Let us examine the beginning of our parasha. The parasha opens with the well-known verse:

"Go forth from your land, and from your birthplace and from your father's house."

(Bereshit 12:1)

We already know our Sages' teaching that this is one of the tests that Avraham had to endure. However this is one aspect in this command that distinguishes this test from all the other trials Avraham underwent. This test has a ertain aspect of 'normalcy' to it -- Avraham is required to uproot his home from one area and relocate to another -- a seemingly normal undertaking. This certainly is incomparable to having to expel Yishma'el from his home (needing to overcome the love and caring he feels towards him,) and is quite distinct from the Akeida -- being required to sacrifice his own son.

Further study will indicate that this test recurs three times. Without entering into the dispute as to where Avraham was when he received the commandment of "Lech Lecha," our parasha begins immediately at the close of parashat Noach, where we become acquainted with Avraham for the first time. At the end of Noach, the Torah describes Terach and his sons Avram, Nachor, and Haran, and then without any Divine command the final verses of parashat Noach tell us:

"And Terach took Avram his son; and Lot the son of Haran, his grandson; and Sarai his daughter-in-law, the wife of Avram his son, and they left with them (leaving) Ur Casdim to travel to the Land of Canaan."

(Bereshit 11:31)

We must note the interesting change that occurs within the verse. The verse begins telling us "And Terach took," afterwards changing from the singular description of Terach's actions to the plural description: "and they left with them" -- ie. with Terach and Avraham. The verse concludes informing us that the left for Canaan -- in other words this first relocation towards Canaan had already occurred, but Avraham was not the instigator, and so too this was not done at God's behest.

This move is halted, the verse informing us:

"And they came until Charan, and they settled there."

(ibid.)

Where exactly did their travels take them? Did they reach the Land of Canaan, then returning to Charan -- where Avraham was then commanded "Lech Lecha" -- "Go forth?" In this case was the Divine command telling Avraham to go ahead himself, without his father, and complete the relocation to Canaan? Or possibly while on the way to Canaan they passed through Charan, deciding to remain there -- for Terach dies in Charan, as the final verse of Noach states: "And Terach died in Charan," (Bereshit 11:32) -- and then God commands Avraham to continue on to the original destination. In any event, the imperative "Lech Lecha" occurs in the context of a previous journey from Ur Casdim towards Canaan.

We must also pay careful attention to the first verses of Lech Lecha:

"Go forth from your land... and I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing."

What test does this command involve? Avraham has known God for many years, and now God promises him blessings and tremendous success -- why would Avraham refuse to leave for Canaan?

In the following verses, there is a third occurrence of relocation to the Land of Israel, for after Avram, Sarai, and Lot reach Canaan, there is a famine and they leave for Egypt. By calculation, they remain in Egypt for ten years, and then depart Egypt, again journeying for the Land of Canaan.

Therefore, already prior to the beginning of our parasha we have seen two separate attempts at relocation to the Land of Canaan, and in parashat Lech Lecha we are witness to the third attempt -- against the background of God's blessing to Avraham: "And I will bless you, and you will be a blessing."

On the verse: "And there was a famine in the land," (Bereshit 12:10), Rashi comments:

"(The famine was) only in that land, in order to test Avraham whether he would doubt God's words telling him to go to the Land of Canaan, and now Avraham is being forced to leave (by the famine)."

In other words the test of moving to the Land of Canaan is not only a trial for those who must relocate to Canaan, but also a test for those already living in the land who must continue to face the hardships of remaining in the land. Through famine and various other harsh conditions they persist and fight in order to remain in the land.

Incidentally, Or HaChaim notes that the trial involved in the command "Lech Lecha" isn't the relocation to the Land of Israel per se, but rather the test is the move to the unknown. Therefore the test is to leave all that is familiar -- the land, the birthplace, and one's father's house. Avraham is continually tested by having to travel to the unknown -- in the Akeida too he must sacrifice his son, yet the location where he is required to perform this act is left unidentified: "on one of the mountains," (Bereshit 22:2.)

Later we will discuss the test involved in relocating to Canaan -- both the test of leaving the Diaspora for Canaan, and the test of remaining in a country wrought with difficulties. Firstly let us enter into the topic of the request for rain in Birkat HaShanim.

The Mishna in Masechet Ta'anit states:

"On the third of Mar-Cheshvan we begin requesting rain. Rabban Gamli'el says (we begin) on the seventh of the month -- fifteen days after Succot."

(Mishna Ta'anit, 1:3)

(ie. Fifteen days fter the conclusion of Succot so that the last of the pilgrims visiting Israel will have reached the Euphrates on his return to Babylon.)

The Gemara comments on this Mishna:

"Rabi Elazar said: 'The Halacha is in accordance with Rabban Gamli'el.' It was stated in a Berraitta: Chanania says: 'In the Diaspora (they begin requesting rain) until sixty days into the period...'"

(Ta'anit 10a)

We must note that the Beraitta mentions four differing opinions as to when the request for rain is introduced into the prayers. The first opinion states - on Shemini Atzeret; the second -- on the third of Cheshvan; the third -- on the seventh of Cheshvan (in accordance with Rabban Gamli'el as cited in the Mishna); and the fourth opinion -- on the seventeenth of Cheshvan.

The motivation given for the fourth opinion, the seventeenth of Cheshvan, is not related to the rain itself. The option of beginning the request for rain on the third of Cheshvan was not incorporated into Halacha. The proposal to begin requesting rain on Shemini Atzeret stems from the fact that that is the date that opens the season when rainfall is required. Rabban Gamli'el does not dispute this fact -- he simply takes one other factor into consideration: the pilgrims who must return to Babylon after having visited Israel for Succot. The concern for these pilgrims is thus the reason to postpone our prayer for rains to a later date. It follows that according to Rabban Gamli'el the seventh of Cheshvan has no independent agricultural or astronomic significance with regards the rains, but rather he attempts to reconcile the appropriate instant for requesting rain with the needs of those pilgrims desiring to return to their homes without difficulty.

If we return to the Gemara we note that Chanania adds "in the Diaspora (they begin requesting rain) until sixty days into the period..." The year is divided into four periods, or seasons, and until sixty days from the beginning of the period of Tishrei they begin to request rain. (Since the seasons are based on the solar cycle, the date that they begin their prayers for rains is the fifth of December.)

Rashi explains that the reason they delay their request for rain, (starting about a month after the request for rain is inserted into the prayers in Israel), is because:

"(Babylon) is a lower location and they do not require rain as much."

The "Diaspora" referred to in the Gemara is Babylon, and it seems that in Babylon heavy rainfall is not essential, for too much rain is destructive (as Babylon has a low location), and therefore they delay their request for rain.

In summary, the institution of the request for rainfall is dependant on the specific needs of the location. In Babylon they request rain in accordance with their need, and so too is the case in the Land of Israel -- however there the request for rain is postponed in order to accommodate the pilgrims returning from Israel to Babylon.

In truth, we have already seen in the Gemara in Berachot (32a) the reason for incorporating the request for rain in the beracha of Birkat Hashanim. The answer given is as follows:

"Rav Yosef said: 'Since it has to do with one's livelihood, therefore it was incorporated into the b'racha of livelihood."

From this Gemara we see that the request for rain has as its foundation the 'livelihood' required for the world. In this case, regarding the needs of the world for rain, the rain is required from Shemini Atzeret -- but another consideration postpones the request to the seventh of Cheshvan. In the Diaspora -- Babylon in this context -- the correct moment to make the request begins sixty days after the start of T'kufat Tishrei.

The Shulchan Aruch establishes the Halacha without distinguishing between Babylon and the remainder of the Diaspora, and simply states that outside of Israel the request for rain begins sixty days after the beginning of T'kufat Tishrei.

Why does the Shulchan Aruch integrate the criteria of sixty days after the start of T'kufat Tishrei with regard to every country outside Israel when this only applies to Babylon? As Rashi explained the Gemara that this sixty day postponement is specific to the needs of Babylon -- why don't we establish the Halacha in accordance with the specific needs of each country and climate?

In reality, wherever Jews have found themselves, the request for rain is incorporated into the prayers sixty days after T'kufat Tishrei. Throughout history the Rabbis and Sages have attempted to change this custom so that the request for rain is made from the seventh of Cheshvan, or alternatively according to the needs of each specific location. (This would be the case for ceasing the request for rain -- some areas require rain between Pesach and Shavuot, but still we find the Sages discussing the permissibility of fasting in case of drought -- even during Chol Hamo'ed Pesach -- because of the fast, while none raise the possibility of incorporating the request for rain into the prayers.)

We find an incredible account in the responsa of the Rosh (Rabbenu Asher), describing exactly this issue. As the result of a drought the question arose as to why the request for rain should not be incorporated into the prayers - in the month of Nisan - based on the needs of a specific location.

The Rosh writes:

"And it was in the year five-thousand and seventy-three since creation that the rains ceased and it only rained minimally the entire winter. And we called a fast-day to beseech God to cause it to rain. And it was on the first night of Pesach after arvit, and my master, my father, the Rosh sat at the opening of his home, and a number of the community leaders stood to his left and to his right. And he said: 'Now would be appropriate to raise an issue that has always perplexed me. Why shouldn't we mention and request rain until Shavuot?' And a number of the leaders answered him: 'It is a good idea to inform the community elders as to this idea, and they will agree and implement it, and they will tell the Chazan of the synagogue to mention rain (in the prayers) tomorrow.'"

At this point it was decided that the Chazan would indeed incorporate the request for rain into the prayers. However the circumstances progressed as follows:

"And thus it transpired in the main synagogue that the Thirteen Divine Attributes were said. And as these were mentioned, there were voices and noise from a number of the Sages who disagreed with this practice. And they said that it was not proper to mention rain in the prayers for it is a 'Siman K'lala' (An omen of a curse.) And my master, my father, the Rosh restrained himself, and not another word was spoken that day, until the night of Chol Hamo'ed."

Let us note that the Rosh mentions that the community said the Thirteen Divine Attributes, indicating that they were already in a certain stage of the t'filla (prayer service) for rain into which they incorporated the Thirteen Divine Attributes.

"However when they then began to request rain there was dissent in the community,for a number of sages disagreed with the practice. They claimed that it was not proper to request rain in that season for it is a 'Siman k'lala' (which relates to rain in the wrong season), and then "And my master, my father, the Rosh restrained himself, and not another word was spoken that day, until the night of Chol Hamo'ed."

Then the Rosh compiles a treatise supporting his decision, and this is how his son, the Tur, describes the letter and its contents:

"And he wrote a scroll supporting his decision, and this is its content... for many days in Ashkenaz I was disturbed about two matters that I observed them doing. The one, that they did not request rain in the correct manner..."

Therefore, the first issue that perturbed the Rosh was the request of rain sixty days after the start of T'kufat Tishrei, and the second (that he immediately discusses) is that the cessation of the request for rain at Pesach. In other words the Rosh protests the requesting of rain in the manner of the Babylonians (ie. sixty days after the start of T'kufat Tishrei.) The Rosh claims that the practice in Babylon is irrelevant, and rather the request for rain should be affected based on the specific needs of each locale.

He writes:

"But something that depends on the current situation, and it does not involve transgressing the words of Torah -- it is apt to associate it to the year, the place, and the time. For Babylon rests in an area of abundant water, and they only required rain sixty days after the t'kufa, and the time for sowing (seeds) was later in Babylon. But in the land of Ashkenaz when the time of sowing if from the middle of Tishrei onwards, it is well known that if it does not rain immediately after the planting -- the seeds perish, for the birds and rats will eat the entire crop. Why, then, should we not act as they do in the Land of Israel where they request rain in Cheshvan like (the opinion of) Rabban Gamliel? For in this there is no dispute between those of Babylon and those of the Land of Israel, that these give reasons for their manner of practice, and these give (other) reasons for their manner of practice. Rather in Babylon they did in accordance with their needs, and the Mishna that states that rain is requested from Cheshvan was taught in the Land of Israel in accordance with their needs..."

Also with regard the conclusion of the period when rain is requested the Rosh protests that they cease this request after Pesach.

"It is well known that in Ashkenaz the primary irrigation for the crops is by rainfall beween Pesach and Shavu'ot."

Therefore the Rosh asserts that possibly the time has come to correct this mistake:

"My heart tells me that the time has come to correct that which I have desired (to correct) for many days, for certainly they will listen to you at such a difficult time... and thus they certainly would do, but they turned their hearts and set their minds to the opposite."

But then the Rosh concludes:

"And since I saw that they swayed the hearts of the community not to accepts the words of the Living God from me, I also ceased from mentioning and requesting rain in the synagogue where I pray. Even though I was still able to continue requesting rain, I however did not want to cause "Agudot, agudot" ("Groups, groups" -- various groups in one community each maintaining distinct practices and customs.) And I would not have written on Chol Hamo'ed, had it not been the present need due to the Disgrace of Heaven (caused), and this also is considered a necessity of the Festival."

(Responsa of the Rosh, 4:10)

Here we have the wonderful closing of a great Halachik decisor: since his opinion was not accepted, he retracts his decision. He apologizes the fact that he is forced to write on Chol Hamo'ed, apparently the tumult that his decision had caused required him to further elucidate and clarify his opinion.

Two hundred and fifty years later we find a similar dilemma in the period of the Bach, (R' Yoel Sirkis, author of the 'Bayit Chadash') in Krakow, this itself indicating how many deal with this issue. Then the question was raised as to mentioning "Tal u'matar" in the b'racha of Shome'a T'filla. (While they were not prepared to consider mentioning rain in the b'racha of M'chaye ha'metim, they did question the validity of requesting rain in Shome'a T'filla, just as one would make any personal requests in this b'racha.)

The Bach answers that this would indeed be possible, but immediately backs down from this idea:

"However I have the tradition that one must be cautious not to request rain at all if not in the season that our Sages decreed it, even in Shome'a T'filla. Rather one should appease God through fasting, and the recitation of Selichot and the Thirteen Divine Attributes of Mercy, and through the recitation of verses and psalms that are related to rain; but we do not request rain in the Shemone Esrei".

And then the Bach recalls a story:

"And I heard of two great sages that acted in this manner, that when there was no rain during the summer, they instructed the community to request rain in the b'racha of Shome'a T'filla. Each sage died that very year, and it was argued that the reason (for their deaths) was that they bothered Heaven."

(Bach 117)

In other words these two sages died for 'bothering and inconveniencing' Heaven. This must be understood.

We should pay attention how the Minhag Yisrael -- that which Am Yisrael has become accustomed to do -- overrides the halachik opinions of sages, and even the Rosh himself retracts his words, if only for the resulting mayhem. Indeed in the Bach we find an implicit warning not to alter the period in which rain is requested.

It would appear that there is fundamental concept that the world of Halacha actually yields to the Minhag (practice/custom) of Israel. Let us further examine this b'racha. Birkat Ha'shanim is the b'racha whereby the Jew prays for his most intimate request -- his livelihood, as we saw in the Gemara we brought previously, (B'rachot 32a.)

This is the test of the bond between the Jew and the Land of Israel. When the Sages instituted that the request for rain be recited sixty days into the T'kufa -- this meant that all of the Diaspora Jews would request rain in accordance with the needs of one Diaspora community (Babylon), and no-one would in fact be praying for rain in correlation with their own needs. And the date when this request would commence is in fact in accordance with the seasonal need of the Land of Israel, with an adjustment made to accommodate the pilgrims.

Therefore, no-one in fact request rain when he requires the rainfall! In the Land of Israel they do not commence their request for rain at the correct time, which is - Shemini Atzeret -- out of concern for the returning pilgrims; and in the Diaspora the date was arbitrarily set.

In fact, the seventh of Cheshvan which is the date when those in the Land of Israel begin to request rain is the date that establishes the relationship and connection between those in Israel to those in the Diaspora.

This is reminiscent of the Festivals in the Land of Israel. We have already mentioned in one of our shiurim in the context of the second day of Yom Tov in the Diaspora. Rav Sa'adia Gaon teaches a fundamental concept when he states that there are those who maintain the reason for the second day of Yom Tov in the Diaspora is due to the doubt as to the exact date of the Yom Tov, however he maintains that God already informed Moshe on Mount Sinai that in the Land of Israel one day of Yom Tov would be observed, whereas in the Diaspora two days would be observed! The reason for this being that the Land of Israel is the center and the focus of Judaism, this is where 'God's home' and the national home were destined to be, and a Jew who lives outside of Israel must be 'penalized,' and will feel that he has no set time for his Festivals.

In the words of the Midrash on Shir Ha'shirim (1:6):

"'They made me the keeper of the vineyards, but my own vineyard I have not kept' -The nation of Israel said before God: Lord of the Universe! For not observing Yom Tov properly when I was in the Land of Israel, You gave me two days of Yom Tov in the exile. I thought that I would receive reward for both days -- but I only receive reward for one day.

Regarding the two days of Yom Tov in the Diaspora Rabi Yochanan would quote the verse: "So I too gave them statutes that were not good" (Yechezkel 20:25)."

(Shir HaShirim Rabba 1:4)

The request for rain was instituted based on the last of those returning to Babylon from the Land of Israel -- in fact there is no independent significance to the date of the seventh of Cheshvan. In Israel, which is the principal location, where God and the nation of Israel are destined to be, the seventh of Cheshvan is the date set for the request for rain. This date having being instituted in direct correlation to (and therefore commemorating) the Pilgrimage Festivals. In the Diaspora, where there is no conception of the Pilgrim Festivals, they begin their request sixty days after the t'kufa starts -- even though this date has little association with their needs. This serves as a constant reminder that the Diaspora Jews do not pray for the livelihood in accordance with their genuine present need -- for they are not in their natural locale, they do not live in the Land of Israel. This date was originally established for those living in Babylon, but from then onwards this is a random date arbitrarily set for Jews the world over (outside of Israel.)

In direct contrast to this is the date of the seventh of Cheshvan which was established by Am Yisrael - which at its essence was instituted out of consideration for the pilgrims, and thus hints at their praise -- almost becomes sanctified by God, and is the date when the request for rainfall begins. (This is somewhat similar to the manner in which each Yom Tov is instituted. The Sanhedrin sets the date, whereby the festival's date is derived; here too the date was set by Am Yisrael for all generations.) There is nothing which better characterizes the connection between God and his nation than the establishing of various times throughout the calendar. Therefore it may be that in the Diaspora the Festival must be observed for two days for outside of Israel the possibility of establishing a date does not exist.

Now we can relate to the issue with which we opened this shiur -- the trials and tribulations of the oleh ("one who moves up," ie. someone emigrating to Israel.) We asked what was so difficult in this test -- for Avraham had many Divine promises ensuring his success.

The difficulty is not having to wage war with Canaanite nations, nor is it the relocation to an unknown area -- for in this Avraham continually revealed his trust and faith in God. It may very well be that the difficult in this can only be understood against the backdrop of Avraham's life until now. (Even though this is almost neglected by the verses themselves.) For many years Avraham was involved in 'the making of souls' in Charan, and in the introduction of God's name to every region.

But then God tells him that despite all his achievements, he must simply abandon everything, and leave for a new country. God tells him that it is not enough for Avraham to solely assume a 'spiritual' role, "making souls" and teaching monotheism. Avraham has assumed a spiritual role in a cosmopolitan setting, with great success. But God requires Avraham's service in a specific country, through that country. Without this specific country, if Avraham will not relocate and serve God in this new location, Avraham will not flourish into the "great nation" that he was promised, and he will not merit the Divine blessing of "I will bless you, and you will be a blessing."

This command seems to defy logic, for it would seem that one be able to spread God's name best in a cosmopolitan setting, through various communities, communities in the Disapora. But this is the divine command.

Avraham experiences the process that the entire Nation of Israel endures. He wanders from one place to another, and now God tells him to move to the Land of Israel -- where he must fight the Canaanites -- and not remain in the Diaspora where all his energies are directed at "making souls." In some manner this seems to depict the Nation of Israel that many times prefers to remain in the Diaspora "making souls" than coming to Israel where one must live by the sword. This is also reminiscent of our nation at the eve of the Holocaust, when many Diaspora Jews could not fathom what their brothers were seeking in the Land of Israel.

It is in this exact manner that God tests Avraham -- logical, rational Avraham does not understand why he must move to Israel. This is the same Satan that tries to confuse Avraham during the Akeida, (Binding of Yitzchak on the altar.)

Throughout the generations this same Satan persists, questioning the nation: "Why do you need a state? All the members of the U.N. hate you for this. Before, you could have managed the world, but there were wars, pogroms, etc. It's not the end of the world though, we can just keep on moving from place to place."

We are not talking about the practical Yetzer Ha'ra (evil inclination), which itself is very grueling -- having to leave one's land and birthplace, but more than this. The rational of not connecting the service of God with a curtailment and limiting of space is so appealing that it makes the test ten times more complex.

This principle underlies a number of issues -- for example the translation of the Torah to Greek. Logically, what should be wrong with this? But in fact there was no more difficult a day for the nation than when the Torah was translated to Greek. Is their so much value in the Holy Tongue? Again, why the limitation and restriction to one language? But God desired that we speak the Holy Tongue. Avraham could have questioned the type of Godly blessing he will receive in this land, a land of famine and war. (Even regarding the practicalities of living and influencing under these conditions Avraham is silent and does not complain.) Avraham does not mention the decrease in influence that he will have as a result of the difficult conditions of wars and famine. Ya'akov too undergoes this test -- he travels as his grandfather did before him, just in a reverse manner. He leaves the Land of Israel for Charan where he builds a large, flourishing community, and then after twenty years experiences a bit of Anti-Semitism, and then his wives tell him (something that has in fact always been true) that "We were considered as strangers to him, (Lavan)" (Bereshit 31:15.)

Before Ya'akov leaves the Land of Israel he has the dream of the ladder, wherein he learns that "indeed God is in this place, and I did not know," (Bereshit 28:16.) In the Diaspora, in Charan, God is absent -- there are many "translations" and permutations, but here, "I am God."

More so, the verse states that "indeed God (yud-hey-vav-hey) is in this place" -- God's name that transcends space and time is revealed in this place. The infinite contracts and reveals itself in a finite place -- and this place is here.

Let us return to Avraham. Terach leaves with Nachor, Haran, and Avraham to Charan -- some travel for technical reasons, and others among them travel for spiritual reasons. Yet that that maintains us in the land is the desire of God to reveal Himself here. Therefore Terach does not manage to reach his final destination. Avraham however, succeeds, due to the Godly command. Yes, in Charan he will be able to "make more souls," but this is irrelevant. Revealing God's name in the world means establishing a country of sanctity and holiness.

And if this is not convincing enough -- there are many "Nimrods" who will try to persuade Am Yisrael. And as the Bach states, we even refrain from requesting rain in the b'racha of Shome'a T'filla in order not to indicate our affiliation with the Diaspora. When we must pray for livelihood -- even though we may live in the Diaspora -- we beseech God in accordance with those who live in Israel.

Even today when practically it is so easy to move to Israel, still the test remains complex. This is "Lech Lecha" -- in the words of the Chasidim: "Go to yourself and to your essence."

Our essence is to reveal the name of God in the world as a "kingdom of priests and a holy nation," (Shemot 19:6,) specifically in the land of Canaan, Canaan with all it's hardships and complexities.

May it be God's will that we have the strength to rise up and triumph over this test, and may we see all of Am Yisrael next year in the rebuilt Jerusalem, Amen.

Translated by Sholem Hurwitz.

Copyright Keren Yishai/Rav M. Elon