Daf Notes Discussion

Anger

2008-01-13T07:07:00.000-05:00

The theme of this daf (Nedarim 22) is anger. The dof start talking about the bad and evil consequences of anger and how it can lead you to gehinnom. At the end of the dof we learn that anger can be used sometimes for a positive reason, as we see Rav Sechorah got “angrier” and angrier at Rav Nachman for making a neder. This was a basis for a pesach. There is a second story again how anger was used for a positive purpose at the Rabbis deliberately got themselves mad by walking from the shade to the sun (See the Mefaresh). Anger can be used in a positive way or can be a very negative middah. We see Moshe Rabbeinu used anger in a positive way when he broke the luchos to teach Bnei Yisrael a lesson and to spur them to t’suvah. We see one can “pretend” to be angry to perform a mitzvah or encourage t’suvah.

by Rabbi Yosef Dov Karr

Reb Oizer on Devarim

2007-07-20T18:34:00.001-04:00

Parsha Potpourri
Parshas Devorim – Vol. 2, Issue 37
Compiled by Oizer Alport

אלה הדברים אשר דבר משה אל כל ישראל (1:1)
There is a mystical idea that the content of the parsha read each Shabbos is connected to the events of the coming week. It is interesting to note that Parshas Devorim is always read on the Shabbos preceding Tisha B’Av. What is the connection between them?
The Gemora in Yoma (9b) teaches that one of the reasons for the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash was the sin of baseless hatred of one’s fellow Jews. Many times such hatred has its origins in forbidden forms of speech, such as gossip and painful words.
Our verse opens the book of Devorim by relating that “these are the words which Moshe spoke to all of the Jewish people.” However, the Vilna Gaon reinterprets the verse to suggest that Moshe himself addressed the need to rectify the sins which caused the Temple’s destruction. The verse begins, “These are the words that Moshe spoke.” And what were those words? The Vilna Gaon explains that the end of the verse can be read not as merely describing to whom Moshe spoke, but as the beginning of Moshe’s actual message. He didn’t speak “to the entire Jewish people,” but rather told the people, “Be united as one nation, not splintered into factions.”
Additionally, the Vilna Gaon points out that the very first word in the parsha, אלה, is an acronym for אבק לשון הרע, literally the “dust” of evil speech, used to refer to traces of gossip which are forbidden as they often incite full-blown lashon hara.
Many people who speak in this manner mistakenly justify their behavior by rationalizing that mere words cannot cause any real damage to others. The name of the parsha – Devorim – means “words.” As the end product of this erroneous thinking was a widespread hatred powerful enough to destroy the Temple, we allude to the importance of rectifying this sin by beginning the week in which Tisha B’Av falls with the reading of Parshas Devorim.

אלה הדברים אשר דבר משה (1:1)
There are 5 books in the written Torah, and 6 sections of the Mishnah – the Oral Torah. The Paneiach Raza writes that there are 6 portions in the written Torah which correspond to the Mishnah, each of which begins with the letter א – אלה תולדות נח, אלה פקודי, אם בחוקתי, אלה מסעי, אלה הדברים, אתם נצבים. This is because the spelling of the letter “א” – אלף – comes from the root meeting to study, and the word Mishnah also means to learn.
Of the 6 portions, four begin with the word אלה, which alludes to the four sections of the Mishnah on which we also have Talmudic commentary, as the gematria (numerical value) of the word אלה is 36, which is also the number of tractates in the Babylonian Talmud! The last book of the Torah, Devorim, begins with one of these four parshios in order to teach that in reviewing the Torah and its laws with the nation before his death, Moshe reviewed not only the written Torah but the entire Talmud and Oral Law as well.
Similarly, there are 5 tractates in the Mishnah which begin with the letter א – אלו דברים שאין להם שיעור (פאה), אור לארבעה עשר (פסחים), ארבעה ראשי שנים הם (ראש השנה), ארבעה אבות נזיקין (בבא קמא), אבות הטומאות (כלים), which hint to the 5 books of the written Torah and teach that every component of Torah is deeply intertwined. The Torah itself represents the Will of Hashem, and just as He and His Will are one, so too all parts of the Torah are interconnected, and the components which may seem the most disparate and unrelated are full of deep and powerful wisdom waiting to be unlocked by one who toils to uncover it!

הבו לכם אנשים חכמים ונבנים וידעים לשבטיכם ואשימם בראשיכם (1:13)
The book of Devorim begins with Moshe’s review of the 40-year national history from the time of the Exodus until the present. Rashi (1:3) notes that much of the parsha revolves around Moshe’s rebuke of the Jewish nation for sins they committed during this period, in an attempt to ensure that they wouldn’t continue in these mistaken ways. What is curious to note is that in our verse, Moshe seems to digress from his chastisement to stress that the Jewish people are distinguished, wise, and understanding. Why did he interrupt his focus on reproaching the people with this point, which is hardly a message of rebuke?
Shlomo HaMelech writes in Mishlei (9:8): Do not reprimand a scoffer lest he hate you; reprove a wise man and he will love you. Why would the wise Shlomo advise rebuking a person who seemingly shouldn’t need it and ignoring a scoffer whose ways need correcting?
The Shelah HaKadosh suggests that the erudite Shlomo is actually talking about only one person. The Torah obligates (Vayikra 19:17) a person who sees another Jew engaged in inappropriate activities to rebuke him and attempt to inspire him to change his ways and return to the proper path. In order to do so successfully, a bit of wisdom is required.
Shlomo HaMelech advises that talking condescendingly to the scoffer will be useless and cause the sinner to hate the one attempting to reprove him. However, talking to him as if he is wise and respectable will likely move the sinner to accept his words and love him for caring about him and coming to his assistance.
A modern-day application of this lesson is offered by Rabbi Dr. Abraham Twerski, a well-known contemporary psychiatrist and author. He writes that when growing up, he was a typical child who got into his share of trouble. However, his father taught him a priceless lesson in how to raise well-adjusted children by the manner in which he rebuked him.
All too often, we hear parents screaming at their children, “You good-for-nothing bum! How could you have been so foolish and lazy?” A child who grows up repeatedly hearing this message slowly absorbs the belief that he truly is foolish and lazy. Not surprisingly, he will likely go on to make decisions in his life which will reflect this self-image.
Rabbi Twerski’s father, on the other hand, used to scold his children in Yiddish, “Es past nisht” – what you did isn’t appropriate for somebody as wonderful and special as you! The message which was constantly driven into him was that he was an amazing child with tremendous potential who simply needed to maintain his focus on channeling his energy properly. As one might expect, he grew up with an unshakably positive self-esteem which surely contributed to his success in life.
With this introduction, the Shelah HaKadosh explains that before fully launching into his criticism of the Jewish people, Moshe first built them up by emphasizing their many good qualities and tremendous potential, which would in turn allow his message to be well-received. The lesson for us is clear: whenever we may need to correct a family member, friend, or co-worker, we should do so in the wise and proven manner taught to us by Moshe Rabbeinu and Shlomo HaMelech.

ואצוה את שפטיכם בעת ההוא לאמר שמע בין אחיכם ושפטתם צדק בין איש ובין אחיו ובין גרו (1:16)
Even in his youth, the great Rav Yonason Eibeshutz was known for his remarkable diligence in his studies. While his peers idly passed their free time playing games and acting their ages, Rav Yonason utilized every spare moment for the study of Torah. Somebody once asked him about his behavior, questioning whether he wouldn’t be happier if he spent at least a portion of his free time engaged in more age-appropriate extracurricular activities.
Rav Yonason, demonstrating the sharp mind for which he later became world-famous, explained his conduct based on a Gemora in Sanhedrin (7b). One opinion in the Gemora cites our verse as the source of the law that a judge may not listen to the claims of one of the litigants if the other party isn’t present to challenge his arguments. This is hinted to by the words שמע בין אחיכם – you shall listen between your brothers – which teaches that a judge may only listen to the accusations of one party if the other is present at the time.
The Gemora in Sanhedrin (91b) teaches that a person receives his yetzer hara (evil inclination) at birth, whereas his yetzer tov (good inclination) doesn’t enter him until his Bar Mitzvah, at which point he is held accountable for his actions. Even a person who never becomes a judge in a Jewish court still serves as a judge every moment of his life, as he must constantly listen to the arguments of the two “litigants” inside of him – his yetzer hara and his yetzer tov – and sort them out to reach a judgment about the proper course of action to choose.
“While closing my books to indulge in the hobbies and games enjoyed by the other boys may seem quite tempting,” concluded the wise-beyond-his-years Rav Yonason, “this is the opinion of only one of the litigants – my yetzer hara. As a judge, I am forbidden to listen to his claims until my Bar Mitzvah, at which time the other party will be able to present its counter-claims, and I will be able to reach a judgment regarding the proper course of action. However, until that time, the ‘law’ gives me no choice but to ignore him and to diligently continue with my Torah studies!”

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) As the entire Torah and its laws had been taught in their entirety to Moshe, why are so many important mitzvos, such as Shema, mentioned only in the book of Devorim?
2) Rashi writes (1:3) that Moshe waited to rebuke the Jewish people until close to his death. What purpose was there in rebuking the Jews who were alive at this time for sins committed by their parents and of which they themselves were innocent? (Darash Moshe Vol. 2)
3) Masechta Sofrim (1:7) relates that the day King Ptolemy ordered five of the Jewish elders to translate the Torah into Greek was as painful and difficult for the Jews as the day on which they sinned with the golden calf. In what way was this worse than Moshe’s translation of the Torah into all 70 languages (Rashi 1:5), which presumably includes Greek? (Mishmeres Ariel, Ye’aros Devash quoted in Shiras Dovid, HaK’sav V’HaKabbalah)
4) Rashi writes (1:13) that one would never entertain the possibility that a woman is eligible to serve as a judge. On what basis is it so clear that one could never even consider the possibility that a woman may serve as a judge, especially in light of Tosefos in Niddah (50a d.h. kol), which discusses whether we may derive from Devorah (Shoftim 4:4-5) that women may indeed serve as judges? (Rinas Yitzchok, M’rafsin Igri, Ee’bayei L’hu)
5) Moshe commanded the judges (1:17) not to fear any man (i.e. any potential litigant). If a judge fears that one of the litigants may actually kill him, is he permitted to recuse himself from the trial in order to protect himself? (Kli Chemda, Bishvilei HaParsha, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvos Lo Sa’aseh 276, Shaarei Teshuvah 3:33, Bach Choshen Mishpat 12:1)
6) If a judge mystically recognizes from the faces of the litigants that one of them is guilty, is he permitted to use this knowledge when ruling on the case? (Doveiv Sifsei Yeshonim 1:17)
7) Why did Moshe devote significantly more time to rebuking the Jewish people for the sin of the spies than for the sin of the golden calf?
8) Why did Moshe approve of the people’s suggestion to send spies to scout out the land of Israel (1:22-23) instead of responding that they should trust in Hashem and there was no need to do so? (Kometz HaMincha, Taima D’Kra Parshas Shelach)
9) Rashi writes (2:17) that for the duration of the 38-year period in which the Jewish nation was in Divine disfavor due to the sin of the spies, Hashem didn’t speak to Moshe in the manner in which He was accustomed. Did Hashem communicate with Moshe at all during this time, and if so, in what fashion did He do so? (Rashi Taanis 30b, Rashbam Bava Basra 121b, Rabbeinu Bechaye)
10) There are four blessings which – in the Diaspora, where Yom Tov is observed for two days – are recited exactly once annually, one of which is associated with this time of the year. How many of them can you identify?

© 2007 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Pinchas by Rabbi Ganzweig

2007-07-06T09:13:00.001-04:00

Computers Searches Cannot Fool Reb Chaim

2007-06-17T22:27:00.000-04:00

Recently an interesting episode occurred with Reb Chaim Kanievsky that demonstrated that despite the amazing advances made by modern technology, nothing can be substituted for diligence in Torah study. A Torah scholar in Bnei Barak was discussing Torah topics with Reb Chaim and he queried Reb Chaim regarding the amount of instances where the name Moshe is listed in the Torah. Reb Chaim immediately responded that the name Moshe is listed 414 times in the Torah, to which the questioner responded that he believes that the name Moshe appears 416 times. Reb Chaim smiled and responded that apparently this person had done a computer search which resulted in the extra listings of the word Moshe, as in one instance the word is miseh, from the sheep, and in the second instance, the word is masheh, which means to lend, but certainly these words do not refer to Moshe.

Translated and edited by Rabbi Binyomin Adler
Looking for a professional translator and editor for your writings?
Send email to bentopoftheline@gmail.com

USING SOMEONE'S SIDDUR WITHOUT PERMISSION

2007-06-17T16:06:00.000-04:00

Mishna Berurah (14:16) writes that people are accustomed to finding a siddur in Shul and using it in order to daven. He comments that he does not know the heter for this. Why is it different than seforim, which the Rema rules that it is forbidden to use someone elses without their specific permission for perhaps you will tear it during your learning.

Aruch HaShulchan (14:13) rules that it is permitted since the majority of people are not particular regarding this.

Chassideshe Tidbits on Sh'lach

2007-06-06T23:25:00.000-04:00

Loshon Hara on Eretz Yisroel

2007-06-05T07:27:00.000-04:00

What is the source for speaking loshon hara on Eretz Yisroel? Does this apply to all inanimate objects?

Beha'aloscha by Reb Oizer

2007-06-01T00:37:00.001-04:00

Parsha Potpourri
Parshas Behaaloscha – Vol. 2, Issue 30
Compiled by Oizer Alport

זכרנו את הדגה אשר נאכל במצרים חנם (11:5)
On our verse, which relates that the complainers lamented their recollection of the fish they used to eat in Egypt, the Medrash Pliah cryptically remarks מכאן שמדליקין נרות בשבת – from our verse we may derive that one is obligated to light candles for Shabbos, a mitzvah which has no apparent connection to our verse whatsoever.
The Chida explains the Medrash Pliah by noting that we must first understand what they were complaining about, as we are told that one was able to make the Manna taste like anything he so desired simply through his thoughts. If so, why were they complaining about the fish they used to eat in Egypt when they were perfectly capable of causing the Manna to take on that taste with no effort whatsoever?
Rather, the Gemora in Yoma (74b) states that although one was able to make the Manna taste like anything he desired, it nevertheless retained the standard appearance of the Manna. Even though they were able to make the Manna taste like fish, they lacked the enjoyment and satiety which comes from seeing the food which they wished to taste. The Gemora there even notes that a blind person won’t enjoy or become as full from a meal as a person with normal vision who consumes the same food.
Based on this complaint, the Medrash Pliah questioned how a person will be able to avoid the same dilemma on Shabbos, as he won’t be able to enjoy and appreciate the Shabbos delicacies if he is forced to eat them in darkness, and it therefore concluded that from our verse we may derive that a person is obligated to light candles for Shabbos!

והמן כזרע גד הוא ועינו כעין הבדלח (11:7)
מי שאמר זו לא אמר זו ישראל אומרים בלתי אל המן עינינו והקב"ה הכתיב בתורה והמן כזרע גד וגו' כלומר ראו באי עולם על מה מתלוננים בני והמן כך וכך הוא חשוב (רש"י)
During their travels in the wilderness, a group of complainers began to lament the Manna which they were forced to eat day after day. They wailed that they missed the succulent tastes of the meat, fish, and vegetables which they ate in Egypt, and now they had nothing to look forward to except for Manna. On our verse, Rashi explains that in response to their complaint, Hashem wrote in the Torah a description of how wonderful the Manna was as if to say, “Look, inhabitants of the world, at what my children are complaining about.”
Rav Pam notes that although we don’t merit hearing it, a Divine voice expressing frustration over the things we complain about still goes out regularly. We live in a time of unprecedented freedom and material bounty, and we are surrounded by a society which influences us to believe that we are entitled to immediate gratification, to have everything we want, when and exactly how we want it. If we would only step back and view our lives with the proper perspective, we would be so overwhelmed by the blessings we enjoy that there would be no room to complain about trivialities.
Although we don’t usually hear Hashem’s direct communication about this point, sometimes He sends us the message about priorities and values through a human agent, as illustrated in the following story. A student in a yeshiva was once complaining with his friends about the quality and selection of the meals that they were served. Each boy heaped more and more criticism on every aspect of the food, until they were jolted to their senses by one of the elderly teachers in the yeshiva. The Rabbi couldn’t help but overhear their loud complaints in the dining hall and walked over to deliver a succinct lesson: “In Auschwitz we would have done anything to have gotten such food.”
Every time that a husband comes home to a messy house, filled with children’s toys and dirty clothes, and once again berates his wife over her inability to keep their house clean, a Heavenly voice challenges, “How many families would do anything to have children and would gladly clean up the mess that accompanies them, and here is somebody who has been blessed with healthy children and is upset that they make his house disorderly? Where are his priorities?”
When a husband or a child complains about eating the same supper for the 3rd consecutive night, Hashem can’t help but point out how many poverty-stricken families would do anything to eat this dinner every night for a year, if only to enjoy a nutritional and filling repast. Every time that the parents of the bride and groom quarrel over petty wedding-related issues, a Bas Kol (Heavenly voice) wonders how many parents will cry themselves to sleep that evening over their inability to find a proper match for their aging son or daughter, and who would gladly accede to any terms the other side would set … if only there would be another side.
The next time that we find ourselves upset about issues which are objectively nothing more than nuisances and minor inconveniences, let us remember the lesson of the Manna and open our ears to hear Hashem’s response to our complaints.

וישמע משה את העם בכה למשפחתיו (11:10)
על עסקי משפחות על עריות הנאסרות להם (רש"י)
The Gemora in Shabbos (130a) teaches that any mitzvah which was accepted by the Jewish people with joy, such as circumcision, is still performed happily to the present day. Any mitzvah that was accepted with fighting, such as forbidden relationships, is still accompanied by tension, as the issues involved in the negotiation of every wedding cause struggles. Of all commandments, why did the Jews specifically complain about the prohibition against marrying family members?
Dayan Yisroel Yaakov Fisher suggests that when the Jews heard that they would be unable to marry their close relatives, they feared that they would be unable to enjoy successful marriages. They believed that the ideal candidate for marriage would be a person who was familiar since birth and who would be almost identical in terms of values and stylistic preferences. From the Torah’s prohibition to marry those most similar to us, we may deduce that Hashem’s vision of marriage differs from our own.
The Mas’as HaMelech derives a similar lesson from Parshas Ki Seitzei, which begins by discussing the Y’fas Toar – woman of beautiful form. The Torah permits a soldier who becomes infatuated with a non-Jewish woman during battle to marry her. This is difficult to understand, as only the most righteous individuals constituted the Jewish army. Rashi writes (Devorim 20:8) that somebody who had committed even the smallest Rabbinical sin was sent back from the war. How could such pious Rabbis be tempted to marry a beautiful non-Jewish woman?
Rashi writes (21:11) that a person who marries a Y’fas Toar will ultimately give birth to a Ben Sorer U’Moreh – wayward son. The Gemora in Sanhedrin (71a) rules that a child may only be punished as a rebellious son if his parents are identical in their voices, appearances, and height. The Mas’as HaMelech explains that even the most righteous soldier will be taken aback upon encountering a woman who looks like him and whose voice is identical to his. All external signs seem to indicate that she is meant for him, and he may be convinced that Hashem’s will is to convert her and marry her.
However, from the fact that Rashi teaches that a wayward son will come out of such a union, we may conclude that the ideal marriage isn’t one in which the two partners enter already identical. A Torah marriage is one in which the two partners grow together over time to understand and respect one another, allowing them to overcome their differences and create a beautiful, harmonious blend of their unique perspectives and experiences.

האנכי הריתי את כל העם הזה אם אנכי ילדתיהו ... מאין לי בשר לתת לכל העם הזה (11:12-13)
The S’fas Emes once noted that one of his recently-married Gerrer chassidim had suddenly become much less diligent in his studies. The Rebbe approached the newlywed and inquired as to the source of his recent absence from the Beis Medrash. The chossid was embarrassed that the Rebbe noticed his declining involvement in Talmudic studies, but explained that he was having a difficult time meeting his financial needs and was being forced to spend an increasing amount of time working to support his new wife. The Rebbe asked whether he was receiving any financial assistance from his parents, to which the chossid replied that his father wanted to help him but simply didn’t have the money to do so.
The sagacious S’fas Emes called in the newlywed’s father to discuss his worries that the chossid, who possessed great potential, was being derailed from his true calling by financial matters. The father expressed his concern but reiterated that he was simply unable to do anything to be of material assistance.
The Rebbe replied by asking him why Moshe Rabbeinu, in his complaints to Hashem, began by asking whether he had conceived and given birth to the Jewish nation, and only subsequently continued to express his inability to supply them with the tremendous amount of meat necessary to meet their desires. If he knew that he lacked the means to provide them with their request, why was it relevant whether or not he gave birth to them?
The chossid remained silent, to which the Rebbe answered that we derive from here that only because Moshe didn’t conceive the Jewish nation was he able to excuse himself with the argument that he was incapable of meeting their demands, but if somebody did indeed give birth to another, then the claim of lack of means to assist and support them is completely invalid!

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) As the Gemora in Yoma (24b) rules that lighting the Menorah isn’t considered part of the Divine service and may be performed by a non-Kohen, why is the section discussing the lighting of the Menorah addressed (8:1) specifically to Aharon? (Ritva and Tosefos Yeshonim Yoma 24b, Raavad and Mahar”i Korkos Hilchos Bias Mikdash 9:7, D’var Avrohom 1:14, Mikdash Dovid 21:2, Tzafnas Paneiach Hilchos Berachos 11:15, Shu”t Tzafnas Paneiach 52 and 251, Meshech Chochmah, Chazon Ish Menachos 30:8, Chavatzeles HaSharon)
2) Rashi writes (8:2) that there was a step in front of the Menorah upon which the Kohen would stand when cleaning out and lighting the Menorah. As the Menorah was only 18 tefachim tall (approximately 5 feet), why was it necessary for the Kohen to stand on a step to light it? (Rav Yonason Eibeshutz, Rav Leib Tzintz quoted in P’ninei Kedem)
3) Rashi writes (11:5) that the Manna tasted like whatever the person eating it desired, except for five tastes which it couldn’t take on because they are unhealthy for nursing women. Did the person eating it need to actually state the taste that he desired, or was it sufficient merely to think it? (Shemos Rabbah 25:3, Moshav Z’keinim 11:8, Chavatzeles HaSharon Parshas Beshalach)
4) Rashi writes (11:10) that the Jews began to weep over the fact that with the giving of the Torah, they were forbidden to marry various relatives. There is a Talmudic maxim (Yevamos 22a) גר שנתגייר כקטן שנולד דמי – one who converts to Judaism is considered to be newly born, and is therefore not considered to be legally related to any of his former family members. Why did the Jews cry over the forbidden relationships when they all converted at Mount Sinai and were no longer considered to be related? (Gur Aryeh Bereishis 46:10, Shev Shmaitsa Hakdama 9, Kli Chemdah Vayigash 2, Shu”t Doveiv Meishorim 1:136, Chiddushei HaGranat Kesuvos 28, Peninim MiShulchan Gevoha, Chavatzeles HaSharon, M’rafsin Igri)
5) Is it permissible for a person who is suffering – physically or emotionally – to pray that he, or another person who is in pain, should die? (Ramban 11:15, Ran and Maharsha Nedorim 40a, Aruch HaShulchan Yoreh Deah 335, HaEmek Sh’eilah and Sh’eilas Sholom on Sheiltos 93, Shabbos 30a, Sefer Chassidim 301, Chavatzeles HaSharon)
6) The Gemora in Arachin (16a) teaches that a person is afflicted with tzara’as as a punishment for speaking lashon hara only if his words caused actual damage. Why was Miriam stricken with tzara’as (12:10) when her criticism of Moshe had no effect? (Sh’eilas Sholom on Sheiltos 98, Chofetz Chaim in Be’er Mayim Chaim Hilchos Lashon Hara 3:6, Chavatzeles HaSharon)

© 2007 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Chassideshe Tidbits on Beha'aloscha by Rabbi Ganzweig

2007-05-31T19:44:00.000-04:00

Beha'aloscha by Reb Jay

2007-05-31T19:37:00.000-04:00

Beha’aloscha

“And Hashem spoke to Moshe saying: Speak to Aaron and say to him: When you kindle the lamps (of the Menorah), towards the face of the Menorah shall their light be directed” (Bamidbar Ch.8 v.1-2). Rashi explains that when Aaron saw the sacrificial offerings the head of the tribe offered at the dedication of the Mishkan, he felt bad that the tribe of Levi (of which he was part) was not included. The reason the Levites and the Kohanim (priests who were Levites descended from Aaron) were not included in the number of tribes, and were not given an inheritance in the Land of Israel is as follows: During the incident of the golden calf the Levites were the only tribe that was not at all involved. This was typical of the Levites, as even during the bitter years of enslavement in Egypt they had never been enslaved, as they were too busy studying Torah and Pharoh left them alone.

These two things displayed the true essence of the Levites: ruchniyus. Hashem did not want them to be worrying about tending to their land. This was not to be their role; rather, they would be the caretakers of the Mishkan/Beis Hamikdash (The Levites sang every day in the Mishkan/Beis Hamikdash and transported the Mishkan when the Jews traveled; the Kohanim were in charge of the actual running of the Mishkan/Beis Hamikdash, i.e. sacrifices, lighting the Menorah, etc.). If the Levites were in charge of the running of the Beis Hamikdash, why would Aaron care that they were not represented at the tribe’s offerings at the dedication of the Mishkan?

The Ohr Gedalyahu explains: Each head of a tribe offered up the exact same sacrifice (see Bamidbar Ch.7). Moshe did not want to accept their sacrificial offerings, however, as he did not understand their intentions behind the offerings, until Hashem told him to accept it. This was one of the first manifestations of the Torah She’bal Peh. The body of each sacrifice was identical. The reason and intent each one put behind the offering was different.

This is how we relate to the Torah She’bal Peh. The body of law is the same for every Jew (with minor variation in detail). But the intent behind it can be different for each Jew. The Vilna Gaon says that when the Jews accepted the Torah each person related to it in 70 different ways.

This concept answers the age-old dilemma. How can a Jew retain his individuality while at the same time keeping the Torah the same as millions of other people.
When Aaron saw he did not have an offering he worried that perhaps the Levites would not be able to express their individuality through the Torah She’bal Peh. Then Moshe appeased him by saying, “You will have the honor of the daily lighting of the Menorah.”

The Menorah is the symbol of the Torah She’bal Peh. As opposed to the Aon, which was interacted with once a year, on Yom Kippur, the Menorah was interacted with every day. This is metaphorical to our relationship with the Torah She’bksav and the Torah She’bal Peh. The Torah She’bksav, although to be studied, is the unchanging word of Hashem. The Torah She’bal Peh, while the word of Hashem, is meant to be developed in tandem with man. Thus, even if one is proven right in the Heavenly court, yet proven wrong in the earthly court, the person is judged to be wrong. The Torah was given to man, to be used by man ( Bava Metsia 87b; Chagiga 15b).
Constant interaction and study of the Torah are required. This is similar to the Menorah, which symbolizes the Jewish people’s relationship to the Torah.

Maror

2007-03-23T01:10:00.002-04:00

by Reb Jay

We eat bitter herbs to remember the bitterness of our ancestors’ slavery in Egypt (Either grated horseradish root or romaine lettuce is used). In maror lies an important concept. The taste of maror is bitter. Nonetheless it is a mitzvah to eat maror, and mitzvos are to be fulfilled joyfully. How can this be accomplished with maror? Furthermore, why during korech is the maror eaten with matzah in a sandwich? In our exiles we have undergone many bitter times, too numerous to count. We believe that it was all for a purpose, that there is rhyme and reason to all that we have undergone as a people. Only when the messiah comes, will it be clear to us why everything that has happened had to happen the way it did.

When we eat the maror we taste the bitterness, and remember the bitterness of our ancestors’ slavery in Egypt, and all the other exiles, including the one we are in now.

But we also eat it knowing that this is only a stage. After the maror, we eat the matzah and maror in a sandwich together (Hillel sandwich). We combine the suffering and the redemption, symbolizing that it is all towards one goal. And finally after the sandwich we eat the delicious meal with a feeling of joy. This symbolizes that when the redemption comes, we will understand all that led up to it, and enjoy our state. The meal alludes to yemos Hamoshiach when the world will be filled with the knowledge of Hashem, and mankind shall live in peace.

Matzah

2007-03-23T01:10:00.001-04:00

by Reb Jay

The significance of matzah is when the Jews were leaving Egypt, they were forced to hurry. This did not allow the dough proper time for it to rise; hence they left with matzah.

Is it not rather arbitrary, however, that because the Jews were forced to leave in a hurry, and their dough was not given time to rise, therefore, for eight full days (Pesach is seven days in Israel) we are not allowed to eat or even possess bread?

Obviously there is a much deeper significance to matzah.
In Hebrew the plural form of matzah and mitzvah (commandment) are spelled the same. The sages in the Talmud teach us, “don’t read matzos (plural form of matzah), read mitzvos (plural form of mitzvah).” This means that within matzah lay the true essence of mitzvah.

Einstein proved that speed and time have a direct correlation, i.e., if one could somehow travel faster than the quickest known speed (the speed of light), time could be bypassed.

Traveling faster than the speed of light and bypassing time are impossible. The level below that, however, is not. The level below traveling beyond time would be to do things as quickly as possible, meaning at the first opportunity.

Although time will not be bypassed in this manner, by doing so one is as close as is physically possible to “being above” time.

We do not eat matzah simply because our dough did not have time to rise, but rather we eat matzah because it is sustenance made as quickly as possible. Our birth as a nation took place in a hurried state (the sages state we were born as a nation as we left Egypt). This teaches us that as a nation, we are as close as possible to “being above time”. As we stated earlier, our very existence as a people for nearly 2000 years without a homeland, proves we are unlike any other nation. The normal rules that are either a guarantor of a nation’s flourishing or disappearing do not apply to us.

This is also the reason why the sages state in the Talmud (Pesachim 4a), mitzvos (commandments) should be fulfilled at the earliest possible time i.e. as quickly as possible. (This does not mean mitzvos should be done as quickly as possible - rather they should be fulfilled at the earliest possible time; for example a bris—circumcision-- should be done first thing in the morning). Performing the mitzvos at their earliest time shows an eagerness and enthusiasm. The passage of time usually dulls one’s desires. Our unique relationship with Hashem and His Torah have stood the test of time, and our performance of mitzvos with zeal highlights this concept.

Therefore, precisely at the moment when we became a nation is when we were hurrying out of Egypt with our matzah. Furthermore, of modus operandi of doing mitzvos is to fulfill them at the earliest possible opportunity, thereby reflecting our relationship with time. (For a deeper understanding of this concept, see the Maharal’s classic work Gevuras Hashem).

Another approach to matzah is nullification of the self-i.e. the ego. The whole year we eat dough that has risen, which is full. For eight days we eat dough which has not risen. This is a message to us to tone down our ego in order to enable it to coexist with Hashem. According to the Maharal, this is one of the reasons matzah is called “poor bread”, because it represents simplicity.

Every Generation they try to destroy us

Why is it so important to mention this point? It seems to be a strong inclination amongst Jewish people; to not only relive good times, but also bad ones. Why is this so?

We remember the bad times to remind us that we are special and therefore have special responsibilities.

Let us think back: why did Hashem take us out of Egypt? To fulfill the purpose for which the world was created, i.e., the receiving of the Torah (which rectifies the world).

When we do not remember this and do not in act in accord with our exalted status, Hashem sends us reminders. These reminders take the form of other nations trying to destroy us. This is all done with the hope that any person, by use of minimal perception, will take note of the unnatural attention paid to the Jews by the non-Jewish world.

When we see this happening it is meant to remind us of our awesome responsibilities, and that if we ignore them, Hashem will remind us of them. We can never live as a regular nation. From the moment we accepted the Torah we are a nation set apart. Hopefully we will accept is as the special privilege that it is.

Carpas

2007-03-23T01:09:00.001-04:00

by Reb Jay

Carpas is used as an appetizer. An appetizer whets one’s appetite for the coming meal. Why do we dip? The sages give a cryptic answer: “We dip in order that the children should ask.” The Maharal explains that one of our goals on Pesach is to clarify why it was necessary for us to have undergone slavery. He answers that one of the reasons we had to undergo slavery was in order to enable us to experience freedom. If one has never experienced the opposite of freedom, which is slavery, then one cannot truly appreciate freedom. (This concept is true of all pleasures. They can only be truly appreciated when one has experienced the opposite, and expended the necessary effort to achieve them.)

So when the children ask: “Why do we dip the vegetable?”, we explain what an appetizer is. That just as one cannot really enjoy food, unless a hearty appetite has been developed, so too one cannot enjoy freedom until one has experienced slavery. This concept can be explained on an even deeper level - that one cannot appreciate answers, until one asks questions. In order for Judaism to be meaningful in our lives, we must question, and put the same passion into it that we put into our jobs, families and recreation.
(Based on an idea from Rabbi Uziel Milevsky zt’l)

Arba Kosos

2007-03-23T01:07:00.000-04:00

by Reb Jay

In Shemos ch.6 v.6-7 it states “Therefore say to the children of Israel, “I am Hashem and I will take you out from under the toils of Egypt, and I will deliver you from their labors, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgements. And I will take you to Me as a people, and I will be to you Hashem.”

The Yerushalmi in Pesachim states we drink the four cups to commemorate the four expressions of redemption. I will take you out, I will deliver you, I will redeem you, and I will take you to Me.

The Jews in Egypt were tortured and enslaved, and were strangers in a strange land. These three levels correspond with the first three expressions of redemption. Being tortured corresponds to “I will take you out from under their toils.” This refers to the period of time after the first plague, when the Egyptians stopped torturing the Jews. “ I will deliver you from their labors” refers to the time period after the first couple of plagues, when the Egyptians stopped enslaving them. “I will redeem you” refers to the point in time after the ten plagues, when the Egyptians let us go.

What does the fourth expression, “I will take you to Me”, refer to? In this expression of redemption lies the crux of our redemption from Egypt.

If one were to say our celebration of Pesach is simply to commemorate our leaving Egypt, then the whole Seder is a farce. What is there to celebrate? How many times have we been enslaved since then? We are obviously commemorating something much greater than simply leaving Egypt.

The Seder is a celebration of the very fact that we still exist. What would one say if right now a group of Assyrians demanded a state from the United Nations? Or Mesopotamians? Or Babylonians? Yet fifty something years ago that is exactly what happened. 2000 years after the Jews were exiled from Israel, we are still around (this is not said as a statement that is pro-zionistic, but merely to point the resiliency of Klal Yisroel).

How can this be explained? How can a people be separate from its land for 2000 years, yet still not only exist, but have an identity? Obviously, the secret of our survival is greater than any land, even Israel.

That secret is the last of the four expressions of redemption: “I will take you to Me as a people.” What does “take you to Me” mean? That Hashem will give us the Torah. Our having been taken out of Egypt was only a means to an end; that end is the purpose of our existence.
The word meitzar in Hebrew means constriction. Mitzrayim, the Hebrew word for Egypt, means two constrictions. When Hashem redeemed us from Egypt, He released us from the constriction of being a physical slave, and He released us from the constriction of being spiritual slaves.

A mere seven weeks after we were taken out of Egypt, Hashem gave us the Torah, this being the reason He took us out of Egypt.

During the seder the first three cups of wine are drunk with thanks to Hashem for physically liberating us from Egypt and in thanks for all He has provided us with, both physically and materially since then. The fourth cup symbolizes our gratitude towards Hashem for having found us fit to receive the Torah, which gives our lives meaning and purpose. That is why even in the most horrible of conditions, in Western Europe during the crusades, in Spain during the Inquisition, and in the concentration camps, we gather on the anniversary of Hashem taking us out of Egypt, and we retell the story. And by virtue of our being here to observe the Seder, our relevance and our connection to Hashem and the Torah is proven.

Vayikra by Reb Jay

2007-03-23T00:17:00.000-04:00

Vayikra is the third section of the Torah. Most of this section deals with the laws of korbanos—sacrificial offerings.
Karbon—the singular form of the word karbanos— means to get close. When we offered sacrificial offerings we were getting close to Hashem.
In a person there is a physical side (guf) and a spiritual side (neshama). The connection between these two parts is made through eating and drinking. As Jews we are commanded to eat only kosher food. We receive sustenance from our eating, not merely physical sustenance, but energy that enables us to engage in spiritual acts using both our physical and mental capacities. Therefore we must be careful about what goes into our bodies.
Similarly when we offer a korban to Hashem, we are offering sustenance to Him. In fact our offerings are found to be before Hashem as a “rayach nichoach—a smell of satisfaction” (Vayikra 1:9). Obviously this does not mean that Hashem needs to eat, as He has no physical attributes whatsoever, but what it does mean is that just as food sustains us and enables our bodies and souls to connect, allegorically we are able to connect with Hashem through our giving Him sustenance (Nefesh Hachaim; Rav Tzadok HaKohen).
This is why in certain types of korbanos we are allowed to partake of the meat because our eating further strengthens our bond with Hashem by reason of our partaking in His “meal”

Vayikra by Reb Oizer

2007-03-23T00:10:00.000-04:00

Parsha Potpourri
Parshas Vayikra – Vol. 2, Issue 19
Compiled by Oizer Alport

אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן לד' (1:2)
In the times of the Beis HaMikdash, a person who sinned at least had the comfort of knowing that he could bring a sacrifice to complete the atonement process prescribed by the Torah. In the absence of this option, how can a person in our times fully repent and cleanse the effects of his transgression?
The Mabit offers us a tremendous consolation. He writes that in the times of the Beis HaMikdash, when Hashem’s presence could be tangibly perceived, the ramifications of a sin were correspondingly greater, thus necessitating the offering of a sacrifice to fully purify oneself from its spiritual damage. Since its destruction, we have been living in an era in which Hashem’s Providence is subtly hidden.
While this makes it more difficult to feel and recognize His constant presence, it also effected a change in the amount of destruction caused by sin. Because the transgression doesn’t cause as much damage as it once did, the bringing of a sacrifice is no longer required to effect complete atonement. Atonement may now be fully accomplished through the other steps of the repentance process, namely correcting one’s ways, confessing the sin, and accepting upon oneself never to do so again.

על כל קרבנך תקריב מלח (2:13)
The Gemora in Taanis (2a) refers to prayer as “the Divine Service of the heart.” The laws concerning the daily prayers are often derived from those which govern the offering of the sacrifices in the Beis HaMikdash. If so, where do we find in our prayers a parallel to the requirement that every sacrifice be accompanied by salt?
Rav Moshe Meir Weiss quotes a beautiful answer that he once heard from a Mr. Levinger. He posited that our heartfelt, salty tears are intended to correspond to the sacrifices, while noting that the Torah requires this “salt” to be brought together with every single offering!

ואם נפש אחת תחטא בשגגה מעם הארץ בעשתה אחת ממצות ד' אשר לא תעשינה ואשם (4:27)
Our verse introduces the laws governing the sin-offering which must be brought by a person who sins unintentionally. It is difficult to understand why the Torah requires a person to repent and receive atonement for an action which was completely accidental, with no intention to transgress whatsoever.
An insight into resolving our difficulty may be derived from a story involving the founder of the mussar movement, Rav Yisroel Salanter. On one of his travels, Rav Yisroel was in need of money. He requested a small loan from one of the local townsmen. Because the man didn’t recognize him, he was suspicious of the request and demanded collateral to avoid being swindled. Some time later, Rav Yisroel encountered that same man carrying a chicken, attempting to find somebody who could slaughter it for him. The man approached him and asked if he was could do so.
Seizing the opportunity, Rav Yisroel taught the man an invaluable lesson in priorities and values. He pointed out that with regard to the possibility of losing a small amount of money, the man suspected him of being a fraudulent con artist who wouldn’t repay his loan. Yet when it came to the risk of eating non-kosher meat if his animal wasn’t properly slaughtered, the man had no problem trusting him.
Based on this story, we can now appreciate how Rav Moshe Soloveitchik answers our original question by comparing it to a case of a person carrying glass utensils. If they are inexpensive, it is likely that he won’t be particularly careful, and periodically some of them may fall and break. On the other hand, if they are made of fine china and are extremely valuable, he will take extraordinary precautions to ensure their safe transport.
Similarly, if a person recognized the true value of mitzvos, he would take so much care to avoid transgressing them that accidents would be unthinkable. The Brisker Rav was renowned for what some perceived as a fanatical approach toward performing mitzvos, constantly worrying if he had properly fulfilled his obligations. He explained that just as a person who is transporting millions of dollars in cash would constantly check his pocket to make sure that the money is still there, his mitzvos were worth millions in his eyes and he “felt” them constantly to make sure that he didn’t lose them.
Although a person’s transgression may have been completely devoid of intent to sin, it was the lack of proper recognition of the importance of the mitzvah which allowed him to slip up. It is this mistaken understanding which the Torah requires him to repair and correct.

ואם נפש כי תחטא ועשתה אחת מכל מצות ד' אשר לא תעשינה ולא ידע ואשם ונשא עונו והביא איל תמים מן הצאן בערכך לאשם אל הכהן וכפר עליו הכהן על שגגתו אשר שגג והוא לא ידע ונסלח לו (5:17-18)
A number of commentators are troubled that the sacrifice prescribed by the Torah for somebody in doubt whether he transgressed, such as a person who ate one of two pieces of meat and subsequently learned that one of them wasn’t kosher, is significantly more expensive – 48 times more – than that required of a person who knows with certainty that he sinned. Wouldn’t logic seem to dictate that the opposite would be more appropriate?
The following interesting story will help shed light on this conundrum. The Mir yeshiva spent much of World War 2 in exile in Shanghai. Aware of the dangers faced by their families and friends, the daily prayers were intense. Those during the Yamim Nora’im (Days of Awe) were powerful beyond words. One year in the middle of the Rosh Hashana prayers, one of the students walked out, only to return minutes later wearing a different outfit.
At the conclusion of the prayer services, several of his friends inquired about his peculiar behavior. He explained that he had been trying his utmost to pray with the concentration appropriate for the Day of Judgment, but try as he might, he felt that his prayers weren’t coming out properly.
He remembered that the mystics write that wearing shatnez (a forbidden mixture of wool and linen) can prevent a person’s prayers from being accepted. He realized that the new suit he had received for Yom Tov had never been tested for shatnez. Suspecting it as the culprit, he returned to his room and donned his weekday suit and noticed a marked improvement in his prayers. After the holiday concluded, his new suit was checked and found to contain shatnez, just as he had suspected!
In light of this story, we can understand the answer to our question offered by the Chasam Sofer. He writes that if the smallest bit of dirt would fall onto a bride’s pure white gown, it would be easily detected and removed. If, on the other hand, it falls onto an already filthy garment, it would be difficult to locate because it would blend in with the numerous stains which preceded it.
Similarly, if a righteous person needs to find out if he has sinned, he will be able to clarify the matter by simply checking his pure neshama to see if it has been sullied, just as the student in Shanghai was on such a high level that he was able to detect the problem with his suit. If he finds a “stain” on his soul, he will realize that he has sinned and will bring the offering of a person who knows that he has sinned. If he finds no stain, he won’t have to bring any sacrifice. Either way, he will never be in doubt.
If a person is in doubt and is unable to recognize whether or not he sinned, as in the case of a person who finds out that he may have consumed a non-kosher piece of meat, this can only be the case if his originally pristine soul has been repeatedly stained through his prior transgressions. It is for arriving at this pitiful spiritual state through his previous sins that the Torah requires such an expensive sacrifice to effect his atonement!

ולא אותי קראת יעקב כי יגעת בי ישראל (הפטרה – ישעיה 43:22)
The Darkei Mussar (Parshas Balak) writes that of the thousands of parables developed by the Dubno Maggid, there were three which the Kotzker Rebbe declared were said with Ruach HaKodesh (Divine Inspiration). One of those three was used to explain our verse.
A businessman once returned home from his travels and hired one of the porters at the train station to carry his luggage to his home. Upon arriving at the man’s house, the porter put down the bags and approached the man to receive his payment. The traveler took one look at the boy and informed him that he had mistakenly brought the wrong suitcases.
The surprised porter questioned how the businessman could make this claim with such certainty when he hadn’t even seen the bags, which were still outside. The man explained that it was clear from the boy’s appearance that he had sweated and exerted tremendous effort to transport the luggage. As the bags which belonged to the businessman were filled with lightweight items which wouldn’t have required such exertion, it could only be that the porter mistakenly brought the wrong suitcases.
Similarly, Yeshaya related that Hashem told the Jewish people, “You haven’t called Me” in your performance of mitzvos. The Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh writes (Bamidbar 23:21) that the study of Torah and the performance of mitzvos should be enjoyable and invigorate a person. Yeshaya teaches elsewhere (40:31), וקוי ד' יחליפו כח – those who look to and trust in Hashem will be constantly strengthened and refreshed. Just as the businessman told the porter of his error, the Navi chastises the Jews that they must not be learning and doing mitzvos for Hashem’s sake. The proof of this claim is that instead of feeling renewed and energized, “you grew weary of Me!”

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) The Medrash teaches (Vayikra Rabba 7:3) that in the absence of the Beis HaMikdash, one who recites and studies the laws of the sacrifices will be considered in Hashem’s eyes as if he actually brought them. How does studying these concepts and merely saying the words effect atonement?
2) Many of the sacrifices described in our parsha are completely voluntary in nature. If these mitzvos are so important, why isn’t their performance obligatory, and if they aren’t, for what purpose did Hashem give them? (Birkas Peretz, Akeidas Yitzchok, HaDerash V’HaIyun, Torah L’Daas Vol. 8)
3) The Gemora in Nedorim (10a-b) derives from 1:2 that a person who wishes to sanctify an animal to be offered as a sacrifice may say עולה לד' – an elevation-offering to Hashem – instead of לד' עולה. The Gemora explains that if he says it the other way, we are afraid that he may die before saying the word עולה and he will have said Hashem’s name in vain. According to this logic, how is a person allowed to say a blessing prior to doing a mitzvah when he may die before he performs it and will have said Hashem’s name in vain? (M’rafsin Igri)
4) The Magen Avrohom rules (607:4) that a person may not rest his body on another object while reciting the viduy – confession – on Yom Kippur because the viduy must be said while standing and resting on another object is legally considered sitting. How was a person who brought a sacrifice permitted to lean on it (1:4) while confessing his sins? (Pardes Yosef, M’rafsin Igri)
5) The Torah requires (1:7) the Kohanim to kindle a fire on the copper altar. Because the altar was five cubits tall (8-10 feet), they were required to climb up onto it to do so. How were they able to walk on top of it without burning their bare feet? (Paneiach Raza, Tanchuma Terumah 11, Tosefos Chagigah 27a d.h. she’ein, Rabbeinu Bechaye Parshas Terumah)
6) The Gemora in Chagiga (27a) derives from a verse in Yechezkel that in the absence of the Beis HaMikdash Temple, the generous opening up of a person’s table to serve the poor and other guests serves in lieu of the altar. As a person’s table is comparable to the Altar and the food consumed to a sacrifice, the Rema rules (Orach Chaim 141) that just as every sacrifice required salt (2:13), so too the bread eaten at a meal must be dipped in salt. If a person doesn’t have any salt, can he use sugar for this purpose? (Yafeh L’Lev quoted in Kaf HaChaim Orach Chaim 167:37, Minhagei Chasam Sofer, Shu”t Torah Lishmah 500, Shu”t Rav Pe’alim Yoreh Deah 2:4, Ben Ish Chai Shana Rishona, Bishvilei HaParsha)

© 2007 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Purim by Reb Oizer

2007-03-01T22:27:00.000-05:00

Parsha Potpourri
Megillas Esther – Vol. 2, Issue 16
Special Purim Edition in the
Spirit (or Spirits) of the Times
Compiled by Oizer Alport

המלך מהדו ועד כוש שבע ועשרים ומאה מדינה (1:1)
The Medrash relates that Rav Akiva was once in the middle of teaching a class when he noticed his students beginning to doze off. He digressed from the subject he had been discussing and asked, “Why did Queen Esther deserve to rule over 127 countries? She merited this because she was descended from Sorah, who lived 127 perfect years.” Why did Rav Akiva interrupt his class specifically to interject this tangent at this time?
The Chiddushei HaRim explains that a person could view Esther’s kingdom as simply a collection of countries, and for each year of Sorah’s life she merited to rule over another one. In reality, each country consists of states, cities, neighborhoods, streets, and even houses. Similarly, a year can be subdivided into months, weeks, days, hours, minutes, and seconds.
Rav Akiva explained that Sorah didn’t live a “mostly” good life which allowed Esther to receive the same number of countries as the years of her life. If Sorah would have let up for a week or even a second, it would have resulted in a corresponding deficiency in Esther’s empire, causing her to be lacking a city or even just a house. It was only because Sorah’s life was equally good from the beginning until the end (Rashi Bereishis 23:1), every second of every day, for her entire life, that Esther’s kingdom was complete.
Rav Akiva’s students were obviously quite tired, and they assumed that if they would take a short nap and miss a little of the class, it wouldn’t have any substantial ramifications. Realizing this, Rav Akiva wanted to teach them that every second of our lives, every word that we say, and every action that we take, have very real and direct consequences.

לא הגידה אסתר את עמה ואת מולדתה כי מרדכי צוה עליה אשר לא תגיד (2:10)
It is well-known that Hashem’s name doesn’t appear a single time in the entire Megillah. This peculiarity is traditionally explained as hinting to the fact that the Megillah contains only “hidden miracles” but is lacking open miracles which more clearly demonstrate Hashem’s Providence. Rav Eizel Charif sharply suggested that nevertheless, one clear miracle remains. Mordechai told Esther not to reveal her religion or nationality, and a woman actually managed to keep a secret!

ויבז בעיניו לשלח יד במרדכי לבדו כי הגידו לו את עם מרדכי ויבקש המן
להשמיד את כל היהודים אשר בכל מלכות אחשורוש עם מרדכי (3:6)
Rav Eliyahu Dessler (Michtav M’Eliyahu Vol. 1, 76-77), quoting the Alter of Kelm, derives a fascinating insight into trusting our Sages from the Megillah. Historically, the events described in the Megillah span a period of nine years, beginning with the party held in the 3rd year of the reign of King Achashverosh (1:3) and concluding with the triumph of Mordechai and Esther over Haman in the 12th year of his reign (3:7).
The Medrash relates that Mordechai warned the Jews against intermingling and attending Achashverosh’s lavish and excessive party, but they answered that not to attend would endanger the lives of the entire Jewish nation, and they attended as they felt that saving lives overrode all other concerns. To the naked eye, there were no immediate negative consequences to their attendance, and they surely concluded that they had acted properly and Mordechai had erred in his zealotry.
Nine years later they had surely forgotten the entire affair when Haman was promoted to second-in-command and ordered that every passerby must bow down to him. In reality, it was permitted to do so, as the Gemora in Sanhedrin (61b) states that there was no actual idolatry involved but merely a question of improper appearance. As a result, the Jews en masse once again maintained that it is obligatory to do so in order to protect themselves and their coreligionists.
Mordechai, on the other hand, felt that it was appropriate to be stringent even where not strictly required to do so by the letter of the law, and he refused to bow down. The Medrash records that once again they begged Mordechai not to endanger their lives, but he refused to listen.
True to their worst fears, Haman learned of Mordechai’s intransigence and, filled with rage, declared war on Jews everywhere. From the perspective of the Jewish people, their reasoning was once again proven correct and “Rabbi” Mordechai’s misplaced piety was to blame for the decree. In reality, things work differently in Heaven.
The Gemora in Megillah (12a) states that the Jews of Shushan were deserving of annihilation because, nine years prior, they had refused to listen to Mordechai’s advice and had enjoyed themselves at the forbidden bash. While the Satan convinced them that Mordechai was to blame for their current dilemma, the truth was the exact opposite. It was their failure to respect and heed the Rabbi’s instructions which eventually brought about Haman’s diabolical decree.
When Mordechai approached them and ordered that everybody must fast for three consecutive days, they could have easily responded, “For too long you’ve been ignoring us. We kept telling you that your fanaticism was going to get us killed, and now you finally learned the hard way. You made this mess, and now it’s your job to go get us out of it!”
This was exactly the “logic” which the evil inclination attempted to impress upon them. Fortunately, in this time of national danger, they were inspired to repent and correct their ways. They chose to listen to Mordechai’s instructions and joined him in the fast which allowed Esther’s risky gamble to succeed.
As happy as they were at the time, the Jews never came to appreciate what Mordechai knew through Divine Inspiration. They never connected the seemingly disparate events to form the big picture that he grasped all along. So many times it seems so “clear” to us the rightness of our thinking and the error of our leading Rabbis’ logic. At such times we would be wise to remember this lesson of Purim and to recognize that perhaps the Rabbis are privy to pieces of the puzzle that we never even knew existed.

לעשות אותם ימי משתה ושמחה (9:22)
The Rema rules (Orach Chaim 695:2) that the majority of the festive Purim meal must be eaten before sundown while it is still Purim. A priest once challenged Rav Yonason Eibeshutz to explain why the custom of so many Jewish families is to start the meal just before sundown and to conduct the bulk of the meal during the night after the holiday has already ended.
Rav Yonason sharply responded with a question of his own. The most popular holiday in the priest’s religion falls on December 25. If the non-Jewish day begins at midnight, why is it so prevalent among his coreligionists to begin the festivities the night before?
Having turned the tables and with the priest now on the defensive, Rav Yonason proceeded to brilliantly answer his own question. The holiday they are celebrating on December 25 is really the commemoration of the birth of a Jew. As such, it’s only proper to celebrate it using the Jewish day and to begin at sundown on the evening before. Purim, on the other hand, commemorates the death of Haman, a non-Jew, and it is therefore fitting for our festive meal to be based on the non-Jewish day and continue into the night!

וכל מעשה תקפו וגבורתו ופרשת גדלת מרדכי אשר גדלו המלך
הלוא הם כתובים על ספר דברי הימים למלכי מדי ופרס (10:2)
Rav Yechezkel Abramsky questions the purpose of the Megillah in mentioning that the events detailed therein are also recorded in the historical annals of the Persians. Upon reading this fact, has even a single person ever attempted to track down this version in the recesses of some institutional library?
Rather, it is coming to teach us not to make the mistake of viewing Megillas Esther as nothing more than the historical recounting of an ancient event in our people’s history. If that were its sole purpose, we would be able to research and track down the mundane facts in some academic archives. Instead, the reason that Mordechai and Esther chose to recount the events and the Rabbis saw fit to canonize their Divinely-inspired version must be that it is full of inspiration and moral lessons which are relevant in every generation.
The Mishnah in Megillah (17a) rules that a person who reads the Megillah backwards doesn’t fulfill his obligation. The Vilna Gaon and the Baal Shem Tov (agreeing for once) suggest that this law can be symbolically understood as suggesting that one who reads the Megillah but views it “backwards” through a chronological lens, relating to the events described therein as nothing more than a historical narrative, has failed to internalize the lesson of Purim and doesn’t fulfill his Purim obligation!

Purim Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) The Megillah emphasizes (2:22) that Esther related the assassination plot of Bigsan and Seresh in the name of Mordechai, from whom she originally heard it. The Mishnah in Avos (6:6) derives from here that whoever states something in the name of the original source brings redemption to the world. Why doesn’t this Mishnah tell us who stated this lesson?
2) Esther told Mordechai (4:11) that there is a well-known law that anybody who attempts to enter and approach Achashverosh without being called in to see him will be put to death, yet we find later (6:4) that Haman was on his way to speak to the king about his plan to hang Mordechai on the gallows that he had just built when Achashverosh called him in to discuss a different subject. How was Haman planning to approach the king if he hadn’t been requested to do so?
3) Which two wicked people in Megillas Esther have names which rhyme?
4) If one of the obligations of Purim is to drink to the point that one is unable to distinguish which of Haman and Mordechai deserves to be blessed and cursed (Orach Chaim 695:2), why did the Rabbis establish that the central song of the day, Shoshanas Yaakov, is one which clearly states that Mordechai should be blessed and Haman should be cursed? (Pachad Yitzchok Purim 6)
5) If a father commands his post-Bar Mitzvah son not to get drunk on Purim, does the mitzvah of honoring his father obligate the son to obey his father’s request, or is this considered a command to violate a mitzvah which a child is required to disregard? (Halichos Shlomo Vol. 2 19:25)
6) Which mitzvos, if any, of Purim won’t be applicable in the Messianic era? (Shalmei Moed)
7) If a minyan of men can be arranged only once for the reading of the Megillah on Purim, is it better to do so at night or during the day? (V’Aleihu Lo Yibol pg. 242, Aruch HaShulchan 687:3)
8) If Purim falls on Motzei Shabbos, is a person permitted to practice reading the Megillah on Shabbos, or is this forbidden as an act of preparation for after Shabbos? (Shemiras Shabbos K’Hilchoso Chapter 28 Footnote 169)
9) How many cities can you name which read the Megillah on both 14 and 15 Adar because they are in doubt whether they had walls from the times of Yehoshua bin Nun?
10) On Shavuos and Shabbos Chol HaMoed Sukkos, Megillos Rus and Koheles are respectively read before the reading of the Torah. Why is Megillas Esther read on the morning of Purim only after the reading of the Torah? (Shemiras Shabbos K’Hilchoso Vol. 2 Chapter 58 Footnote 106)
11) Rashi writes (Devorim 25:19) that in order to completely blot out the memory of Amalek, a person must also destroy the possessions of the Amalekites so that their name shouldn’t be mentioned in conjunction with the item. How was Esther permitted to accept the house of Haman (Esther 8:1), who was descended from Amalek (Targum Sheini Esther 3:1), instead of insisting upon its destruction? (Rav Yerucham Perlow on Sefer HaMitzvos of Rav Saadyah Gaon Aseh 59, M’rafsin Igri Inyanim Vol. 2, Chavatzeles HaSharon Esther 8:1)

© 2006 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Teztaveh by Rabbi Ganzweig

2007-03-01T22:24:00.000-05:00

ואתה תצוה את בני ישראל ויקחו אליך שמן זית זך כתית למאור להעלות נר תמיד
Now you shall command the Children of Yisroel that they shall take for you pure olive oil, pressed, for illumination, to kindle a lamp continually.
פרש"י בא"ד שנאמר כתית למאור ולא כתית למנחות
The Tiferes Shlomo expounded on the Possuk as follows kossis – pressed, lame’or – illuminated, When one is in a tight situation; from there will come the light, lo kossis – not pressed, laminochos, hinting to a stationary position. A prominent Rov in Yerushalaim repeated this from one who survived WW II and accredited his survival to the steady encouragement he received from this vort.
We can now value what one vort can accomplish!
ואתה תצוה את בני ישראל
In this week’s Parshah the name of Moshe Rabbeinu is not mentioned, in contrast to all the Sedros since Moshe Rabbeinu’s birth. the Baal Haturim Explains that since Moshe Rabbeinu said after the incident of the eigel (the calf) v’atah im tissa chatossom v’im ayin micheiny nah misifricha asher kossavta (and now if You would forgive their sin – but if not erase me now from Your book that You have written) and the curse of a Chochom (sage) takes effect even on a condition; and it took effect here. One may ask why is Moshe Rabeinu‘s name not mentioned in Parshas Titzaveh, but rather it should not be mentioned in Parshas Ki Sisa when Moshe Rabbeinu said micheiny nah misifricha asher kossavta or thereafter? Explains Rav Moshe Adler that earlier (in Possuk 10) Hashem said to Moshe Rabbeinu v’atah hanicha Lee (and now desist from me) to which Rashi quotes the Medrash – That here Hashem opened a door for Moshe by notifying him that it is up to him; if you will be mispallel (pray) for Klal Yisroel then they will not be destroyed . More so since Moshe Rabbeinu saw that there is (previously) a Parshah without his name he deduced that he can undertake on himself to say micheiny misifricha erase my name.
From this we see how Hashem always opens the door of tefillah for all those who want to beseech Hashem in all situations.

שמחת פורים
The Beis Aaron would say ki bisimcha satzayu (lit. for in gladness you shall depart) with happiness one can depart all hard situations.
The Baal Shem Tov related the following story There was once a great Tzaddik whose wish always came true. The Tzaddik wished and Hashem fulfilled it was therefore decreed that he always be drunk.
To this stated the Chidushei HaRim on Purim kol haposhet yodo nosnim lo - He who stretches out his hand is given (literally in charity; seforim say in tefillos too) a person can request all that his heart desires. the sages therefore obliged us to drink wine on Purim…
The Chidushei HaRim would conclude that the optimal is to do as the sages commanded us, and one will only gain by doing such, we therefore heed their instruction to fill the day of Purim (and night after too!) with festivities in thanksgiving to Hashem for our rescue from Hamon inc. We are lucky and proud to be the nation of Hashem. We will daven to Hashem as fit for this great and opportune day, fulfill the commandments of the day, mishteh visimcha (feasting and gladness).In this manner we are upholding the inspiration of this wondrous and joyous day.
לזכות מיכאל בן אסתר לרפו"ש
חיים מרדכי בן צביה איידל לרפו"ש
חי' מרים בת ברכה עלקא לרפו"ש
To receive by fax or for dedication opportunities, to merit spreading Divrei Torah to hundreds of locations worldwide please call 732-901-6225 or fax 732-730-1588

Tetzaveh by Reb Oizer

2007-02-27T15:31:00.000-05:00

Parsha Potpourri
Parshas Tetzaveh – Vol. 2, Issue 15
Compiled by Oizer Alport

ואתה תצוה את בני ישראל ויקחו אליך שמן זית זך כתית למאור להעלת נר תמיד (27:20)
As our verse discusses the use of olive oil for the menorah in the Beis HaMikdash, the Medrash (Shemos Rabbah 36:1) expounds upon a verse in Yirmiyahu (11:16) in which the prophet compares the Jewish people to olives. One explanation of the Medrash is that just as olive oil is unique in that it remains completely separate and rises to the top when combined with any other liquid, similarly the Jews will always remain distinct from their non-Jewish neighbors and will be superior to them as long they perform Hashem’s will.
In his commentary to a very similar Medrash (Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:21), the Y’dei Moshe quotes a fascinating legal ruling which he heard from the Rav of Krakow, who was his brother-in-law. The Medrash states that olive oil will rise to the top when mixed with every משקה (liquid) in the world.
However, when he mixed it with whiskey, he found that the olive oil actually settled to the bottom. In order to resolve this scientific challenge to the words of the Medrash, we are forced to conclude that whiskey is not legally considered a liquid, and as a result one shouldn’t use whiskey to make Kiddush on Shabbos day, which must be recited over a “liquid!” (See however Machatzis HaShekel Orach Chaim 272:6 who quotes this opinion and concludes that it is inappropriate to derive legal rulings from Aggadic sources; additionally, highly unscientific tests seem to contradict his claims about the result of mixing whiskey with olive oil.)

ועשית בגדי קדש לאהרן אחיך לכבוד ולתפארת (28:2)
Rav Yitzchok Hutner once related that while studying in Slabodka, he often heard America referred to as the “goldeneh medina..” Lliving in the poverty that was rampant in Eastern Europe at that time, he couldn’t even begin to imagine the wealth and excess being referred to. Even upon arriving at America’s shores, he and all of the immigrants with whom he associated continued living under very simple and modest conditions. Hearing everybody complain about the difficulty in finding a job which paid a decent salary and allowed a person to respect his religious traditions, Rav Hutner remained cynical about the reports that America was a country where money was the most precious commodity and dollars rolled through the streets.
One day, that all changed. Rav Hutner was walking down a Brooklyn street during the week of Parshas Tetzaveh, and he observed two small Jewish boys playing ball in front of their house. The older of the two was regaling his younger brother with all that he had learned from his Rebbe about the lofty role of the Kohen Gadol – his eight beautiful garments, made to invoke glory and splendor; the sacrifices he was able to bring daily in the Beis HaMikdash; and of course, his unique role in effecting atonement for the entire Jewish people once annually, on the holiest day of the year in the holiest place on earth. The young boy listened with interest and fascination, envisioning the action transpiring before his very eyes. He paused to take it all in and digest it before asking … “Tell me, what do you think his annual salary was?” Sadly, Rav Hutner would say later that he had finally been welcomed to the goldeneh medina!

והיה על אהרן לשרת ונשמע קולו בבאו אל הקדש לפני ד' ובצאתו ולא ימות (28:35)
The Gemora in Pesachim (112a) relates that Rabbi Akiva gave seven commands to his son Rabbi Yehoshua. One of them was that he shouldn’t enter his house suddenly and unexpectedly. In his commentary on the Gemora, the Rashbam quotes a Medrash which relates that whenever he approached his home, Rabbi Yochanan would intentionally make noise so as to alert anybody who may be inside to his imminent arrival.
Rabbi Yochanan explained his actions based on our verse, which states that the Kohen Gadol must have bells on the hem of his Me’il (Robe) in order that the sound announcing his entrance should be heard whenever he entered Hashem’s Sanctuary.
Rav Shmaryahu Arieli questions how an individual person, even one as great as Rabbi Yochanan or Rabbi Akiva, could derive guidelines for proper conduct from the Torah’s rules for the Kohen Gadol, who was subject to special stringencies due to the sanctity of the Temple in which he served?
Rav Arieli quotes the Gemora in Sotah (17a), which teaches that if a husband and wife dwell together in peace and harmony, the Shechina (Divine Presence) will rest between them and fill their house with an atmosphere of Holiness. If so, we can understand that any man with a successful marriage must recognize that the Shechina resides in his house and conduct himself just as the Kohen Gadol did.
Lest one think that these lofty levels were only for previous generations, a modern-day example of such behavior can be found in a beautiful story involving Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach. Somebody was once discussing an important issue with Rav Shlomo Zalman on his way home. As they walked through the streets of Jerusalem, Rav Shlomo Zalman suddenly paused to straighten and clean his clothes.
As his clothing didn’t appear disheveled to begin with, the man inquired as to the cause of the Rav’s actions. The saintly Rav replied that he had been blessed for decades to live in peace and tranquility with his wonderful, loving wife, and they were therefore fortunate to feel Hashem as a regular presence in their home. As they were turning the block to approach his house, he felt compelled to ensure that his appearance would be appropriate for the important Guest he was about to greet!
In light of such daily behavior, it shouldn’t be surprising to conclude by mentioning that at the funeral of his beloved wife and lifelong partner Rebbetzin Chaya Rivkah, the normally humble Rav Shlomo Zalman announced that it is customary that at the funeral of one’s spouse, he should ask forgiveness from the deceased for anything he may have done or said that caused pain in any way.
However, Rav Shlomo Zalman continued, “I have no need to do so, for I can say with complete confidence that in almost 54 years of marriage, I never once upset or hurt her in any way, and there is nothing for which I need to ask her forgiveness.”
Although marriage brings its daily challenges for even the most compatible of spouses, let us learn to overcome them by viewing our efforts to keep the peace as bringing the Divine presence into our homes, thereby turning ourselves into High Priests who serve Hashem every time we enter our homes and instill an atmosphere or happiness and harmony.

שבעת ימים ילבשם הכהן תחתיו מבניו אשר יבא אל אהל מועד לשרת בקדש (29:30)
A controversy once broke out when the Rav of a small town in Europe passed away. The leaders of the community wanted to appoint an outsider to take his place, while some of the Rav’s sons argued that they were suited for the position and deserved precedence as the “inheritors” of their deceased father. They agreed to bring the dispute to the Chofetz Chaim for resolution.
The Chofetz Chaim began by agreeing that Jewish law recognizes that all religious positions, including Rabbinical appointments, are subject to be inherited by the offspring of the deceased. However, the Gemora in Yoma (72b) distinguishes between the son of the Kohen Gadol, who may inherit his father’s purely religious position, and the son of the Kohen Meshuach Milchama (the Kohen who leads the Jews to battle), who may not. Because the latter position is uniquely intended for a man of war and is not purely a religious function, the fact that somebody was suited to the role is irrelevant to his son’s capacity to inherit and fill the role.
Similarly, it was once true that the function of the Rav of a community was purely religious in nature – to render legal rulings and to teach the people – and his children were legally entitled to be offered the position before other candidates were considered.
However, the Chofetz Chaim continued, this has unfortunately changed due to the assault of the reform and communist movements on traditional religious standards and values. As a result, the role of the Rav has been transformed into that of a general leading his troops into a fierce battle, regarding which the Gemora rules that the children are not entitled to automatic precedence in inheriting and filling the position of the deceased Rav!
זכור את אשר עשה לך עמלק בדרך בצאתכם ממצרים (דברים 25:17)
The Kli Yakar writes (Shemos 17:8) that in relating that Amalek attacked the Jewish people in Refidim, the Torah is hinting to the source of their ability to have any power over the Jews. As long as the Jewish nation is in a state of internal unity, Amalek has no ability to harm them. Refidim (רפידם) contains within it the letters which form the root of the word פירוד – separation – hinting to the fact that when the Jews encamped there, they were stricken by strife and discord (see Rashi Shemos 19:2).
The Chiddushei HaRim suggests that this is alluded to by the Torah’s emphasis on remembering what Hashem did לך – to (the singular) you, as Amalek holds no sway over a united Jewish nation. Rashi writes (Devorim 25:18) that Amalek struck at those who had been expelled by the Clouds of Glory from the Jewish camp as a result of their sins. Those individuals didn’t enjoy the merit of being part of the community, and they were therefore susceptible to Amalek’s attacks.
Haman, who was descended from Amalek, learned this lesson from his ancestors. The Sfas Emes notes that Haman described to Achashverosh (Esther 3:8) his desire to eradicate an עם מפוזר ומפורד. Literally, he described the Jews as a people who are scattered and dispersed around the world, but this may also be understood as a nation of people are who separated from one another and lacking in unity.
The Shelah HaKadosh writes that recognizing the true source of Haman’s power, Esther immediately began efforts to unify the nation, instructing Mordechai (Esther 4:16) go gather together all of the Jews, not just physically but also symbolically. Not surprisingly, it was this national togetherness which prevailed, as is memorialized in the well-known song Shoshanas Yaakov צהלה ושמחה בראותם יחד תכלת מרדכי – the Jewish nation was cheerful and glad when they saw together that Mordechai was robed in royal blue – a lesson which should inspire us to new levels of feeling a sense of community and togetherness with our fellow Jews in these difficult times for our people.

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) Hashem told Moshe (27:20) to command the Jewish people to take pure olive oil in order to light the menorah. Is it also preferable to use olive oil instead of candles to light one’s Shabbos candles? (Mishnah Berurah 264:23, Pri Megodim Aishel Avrohom 264:12, Aruch HaShulchan Orach Chaim 264, Dibros Moshe Shabbos Chapter 2 Ha’arah 23, Shu”t Az Nidb’ru 3:4)
2) Hashem told Moshe (28:3) to instruct the “wise of heart” to make garments for Aharon. Hashem later added (31:6) that He had placed wisdom into the hearts of those are wise to allow them to do so. From this latter verse the Gemora in Berachos (55a) derives that Hashem only gives wisdom to one who already possesses it. How did these wise-hearted individuals escape the apparent catch-22, and from where did they attain their initial wisdom? (Baal HaTurim 28:3, Nefesh HaChaim 4:5, Sichos Mussar 5733:2, Shiras Dovid)
3) The Gemora in Yoma (9b) states that the first Temple was destroyed for the sin of idol-worship. As the Gemora in Zevochim (88b) states that the ephod (28:6-12) atoned for the sin of idolatry, how could the Beis HaMikdash be destroyed for a sin for which the ephod effected atonement? (Shavuos 7b, Tosefos Sanhedrin 37b, Rav Chaim Kanievsky quoted in M’rafsin Igri)
4) As the Me’il was a four-cornered garment, why wasn’t the Kohen Gadol required to place tzitzis on its corners? (Minchas Chinuch 99:4, Shu”t Doveiv Meishorim 3:16, Chavatzeles HaSharon)
5) Why was there a need for two different altars in the Mishkan? (Kli Yakar, Taam V’Daas)
6) Rashi writes (Devorim 25:19) that in order to completely blot out the memory of Amalek, a person must also destroy the possessions of the Amalekites so that their name shouldn’t be mentioned in conjunction with the item. How was Esther permitted to accept the house of Haman (Esther 8:1), who was descended from Amalek (Targum Sheini Esther 3:1), instead of insisting upon its destruction? (Rav Yerucham Perlow on Smag Aseh 59, Chavatzeles HaSharon)

© 2007 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Purim by Reb Jay

2007-02-27T15:24:00.000-05:00

Purim

At the time of Kabalas HaTorah, Bnei Yisroel stood at the foot of the mountain. Rav Avdimi Bar Chama Bar Chasa says this teaches that Hashem held the mountain over the Jewish people and said to them: “If you accept the Torah, good. If not, this shall be your burial place”. Rav Acha Bar Yaakov says we see from here that the acceptance of the Torah was coerced. Rava says it was reaccepted (willingly) in the days of Achashverosh, as it is written Kimu V’kiblu (Shabbos 88a).

What is the implication of Kimu V’kiblu? That when Klal Yisroel accepted the mitzvos of Purim upon themselves, this shows that they willingly accepted the Torah, albeit 1300 years later (the Maharal writes that the trepidation of Klal Yisroel in accepting the Torah was regarding the Oral Law; thus by accepting these mitzvos which had been decreed by the Rabanan, they were showing their acceptance of the Oral Law).

However, the Gemara in Shabbos (14b) states that Shlomo HaMelech instituted the mitzvos of eruvin and netilas yadayim. Therefore, Klal Yisroel already accepted upon themselves mitzvos d’rabanan, so why doesn’t the Gemara say that they reaccepted the Torah (willingly) in the days of Shlomo HaMelech? What is unique about Purim?

The Miracle of Purim occurred between the first and second Beis Hamikdash. This was a time of unprecedented change for Klal Yisroel. To go from having a Beis Hamikdash, to having it destroyed was a potentially a devastating loss that could lead to tremendous despair. People could think that the relationship between Hashem and Klal Yisroel had now ended. Klal Yisroel was in a transition period from Ha’aras Panim (seeing Hashem’s “face” kaviyachol) to Hastaras Panim--the hiding of Hashem’s “face” (in fact, soon after the Miracle of Purim, the gift of prophecy was lost--Yoma 9b). It was in this framework that the Miracle of Purim occurred.

Megillas Esther is unique in that the name of Hashem is never mentioned openly. The meforshim explain that this is to teach us that just as Hashem effects salvation for us through open miracles above nature--l’maaleh min hateva (i.e,Pesach), He also effects salvation for us within nature (i.e, Purim). The Miracle of Purim was a gift to enable us to understand this concept.

When Klal Yisroel said Kimu V’kiblu and willingly accepted these mitzvos, it was more than the mitzvos they were accepting. Klal Yisroel was accepting the hashgacha of the Ribono Shel Olam, even B’hastaras panim.

In order to understand this, we must first understand the dilemma posed by the aforementioned Gemara in Shabbos. It says in the Parshas Mishpatim that when Klal Yisroel accepted the Torah, they said na’aseh v’nishma--we will do and we will listen, thus implying they fully accepted the Torah willingly. Yet the Gemara mentioned here says Hashem had to hold the mountain over their heads in order to make them accept it. There are many answers to this apparent contradiction. One answer is that Hashem did not literally hold the mountain over their heads. However, by virtue of what Klal Yisroel experienced at Har Sinai--this unprecedented closeness with Hashem--it is as if He held a mountain over their heads. Klal Yisroel lost their Free will because of their proximity to Hashem (the Ramban learns that Malachim have a degree of free will, but they are unable to manifest it, due to their closeness with Hashem).

It was only during the days of Purim that they reaccepted the Torah willingly. When Klal Yisroel saw that even at a time of hastaras panim--when Hashem seemingly turns His face away from us--there is still hashgacha, that He is still guiding us. It was to this hashgacha, and to the mitzvas hayom of Purim that Klal Yisroel said Kimu V’kiblu--we will fulfill and we accept.

Terumah by Reb Jay

2007-02-23T07:34:00.000-05:00

In this week’s parsha, the Jewish people are commanded to build the Mishkan (tabernacle): “They shall make a sanctuary for Me, so that I may dwell amongst them” (Shemos 25:8).

Then instructions are given on building different vessels which would be inside the Mishkan, starting with the Aron (which would hold in it the Tablets which Moshe received at Sinai): “They shall make an ark of shittim wood” (Shemos 25:10). After the Aron, commands are given to build the Keruvim, the Shulchan and the Menorah. Only after this are the detailed instructions given for how to build the Mishkan itself, its covering, its walls etc.

If the Mishkan was intended to have been built first, why were the specifications given for the ark first? And when Moshe gave over the instructions to Betzalel the son of Uri, who had been appointed to build the Mishkan, he told him to first build the ark, then build the Mishkan. Betzalel correctly deduced that first the house is built in which the “furniture” will be placed (Meseches Brochos 55a). Why would Moshe deviate from the order given to him by Hashem?

In Judaism, spiritual acts and instructions often have as much significance as physical ones do. Even though the physical construction of the Tabernacle was to take place before the construction of the ark, because the ark housed the Torah it was the focal point of the Tabernacle. So the first mention was of the Tabernacle, as that was to be the first tangible thing to be built. But the specifications were given first for the ark, because the ark is the purpose of the tabernacle not vice versa.

The Mishkan was built as an equal to the world (Midrash Rabbah Bamidbar), a world of compressed spirituality, a place where Hashem’s presence could dwell in this world. The Torah was the impetus and the blueprint for the world: “Hashem looked in the Torah and created the world” (Zohar HaKadosh Parshas Terumah). So just as in the Mishkan, on a spiritual level, the ark preceded the Mishkan, as the raison d'être of the Mishkan was to be the ark, so too the Torah preceded the world, as the raison d'être of the world is the Torah.

What does it mean the Torah predates the world? The concepts listed in the Torah are not subject to the constraints of time. True, there are certain commandments at the present time which are not in practice, such as the laws of the Karbanos, and the laws relating to a king. This is not because these laws are no longer relevant, but rather, we lack the necessary means to fulfill them.

The idea that the Torah is older than the world itself forces us to confront reality in a completely different fashion. Instead of trying to see and understand the Torah through the glasses of contemporary mores, we must view contemporary reality through the spectrum of the Torah.

One of the biggest challenges to being a Jew in our society is the problem that very often our views will conflict with the New York Times, G-d forbid.

The perspective of the Torah is the perspective of Hashem. A perspective not clouded by changing views.

We must remember to view the Torah from this perspective, and when we do so, we will see the wonder of the Torah, that it is truly timeless.

Yisro by Ivaylo

2007-02-09T08:55:00.001-05:00

This week's Torah portion touches a live nerve deep within my own soul. Much akin to Moses' father-in-law, my personal path to spirituality has been anything but straight and narrow. Born, raised, and indoctrinated behind the Iron Curtain, the chances of discovering a faith, any faith, were somewhere between slim and none. Yet, I am here to tell You - if I could do it, against all odds, so can You.
At the age of thirteen or so, I was awoken in the middle of the night by an unusual dream - an image of a word had been emblazoned deep in my mind's eye. The word, which at that age I did not know the definition of, was "EMANATION." That is how my search for truth commenced. Looking back, sometimes I wish that there was some sort of explanation attached to it, something to push me towards Judaism even then. But it was not meant to be, I had to pass through years of trials, tribulations, twists, turns and a myriad of dead ends, to finally make it where I stand today.
The sages teach us that when we are introduced to a spiritual concept that is true, it resonates within our soul, and we know it is absolutely true, even if we are unable to prove it in any tangible fashion. That is how I feel about Judaism. The sources tell of an angel who teaches the entire Torah to every child in the womb, and when the child is born the angel causes the child to forget it by gifting it with speech. On a personal note, Torah learning for me feels like remembering, rather than learning anew. It is said that the souls of the generations of Israel, as well as the souls of all future converts were present at Mt. Sinal. Again I feel, I know, that I was there, and the experience at Mt. Sinai is inside my own heart.
Where Yitro and I differ, however is at the historical backdrop in which we join the Jewish people. A spiritual giant of a man, Yitro heard what G-d had done for the Jewish people and hurried over to embrace their faith. Things could not be better for the Jews, and becoming one carried certain intrinsic benefits. As for myself, you don't need many examples from our day and age to prove you that as Jews, we are fighting an uphill battle. So why make life harder than it already is?
My father, may G-d have mercy on his soul, did not relate to my understanding of spirituality. An atheist to the bone, he viewed my journey as a waste of time and energy. My mother, a nominal Christian, supports my actions, as she feels in her heart that this is not a choice I have made - this is who I am.
What about you? Do you know who you are? Do you know what you are doing here?
The answers to all these questions, and more are to be found in Torah. Study, learn, help others learn, do the mitzvahs that's what I feel defines our existence. Moreover, if you are doing what you are supposed to be doing, if you are fulfilling your mission, your soul reverberates with joy, and you are truly happy to serve Hashem.

Ivaylo V. Stanev

Yisro by Rabbi Naftali Ganzweig

2007-02-08T00:42:00.001-05:00

וישמע יתרו כהן מדין
R’ Leibel Eiger says that the background of Yisro (and his résumé) as an introduction to the giving of the Torah is to teach us that anyone searching for the truth shall not be discouraged from trials, trivia’s and past experiences and one shall always hope for salvation. Yisro who was so far from the truth born and bred to idolatry merited to come close to Hashem, surely a Jew can hope for salvation, merit to come close, learn and teach others. Therefore one should not be disheartened but hope daily Today I will merit to come close to Hashem.

ביום הזה באו מדבר סיני
פרש"י שיהיו דברי תורה חדשים עליך
Thoughts of failed past learning experiences are irrelevant, while learning Torah they can only bring to discouragement and lead to weakness therefore one shall see the words of Torah as new as if he is beginning to learn Today. - Sar Shalom
כל אשר דבר ה' נעשה
Every thing that Hashem has spoken we shall do
Two men met on a flight. Upon schmoozing about their trip one said to the other, why is it that you are sitting in first class? a limo is awaiting your arrival to bring you to a comfortable apartment (on the house), while I am paying for my economy ticket out of my own pocket? The answer was simple; I am on a business trip my boss is providing me with my necessities that I may serve him with full devotion and capabilities I therefore must be comfortable and rested to be able to work at my full capacity, were as you are going for your own interests and you must cater to yourself.

The Bnei Yissochor asks why by birchas hamozon (grace after meals) do we say (when ten men are present) nivarech (let us bless) Elokeinu – Midas hadin (attributes of judgment) and not nivarech Hashem – Midas horachamim (attributes of mercy)? (since sustenance is an attribute of mercy) To which he answers that since Klal Yisroel are servants of Hashem it is obligatory that that a master give his servant food, therefore it is appropriate to say nivarech Elokeinu (judgment) since we are avdei Hashem
The afore mentioned story of our travelers is a parable. If our agenda is one of devotion to Hashem then we are on a business trip – all necessities are included (luxuries are extra) otherwise it’s out of pocket expenses

Mazal Tov to our counterpart Al Hatorah V’al H’avodah on the occasion of one year of harbotzas Hatorah – much hatzlochah B”H

To receive by fax or for dedication opportunities, please call or fax 732-901-6225

Yisro by Reb Jay

2007-02-08T00:40:00.000-05:00

In this week’s parsha, Moshe is reunited with his father-in-law, Yisro.

While Yisro is there, he observes Moshe as he carries out his role as judge of the Jewish Nation. While observing he notices that the people are standing all day and waiting their turn for Moshe to judge them. Yisro asks Moshe: “What is this thing you do to the people? Why do you sit alone with all the people standing by you from morning to evening?” (Shemos 18:14).

Yisro was concerned both about Moshe and the people. He worried that Moshe would soon be worn out, and that the people were waiting too long to receive justice. Yisro proposed that they establish a court system with lower courts and higher courts, thus easing the burden on Moshe and the people.

What does it mean “from the morning to the evening”? The Gemara in Shabbos (10a) asks, “did Moshe literally sit and judge the entire day? When did he have time to study Torah?” The answer given is that whoever involves himself in proper judgement for even one hour, it is as if he is a partner with Hashem in the act of creation.

We learn two fundamental concepts from this Gemara.

One is the importance of Torah study. That as important as judging other Jews is (important enough to be considered a partner with Hashem) and the kindness Moshe was doing for the community, nonetheless, the thought that he would go the whole day without Torah study is considered inconceivable.

The second thing we learn is that it is possible for a person to perform an act that will place him on the level of being a partner with Hashem.

What does this mean?

The level of judgement is an extremely high level. Without justice the world is not able to exist, as we see from the story of Noach (in the time of Noach thievery was normative, which bespoke the terrible lack of justice, thus necessitating the destruction of the world). Rashi in the first parsha of the Torah explains that Hashem first “thought” to create the world in judgement, and then added mercy.

This does not mean Hashem thought, the way a human being has a thought process, and then changed His mind and added mercy. Rather, it means that for the world to exist solely by virtue of judgement is ideal. A level which, for the most part, man is unable to aspire to, thus the need for mercy. However, judgement is such an important virtue that for Hashem to will the world through judgement (the world only exists by virtue of Hashem’s will) even if it never came to fruition (for man would be unable to survive), nonetheless shows the importance of judgement.

So a person who is involved in judgement is attaching himself to the ideal level of the creation of the world.

What is one to do who is not a judge, how does such a person become a partner with Hashem? There is one other action a person can do that makes him a partner with Hashem in the creation of the world. That is the recital of the “Vayichulu” prayer (Bereshis 2:1-3) on Friday night. These are the verses that speak of the first Shabbos after the six days of creation. The reason being that a person who says this believes Hashem created the world. Even if we are unable to live up to the ideals of Midas Hadin (judegment), at least on Shabbos we can acknowledge that Hashem created the world. And when we put this belief into action, we have begun to fulfill our mission on this earth.

Bo by Reb Jay

2007-01-23T22:45:00.001-05:00

In this week’s parsha are the final three makkos: arbeh, choshech and makkos bechoros.

The Zohar Hakadosh writes (2, 184a) that there is no light except for that which comes from darkness. That is why the world was started from evening and not morning. This is also true on a personal level. This is the reason that a person’s principal inclination when he is young is the yetzer hara. Only when a person matures (for a boy thirteen years of age, and a girl twelve) does their yetzer begin to develop. (This does not mean that children below these ages cannot do good things. What it means is that at these ages it is a child’s natural tendency to be self-centered, and only through inculcation of positive character traits will their good inclination begin to assert itself.)

And this is certainly true on a national level, that Klal Yisrael will undergo much darkness, till they will experience light.

What is this concept coming to teach us?

There are three distinct ways that we can look at suffering. The first, and least productive way, is to see it as an obstacle to what we are trying to accomplish in life. The second way is that we see problems and suffering as things that make us stronger, and overall, we are better for the experience. This is a positive way of viewing obstacles.

But there is a third way. This way is to see problems and suffering not as obstacles but as an integral part of us. For example, when a person loses his job. To see the loss of the job as a positive thing, as a sign that this job was not for him and to make the most of his new opportunity.

And for us as Jews to see all our suffering in our many dark exiles, not as something we had to undergo to achieve the final redemption, but as part and parcel of the final redemption. That we are who we are not in spite of our trials, but because of them.

So when Hashem was finishing up the ten plagues, He specifically chose to end with darkness and the killing of the first born. This was to show that the darkness (killing of first born also is darkness to a large degree), is really part of the light of our redemption from Egypt and our receiving of the Torah.

In order for us to truly appreciate this concept, that light comes from darkness, we must observe the twists and turns of our history. When we look at it honestly, it will lead us to believe in and trust Hashem, and to see that all that He does is for the best.

Bo by Rabbi Ganzweig

2007-01-23T16:17:00.000-05:00

by Rabbi Naftali Ganzweig

ואמרתם זבח פסח הוא לה' אשר פסח על בתי בני ישראל במצרים ואת בתינו הציל ויקד העם וישתחוו

You shall say: “It is a meal of deliverance performed through a halting passing over dedicated to G-d, Who Paused as He passed over the houses of The Children of Israel in Mitzrayim (Egypt) when He struck Mitzrayim mortally and rescued our houses!” And the people bowed and prostrated themselves.

Asks R’ Moshe Leib Sassover why does the Posuk say that Hashem paused - passed over on the houses of the Yidden with the phrase al botei Bnei Yisroel on the houses of the Jews it should say that Hashem passed over the homes of the Jews? Says R’ Moshe Leib of Sassov that when Hashem went through Mitzrayim during makas bichoros and he passed over the house of a Jew he danced on the house, “This is the house of a Yid”. When R’ Moshe Leib was at the table of The Rebbe R’ Elimeilech of Lizensk and he said this vort he (R’ Moshe Leib) burst into a enthusiastic dance on the table “Doh voint ah Yid, Doh voint ah Yid - here lives a Jew, referring to the great tzaddik (and his elevated holiness).

A Jewish home is a dwelling place of the Shechina (divine presence). Many seforim say that when Moshiach comes, homes that attained the status of a mikdash m’at by filling them with Torah and mitzvos will also go to Eretz Yisroel, just as shuls they too are a dwelling place of the Shechina.

R’ Elya Lopian would say that one who eats with the intention to gain energy to serve Hashem his meal is honored as a seudas mitzvah.

The Mishnah in Avos 3:4 says three that eat and do not say Divrei Torah it is as if they had eaten from sacrifices of the dead, but three that sit on one table and speak words of torah it is as if they ate from the table of Hashem.

The Rebbe of Parshischa once asked his disciples; had it not been already said by Hashem that the Jews will be in bondage in Egypt. Therefore why did Hashem bring the makos on Paroh?
ָ
To which he answered that the Jews do all the commandments to fulfill the will of Hashem with fear and fondness. Not so Paroh that slaved and tortured the Jews because of his own evilness and wickedness and he did not say I am doing this for the sake of Hashem. (No l’shaim yichud was said!)

From this we can learn that by being mamlich (carnating - crowning) Hashem on all our actions we are elevating them to be mitzvos, the will of Hashem and we are thus glorifying the name of Hashem in this world.

As a result our homes are not mundane dwellings, but houses of spiritual elevation on which Hashem rejoices “Here lives a Yid”.

לז"נ אסתר בת ר' משה חיים ע"ה
נלב"ע ב' חשון תשנ"ז
To receive by fax or for dedication opportunities,
Please fax 732-730-1588

Vaera by Reb Jay

2007-01-20T22:40:00.001-05:00

Va’ayra

In this week’s parsha, Moshe and Aron come to Pharoh to plead the case of the Jewish people. Hashem instructs them to show Pharoh a sign by turning their staff to snakes. Pharoh scoffs at what he views as “unimpressive magic”. He even brings in schoolchildren to prove the Egyptian people’s proficiency in magic. Aron then turns the snake back into a staff, and his staff eats all the other staffs in the room. Pharoh was also unmoved by this sign.

What is the meaning of this story? What is the significance of the staff?

The staff possessed by Moshe and Aron had been handed down since the time of Adam the first man.Within the staff there was a duality. On the one hand the staff had the four letter name of Hashem on it attesting to the mercy of Hashem. Also inscribed on the staff, however, was the acronym of the ten plagues, attesting to the aspect of Hashem’s judgement. ( Although the ten plagues had yet to take place, the acronym was the concept expressing Hashem’s dominion over the entire creation which wass the purpose of the ten plagues. The first three expressing Hashem’s dominion on things below the ground, the middle three expressing His dominion on the ground, and the last four expressing His dominion above ground. Thus the acronym was a prediction of the expression of Hashem’s power.)

This duality also spoke to a much deeper concept. We know that free will is perhaps the most fundamental aspect of creation. Without it, there would be no possibility of true good, because there would be no choice. Thus, evils role in the world is as a necessary option so that one may exercize one’s free will to be good. However, the question still remains: if Hashem is pure good, how can evil come from a source which is pure good?

The answer is that evil was not created, rather it was made possible. If we do what is right the world remains in its good state. If we pervert the world though, we turn that evil possibility into reality.

Rav Moshe Shapiro explains that this idea is signified through the staff. The word for staff in Hebrew is mateh. The word mateh can be used in a couple of different ways. It can mean to bend, and it can mean to extend or stretch out from the source, i.e., like a branch from a tree (which is what a staff is). The word mateh can also mean a tribe, which is what the twelve tribes were:extensions of Yaakov. This staff had originally been given to Adom—the first man. It was meant to stand as a junction between heaven and earth. Hashem told Moshe and Aron to turn the staff into a snake to signify that Pharoh was bending the world, much as a snake moves in a bent form, and the snake is a metaphor for the evil inclination, which causes man to desire to bend the world.

Pharoh laughs at this message. Moshe and Aron counter his laughter by having the staff eat the other staffs. This is display demonstrates that the straightness of the staff, when it is used as an extension between the heaven and earth, will always be able to overcome its use for evil. Thus the staff ideally symbolizes Hashem’s attribute of mercy, but when need be, symbolizes His attribute of judgement.

Vaera by Reb Oizer

2007-01-19T07:02:00.000-05:00

Parsha Potpourri
Parshas Vaeira – Vol. 2, Issue 9
Compiled by Oizer Alport

בני ראובן ... ובני שמעון ... ואלה שמות בני לוי לתלדתם גרשון וקהת ומררי (6:14-16)
After listing the sons of Jacob’s two oldest sons, Reuven and Shimon, the Torah records, “And these are the names of the sons of Levi in order of their birth: Gershon, Kehas, and Merari.” Why does the Torah emphasize that it is stating the names of Levi’s sons, a point which isn’t mentioned with regards to the sons of Reuven and Shimon?
The Shelah HaKadosh answers based on Rashi’s comment (5:4) that the tribe of Levi wasn’t included in Pharaoh’s enslavement of the Jews and therefore lived relatively easy and comfortable lives. It would have been easy for them to isolate themselves in Goshen, learning Torah all day and turning a blind eye to the plight of their brethren.
In order to combat such natural feelings, Levi specifically gave his children names which would eternally remind them of the suffering of the rest of the Jews. The name Gershon alludes to the fact that the Jews were considered foreigners and temporary dwellers in Egypt, not fitting in and belonging there no matter how easy life may have been in Goshen. K’has hints to the fact that the backbreaking labor set their teeth on edge, and Merari refers to the bitterness of the Egyptian enslavement.
So many times we hear of pain and suffering – with illness, jobs, finding a spouse, raising children, or in Israel – and our first reaction is to dismiss it as not germane to our comfortable lives, but Levi teaches that the suffering of every single Jew is indeed relevant and we must feel their plight!
The Chofetz Chaim’s wife once panicked when she awoke in the middle of the night to find his bed empty. Upon finding him sleeping on the floor, he explained to his puzzled Rebbitzin that with World War I raging all around them and Jews being chased from their houses all across Europe, how could he possibly allow himself the comfort of sleeping in a comfortable bed?
Similarly, when a great fire once ravaged most of the Jewish section of the town of Brisk, Rav Chaim Soloveitchik (the Rav of the town, whose house was spared) insisted on sleeping in the synagogue together with the rest of his homeless congregants in order to share in their suffering. Not at all surprising, considering that the Chofetz Chaim was a Kohen and Rav Chaim a Levi, and they clearly learned well the lessons of their great-great grandfather!

הנה אנכי מכה במטה אשר בידי על המים אשר ביאר ונהפכו לדם (7:17)
לפי שאין גשמים יורדים במצרים ונילוס עולה ומשקה את הארץ ומצרים עובדים לנילוס (רש"י)
After tempting Chava to eat from the forbidden Tree of Knowledge, the serpent was punished and cursed that it will travel on its stomach and eat dust all the days of its life (Bereishis 3:14). In what way does this represent a curse, as other animals must spend days hunting for prey, while the snake’s diet – dust – is to be found wherever it travels?
The Kotzker Rebbe explains that this point is precisely the curse. Other animals are dependent on Hashem to help them find food to eat, while the snake slithers horizontally across the ground, never going hungry, never looking upward, and therefore totally cut off from a relationship with Hashem, and therein lies the greatest curse imaginable!
Rashi writes that the first plague (blood) was directed against the Nile, which had been deified by the Egyptians because it never rained in Egypt and their only source of water was the rising Nile. Rav Shimshon Pinkus symbolically explains that just like the serpent, the Egyptians were a totally “natural” people. It never rained in their country, so they never had to look skyward to see what the clouds foretold.
In doing so, their hearts also never gazed toward the Heavens, thus effectively cutting them off from perceiving any dependence on or relationship with the Almighty. Everything which occurred in their lives could be explained scientifically, appearing to be totally “natural.” In light of this, the Exodus from Egypt wasn’t merely a physical redemption from agonizing enslavement, but it also represented a deeper philosophical departure. The book of Exodus, then, is the story of exchanging a worldview devoid of spirituality, through which everything is understood and explained according to science and nature, for one in which we confidently declare that Hashem runs every single aspect of the universe and of our daily lives, and we are proud to be His chosen people.

ויאמר ד' אל משה אמר אל אהרן נטה את מטך והך את עפר הארץ והיה לכנם בכל ארץ מצרים (8:12)
לא היה העפר כדאי ללקות על ידי משה לפי שהגין עליו כשהרג את המצרי ויטמנהו בחול (רש"י)
Rashi writes that Moshe was commanded to have Aharon bring about the first two plagues because he had gratitude to the river which had protected him when he was placed there as an infant, and it was therefore inappropriate for him to strike the water. This sense of appreciation is understandable, as the water indeed sheltered him, and it was there that Pharaoh’s daughter discovered and rescued him.
However, regarding the third plague, lice, Rashi’s explanation that it was inappropriate for Moshe to strike the same ground which protected him by hiding the body of the Egyptian he slew is difficult to understand. Although Moshe thought that nobody saw the killing, in reality Dasan and Aviram witnessed the murder and informed on him to Pharaoh, who would have killed Moshe if not for a miracle that saved his life (Rashi 2:14-15). Practically speaking, the ground did absolutely nothing to benefit or assist him in any way, so why did he feel gratitude toward it, and why couldn’t he strike it himself to bring about the plague of lice?
The Maharzu suggests in his commentary on the Medrash (Shemos Rabbah 10:7) that the ground did indeed help Moshe by providing him temporary peace-of-mind by allowing him to think for at least the first day that his killing would go unnoticed. However, I would like to suggest that the Torah is coming to teach the fallacy of a common English expression.
If we give of our precious time, energy, and heart in an earnest attempt to help somebody out, only to have our efforts fail, the average American will tell us, “Thanks, but no thanks,” indicating that he owes us no debt of gratitude for our efforts and not-so-subtly suggesting that next time we should just mind our own business. Yet the Torah teaches that because the ground was willing to help, and tried to be of assistance in doing its best to cover up the taskmaster’s corpse, Moshe was obligated to show his appreciation for its good-faith efforts and was unable to strike it to bring about the plague of lice.
So many times a spouse, a child, a friend, a shadchan, or a co-worker will volunteer to try to help us out of a jam or just to lend a helping hand around the house. Unfortunately, to say the least, these efforts don’t always lead to the results we were hoping for. The next time it happens, instead of taking it out on them and rubbing the failure in to somebody who already feels badly enough, let us remember the lesson of Moshe and the ground, and express our sincere appreciation for their time and good intentions.

ותהי הכנם באדם ובבהמה כל עפר הארץ היה כנים בכל ארץ מצרים (8:13)
A number of our greatest Rabbis (Rambam, Rabbeinu Yonah, Meiri, Vilna Gaon) write in their commentaries on Pirkei Avos (5:4) that during the plague of lice, the lice also infested the land of Goshen where the Jews lived, just that they didn’t cause them the suffering that they did to the Egyptians.
The Mishmeres Ariel brings a strikingly simple proof to this astonishing fact. One of Yaakov’s reasons for requesting that Yosef not bury him in Egypt was to avoid the lice which would be crawling throughout the ground (Rashi Bereishis 47:29). If, however, the lice were nowhere to be found in the land of Goshen, then Yaakov could have simply made Yosef swear to bury him there and not burden him to carry his body all the way to the land of Israel. From the fact that he made him do so, it must be that he knew this wouldn’t suffice as the lice would also be present in Goshen!
Rav Chaim Kanievsky suggests the reason for this peculiarity was that in the first two plagues, Pharaoh’s magicians were able to replicate the actual plague. As such, the only proof that Moshe’s plagues were caused by Hashem and not by sorcery was the fact that they miraculously stopped at the borders of the Jewish land of Goshen. In the plague of lice, on the other hand, Pharaoh’s magicians were unable to copy the plague and freely admitted that it had been performed by Hashem, in which case there was no need for the additional miracle of preventing the lice from entering the land of Goshen, just that Hashem prevented them from causing actual pain or inconvenience to the Jews living there.

ויעש ד' את הדבר הזה ממחרת וימת כל מקנה מצרים וממקנה בני ישראל לא מת אחד וישלח פרעה
והנה לא מת ממקנה ישראל עד אחד ויכבד לב פרעה ולא שלח את העם (9:6-7)
The Vilna Gaon is bothered by several apparent inconsistencies in the Torah’s description of the damage done by the plague of pestilence. Initially, the Torah states with regard to the animals of the Jews that not a single one died, but in the second verse the wording indicates that while not more than one Jew lost animals, one did indeed suffer at the hands of the plague. Additionally, the first verse discusses “the animals of the children of Israel,” while the latter refers simply to “the animals of Israel.”
Finally, as difficult as Pharaoh’s actions throughout this entire period are difficult to understand, there is generally some minimal logic to his stubbornness. Here, however, the Torah seems to indicate that hearing that the plague didn’t affect the animals of the Jews somehow caused him to further harden his heart, which seems quite counter-intuitive.
The Vilna Gaon brilliantly explains that the resolution to all of these difficulties is based on a single piece of information. Rashi writes (2:11) that one of the Egyptian taskmasters set his eyes on a Jewish woman by the name of Shulamis bas Divri. One night he ordered her husband out of the house and entered pretending to be him, and from that union was born a child. However, the Ramban (Vayikra 24:10) quotes an opinion that before the Torah was given, a person’s identity was determined by his father, which means that the son of the taskmaster and Shulamis was considered a non-Jew.
Although the first verse states that among the children of Israel – proper Jews – no animals died, the animals of Shulamis’s son were indeed stricken together with those of the Egyptians, and it is to them that the second verse refers in hinting that one Jew – somebody viewed as a Jew even though in reality he wasn’t – was afflicted. Upon hearing that the Jews weren’t completely spared, Pharaoh attributed the entire episode to a big coincidence, and not surprisingly hardened his heart and refused to free the Jews!

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) In last week’s parsha, Moshe expressed his reluctance to serve as Hashem’s agent to free the Jewish people due to his severe speech impediment, to which Hashem replied that his brother Aharon would assist him as his spokesman (4:15-16). Why did Moshe repeat the exact same worry (6:30), and as the reply that he received was identical (7:1-2), in what way did it reassure him any more than what he had already been told previously? (Meged Yosef)
2) Hashem told Moshe (7:3) that He would harden Pharaoh’s heart so that he would refuse to free the Jewish people. Does this mean that Pharaoh completely lost his free choice to repent his ways even if he changed his mind and wished to do so? (Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah 6:3, Radak Shmuel 1 2:25, Chofetz Chaim, Rav Chaim Berlin quoted in Peninim MiShulchan Gevoha)
3) As private citizens, why weren’t the Egyptians and their animals exempt from the punishment of the plagues which should have been meted out exclusively to Pharaoh for his cruel role in enslaving the Jewish people? (Taima D’Kra Parshas Vayigash, M’rafsin Igri)
4) After Moshe caused all of the water in Egypt to turn to blood, Pharaoh’s magicians duplicated the feat and therefore he wasn’t impressed (7:22). If all of the water had turned to blood, from where did they obtain water to turn into blood? (Rabbeinu Bechaye, Paneiach Raza, Tosefos Rid)
5) The word in the Torah containing the most letters is in this week’s parsha. What is it?
6) Which of the plagues was the harshest and most unbearable for the Egyptians and why? (Seichel Tov and Be’er Yitzchok quoted in Shaarei Aharon, Taam V’Daas)
7) Rashi writes (9:14) that just prior to the 7th plague, Moshe warned Pharaoh about the plague of the slaying of the first-born, which was so severe as to be considered equivalent to all of the other plagues combined. Why did Moshe choose to warn Pharaoh at this time about a plague which wasn’t yet imminent? (Moshav Z’keinim, Tosefos Rid, Rabbeinu Bechaye, Abarbanel, Minchah Belulah, Gur Aryeh, Chavatzeles HaSharon, Torah L’Daas Vol. 9)

© 2007 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Shmos by Reb Oizer

2007-01-10T17:59:00.000-05:00

Parsha Potpourri
Parshas Shemos – Vol. 2, Issue 8
Compiled by Oizer Alport

הבה נתחכמה לו (1:10)
The Gemora in Sotah (11a) records that three of Pharaoh’s advisors were consulted regarding his worries about the Jewish population. Bilaam suggested the wicked plan and was killed, Iyov remained silent and was punished with tremendous afflictions, and Yisro disagreed with the plan and fled and was rewarded with descendants who were righteous Torah scholars and judges. Why did Bilaam, who presumably deserved the most severe punishment for his active role in Pharaoh’s diabolical scheme, get off relatively easily with an instant death, while Iyov sufferedortuous pains throughout his life?
Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz answers that this question stems from a fundamental error, as Rashi writes (Kiddushin 80b) that being alive is the greatest present and kindness that Hashem could ever give a person, regardless of what difficulties may transpire in his life. In fact, Dovid Hamelech – who was no stranger to suffering – expressed this idea explicitly (Tehillim 118:18): יסר יסרני ק-ה ולמות לא נתני – Hashem afflicted me greatly, but at least He didn’t give me over to death.
Therefore, the unimaginable and excruciating pain and agony of Iyov is still considered infinitely preferable to the quick, relatively painless death of Bilaam due to the sheer fact that he remained alive. As we all suffer various difficulties and setbacks throughout our lives, it would behoove us to recall and focus on this lesson, perhaps every time we recite the aforementioned verse during Hallel, that we must be eternally grateful to Hashem for the wonderful gift we call life!

ויבן ערי מסכנות לפרעה את פתם ואת רעמסס (1:11)
The Gemora in Sotah (11a) explains that the names of the cities Pisom and Raamses allude to the fact that the earth there was completely unsuitable for building, and whatever the Jewish slaves would build would immediately be swallowed up by the unstable ground. Rav Avrohom Yaakov Pam questions why Pharaoh, who had an entire nation available to serve him as slaves, didn’t choose to have them work in a more appropriate location where they would be able to build for him beautiful palaces and buildings which would bring honor and glory to his kingdom?
Rav Pam suggests that no matter how overwhelmingly difficult a person’s task may be, he is still able to feel good about his accomplishments as long as he feels there is a purpose in his efforts, regardless of whether he will ultimately benefit in any way from the finished product. If Pharaoh had put the Jews to work building splendid edifices, even though they would never be allowed to set foot in them, they would still feel a sense of purpose in their suffering and would take pride in the fruit of their labors. The diabolical Pharaoh was willing to forego all potential benefits to himself and to his kingdom from working them under more suitable conditions in order to afflict them with crushing harshness.
Rav C. once had a son born very prematurely and severely underweight. The doctors and nurses in the hospital went beyond the call of duty, putting in tremendous efforts over the course of two months until the baby was finally healthy and strong enough to return home. Rav C. searched far and wide for an appropriate gift demonstrating his gratitude toward the medical staff, but couldn’t find anything suitable.
In frustration, he turned to his Rebbe, Rav Elya Svei, who suggested that the doctors didn’t need any more fountain pens or paperweights. Rather, he suggested that each year on the baby’s birthday, Rav C. should bring his son to the hospital to show the doctors and nurses the fruits of their efforts. So many times medical professionals put in tremendous energy, fighting an uphill battle, only to become dejected when they lose more often than not. The best gift of gratitude would be to strengthen them by reminding them that their efforts make a difference and are eternally remembered and appreciated.
While most of us hopefully haven’t had such extensive interactions with the hospital staff, we have all benefited greatly from the Herculean time and energy invested in our education and upbringing by our parents and teachers, and it behooves us to give them the sense of satisfaction and accomplishment they deserve by letting them know what a difference they made in our lives and how appreciated they are.

והיה אם לא יאמינו לך ולא ישמעו לקל האת הראשון והאמינו לקל האת האחרון
והיה אם לא יאמינו גם לשני האתות האלה ולא ישמעון לקלך ולקחת ממימי היאר
ושפכת היבשה והיו המים אשר תקח מן היאר והיו לדם ביבשת (4:8-9)
The Tosefos Yom Tov (Demai 7:3) writes that there are those who ask a powerful question based on the verse in Chaggai (2:9) גדול יהיה כבוד הבית הזה האחרון מן הראשון – the glory and honor of the last Beis Hamikdash will be even greater than that of the first. This verse is referring to the 2nd Temple, and yet it refers to it as the “last” one, seemingly indicating that there won’t, G-d forbid, be another.
He answers that many times the word “last” doesn’t mean the final one, but rather it refers to the last one vis-à-vis the first one, even though there may indeed be others which come after it. Although this sounds a bit foreign grammatically, he cites two places where the Torah indeed uses such language, one from our verses (the other from Bereishis 33:2) in which Hashem tells Moshe that if the Jews won’t believe the first sign, they will trust in the last sign. Hashem then adds that if they won’t believe the “last” sign, they will surely believe the third one in which Moshe will turn the water of the river into blood!
The Kehillas Yitzchok and Imrei Noam bring a clever hint to this proof from 12:13, והיה הדם לכם לאות על הבתים, which literally means that the blood from the Passover-sacrifice will be a sign on the doors for Hashem to skip over that house. However, it can also be understood as stating that the blood (which was the 3rd proof of Moshe’s legitimacy) will be a sign for you regarding the Temples, as if anybody attempts to prove from Chaggai 2:9 that the second Temple was the final one, we may now answer that the blood mentioned in our verse proves that it isn’t so!

כי כבד פה וכבד לשון אנכי (4:10)
Rav Yitzchok Zilberstein was once asked by a heavily speech-impaired person regarding the legal permissibility of a new treatment that was suggested to him. An expert in the field had experienced remarkable success at treating such problems by completely isolating the patient for one month and not allowing him to speak or hear a single word during that time, after which he then begins the arduous process of re-teaching the letters and their proper pronunciations from scratch. The questioner was concerned that enrolling in this treatment would require him to miss all of his prayer obligations, including the Biblical requirements of the twice-daily recitation of Shema and Kiddush on Shabbos.
Rav Zilberstein answered that a decision of the Avnei Nezer in a similar case is also applicable in this one. The Avnei Nezer was asked if a person is obligated to be circumcised in a case where the doctor says that doing so will leave him with a permanent limp. The Shulchan Aruch rules (Orach Chaim 756:1) that a person is only obligated to spend up to one-fifth of his possessions in order to perform a positive commandment. He therefore ruled that if the value to the man of walking without a limp is greater than one-fifth of his estate, he is exempt from the mitzvah of circumcision. Similarly, Rav Zilberstein opined that if curing his severe speech impediment is monetarily equivalent to more than one-fifth of his possessions, he may proceed with the treatment even even at the expense of his prayer obligations.

ויאמר פרעה מי ד' אשר אשמע בקולו לשלח את ישראל לא ידעתי את ד' (5:2)
The Darkei Mussar notes the striking contrast in Pharaoh’s actions over the span of just a few short years. In Parshas Mikeitz, Pharaoh had no problem accepting all of Yosef’s interpretations and recommendations, even though Yosef made it clear that his explanations emanated from Hashem while Pharaoh himself was an idolater. Yet a short while later, the very same Pharaoh had completely forgotten Hashem’s existence and all of the benefits that he had received through Yosef.
There was once a rich businessman whose associates received word that his entire inventory had been lost at sea. Unsure about how to inform him, they went for guidance to the local Rav, who volunteered to break the news himself. The Rav called in the businessman and engaged him in a lengthy discussion about trust and faith in Hashem, as well as the insignificance of temporal, earthly possessions relative to the infinite, eternal reward of the World to Come.
At this point, the Rav asked the man what would happen if he were to receive word that his entire fleet had sunk in the ocean. The businessman, inspired by the insightful words of the Rav, answered that he could accept it. Assuming that his plan had worked, the Rav informed him that this had indeed occurred. Much to the Rav’s surprise, the man promptly fainted. After awakening the businessman, the Rav pressed him for an explanation. The man replied that “it’s much easier to have faith and trust in a G-d Who could wipe out my possessions than in one Who actually did.”
Pharaoh was a wicked idolater to the core who never believed in Hashem from the beginning. Nevertheless, it was easier for him to “believe” in a Hashem Who sends His agent (Yosef) to bring him satiety and riches than in a Hashem Who sends His agent (Moshe) to order him to free millions of slaves.
The Medrash says that Hashem figuratively rides over the righteous, as the Torah states (28:13) regarding Yaakov והנה ד' ניצב עליו – and behold Hashem was standing over him. The wicked, on the other hand, view themselves as superior to their gods, as the Torah relates (41:1) ופרעה חולם והנה עומד על היאור – and Pharaoh dreamed that he was standing over the river, and the Nile River was one of the Egyptian idols. When we recite Krias Shema twice daily and accept upon ourselves the yoke of Heaven, let us focus on genuinely placing Hashem above us and truly accepting His will, whatever it may be.

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) In Sefer Bereishis, Onkelos renders the word עברי – Hebrew – into Aramaic as עבראי (see e.g. Bereishis 41:12), but beginning in Parshas Shemos he changes and translates it as יהודאי – Jews. Why the sudden change? (Be’er Moshe, Pardes Yosef, Eebay’ei L’hu)
2) Rashi writes (2:14) that Moshe killed the Egyptian who was striking a Jewish slave by saying Hashem’s Ineffable Name. If somebody does kills another person in this manner, is he considered a murderer? (Halachos Ketanos 2:95, Maaseh Rokeach Hilchos Shabbos 24:7, Shu”t Yehuda Ya’aleh Orach Chaim 1:199, Kehillas Yaakov Bava Kamma 45)
3) Hashem was revealed to Moshe while he was shepherding the sheep of his father-in-law Yisro (3:1). A disproportionate number of our greatest ancestors – Hevel, Avrohom, Yitzchok, Yaakov, Moshe, Dovid, and Shaul – were shepherds. Why is this profession uniquely suited for one destined for spiritual greatness? (Rabbeinu Bechaye)
4) Hashem told Moshe (3:8) of His intention to redeem the Jewish people from slavery in Egypt and to bring them to the good and wide land of Israel. In what way is the narrow land of Israel considered wider than the land of Egypt? (Taima D’Kra, M’rafsin Igri)
5) Rashi writes (4:24) that an angel sought to kill Moshe because of his negligence in circumcising his son Eliezer. As circumcision is merely a positive commandment and there is no source which states that failure to perform this mitzvah incurs the death penalty, why was Moshe almost killed as a result of not doing so? (Maharsha Nedorim 31b, Chasam Sofer in Toras Moshe, Zahav MiSh’va, Chavatzeles HaSharon, M’rafsin Igri)
6) Rashi writes (4:24) that an angel sought to kill Moshe because of his negligence in circumcising his son. The Targum Yonason ben Uziel explains that Yisro wouldn’t allow him to do so, as the Medrash states (Yalkut Shimoni 169) that Yisro and Moshe had agreed that Moshe’s first child should be an idolater. How is it possible that Moshe agreed to allow one of his sons to be an idol-worshipper? (Shu”t Radvaz 6:2168, Taima D’Kra, Chavatzeles HaSharon)
7) According to the opinion that a woman is unfit to perform a circumcision, the Gemora in Avodah Zara (27a) states that although the verse (4:25) seems to indicate that Tzipporah circumcised her son, one must say either that she began the circumcision and Moshe completed it. As the Shulchan Aruch invalidates (Yoreh Deah 2:10) a ritual slaughter which is begun by somebody who is unfit to do so and completed by a person whose slaughter is valid, why is a circumcision performed in such a manner any different? (Kli Chemda, Chavatzeles HaSharon, M’rafsin Igri)
8) What did Pharaoh do wrong in refusing to accept orders (5:2, 4-5) from Moshe and Aharon, two total strangers, who suddenly appeared in his palace and began demanding that he should immediately set free an entire nation of slaves, something that no rational person would have considered normal? (Nesivos Rabboseinu)

© 2007 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Vayechi by HaChoson Oizer

2007-01-05T14:38:00.000-05:00

Parsha Potpourri
Parshas Vayechi – Vol. 2, Issue 7
Compiled by Oizer Alport

ישימך אלקים כאפרים וכמנשה (48:20) בך יברך ישראל לאמור
As a fulfillment of Yaakov’s blessing to Yosef, fathers bless their sons on Friday night that they should grow up to be like Ephraim and Menashe. Of all of our ancestors, why do we specifically bless our children to be like Ephraim and Menashe and not Avrohom, Yitzchok, Yaakov, Yosef, or any of the other tribes? If there is something unique about them, why don’t we just choose one of them to mention; what is the intent of blessing our sons to be like both of them?
The Mikdash Mordechai, Meged Yosef, and Rav Eliezer Sorotzkin answer that almost from the beginning of time, there has been a problem of sibling rivalry. It was responsible for the first murder in history, when Kayin killed his brother Hevel as he was jealous that his brother’s sacrifice found favor in Hashem’s eyes and his own did not. Yishmael had to be sent away to protect Yitzchok, and Yaakov had to flee for his life from his brother Eisav. Certainly Yaakov’s children were no strangers to jealousy, as they almost killed Yosef for being their father’s favorite child.
On the other hand, Yaakov blessed the younger Ephraim to be greater than the older Menashe, which certainly would have been grounds for fighting and anger, yet we find no hint of ill will between them. As the Shabbos Queen comes to permeate our houses with an atmosphere of peace and tranquility, we specifically bless our sons that they should go in the ways of Ephraim and Menashe and there be only peace and harmony between them always.

יששכר חמור גרם רובץ בין המשפתים (49:14)
Rav Tzvi Markovitz questions why the tribe of Yissochor, whose descendants are known for their dedication to Torah study, is specifically compared to a donkey as opposed to any other animal. He posits that while the Torah scholars also “carry a load” similar to a donkey, this parallel isn’t sufficient, as there are other animals – such as horses – which are also capable of transporting heavy burdens.
Rather, Rav Markovitz points out that all animals carrying loads must inevitably stop to rest, but there is a critical difference in how they do so. When horses stop for a break, their burden must be removed until they are ready to continue, as opposed to donkeys which are able to lie down and rest even while still carrying the weight on their backs.
It is specifically to them that the tribe of Yissochor is compared, as those who “carry the load of Torah” must also periodically stop to recharge, but the distinguishing characteristic of true B’nei Torah is that even at these moments, they conduct themselves in accord with their year-round behavior, never casting off their “burden” for a moment.
This can be contrasted to a well-known, if perhaps apocryphal, story which is related about Artistotle. As the story goes, in between lessons his students once bumped into him “on the wrong side of town,” in an area known for its immoral activities. Unable to reconcile his current behavior with the lofty philosophical teachings he espoused during his lectures, they asked for an explanation (what they were doing there has never been established). He allegedly answered them, “When class is in session, I am the great Aristotle, and I share my pearls of wisdom with the world. At other times, I am not the Aristotle with whom you are familiar,” a concept which the Torah hints to us is entirely foreign to our way of life.

וירא מנוחה כי טוב ואת הארץ כי נעמה ויט שכמו לסבול ויהי למס עובד (49:15)
Prior to his death, Yaakov gathered together his 12 sons, who represented the 12 tribes from which all Jews would be descended, and gave each of them a blessing which was uniquely suited for his unique role within the Jewish nation. In blessing his son Yissachar, whose descendants are traditionally associated with the study of Torah, Yaakov noted that “he saw that peaceful serenity is good and that the land was enjoyable, and he bent his shoulder to bear a heavy load.”
Rav Yerucham Levovitz, the great Mashgiach (spiritual supervisor) of the Mir yeshiva in Europe, points out an apparent contradiction in the verse. It begins by referring to the comfortable life of tranquility and the pleasant land enjoyed by the tribe of Yissachar, something which we can relate to and envision with little difficulty. However, just as we begin dreaming about the tropical pleasures that Yissachar must have had, Yaakov continues and describes his life of tranquility as one in which he bent his shoulder to work hard and carry a weighty burden, which hardly matches the mental images we would associate with Yissachar’s lot based on his initial description.
During World War II, all of European Jewry was under attack and in shambles. Even those who managed to hide or escape lived daily with the fear that numerous family members were unaccounted for and may not have been as fortunate. In the midst of all of this unprecedented destruction and uncertainty, the students of the Mir yeshiva stuck together and fled across Russia to Japan, China, and ultimately to freedom in the United States.
During one stage of their flight, they were on a boat which encountered choppy waters. As if they didn’t have enough to worry about regarding the plight of their brethren back in Eastern Europe, many of those on the boat became quite anxious as the boat was tossed and turned, wondering if they would ever reach their intended destination. Meanwhile, the illustrious Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz, was oblivious to the situation around him, completely absorbed in the difficult book Shev Shmaitsa that he was studying. Somebody approached him for guidance and comfort, asking “Where are we holding?” As he was referring to the plight of the boat, he was quite taken aback when Rav Chaim, completely engrossed in his studies, took it as a question about the book and innocently responded, “Shmaitsa Gimel (Chapter 3)!”
Rav Yerucham explains that Yaakov was coming to teach us that the true definition of peace and tranquility is the exact opposite of what people are accustomed to thinking. The American attitude is that true calm and serenity can only be had on a quiet beach, curled up with a good book and a martini, enjoying the backdrop of gentle waves crashing and the sun warming our bodies, with nobody around to disturb us (not even our Blackberries).
While this is indeed a pleasant and appealing mental image, it by definition restricts our inner state and makes it dependent on external factors beyond our control, implying that if we are unable to be in the situation and circumstances that we would ideally prefer, then inner bliss is unfortunately unattainable at that moment. After a bit of reflection, we should realize that this could hardly be the meaning of true inner tranquility and satisfaction.
The Torah comes to teach us that our mission in this world is to rise above whatever situations life may throw our way, not to focus outward but inward. If we carry within ourselves an untouchable reserve of inner joy and serenity, then we will be able to remain happy and calm throughout life’s journeys and tests, the circumstances of which are all too often beyond our control. By blessing Yissachar and his descendants to carry within themselves the yoke of studying Torah and doing mitzvos, Yaakov was revealing to them – and to us – the key to true simchas ha’chayim (happiness and peace).

וזאת אשר דבר להם אביהם ויברך אותם איש אשר כברבתו ברך אותם (49:28)
The Torah seems to indicate that Yaakov blessed each and every one of his sons. This is difficult to understand, as Rashi seems to explain his words to Reuven, Shimon, and Levi more like words of rebuke than of blessing. In what way was his harsh criticism considered a blessing?
Rav Uri Weissblum answers that we must redefine our understanding of a blessing. If somebody is sick but doesn’t realize it, or perhaps knows that he is sick but is unable to diagnose his illness, a doctor who comes along and points out to him his sickness and clarifies its treatment is indeed offering him a tremendous gift. Similarly, if a person’s friend has a large pot with a hole in the side, rather than giving him gifts to put in the pot which will only fall out and leave him with nothing, the preferable option would be to bring the hole to his attention so that he may fix it, at which point he will then be able to retain his future acquisitions.
Therefore, Yaakov felt that the most appropriate “blessing” he could offer to his 3 eldest sons was to point out to them characteristics which needed improvement (Reuven’s impetuosity and Shimon and Levi’s anger). Calling their spiritual illnesses to their attention would allow them to “plug the holes,” become whole, and ready for future blessings.
Rav Yisroel Salanter points out that everybody has his own personal “holes” which need fixing, and he suggests that this is the intent of the Mishnah in Avos (4:2) ובורח מן העבירה – a person should flee from “the sin.” He explains that every person has within himself one bad middah (character trait) which forms the root of his personal issues and difficulties, which of course the yetzer hara (evil inclination) will attempt to hide and disguise so as to prevent its cure. By calling their personal weak spots to their attention, Yaakov was indeed giving them a tremendous blessing.
However, Rav Dovid Feinstein adds that the rebuke can only be considered a blessing if one indeed accepts it and learns from it. Rav Shimon Schwab notes that although Yaakov referred to Shimon and Levi as “brothers” (49:5) and seemed to equate them in all of their actions, Levi’s descendants became one of the tribes of Torah scholars while Shimon’s descendants included Zimri who sinned publicly with a Midianite woman (Bamidbar 25:6, 14).
Rav Schwab posits that the difference between them was that unlike Shimon, Levi accepted the rebuke, internalized his father’s words, and uprooted his negative character traits, and indeed it was Levi’s descendant Pinchas who would kill Shimon’s offspring Zimri for his sin. We may derive from here that it is not one’s sins or what happens to a person that is critical, but rather what he makes of them. Yaakov teaches that if a person learns from his flaws and difficulties and repents his ways, he can turn even his biggest mistakes into the greatest of blessings.

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) Rashi writes (47:29) that in requesting Yosef to place his hand under his thigh, Yaakov was requesting him to take an oath not to bury him in Egypt. The Ramban (26:5) writes that the Avos only observed the mitzvos when they were in Eretz Yisroel, and therefore Yaakov was permitted to marry two sisters when he was outside of Eretz Yisroel. If so, what was the purpose of Yosef swearing not to bury his father in Egypt, as he took the oath outside of Eretz Yisroel and according to the Ramban it wasn’t binding? (Chida, Shu”t Avnei Nezer Yoreh Deah 2:306)
2) It is customary to quote the blessing which Yaakov gave to his grandchildren (48:20) as fathers bless their sons every Friday night that they should grow up to be like Ephraim and Menashe. While doing so, should one place only one hand on his child’s head or do so with both hands? (Siddur Yaavetz, Vilna Gaon quoted in Torah Temimah Bamidbar 6:23 footnote 131)
3) The blessing which Yaakov gave to Yehuda (49:8-12) contains all of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet except for one. What letter is missing, and what is its significance? (Rabbeinu Bechaye)
4) Rashi writes (49:13) that the tribe of Zevulun engaged in commerce and shared their profits with the tribe of Yissochor in order to allow them to be free to engage in the study of Torah. For enabling this Torah learning, the tribe of Zevulun receives half of the reward for the study that occurs as a result of their financial support. Is the reward given to Zevulun deducted from that which the Torah scholars of Yissochor will receive for their learning? (Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh Shemos 30:13, Chiddushei HaRim Avos 2:12, Vilna Gaon quoted in Taam V’Daas, Shu”t Igros Moshe Yoreh Deah 4:37, Chavatzeles HaSharon)
5) Other than before going to bed, when is a person supposed to say לישועתך קויתי ד' – I await Your salvation, Hashem – part of the blessing Yaakov gave to Dan (49:18)? (Mishnah Berurah 230:7)
6) When Shimi ben Geira cursed Dovid HaMelech, Dovid ordered that he not be punished for doing so, explaining (Shmuel 2 16:11) that “Hashem told him to curse me.” Before his death, why did Dovid then command his son Shlomo (Melochim 1 2:9) to hold him accountable for his actions and avenge the curse by using his wisdom to bring Shimi down to the grave in blood?

© 2006 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Vayechi by Reb Jay

2007-01-04T22:57:00.001-05:00

This parsha, the last in the Book of Bereshis, closes out the story of Yaakov and his children. Yaakov, realizing it is near the time of his death, wishes to bless his children. Before he does this though, he calls over Yoseph and his two sons--Ephraim and Menashe--and gives them a special brocha. This brocha is so special that for all future generations, when parents bless their sons, it will be done using the names of Ephraim and Menashe, as Yaakov says before giving them the brocha: “By you shall Israel bless” (Bereshis 8:20; Girls are blessed using the names of the 4 mothers: Sorah, Rivka, Rachel and Leah.)
What was so special about Ephraim and Menashe, that for all future generations, boys would be blessed to aspire to be like them?
Yaakov knew that Klal Yisroel is destined to spend much of its existence in Golus (this is a quality that makes us unique among the nations, as what other nation/culture has spent more of their exsistence in exile, then in their own land?). Yoseph was the first person in the nation of Israel to rear his children in a foreign land.
When Yaakov saw that Yoseph had risen to the challenge and raised children in golus who were worthy of being part of Beis Yaakov, he used them as the standard bearer for all future generations. To show that the foundation of Klal Yisroel is not based on location, but on Torah. As Rav Sa’adya Gaon wrote in Emunah V’Daos, “our nation is a nation only by virtue of the Torah”.
To rear children anywhere is a difficult task, but particularly in a country as morally corrupt as Egypt. Nonetheless, Yoseph ensured that his sons were reared in the paths of his parents, grandparents and great-grandparents. This great act of rearing children properly in such adverse conditions would not only imbue future generations of Jews with the spiritual DNA to resist assimliation, but would also be a lesson of how to go about doing so.

Vayigash - Sfas Emes

2006-12-28T19:10:00.000-05:00

VaYigash 5631 Second Ma'amar

Sfas Emes

by Reb Moshe David Tokayer
Petach Tikvah, IL

“ויאמר יוסף אל אחיו אני יוסף העוד אבי חי ולא יכלו אחיו לענות אתו כי נבהלו מפניו/Yosef said to his brothers, ‘I am Yosef. Is my father still alive?’ His brothers could not answer him because they were shocked before him.” The Midrash says that in this pasuk Yosef rebuked his brothers and they were not able to answer because of the shame they felt. The Midrash compares this with God’s rebuke on the ultimate day of judgment, “אוי לנו מיום הדין אוי לנו מיום התוכחה/Woe is to us on the day of judgment; woe is to us on the day of rebuke.” If the brothers could not withstand Yosef’s admonishment, how will we be able to withstand the ultimate admonishment before the redemption. Is the Midrash’s comparison simply one of degrees of rebuke or is there a fundamental connection between Yosef’s chiding his brothers and God’s chastisement on the final day of judgment?

The Sfas Emes explains that the rebukes are fundamentally the same. To understand why, we need to understand why the brothers were ashamed. The Sfas Emes explains that the brothers were mistaken about Yosef himself. The Zohar tells us that Yosef was שומר הברית/keeper of the covenant. Conventionally, this refers to his overcoming the temptations presented to him by the wife of Potiphar. The covenant that he kept was the covenant of the circumcision.

In this world holiness is hidden by gross physicality. The removal of the foreskin represents an unveiling of the holiness that lies within the physical world. (See VaYeira 5632 First Ma’amar for a detailed discussion of this concept.) Yosef, as the keeper of the covenant, represents the holiness that is within the physical world. The brothers, because this was hidden, did not realize it. Once Yosef revealed himself to his brothers, when they were confronted with their mistake, they stood in shame.

At the ultimate redemption as well, it will be made clear for all to see that the physical world in which we live is replete with holiness. God gave us the physical world and our circumstances to use to accomplish God’s will thereby rectifying ourselves and our environment. Before the final redemption, when this fact becomes clear to us we will look back at our lives and wonder how we could have used the physical world for purposes that were at odds with God’s will. Realizing our mistake, we will stand in shame before God. This is why the Midrash compares Yosef’s rebuke and the rebuke on the final day of judgment. They are fundamentally the same.

We can prevent the rebuke and our resulting shame by internalizing the understanding that everything around us and everything that happens to us are tools that God gave us in order to use to accomplish His will and come close to Him. On the day of judgment we will be able to stand before God, not in shame, but proudly having used these tools for their fundamental and ultimate purposes. Amen.

Vayigash by Reb Oizer

2006-12-28T17:26:00.000-05:00

Parsha Potpourri
Parshas Vayigash – Vol. 2, Issue 6
Compiled by Oizer Alport

והיה כראותו כי אין הנער ומת והורידו עבדיך את שיבת עבדך אבינו ביגון שאלה (44:31)
In pleading for mercy from Yosef, Yehuda stressed the fact that if Binyomin remained in Egypt as a slave and didn’t return with them, their father Yaakov would suffer greatly and may even die from the agony. Why did Yehuda mention only the pain which would be caused to their father over the loss of a beloved son and made no mention of the intense pain which would be caused to Binyomin’s 10 sons over the loss of their unique and irreplaceable father?
The Kotzker Rebbe derives from here that the love of a father for every single one of his 12 children is greater than the collective love of all 10 children for their one and only father! Rav Dessler writes that contrary to common wisdom, feelings of love toward another person are generated not by receiving from that person but by giving to him. As any parent can attest, raising a child is an opportunity like no other to constantly give of oneself to help another person who is unable to help himself. The tremendous feelings of love generated by such extreme and continuous giving are unmatched and unparalleled, as Yehuda explained to Yosef!

ויאמר יוסף אל אחיו אני יוסף העוד אבי חי ולא יכלו אחיו לענות אותו כי נבהלו מפניו (45:3)
When Yosef’s brothers came to Egypt to purchase food during the years of famine, he was able to recognize them immediately, but after 22 years of separation they were unable to identify him. As a result, he was able to subject them to a dramatic and frightening series of events. After accusing them of being spies, he incarcerated Shimon in order to force them to return with his beloved maternal brother Binyomin. After confusing them by inviting them to join with him at a banquet, he had his goblet planted in Binyomin’s sack in order to frame him for stealing.
Finally, when Yehuda pleaded for mercy, explaining how much their father Yaakov would suffer if they failed to return with Binyomin, Yosef was unable to hold himself back anymore. He ordered all of his Egyptian officers and servants out of the room and revealed his true identity to his brothers, telling them, “I am Yosef. Is my father still alive?”
The Medrash (Bereishis Rabbah 93:10) understands Yosef’s words not as a factual question but as a rebuke of his brothers, and derives from their inability to answer him a hint to how great will be our shame and embarrassment when Hashem Himself rebukes us in His Heavenly Court. Yet many commentators struggle to understand exactly where the censure lies in Yosef’s words, which on the surface appear to represent a simple question about his father’s welfare.
The Beis HaLevi explains that Yehuda had been begging for mercy on behalf of Binyomin as a result of the unfathomable suffering which his imprisonment would cause to their father Yaakov. Yosef therefore subtly reminded them of their utter lack of concern for Yaakov’s well-being when they sold him as a slave, thereby demonstrating the contradiction in their actions and calculations, an argument to which they had no answer.
There was once a yeshiva student who was scheduled to fly home to visit his family during a break in the yeshiva studies. A few hours after setting out for the airport, he returned to yeshiva. He explained to his confused Rosh Yeshiva that he had arrived late to the airport and missed his flight, to which the Rosh Yeshiva happily exclaimed, “Boruch Hashem!” Now it was the boy’s turn to be confused.
The Rosh Yeshiva explained that every day the boy came late to prayers, to his studies, and to class. He worried that when the boy would eventually pass away, he would be asked about his tardiness, to which he would answer that he simply had a difficult time with punctuality. At that point he would be shown that when something was important to him, such as making a flight home, he had no problem arriving on time, and his defense would be contradicted and rejected. Now, however, the Rosh Yeshiva rejoiced, because the boy also arrived late to the airport, and while his attendance record in yeshiva was far from exemplary, at least his defense would remain intact!
There will also come a time when Hashem will similarly judge us. We think that when we are asked why we didn’t give more charity or spend more time studying Torah, we will defend ourselves by invoking our lack of extra funds and free time. Hashem will then “remind” us of all of the frivolous luxuries for which we had no difficulty finding money, and of all of the thousands of hours we wasted over the course of our lives involved in trivial nonsense, leaving us speechless and humiliated to the core.
We must take heed of the lesson of Yosef’s rebuke of his brothers and make sure to expend at least as much effort on our spiritual affairs as we do on physical matters. The same efforts we make in trying to maximize the return on our investments or on planning a trip in great detail to maximize our enjoyment should also carry over to matters of the soul, as we devote the same energy to our efforts to improving our returns on our spiritual portfolio and to getting the most out of the journey to this world on which our souls have been sent.

ויאמר יוסף אל אחיו אני יוסף העוד אבי חי ולא יכלו אחיו לענות אותו כי נבהלו מפניו (45:3)
When Yosef’s brothers came to Egypt to purchase food during the years of famine, he was able to recognize them immediately, but after 22 years of separation they were unable to identify him. As a result, he was able to subject them to a dramatic and frightening series of events. After accusing them of being spies, he incarcerated Shimon in order to force them to return with his beloved maternal brother Binyomin. After confusing them by inviting them to join with him at a banquet, he had his goblet planted in Binyomin’s sack in order to frame him for stealing.
Finally, when Yehuda pleaded for mercy, explaining how much their father Yaakov would suffer if they failed to return with Binyomin, Yosef was unable to hold himself back anymore. He ordered all of his Egyptian officers and servants out of the room and revealed his true identity to his brothers, telling them, “I am Yosef. Is my father still alive?”
The entire episode and ordeal of the brothers’ encounter with Yosef seemed so illogical and nonsensical as to seem more like a bad dream than reality, yet in a split second, in just two words, אני יוסף – I am Yosef – suddenly the entire picture became crystal clear. All of the seemingly inexplicable events and details fell into place, and everything made perfect sense.
The history of the Jewish nation has been fraught with lofty highs and awful lows. The life of every individual Jew follows a similar pattern. Many happy events seem too good to be true, while many struggles seem too great to bear. Certainly, there seems to be no rhyme or reason to them, no interconnecting links weaving them together as part of a larger picture and greater plan. The Chofetz Chaim writes that just as with Yosef’s brothers, there will come a time when we will merit Hashem’s revelation in all of His glory and splendor. Upon hearing just two words, אני ד' – I am Hashem – everything will immediately fall into place, and all of our questions will vanish into thin air.

ויגידו לו לאמור עוד יוסף חי וכי הוא מושל בכל ארץ מצרים ויפג לבו כי לא האמין להם וידברו אליו את כל דברי יוסף ... וירא את העגלות אשר שלח יוסף לשאת אותו ותחי רוח יעקב אביהם (45:26-27)
סימן מסר להם במה היה עוסק כספירש ממנו – בפרשת עגלה ערופה (רש"י)
Yaakov’s initial reaction upon hearing the brothers’ report that Yosef was still alive and was a ruler in Egypt was one of disbelief. Even if they met somebody who claimed to be Yosef, Yaakov was convinced that it was nothing more than a fraud. Yet when the brothers added on that the person they met had also mentioned the last Torah subject that Yosef had learned together with Yaakov before being separated, Yaakov was convinced that he was indeed legitimate. The obvious question is that if until now Yaakov suspected that the person was an impostor, what proof did this additional knowledge constitute to the contrary, as this suspected con artist could easily have discovered this fact through thorough research?
The Darkei Mussar and Rav Shimshon Pinkus give a beautiful answer based on an amazing story involving the Vilna Gaon. In the times of the Gaon, there was a tragic case of an agunah in Vilna – a woman whose husband sadly disappeared without a trace not long after their wedding, leaving her forbidden to remarry. After more than ten years had passed, out of nowhere, one day a man appeared in Vilna claiming to be her long-lost husband.
The woman and her family were skeptical, and suspected that in reality he was a lowly swindler in pursuit of the family’s wealth, but to the surprise of all, he was able to answer every question they posed about things that presumably only the real husband would know. He even took his “wife” aside and privately reminded her of intimate details which had transpired between the two of them and which nobody else could possibly know.
Still unsure, they consulted the Vilna Gaon, who instructed them to say nothing further and to wait until the coming Shabbos. That Friday night, the Gaon escorted them to the synagogue. Upon entering, he asked the man to identify the family’s regular seats. His guise up, the man was humiliated and immediately fled.
Amazed, the family asked the Gaon for an explanation of his brilliant detective work. He explained that it was indeed quite straightforward. It was clear that this had been either the real husband or somebody who had encountered him and paid him to reveal all of his detailed knowledge about his wife and family so that he could pass as him and make off with the family’s fortune. The Gaon knew that it would never occur to an impostor to ask the real husband about spiritual matters, so asking the man to point out the family’s seats in the synagogue was the perfect litmus test, which the man clearly failed!
Similarly, Yaakov was skeptical about the identity of the purported Yosef whom the brothers had met in Egypt. After all, they had had extensive interactions with him until now and not one of them was able to recognize him as their long-lost brother. Perhaps the man had similarly extracted from Yosef details about his family which he could then use for his own ulterior motives. Only when he proved that he remembered the last Torah topic that they had learned together, a spiritual matter, was Yaakov convinced that this could be none other than the true Yosef!

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) Rashi (44:18) writes that Yehuda challenged Yosef by comparing him to Pharaoh, arguing that just as Pharaoh makes decrees but fails to follow through, so too you (Yosef) haven’t kept your promises. Where did Pharaoh make a decree that he subsequently neglected to keep? And where did Yosef make a promise that he later ignored? (Tosefos Rid, Moshav Z’keinim, Bartenura)
2) Just prior to sending his brothers back to Yaakov in Canaan, Yosef warned them (45:24) not to become agitated on the journey. According to one of Rashi’s explanations, Yosef was advising them not to travel too quickly by taking large steps, as the Gemora in Taanis (10b) states that doing so causes a person to lose 1/500th of his eyesight. What can a person who has done so do as a remedy in order to restore his lost vision? (Mishnah Berurah 271:48)
3) Rashi writes (46:10) that after Shimon and Levi killed Sh’chem and the men of his town, Dina refused to exit Sh’chem’s tent until Shimon promised to marry her (34:26). How was Shimon permitted to marry his sister Dina? (Moshav Z’keinim, Panieach Raza, Tur HeAruch, Gur Aryeh, Mizrachi, Kli Chemda, Mas’as HaMelech, Chavatzeles HaSharon, Emunas Itecha, M’rafsin Igri)
4) Which two people who are mentioned explicitly by name in Parshas Vayigash were twin brothers? (Seder HaDoros, HaK’sav V’HaKaballa, HaDrash V’HaIyun, Torah L’Daas Vol. 7)
5) At the emotional reunion between Yaakov and Yosef, the Torah relates (46:29) that Yosef fell on his father Yaakov’s neck and wept. Rashi explains that Yaakov didn’t reciprocate by falling on Yosef’s neck and kissing him because he was in the middle of reciting the Shema. The Shulchan Aruch rules (Orach Chaim 66:1) that a person should interrupt the Shema even in the middle of a verse in order to greet a king or other great man whom one is obligated to honor and respect. As Rashi writes (48:2) that Yaakov exerted himself to sit up in his bed to honor Yosef’s royal position, why didn’t he similarly stop his recitation of the Shema in order to greet and honor Yosef? (Taz Orach Chaim 66:1, Biur HaGra Orach Chaim 66:4, Chavatzeles HaSharon)
6) From which act of Yosef’s can one derive an obligation to express one’s gratitude for acts of kindness done for him even by a non-Jew? (Targum Yonason 47:22, Shelah HaKadosh)

© 2006 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Vayigash by Reb Jay

2006-12-28T17:14:00.000-05:00

In this week’s parsha, there is the culmination to the story of Yoseph and his brothers.

We see that the written and oral law do not whitewash the stories of our ancestors. If Yehudah and his brothers had simply wanted Yoseph out of the picture for malicious reasons, there is no way they would have been worthy in the eyes of Hashem to be the progenitors of the Jewish nation. So there must be more to the story.

The 12 tribes represented a unified Klal Yisroel—nation of Israel, with each brother taking a different role. Yehudah, as leader of the brothers, felt there was something in Yoseph which would lead to the ultimate disentigration of the tribes. These ideas were not produced out of thin air. When he saw Yoseph coming forward with dreams proclaiming that the brothers would eventually bow down to him, and when Yoseph would report anything that he perceived as negative back to Yaakov, Yehudah seriously worried for the future of the 12 tribes. He, along with the brothers, deemed it necessary for Yoseph to be out of the picture. Their first thought was to kill him. Later, they decided to sell him, and they told Yaakov he had been killed by a wild animal.

Why did Yoseph do these things that created such acrimony between him and his brothers? It says in Psalms: “Turn away from evil and do good.” This is manifest in the 2 types of commandments: positive commandments such as praying, tefilin, etc, and negative commandments such as not to steal, not to eat non-kosher animals, etc. Yoseph saw it as his responsibility to rebuke his brothers, to persuade them to turn away from evil (for this reason Yoseph “told” on his brothers to Yaakov. In reality he had judged them wrongly). In fact, when the Jewish people are redeemed, there will be 2 steps: first there will be the Moshiach from the house of Yoseph. His job will be to turn the Jews away from evil. Then shall come the Moshiach from the house of David, who will lead them in doing good. So although Yehudah fears of the disunity that Yoseph would cause were not unfounded (Rav Tzadok in fact explains, that, to a degree, these fears proved true 700 years later, when 10 tribes broke off, led by Yeravam, the leader of the tribe of Ephraim, who was the son of Yoseph) he misunderstood Yoseph’s motivation. And Yoseph was too impetuous in how he carried out his behavior.

After being sold, Yoseph ended up in Egypt where many miraculous events occurred to his benefit. Eventually Yoseph ended up as Prime Minister. Not knowing he was their brother Yoseph the brothers came to him to procure food , as a terrible famine is raging throughout the region.

Yoseph gave them a very hard time. He went so far as to plant a goblet in his brother Binyamin’s bag, accused him of stealing it, and told the brothers Binyamin must remain in an Egyptian prison. Only after Yehudah confronted him did he admit that he is their long lost brother Yoseph.

Why did he do this? Yoseph, now a man, still understood that it was his role to rebuke the brothers. Not rebuke them needlessly, but to improve them. The greatest test to see if a person regrets an action taken is to put him in the exact same situation. So Yoseph took Binyamin, who like Yoseph was the son of Rachel (they were the only two children Rachel had) and put him in a situation where he would be torn away from the family. It was the same situation as twenty two years earlier, when Yoseph was torn away from his father . Would they stand up for him? This time the brothers got it right and fought for their brother. When Yoseph saw this, he realized they had truly atoned for their earlier actions.

Vayishlach by Reb Jay

2006-12-05T16:18:00.000-05:00

“Yaakov was left alone and a man wrestled with him until the break of dawn. When he saw that he could not overcome him (Yaakov), he struck the socket of his hip...Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the gid hanasheh to this day, because he struck Yaakov’s hip socket on the displaced sinew” (Bereshis 32:25-26, 32).

There are many questions to be asked from this incident. Who wrestled with Yaakov? What did he want from him? What does it mean, when he (the malach) could not overcome Yaakov, he injured him? And finally, why do we not eat of the gid hanasheh till this very day?

The Midrash states that Yaakov’s wrestling partner was actually the sar of Esav. Obviously a nation’s angel stands for the interest of the nation that it is representing. The Michtav M’Eliyahu writes that the angel that represented Esav was the yetzer hara itself.

How was Esav’s evil manifest? In his mocking of all things good. We see this in the answer that the angel of Esav gave to Yaakov when asked his name: “why do you ask me for my name?” The simple meaning of this answer is, why do you care what my name is? But it could also be read, my name is, “why is this?” To anything that is worthwhile or serious, the response of Eisav is to mock, and to scorn, to ask “why is this” (this, in fact, was what Esav said regarding his birthright, “what is this birthright to me?”).

The “fight” between Yaakov and the angel of Esav was not a physical one. It was a spiritual battle for the neshamos of future generations. Will we look at our birthright as an honor and as an obligation to improve the world, as Yaakov did, or will we look at it as a joke, at something to make fun of, as Esav did. This was truly a battle for the ages.

What does it mean, “and he (the malach) saw that he was unable to over come him (Yaakov)”? This posuk teaches us that there is no inherent weakness in Klal Yisrael. If so, how did the malach injure Yaakov? And when the angel of Esav saw that Yaakov was going to be triumphant, he found a spiritual weakness in him. The Zohar says this weakness was lack of support for Torah study, that Klal Yisrael would not take the study of Torah seriously enough. And it was this weakness which was able to prevent the clear victory of Yaakov. In other words, it is never possible for any nation to overcome Klal Yisrael on their own merits/strength; only through our own weakness are we vulnerable.

The Chinuch gives a moving explanation as to why we do not eat the gid hanasheh until today. He writes that when we do not eat this gid hanasheh, it is to remind us that in the course of our galus, we will undergo much pain and suffering. But we must always remember that as dark as it may seem, just as Yaakov was healed by the first rays of the sun, so will all of Israel be redeemed at the dawn of the Moshiach, after our long night of galus.

It is incumbent upon us to remember what the weakness the angel of Esav—the yetzer hara—found in Yaakov, and how only through strengthening ourselves in Torah—both learning and supporting—can we can fight and overcome the yetzer hara.

Vayetzei by Reb Jay

2006-12-01T07:01:00.000-05:00

After arriving at the house of Lavan, Yaakov Avinu arranges with Lavan that he will marry Rochel.

Of course, Lavan replaces Leah with Rochel, and the deception is able to succeed because Rochel tells Leah the simanim that she had pre-arranged with Yaakov.

When Yaakov realized the morning after the chasuna that it was in fact Leah that he had married, Yaakov was upset. The Midrash (Bereishis Rabbah) relates that he confronted Leah and asked her how she could have tricked him. Leah replied that who was Yaakov to say anything, as Yaakov tricked his own father and brother in order to receive the brocha.

How are we to understand the answer of Leah? Was she trying to one up Yaakov, by telling him that since he had deceived, that she was allowed to deceive as well? Furthermore, the Gemara in Kesubos tells us that if a person marries someone under false pretenses, the Kiddushin is not tofes (see Tosfos “Chazaka” Kesubos 10a), and is in fact a mekach ta’us (an acquisition made under false pretences that is invalid). How could Leah and Rochel have been involved in such a michshol?

Let us try to understand the answer that Leah gave Yaakov when asked how she could have played a role in the deception. Leah was not saying that since you deceived, I deceived as well. Leah was in fact telling Yaakov that the moment he took the brochos from Eisav, everything changed. Why did Yaakov take the brochos from Eisav? The Shelah Hakadosh writes that ideally, there were meant to be four avos: Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov and Eisav. Eisav would have been a melech of gashmiyus, and Yaakov a melech of ruchniyus. While Yaakov realized his potential, Eisav did not. Therefore, Yaakov needed to usurp Eisav’s role. This was understood by Rivkah, and was the reason she told Yaakov to take the brochos. This also extended to their prospective wives. The zivug of Yaakov was Rochel and the zivug of Eisav was Leah. Once Eisav did not fulfill his role, the responsibility of marrying Leah fell to Yaakov.

That is what Leah meant by her reply to Yaakov. She was saying that once Yaakov deceived his father and took the brochos, he also accepted the responsibility to marry her. And knowing this to be true is what allowed Rochel and Leah to conspire that Yaakov marry Leah. And when Yaakov heard this from Leah, he did not opt out of the marriage as he had every right to (being that it was a mekach ta’us), but stayed with Leah.
Later on, when Yaakov escaped and Lavan caught up to him, Yaakov confronts Lavan with all the evil he has perpetuated upon Yaakov. But he never confronts him with the fact that he switched Leah and Rochel, because Yaakov knows that this particular act was Min Hashamayim, and for the good of Klal Yisroel.

Toldos by Reb Jay

2006-11-23T14:50:00.000-05:00

Of the three Avos--Avraham, Yitzchok and Yaakov--least mention is made of Yitzchok.

Who was Yitzchok? Was he merely a bridge between Avrohom and Yaakov? Or was he as much of a “founding father” of Judaism as Avrohom and Yaakov.

What does it mean to be a “founding father” or “mother” (Sorah, Rivka, Rachel and Leah)? When a tree is planted and the owner of the tree realizes the tree will grow in an undesirable direction, it is very simple to rectify the problem in the first couple of years of the tree’s life.

So too in Judaism. When Avrohom discovered Hashem and started the process of the Jewish nation any act he did would have consequences for thousands of years. Any test which he and the other “fathers” and “mothers” were given was something that was neccessary to ensure our survival as a people.

Avrohom’s primary characteristic was Chesed—lovingkindness. This was expressed by the expansion of his message. Thousands of people followed Avrohom and Sorah to hear their message of belief in Hashem and the idea that life has purpose.

Yitzchok’s primary character trait was Gevura—strength of conviction; discipline. While the role of Avrohom was in building, Yitzchok’s role was in strengthening the building—internalizing the message of his parents.

Hashem’s communication with Avrohom was totally different from the way it was with Yitzchok. For example, while Hashem told Avrohom to bring Yitzchok up as an offering, He never directly told Yitzchok—Yitzchok only heard it from his father. But Yitzchok’s strong conviction allowed him to impicitly trust Hashem.

Over the course of his life Avrohom dug many wells. In the time of Yitzchok most of these wells were filled in by the Phillistines. Yitzchok redug these same wells. Thus we see his reaction was never to lose hope, but to see adversity only as a temporary setback. This is metaphorical of the Jewish role after destruction of our Temples and other setbacks we have suffered as a nation.

Just as Avrohom’s quality—willingness to sacrifice all that is dear for Hashem—enabled so many Jews throughout the generations togive their lives for Judaism, similarly Yitzchok’s strong conviction has enabled us to come back from so many setbacks.

What happenned to the thousands of followers Avrohom and Sorah attracted? When these people heard the message of Avrohom and Sorah, it struck a chord in them. However, when they saw what Yitzchok had to go through, they decided they would “keep” what they had learned from Avrohom and Sorah, but the next step was too much for them. This is why Avraham is considered “father of all nations”, while Yitzchok is exclusively a Jewish father.

Vayera by Reb Jay

2006-11-09T22:40:00.000-05:00

In this week’s parsha, the Torah records the incident of the Akeidah, the binding of Yitzchok. This story holds a place of paramount importance in Judaism. It is the truest act of devotion to Hashem that indicates that, even in circumstances that appear to be beyond our understanding, we should still place our trust in Hashem.

Every aspect of this narrative has many lessons and ramifications for future generations. It is no exaggeration to say that from these verses, we can understand our destiny.

Let us focus on the latter part of the story, after Avraham had already been told by Hashem to lay down his knife and not to slaughter Yitzchok.

The Torah tells us: “And Avraham raised his eyes and saw a ram afterwards, caught in the thicket by its horns” (Bereshis 22:13).

There a few obvious questions on this verse. What does it mean by “afterwards”? Furthermore, what is the significance of the ram being caught in the thicket?

The Midrash tells us (Bereshis Rabbah) that the word “afterwards” contains a hint to the future. When the Children of Israel sin, they can repair their fractured relationship with Hashem afterwards by blowing the Shofar on Rosh Hashanah. The Gemara (Yerushalmi Ta’anis Chapter 4 Law 2) explains that when we are entangled by our sins, and get caught in the web of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians and Romans (the four exiles we are to endure), we will be redeemed with the sound of the ram’s horn.

Similarly on an individual level, just as the ram was entangled in the thicket, when we are entangled by our sins, we free ourselves through offering ourselves up to Hashem (in a figurative, not literal manner) just as this ram was offered up to Hashem.

The ram seen by Avraham and ultimately sacrificed is listed in Pirkei Avos (Chapter 5 Mishna 6) as being one of the things created at dusk between the sixth and seventh day of creation.

The Midrash tells us that Hashem always creates the antidote before He creates the sickness. The reason this ram was created, then, is because the ram’s horn, the Shofar, is used not only on Rosh Hashanah, as a tool to accept the Kingship of Hashem, but also to herald the receiving of the Torah, and to announce the coming of the Moshiach. Even as mankind may suffer personal exiles due to their sins, or when the Jewish people are undergoing a national exile, the antidote — the Shofar and the subservience to Hashem it represents — has already been created.

When Avraham saw the ram caught in the thicket, this ram had been waiting for him for two thousand years. Why didn’t Avraham see it immediately? The Midrash tells us that the Soton hid it from Avraham. But when Avraham performed the will of Hashem, he was no longer able to hide it. The Soton, especially in his role as our evil inclination, is the master of obfuscation, but as long as we do the will of Hashem, his tricks are unable to deceive us.

Lech - Lecho by Oizer

2006-11-03T11:21:00.000-05:00

Parshas Lech Lecha

Compiled by Oizer Alport

ויוצא אתו החוצה ויאמר הבט נא השמימה וספר הכוכבים

אם תוכל לספר אתם ויאמר לו כה יהיה זרעך (15:5)

After Avrohom Avinu miraculously defeated the armies of the four kings and rescued the captured people and possessions, he feared that the miracles Hashem performed on his behalf had detracted from the reward awaiting him in the World to Come. Hashem reassured him and promised that his reward would indeed be very great. Avrohom then expressed his worry that he had no children to inherit him, to which Hashem replied by promising that he would indeed merit to have children.

Hashem then took Avrohom outside and instructed him to gaze toward the Heavens. Hashem challenged him to attempt to count the number of stars and cryptically added, “so shall your offspring be.” Why did Hashem present Avrohom with such an impossible task, and what did He mean with His blessing, “so will your offspring be?”

Rav Meir Shapiro beautifully explains that although finite, the number of stars is clearly so great as to be beyond human comprehension and certainly uncountable with the naked eye. An intelligent person who is challenged to do so will likely decline the impossible task. Knowing that he will be unable to successfully finish the project, he will choose not to even begin. Avrohom Avinu was also aware of this reality. Nevertheless, when Hashem suggested that he attempt to count the stars, he quickly went outside, looked up in the sky, and began counting, “One, two, three.”

Avrohom was undaunted by apparent restrictions and natural limitations, recognizing that the power of one’s will and commitment to a project can allow him to succeed where others foresaw only failure. Upon recognizing Avrohom’s contagious enthusiasm and willingness to disregard naysayers, Hashem quickly blessed him that so should his offspring be a nation known for their dedication and perseverance against all odds.

Not surprisingly, Rav Meir Shapiro – whose yahrtzeit (7 Cheshvan) traditionally falls in the week of Parshas Lech Lecha – lived by his own teachings. More than any other single figure in the 20^th century, he singlehandedly revolutionized Torah study as we know it today through his development of the concept of Daf Yomi – learning one page of Gemora daily. The odds of his program spreading and taking off were clearly stacked against him. The potential for any of a number of obstacles to derail his plan before it got off the ground was great. Yet like his forefather Avrohom before him, he ignored the probability of not succeeding, realizing that with the aid of the fire which burned within him, he would be able to reach the stars, and beyond!

ויאמר אד-ני ד' במה אדע כי אירשנה (15:8) ׁ

The Gemora in Berachos (7b) derives from our verse that Avrohom Avinu was the first person in history to call Hashem אדון – Master. The story is told (see introduction to Shu”t Kanfei Yonah) that the author of a new commentary on the Siddur (prayer-book) brought his manuscript to the great Vilna Gaon to receive his comments and request a letter of approbation. The Gaon began to examine the work and noticed that the author suggested an original insight explaining why the morning prayers begin with Adon Olam (Master of the World).

The Gemora in Berachos (26b) states that each of the forefathers instituted one of the three daily prayers: Avrohom enacted Shacharis, Yitzchok originated Mincha, and Yaakov introduced Maariv. As the morning prayers were instituted by Avrohom Avinu, who was the first person to refer to Hashem as אדון, we therefore begin Shacharis with Adon Olam. Upon reading this, the Gaon was overcome with joy and remarked that if only for the beauty and truth of this one insight, the publication of the entire work is justified!

In a similar vein, the Meshech Chochmah notes that although the mitzvos of wearing a Tallis and Tefillin are applicable the entire day, we are accustomed to wear them only during the morning prayers. After miraculously defeating the armies of the four kings, Avrohom brought back all of the people and possessions which had been taken captive. The King of Sodom suggested that Avrohom return to him the people while keeping the possessions for himself. Lest the wicked king of Sodom take credit for making him rich, Avrohom refused to accept any gifts, emphatically swearing (14:23) that he wouldn’t accept even a thread or a shoestrap. The Gemora in Sotah (17a) states that in the merit of this statement, Avrohom’s descendants received the mitzvos of Tallis and Tefillin. Although they may be worn the entire day, because we merited to receive them through the actions of Avrohom, we are accustomed to commemorate this by wearing them during the morning prayers which he instituted!

ותקח שרי אשת אברם את הגר המצרית שפחתה מקץ עשר שנים

לשבת אברם בארץ כנען ותתן אתה לאברם אישה לו לאשה (16:3)

ותקח שרי - לקחתה בדברים אשריך שזכית לידבק בגוף קדוש כזה (רש"י)

After ten years of not bearing any children to Avrohom, Sorah suggested that perhaps she would merit to give birth if she allowed Avrohom to marry her maidservant Hagar. Rashi writes that after Sorah spoke to Hagar to persuade her to agree to this plan, Hagar was convince and willing to go along with it. Rashi previously commented (16:1) that Hagar was none other than the daughter of the wicked Paroh. When she heard of the miraculous punishments which Hashem meted out there for the sake of Sorah (12:17), she decided to attach herself to this family in any way possible.

Although this surely required tremendous personal sacrifice on her part, she nobly preferred to be a maidservant to such holy people rather than a prestigious woman in Egypt. If Hagar had already given up everything she knew and enjoyed in life – wealth, honor, fame – in order to draw become even minimally attached to this holy family, why was it necessary for Sorah to convince Hagar to agree to be married to the righteous Avrohom?

Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz answers with a beautiful insight into human nature. At the end of Dovid HaMelech’s life, he gave his final instructions to his son Shlomo, who would succeed him as king. He commanded Shlomo (Melochim 1 2:8-9) to remember the vicious curses which Shimi ben Geira had heaped upon him (Shmuel 2 16:7-8). However, because Dovid had sworn to Shimi that he wouldn’t kill him for his actions, he advised Shlomo to use his wisdom to find a means to avenge his disgrace and execute Shimi.

Shlomo dutifully called Shimi and commanded him to build a house in Jerusalem, informing him that he must remain within the city limits, for on the day that he departs he will be killed (2:36-37). Shimi agreed to the terms and indeed built a house in Jerusalem and refrained from departing the city for 3 years. At that time, two of his slaves escaped and he pursued them out of the city in order to bring them back. Upon hearing of this, Shlomo had Shimi summoned and decreed that because he had violated the conditions of their agreement he was to be killed.

Although in hindsight this represented a brilliant method of reconciling Dovid’s promise not to directly kill Shimi for his act of rebellion with Dovid's desire to have Shimi punished, how did Shlomo know that his plan would succeed, as we indeed find that Shimi managed to abide by the condition for 3 years before an unexpected episode caused him to stumble? Why did Shimi, who was a wise man who understood the consequences of leaving Jerusalem and managed to refrain from doing so for 3 years, suddenly commit such a foolish mistake, one for which he paid dearly with his life?

The Alshich HaKadosh explains that Shlomo, in his infinite wisdom, understood human nature profoundly. A person’s natural inclination is to crave freedom and resist any restraint on it whatsoever. Although Shimi’s “jail” didn’t resemble the typical cell, in that he was free to enjoy everything offered by the greatest city on earth, he was nevertheless artificially confined. Shlomo recognized that sooner or later Shimi’s need to feel free and unrestrained would win out and he would violate the terms of their arrangement. When that eventually occurred, Shlomo was ready and waiting to execute Shimi in a dignified manner, just as his father had requested.

Similarly, Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz suggests that Hagar had demonstrated tremendous dedication and commitment to her ideals in willingly leaving behind the splendor of her father’s palace in Egypt. She was willing to give up everything in order to take a menial job serving the family of the holy Avrohom in degrading ways. Nevertheless, she knew deep down that at any time, she was free to change her mind and return to her homeland. Although a marriage to Avrohom would offer her the unique opportunity of being married to the man who introduced the knowledge of Hashem to the world and to bear a child with him, it would also require a commitment on her part to voluntarily renounce her independence and autonomy, and it was for this reason that Sorah needed to convince Hagar to overcome her internal resistance.

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) Tosefos writes (Berachos 7b d.h. lo) that the events in Parsha Lech Lecha are related out of chronological order. Avrohom was 73 years old when he fought the war against the four kings (14:14-16), but he was only 70 at the time of the ברית בין הבתרים (covenant between the parts), even though it is related later (15:7-21). The commandment at the beginning of the parsha to leave his homeland (12:1-3) occurred when Avrohom was 75 (12:4). As the covenant between the parts took place in the land of Canaan (15:7), why did Avrohom go there before Hashem commanded him to do so (12:1-3), and once he had gone there why did he return to Charan?

2) Rashi writes (12:5) that in addition to Lot, when setting out for the land of Canaan Avrohom and Sorah also took the people whom they had converted during their time in Charan. What happened to all of these converts and their descendants, as no subsequent mention is made of them? (Meshech Chochmah 21:33, Ayeles HaShachar)

3) Rashi writes (12:11) that due to his great level of modesty, Avrohom never looked at Sorah until they were about to enter Egypt. How was he permitted never to look at her when the Gemora in Kiddushin (41a) rules that if it is forbidden to marry a woman until he has looked at her to ensure that she will find favor in his eyes? (Maharsha Bava Basra 16a, Oznayim L’Torah, Mishmeres Ariel, Eebay’ei L’hu, Maharsha Yevamos 100b)

4) When approaching Egypt, Avrohom asked Sorah to pretend to be his sister so that the Egyptians won’t kill him in order to be permitted to marry her (12:12-13). As forbidden relationships are one of the three categories of sins for which one is required to give up his life rather than transgress them (Rambam Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 5:6), how could he ask her to do so in order to save his life? (Nesivos Rabboseinu, Taam V’Daas, HaK’sav V’HaKaballa, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and Rav Chaim Kanievsky quoted in M’rafsin Igri, Eebay’ei L’hu)

5) Rashi writes (13:14) that as long as the wicked Lot remained with Avrohom, Hashem didn’t speak to him. How can this be reconciled with an explicit verse which states (12:7) that Hashem did speak to Avrohom during the time that he was traveling with Lot? (Moshav Z’keinim, Paneiach Raza, Rav Ovadiah Bartenura, Akeidas Yitzchok)

6) A person who sees a large and impressive lake recites the blessing עושה מעשה בראשית – Who makes the work of Creation (Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 228:1). However, this is only the case if the lake was created in that location at the time the world was formed, but not if it was subsequently formed through the actions of man (Mishnah Berurah 228:6). Does one who sees the Dead Sea recite this blessing, as the Torah seems to indicate that it was only created in the time of Avrohom (Rashi 14:3), but the Gemora in Bava Basra (74b) seems to indicate that it was one of the 7 lakes which was formed at the time of Creation to surround the land of Israel? (Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv quoted in Ayeles HaShachar, Shu”t Shevet HaLevi 9:47, Mor U’Ketziah Orach Chaim 228, Sefer Pardes quoted in Nimukei Orach Chaim 228:2, Piskei Teshuvos 228:3)

7) After Avrohom miraculously defeated the four kings and rescued the captured Lot (14:14-16), he feared that the miracles performed on his behalf had detracted from the reward which awaited him in the World to Come. Hashem reassured him and promised him that his reward would indeed be great (Rashi 15:1). Of what concern was this to Avrohom, as the Mishnah in Avos (1:3) advises one to serve Hashem without concern for the reward he may receive for his actions? (Ayeles HaShachar, Ruach Chaim)

© 2006 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net

Lech - Lecho by Reb Jay

2006-11-03T11:03:00.000-05:00

In this week’s parsha there is the chronicle of the relationship between Avraham, the father of the Jewish people, and Hashem.

Avraham had been involved in a war. After the war, and the rescue of his nephew Lot, and after Avraham had seen miraculous acts performed by Hashem, Avraham said to Him, “You have given me no offspring.” Avraham was not complaining. In fact the Midrash relates (Bereshis Rabbah) that he was worried that perhaps when Hashem performed these miracles for him, his merit had run out. Furthermore, he saw in the stars that he was to have no children. The Torah tells us: Hashem took him outside and said “gaze now towards the heavens and count the stars if you are able. And He said to him, so shall your offspring be” (Bereshis 15:3-5).

Hashem told Avraham to go outside for two reasons. The first reason is logical, to show Avraham the vast number of stars and how they are uncountable. The second reason is much deeper. The Gemara explains (Shabbos 156a) that Hashem was telling Avraham to see outside of nature. Yes, according to nature Avraham was not able to father children, and the astronomers were reading the stars correctly. Hashem was telling Avraham to see outside of his perceptions, in that not only was Avraham outside nature, but it had to be that way, for he was to father a nation that would be outside nature. Ain mazal l’Yisroel-the Jewish people are not under astronomical influence.

For example, a nation usually starts when a group of people live in a regional area, decide to form a government, write a set of laws, form an army, and become a nation. Rarely is the constitution written before the area is even settled. Yet that is what the Jewish people did, by receiving the Torah and then going to Israel. It is outside the natural order of the world for a group of people to identify both as a religion and a nation while away from that land for close to two thousand years, but that is what the Jewish people have done.

Rav Moshe Chaim Luzzato writes in Da’as Tevunos, that Hashem runs the world with two traits. The first trait is the way of judgment, in that the world runs through reward and punishment. The second trait is through His goodness, as due to His perfection He desires to return the world to a state of perfection, to rectify the world. The first trait is how Hashem runs the world through nature; the second trait is above nature. It must be our will to perform the will of Hashem. We elevate ourselves through performance of His will, the Torah, and cling to His trait of running the world above nature, leading to the perfection of the world.

Parshas Noach by Reb Jay Spero

2006-10-27T06:58:00.000-04:00

In this week’s parsha we have the famous story of Noach and his ark. As we know, every story that is mentioned in the Torah is not mentioned merely as an historical guide. It is mentioned to us as information that is relevant and meaningful to our lives.

What are we to glean from the story of Noach and the water that rained down on the earth?

“Hashem said to Noach: The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with robbery through them; I am about to destroy them from the earth” (Bereshis 6:13). When Hashem tells this to Noach, He is not telling him something that will happen in the next week. In fact, it took Noach one hundred and twenty years to build the ark. The Midrash mentions that Hashem gave Noach specific instructions on which trees to plant in order to obtain the proper wood for the ark. The Zohar explains that the reason for this was that the ark had a strong degree of holiness, similar to the Tabernacle. That just as the tabernacle was a place where Hashem “concentrated” His Shechina—Divine presence— so too the ark was a place on earth where Noach and the Shechina would be able to dwell while the world underwent a purification process (obviously Hashem does not need a place to dwell, as He has no physical needs, but one of the reasons He created the world, was that man should perfect it enough that He would be able to dwell amongst man, which is precisely what He was doing here.)

What was supposed to happen in these one hundred and twenty years? Noach was meant to have an effect on the people around him. That when they would see him building the ark, they would ask him what he was doing, and he would tell them that he was preparing for the end of the world. He would then explain to them why Hashem desired to destroy His own handiwork. Although the people themselves had not heard the voice of Hashem there is an obvious imperative to be a moral human being, and in this society, the thievery was so rampant, that it was not worthwhile for them to continue to exist.

From this we learn an extremely important lesson: the ability for one person to make a difference.

Hashem would not have had Noach build the ark for all those years if He didn’t think it there was potential for change. This shows the tremendous power we have to effect change. And although at the end, Noach did not have a positive effect on the world, he did have a positive effect on his family and himself.

The significance of the water was a purification process. “I will send rain upon the earth, forty days and forty nights” (Bereshis7:4). The number forty has a lot of meaning in Jewish thought: forty days of the flood, a mikvah—ritual bath—requires forty s’ah (a s’ah is a measurement), forty days from conception to formation of fetus, etc. This number signifies change, from nothing to something, from impurity to purity.

When Hashem made it rain for forty days, He was purifying the world. This is a lesson for us, because as we know, each person is a miniature world, and we have the ability to purify ourselves, just as Hashem purified the world.

Breishis by Reb Jay

2006-10-20T16:26:00.000-04:00

In this week’s parsha, the Torah brings the story of Kayin and Hevel. Kayin and Hevel are famous in history for being the first known case of fratricide. Their story is thought to be a simple one. Two brothers, who were unable to get along, the tension rising until one finally killed the other.

The reality of this story is much more complex than that. What really happened between Kayin and Hevel contains lessons and implications that can used to learn from, even today, some fifty seven hundred years later.

Kayin and Hevel were the children of Adom and Chavah. They literally had the whole world for the taking. Kayin was a farmer, and Hevel a shepherd.

Although popular perception has Kayin as the “bad guy” and Hevel as the “good guy”, Kayin, in fact, was the first of the two brothers who thought of offering up a sacrifice to Hashem. Offering up a sacrificial offering is meant to be a difficult thing. It is hard for human beings to part with their physical possessions. When we offer them up to Hashem, our giving shows our love for Him, as giving is a sign of love (obviously Hashem does not need these offerings, as He has no needs; sacrificial offerings, as all commandments, are done for us). For Kayin this was particularly difficult. Kayin’s name means acquisition. He was a person who desired to acquire possessions. For him to bring an offering from the ground was very difficult - so difficult, that Kayin’s offering was of an inferior quality.

Hevel, although it was not his idea to bring an offering, offered up the choicest sheep of his flock.

Hevel’s offering was accepted, and Kayin’s was not: “Hashem turned to Hevel and his offering, but to Kayin, He did not turn. This upset Kayin and his face fell”. Hashem told Kayin: “Why are you upset and why has your face fallen? Surely if you improve yourself, you will be forgiven. But if you do not improve yourself, your sin is preserved, its desire (“it” being the evil inclination, which is the part of us that demands instant gratification) is toward you, yet you can conquer it” (Bereshis 4:5-7).

Kayin’s despondency was understandable, having just had his offering rejected by Hashem. But Hashem does not reject him. He simply tells him that he has sinned through his lack of gratitude. But this is easily rectified. All Kayin must do is improve. But Hashem warns him that if he does not improve, sin will overtake him. The nature of man is not to be stagnant, but rather to improve or, Hashem forbid, regress.

What does Kayin do after Hashem reaches out to him? He ignores Hashem’s entreaties. He goes to Hevel and provokes him into an argument and kills him. The Midrash (Bereshis Rabbah) explains that Kayin proposed to Hevel that they divide the world. Kayin’s intention in making this formal split was to provoke Hevel into an argument and kill him, a ruse that worked.

Kayin kills Hevel because he is jealous. If there had been no Hevel, Kayin would not have found it difficult to achieve atonement for his sin. But once he saw that Hevel’s sacrifice had been accepted he could not bear it.

The commentators ask, why did Hevel deserve to die? The Maharal explains that Hevel was complicit in this tragic story, because he brought his offering to trump Kayin. Obviously, this was not the only reason, as his offering was accepted, but nonetheless, it was a strong motivating factor of his offering (the Gra learns differently; see the Gaon's peirush to Koheles). These are the tragic results of jealousy: the death of one brother and the exiling of the second (to wander the earth was the punishment Hashem meted out to Kayin).

The Mishna in Pirkei Avos counts jealousy as something that pulls a person out of the world (Chapter 4 Mishna 21). The meaning is obvious. When a person focuses not on what he needs to accomplish, but on his friend’s accomplishments, he has lost his purpose, i.e., he has pulled himself out of the world.

Painting your Masterpiece

2006-10-03T07:53:00.000-04:00

Read painting-your-masterpiece by Rabbi Frand. Neil Harris from Chicago wrote it over and he did a masterful job. Chazak U'Boruch!

Audio Presentation on Rosh Hashana by Ben

2006-09-22T12:43:00.000-04:00

Audio Presentation on Rosh Hashana

Avinu Malkeinu

2006-09-21T22:27:00.000-04:00

By Ben Adler

Our Father, our King, erase through Your abundant compassion all records of our guilt

If we have asked Hashem to forgive and wipe away our sins, why do we now beseech Him to erase through His abundant compassion all records of our guilt?

This question can be answered as follows: The commentaries wonder why Yaakov rebuked Reuven for his sin of switching his mother’s bed, if Reuven had already repented. The Ohr Hachaim[1] and Reb Elya Lapian[2] answer that although Reuven had repented from his sin, the impression of his action was still evident, and Yaakov chastised Reuven on his middah of being haste. [This may be comparable to one who received a speeding ticket and is absolved from paying the fine, but earns a point on his record. The point reflects his driving habits, and to feel truly innocent, one would ask to have the points removed from his record.] In this vein we can explain our request here. Although You have forgiven our sins and wiped away and removed our willful sins and errors, we are still concerned with our records of our guilt. Therefore we ask Hashem to erase our records of guilt entirely, so even the impression of sin is obliterated.

Our Father, our King, [remember us for merit] inscribe us in the book of merits

What does it mean to be remembered for merit? The Chofetz Chaim asks regarding the supplication that we recite during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah, Avinu Malkeinu kasveinu b’seifer zechuyos, Our Father, our King, inscribe us in the book of merits. If we are meritorious, then we do not need to be inscribed in the book of merits. If we are not meritorious, then of what benefit is it to be inscribed in the book of merits? Let us examine the word zechuyos, merits. The Sefarim write that the word zechus is derived from the word zach, pure. We ask Hashem to remember us for merits, and essentially we are requesting that Hashem purify us, because Hashem is the Only One Who can judge us as meritorious. Similarly, during the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah, we ask Hashem to inscribe us in the book of merits, because we were judged on Rosh Hashanah, but we do not know the outcome of the judgment. Therefore we ask Hashem to purify us, and then we can be inscribed for life and merits together with the righteous.

[1] Breishis 49:4

[2] Lev Eliyahu Ibid

Why Apples?

2006-09-20T05:51:00.001-04:00

Rabbi Jay Spero

Why do we eat an apple on Rosh Hashana? Sure an apple is sweet, but so are grapes. What is special about the apple?

When Yakov came in to receive the brocha from Yitzchok, Yitzchok smelled
the scent of Yakov's clothing, and said, "see the smell of my son is
like the smell of a field" (Toldos 27:27). Rashi quotes the Gemara in Ta'anis that says that Yaakov smelled like an apple orchard. The Shelah writes that this is why we use on apple on Rosh Hashana.

What is the significance of a Tzadik (Yaakov Aveinu) smelling like an
apple orchard? What is the reasoning behind the Shelah's comment?
The Gemara in Shabbos (88a) asks what is the meaning of the posuk in Shir
Hashirim (2:3): "Like an apple tree among the trees of the forest"? The
Gemara answers that this refers to the Jewish people, that just as an
apple tree is unique in that its fruit comes before its leaves (unlike
other trees whose leaves come before its fruit), so too the Jewish
people, who said "we will do and we will listen" (na'aseh v'nishma) are
unique-- unlike other nations who want to know what they are accepting
before they accept it.

Tosfos questions the Gemara and states that this posuk in Shir Hashirim
is not referring to the Jewish people, but to Hashem ? Tosfos does not offer
an answer (but suggests a different posuk in Shir Hashirim).

However, the Nefesh Hachaim gives a beautiful answer. Shir Hashirim is a
series of dialogues between the Jewish people and the Hashem. The Nefesh
Hachaim explains that if the Jewish people perceived Hashem to be similar
to an apple tree, that is because the Jewish people are similar to an apple
tree. The Gemara in Brochos (6a) explains that just as we wear Tefilin
that expound on the oneness of Hashem (Shema Yisroel Hashem Elokeinu
Hashem Echad), so does Hashem wear Tefilin that expounds on the oneness
of His beloved nation (Who is like Yisroel, a unique nation in the world;
Divre Hayamim 1). This shows that Hashem gave us a tremendous gift: the
ability to have a reciprocal relationship with Him. That is how we have
the awesome responsibility on Rosh Hashana to crown Hashem as King.

And when Hashem sings our praises and says we are special,because we had
so much trust in Him that even before we knew what was in the Torah we
were willing to accept it, what is the reciprocal side of this? When
Hashem was willing to give us the Torah based on our acceptance, even
before there was act, because He had trust in us. This illuminates the
special relationship we have with Hashem, and when we eat the apple
this Friday night, we must contemplate while eating the apple the
uniqueness of this relationship.

Not for our Welfare

2006-09-17T02:40:00.000-04:00

Tefillah on Rosh Hashanah
is not for our Welfare

The Yesod V’Shoresh Ha’avodah writes that all the Tefillos that we recite on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur is that the Name of Hashem should be sanctified amongst the nations and throughout the whole world. One should be distressed and cry on this Day of Judgment, as we are praying regarding the desecration of Hashem’s great name. One should pray with this intention regarding Hashem’s Name even more than the intentions that he has concerning his own welfare. In exile, one should always cry and be distressed on the desecration of Hashem’s Name amongst the nations who worship wood and stone, the handiwork of man. The nations taunt us and wonder, “where is your G-d, let Him stand and help you.”

The strategy that one must adopt to awaken his heart to crying is by reciting the words of the Tefillos with deliberation, and he should pause wherever there is a break in the recital, and this will arouse him to weeping. For example, when reciting u’vchen ten pachdecha Hashem Elokeinu al kol maassecha, he should have in mind the following: “until when will Your great Name be desecrated amongst the nations, and for this reason instill Your awe upon all Your works, that they should all recognize that there is no G-d other than You, and Your Name will grow exalted amongst the nations.” These are the intentions that one should have with great weeping and tremendous distress. Similarly, when reciting the words v’aimascho al kol mah shebarasa…. v’yeiasu kulam agudah echos… one should weep with the same intention mentioned previously.

When one recited the words u’vchen ten kavod Hashem le’amecha, he should have the following intention: “grant honor to Your people, not for our sake, rather for Your great Name that will grow exalted and sanctified amongst the nations, because now, we, the Holy Nation, are at a low and in great disgrace, and the nations scorn us and wonder, “where is your G-d?” The same intentions apply to the rest of the bracha, specifically the words: V’simloch atah Hashem levadecha Then You, Hashem, will reign alone over all Your works. One should have kavanah when reciting these words, and he should weep and be in great distress.

Keep Davening in “Mar-Cheshvan”

2006-09-17T02:35:00.000-04:00

Daven in Tishrei,
Keep Davening in “Mar-Cheshvan”

Rav Shimshon Pinkus writes that whenever Elul comes, people wonder what is required of them during the forty-day period from Rosh Chodesh Elul through Yom Kippur. In truth, there is a unique idea that is reflected during this time period. The month of Cheshvan is referred to as Mar Cheshvan. This alludes to the idea that Cheshvan is a month where meracshin sifevovasei, the lips stir and are in motion. Once the month of Elul has passed, and we then proceed to Rosh Hashanah, Aseres Yemei Teshuvah, and Yom Kippur with the selichos and Tefillos that we recite, we conclude with Sukkos, Hoshanah Rabbah, and Simchas Torah. We have become so accustomed to reciting Tefillos and praises to Hashem in those two months of Elul and Tishrei, when we enter into the month of Cheshvan, our lips are still moving and reciting the Tefillos and offering praises to Hashem.
The concept that the lips can move subconsciously only exists when the words that we recite are internalized in the very depths of our hearts. Normal speech emanates from the brain that decides what words a person should utter. When the lips move by themselves, however, this is a sign that there are thoughts in the deep recesses of ones consciousness that he may not even be aware of, and at any particular moment these thoughts are expressed on their own. The reason for this phenomenon is due to the tremendous impact that the recital of the words had on the person.

This essentially is the goal of this time period, in which one should acquire such an intensity of Torah study, prayer, and fear of heaven, that the words should penetrate to the very depth of his heart, and they should descend to the depths of his soul. Even when the Days of Awe have passed, in the month of Cheshvan the lips should still be uttering the words of the living G-d on their own accord. This process should continue until Elul of the following year. This is the time when one should fill up his spiritual storehouses for the upcoming year that will be upon us for the good.

Praying in a State of Awe

2006-09-17T02:31:00.000-04:00

Rabbi Yitzchok Margareten

The Medrash states that Hashem told Adam Harishon after he sinned and repented, “just like you were judged and were vindicated on Rosh Hashanah, so too your children in the future will be judged on Rosh Hashanah and they will be vindicated. It is interesting to note that when Adam Harishon responded to Hashem’s question , “Where are you?” Adam did not express any form of regret. In fact, Adam placed the blame for his violation of Hashem’s command on Chava, claiming , “Haisha asher nasata imadi hi nasna li min haeitz v’ochel, the woman whom You gave to be with me-she gave me of the tree and I ate.” Why then is our judgment on Rosh Hashanah considered to be a replica of Adam’s situation, when Adam denied his complicity in the eating from forbidden fruit?

Although not apparent from the narrative recorded in the Torah, Adam expressed acknowledgement of his sin by stating , “Es kolcha shamati bagan v’ira ki eirom anochi v’aeichavei I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I am naked, so I hid. Essentially, Adam was declaring that he had achieved a level of Yiras Shamayim, fear of heaven, and this earned him vindication. The lesson for future generations is that on Rosh Hashanah we should realize that we are standing in front of the Melech Malchei Hamelochim, the King of all kings. This recognition will surely instill fear of heaven in us, and then we too can be zoche badin, be vindicated in judgment.

We find a similar lesson in the blowing of the Shofar. It is said: Im yitaka Shofar ba’ir v’am lo yecheradu, is the Shofar ever sounded in a city and the people not tremble? The very essence of hearing the Shofar blasts inspires fear. Once we are instilled with fear of heaven, we can proceed with the correct protocol of Teshuvah and earn atonement.

There are two aspects to Shofar blowing. One idea is that we use the Shofar of a ram to merit the act of Akeidas Yitzchak, the binding of Yitzchak on the altar. The second aspect is that we use a Shofar that is bent, and this reflects our hearts that are bent towards serving Hashem. The question is, if one has a choice of using a straight Shofar of a ram or a bent Shofar of a different kosher animal, which Shofar is the preferred one? The Ritva writes that it is more important to blow from a bent Shofar. We see that the essence of our Tefillos on Rosh Hashanah and the blowing of the Shofar is that we should be humbled and in awe of Hashem.

Further proof of this idea that we can only recognize Hashem as our King through Yiras Shamayim can be found in the words of the Medrash . It is said: todieini orach chaim You will make known to me the way of life. Dovid HaMelech said to Hashem: “Show me the way of life.” Hashem responded, “Dovid, you ask for life? Anticipate yirah, fear of heaven, as it is said: Yiras Hashem tosif yamim the fear of Hashem will increase days. Reb Noson Vachtfogel explains that the theme of malchiyus, kingship of Hashem, can be found in the verse: Ben yechabed av v’eved adonav v’im av ani ayeih kevodi v’im adonim ani ayeih moraii a son will honor his father and a servant his master. If I am a Father where is My honor? And if I am a Master where is My fear? In order to have a connection to the King, one must have Yiras Shamayim, fear of heaven. If we discover that we are not afraid of the Day of Judgment, it is because we do not have Yiras Shamayim instilled in ourselves.

Similarly, the Medrash states regarding the verse: Vayecherad Yitzchak charada gedolah ad meod then Yitzchak trembled in very great perplexity, that the fear that Yitzchak experienced upon realizing that he had given Yaakov the brachos was a greater fear than he felt when he had been offered up by Avraham at the akeidah. The Medrash states that by the akeidah, Yitzchak’s soul left his body. What distinguished the fear by the brachos where Yitzchak’s soul did not leave his body with the fear of the akeidah? Reb Noson answers that at the akeidah, Yitzchak felt the fear of death upon him, and this was the vehicle for his soul to exit his body. By the brachos, Yitzchak was overcome with Yiras Shamayim, as he had erred regarding to whom he should have proffered the brachos. Based on the verse: Yiras Hashem tosif yamim the fear of Hashem will increase days, it follows that Yitzchak’s Yiras Shamayim would not be the cause for his soul to leave his body, which is a form of death. Similarly, when we pray on Rosh Hashanah and experience true Yiras Shamayim, we will be filled with joy and this gives us strength and allows us to ascend on the spiritual ladder.

Elul by Ben

2006-09-07T18:22:00.000-04:00

The Baal HaTurim writes that the words לולא האמנתי are a רמז to Elul, as the word לולא spells out אלול. It is said regarding bringing Binyomin going down to Mitzrayim כי לולא התמהמנו כי עתה שבנו זה פעמים, for had we not delayed, by now we could have returned twice. Following the style of the Baal HaTurim, this verse can be interpreted homiletically in two manners. One is that the Gemara states , אחרי הארי ולא אחרי האשה it is preferable to follow a lion than to follow a woman. The sefarim write that this alludes to the idea that the month of אב is represented by the מזל אריה, and the month of אלול is represented by the מזל בתולה. Thus, the Gemara is exhorting us to repent after the month of the ארי, i.e. the month of אב, rather than to repent after the אשה, i.e. the month of אלול. This is alluded to in the verse that states כי לולא התמהמנו כי עתה שבנו זה פעמים. If one had not delayed until לולא, which spells out אלול, one could have repented twice, i.e. after the month of אלול and after the month of אב. Alternatively, this verse can be explained by citing the famous contradiction. On the one hand it is said השיבנו ה' אליך ונשובה, where we ask HaShem, bring us back to You, HaShem, and we shall return. Yet a different verse states שובו אלי ואשובה אליכם, return to Me and I will return to you. Apparently we need both approaches, as we need HaShem to return to us so that we can return to HaShem. This is also alluded to in the above-mentioned verse. If we had not delayed, we could have returned “twice,” i.e. HaShem would have returned us and we would have then returned to Him. Let us merit that we do not delay any further and that we repent our ways and return to HaShem, and may we all merit being inscribed immediately in the Book of Life.

Positive Chinuch

2006-08-29T14:59:00.000-04:00

by Rafi G.

NOTE: no halachic conclusions should be drawn from this article. A competent Orthodox Rabbi must be consulted regarding any practical questions that might arise. The following is a discussion for hashkafic thought alone and has not been fully researched for the purpose of psak.

On daf 82a of Masechet Yoma we have a discussion in the gemara regarding what age a parent must begin training his child to fast on fast days, specifically Yom Kippur.

The Tosefos Yeshanim asks an interesting question: There is a rule in halacha that says if one sees a child eating neveilos (non-kosher food) one must not (or need not) stop him. So what is the big discussion on what age to train him to fast, we should be discussing what age to stop him from actually transgressing something assur!!??

The Tosefos Yeshanim answers the question by bringing the opinion of R' Eliezer from Mitz. R' Eliezer from Mitz is of the opinion that the two issues are completely separate. There is an inyan of "chinuch" which entails training and educating the child to do a mitzva - to do what is right. Then there is an inyan of abstaining from issur. Chinuch, he says, has no bearing on abstaining from issur, only doing mitzvos. That is why we are discussing training him to fast rather than stopping him from issur.

The idea R' Eliezer is telling us is mind boggling (to me). The mitzva of chinuch is only for positive mitzvos, not to stop him from doing something wrong (though that too might be admirable to teach a child when possible). If one sees the candy-man in shul give a child a candy with a questionable hechsher (or even no hechsher), one should talk to the candy-man about no longer providing those candies, but he should not take away the candy from the child! Let the child finish eating it. To me that is an amazing chiddush in chinnuch!

Why is that so?

I was thinking about it and considered this thought. We want to give our children a positive outlook on Yiddishkeit and mitzvos. The obligation of chinnuch incorporates that idea. The obligation to educate your child in mitzvos is, on the one hand, to train the child in the habit of actually doing the mitzvos. On the other hand, it is also to engender within the child the positive attitude towards doing mitzvos. We urge him to do mitzvos, but we do not stop him when he does issurim. We want to give over the positive aspect and not the negative.

Again, this should not be used as a halachic guide. It is simply a thought on an idea presented by R' Eliezer from Mitz in the Tosefos Yeshanim. If the question arises and you need to know whether to stop your child from doign something that is assur, you must consult with your Rav.

Daf Yomi - Yoma 75 - Could the Manna Taste like Pig?

2006-08-25T07:07:00.000-04:00

Daf Yomi - Yoma 75 - Could the Manna Taste like Pig?

Gilyonei Hashas writes that he saw in a certain sefer that discusses the issue of what would be if a person had in mind that the manna should taste like something which is forbidden to eat, such as chazir. What would you think should be the halacha?

As of now, there are 14 comments below.

100 Brochos

2006-08-18T08:21:00.000-04:00

Daf Yomi - Yoma 70 - 100 Brochos

The Gemora states that two reasons explaining why a second sefer Torah was not brought to the kohen gadol for Parshas Pinchas. One is because it will look like the first one was possul. Secondly, it will cause him to make a new brocha unnecessarily.

The latter reason is brought down in Shulchan Aruch regarding a shochet who has many animals ready to be shechted. He should not talk in between the slaughterings for then he would be required to recite another brocha.

The Shalah rules that on Shabbos it is permitted to delay eating the fruits that were brought in middle of the meal and rather wait for the conclusion of the meal in order to enable a recital of a brocha acharona which will help one reach the goal of reciting one hundred brochos every day (which can be difficult on Shabbos).

The Magen Avrohom asks on this from our Gemora. Yom Kippur is even more difficult to reach this goal and nevertheless we do not permit the kohen gadol to bring another sefer Torah enabling him the opportunity of reciting another brocha.

Perhaps we can answer that this would be applicable only to the kohen gadol and therefore we apply the regular halacha of ברכה שאינה צריכה, however the fruits on Shabbos pertains to everyone and would be beneficial for all, so there we permit the extra brocha.

I just found in the אליהו רבה that the kohen gadol did not have the problem of one hundred brochos for he recited eight brochos on krias haTorah and he made a brocha on each and every avodah according to the Ramban.

posted by Avromi at 8/15/2006 04:52:00 PM
11 Comments:

Aton said...

Maybe there's a difference between generating a brand new Beracha/set of Brachos (Borei Pri Ha'Eitz and Borei Nefashos, or Al Ha'Eitz depending) and causing the same Bracha to be repeated (Asher Bachar Banu, Al HaShechitah) -- it's clear when you make the same Bracha twice in a row on an item present at the outset that there's nothing new about this situation, thus no new real Mechayev of a Bracha, and it is undesirable to purposely be Mesi'ach Da'as so as to make a Bracha on that which you already know about (additional animals present at the first moment of Shechitah, e.g.). 100 Berachos maybe thus are parallel to Yitzchak's Me'ah She'arim, which are each distinct -- it's not the Beracha but Mechayev Bracha that you're supposed to experience and identify and be Mevarech. However, if it is a different Bracha to be said (thus identifying a different aspect of Beracha, like Ha'Eitz when previously HaMotzi was made), or if there are items now that weren't there initially so there's a new Mitzvah/Hana'ah/Mechayev Shevach, additional Berachos are appropriate?

Wed Aug 16, 10:22:49 AM 2006

Avromi said...

I spoke over your chiluk with two Roshe Kollel here, one from Montreal and one from Boston. One agreed and one didn't. Iy"H, we will research more.

Wed Aug 16, 01:52:35 PM 2006

Aton said...

Shkoyach!! Unfortunately I don't have too many Roshei Kollel here to run things by, at least not yet... I'm curious to hear what the objections were...

Wed Aug 16, 02:03:55 PM 2006

Avromi said...

Rabbi Zalman Leff from Boston objected by stating that the reason behind the issur of brocha sheaina tzricha is based on the possuk of lo sisa. Why should we be more lax if it is a different brocha? Lo sisa still applies.

Wed Aug 16, 02:05:35 PM 2006

Avromi said...

Rabbi Dovid Elias from Montreal concurred and said that the concept of 100 brochos is for different brochos and therefore we might be lenient on the eina tzricha if it's a benefit for the 100 brochos. As proof to this he cited the minhag of chasidim (although hes a Yekke - big time) to eat kneidlach on the eighth day of Pesach for a mezonos is really needed. (What about the other days?)

Wed Aug 16, 02:08:32 PM 2006

David said...

Ein min-ute! Speaking for the Chassidim of the world ( or at least those of us with chassidishe netiyos) the reason we eat knaidlach on eighth day Pesach has nothing to do with 100 berachos. The reason we eat it then is only because we couldnt eat it the first 7 days b/c of gebrokzt. Memailah, once the issur falls away, we ess.

Wed Aug 16, 05:13:05 PM 2006

Avromi said...

firstly, why is gebrokzt only seven days if its due to chametz issues?

secondly, there's more than one reason.

did you know some say the Baal Shem Tov found 40 kneidlach or something of the sort?

Wed Aug 16, 05:26:11 PM 2006

David said...

The real answer, I suppose, to your question, is that gebroktz is a minhag, and "aim mashivin al haminhag". Beleive me, everybody I know who doesnt eat gebrokzts asks himself the same question: ( " If this is really chometz, why can we eat it on the last day?"). Al minhag zeh ne'emar, "eeyasher chailee, avatlino". ( Looks better in hebrew).

But it's not b/c of the 100 berachos.

Wed Aug 16, 05:34:21 PM 2006

Avromi said...

I'll have to get you the mekor for it

Wed Aug 16, 05:39:20 PM 2006

ben said...

once we're on the topic of מאה ברכות it's worth knowing this בן איש חי שנה ראשונה פ' בלק

ודע דאע"ג דכל הברכות אנשי כנה"ג שהם עזרא הסופר ובית דינו תיקנום, אל תסבור לומר דמימות מרע"ה עד כנה"ג לא היו מברכים כלל, דדבר זה לא יתכן מכמה טעמי תריצי, אך העניין הוא כמו שהיה בתפילה דקודם אנשי כנה"ג היה כל אחד מסדר תפילתו כפי צחות לשונו, עד שבאו אנשי כנה"ג ותקנו י"ח ברכות על הסדר שיהיו ערוכות בפי הכל בשוה, וכן היה ענין הברכות שהיה כל או"א מברך ומסדר ברכותיו כפי צחות לשונו ובאו אנשי כנה"ג ותקנו נוסח כל הברכות שיהיו ערוכות בפי הכל בשוה וכמ"ש הרב ידי אליהו גאליפפה ז"ל ד ב' יע"ש, וקודם דאתא דוד ההע"ה לא היו מדקדקים לברך כל או"א מאה ברכות כפי צחות לשונו הן בדרך תפילו והן ע"פ הנאותיו אלא כאשר יזדמן יש מברך עשרים ברכות יש ארבעים יש ששים או יותר, עד שבא דוד הע"ה ותקן לברך כל או"א מאה ברכות בכל יום, אך עדיין אין הנוסח שוה ואתו כנה"ג ותתקנו נוסח שוה לכל אדם:

Thu Aug 17, 12:33:14 AM 2006

Aton said...

Just one point about Bracha She'Eino Tzricha in a different bracha- on Sukkah 27a it suggests that a way to make up a missed Sukkos Se'udah on Shmini Atzeres, according to R. Eliezer, would be to eat Minei Targima after the Se'udas Yom Tov. Ritva points out that you don't just have another meal because of B'racha She'Aino Tzricha. Could this be a Makor that making a different Bracha is indeed different than repeating the same one for the purposes of Lo Sisa?

Thu Aug 17, 01:52:43 PM 2006

Lo Osoh V'Lo Klum vs. Lo Osoh Klum

2006-08-15T16:51:00.000-04:00

Daf Yomi - Yoma 60 - לא עשה ולא כלום and sometimes it states לא עשה כלום

There are several times in shas that it states לא עשה ולא כלום. The רמע מפאנו explains this statement as follows: לא עשה means that he did not fulfill the mitzva and ולא כלום means that he did not do an aveira either. The Mishna states that if the kohen gadol performed one avodah before the other - לא עשה כלום. This is referring to the sprinkling of the דם השעיר in the Kodesh Hakodoshim before the sprinkling from the פר. In this instance, besides not fulfilling the mitzva, there is an aveira as well, for he entered the Kodesh Hakodoshim unnecessarily and is considered a ביאה שלא לצורך. The Gemora on עמוד ב discusses a case where he performed the חפינת הקטרת prior to the slaughtering of the פר and here the Gemora says לא עשה ולא כלום. This is understood because there is no aveira being committed for the חפינה is done outside. There is no mitzva or aveira. (שערים מצויינים בהלכה)

Did you come across any instance of either one of those expressions recently? Tell us about it and lets see if the yesod fits. Thanks

Bein Habadim by Rav Eliezer Jacobovits

2006-08-15T00:48:00.000-04:00

The Chiddushei Aryeh Leib from Rav Ayeh Leib Mallin quotes a Rashi from Perek Eizehu Makomon(5th perek of zevachm) that the haz'oh of bein habadim is the kohen gadol standing between the poles of the aron and sprinkling the blood towards the aron but not neccessarily reaching the aron. He asks why Rashi thought to tell us these things here where the mishna isn't discussing all the dinim of these sprinklings? Furthermore, he asks how does Rashi know that the kohen had to stand between the poles? He answers based on a Gri'z. The Brisker Rav asks( I don't have either sefer with me and I don't remember where) if a kohen has to stand in the area where an avodah is taking place, assuming that there is a designated place for that avodah? The gemarah in Zevachim learns some avodos have pesukim that require the kohen to be in the designated area. His question is do we learn from them to all other avodos or not.Reb Aryeh Leib is m'chadesh that the sprinkling of blood by the aron wasn't an avodah of matan dam, putting the blood in a specific place, but an act of sprinkling itself. The kohen had to sprinkle the blood and it would kosher wherever it went, assuming he was doing it in the right direction.He says therefore a kohen whom was missing part of his arm was still kosher to do this avodah. So, the kohen had to be in between the poles of the aron because that was the main part of that sprinkling as the mishnah in Eizehu Makomon says that the blood was sprinkled bein habadin, paroches, and the mizbeach hazahav. The latter two are where the blood went onto but the first never is mentioned as a destination. So, Rashi is teaching us that the kohen had to stand there and sprinkle the blood in the direction of the aron without having to touch the kappores because that's what the mishnah is teaching us.

KINNOS - Think of the Chilul Hashem

2006-08-02T09:44:00.000-04:00

Tisha B'av 5766

In my shul we have a program which has become quite common among anglo communities in Israel. Instead of reading all the kinot published as was commonly done, we select a number of the kinnot to read (a lot of them, but not all of them). Before each kina one of the members will give a brief introduction to the kinna, an explanation, some words of inspiration, etc. The idea is that instead of mindlessly reading a lot of kinnot that many do not understand, we say less but it is more infused with meaning and understanding.

I was asked to give the introduction to Kinna 23, entitled "V'Es Navvi". Below I am posting what I plan (more or less to say as the introduction.

Kina 23

In Kina 21 we just lamented about the Asara harugei Malchus. There we read about R' Yishmael Ben Elisha, one of the great Kohanim Gedolim. We read about his horrific death at the hands of the Roman conquerors.

In 23 we will be lamenting the story of the children of R' Yishmael Ben Elisha. The paytan relates the tragic story of how these 2 children, a son and a daughter were captured by separate captors. The captors were bragging to each other about the special beauty each one saw in his respective captive. They came up with a plan to have the two captives mate and they would share the offspring, which they assumed would be tremendously beautiful children.

The paytan goes on to describe how they were put together in a dark room and they stayed apart the whole night ashamed that this is what could come of the child of such a great man. By daybreak they each realized who the other was and they held each other and their nashamos left them together.

Truly a tragic story. Bit it is difficult, at least for me, to relate to a story of a kidnapping from about 2000 years ago and be moved to tears.

If one has a hard time relating to a story from so long ago and crying about it and simply reads it as a tragic story, there is no lack of similar stories from more modern times.

If you must, think about Gilad Shalit, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev who are being held by barbaric captors under who knows what type of conditions. Think of Ron Arad whose daughter never had the opportunity of knowing him because he has been held captive for so long. Think of all the other MIA's who we have no idea of their whereabouts. Think of their parents who have no idea if their children are alive or dead or what kind of condition they are in. Think of the turmoil these people are going through.

The ArtScroll explains that we are not crying specifically about the capturing of these young adults, rather we are crying about the hillul hashem. We are crying because the children of R' Yishmael Ben Elisha, who the gemara relates regarding him that Hashem even asked him for a blessing, who come from such purity and yichus, were debased and defiled in this manner. That is a hillul hashem.

But if you have a hard time crying about a hillul Hashem that took place 2000 years ago, think of the hillul hashem that we have gone through daily, throughout history, since the destruction of the beis hamikdash. All Jews are princes and princesses and we all come from great yichus of Avraham Avinu. Yet the blood of jews, the children of Jews, have been left for hefker for the pillaging of the goyim. We have suffered throughout history bloog libels and progroms and holocausts. Killing and kidnappings. Even to this day. That is something everybody can relate to. If thinking of children being kidnapped 2000 years ago creating a hillul hashem does not move you to tears, think of the more modern instances of the same events, and that should move you.

But the kina ends off in the morning. In the morning they saw each other and were saved from the defilement and debasement that had been planned for them. Together they died being mekadesh shem shamayim. That is the g'vurah of the Jew. Despite our being hefker in the eyes of the goyim, they are not able to destroy our humanity, our moral purity. They cannot take away our tzelem Elokim. We are still people and we are still Jews. Despite our suffering, we will not give up our morals.

אוי כי זאת גזר אומר ועושה

איכה Perek 4 -5 by David Farkas

2006-08-01T18:05:00.000-04:00

4:3- גַּם-תַּנִּין (תַּנִּים) חָלְצוּ שַׁד, הֵינִיקוּ גּוּרֵיהֶן; בַּת-עַמִּי לְאַכְזָר, כַּיְ עֵנִים (כַּיְעֵנִים) בַּמִּדְבָּר
This is the very worst lament of all. To expound on Rashi, the people have lost their humanity to such an extent that even the jackals are kinder than they are. It is crucial that men do not lose their sense of humanity and civilization when under extreme circumstances. This is true of our humanity in how we deal with others, as well as with ourselves as individuals, regarding cleanliness, hygiene, etc.

4:13- מֵחַטֹּאות נְבִיאֶיהָ, עֲו‍ֹנֹת כֹּהֲנֶיהָ: הַשֹּׁפְכִים בְּקִרְבָּהּ, דַּם צַדִּיקִים
Can the priests and the prophets have been guilty of such crimes as murder? According to Rashi, the reference is to false prophets and idolatrous priests. But according to the simple explanation, can they really have stooped so low? Maybe. Or maybe it is holding the leaders figuratively responsible, for not having done more to prevent the atrocities. See the end of Sotah for a parallel, concerning the Eglah Erufah. The law is that upon finding a corpse, and being unable to solve the murder, the leaders of the nation must declare publicly that they did not kill the person. The Talmud explains that this is not because they are actually suspected of such crimes, but because their actions as leaders, or inaction’s, may have led to it.

4:15- סוּרוּ טָמֵא קָרְאוּ לָמוֹ, סוּרוּ סוּרוּ אַל-תִּגָּעוּ--כִּי נָצוּ, גַּם-נָעוּ; אָמְרוּ, בַּגּוֹיִם, לֹא יוֹסִפוּ, לָגוּר
What an astoundingly tragic prophecy. The prophet tells us that the nations of the world will refuse to take the Jews in. This has been the story of the Jews since the destruction.

5:3- יְתוֹמִים הָיִינוּ ְאֵין) אָב, אִמֹּתֵינוּ כְּאַלְמָנוֹת
My uncle Willis told me in the name of his wife’s grandfather, Rav Yisroel Gustman, that the verse seems redundant. If one is an orphan, of course he has no father! But rather, he said, there are two types of orphans. There is the type who knew his father, and his father has now died. And then there is the poor fellow who never even knew his father. He thus highlighted the difference between today’s generation, and the generation that came out of Europe. The latter at least knew the father, i.e., what Jewish life was for centuries in Europe. We however, we were never even privileged to know what our father – Yiddishkeit of the old country – was like.
This is really what effectively caused the era of what we call the achronim to come to an end. All periods of Jewish scholarship end with two things in common. First, there must be a major event, catastrophe or advance, which changes the landscape in such a way that people realize that an era has passed. Second, the last scholars of the period must outshine, in a very large way, those that follow after him. Thus, the period of the amoaraim ended with the writing of the Mishna by R’ Yehuda Hanasi, who was clearly the greatest man of his time. The writing of the Mishna was clearly a landmark event in Jewish history, for that was the first time that the Oral law had been committed to writing. (Broadly speaking, of course. Many scholars have pointed out that R’ Yehuda merely collected and edited the private collections of written Mishnayos which had already existed for some time.) The period of the tannaim ended with the writing of the Gemara by Ravina and Rav Ashi, who also, stood head and shoulders above everybody else of their time. Rav Saddia Gaon, who ended the period of the Geonim, was perhaps the greatest of all the Gaonim before him. The Rishonim ended with the introduction of the printing press, an event that would have far-reaching repercussions in the Jewish world. And in our times too, the men who emerged from Europe were far more learned than anyone this generation has managed to produce. Thus, the era of the achronim has come to an end.

5:21- הֲשִׁיבֵנוּ יְהוָה אֵלֶיךָ (וְנָשׁוּבָה)חַדֵּשׁ יָמֵינוּ כְּקֶדֶם
The verse speaks about the idea of repentance. Sometimes people misunderstand the meaning behind the daily prayer for repentance. We are not praying for the ability to come closer to Him, for greater Deveikus, if you will. If this were the case, we would simply pray precisely for that, in those terms! Besides, the mere fact that one prays at all is itself indicative of an already existing relationship between God and the supplicant, (albeit one that can be improved), and thus by itself shows a desire to improve the relationship.
Rather, it seems to me that the prayer for repentance is really a prayer for help in becoming a better person, which would then lead to greater Deveikus. We pray that we should be able to break our bad character traits with ease, and with little outside interference. Once we have done that, we can move forward in our relationship with God. This is entirely different from the way the prayer is commonly understood.

5:22- כִּי אִם-מָאֹס מְאַסְתָּנוּ, קָצַפְתָּ עָלֵינוּ עַד-מְאֹד
It seems strange to end on this somewhat sour-sounding note, which basically says that we’ve suffered enough already. Why not end it on the pen-ultimate verse, which anyway is the one we repeat?
It might be because this at least gives us the hope of a future redemption. After all, it offers a convincing rationale to end this bitter, bitter exile. The other verse though, requires an effort on our part to do Teshuvah (According to the Medrash “shuvu bonim shovvim” -Jeremiah 3:22 - we may even have to take the initiative. I have not found this Midrash yet though. See also Malachi 3:7 - שׁוּבוּ אֵלַי וְאָשׁוּבָה אֲלֵיכֶם) This, unfortunately, has proven to be a difficult task. It is perhaps better then, that we end the exile on a kind of “ back-door” plea bargain of having suffered enough, rather than risk gaining it through the nobler, but riskier, route of repentance. It’s like a criminal appearing before the parole board. Naturally the criminal would like to exonerate himself, and demonstrate that he has done whatever it takes to reintegrate into society. However, if the standards seem to be daunting, he would rather show that he has already paid his debt to society and any more punishment would be futile or even counter productive. That’s what we say to God here.

May we all merit the coming of the Redemption, speedily, in our days.

Amah Traksin by Rafi G.

2006-07-29T22:33:00.000-04:00

On Daf 51-52 we find the issue of "Amah Traksin" There was one amah of space designated between the heichal and the kodesh kodoshim. The space was delinieated by a wall/curtain in the first beis hamikdash and in the second Beis Hamikdash it has to be separated by two curtains (or one, depending on a machlokes, but we hold 2). The gemarrah discusses in great detail why the amah had to be separated the way it was, and which side it was similar to for kedusha (the kodesh kodoshim or the heichal), etc.

The thought struck me: Why do we need to know so much detail about this one amah? There was only one person who approached and entered that amah and that was only once a year as it is on yom kippur, and it was only a passage to the room beyond it, so why does it make such a big difference to us that the gemarrah needs to dedicate a whole amud to delineating this amah and discussing its purpose? Mah Nafka Minah?

It is important for us to delineate the amah because we need to know our limits. It does not matter whether or not you will actually get close to those limits or not, but our lives are limited by our limitations and we have to be aware of what those are. For us to function properly, those limits are important.

Psychologists always tell us about children that they misbehave because they are testing the limits and parents who do not delineate a childs borders are negligent as that is the cause of many problems.

We need to know our borders and our limits. It provides for a healthy attitude and a healthy approach to life. Without limits, we are living a life of chaos.

איכה - Perkek 2 - 3 by David Farkas

2006-07-27T19:53:00.000-04:00

2:12 - לְאִמֹּתָם, יֹאמְרוּ, אַיֵּה, דָּגָן וָיָיִן בְּהִתְעַטְּפָם כֶּחָלָל, בִּרְחֹבוֹת עִיר בהשתפך נפשם אל חיק אמתם

It seems a little strange that young children, crying out to their mothers, would ask for wine, rather than water.

3:6 -במחשכים הושיבני כמתי עולם

This phrasing – “they placed me in darkness” - is not just metaphoric, but rather quite literal. There is a pit in the city of David, just outside the Western Wall area, which contains a pit believed to be the one Jeremiah was thrown into. Even if not this exact pit, it was certainly one similar, and probably within a hundred foot radius as well, for the area, at least, is known. The pit is absolutely pitch -black. See also verse 53 - צמתו בבור חייו וידו אבן בי. As I explained in my notes to Jeremiah, some commentators understand that 30 men were needed to haul Jeremiah out of the pit because of the muck in the pit he was mired in.

3:30 - יתן למכהו לחי ישבע בחרפה

This is not to be confused with the Christian doctrine of “turn the other cheek”. That doctrine, so far as I can tell, was intended for all times and all seasons, whereas this was only meant for certain dark periods in Israel’s history. Our sages have said, in Berachos, that it is best not to start up with the wicked when they seem to be having success.

For a completely novel interpretation, see the Nachal Eshkol. He understands the verse to be giving advice concerning how to deal with those who would attack us. The best way, according to this understanding of the verse, is to deliberately allow yourself to be hit. This will then turn the desire of the attacker into a sense of shame, and he will thus desist. Whether this philosophy is correct or not, in light of the events of the 20^th century, is open for question. In general, of course, the correct Jewish response to gentile aggression has always been debated, just as any country argues internally over the best response to foreign aggression. As others have pointed out, the stories of Chanukah and Purim indicate that sometimes military fighting is called for, sometimes prayer, and sometimes diplomacy. Of course, our forefather Jacob combined all three when preparing to confront Esau.

Keruvim Embracing Each Other - Yoma 54 - by Avrohom Adler

2006-07-27T18:38:00.000-04:00

The Gemora on daf 54 relates that when the goyim entered the Kodesh Kodoshim, they saw the keruvim were locked in an embrace. The mefarshim ask from a Gemora in Bava Basra (99). One possuk says the keruvim faced each other and one says that they faced away from each other. The Gemora answers that it depended on Klal Yisroel's demeanor. When they fulfilled the will of Hashem, they were facing each other. If so, at the time of the destruction of the Beis Hamikdash, why were the keruvim facing each other?

The Ritva answers that the Gemora in Bava Basra is referring to the keruvim that Moshe made (those that were on the ארון) and our Gemora is discussing the keruvim that were drawn on the wall and these keruvim never changed their positions. Rashi seems to indicate like this pshat for he says that the goyim peeled them off the walls and then brought them outside.

The Maharsha brings from Rishonim that it was a special miracle at this time in order to shame the Jews in the eyes of their enemies.

An answer is brought in the name of a Rov from the previous generation who was forced out of his position due to his constant rebuking of the community members on their deficiency in avodas Hashem. As he was departing, he gave a farewell drasha and he asked the former question. His answer was that at the time that the רבונו של עולם was compelled to remove his heavenly presense from the Beis Hamikdosh, this was not the time to make calculations. It pained Him to such an extent, like a father who is forced to leave his son, it was as if all reckoning was forgotten and that is why the keruvim were embracing each other.

Rav Meir Bergman proposes another solution and he says that this is the accurate answer. The professionals, who initially crafted the keruvim formed them facing each other. Subsuquently, when the shechina resided in the Beis Hamikdash, the keruvim were given a רוח חיים, and when Bnei Yisroel were not virtuous and not commiting themselves to do the will of Hashem, the keruvim turned away from each other. At the time of destruction, the shechina completely vanished from the Beis Hamikdosh and nothing remained. The keruvim then reverted back to their original construction and they were found facing each other.

Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz states that there is an important lesson to learn from here in the method of מדת הדין - when Hashem is administering justice to those that deserve it, at the outset there must be love. Pinchas had the right to be a zealot for he was a descendant from Aharon Hakohen who was a seeker of peace and harmony. This is what the Gemora in Sotah (47) means when it states לעולם תהא שמאל דוחה וימין מקרבת. One must be extremely cautious in these matters. This is the lesson we learn from the keruvim.

Klal Yisroel are Beloved - Yoma 52 - Rabbi Jay Spero

2006-07-27T14:06:00.000-04:00

Yoma 52a-- חביבין ישראל שלא הצריכן הכתוב לשליח

Bnei Yisroel are dear and do not necessitate an agent. Rebbi Yossi tells us
that the Kohen Godol is able to walk along the northern wall towards
the Kodesh Kodashim. Although this means that he will be walking
with his eyes directly towards the Kodesh Kodashim--which according
to Rebbi Meir would not be proper--Klal Yisroel is beloved, and therefore,
we do not need an intermediary to communicate with Hashem (and can
"look" directly at the Kodash Kodashim). This means that each and
every Jew can daven directly to Hashem (this is according to Rashi's
pshat; see Rabeinu Chananel or Tosfos Yeshanim for a different
understanding).

How are we to understand this statement of Rebbi Yossi? Rebbi Yossi
holds that the opening to the Kodash Kodashim was in the north, thus
requiring the Kohen Godol to walk along the northern wall. What is the
significance of the opening being in the north? The word for north in
loshon hakodesh is tzafon. The word tzafon also means conscience or
intellect. The Shem Mishemuel writes in the name of his father (N'os
Deshe/Avnei Nezer) that the Korban Olah was slaughtered at the
north side of the mizbeiach (Vayikra 1:11). This, writes the Shem
Mishmuel, is because the Korban Olah comes to be mechaper for sinful
thought which occur in the "north" of man, i.e, the intellect. One would
think that logically, one is only required to atone for sins involving an action.

Why do sinful thoughts require atonement? The highest level of person is
his sechel (the neshama, contrary to popular belief, is not contained in
the heart, but in the brain). This is our essence. When a person uses his
intellect the proper way, he can build olamos. When used the wrong way,
chas v'shalom, it can destroy them (see first perek of Nefesh Hachaim).
The Kohen Godol is a representative of Klal Yisroel. Although we are not
perfect, and unfortunately we perform aveiros, our nekudas hapnimi is
goodness. And it is that nekuda that always desires to have a shaychus -
a connection with the Ribono Shel Olam, even when we have become
lowered and unworthy. Thus although the people the Kohen Godol
represents may not be zoche al pi din to walk directly opposite the
Kodash Kodoshim (which l'choreh is the reason Rebbi Meir does not
allow it), Rebbi Yossi says that we are beloved before Hashem, and
this enables us to talk to Him directly (and walk opposite the Kodash
Kodashim).

The Me'or Anayim asks how is it that we can have a shaychus with the
Ribono Shel Olam when the chasm between us and Him is so great?
There are several answers to this question, and one answer is that
it is a chesed from Hashem--olam chesed yiboneh. And it is through
this chesed that He allows us this opportunity to relate to Him directly.
The loshon of Chavivin Yisroel is only used a handful of times, that
we were created B'tzelem (which means that we can imitate Him),
that we have the Torah (Kli Chemda), that we are called bonim. Each
of these connotes that our chavivus is our inherent closeness with the
Ribono Shel Olam. May we be zoche to actualize it.

איכה פרק א by David Farkas

2006-07-26T18:15:00.000-04:00

1 - 21 שָׁמְעוּ כִּי נֶאֱנָחָה אָנִי, אֵין מְנַחֵם לִי כָּל-אֹיְבַי שָׁמְעוּ רָעָתִי שָׂשׂוּ, כִּי אַתָּה עָשִׂית הֵבֵאתָ יוֹם-קָרָאתָ, וְיִהְיוּ כָמֹנִי

See Rashi, who explains that Jeremiah accuses God, as it were, for being the source of the nations’ hatred towards us. Because the Torah forbids us to eat of their foods and marry their children, the nations tend to dislike us. This might be the idea behind the comment of our sages in Shabbos 88a, that Sinai is called such because the gentile’s hatred [sinnah] toward us came from Sinai. The passage is usually interpreted to mean that the gentiles are somehow jealous of us.

However, the verse seems to suggest the nations were happy specifically because God Himself caused our destruction. oweverHPerhaps then the meaning is as follows: Had Israel merely been the victim of an unfortunate accident, like a plague or an earthquake, the nations would not have rejoiced so over Israel’s downfall for they might appreciate the fact that the same thing could happen to them. They might also attribute it to an act of nature. (Still an act of God, but less apparent). What caused them to rejoice was that this was manifestly an act of God! The nations were thus able to expose the Jews as the true hypocrites they were, and ask them, where was their God now? This was a validation for their own failure to accept the yoke of the Torah, or at the very least, their failure to recognize Judaism properly.

Thousands of years later, the Nazis too, would ask this question of the martyrs –“Where is your God now?” Rav Gifter (z’l) tells of what his great Rebbi responded moments before he was murdered, when his Nazi executioner mocked him by asking him this very question: “He is not only my God, He is your God also, and the whole world will yet find this out.”

Coming Soon Iy"H

2006-07-26T13:53:00.000-04:00

This site will be posting comments from guest bloggers who will submit Divrei Torah on the Daf HaYomi pertaining to issues of Halacha, Agada, and Mussar. It will also, at times, have Divrei Torah on timely topics. The postings will be on the site for approximately ten days up until two weeks. Readers are invited to post comments and discuss the forums that have been posted.