Aufruf: The Souce of the Choson's Aliya And Why the Women Throw Sweets {Wedding Series Part 4}

 Mazal Tov to Rabbi Glatstein and family on the upcoming of the chassanah of daughter Glatstein! Rabbi is going to Eretz Yisrael for the Aufruf of his future son in law!❣️🎵🎶💝💖💕🎼

Reb Ginsbourg: Parshas Toldot

The wells that Yitzchak dug

Well known commentors discuss the story of the wells Abraham and then Yitzchak dug.

 Breishit (26:12-22) ’And Yitzchak sowed in that land, and he found in that year a hundred fold, and Hashem blessed him. And the man became great, and he grew constantly until he had grown very great. And he had possessions of sheep and possessions of cattle and much production, and the Philistines envied him. And all the wells that his father’s servants had dug in the days of Avraham, his father, the Philistines stopped them up and filled with earth.

‘And Avimelech said to Yitzchak:’Go away from us, for you have become much stronger than us. And Yitzchak went away from there, and he encamped in the valley of Gerar and dwelt there.

‘And Yitzchak again dug the wells of water which they had dug in the days of his father Avraham, and the Philistines had stopped them after Avraham’s death; and he gave them names like the names his father had given them.

‘And Yitzchak’s servants dug in the valley, and they found there a well of living waters.

‘And the shepherds of Gerar quarreled with Yitzchak’s servants, saying:’The water is ours’, so he named the well עשק; Esek, because התעשקו עמו: they contended with him.

‘And they dug another well, and they quarreled about it also, and he named it שטנה: Sitnah.

‘And he moved away from there, and he dug another well, and they did not quarrel over it, so he named it רחובות: Rehoboth, and he said:’For now Hashem has made room for us, and we will be fruitful in the land.’

The Be’er Mayim Chaim comments: The Philistines, when they saw that Yitzchak’s affairs were blessed beyond the usual, and perceived that he received the blessing of the land, envied him on two accounts: One, that he was the one who received it, and that therefore they were deprived of it, as had he not received it, they would have received it.

Second: they envied him, why did he merit such blessings? All the years that they had inhabited the very same land, they were not so blessed.

They therefore said in their hearts, that perhaps Avraham and he - Yitzchak - were so blessed because of the wells that they dug, as the well of water allude to unceasing chesed, and - as is known - the well is the recipient of all kinds of success and blessings, which is why they dug the wells.

They - the Philistines - sought to nullify this, and filled the wells with earth, so that there should be no remnant of those wells, as perhaps thereby Yitzchak would be unable to receive the blessings, and they - instead - would be the recipients.

Avimelech, when he saw that this, too, did not avail, said:’Better I should break the covenant I entered into with his father, and chase him from my land, so that we receive the blessings.’

The Alshich haKadosh adds: Avimelech was ashamed to say to Yitzchak:’Leave my land’, and left it to his people to block the wells that Yitzchak dug

However, when he saw that this did not achieve his desired result, he spoke to Yitzchak, himself.’

Abarbanel expounds: The Torah relates that all the wells that Avraham’s servants had dug, the Philistines blocked, and filled with earth.

As these were only גומות גדולות: wells of still waters - not of flowing waters - which served to give water to sheep, the Philistines - in their wickedness - blocked them, so that Yitzchak’s servants would not benefit from them, and would depart from there, due to the lack of water.

In addition, Avimelech said to Yitzchak: ’Go away from us, for you have become stronger ממנו: from us’ - meaning that, due to your large flocks, there was no room for the flocks of the locals.

So Yitzchak departed from there, but remained close to the city, settling by the Gerar River - not, as Rashi comments, far from the city, as the name of the River: Gerar indicates that it was close to the city, whose name it bore.

He settled there against the wishes of the locals - not only that, but he dug the wells which had been dug by his father, Avraham, which had been blocked, and he called them by the names Avraham had given them, as a sign that they were not new wells.

He found a well of live water - indicating that the others were not of live water - yet, even then, the local shepherds argued with him, saying: ’It is our water’, claiming that the river was the source of the living water, and it was theirs, just as the water of the river was theirs.

Despite this, these waters remained with Yitzchak’s shepherds; his shepherds also dug another well, which - though the locals again argued concerning it - he called שטנה: an allusion to their שנאה: hatred of him.

It was only when he dug a third well, that they did not argue over it, and he therefore called it רחובות, saying: ’Now Hashem הרחיב: has made room for us, and we will be fruitful in the land.'

This is the reason for the Torah relating this story - for which Ramban could find no reason, nor honor to Yitzchak, as to why it was brought here- which, to my mind, reflects great honor to Yitzchak, and is therefore related here.

Rav David Hofstedter asks: ‘Why did the Torah see a need to relate at such length the story of the wells that Avraham and Yitzchak dug? Further, why did the Philistines completely block the first wells that Avraham had dug, whilst - regarding the well that Yitzchak dug - they argued and claimed ownership of the water, but did not block the well?

It would appear, as Ramban wrote, that all that occurred to our Avot, was a signpost to their descendants, and it is for that reason that the Torah related the story of the wells, as a lesson as to the future.

Therefore, the opposition of the Philistines to the wells that Avraham and Yitzchak dug, contains allusions to what is likely to befall their descendants in their exile - when, though they be blameless, the nations will oppress them and seek to destroy them.

With this in mind, it would seem that the two incidents of the wells allude to two separate ways in which the nations proceed, in their hatred of Jews.

Thenlocals acted in two ways, with regard to the wells: the first, by their jealousy of the wealth and greatness of Yitzchak, which the Torah relates.

This jealousy does not appear to be from the common people, as they seemingly sought to draw close to Yitzchak, in the hope that some of his success would rub off on them - rather, it came from the King and his ministers, on seeing Yitzchak’s success, in their concern that he find greater favor than them, in the eyes of the people.

For this reason, the King himself expelled Yitzchak from Gerar -

Ohr Hachaim haKadosh comments: There is no greater humiliation to a King, than someone being seen as greater than he.

The blocking of the wells was also not done by the common people, but by the hand of the ministers, out of their envy of Yitzchak, hoping that - as with his expulsion from the kingdom - he would be forgotten by the people, this by the wells that he dug, being filled up with earth, leaving no relic of Yitzchak.

As against this, on the second occasion that the local inhabitants argued with Yitzchak over wells, it was the common people -‘the shepherds of Gerar’ - and not due to envy of Yitzchak’s greatness, but because they sought for themselves some of the blessings that were Yitzchak’s lot, in the land, without understanding that the water was in his merit - they therefore claimed: ’The water is ours’.

This claim grew into actual hatred, as is reflected in the name given to the well.

We find therefore, that in our parsha the form that the enmity of the nations to Israel os going to take whilst they are in galut.

At times the rulers will feel threatened by the rise to prominence of the Jews, as was the case in Egypt.

At other times, the hatred of the Jews will emanate from their desire for their money - in general this starts with the common people, in their feeling that the Jews hold all the money, but, in the fullness of time, this blossoms into actual hatred, leading to pogroms.

This second way, was what occurred to Yitzchak, when the desire for money of the shepherds of Gerar led to them to argue with the servants of Yitzchak, and culminating in actual hatred.

Our parsha teaches us how to react to both of these approaches - that we should distance ourselves from the nations, as Yitzchak did, in both situations - there is no other way for us, whilst in exile, to contend with their envy and lust for our money.

‘The deeds of our Avot are signposts for us, their sons, as to how we are to act.’

Haktav veHakabalah comments : The names given to the wells, are, in a literal sense, straight-forward and not indicative of any special matter, and we might wonder what importance there was to tell us these names, and what would be lost by their nullification, and why Yitzchak strove so valiantly to return the wells to their original names.

In fact, these names are all reflective of Hashem’s chesed to His people, as were the names given on other occasions by the Avot, to mark Hashem’s chesed.

It was Avraham’s way in all that he did, to bring the errant people - who believed that the stars and other celestial entities determined the fate of man - to understand and believe in the One true G-d.

‘To this end, Avraham gave names to the wells he dug, being aware that, as the wells of water were needed by all, that from the names he gave them, there would be a constant reminder of the true G-d.

The Torah makes known the high regard in which Avraham was held in his lifetime - as is seen clearly in his dealings with the burial plot for Sarah - so that none dared challenge the names he gave the wells, in his lifetime.

After his death, however, the people reverted to their errant beliefs, and so sought to block the wells, which inevitably would lead to the nullification of their names.

The Torah comes to teach that Yitzchak followed the way of his father, and strove to dig the wells that his father had dug, and to return the names his father had given them, so as to return the people to the true belief.’

Rabbeinu Bahya introduces a novel insight:’There are some who see in the wells an allusion to the gerim that converted in the days of Avraham, who readily accepted belief, just as the wells are to receive water and to open hearts which are blocked to receive emunah - this can be described as ‘digging’.

Out of envy, the Philistines blocked them - meaning: blocked their hearts and returned them to their errant beliefs, as if ‘filling them with earth’ - as, whereas Avraham filled them with wisdom and knowledge of Hashem in belief of His oneness, the Philistines filled them with their false beliets, the Torah describing this as ‘filling with earth’.

Later, Yitzchak overpowered them, and returned them to the right path - which the Torah alludes to, in saying;’ Yitzchak dug the wells of water which were dug in the days of Avraham, his father, which the Philistines blocked, and called them by the names that his father called them’, as that is the way of those engaged in conversion, as the prophet says:(Isaiha 65):’And his servants he called by another name’.’

The Netivot Shalom notes the difference in the Torah’s description of the wells dug in Avraham’s time, and those that Yitzchak dug: Whereas, with regard to Avraham, the Torah said:’Hashem blessed Avraham בכל: ‘in everything’, it did not say what he did with this blessing - whereas, with regard to Yitzchak it says:’And he sowed..’, as Rashi comments:’the earth was hard, and Hashem blessed him in this regard’.

What do all these details come to teach us?

Also, in its description of the wells they dug - a full parasha was devoted to this in the case of Yitzchak, whereas in the case of Avraham, the were only mentioned in passing - the Torah not stating that Avraham dug wells, only stating:’the wells that the servants of Avraham dug in the days of Avraham, his father, were blocked by the Philistines’ - whereas the Torah describes at length the matter of the wells that he dug, and the names that he gave them - why is this so important, in the case of Yitzchak?

The answer might be found in the different attributes of the two Patriachs: Avraham’s attribute is love of Hashem, whilst that of Yitzchak, is awe, and in this difference, we can understand our parasha - the Torah relates that ‘And Yitzchak sowed..’, sowing alluding to effort in serving Hasham - and, through this effort, ‘he found in that year one hundred gates’- one hundred ways to come closer to Hashem, as, in this service, awe is greater than love, as the acquisition of awe requires more effort than the acquisition of love.

For this reason, the wells that Avraham dug were blocked by the Philistines and filled with earth, while the well that Yitzchak dug was not blocked up - because Avraham was the attribute of love, and therefore his wells were dug without effort, unlike the well of Yitzchak - whose attribute was awe - required effort, and is therefore everlasting.

Whilst the attribute of love is higher than the attribute of awe, it is also attainable without much toil, and therefore, in times of trial, it was easily blocked by the Philistines - unlike the attribute of awe, which is only attained by toil, and is therefore everlasting.

We now understand why, in the case of Avraham, the Torah does not tell us that he dug wells, as it did with regard to Yitzchak.

A parting gem from Rav Matityahu Salomon:’Only one parsha is dedicated to Yitzchak Avinu: Parashat Toldot.

Yaakov Avinu reveals to us the essence of his father - Yitzchak - when, in his striving with Laban, he states:(31:42) ’Were it not for the G-d of my forefather Avraham ופחד יצחק: and the Awe of Yitzchak..’.

We learn from this, that the attribute of Yitzchak was פחד: awe or fear, and, armed with this, we can approach the Torah to learn the little that is revealed.

Yitzchak was the first of the Avot to have a righteous father, who could guide him ln the right path, so that - whenever confronted with a situation that required a decision, he would ask himself what his father would do.

This was the way of Yitzchak throughout his life: to judge all his deeds by what his father would do.

We therefore read that ‘he dug the wells of water that had bern dug in the days of his father, which the Philistines had blocked and filled with earth, and he called them by the names that his father had called them.,

However - as Sforno points out - this was a defect in Hashem’s eyes, and all the while that he did not, of himself, go out to proclaim Hashem’s Name, the only blessings he received were in the zechut of Avraham.

Once he did go out and proclaim Hashem’s Name, we read that Avimelech went out to him, saying: ’You are now the one blessed by Hashem’ - and he suffered no further strife from the Philistines.

We can conclude that the reason for going in the way of forefathers, is the fear of erring, which is understandable - but only when we are talking of digging wells, or the names by which to call them.’

לרפואת נועם עליזה בת זהבה רבקה ונחום אלימלך רפאל בן זהבה רבקה ולרפואת נריה דוב בן חנה ופצועי צה"K, בתוך שאר חולי עמנו

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/76692515692303107/8701917226693257267

Rabbi Freund: Parashas Toldot

 

The wells they could not bury

Why would anyone deliberately destroy a source of water in a land where every drop counts? Something remarkably similar happened in Gaza in 2005, after Israel withdrew from the territory and expelled its Jewish communities.

In this week's Parshat Toldot, the Torah recounts how the Philistines filled with earth the wells that Avraham's servants had dug (Genesis 26:15). In a region where water was essential to life, the decision seems almost incomprehensible. The wells could have served the Philistines themselves. Instead, they made them useless.

The Radak (Rabbi David Kimchi, 1160-1235) explains that after Avraham's death, the Philistines feared that his son might one day become powerful enough to reclaim the wells. They therefore chose to block them, even at the cost of depriving themselves of the water.

Their attitude, according to the Radak, amounted to: Better that neither of us have it.

The Torah offers its own explanation for this behavior: "And the Philistines envied him" (Genesis 26:14). They could not bear the thought of Yitzchak enjoying the fruits of his father's efforts, even when the alternative harmed them too.

But there is another side to the account: "And Yitzchak dug again the wells of water which they had dug in the days of Avraham his father," the Torah tells us. "And he called them by the names which his father had called them" (Genesis 26:18).

Rashi explains that these were the same wells the Philistines had stopped up. The Rashbam (Rabbi Shmuel ben Meir, 1085-1158) adds that preserving their names helped prevent others from disputing Yitzchak's ownership.

In other words, Yitzchak did not regard the destruction as the end of the story. He returned to the wells, reopened them and restored their original names.

The difference between the two sides could hardly be clearer. The Philistines saw something built by Avraham and wanted it buried. Yitzchak saw the same wells and set about making them useful again.

Something remarkably similar happened in Gaza in 2005, after Israel withdrew from the territory and expelled its Jewish communities.

Before the withdrawal, American Jewish donors raised $14 million to purchase more than 3,000 thriving greenhouses which exported produce and flowers to Europe - from departing Israeli farmers and leave them for Palestinian Arab use. It was a substantial economic opportunity: the greenhouses could provide work and a continuing harvest to families in Gaza.

Yet within days, Palestinian Arab looters had stripped dozens of greenhouses of irrigation pipes, pumps and plastic sheeting. Some Palestinian Arab policemen even joined in. Many of the structures, along with valuable agricultural equipment, were lost in the very first days after Israel left.

Nor were the greenhouses the only targets. Crowds also set fire to synagogues in Gaza's former Jewish communities, destroying buildings that bore witness to the Jewish presence there.

Just as the Philistines buried wells that could have supplied them with water, Palestinian Arab looters damaged agricultural infrastructure that could have helped sustain Gaza's economy.

The Philistines' destruction of Avraham's wells, however, was not the end of the story. Yitzchak refused to be deterred.

His servants dug new wells, only to encounter further opposition. At one well, neighboring shepherds challenged their claim to the water. At another, the quarrel began again. Finally, they dug a well over which no one disputed, and Yitzchak named it Rehovot, saying that G-d had made room for them to prosper (Genesis 26:20-22).

Yitzchak's greatness lay in his refusal to let other people's hostility determine whether he would continue to build. He did not need to win every quarrel to remain faithful to his purpose. He simply kept digging.

Israel's enemies may seek to uproot Jewish communities, destroy what Jews have built and erase their presence from Eretz Yisrael. But the lesson of Yitzchak's wells is that destruction need not be the final word.

The Jewish people's answer must be to return, rebuild and strengthen our hold on the land of our forefathers. The Philistines thought they could erase Avraham's legacy by burying his wells. Yitzchak proved them wrong by digging again.

And that is what we must continue to do today.

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/436148

Read This and Think Twice:

 Seven Jewish employees of New York City’s Health Department have filed a federal lawsuit accusing the city of antisemitic discrimination, retaliation and fostering a hostile work environment after they were investigated for organizing a gathering to mourn victims of a terror attack.

The lawsuit centers on an online support meeting arranged following the December 2025 massacre at a Chanukah celebration at Bondi Beach in Australia. The employees allege that their effort to find comfort among colleagues instead subjected them to a prolonged internal investigation.

An email inviting coworkers to the gathering quoted a rabbi warning that calls to “globalize the intifada” were calls to murder Jews and that “anti-Zionism kills.” Approximately 16 people attended the meeting.

According to the lawsuit, other employees, including prominent anti-Israel activists, subsequently complained that the invitation was discriminatory and improperly linked the Australian massacre to support for Palestinians. The plaintiffs allege that the overwhelming majority of those who complained had not attended the gathering.

The city then launched an investigation into the Jewish organizers over allegations of racial and religious discrimination. The inquiry lasted approximately four months and, according to the plaintiffs, involved aggressive questioning and unfair procedures.

The employees allege that investigators challenged them to explain why they viewed slogans involving “intifada” as threatening. They further contend that the questioning suggested their expressions of grief over murdered Jews were offensive to Arab or Muslim colleagues.

The investigation ultimately closed without definitive findings, according to the account, but the plaintiffs say they received no apology and that records of the inquiry remain in their personnel files.

Beyond the investigation, the lawsuit alleges a broader pattern of unequal treatment within the department. The employees say their request to establish a Jewish heritage group called “Hinenu” was rejected on the grounds that Judaism is a religion rather than an ethnicity, despite their description of the proposed group as nonreligious.

They contrast that rejection with the recognition, funding and access to city facilities provided to other employee groups organized around ethnicity or geographic heritage.

The plaintiffs also allege that other employee groups used city resources to host one-sided political presentations accusing Israel of “genocide” and colonial rule. Materials circulated within the department allegedly included descriptions justifying the October 7 attacks as “armed resistance.”

Senior department officials are also accused of distributing official messages comparing Israel to apartheid and using an International Holocaust Remembrance Day message to condemn Israeli actions in Gaza. The lawsuit further alleges that city-sponsored discrimination training minimized antisemitism compared with other forms of racism.

The plaintiffs connect the alleged workplace climate to Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s policies and statements, including what they describe as the reversal of earlier measures intended to combat antisemitism and BDS.

Represented by the Jewish legal organization NJAC, the employees are asking the court to require recognition of their Jewish employee group, remove the investigation records from their personnel files and award substantial damages.

“The city told its Jewish employees that every identity counts except theirs, and then investigated them for mourning murder victims,” the organization’s chief executive said.

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)

https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/israel-news/2622390/antisemitism-lawsuit-jewish-nyc-health-workers-say-they-were-investigated-for-mourning-terror-victims.html

Shalom Pollack: He Was Right

 One does not have to agree with everything Rav Kahana said to recognize that he made good points that others haven't thought of or avoided, and, on balance, he was on target.

Before addressing his particular policies, it is important to understand what those policies were designed to achieve.

First and foremost, he wanted to bring the Jewish people to another stage of our history by teaching them why to be Jewish and to be proud of it.

This can not be overestimated.

It is the crux of the matter.

His unapologetic message of Jewish pride and self-confidence was designed to remold the problematic self-perception of individual Jews and the Jewish nation as a whole.

Two thousand years of learned insecurity and internalized inferiority -  the fear of being too noticed - is a complex that Jews have yet to overcome.

These psychological/social chains were loosened by his relentless educating of Jews and the institutions he established in the USA.

As far as his policies go, I think the criteria for policies should be what will help Jews survive and flourish, psychologically, socially, and especially physically.

In the USA, the JDL addressed all the above. His motto, "every Jew a .22," was revolutionary and unsettling for the Jewish establishment, which just wanted to keep a low Galut profile and hope that storms would blow over and be infrequent. Since when do Jews, like all other peoples, dare to defend themselves?

It's not "Jewish"

Soviet Jewry owes him a big thank you, as he brought their issue to the front pages through "non-Jewish" means; the ones that the establishment frowned upon.

He earned a place in the hearts of a large number of Jews, especially Holocaust survivors.

He hit a nerve that was thought to be dead.

In Israel,  the Jewish state adopted many Galut complexes that the Jewish state was supposed to eliminate but did not. On the contrary.

Rav  Kahane was even more foresighted about the Israel malaise than about the USA.

He understood that Israel was the most important theater in the Jewish world; the one that determines the nation's future.

In 2026, many people in the street will  now say "Kahane was right," though perhaps still  in a whisper

In the 1980's, when he warned us so succinctly about the many developments leading up to  2026,  far fewer would have agreed with him

What was he "right" about?

He addressed many issues about Jewish national health and survival, but the one he is known most for is his warning about the "cancer" in our  Jewish state. He dared to declare that the Arabs who lost the war of 1948 (the "Nakba", or disaster in Arabic) will never let go of their hatred for the Jewish enemy that they tried to exterminate but failed. Their hate and desire for revenge will only grow despite all attempts to make them comfortable in the Jewish state.

He often said, "I don't hate Arabs; I love Jews".

When Arabs frequently murdered Jews,  it pained him to his soul because he loved Jews and mourned over what he saw as the inevitable continuing and increasing deaths that could be prevented.

Israel ignored its core existential problem, and it gave him no rest.

He said, "I don't want the Arabs to conquer the Jewish state with bullets or with  babies."

Everyone shoved the issue under the rug and demonized him.

He said democracy - giving the Jew hating Arabs a vote in determining the fate of the Jewish state is inviting national suicide.

Half a century ago, the numbers of Arabs and their  self-confidence (Hutzpa) weren't as apparent as today,

The illusion that, despite the democratic rules played in the Jewish state, it would always be securely Jewish.

It  was a convenient story to believe

He warned otherwise.

He warned of a coming Red-Green alliance in Israel.

They laughed.

He was on target long before the dilemma we face today, as pro-Hamas Arabs make up a huge chunk of the Knesset and brazenly walk out when the national anthem is played.

Those who walked out (the entire Knesset membership) when Kahane spoke in the mid-1980s never thought this day would come.

Kahane warned in an empty Knesset that the day was indeed coming.

He did warn us, and he was right.

The day has come.

Without going into policy details, Arabs have already  long since decided the fate of the Jewish state with their votes in the Knesset ( Oslo, Gush Katif expulsions)

Should they also vote on "who is a Jew", or about Jewish identity and Jewish education, in the name of democracy?

Is that why a Jewish state was founded after two thousand years, to be a perfect democracy?

As Moshe Feiglin says, 'Israel is a Jewish state.

Period.

Democracy is our chosen form of government.

The latter is there to serve the former.

Intermarriage in Israel is a real problem. Rav Kahane was the first to ring the bell.

Arab men very often prey on  Jewish girls (never Jewish men marrying Arab women - their fathers literally kill them), with repeated tragic results when the girls are trapped in the Arab villages in Israel.

The state treats it as a personal choice and not the concern or responsibility of the Jewish country.

I don't know exactly which policies or laws will prevent this tragedy, but  I am ready to listen.

Separate beaches, age guidelines for mixed workplaces..

Something has to be done to save our sisters and their families from the humiliating tragedy in our Jewish state.

Families who moved to Israel never dreamt of their daughters marrying a Muslim in Morocco or Yemen. Why in the Jewish state?

It must be fixed, and fast

As far as foreign policy goes, Kahane welcomed relations with all countries based on mutual interest.

Our experience has shown us that an independent policy,  even going against American directives and enduring embargos, such as in  1948 and 1967, brought the best results and respect.

We are far stronger,  richer, and more populous than in  48  and 67.

A self-assured and proud Jewish population is our greatest weapon, along with faith in our justice and God.

These nation-saving tools must be cultivated with the necessary budgets.

They are  more powerful weapons than another 10  F -  35s and "Iron Dome"

The best foreign policy is success.

Anti-Semitism will never go away and will never be appeased. It is less likely to raise its head when we succeed and do not apologize.

Libels of Genocide arise exactly when we try to please our enemies.

Rabbi Kahane said, I don't want their love; I want their respect"

He was right.

shalompollack613@gmail.com