certitude. But when a Nes occurs, and that water is turned to blood, it makes us realize that even that which we understood about Teva was false: the water itself always had the capability of turning into blood, a fact that escaped us until we saw it.

As R’ Yerucham puts it, “Hahochfi HaTzur Agam Mayim”, when we see a rock become a spring of water, “Roeh Eifoh Ki Lo Yada Klal Mahu Even”, we realize that we never even knew what a rock is. The Nes causes us to change our entire perspective on Teva, and realize that we didn’t even know what we don’t know.

Rav Dessler, in Michtav M’Eliyahu, quotes R’ Yerucham as saying that the Nes of Krias Yam Suf was not that the Yam split, for the ocean has rifts and currents all the time, the Nes was that we were able to realize that it was a Nes. This is closely related to the approach of R’ Yerucham here: the Nes is not what occurs, but what we take from it, what it does to our perception of reality.

Perhaps the idea of Ki Ain Kavod L’Nes L’Hisparsem, as applied in our Haftorah, is related to this concept.

In both stories, Elisha was hoping to perform a personal Nes for someone: to create an unending stream of oil, or to revive a deceased child. In order to cause this to happen, he needed to ensure that the Nes would have the desired affect: to change the outlook of its beneficiary. The Nes therefore needed to take place in a quiet and unobtrusive manner, to allow for focus and introspection. If people were there, and knew what was meant to occur, the would distract from the moment, or even offer their wise opinion as to what “really” happened. This would detract from the ultimate purpose of the Nes, which was to have an impact on the person it was done for.

Once the Nes occurs, such as in the Gemara in Taanis, it is a Mitzava to be Mefarsem it so that others may too be affected by it. R’ Chanina did not make the Nes so that others could see it, the vinegar began to burn B’Tzina. It was only once it was already lit, and the lesson of “Mi Sheyomar L’Shemen V’Yadlik Hu Yomar L’Chometz V’Yadlik” was learnt, that the opportunity for Pirsum was created.

It seems that this lesson is quite appropriate for our Parsha.

One of the central themes of the Parsha is the Nisyonos of Avrohom Avinu, the tests of Emunah and Bitachon he underwent, ending with the greatest Nisayon: Akeidas Yitzchok.

The word Nisayon is of course directly related to the word Nes, and perhaps the lesson of R’ Yerucham rings true when it comes to Nisyonos as well.

We all undergo Nisyonos in life, and most of the time they are of the private nature. Perhaps the purpose of a Nisayon is that when we pass it we realize that it wasn’t a Nisayon at all. What we thought was an insurmountable test, was always well within our reach. We thought we understood ourselves, our nature, our capabilities, but in reality we underestimated what we were capable of. Roeh Eifoh Ki Lo Yada Klal Mahu Even.

When we are presented with a Nisayon, we must keep this in mind. Ain Kavod L’Nes L’Hisparsem, the purpose of our personal struggles is that we may learn from them just what we were capable of to begin with.