The Tora narrative describes the competition between the individuals of the story, especially within the family. Already in Bereshit, we stumbled upon the rivalry between Kayin and Hevel, whose essence is not outlined. According to the Midrash, both were owners of land and livestock. Each one wanted the future Beit HaMikdash to be built on his plot, and because of it, a fight to the death took place. 

The competition takes on a different form in the case of Avraham and his nephew Lot. This time, the problem has an economical ingredient because the size of their herds – with the requirement of sufficient pasture – prevents them from staying together, and they decide to separate. Lot opts for fertile valleys, despite its inhabitants exhibiting immoral behavior. We refer to the cities of Sedom and Amora. 

Avraham’s children have different personalities and cannot grow under the same roof. His wife Sara wants to make sure that her son Yitschak does not share the home with Yishmael, son of the concubine Hagar, and urges that they be exiled from the parental home.

In this same sense, we find that Yaacov and Esav cannot share the parental home either. They are two different individuals. Esav is a hunter, and Yaacov is an introverted and studious young man. In this case, the characters cease to have a linear and simple character, and complexity begins. Esav is a hunter, a man of the field; however, he is very respectful of the parents and remains in the paternal home, while Yaacov flees and takes refuge in the home of his uncle Lavan. 

Why did he have to leave the land of Canaan? Because Yaacov has to resolve internal conflicts. He used deception to obtain his father’s blessing, a fact that produced the wrath of his firstborn brother Esav who, as revenge, expressed the intention to assassinate him. With didactic intent, the Tora relates that Yaacov was the target of deception as well, but at the hands of his uncle Lavan, a master of deception according to the Chachamim. Although in love with Rachel, through a ruse, he found himself married to the not loved Le’a, Rachel’s sister. For a greater didactic emphasis, Le’a gives birth to six children, a highly regarded and important fact in an agricultural society, while his beloved Rachel has difficulty conceiving.

After two decades of absence, Yaacov decides to return to the ancestral land but knows that he will have to face the wrath of his brother Esav first after a long absence. In the filial meeting, Esav shows his brotherhood, embraces Yaacov, and invites him to share the benefits of the Promised Land. But in a revival of the episode between Avraham and Lot, the abundance of their cattle and goods prevents them from sharing the same land. Yaacov gives Esav a sizable herd, and he now needs a significant expansion of his fields, where other herds will not compete for the same sustenance. In the outcome of the aforementioned episodes, an important difference in the values of these characters comes to light. For Esav, the material is all-important, and for Yaacov, the spirit is foremost.

Kayin is willing to solve the problem, even by murdering his brother, because he thinks that as the firstborn, he should have the first choice for the location of the future House of God in his territory.  Yishmael feels rejected by Avraham and does not attempt reconciliation because his pride has been violated. He is a hunter and a man of the field who only returns to his father’s home after the death of the patriarch to participate in his burial.

Esav remains by his parents’ side, especially during the long absence of his twin brother Yaakov. But for purely material reasons, he leaves the Promised Land and settles in Seir, which is the land of Edom. 

The continuity of Judaism could not depend on individuals who were willing to take a different course to respond to circumstantial situations at critical moments. The teachings of the patriarchs had to be deeply internalized so that their descendants would not deviate from the path traced, even under the most adverse circumstances. Perhaps that is the message the Chachamim wish to emphasize in their interpretation of the verse:  Im Lavan Garti, “I resided with Lavan.” They point out that the word Garti is numerically equivalent to Taryag. They are the same Hebrew letters but in a different order. The moral is that even in Lavan’s home, Yaacov did not forget the Taryag Mitzvot, the 613 ordinances of the Tora. His behavior followed the teachings of Yitschak.

MITZVAH: TORA ORDINANCE IN THIS PARSHA

CONTAINS 1 PROHIBITION

1. Genesis 32:33 Do not ingest the sciatic nerve (guid hanashe))

VAYETSE_GENESIS XXVIII:10-XXXII:3

The account of the different aspects of the life of the patriarchs also documents the development of the history of the Hebrew people. An additional reason why, in the central prayer, the Amidah, the Chachamim insisted on separating the individual notion of Divinity from each of these patriarchs. Instead of stating the God of Avraham, Yitschak, and Yaacov, the text reads:  the God of Avraham, the God of Yitschak, and the God of Yaacov, because each of the patriarchs had different experiences and their relationship with the Creator was individual.    

Genesis relates that God was always at Avraham’s side to direct his activities and protect him when necessary. From the first instruction to leave the parental home, Avraham becomes a traveler whom God never abandons and protects from all dangers. Even the severe test of tying his son Yitschak to an altar to turn him into a human offering has a happy ending. At the critical moment, the Creator sends an angel to prevent the sacrifice and thus announces to humanity that the one God did not desire human sacrifice. 

Moreover, God’s revelation to humanity will have the opposite purpose: to promote life and understanding among human beings. God protects Avraham from the designs of Pharaoh who wants to seduce Sara and does the same in the case of King Avimelech. God sends an angel to save Lot and his family. He cures Avraham of the circumcision surgery and causes Sara to miraculously become pregnant at the age of ninety, to ensure the biological continuity of the patriarch.

The case of Yitschak is different because he is not proactive, he does not travel, and he never leaves the land of Israel. Just as Avraham allows Yishmael, son of the concubine Hagar, to be banished, Yitschak allows Yaacov to receive the spiritual inheritance, even though he was not the firstborn son. In both cases, their respective wives Sara and Rivka become the decisive factor in deciding the future development of events.

The Jewish people are called B’nai Israel, because the third patriarch Yaacov (Israel is the name he receives as a result of the struggle he had with the protective angel of Esav), becomes the mold that will serve as a model for their descendants, the Hebrew people. 

Where is God during the drama unfolding among the sons of Yaacov that resulted in Egyptian slavery? God never informs Yaacov – during his long years of grief over the disappearance of his favorite son – what his fate had been. The life of the third patriarch begins a partial withdrawal from God’s intervention so that human beings take direct responsibility for their actions.

The narrative of the Hebrew people parallels God’s progressive absence from History. On Mount Sinai the people receive the fundamental document for coexistence, the Tora, as the manifest will of God. It contains the “secret” of life, what kinds of behavior lead to possible harmony and understanding, emotional development, and spiritual growth.

While Avraham and Yitschak allowed children to be excluded from the spiritual heritage, Yaacov recognized the sons of concubines as authentic parents of tribes that would make up the Hebrew people. Notwithstanding, the quarrels, grudges, hatred, and envy between the brothers, the story concludes with the understanding between the rivals when the goal is defined, and the purpose is clarified: the construction of a people that will raise the message of monotheism for the rest of Humanity. 

While God orders the transfer of Avraham and the residence of Yitschak, the case of Yaacov is one of constant confrontation. It is about the vicissitudes of family life, and the struggle against a hostile environment. It should come as no surprise that more than half of Bereshit is related to Yaacov’s life, his experiences, and the responses he gave to different situations, to the adversity to which he was subjected. In an imperfect world, he had to use half-truths in some cases, without ever losing the horizon: the construction of a people that must house the diversity represented by the individual character of its children, who must be united in their fundamental task: the propagation of the notion of the unity of God, father of all humanity.

VAYETSÉ_GÉNESIS XXVIII:10-XXXII:3

El relato de los diferentes aspectos de la vida de los patriarcas también documenta el desarrollo de la historia del pueblo hebreo. Razón adicional para que, en la oración central, la Amidá, los jajamim insistieran en separar la noción individual de la Divinidad de cada uno de estos patriarcas. En lugar de afirmar el Dios de Avraham, Yitsjak y Yaacov, el texto reza: el Dios de Avraham, el Dios de Yitsjak y el Dios de Yaacov, porque cada uno de los patriarcas tuvo experiencias diferentes y su relación con el Creador fue de carácter individual.

El Génesis relata que Dios siempre estuvo al lado de Avraham para dirigir sus actividades y protegerlo cuando era necesario. Desde el primer instructivo de abandonar el hogar paterno, Avraham se convierte en un viajero a quien Dios nunca abandona, sino que protege de todos los peligros. Incluido la severa prueba de atar a su hijo Yitsjak sobre un altar para convertirlo en una ofrenda humana tiene un final feliz. En el momento crítico, el Creador envía un ángel para que impida el sacrificio y para de esa manera se pueda anunciar a la Humanidad que el Dios único no deseaba el sacrificio humano. 

Más aún, la revelación de Dios a la Humanidad tendrá el propósito opuesto: promover la vida y el entendimiento entre los seres humanos. Dios protege a Avraham de los designios del faraón que quiere esposar a Sará y hace lo mismo en el caso del rey Avimélej. Envía un ángel para salvar a Lot y su familia. Cura a Avraham de la circuncisión y propicia que Sará milagrosamente quede embarazada a la edad de noventa años, para asegurar la continuidad biológica del patriarca.

El caso de Yitsjak es diferente porque no es proactivo, no viaja, nunca abandona la tierra de Israel. Tal como Avraham permite que se destierre a Yishmael, hijo de la concubina Hagar, Yitsjak permite que Yaacov reciba la herencia espiritual, no obstante que no era el hijo primogénito. En ambos casos, sus respectivas esposas Sará y Rivká se convierten en el factor decisivo para decidir el futuro desenvolvimiento de los acontecimientos.

El pueblo judío se denomina Benei Israel, porque es el tercer patriarca Yaacov (Israel es el nombre que recibe a raíz de la lucha que sostiene con el ángel protector de Esav), quien se convierte en el molde que servirá de modelo para su descendencia, la cual será el pueblo hebreo. 

¿Dónde está Dios durante el drama que se desarrolla entre los hijos de Yaacov que resultó en la esclavitud egipcia? Dios nunca informa a Yaacov –durante sus largos años de dolor por la desaparición de su hijo preferido– cuál había sido su suerte. La vida del tercer patriarca da inicio a un retiro parcial de Dios para que los seres humanos asuman la responsabilidad directa de sus acciones.

La narrativa del pueblo hebreo es paralela a la ausencia progresiva de Dios de la historia. En el monte Sinai el pueblo recibe el “récipe”, un documento fundamental para la convivencia. La Torá, como la manifiesta voluntad de Dios, contiene el “secreto” de la vida, cuál es el comportamiento que conduce a la posible armonía y al entendimiento, al desarrollo emocional y al crecimiento espiritual.

Mientras que Avraham y Yitsjak permitieron que se excluyera a hijos de la herencia espiritual, Yaacov reconoció a los hijos de las concubinas como padres auténticos de tribus que conformarían el pueblo hebreo. No obstante, las riñas y rencores, los odios y la envidia entre los hermanos, la historia concluye con el entendimiento entre los rivales cuando se define la meta, cuando el propósito se aclara: la construcción de un pueblo que enarbolará el mensaje del monoteísmo para el resto de la Humanidad. 

Mientras que Dios ordena el traslado a Avraham y la residencia a Yitsjak, el caso de Yaacov es la constante confrontación de las vicisitudes de la vida familiar, la lucha contra un medio hostil. No debe sorprender que más de la mitad de Bereshit esté relacionado con la vida de Yaacov, sus experiencias y las respuestas que dio a las diferentes situaciones, a la adversidad a a que fue sometido. En un mundo imperfecto tuvo que utilizarlas medias verdades en algunos casos, sin perder nunca el horizonte: la construcción de un pueblo que debe albergarla diversidad representada por el carácter individual de sus hijos, quienes, sin embargo, deben estar unidos en su cometido fundamental: la propagación de la noción de la unidad de Dios, padre de toda la Humanidad.

TOLEDOT_GÉNESIS XXV:19-XXVIII:9

Acertadamente, muchos señalan que la Torá no esconde los errores de sus actores, los héroes son descritos con sus fortalezas y debilidades de carácter. Este hecho apunta hacia la autenticidad del texto sagrado, aun para aquellos que consideran que es un documento producido por humanos. 

Por ejemplo, la conducta de los patriarcas no es siempre impecable. Avraham, por insistencia de su esposa Sará, expulsa del hogar a su concubina Hagar con su hijo Yishmael, hecho de cuestionable moralidad. Mientras que, en nuestros capítulos, Rivká, esposa del segundo patriarca Yitsjak, “manipula” a su hijo Yaacov y cubre parte de su cuerpo con pieles para hacerse pasar por su hermano gemelo Esav ante el anciano y casi ciego padre. Cuando es confrontado por su primogénito Esav para que también le otorgue la bendición, Yitsjak responde: “Bemirmá”, a través de un “engaño”, tu hermano Yaacov la arrebató.

Las intrigas que se tejerán entre los hijos del tercer patriarca tendrán una profunda raíz en su personalidad. Así lo señalan los exégetas, por ello Yaacov no podía protestar el trato que Yosef recibió a manos de sus hermanos. El rabino Yuval Cherlow profundiza nuestro cuestionamiento al señalar que, dado que la transmisión de la herencia espiritual de los patriarcas se produjo a través de una estratagema, este hecho pone en duda la legitimidad de la sucesión del patriarcado y la autenticidad de las raíces del judaísmo. Todo se hizo bemirmá. 

Es interesante por ello destacar que Onkelós, la traducción autorizada al arameo traduce esta palabra como Bejujmá, que quiere decir “con inteligencia”. O sea que no se trató de un engaño, sino un acto audaz para prevenir un desastre. ¿Acaso no había recibido Rivká el augurio de que el mayor serviría al menor? Ello quiere decir que Esav estaría subordinado a Yaacov, mensaje que recibió cuando todavía no había terminado el período del embarazo. 

Más aún, la bendición que Yaacov obtuvo inicialmente de su anciano padre se refería a la abundancia material que tendría, al hecho de que se enseñorearía por encima de otros y tendría la potestad de bendecir y maldecir. Pero la transmisión del patriarcado se produjo en una segunda oportunidad, cuando el padre se enteró de que Esav había decidido vengarse y, por lo tanto, consideró oportuno que Yaacov se ausentara del hogar paterno por un período prudencial. Esta vez, Yitsjak le instruyó que se dirigiera a Padán, donde podría casarse con una mujer perteneciente a la familia. Invocó a Dios para que le transmitiera la bendición de Avraham, a él y a su descendencia. En esta ocasión, vemos con claridad la bendición patriarcal de sucesión. 

En apariencia, Yitsjak reconoce conscientemente que el auténtico heredero, el eslabón de la continuidad, será Yaacov y no Esav. Este no es el único caso en el cual la conducta de los patriarcas puede ser cuestionable. ¿Acaso no le había exigido Avraham a Sará que dijera que era su hermana y no su esposa, cuando se vio obligado a descender a Egipto debido a la hambruna que reinó en la región? ¿Acaso no hizo algo similar en el caso del rey Avimélej, quien fue castigado por intentar el amor con Sará? 

Incluso, cuando Moshé se presentó ante el faraón para que permitiera que el pueblo hebreo saliera al desierto para “servir” a Dios por un período de tres días, ¿acaso su verdadera intención no era escapar totalmente de la esclavitud egipcia? Cherlow argumenta que tal vez la narrativa bíblica admite la viabilidad de la palabra ambigua cuando el propósito es correcto y justo. No olvidemos que nos encontramos en la época de la historia que es anterior a la entrega de la Torá con sus exigencias y normas específicas. 

Tal vez, en un principio se permitió cierta elasticidad de conducta y palabra a los héroes bíblicos, manera de actuar que debe contrastarse con el culto idólatra de la época. Efectivamente, el patriarca Avraham temía ser asesinado por los egipcios y que se apoderaran de su esposa Sará, cuya belleza es mencionada por primera vez. La falta de precisión de Avraham al llamar hermana a su esposa es entendible frente a la mencionada alternativa. Está claro que la sensibilidad moral y ética es un proceso que se fue acentuando e incrementando de acuerdo con las vivencias de los patriarcas, y que se normalizó y formalizó con la entrega de la Torá en el monte Sinaí.

TOLEDOT_GENESIS XXV:19-XXVIII:9

Many point out that the Tora does not hide the mistakes of its characters, the heroes are described with their strengths and weaknesses of character. This fact points to the authenticity of the sacred text, even for those who consider it to be a document produced by humans. 

For example, the conduct of the Patriarchs is not always impeccable. Avraham, at the insistence of his wife Sara, expels his concubine Hagar from his home with her son Yishmael, a fact of questionable morality. While, in our chapters, Rivka, wife of the second patriarch Yitschak, “manipulates” her son Yaacov and covers part of his body with skins to pose as his twin brother Esau before the old and almost blind father. When confronted by his firstborn son Esau to also grant him the blessing, Yitschak replies: “Bemirma“, by way of “deception”, your brother Yaacov snatched it.

The intrigues that will be woven between the sons of the third patriarch will have a deep root in his personality. This is what the exegetes point out, so Jacob could not protest the treatment that Joseph received at the hands of his brothers. Rabbi Yuval Cherlow deepens our questioning by pointing out that since the transmission of the patriarchs’ spiritual heritage occurred through a ploy, this fact calls into question the legitimacy of the Patriarchate succession and the authenticity of Judaism’s roots. Everything became Bemirma. 

It is interesting to note that Onkelos, the authorized translation into Aramaic interprets this word as Bechochma, which means “intelligently”. So, it was not a hoax, but a bold act to prevent a disaster. Had not Rivka received the augury that the older would serve the younger? This means that Esau would be subordinate to Yaacov, a message she received when she had not yet finished her period of pregnancy. 

Moreover, the blessing Yaacov initially obtained from his elderly father concerned the material abundance he would have, the fact that he would rule over others and have the power to bless and curse. But the transmission of patriarchy occurred on a second opportunity, when the father learned that Esau had decided to take revenge and, therefore, considered it opportune for Yaacov to absent himself from the paternal home for a reasonable period. This time, Yitschak instructed him to go to Padan, where he could marry a woman belonging to the family. He invoked God to pass on Avraham’s blessing to Yitschak and his descendants. On this occasion, we see clearly the patriarchal blessing of succession. 

Apparently, Yitschak consciously recognizes that the true heir, the link of continuity, will be Yaacov and not Esau. This is not the only case in which the conduct of the Patriarchs could be questionable. Had Avraham not demanded that Sara say that she was his sister and not his wife when he was forced to descend into Egypt because of the famine that reigned in the region? Did he not do something similar in the case of King Avimelech, who was punished for trying to make love to Sara? 

Even when Moshe appeared before Pharaoh to allow the Hebrew people to go out into the wilderness to “serve” God for a period of three days, wasn’t his real intention to escape Egyptian slavery altogether? Cherlow argues that perhaps the biblical narrative admits the viability of the ambiguous word when the purpose is right and just. Let us not forget that we are in the epoch of history that predates the giving of the Tora with its specific demands and norms. 

Perhaps, at first, a certain elasticity of conduct and speech was allowed to the biblical heroes, a way of acting that must be contrasted with the idolatrous cult of the time. Indeed, the Patriarch Avraham feared being killed by the Egyptians and seizing his wife Sara, whose beauty is mentioned for the first time. Avraham’s lack of precision in calling his wife a sister is understandable in the face of the aforementioned alternative. It is clear that moral and ethical sensitivity is a process that was accentuated and increased according to the experiences of the Patriarchs, a fact that was normalized and formalized with the delivery of the Tora on Mount Sinai.

JAYEI SARÁ_GÉNESIS XXIII-XXV:18

La Torá omite los detalles del desarrollo espiritual del primer patriarca Avraham. Capítulos atrás se nos informó que había recibido el mandato Divino de Lej Lejá: el instructivo de abandonar åel hogar de sus padres para fundar una nueva nación en una Tierra Prometida que le sería mostrada. Hay quienes dicen que Lej Lejá era un imperativo para que el patriarca se conociera a sí mismo y la dirección del viaje era Lejá: “a tí mismo”.

¿Cuál sería la misión de esta naciente nación? La respuesta inmediata es que tendrá que ser Or LaGoyim, una luz para las naciones. ¿Cómo logrará este cometido? La respuesta será dada a través de las narrativas de Bereshit, la revelación en el Sinai y la conquista de la Tierra Prometida después del Éxodo de Egipto.

A mediados del siglo XIX, Rabí Israel Salanter creó el movimiento Musar, cuyo propósito era la búsqueda de la perfección ética del individuo. Uno de sus muy citados dichos es: “En el comienzo quise perfeccionar el mundo y, como la tarea era muy difícil, decidí ocuparme de mí mismo”.

Meses atrás, Rabí Yehudá Amital, de la afamada Yeshivá Har Etzion de Israel, utilizó esta cita para proponer lo contrario, una tergiversación utilizada por muchos: “En un principio decidí perfeccionarme y como era una tarea muy difícil, decidí emprender el mejoramiento del mundo”. No hay duda de que existen ejemplos de individuos y sociedades que siguen el dictamen atrevido de Amital, quieren cambiar el mundo y las credenciales que muestran se resumen en la incapacidad de producir un cambio sustantivo en su sociedad. 

En el caso del patriarca se planteaba la doble tarea: el cambio individual –o sea, su transición de la idolatría que había observado en el hogar paterno al monoteísmo–, y la misión de propagar este mensaje al resto de la Humanidad. 

El Talmud recoge el testimonio de Rabí Akivá cuando se le cuestiona acerca de por qué Dios no había creado al hombre ya circunciso, si su deseo era la práctica de la circuncisión. De acuerdo con Rabí Akivá, el mundo que Dios creó no es perfecto, ni tampoco lo es el ser humano. La tarea del hombre es mejorar el mundo y perfeccionarse a sí mismo. Por lo tanto, la práctica del Brit Milá sirve para recordar que la persona tiene esta tarea por delante, debe trabajar sobre sus emociones e intelecto, y doblegar sus pasiones para tonificar su alma y espíritu.

El nombre del patriarca, que en un principio se llamó Avram, sufre una transformación con la adición de la letra “he” y se convierte en Avraham: Av hamón goyim, el padre de multitudes. Ahora su nombre señala el norte de una misión de carácter global; su interés será la Humanidad, a la cual tiene que llevar el mensaje de la existencia de un solo Dios. 

El caso de la primera matriarca es similar. En un principio, su nombre era Sarai. La terminación con la letra “yod”–que en hebreo significa posesión– alude tal vez a su tarea de purificar su propio ser, centrarse en el desarrollo espiritual de su persona. Cuando un sustantivo es transformado con la letra “yod” al final, quiere decir “mío”, tal como en el caso de la palabra “shulján” y “shuljaní” (“mesa”, y “mi mesa”, respectivamente). El nombre Sarai también cambia: se suprime la “yod” al final, y se sustituye por la “he”. De esta manera, su nombre se transforma en Sará, para convertirse simbólicamente en Em hamón goyim, la madre de multitudes.

La tarea de los patriarcas tenía la doble vertiente: el ingrediente personal y la misión universal. Está claro que para ser “Or LaGoyim”, una luz para las naciones, se requiere primero el mejoramiento personal, el crecimiento espiritual del individuo para que, a través de su comportamiento y enseñanzas, pueda ser un factor transformador de la sociedad.

CHAYE’I SARA_GENESIS XXIII-XXV:18

The Tora omits the details of the spiritual development of the first patriarch Avraham. In previous chapters, we were informed that he had received the Divine mandate of Lech Lecha: the instruction to leave his parents’ home to create a new nation in a Promised Land that would be shown to him. There are those who say that Lech Lecha was an imperative for the patriarch to know himself and the direction of the journey was Lecha: “yourself.”

What would be the mission of this nascent nation? The immediate answer is that it will have to be Or LaGoyim, a light unto the nations. How does one accomplish this task? The answer will be given through the narratives of Bereshit, the revelation at Sinai, and the conquest of the Promised Land after the Exodus from Egypt.

In the mid-nineteenth century, Rabbi Israel Salanter created the Musar movement, whose purpose was the search for the ethical perfection of the individual. One of his much-quoted sayings is: “In the beginning, I wanted to perfect the world and, as the task was very difficult, I decided to take care of myself.”

Months ago, Rabbi Yehuda Amital, of the famed Yeshiva Har Etzion of Israel, used this quote to propose the opposite, a misrepresentation used by many: “At first I decided to perfect myself and since it was a very difficult task, I decided to undertake the improvement of the world.” There is no doubt that there are examples of individuals and societies who follow Amital’s bold judgment, want to change the world and the credentials they show are summed up in the inability to bring about substantive change in their own society. 

In the case of the patriarch, the double task was posed: individual change – that is, his transition from the idolatry he had observed in his paternal home to monotheism – and the mission of spreading this message to the rest of humanity.

The Talmud records the testimony of Rabbi Akiva when asked why God had not created an already circumcised man if his desire was the practice of circumcision. According to Rabbi Akiva, the world God created is not perfect, nor is the man. Man’s task is to improve the world and perfect himself. Therefore, the practice of Brit Milá serves to remind the person of this task ahead, to work on his emotions and intellect, and bend his passions to tone his soul and spirit.

The name of the patriarch, who was originally called Avram, undergoes a transformation with the addition of the letter “he” and becomes Avraham: Av hamon goyim, the father of multitudes. Now this name points to a global mission. Avraham’s interest will be humanity, to which he must carry the message of the existence of One God. 

The case of the first matriarch is similar. At first, her name was Sarai. The ending with the letter “yod” – which in Hebrew means possession – perhaps alludes to her task of purifying her own being, focusing on her spiritual development. When a noun is transformed with the letter “yod” at the end, it means “mine,” as in the case of the word “shulchan” and “shuljani” (“table,” and “my table,” respectively). The name Sarai also changes: the “yod” is deleted at the end and replaced by the “he“. In this way, her name is transformed into Sarah, to symbolically become Em hamon goyim, the mother of multitudes.

The task of the patriarchs had a double aspect: the personal ingredient and the universal mission. It is clear that to be “Or LaGoyim“, a light unto the nations, requires first personal improvement, the spiritual growth of the individual so that, through his behavior and teachings, he can be a transforming factor of society.