Rashi (25:30) writes that Avraham died 5 years before his expected time so that he should not witness Eisav going off the derech:
שאותו היום מת אברהם, שלא יראה את עשו יוצא לתרבות רעה, ואין זו שיבה טובה שהבטיחו המקום, לפיכך קיצר חמש שנים משנותיו.
I guess quality of life trumps quantity of life.
The Maharasha in Mes Shabbos (130) gives a different explanation why Avraham's life was shortened.
The Mishna there records R' Eliezer's view that machshirei milah are doche shabbos, e.g. one can sharpen the milah knife on shabbos, even though it could have been done in advance. We don't pasken like R' Eliezer, but the gemara says that there were places that held of his shita:
א"ר יצחק עיר אחת היתה בא"י שהיו עושין כר"א והיו מתים בזמנן
There was one town that followed his view and as a reward, no one in that town died early.
Maharasha explains that since in that town they were so careful about doing the milah on time that they would even do machshirei milah on shabbos if needed, therefore Hashem rewarded them by seeing that they live out the full amount of time allotted to them.
Adds the Maharsha, Yitzchak was the first one to receive a milah in its proper time on day eight, and therefore he lived out a full life. Avraham only was nimol late in life, and we see that his life was cut short.
(It's an interesting chidush because Avraham was not given the mitzvah of milah until late in life. It's not like he delayed doing what he had been commanded, so why should he lose out? It must be that it is a metziyus that having the milah in the proper time, b'zmano on day 8, grants one an extended life in a way that not having it then, whether by choice or not, does not.)
If you say like the Brisker Rov, that
ReplyDeleteקודם שנאמרה מצות מילה הלא לא הויה כלל חלות ערל בעולם
then you have a kashe on the Mahrsha. But if you say like, for example, the Shlah in Vayeira, that
עוד יש לפרש, אברהם אבינו קיים כל התורה כולה (בר"ר סד, ד), ובמצות מילה ידע שיצוה אותו הקב"ה על המילה, וקודם שנצטוה היה אברהם מהרהר מה יעשה, אם ימול את עצמו, או ימתין עד שיצוה אותו הש"י. ויעץ בזה עם ממרא,
then the answer is that he did intentionally delay his bris. He could perfectly well have done it before, but he delayed it after consulting Mamrei, who said to wait.
This pshat is ok, until you see the next line in the Shlah,
ונתן לו עצה על המילה הזו, כלומר על מילה בזמנה שצוה לו המקום כי כן המצוה יותר מהודר
which indicates that aderaba, waiting for the tzivui makes it "bizmano." If so, then waiting for the tzivui makes you more bizmano than doing it sooner.
But even so, it could be that it's not a din in "yom hashmini," it's a din in seizing the first opportunity to do it, even if doing it later would be more mehudar.
>>>it's a din in seizing the first opportunity to do it, even if doing it later would be more mehudar.
DeleteSorry, but I lost you. The reason it was more mehudar to wait is because post-tzivuy is considered zmano. The schar of full life is for doing milah b'zmano. So even according to the Sh'aH, I don't see how the question is resolved. Unless you are rereading zmano in the gemara to mean first opportunity, but why would u do that?
You're right. I was using the Shlah but not as he meant it. He says, unlike the B'R, that milah would have been meaningul even before the tzivui. If so, I said that Avraham Avinu delayed doing a bris he could have done. But then he says that doing it early would be called shelo bizmano, and less mehudar, so it doesn't make sense to call it "a delay." As Rav Schwab is quoted, "zu früh ist auch nicht pünktlich."
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry I never understood the original question that the Griz ZYA is coming to answer. It's clear that circumcision is also a covenant and you cannot have a covenant without two sides unlike other Mitzvos that are not covenants. This is clearly alluded to in the two brachos of bris.
ReplyDeleteAlthough EE wants to stick this answer into the GRIZ, I assumed the GRI"Z avoided saying it because it may be true as part of the taam ha'mitzvah of why we do milah, but the why behind a mitzvah doesn't always govern how, when, and what must be done.
Deleteשו"ת שרידי אש (ח"ב סימן נג)
ReplyDeleteואני הפעוט, מעודי הייתי תמה על המקשים, הרי מצוות מילה ניתנה בתור ברית שכרת עמו הקב"ה וכו' ואיך אפשר היה לו לקיים מצוה זו קודם שנכרתה עמו ברית זאת.
It has also been said that the Brisker Rov's pshat is based on what you're saying. It's only areilus after Hashem declared it to be covenantal.