לקוטי שיחות חלק ל״ה - חיי שרה ב

Parshas Chayei Sarah

1. "And Avraham was old, advanced in days." The Kli Yakar writes: "Many commentators wondered: has it not already been said [earlier, in Parshas Vayeira], 'And Avraham and Sarah were old, advancing in days,' and there were about thirty-seven years between these two times?" What then is meant by saying here "And Avraham was old, advanced in days," as though only now had he grown old?

Now this question arises (also) according to the plain meaning of the verse, and it requires examination why we do not find it resolved in Rashi's commentary on the Torah [as has been explained many times, that in his commentary on the Torah Rashi resolves every difficulty in the plain meaning of the verse, and where Rashi did not find a (sufficient) explanation to settle the verses according to their plain meaning, Rashi writes "I do not know" and the like].

The Midrash states: "It is already written, 'And Avraham and Sarah were old'; why does it say [again] 'And Avraham was old'? Rather, since the Holy One, blessed be He, had restored him to the days of his youth, it was necessary to write a second time, 'And Avraham was old.'" Seemingly one could say that this answer has a place also according to the plain meaning of the verse — as Rashi states explicitly regarding Sarah, that G‑d blessed her "so that she returned to her youth" [in keeping with the plain sense of the verses in Parshas Vayeira, that although "(Avraham and Sarah were old . . .) it had ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women . . . After I have withered shall I have smoothness, and my master is old," nevertheless a son was born to Sarah and "Sarah has nursed children"]. From this it would seemingly be understood regarding Avraham too: although at first "Avraham and Sarah were old, advancing in days" (and as Sarah said, "After I have withered . . . and my master is old" — that for Avraham too the time when he could father children had already passed), nevertheless he returned to his youth. Therefore the verse needed to inform us that after (about) thirty-seven years had passed since the birth of Yitzchak, once again "Avraham was old, advanced in days."

But it is impossible to answer this way according to the plain meaning, for we find afterwards (at the end of the parsha) that Avraham married another wife and fathered several sons from her (the sons of Keturah).

2. We find another answer in the Midrash: "Here [in Parshas Vayeira] it is old age that still has moisture (vigor), and there [in our parsha] it is old age that has no moisture." That is, Parshas Vayeira speaks of the beginning of the days of old age, when a person still has "moisture," whereas "And Avraham was old" in our parsha means an old age that "has no moisture."

But seemingly this distinction has no connection to the plain meaning, for in both places the same expression is used, "old, advanced in days" ("old, advancing in days"). Why then is this distinction between two stages of old age not alluded to in the wording of the verse (such as "very old" and the like)?

The Ramban explains that there is a difference between "ba'im bayamim" (advancing in days) in Parshas Vayeira and "ba bayamim" (advanced in days) in our parsha. For "ba'im bayamim" is in the present tense, "like 'those who come into these gates,'" and therefore it means that "they are beginning the days of old age" (when there is still "moisture") — they are now entering and coming into the days of old age; whereas "ba bayamim" is in the past tense, "like 'your brother came with cunning,'" and it means "that he had already come into the days."

But it is difficult to say that Rashi too holds this distinction in explaining these verses, for then he should have written so explicitly — as we find later in Rashi's commentary (in Parshas Vayeitzei), where he explains the difference between the two times it says that Rachel "ba'ah" (came): "The first [where 'the accent is on the alef'] is an expression of [one who is] doing, and the second [where 'the accent is above, on the beis'] is an expression of [one who] did."

3. This will be understood by first explaining the double expression "old, advancing in days" (and likewise here, "old, advanced in days"). For seemingly one must understand: what does the expression "advanced (literally, 'come') in days" add to "old"?

Here too, we do not find that Rashi explains this expression in his commentary on the Torah. We are therefore compelled to say that he holds that the meaning of "advanced in days" is so simple that there is no need to explain it.

According to several commentators on the plain meaning, the expression "advanced in days" indicates extreme old age, as the Ibn Ezra explains "ba'im bayamim" — "they had reached many days." But it requires examination how the expression "advanced in days" alludes to "many days," even more than plain "old age."

[The Ramban writes: "A person in the days of his youth is called 'standing in days,' and his days are called his own, for they are his . . . but when he grows old and lives more days than most people of his generation, he is called 'come in days,' because he is like one who has come into another land, etc." But seemingly this is not the simple sense of the expression "advanced in days" — to the point of saying that Rashi did not need to explain it explicitly and relied on the student of Scripture (including "a five-year-old") to understand it on his own!]

Furthermore: the age of one hundred years for a man (Avraham's years) and ninety for a woman (Sarah's years) was seemingly not considered extreme old age in that period. Moreover: the expression "old, advanced in days" is found also regarding David (in the haftorah of our parsha), when he was close to seventy years old — an age that is certainly not considered extreme old age.

4. The explanation of this may be said as follows:

The meaning of "ba bayamim" is — as the simple sense of the words — that he arrived and came (entered) into the days, like "coming into a house" and the like. That is to say, it is not a description of the number of a person's years (whether many or few), but of the manner of the person's life in these days.

That is: the days that have passed over the person, and the events in them, are not like something that passes and goes by and leaves no impression. Rather, the person "put" his essence and soul into each and every day and its events and experiences, so that each and every day and each and every event (whether something joyous or, G‑d forbid, its opposite) acts upon him and affects him, until it is openly recognizable in his features, etc.

[As we see tangibly, that not all people of the same age are alike, and sometimes one of them appears older than another, for the impression of the events that have passed over him is recognizable on him, since every event, etc., touched his heart.]

This is also the meaning of the expression "old, advanced in days" regarding David, although the number of the years of his life was only close to seventy: the many events that passed over him (such as the many wars, the anguish from his son, etc., and the like) left their mark on him, in the manner of "advanced in days."

And this is "And Avraham and Sarah were old, advancing in days": not only were they "old" because of the number of the years of their lives, but moreover, the days of their lives did not pass and go by from them, but were in the manner of "advancing in days," as above.

5. According to this we can also explain why our parsha says once again "And Avraham was old, advanced in days." It may be said that the main novelty is not in the word "old" (for he was old before this too, as above), but in his being "advanced in days":

It is the nature of things that the more a person grows older, the less the events around him affect him (so much) — whether because he has become more measured ("the older they grow, the more settled their minds become"), or because it is the nature of an old man who has already been through much in his life that the things around him do not occupy a place with him.

Therefore, although it has already been said, "And Avraham and Sarah were old, advancing in days," because of the many events that had passed over them until that time, it is nevertheless necessary to inform us of the novelty that even after another thirty-seven years had passed for Avraham, "Avraham was [not only] old [but also] advanced in days" —

that the events of these thirty-seven years too affected him and left their mark on him, in the manner of "advanced in days."

On the contrary: it may be said that precisely in these years there were events more important and more decisive in Avraham's life than the events of his earlier years — the birth of Yitzchak (for "through Yitzchak shall offspring be called yours"), up to the Akeidah of Yitzchak and the passing of Sarah, etc.

6. According to this explanation of "advanced in days" (that a person's days are such that he "enters" into them and they leave an impression on him, etc.), the Zohar's explanation of "advanced in days" is well understood: that all the days of his life were complete in the service of G‑d, that he did not fail to serve G‑d even one day of the days of his life.

According to the above it is understood that the Zohar's explanation is not merely by way of allusion, but is founded on the simple meaning of "advanced in days": there was no day for Avraham that merely passed and went by; rather, Avraham came and entered into his "days," to serve G‑d in each and every day as was demanded on each day according to its nature.

That is: the matter of "advanced in days" according to the plain meaning of the verse (as above) refers to Avraham's physical life, that the events of each and every day affected him, etc.; whereas in the Zohar, the inner dimension of the Torah, the inner content of Avraham's life is emphasized — the life of his soul and his service of G‑d, which is Avraham's true life [in the words of the Alter Rebbe, "the life of a tzaddik is not a life of flesh but a spiritual life"]. Therefore it explains that Avraham's coming and entering into each and every day (to the point that the impression of all the days of his life was recognizable on him) was because all his days were filled with the service of G‑d, in such a way that each and every day was a "living" day.

(From a talk of Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah 5748)

* * *

7. According to the above explanation of the words of the Zohar on "advanced in days," we can also explain the wording of the verse at the beginning of our parsha, "And the life of Sarah was one hundred years . . . the years of the life of Sarah." For seemingly one must be precise: generally, when the Torah states the sum of the years of a person's life, the wording of the verse is "And all the days of . . . were" or "(the days of) the years of the life of . . ." If so, here too it should have said "And the days of Sarah were" or "And the years of Sarah were." What is the expression "And the life of Sarah was"?

The explanation of this may be said as follows:

The main novelty of this verse is to inform us that all of Sarah's days were filled with the service of G‑d in utmost perfection — in the words of the Midrash, "just as they are whole, so their years are whole" — to the point that (as Rashi explains) "all of them were equally good": the measure of "good" in all her years was equal.

Seemingly these words are astonishing: How can one say that all of Sarah's one hundred and twenty-seven years were "equally good"? It is understood that one cannot compare her standing and situation when she was in Ur Kasdim, and likewise in Charan, with her standing and situation after she came "to the land that I will show you." And on the other hand, these one hundred and twenty-seven years also include the time she was in the house of Pharaoh, and likewise in the house of Avimelech, etc.

But the explanation of this, simply, is: "The life of Sarah" means the things in which Sarah lived; and "the life of Sarah" was "equally good" throughout all her years [similar to what was said above from the Zohar on the explanation of "advanced in days" said of Avraham, that each and every day was complete in the service of G‑d].

For it is understood that the true meaning of "the life of Sarah" was not the life of her body (eating, sleeping and the like) — Sarah our mother did not "live" in such matters. And it is obvious that when she was in the house of Pharaoh or in the house of Avimelech, the undesirable aspect of this was not part of "the life of Sarah" [for, on the contrary, her being confined in the house of Pharaoh and the house of Avimelech caused her great pain].

Rather, "the life of Sarah" is her spiritual life, beginning with the three mitzvos particular to Jewish women, as Rashi brings in our parsha: "A lamp burning from Shabbos eve to Shabbos eve, a blessing found in the dough, and a cloud attached to the tent" (which, as the commentators explain, correspond to the three mitzvos of lighting the Shabbos candles, challah, and family purity).

And this life was "equally good" every single moment that she was on earth.

And this is the emphasis "And the life of Sarah was . . ." — although the days and years of Sarah included many differences and changes in her standing and situation, "the life of Sarah" was equal throughout all the days of her life: "all of them were equally good."

(From a talk of Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah 5743)

Key Lesson

"Advanced in days" means that a person truly enters into each day, so that it leaves its mark on him. Avraham did this even in old age, when events usually touch a person less; and as the Zohar explains, he did so because every day of his was filled with the service of G‑d, so that each day was a "living" day. Likewise "the life of Sarah" was "equally good" in all her years, for her true life was her spiritual life and her mitzvos, which no change of circumstance, not even exile in Pharaoh's palace, could diminish.