11) Abraham had offspring that were deficient, Ishmael and all the children of Ketorah, and Isaac had Esau and all his chiefs.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:118b)

Page 185 Note 540

.

(11) AND SARAH SAW THE SON OF HAGAR THE EGYPTIAN etc - Rabbi Shimeon bar Yohai said: Rabbi Akiva used to interpret this to his [Ishmael’s] shame, Rabbi Akiba lectured: AND SARAH SAW [THE SON OF HAGAR THE EGYPTIAN, WHOM SHE HAD BORNE TO AVRAHAM, MAKING SPORT.] Now 'making sport' refers to nothing else but sexual immorality, as in the verse, "The Hebrew servant, whom you have brought to us, came in to make sport of me. (Gen. 39:17). This teaches that Sarah saw Ishmael ravish maidens, seduced married women and dishonored them. R. Ishmael taught: This term 'making sport' refers to idolatry, as in the verse, "And the people sat to eat and drink and got up to make sport' (Exodus 32:6). This teaches that Sarah saw Ishmael build altars, catch locusts, and sacrifice them. R. Eleazar said: The term 'making sport' refers to bloodshed, as in the verse, "Let the young men, please, arise and make sport before us" (II Sam. 2:14) Rabbi Azariah said in Rabbi Levi’s name: Ishmael said to Isaac: 'Let us go and see our pieces in the field' and he would pick up the bow and shoot arrows, aiming in Itzchak's direction, while pretending to be playing (making sport), as it is written: "as a madman who casts fire-brands, arrows, and death; so is the man that deceives his neighbor, and said: 'I am just joking (making sport)'. And I [Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai] say that this is to be interpreted to the praise [of Ishmael]. This expression of making sport is only used as 'inheritance'. In the moment that Itzchak our father was born all were happy. Ishmael said to them: are you dumb? I am the first-born, I am going to receive double portion [of the inheritance], that from the answer of Sarah our mother to Avraham 'because the son of this maidservant will not inherit with my son, with Itzchak' you learn that he would not inherit 'with my son' - even if he wasn't Itzchak - and 'with Itzchak' - even if he wasn't my son. All the more so [this is true] 'with my son, with Itzchak'.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:118b)

Page 185 Note 541

(1) And these are the names of the Sons of Israel that came into Egypt with Yaakov, every man came with his household – There it is written (Mishlei 13, 24): “He who spares the rod hates his son; but he who loves him discipline shim in his youth.” Ordinarily in the world, if a person says to his friend: “So-and-so hit your son”, he would be ready to reduce his livelihood. And why is it taught “ He who spares the rod hates his son”?! In order to teach you, that anyone who refrains from disciplining his son in the end causes him to fall into evil ways and will hate him. This is what we have found with Yishmael, who behaved wickedly on Avraham his father but did not rebuke him, with the result that he fell into evil ways and he hated him and he left from his house with nothing. What did Yishmael do when he was fifteen years old? He started to bring idols from the market and he would play with them and worship them as he had seen others do, immediately (Bereishit 21, 9) “And Sarah saw the son of the Egyptian Hagar that she had given birth for Avraham was fooling around etc…” And there is no fooling except for idol worship, like that it says (Shemot 32,6): And they rose up to fool around. Immediately (Bereishit 21,10): And she said to Avraham , Send out this maid-servant and her son, perhaps my son will learn from him. Immediately, (Bereishit 21,11) And this thing was very bad in the eyes of Avraham etc...on account of his son because he had become evil. (Bereshit 21,12) And G-d said to Avraham, do not let it be evil in your eyes etc... From here you can learn, that Avraham was secondary to Sarah in prophecy, following on, (Bereishit 21,14): And Avraham got up in the morning and he took bread and a bottle of water, to teach you, that he hated Yishmael because of his evil ways, and sent him and his mother Hagar empty-handed and expelled them from his house because of this. Do you really think that Avraham, of whom it is written (Bereishit 13,2): And Avraham was very rich in cattle etc... that he would send his wife and his son from his house empty-handed, without clothes or means of a livelihood?! Rather, this is to teach you, since he turned evil, he stopped thinking about him. What was his end? After he had been expelled, he sat at the cross-roads and was a bandit, as it says (Bereishit 16,12): And he was a wild man. And similar to this (Bereishit 25,28): And Yitzchak loved Esav, therefore he turned to evil ways, because he was not rebuked, like we were taught: Five transgressions the evil Esav transgressed on that day: He seduced an engaged lady, and killed a man, denied resurrection, and rejected the fundamentals of religion and spurned his birthright, that he desired the death of his father, and sought to kill his brother, as it says (Bereishit 27,41):May the days of mourning for my father be brought close etc.. And he forced Ya'acov to flee from his father. And he even went with Yishmael, to learn from his evil ways and to add to his wives, as it says (Bereshit 28,9): And Esav went to Yishmael. Similarly with David, that he did not rebuke or chastise his son Avshalom, he turned to evil ways and sought to kill his father, and he lay with concubines, and becoming the cause if his wandering, bare-footed and crying, and many thousands and myriads of Israelites were slaughtered, and he caused much suffering upon them which did not end. As it is written (Psalms 3,1): A song of David, when he fled from Avshalom his son, just as it was written after (Psalms 3,2) How great in number have my enemies become etc.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:118b)

Page 185 Note 541

(1) The great Rabbi Hoshaya opened [with the verse (Mishlei 8:30),] "I [the Torah] was an amon to Him and I was a plaything to Him every day." Amon means "pedagogue" (i.e. nanny). Amon means "covered." Amon means "hidden." And there is one who says amon means "great." Amon means "nanny," as in (Bamidbar 11:12) “As a nanny (omein) carries the suckling child." Amon means "covered," as in (Eichah 4:5) "Those who were covered (emunim) in scarlet have embraced refuse heaps." Amon means "hidden," as in (Esther 2:7) "He hid away (omein) Hadassah." Amon means "great," as in (Nahum 3:8) "Are you better than No-amon [which dwells in the rivers]?" which the Targum renders as, "Are you better than Alexandria the Great (amon), which dwells between the rivers?" Alternatively, amon means "artisan." The Torah is saying, "I was the artisan's tool of Hashem." In the way of the world, a king of flesh and blood who builds a castle does not do so from his own knowledge, but rather from the knowledge of an architect, and the architect does not build it from his own knowledge, but rather he has scrolls and books in order to know how to make rooms and doorways. So too Hashem gazed into the Torah and created the world. Similarly the Torah says, "Through the reishis Hashem created [the heavens and the earth]," and reishis means Torah, as in "Hashem made me [the Torah] the beginning (reishis) of His way" (Mishlei 8:22).

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:118b)

Page 186 Note 542

(1) THE TRIALS OF ABRAHAM (continued)
THE ninth trial (was as follows): Ishmael was born with (the prophecy of the) bow, and he grew up with the bow, as it is said, "And God was with the lad, and he grew … and he became an archer" (Gen. 21:20). He took bow and arrows and began to shoot at the birds. He saw Isaac sitting by himself, and he shot an arrow at him to slay him. Sarah saw (this), and told Abraham. She said to him: Thus and thus has Ishmael done to Isaac, but (now) arise and write (a will in favour) of Isaac, (giving him) all that the Holy One has sworn to give || to thee and to thy seed. The son of this handmaid shall not inherit with my son, with Isaac, as it is said, "And she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son" (Gen. 21:10).

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:118b)

Page 186 Note 546

And furthermore, how much did they actually sin? How long is a person’s life? Seventy years. Subtract the first twenty years of his life. One is not punished for sins committed then, as in heavenly matters, a person is only punished from age twenty. Fifty years remain for them. Subtract twenty-five years of nights, and twenty-five years remain for them. Subtract twelve and a half years during which one prays and eats and uses the bathroom, and twelve and a half years remain for them. If You can endure them all and forgive the sins committed during those years, excellent. And if not, half of the sins are upon me to bear and half upon You. And if You say that all of them, the sins of all twelve and a half years that remain, are upon me, I sacrificed my soul before You and You should forgive them due to my merit. The Jewish people began to say to Isaac: You are our father. Only Isaac defended the Jewish people as a father would and displayed compassion toward his children. Isaac said to them: Before you praise me, praise the Holy One, Blessed be He. And Isaac points to the Holy One, Blessed be He, before their eyes. Immediately they lifted their eyes to the heavens and say: “You, Lord, are our Father, our Redeemer, everlasting is Your name.”

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 187 Note 551

(2) What had Ishmael done? When he was fifteen years old, he brought idols into his home, to play with and to worship as he had seen others do. As soon as Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne unto Abraham, making sport (Gen. 21:9). The word sport refers only to practicing idolatry, as it is said: And the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to make sport (Exod. 32:6). She said to him: Abraham, cast out this bondwoman and her son (Gen. 21:10), lest my son learn from his behavior.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 187 Note 551

Rav Beivai bar Abaye said to the Angel of Death: Do you have the right to act in this manner, to take someone before his time? The Angel of Death said to him: And is it not written: “But there are those swept away without justice” (Proverbs 13:23)? Rav Beivai said to him: And isn’t it written: “One generation passes away, and another generation comes” (Ecclesiastes 1:4), which indicates that there is a predetermined amount of time for the life of every generation.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 187 Note 556

The Angel of Death said to him: I told you to bring Miriam, the raiser of women’s hair. His agent said to him: If so, return her to life. He said to him: Since you have already brought her, let her be counted toward the number of deceased people. Apparently, this woman died unintentionally. Rav Beivai asked the agent: But as her time to die had not yet arrived, how were you able to kill her? The agent responded that he had the opportunity, as she was holding a shovel in her hand and with it she was lighting

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 188 Note 558

And Rabbi Yitzḥak said: A man is judged only according to his deeds at the time of his judgment, and not according to his future deeds, as it is stated with regard to Ishmael: “For God has heard the voice of the lad where he is” (Genesis 21:17). Although Ishmael and his descendants would act wickedly in the future, his prayer was heard and answered because he was innocent at the time.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 187 Note 551

and sweeping the oven. She took the fire and set it on her foot; she was scalded and her luck suffered, which gave me the opportunity, and I brought her.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:111b)

Page 188 Note 558

Rav Beivai bar Abaye said to the Angel of Death: Do you have the right to act in this manner, to take someone before his time? The Angel of Death said to him: And is it not written: “But there are those swept away without justice” (Proverbs 13:23)? Rav Beivai said to him: And isn’t it written: “One generation passes away, and another generation comes” (Ecclesiastes 1:4), which indicates that there is a predetermined amount of time for the life of every generation.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:111b)

Page 188 Note 558

of thin wood and a candle [sheraga], since in that case his own action, i.e., that of the one who sent the flame, definitely caused the fire to spread. The mishna teaches that if one sent a fire in the hand of a halakhically competent person, the halakhically competent person is liable…If another came and fanned the flame the one who fanned it is liable. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says with regard to the correct text of the mishna: The one who teaches it using the word fanned [libba] is not mistaken, and the one who teaches it using the word blew [nibba] is not mistaken. Rav Naḥman explained: The one who teaches using the word fanned [libba] is not mistaken, as it is written: “With a flame [belabbat] of fire” (Exodus 3:2), and the one who teaches using the word blew [nibba] is not mistaken, as it is written: “He creates the fruit [niv] of the lips” (Isaiah 57:19), which can be interpreted as referring to the breath of the lips. § The mishna teaches: If the wind fanned the flames, all the people involved are exempt, indicating that even if one fanned the fire at the same time that the wind was blowing he is exempt. The Gemara cites a baraita in which the Sages taught the same idea explicitly: In a case where one fanned the flame and at the same time the wind fanned it, if his fanning has sufficient strength by itself to fan the flames, he is liable for damage caused by the fire, since even without the wind the fire would have spread. But if his fanning alone was not sufficient, he is exempt. The Gemara asks: Why is he exempt if his fanning is not sufficient? Let it be the same halakha as the case of one who winnows grain on Shabbat by throwing it into the air, and the wind assists him by separating the chaff from the grain. In such a case he is liable for desecrating Shabbat, despite the fact that without the assistance of the wind he would not have been able to winnow the grain. Abaye said: With what are we dealing here? We are dealing with a case where he fanned the fire from one side and the wind fanned it from the other side, and the fire was blown in the direction the wind was blowing. Therefore, it is clear that his fanning did not help the fire spread, so he is exempt. Rava says: We are dealing with a case where he fanned it along with a typical wind, and this was not sufficient to cause the fire to spread, and suddenly an atypical wind came and fanned it. Therefore, he is exempt since he could not have anticipated this. Rabbi Zeira said: We are dealing with a case where he only heated [detzamera tzamurei] the fire by breathing on it, rather than fanning it properly. Rav Ashi said: When we say that one is liable in a case where he winnows and the wind assists him, this statement applies with regard to the halakhot of Shabbat. With regard to Shabbat, the principle is that the Torah prohibited planned, constructive labor. The primary consideration is that his objective is accomplished, even if he did not perform the entire act of labor. But here, in the context of damages, he is considered to have caused damage merely through indirect action, and one who causes damage through indirect action is exempt. MISHNA: If one sends forth a fire, i.e., allows it to escape, and it consumes wood, or stones, or earth, he is liable, as it is stated: “If a fire breaks out, and catches in thorns, so that a stack of grain, or standing grain, or the field, is consumed, the one who kindled the fire shall pay compensation” (Exodus 22:5), which teaches that he is liable also for destroying the field itself. GEMARA: With regard to the verse cited in the mishna, Rava says: Why do I need the Merciful One to write in the Torah all of these terms: “Thorns,” “a stack of grain,” “standing grain,” and “field,” which seem to be redundant? Rava explains: All the terms are necessary, because if the Merciful One had written only “thorns” in the Torah, I would say that it is specifically thorns for which the Merciful One renders one liable, because it is common for fire to be near them, and it is common that one is negligent. But with regard to a stack of grain, with regard to which it is not common for fire to be near it, as grain is valuable, so one keeps it out of harm’s way, and it is not common that one is negligent in allowing it to catch fire, I would say that he should not be liable. And if the Merciful One had written only: “A stack of grain,” I would say that it is specifically for such a stack that the Merciful One renders him liable, because it involves a substantial financial loss. But with regard to thorns, which involve only a minimal loss, I would say that he should not be liable. Therefore, the verse teaches that he is liable for damage to thorns as well. Why do I need the Torah to state the term “standing grain”? It is in order to teach that just as standing grain is exposed, so too, one is liable only for damage caused by fire for all items that are exposed. One is exempt from liability for damage to items that are concealed. The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who deems one liable for a concealed article damaged by a fire, why do I need the Torah to state the term: “Standing grain”? The Gemara answers: The term serves to include all items that have stature, i.e., trees and animals, and not only produce. The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of the Rabbis, who derive the halakha of concealed articles from the term “standing grain,” from where do they derive that all items that have stature are included? The Gemara answers: They derive it from the term: “Or standing grain,” since the additional word “or” is an inclusive term. The Gemara asks: And what does Rabbi Yehuda derive from the additional word “or”? The Gemara answers: He requires the word “or” to divide the terms, i.e., to teach that one is liable for damage to any one of the items listed, and not only where the fire burned all of them together. The Gemara then asks: And from where do the Rabbis derive the halakha to divide the terms so that one is liable for damage to each one independently? The Gemara answers: They derive it from the second instance of the word “or,” as the verse states: “Or the field.” The Gemara asks: And what does Rabbi Yehuda derive from the phrase “or the field”? The Gemara answers: Since the Merciful One wrote in the Torah: “Or standing grain,” He also wrote: “Or the field,” for stylistic consistency, but no additional halakha may be derived from this term. Rava continues to elaborate on the different terms in the verse: And why do I need the word “field” in the verse? It serves to include liability for damage in a case when the flames licked a plowed field and charred its stones. The Gemara asks: But let the Merciful One write only the term “field,” and then it would not require all these other terms. If one is liable for damage to a field, which is not totally destroyed by the fire, he is certainly liable for damage to other items that are completely destroyed. The Gemara answers: It is necessary to write the other terms as well, because if the Merciful One had written only “field,” I would say that for what is in the field, yes, one is liable, but for anything else, no, one is not liable. Therefore, it teaches us that one is liable for any damage caused by fire. § The Gemara cites an aggadic midrash based on this verse: Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says that Rabbi Yonatan says: Calamity befalls the world only when wicked people are in the world, but the calamity begins only with the righteous first, as it is stated in the verse: “If a fire breaks out, and catches in thorns, so that a stack of grain, or standing grain, or the field, is consumed” (Exodus 22:5). When does the fire, i.e., calamity, emerge? At a time when the thorns, i.e., the wicked, are found with it. But calamity begins only from the righteous first, as it is stated in the continuation of the verse: “And a stack of grain is consumed [vene’ekhal].” It is not stated: If a fire breaks out, and catches in thorns, and consumes [ve’akhal] the stack of grain; rather, it states: “A stack of grain is consumed,” meaning that the stack, i.e., the righteous, has already been consumed before the thorns. Rav Yosef taught a baraita: What is the meaning of that which is written with regard to the plague of the firstborn: “And none of you shall go out of the opening of his house until the morning” (Exodus 12:22)? If the plague was not decreed upon the Jewish people, why were they not permitted to leave their homes? Once permission is granted to the destroyer to kill, it does not distinguish between the righteous and the wicked. And not only that, but it begins with the righteous first, as it is stated in the verse: “And will cut off from you the righteous and the wicked” (Ezekiel 21:8), where mention of the righteous precedes the wicked. Rav Yosef cried and said: Are all these righteous people also compared to nothing when calamity strikes? Abaye said to him: It is goodness for the righteous that they die first, as it is written: “The righteous is taken away because of the evil to come” (Isaiah 57:1), so that he will not have to endure the suffering that will befall the people. Rav Yehuda says that Rav says:

A person should always enter an unfamiliar city at a time of good, i.e., while it is light, as the Torah uses the expression “It is good” with regard to the creation of light (see Genesis 1:4). This goodness is manifest in the sense of security one feels when it is light. And likewise, when one leaves a city he should leave at a time of good, meaning after sunrise the next morning, as it is stated in the verse: “And none of you shall go out of the opening of his house until the morning” (Exodus 12:22).

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:111b)

Page 188 Note 559

§ The Gemara relates: Rabbi Yishmael asked Rabbi Akiva a question when they were walking along the way. He said to him: You who served Naḥum of Gam Zu for twenty-two years, who would expound and learn that every appearance of the word et in the Torah is meant to teach something, what would he expound from the phrase: “The heaven and the earth” [et hashamayim ve’et ha’aretz] (Genesis 1:1)? He said to him: These words should be expounded as follows: Had it stated: In the beginning God created hashamayim veha’aretz, i.e., the heaven and the earth, without the word et, I would have said: Shamayim is the name of the Holy One, Blessed be He, and the same goes for aretz, and the verse would sound as if it meant that God, whose name is Shamayim and Aretz, created the world. Since it states “et hashamayim ve’et ha’aretz,” it is clear that these are created objects and that shamayim means the actual heaven and aretz is the actual earth. It is for this reason that the word et is necessary.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 188 Note 560

GEMARA: The Sages taught a baraita: With regard to the lower hinge pin of the door of a carriage, box, or cupboard, one may restore it to its place in the Temple; in the rest of the country one may only push it back into place, provided that it did not come out of its socket entirely. As for the upper hinge, one may not restore it in either place. This is prohibited as a preventive measure, lest one come to bang it in forcefully, thereby performing an actual labor prohibited by Torah law. And if he actually banged it in, he is liable to bring a sin-offering, as his action is considered building.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 189 Note 556

(1) (Deut. 2:5:) DO NOT ENGAGE THEM IN BATTLE, FOR I WILL NOT GIVE YOU ENOUGH OF THEIR LAND FOR ('ad) <EVEN> THE SOLE OF A FOOT TO TREAD (rt.: DRK) ON. R. Meir says: Until ('ad) his (the Holy One's) feet stand on that day (upon the Mount of Olives). R. Samuel says: Until ('ad) that one comes of whom it is written (in Numb. 24:17): A STAR SHALL COME (DRK) OUT OF JACOB. This refers to the messianic King. The Holy One said to them: In this world you have no property on this mountain, but in the world to come you shall be redeemed. Then you shall claim it and take possession of it. It is so stated (in Obad. vs. 19): THE NEGEB SHALL TAKE POSSESSION OF THE MOUNTAIN OF ESAU. It is also written (in vs. 21): FOR SAVIORS SHALL GO UP ON MOUNT ZION TO JUDGE THE MOUNTAIN OF ESAU, AND THE KINGDOM SHALL BELONG TO THE LORD.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 189 Note 571

The Gemara clarifies the reasons for their opinions: Rav Huna said he has fulfilled the mitzva due to a statement of Rav Asi, as Rav Asi said that the reason for this mitzva is that the Messiah, son of David, will not come until all the souls of the body have been finished, i.e., until all souls that are destined to inhabit physical bodies will do so, as it is stated: “For the spirit that enwraps itself is from Me, and the souls that I have made” (Isaiah 57:16). Consequently, once a child has been born and his soul has entered a body the mitzva has been fulfilled, even if the child subsequently dies. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said he has not fulfilled the mitzva, as we require “He formed it to be inhabited” (Isaiah 45:18), and this is not fulfilled when the children have passed away and no longer inhabit the earth.

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 189 Note 572

(12) Rabbi Ishmael said: In the future the children of Ishmael will do fifteen things in the land (of Israel) in the latter days, and they are: They will measure the land with ropes; they will change a cemetery into a resting-place for sheep (and) a dunghill; they will measure with them and from them upon the tops of the mountains; falsehood will multiply and truth will be hidden; the statutes will be removed far from Israel; sins will be multiplied in Israel; worm-crimson will be in the wool, and he will cover with insects paper and pen; he will hew down the rock of the kingdom, and they will rebuild the desolated cities and sweep the ways; and they will plant gardens and parks, and fence in the broken walls of the Temple; and they will build a building in the Holy Place; and two brothers will arise over them, princes at the end; and in their days the Branch, the Son of David, will arise, as it is said, || "And in the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed" (Dan. 2:44).

Zohar, Pritzker Edition, Vol. 2 (2004),

Parashat Va-Yera, (Zohar 1:119a)

Page 190 Note 579