Parshas Chayei Sarah
1. On the verse[1] "And Avraham again took a wife, and her name was Keturah," Rashi explains: "Keturah — this is Hagar.[2] She was called Keturah because her deeds were as pleasant as incense (ketores),[3] and because she tied up (kashrah) her opening,[4] not having been joined with any man from the day she separated from Avraham."
We need to understand:
a) What compels us, according to the plain meaning of the verse, to say that "Keturah — this is Hagar"? On the contrary: the simple wording of the verse — "And Avraham again took a wife, and her name…" — implies that "took a wife" here means a new taking of a wife,[5] in addition to the earlier ones[6] (as the Midrash[7] indeed asks: "But it is written, 'again'!").
b) From the fact that Rashi states the second reason with a connecting vav — "(She was called Keturah because her deeds were as pleasant as incense) and because she tied up her opening, etc." — and not "another explanation" (or the like), it is understood that Rashi holds that these are [not two separate explanations (as in the Midrash[8]) of why "she was called Keturah," but] two reasons within one explanation: that is, the name "Keturah" alludes to both meanings together — a term of incense ("her deeds were as pleasant as incense") and a term of tying ("she tied up her opening, etc.").[9]
We need to understand: from where does Rashi take, according to the plain meaning of the verse, that she was called "Keturah" for two reasons (and not, as in the Midrash, that these are two explanations)?[10]
c) The question of the commentators:[11] on the verse[12] "And she went and strayed," Rashi says, "she returned to the idols of her father's house." How, then, does Rashi say here, "her deeds were as pleasant as incense"?[13]
2. The explanation of this: What compels Rashi to say "Keturah — this is Hagar" is a difficulty (not in this particular verse, but) in the overall story of Avraham and Hagar.
Rashi explained earlier[14] that "Avraham converted the men and Sarah converted the women." Now, if Avraham could influence people from outside, he surely had an influence on the members of his household (also Yishmael, who "went out to an evil way,"[15] did teshuvah in Avraham's lifetime[16]).
The question arises: how is it that Hagar "returned to the idols of her father's house"[17] and Avraham did not bring her to do teshuvah?
[One cannot say that this is because Hagar was far away from Avraham (as we learned earlier[17] that Avraham sent her away from his house together with Yishmael), because by the time of the Akeidah[18] the situation of "Cast out this maidservant and her son"[19] had already been annulled,[20] as Rashi explains the verse[21] "his two young men" — "Yishmael and Eliezer" (and simply, Hagar was together with Yishmael[22]).]
To this Rashi says, "Keturah — this is Hagar, and she was called Keturah, etc.": indeed so — by calling Hagar by the name "Keturah," the verse means to allude that now "her deeds were as pleasant as incense," for she indeed did teshuvah[23] for having "returned to the idols of her father's house."
With this, Rashi's wording "Keturah — this (zo) is Hagar" — not "she (hi) is Hagar"[24] as in the wording of the verse[25] "that is Chevron" (and the like) — is precise and also sweeter. "She is Hagar" — a term for one who is absent — would imply that here, in these verses, no one is speaking about Hagar; she is like one who is "absent." But when one says "this is Hagar," it means that Hagar is "present": the five-year-old keeps asking — what is happening with Hagar? Why do we not find that she did teshuvah? Therefore Rashi says precisely "this is Hagar": here, we are speaking of that very Hagar about whom you have been asking and talking until now.[25*]
3. But Rashi cannot be satisfied with this reason alone.[26] For although it is true that now "her deeds were as pleasant as incense," since there was a time when "she returned to the idols of her father's house," Avraham Avinu, who was utterly modest,[27] would not afterwards have taken her as a "wife" had she in the meantime "been joined with" another "man"[28] [especially since the verse "And Avraham again took…" comes right after the verse[29] "And Yitzchak brought her into the tent, Sarah his mother…" — and both Sarah and Rivkah were utterly modest[30]].[31]
Therefore Rashi continues, "and because she tied up her opening, etc.": the name Keturah also alludes to the fact that "she had not been joined with any man from the day she separated from Avraham," and therefore it was fitting for Avraham to take her.
4. According to the above — that with the name "Keturah" the verse alludes to the fact that Hagar did teshuvah (through Avraham's influence) — we can explain, according to the inner dimension of the matter, several details in the verse that are seemingly not smooth (at least according to the inner dimension):
a) Since "Keturah — this is Hagar," how does the wording "And Avraham again (vayosef)…" fit (as is asked in the Midrash, as mentioned above in section 1)?[32]
[According to the plain meaning this is no difficulty: although "Keturah — this is Hagar," since for Avraham it was a new taking, the wording "again…" fits it.[33] Moreover: since earlier Hagar was a "maidservant," and now Avraham took her as a "wife" [at least as a "concubine"[34] in the manner of "(wives with a kesubah,) concubines without a kesubah"[35]] — this is consequently a matter of "again," an addition, in the taking of a wife.[36] But the wording "again…" will be still more precise and smooth according to the explanation in the inner dimension of things, as follows.]
b) Why are Hagar's "pleasant deeds" alluded to by comparison specifically with "incense"?[37]
c) Why does the Torah allude to Hagar's teshuvah specifically in the verse that speaks of Avraham's taking her?
5. The explanation of this:
In Chassidus[38] the difference is explained between Avraham's service before he circumcised himself and his service afterwards. Before he was circumcised he was called "Avram," meaning av ram, "exalted father" — he was lofty and removed from the world ("exalted above all nations"[39]); his service was within the levels of holiness itself.[40] But after the circumcision his name became "Avraham" — "father of a multitude of nations"[41] — for he had an effect also on the "nations," raising them up to holiness.
And this service was through Sarah, who separated the "waste" from the "nations" and raised up their good and the sparks of holiness. (That is why she said, "Cast out this maidservant and her son.")[42]
The elevation that Avraham attained after Sarah's passing consisted in "And Avraham again took a wife, and her name was Keturah": he brought (Yishmael and) Hagar back in teshuvah — that is, he accomplished refinement also in the "waste" that Sarah had separated ("Cast out…").
The explanation of this: The refinement among the "nations" that was accomplished through Sarah is only in kelipas nogah, which is a mixture of good and evil, and the manner of refining it is to separate the waste and evil and raise up the good that was mixed in there. And since the "waste" has no (revealed) good, it must therefore be pushed away ("Cast out…").
But the refinement of Yishmael and Hagar is not through raising up the good mixed within them — for they have no (revealed) good[43] — but is a refinement by way of addition, in the manner of "willful sins become for him as merits."[44]
6. And this is the explanation of the three precise points mentioned above (section 4):
a) The wording "And Avraham again (vayosef)…" — because transforming the "waste" (the three impure kelipos) to good is a matter of "addition,"[45] as the Tzemach Tzedek[46] explains the verse[47] "May G‑d add (yosef) to me another son": the matter of "adding" — hosafah — is that one makes of an "other" a "son."
And the "addition" is twofold: (a) in the world — it is an addition and something new in creation, because from the standpoint of creation willful sins cannot be transformed into merits; (b) in Avraham — "And Avraham again (added)…" — because the transformation of the three impure kelipos can be accomplished only by the power of G‑d's very Essence. From the standpoint of His Essence it is (in the words of the Midrash[48]) "I do not know which of them He desires — the deeds of these (the deeds of the wicked), etc.,"[49] and because the willful sins have no standing there, from there comes the power to transform them, too, into merits.
And this is the meaning of "And Avraham again…": because a higher power and level — which comes from the Essence[50] — was added to Avraham, he was able to accomplish the refinement of Hagar (and Yishmael).
b) "Her deeds were as pleasant as incense" specifically[51] — because, as is known,[52] the eleven spices of the incense transform the eleven crowns of impurity to holiness.[53]
c) The purpose of "took a wife" is "Be fruitful[54] and multiply…,"[55] and giving birth is a matter of addition and newness. This explains why Hagar's teshuvah, whose essence is addition (as above), is alluded to specifically here, where the subject is "And Avraham again took a wife…," whose purpose is (as the parshah continues) "And she bore him…."
7. In connection with this verse there is a story in the Gemara[56] that is seemingly very puzzling:
"The sons of Rabbi Tarfon's sister were sitting before Rabbi Tarfon (and were not saying anything — Rashi). He opened and said (so that they would speak — Rashi): 'And Avraham again took a wife, and her name was Yochani' (he said it as a mere word, in order to open their mouths — Rashi). They said to him: 'It is written Keturah!' He called them 'sons of Keturah.'"
It is not understood:
a) Why does the Gemara relate this at all — especially since there is a rule[57] that "Scripture did not speak disparagingly even of an impure animal," and all the more so disparagingly of "the sons of Rabbi Tarfon's sister"? We must say that there is "Torah" in this — an instruction.[58] What is the instruction?
b) There are various means of getting another person to begin speaking — not by saying a verse other than as it is!
c) How may one use a verse of the Torah for such a purpose at all?[59]
d) Why did Rabbi Tarfon say "(and her name was) Yochani"?[60] It would seemingly have been more fitting to change the verse by saying "and her name was Hagar" [which, although it differs from the wording of the verse, is true in content, at least according to most opinions — and even according to those who disagree,[60*] "these and these are the words of the living G‑d" according to them too (which is why Beis Hillel were permitted to state the words of Beis Shammai before their own[61])]; that change from the wording of the verse would also have been enough to rouse them.
8. This will be understood by first introducing what our Sages say:[62] "Whoever teaches Torah to his fellow's son, Scripture regards him as if he had given birth to him" — because through learning Torah one becomes "a new being," and therefore it is "as if he had given birth to him."
Although the simple wording, "Whoever teaches his fellow's son, etc.," implies that this is so even if "his fellow's son" already has some knowledge of Torah, it applies, of course, chiefly to one who until now had no connection with Torah study; then the "teacher" brings about a renewal in "his fellow's son" (whereas if he had already learned Torah before, the "teacher" only adds to his previous knowledge and being).
With this we can understand the change of wording in Rashi's comment on "These are the offspring of Aharon and Moshe":[63] "…and they are called the offspring of Moshe because he taught them Torah. This teaches that whoever teaches, etc., Scripture regards him as if he had given birth to him. 'On the day G‑d spoke with Moshe' — these became his offspring, etc." Regarding "the sons of Aharon" he uses the wording "these became his offspring" (not merely "as if"), whereas "whoever teaches, etc." is no more than "Scripture regards him as if he had given birth to him."
The reason for this: since "the sons of Aharon" began, "on the day He spoke…,"[64] their Torah study ("what he learned from the mouth of the Almighty"[65]) from Moshe in a manner of renewal, they[66] then became the "offspring" of Moshe (not merely "as if"); whereas "whoever teaches, etc.," which includes all ways, is in all of them alike no more than "as if he had given birth to him."
9. This is also the explanation of the above story. Rabbi Tarfon saw that "the sons of his sister" had no connection with words (and understanding) of Torah; and since they had a connection with him,[67] he wanted to bring it about that they should become connected with understanding the Torah — the "(as if) he gave birth to him."
For this he brought something similar in the Torah (as an instruction) — "And Avraham again took a wife…," whose purpose is (as continues immediately afterwards) "And she bore him…."
So too Rabbi Tarfon took an action — "he opened and said" — to bring about in his sister's sons "(so) that they would speak" in Torah — the "as if he had given birth to him."
10. According to this it will be understood why he said "and her name was Yochani." The Gemara says in Sotah[68] that "a mischievous widow" is one of those who "destroy the world," "such as Yochani bas Retivi." Rashi explains: "She was a widow who was a sorceress. When the time came for a woman to give birth, she would close up her womb by sorcery; and after the woman had suffered greatly, she would say, 'I will go and beg for mercy; perhaps my prayer will be heard,' and she would go and undo her sorcery, and the child would come out, etc." That is, she wanted people to think that the birth came about miraculously, as a result of her prayers.
It may be said that this is why she was called "Yochani": the name "Yochani" points to a matter of a miracle, as is understood from what the Gemara says in Berachos:[69] "One who sees Huna in a dream — a miracle will be done for him… Yochanan — miracles of miracles will be done for him." Moreover, the term "Yochani" has a special connection with the birth of children (in addition to what is related in Sotah there), as it is written,[70] "the children with whom G‑d has graciously favored (chanan) your servant."
That is why Rabbi Tarfon said "and her name was Yochani": because he needed here to bring about a matter of (as if) giving birth[71] (through and in Torah study), which is not according to nature and the usual order.
This is also the explanation of the continuation of the story: after his sister's sons told him "It is written Keturah," Rabbi Tarfon called them "sons of Keturah." If "it is written Keturah" [a term of tying (she closes up the womb), the opposite of "Yochani," which brings about birth, as above], the matter of "birth" in Torah study (the opening of the mind in understanding Torah) will not come about in them; rather, they will remain "sons of Keturah" (tying) — with a closed mind, unconnected with understanding the Torah.[72]
11. According to the above explanation (sections 5–6) of "And Avraham again…" according to the "wine of Torah" in Rashi — that since Avraham had to bring about an addition and newness (birth) by transforming the three impure kelipos to holiness, there first had to be "And Avraham again (added)…," an addition and elevation in Avraham's level — one can also explain, according to the inner dimension of things, why Rabbi Tarfon also brought the beginning of the verse, "And Avraham again"
[for seemingly[74] it would have been enough had he said "and took a wife, and her name was Yochani" (and they would have known which verse he meant, since this is the only verse with the wording "and took a wife, and her name was…")]:
In order for him to be able to accomplish "teaching his fellow's son Torah," which with his sister's sons[75] is a matter of birth and renewal,[73] he had to add to his own level; by that power he could accomplish birth and renewal in his sister's sons.
And for this he brought a proof from something similar in a verse of the Torah: "And Avraham again (added) (and through this) took a wife…" — the addition in Avraham's level made possible "took a wife…" (whose purpose, as the parshah continues, is "And she bore him"), a matter of birth and renewal, as above.
12. Another explanation (of "He called them 'sons of Keturah'"): The Rambam[76] rules that "the sons of Keturah, who are the seed of Avraham… are obligated in circumcision." That is, through "And Avraham again took a wife, and her name was Keturah" — which is a matter of renewal not according to the order of hishtalshelus (as above, section 6) — he brought it about that there should be "sons of Keturah," and they are obligated in milah. And milah (מילה) is[77] the acronym of "Who will go up for us to the heavens"[78] (whose final letters spell G‑d's Name Havayah) — it is higher than the level of Torah and the Name Havayah, that is, higher than the order of hishtalshelus (and this comes through "And you shall circumcise the foreskin of your heart"[79] — the matter of teshuvah).
And this is the meaning of "He called them 'sons of Keturah'": Rabbi Tarfon called forth and drew down[80] into them the matter of "birth" in Torah study not according to the order of hishtalshelus — through Avraham's accomplishment in the "sons of Keturah."
(From a talk of Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah, 5737)
Key Lesson
Hagar, who had gone back to idolatry, returned in teshuvah and became "Keturah," her deeds as pleasant as incense — a transformation that came from a new, higher power that Avraham drew down from G‑d's very Essence. Likewise, one who teaches Torah to someone with no connection to it is "as if he gave birth to him," and to open a closed mind one must first raise oneself to a higher level, as Rabbi Tarfon did with his sister's sons.