Vayera 5782

...The people of Sodom did not know God, so how could they be sinners to God? Even so, it seems to me that it is possible to say that they were sinners to God even though they didn't know the Holy Name, because they were doing acts that were evil in the eyes of God and it is therefore appropriate to call them "sinners to God."

...There are two kinds of tests: one a test for the purpose of examination and the other a test for the purpose of potential. A test for the purpose of examination is a test in which looks for the natural presence of one thing in another. For instance, one who examines gold to determine whether it is indeed gold or just dross. But a test for the purpose of potential is different, such as the test to see if a particular piece of gold has the ability to stretch, etc. A test of potential can also be a test of a human being, if he is whole with God's will, as is the nature of most people.

(1) ויהי אחר הדברים האלה, It is very difficult to explain the matter of G’d’ “testing” someone, seeing that G’d knows in advance what the result of such a test is going to be. What then is the point of such a test? If the point was to demonstrate to the world at large that Avraham successfully passed such a test, how could this be accomplished in a setting where only Avraham and Yitzchok were present? He had even left the lads who had accompanied him behind so that there were no witnesses whatsoever to his carrying out a command which he had not even told Yitzchok about until the last possible moment! Even if Avraham had told someone what had transpired on the mountain, who would have believed him? The truth is that the purpose of the trial was to demonstrate to the world Avraham’s love for G’d. It was not meant to demonstrate anything to the generation during which Avraham lived, but to prove this to subsequent generations of people who believed in the Torah which was handed down to us by Moses at the command of G’d Himself. All that is written in the Torah [including such stories as that of Bileam and Balak, none of which had been witnessed by any Jew alive at that time, Ed.] is meant to teach the extent to which we are expected to demonstrate our love for G’d if and when the occasion arises.

(2) והאלוקים נסה את אברהם, G’d now subjected Avraham to a painful test, something which was bound to cause him grief. Whenever the root נסה occurs, such as in Job 4,2 or Exodus 17,7 or Psalms 26,2 the connotation is an unpleasant one for the one being subjected to it. In this instance, G’d, so to speak, indicated to Avraham that he had been foolish to think that he could guarantee’s Yitzchok’s and his descendants well being into the future, as he might have to terminate his life before he even had produced any offspring who would be called upon to honour his father’s deal with Avimelech.

(1) והאלוקים נסה את אברהם, “and G’d had tested Avraham.” This is the portion dealing with the binding of Yitzchak, an event which is the cornerstone of the Jewish faith throughout the ages. Jews have placed their trust in their eternal future in the merit accumulated by both Avraham and Yitzchak as protecting them against extermination by their enemies.
We must not make the mistake of thinking that G’d tested Avraham in order to find out for Himself how Avraham would respond to this trial. It was a “test” only when viewed from the vantage point of his contemporaries who could not have known in advance how Avraham would respond to a trial which conflicted so absolutely with everything he thought he knew about what G’d wanted from man. G’d used this “test” in order to demonstrate to the people of his own time as well as to his descendants the greatness of this man’s devotion to G’d. (2) The incident of the binding of Yitzchak was designed to demonstrate the extent of Avraham’s reverence for G’d as well as his love for G’d. Love is something which can exist on three levels:
1) Someone loves his king and because he loves him he tells others about the king’s virtues and his accomplishments. Such a tribute to his king does not involve the one who extols the king’s virtues in any sacrifice. It does not cost him a penny to tell others complimentary things about his king.
2) Love on a higher level is someone who spends a great deal of his own money to make his king popular; however, even he draws the line at laying down his life on behalf of that king.
3) This subject not only tells the world about the greatness of his king and spends all his money advertising this fact, but he is also prepared to lay down his own life on behalf of his king.

Remain here. Had Abraham slaughtered Isaac, this would have been an act of murder and a hateful abomination in the yes of God. Abraham's very soul, which knew secrets of divine wisdom, would have opposed such an act to the point that he would have been ashamed to do in front of his servants, just as anyone is ashamed to do an abomination in public. But even so, Abraham's trust and faith in God and his reverence for God superseded all of this and he did not restrain himself from performing God's command, even though it was in opposition to common sense and goodness, even though it would have made him hated by all people. Eve3n so, his love of God was more powerful than all of that, and he was tested and found to be perfect.

...Maimonides writes that it is not appropriate to subject a non-Jew to harsh labor even though doing so is technically allowed by the Torah. He ruled that any task that does not have a specified limit is in the category of harsh labor. For example, "Herd my sheep until I come back," but with no time limit. It appears that Abraham said, "Stay here with the donkey" and added "until we pray and return to you" so that he wouldn't be subjecting them to harsh labor. He limited the time of "we shall pray and return" to the time required for prayer...