The Living Torah

Its All Over

2010-10-19T15:28:00.002+01:00

This Blog is no longer active (officially).

This too is for the good

2010-07-17T23:25:00.000+01:00

Adapted from a shiur by R' Shlomo Farhi

The Gemara relates a story about a gentleman called Nachum. He was a man who had a a difficult life, but whenever something bad happened, he would say "Gam Zu L'Tovah - this also is for the good", and this is what he later became known as - Nachum Ish Gam Zu. But why does the Gemara call him Nachum Ish Gam Zu, literally, “Nachum Also”? He was famous for saying "Gam Zu L’Tovah" yet he is not called "Nachum Ish Gam Zu L’Tovah"! One would think that "L’Tovah" would be the key part of what he is remembered as, as opposed to the seemingly extraneous ‘also’.

To understand the answer, we must be aware that there is a fundamental misunderstanding with regard to what he did, and consequently what he is remembered for until today. He wouldn't pass a car crash and point and say it was “l’Tova” - one cannot label an inherently bad thing as "good". "Good" is clearly not an applicable adjective. The depth behind his words is as follows: What he did was recognise the masterplan of Hashem, and the web in which events in our lives unfold. He attempted to see the bigger picture, the greater good which is hidden from our direct sight. That web, that bigger picture, is l'tova. Parts of it may not be, or may not obviously be but in recognising that bad events are part of a good web, we should be able to say "Gam Zu L’Tovah!" So in fact ‘Gam Zu’ – his ability to see that this is "also (one more event)" is the key part of what Nachum said - it is the mechanism by which he could label bad as "also" being good. Not just "L’Tovah".

It take a great inner strength to truly be able to say, in the face of a bad event ‘this too shall pass’ and to really believe in the bigger picture and the greater good. But by working on that strength, we will be able to get to the stage where we can say, as Nachum did, Gam Zu L’Tovah – This too is for the good. The word ‘also’ is the very mechanism that allowed him (and resultantly us) to state something was ‘L’Tovah’.

The Many Divided Tents of Yaakov

2010-07-08T23:46:00.000+01:00

Adapted from Twerski on Chumash (pg333)

Mah Tovu is the opening verse of Shacharit. In many communities, this verse is not recited. Although it appears to be a blessing, the feeling is that nothing benevolent could have come from the tongue of the evil Balaam. The Gemara says that all of Balaam’s ‘blessings’ reverted to being curses, except for Mah Tovu (Sanhedrin 108b). Nevertheless, some authorities did not wish to cite even this blessing. They followed the principle, “Only wickedness emanates from the wicked” (I Shmuel 24:14).

But what harm could possibly be contained in Mah Tovu?

R’ Yaakov Yosef of Polonya (one of the foremost Talmidim of the Besht) explained that the words of the true prophets are for the greater part sharp reprimands. They were critical of Bnei Yisrael’s behaviour and pointed out their dereliction, demanding that they correct their errant ways. They warned Bnei Yisrael of the grave consequences awaiting those who deviated from the Torah. Not so the false prophets. They preached that all was well and that there was no reason for concern that any harm would befall Israel.

Quoting a Pasuk in Mishlei where Shlomo Hamelech writes that the wounds inflicted out of true love and concern are trustworthy, whereas the abundant kisses of an enemy are worthless (27:6), R’ Yaakov Yosef wants to explain that Balaam’s intention was to curse Yisrael by telling them how wonderful they were. They were so perfect that they did not need to do anything to improve. The Gemara says in (Ketuvot 108b) that if you find a spiritual leader who is beloved in his community, it may be because he does not chastise them for their delinquencies in the observance of Mitzvot. We must be cautious when we hear only praise and no rebuke. As pleasant to the ear praise may be, it does not often stimulate a person to self-improvement.

When R’ Shimon Sofer became the rabbi of Cracow, he found more than a hundred synagogues and shtiblach. He realized that this proliferation of places of worship was not the result of overcrowding, but rather splintering, which was generally due to petty differences. R’ Sofer said, “Now I understand why the Gemara said that all of Balaam’s blessings reverted to curses except for Mah Tovu. Balaam’s intention was to curse Yisrael, but in his infinite mercy, Hashem twisted his tongue so that he pronounced blessings. When Bnei Yisrael sinned and lost favour with Hashem, Balaam’s intention to curse was realized.

“Mah Tovu, however, did not have to revert to a curse. It was never a genuine blessing to begin with. With his prophetic insight, Balaam saw that Jews would be nitpicking and seeking to break away and make many places of worship. His ‘blessing’ that there be many ‘tents of Yaakov’ was actually a veiled curse, and did not have to revert.

There is a principle of “In the multitude of people is a king’s glory – but in the lack of people is a minister’s ruin” (Mishlei 14:28). The finest way of honouring the Divine name would be for large congregations to have standing room only. R’ Sofer’s comments are as timely now as they were more than a century ago. We still suffer from lack of unity. The Malbim explains the second half of the above Pasuk to emphasize that even when there is an impressive display of numbers if there is a lack of unity in religious faith and understanding then it’s all for naught. Division and splits within communities realize the ‘curse’ of Balaam. Let the establishment of new places of worship be the result only of the existing shuls becoming overcrowded and let’s take step to repair the very present divides within our community.

Speaking?

2010-05-04T22:29:00.000+01:00

”ויאמר ה׳ אל משה אמר אל הכהנים בני אהרון ואמרת אלהם“
“And G-d said to Moshe: Say to the Kohanim, the Sons of Aharon, and say to them”

R’ S.R Hirsch in his commentary on Parashat Emor points out that there seems to be a discrepancy between the formula used to address Moshe regarding the Kohanim (אמור אל הכהנים...ואמרת אלהם) and the formula used to address Moshe regarding the rest of Bnei Yisrael דבר אל בני ישראל...ואמרת אליהם

דבר aims at giving the short curt idea, the general order of the law, whereas ואמרת gives the complete explanation of the details, giving the understanding of the spirit of the law, appealing to the mind and heart. דבר and אמר differ as ‘speaking’ and ‘informing’. Speaking is the expression of thoughts in words without any consideration of its being accepted by the listener. But informing is always ‘telling somebody’. One can speak to oneself but not inform. Quite the same with דבר and אמר. Whereas דבר is the concise expression of the thought, אמר is addressing the same to the mind and feeling of another person, the complete explanation and development of the thought. We can begin to see the difference between the Aseret Hadibrot and the Aseret Mamarot (of Creation). The words of creation is an Amirah. It immediately realizes itself in the object to which it is addressed. The word of the Torah is a דבר, in the first place it is just said and then it awaits being accepted and carried out.

What is the purpose of this whole Pasuk moving in the ‘Amirah’ and why is there a seeming redundancy with the words: ‘say to them and tell them’?

Rashi on this Pasuk based on a Braitta in Yevamot tells us that the double expression is cautioning the Kohanim regarding minors.

R’ Moshe Feinstein views this as a lesson in educational philosophy and approach. One cannot inculcate children or students with fidelity to Torah and its values by merely telling them what their obligations are.

Parents and educators must demonstrate that the Torah way of life is precious, desirable and beautiful. When a child recognizes that the Torah is the key to serenity and a happy and fulfilled life, he will want to follow the Torah. One must speak to his children ‘twice’; once to teach them the Mitzvot and a second time to ignite within them a burning desire to live a Torah life.

But then why is the Pasuk all in ‘Amirah’? This a beautiful Pshat on the standard formula of דבר אל בני ישראל...ואמרת אליהם, where the דבר is the instruction and the אמר the ignition of a desire, the development of the thought. But what is specific by the Kohanim that Lashon Amirah is used throughout?

I think that here we are being taught a lesson about what it means to be a ‘Chosen Nation’.

R’ Zalman Sorotzkin explains why the charge to be particularly careful about children was given to the Kohanim. While parents can usually control their home environment in which a child is raised, peer pressure and society can have a detrimental effect on a child. It is the parent’s duty to address those influences in an appropriate many. Kohanim are subject to privileges – but they have unique proscriptions as well. Thus, the child of a Kohen was, at times, forced to act differently from his friends. It was his parent’s duty to see to it that he maintained his unique status. So too with the rest of Bnei Yisrael; just as the Kohanim need to behave differently to the rest of the nation, so do Jews need to behave differently to the other nations. Primarily this means that as Hashem’s chosen nation we need to maintain a pristine standard of behaviour, both in our actions and our attitudes. And our parents must guide and encourage their child to hold his own in the face of the different standards his friends or the others around him maintain. This steadfastness can be only be brought about if the desire exists. An emphasis is placed upon אמר because a desire for Torah and her way of life is paramount.

Moshe and Humility

2010-03-19T15:57:00.000Z

From a linguistic perspective, the removal of even one letter from a word in Lashon Hakodesh will alter the meaning of that word. The first word of this week’s Parasha, which is Vayikra, with an Aleph as the last letter of the word, translates into ‘And He called (to Moshe).’

Rashi says that the language of calling precedes every statement, and every saying and every command. He makes a distinction between Vayikar and Vayikra – the emphasis on the inclusion of an Aleph – one is used to connote affection; it is the language of endearment and implies a friendly calling whilst the other (Vayikar) is used when Hashem appeared to Bilaam and implies a chance or forced meeting

When we read of Hashem communicating with Moshe in the Torah, we see such verbs as Vay’daber (And He spoke), Va’yomer (And He said), Vayatzav (And He commanded). Yet, the language of Vayikra (And He called) precedes them all in prominence.

Whether or not the Aleph is present makes a great difference to the translation of the word, however on closer inspection the letter Aleph of the word Vayikra is written diminutively (Aleph Z’aira), The Baal HaTurim explains that Hashem had ordered Moshe to write Vayikra, but Moshe, the most humble of all men, wanted to use the less complimentary Vayikar, He did not want to accord himself the endearing term of Vayikra. To fulfill Hashem’s command, he wrote the Aleph but wrote it smaller than the rest of the word.

(An interesting side point is that because Moshe wanted to write Vayikar, Hashem lovingly called him close – R’Simcha Bunim offered the following insight into how one might be able to maintain our humility even if we were to reach the heights that Moshe did: “A person standing at the peak of the mountain realizes that he is not really taller than everyone else; it is the mountain that holds him high. We should recognize that our achievements are not of our own doing – Hashem holds us up and grants them to us.)

The Baal Haturim is in essence saying that a compromise was made metaphorically, between Hashem and Moshe in the writing of the term Vayikra, by allowing Moshe the Aleph Z’aira.

However this explanation of the Baal Haturim leads to a dilemma: the endearing language of Vayikra appears before Sefer Vayikra, without any Aleph Z’aira:

“…..And the seventh day He called to Moshe from the midst of the cloud.” (Shemos 24:16)

If Moshe was so concerned with his humility, why does he pen the full endearing term Vayikra (including a standard size Aleph) in Sefer Shemos? Why would he have waited until Sefer Vayikra to show his reluctance to writing Vayikra?

The Chasam Sofer in Torat Moshe addresses the problem in the following manner:

The possession of Ruach Hakodesh is meant to imply that an individual has a higher than basic human comprehension, and a more penetrating visualization of the past, present, and future. He writes that there are three levels of Ruach Hakodesh.

The first level is designated by the term Vayikar (coldly or coincidentally communicated with). This level of Ruach Hakodesh is available even to the Prophets of the other nations, as we see with Bilaam.

The second level of Ruach Hakodesh is hinted to by the term Vay’daber (And He spoke). This attainment of Ruach HaKodesh is only available to Yisrael, and not to the other nations.

And lastly, the third level of Ruach Hakodesh appears in the Torah as Vayikra, that special language of endearment. This level could only have been achieved by Moshe Rabbeinu, and no one else, because Bnei Yisrael sinned with the Eigel HaZahav (golden calf). Prior to the terrible sin of the Eigel (prior to Sefer Vayikra), all of Bnei Yisrael were on a higher spiritual plain, and did in fact possess this third and highest level of Ruach HaKodesh designated by the endearing word Vayikra. Hence, prior to the Eigel, Moshe did not wish to pen an Aleph Z’aira onto the word in Shemos (24:16), because the honour of all Bnei Yisrael was also inferred from the word Vayikra. Under no circumstance, would he consider reducing the honour of Bnei Yisrael.

However, in Sefer Vayikra (which takes place after the sin of the Eigel), that highest level of Ruach Hakodesh through the term Vayikra, would apply only to Moshe Rabbeinu and no one else. And, when it came to his own personal honour, Moshe was suddenly unwilling to pen the endearing Vayikra.

There would certainly seem to be a powerful Musar Haskeil (instruction of intellect- see Mishlei 1:3) here, in that the truly honourable are not concerned with their own honour, but rather, with the honour of others. While this highest level of Ruach Hakodesh is attainable no more, let us never forget that the only way to have achieved it was through an immense concern for the dignity of others, not for oneself. Developing a true and sincere awareness of modest humility is the key to personal success in all one’s endeavours. The humility of the humble will earn respectful esteem as Shlomo Hamelech writes:

"ושפל רוח יתמך כבוד" (Mishlei 29:23)

Shabbat Shalom,
eli

A Goat, Challot and The Arei Miklot

2010-03-19T15:54:00.000Z

“He shall lean his hands on the goat’s head and slaughter it before Hashem, in the place where burnt-offerings are slaughtered. (If it is slaughtered with the intention of being a sin-offering, then) it is a valid sin-offering.

An obvious question on this arises. Why does the חַטָּאת have to be slaughtered in the same place on it as theעוֹלָה ? Surely the two have no connection to each other as the חַטָּאת is brought by someone who sins unintentionally whereas the עוֹלָה is a sacrifice brought out of free will.

Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch explains that עוֹלָה also has a second meaning - to raise. The Korban raises the owner from their current state to a higher state in order to bring himself closer to Hashem.
The Midrash Vayikra Rabba however, says that the עוֹלָה is to atone for sinful thoughts and fantasies that appear in peoples minds or imagination. This happens to everyone. This differs significantly to a חַטָּאת, where although the sin was בִּשְׁגָגָה - unintentional, if he would have been more careful it would not have occurred.

People seeing him bringing a חַטָּאת may look badly on him because of his actions. Therefore the Torah instructs that the owner places his hands in the same way as the עוֹלָה, the voluntary offering to save the feelings of the person offering the sacrifice.

There is a story with Rabbi Yisroel Salanter, the founder of the Musar movement that exemplifies this point. He was once invited out for a Friday night meal. His host noticed when it came to eating that his wife had forgotten to cover the two challos. He flew into a large temper in front of his wife and started shouting at her in front everyone present. “It’s a disgrace! How can you have forgotten something like that?” She immediately apologised profusely and rectified it, but was obviously embarrassed. After the meal the great Rav approached the man and asked him “What is the reason we cover the challos?” The husband replied “In order the challos don’t feel inferior to the Kiddush wine.” Rabbi Yisrael rebuked him in a slight manner “You were concerned with the feelings of an inanimate object, but did not take into consideration the feelings of your wife?”

The Torahs thought for both human feelings are also seen with the Arei Miklot. Many special sign-posts were erected to direct people. This was so that people who had killed unintentionally would not have to be put into the embarrassing situation of having to ask for directions to the Arei Miklot where they will be safe from the family of the murdered person.

With this we can more fully understand the Mishna in Pirkei Avos which teaches that יהי כבוד חברך חביב עליך כשלך, you should respect other peoples honour as your own.

By Raphael Waller

Shabbat Shalom

New Way to Get the PDF Version

2010-03-15T22:10:00.000Z

Due to the decrepit programming of the Main website and the difficulty involved with uploading the PDF, I've decided to create a secondary place where anyone can can get a copy.

I'll upload just before we go to print, usually on a wednesday (sometimes when we're running late - on a thursday) meaning that you won't have to be anxiously waiting, sitting by your computer fretting on a friday in order to get yourself a copy. [ Heres hoping :) ]

Visit http://www.scribd.com/TheLivingTorahWeekly for a printable version of the full Living Torah Weekly.

(Hat tip to GDT blog for the website)

Shabbat, The Mishkan and Donations

2010-03-11T23:18:00.000Z

The first of this week’s Parashas starts off with Moshe gathering the Jewish people together to tell them three things. Firstly, how they should keep Shabbos even though they are building the Mishkan. Secondly, that no fire should be lit on Shabbos. Thirdly, that they should make donations towards the building of the Mishkan.

Rashi points out when this gathering took place. He says that it was as soon as Moshe had come down from Har Sinai after the Eigel with the second Luchos. Since Moshe came down on Yom Kippur, the first available opportunity was on the day after Yom Kippur.

The Sifsei Chachomim asks on this point a question from Rashi in Parashas Yisro. Over there (Shemos 18:13) the possuk tells us that, “It was on the following day and Moshe sat and judged the nation …. From morning to evening.” Rashi says that the day that the possuk is referring to is the day after Yom Kippur. If Moshe spent that whole day “from morning to evening” judging the nation, then when could he say Parashas Va’yakhel?

The Sifsei Chachomim answers that Rashi himself covers this question in a later comment on that possuk in Yisro. Rashi says peshat in “from morning to evening” is not to be taken literally. Rather it is there to teach us that whoever judges a correct judgement, it is if they are partners with Hashem in creation where it says, “And there was evening, there was morning.” Since “from morning to evening” is not literal rather Moshe only spent some of his time judging he had time to say over Va’yakhel.

The Kli Yakar says over that there is a much more fundamental connection between Moshe judging the people and Parashas Va’yakhel. Parashas Va’yakhel instructs the Jewish people to bring donations to the Mishkan. This could only be done once Moshe had judged the people to solve all the monetary disputes, because if people would donate beforehand there might be donations of some funds which come from somebody who is not the rightful owner. Only after all disputes are solved and all monies are definitely with their right owner can the donations begin.

He goes onto explain why all this had to happen on the day after Yom Kippur. The Mishkan was a unique opportunity for over 3 million people to have a share in the same building. What would normally happen when 3 million Jews would have to build a house together? Can you imagine the Machlokes? The only way this could happen is if all the Jews had Achdus. On Yom Kippur when we received the second Luchos and forgiveness for the Eigel we managed to also regain the incredible level which we had at Matan Torah of “K’Ish Echad B’leiv Echad”-“Like one man with one heart.” Only with this level of Achdus could we begin to start talking about building a Mishkan. Therefore Parashas Va’yakhel needed to start as soon as possible now Moshe has removed the technical problem of a few court cases.

He then brings a Drush which puts the icing on the cake. We are told that there should be no fire lit in our dwellings on Shabbos. Fire is representative of heated Machlokes. Building the Mishkan helped us maintain the level of Achdus and avoid Machlokes. However, that is all very well throughout the week, what about Shabbos when we can’t build the Mishkan? Therefore we have a special possuk warning us that on Shabbos when we aren’t building the Mishkan, be extra careful to avoid Machlokes.

By Aharaon Goldwater

Those Wise in Heart

2010-03-11T23:15:00.000Z

“Let all those with a wise heart among you come and make everything that Hashem commanded” (35:10)

This week the words ‘Chacham Lev’ are repeated seven times and the root of Chacham appears eleven times. Chachma is generally translated as wisdom. The meaning of the phrase wise-hearted needs further clarification.

Two approaches to Chachma:

The Ramban comments that at first none of Bnei Yisrael were aware that they had the skills necessary to carry out the Divine will but through their devotion to Hashem they discovered that they had the skills required within in them. Emotional factors do not allow a person to accept something about himself whether it be good or bad no matter how many times he is told it and regardless if it is explained to him in detail. Our emotions can cloud our minds meaning that no intellectual information will register.

We usually think of wisdom as associated with the mind and brain rather than with the heart. We also usually associate the heart with our emotions rather than with wisdom. The phrase of Chacham Lev seems to be telling us of the importance that we should attach to our emotions and that we must understand ourselves and our emotional responses to any situation. According to R’Hirsch understanding and insight are subcategories of Chachma – wisdom. Our emotions and our intellect are very closely related; lack of one has an adverse effect on the other.

It is possible to think that this character of Chacham Lev is only relevant to this week’s Parasha (It only appears five times in the Torah – all in our Parasha). The Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim (3:54) notes that is specifically linked to the art of construction. However the phrase and its inner meaning seems to include a broader category than simply the ability to make things. In other places around the Tanach, the phrase is related to the observance of Mitzvot:

“One whose heart is wise will do the Mitzvot, but a fool will have tired lips.” (Mishlei 10:8)

Indeed the Malbim comments that ‘Chacham Lev’ refers to someone who has integrated the moral discipline that wisdom imposes with his natural instincts and passions.

Alternatively, Rabbi Yehuda Halevi says that we describe Hashem as ‘wise in the heart’, not because intelligence is a description of Hashem rather because it is intellect that is our essence and Hashem is the very ultimate of intellect, the very epitome of Chacham Lev – Where there is complete unity between ‘wisdom’ and the one who possess it. It is a natural characteristic of Hashem; a human being can achieve the same objective if he yearns for Hashem and attempts to be an instrument for the establishment of Hashem’s kingdom in our world. Much like Betzalel was.

The Pasuk describe Betzalel as having/using wisdom, insight and understanding. R’Hirsch says that he was appointed specifically because he had these qualities. The building of the Mishkan was not merely the external work of artisanship but a way to establish a structure where there are no spare parts, where each part has a symbolic significance.

So in summary, it is likely that Chacham Lev is the wisdom needed to build the Mishkan, wisdom that can translate a Divine plan into human reality, something that will form a bridge between our emotions and our intellect and between us and Hashem. The Mishkan is the centre of vitality of Am Yisrael. It a spiritual and emotional centre, the source of all the teachings of Bnei Yisrael, intellectual or otherwise.

What is needed to construct such a centre is wisdom combined with a heart, someone who is truly Chacham Lev. Only this can bring together the highest point of the Jewish soul and its strong yearning for Hashem. This is wisdom that results from the link between man and Hashem.

Shabbat Shalom,
eli

The Luchos: The Marriage Document

2010-03-04T22:50:00.000Z

“It happened as he drew near the camp and saw the calf and the dances that Moshe’s anger flared up and he threw the tablets from his hands and he broke them at the foot of the mountain”
(Shemos 32:19)

The question is asked by this episode of the golden calf as to why Moshe broke the luchos. He seemed to have lost his temper and smashed the luchos out of anger; despite the sin of the people, is this the way a leader should act? Rashi justifies Moshe’s actions by bringing a gemora in Shabbos (87a) which says that since a heretic may not partake in the korban pesach which is one of the mitzvos, surely a nation of heretics can not receive the Torah.

The Midrash gives an interesting idea. Moshe realised the sin which had been committed by the Bnei Yisroel would face judgement from Hashem. Moshe therefore broke the luchos in the defence of the Bnei Yisroel as he could now protest that since the Bnei Yisroel had not physically received the laws then perhaps they don’t apply.

Another explanation is based on the Midrash that the letters of the luchos departed when Moshe saw the sin. This made them suddenly very heavy so Moshe could no longer carry them. Alternatively, as Rashbam says, Moshe became weak upon seeing the levels to which the Bnei Yisroel had sunk and he could no longer carry the luchos. Nevertheless, the question remains, why did Moshe only break the luchos when he saw the sin? Was the warning from Hashem (32:8) not enough?

Rabbi Twerski brings the Midrash which says that Moshe wanted to teach the Bnei Yisroel a lesson that no matter how trustworthy the witness, even Hashem, two witnesses are required to give testimony. Therefore, it was only when Moshe, acting as a second witness, saw the sin did he actually believe it.

After this point, the Torah relates that Moshe punished those who worshipped the calf without witnesses or a warning by grinding the gold of the calf and adding it to water and then force feeding the concoction to them. If they were guilty the water was poisonous, if not, it would pass through them normally. This form of justice is similar to that of the sotah, the woman suspected of adultery. The other sinners were killed by the sword or by plague. The question is asked, why was the form of justice chosen similar to that of the sotah?

The answer fits in with why Moshe broke the luchos. Many times throughout Tanach, the relationship between Hashem and the Jewish People is compared to that of a husband and wife. The Midrash brings a parable of the newly married man who heard rumours that his wife was unfaithful. In order to ensure that the wife, if accused, would be judged as a single woman rather than a married one, for which the punishment is lighter, the marriage document was torn up. Here too, Moshe effectively tore up the marriage document, the luchos, in the hope that the sin of the Bnei Yisroel would seem lighter. Nevertheless, by the punishment, the Bnei Yisroel are still considered to be under contract with Hashem so their punishment is the same as that of the sotah; just as she is suspected of being unfaithful to her husband and is given the water of the sotah, so too, the people who were suspected of worshipping the idol but not witnessed doing so are punished in the same way.

By Ari Levy.

A Burning Fury

2010-03-04T22:48:00.000Z

“You shall not kindle fire in any of your dwellings on the day of Shabbat”

Regarding this Pasuk the Chatam Sofer emphasizes the necessity to prepare oneself spiritually in order to derive maximum spiritual benefit from Shabbat. Within the soul of every Jew burns a fire of love for Hashem and a desire to achieve closeness with Him. If we invest energy to fan that flame during the weekdays, so that it will burn strongly, we will not have to begin ‘from scratch’ on Shabbat. However, one who wastes his weekdays on foolishness, entering Shabbat unprepared will have to begin to ignite the flame – kindle a spiritual fire – on Shabbat. Therefore the Torah teaches us that “you shall not kindle fire…on the day of Shabbat”. Don’t wait until Shabbat to kindle your soul; keep it warm all week long, so that the flame can peak on Shabbat.

There are two traits that the Rambam (Hilchot Dei’ot) says that we should avoid enacting through something called Middah Benonit (sometimes called the golden mean, generally meant as the middle path – one of temperance; it is recommended for various middot) and warns against any moderation. He says that arrogance and anger should both be eliminated in an extreme and uncompromising fashion. He says that rage is a terrible trait and endorses a distancing from the path of Middah Benonit to the removal of any trace of anger or fury from within us.

He quotes various sources, one of which says that “he who expresses his anger it is as if he has done Avodah Zara.” The comparison stems from the lack of any boundaries and the vulnerability which submission to anger both reflects and generates.

Namely by showing such utter lack of control, such inability to maintain or coordinate moral will and impose it on emotional torrent or emotional strain, the person has displayed or even created vulnerability for future temptation, the type of temptation that could even lead to idolatry. Because on the day when you succumb to your anger, the Yetzer Hara has overpowered you and that overpowering creates a mode of submission to the Yetzer Hara, submission to hormones, to emotional needs and to personal aggravation; today’s submission will precipitate, will facilitate tomorrow’s vulnerability to other suggestions of the Yetzer Hara i.e. Avodah Zara.

The inability to condition oneself to restraint means that we will surely sin in the future. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak says in Nedarim כב: quoting a Pasuk in Mishlei that one who is constantly full of rage and anger is overwhelmed and suffused with sin. (“ובעל חמה רב־פשע - A man of wrath commits much transgression” - 29:22)

The Gemara earlier on (כב.) says regarding one who is angry that it as if the Shechinah is trivial to him and says that the moment of anger itself, the submission or expression of anger can only be conducted if there is a blurring or neglect of Hashem’s presence.

The Shelah interprets אש, fire, as a reference to anger and strife. The Pasuk is telling us not to allow the fire of anger or strife to burn specifically on Shabbat. But this raises the question of surely this should be so every day of the week, we should be Rodef Shalom constantly and we should be avoiding anger wherever possible (as we saw above) – why is the prohibition against becoming angry especially relevant on Shabbat. According to Chazal the fire of Gehinam does not burn on Shabbat. One who gets angry causes Hashem to allow that fire to burn in him. If you are angry specifically on Shabbat you are explicitly demonstrating the blurring or neglect of Hashem’s presence.

Shabbat is a time for peace, the Zekan Aharon quotes the Ramban who said that the Mussaf offering of Shabbat, unlike the other Mussaf offerings, does not include a Korban Chatat (a sin offering) because “for Shabbat and the nations of Israel are mates, and peace reigns between them”. On Shabbat peace should reign between man and Hashem, demonstrated through peace between man and man.

‘No אש may burn in any of your dwellings on Shabbat.’

And Shabbat Shalom.

(Transcribed partly from KMTT Podcast - Ethics and Character - by Rav Moshe Taragin)

Shabbos Kodesh

2010-03-03T15:25:00.001Z

A fantastic piece from the Meshech Chochma, R' Meir Simcha of Dvinsk (bigraphy here).

The Pasuk says: וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת כִּי קֹדֶשׁ הִוא לָכֶם מְחַלְלֶיהָ מוֹת יוּמָת כִּי כָּל הָעֹשֶׂה בָהּ מְלָאכָה וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא מִקֶּרֶב עַמֶּיהָ - Keep the Sabbath, for it is a sacred thing for you. Those who desecrate it shall be put to death, for whoever performs work on it, that soul will be cut off from the midst of its people. (31:14)

The concept of being put to death for breaking Shabbos is odd from a logical perspective - one is commanded to break Shabbos to save another Jew's life, and even in a case where there is only a possibility of there being a danger to someone, one is still commanded to break Shabbos. So it is clear that a human life is more precious than Shabbos, but this being the case, how can we put someone to death who breaks it? Isn't this counter-intuitive?

R' Meir Simcha explains the answer beautifully. Shabbos is less sacred than a Jew, as without a Jew observing Shabbos, Shabbos essentially isn't there. As such, everything about Shabbos, including the very purpose of Creation, is solely remembered by a Jew who observes it, and this means that Shabbos is "indebted" to the Jew, and we therefore forego it to save a Jew's life.

Not so by someone who desecrates Shabbos. Such a person cuts himself off from the the connection to Hashem and the Torah, and it is better for this person to die and get atonement like that than for him to survive and continue in his ways.

So this is what the Pasuk is telling us: "וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת כִּי קֹדֶשׁ הִוא לָכֶם - Keep the Sabbath, for it is a sacred thing for you", ie it is vitally important for Jews to honour and observe Shabbos, because if they don't, who will? Therefore " מְחַלְלֶיהָ מוֹת יוּמָת - Those who desecrate it shall be put to death", because someone who desecrates it has lowered themselves to below the level of Shabbos, the sign Hashem gave us. "כִּי כָּל הָעֹשֶׂה בָהּ מְלָאכָה וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא מִקֶּרֶב עַמֶּיהָ - for whoever performs work on it, that soul will be cut off from the midst of its people" - this person has lowered himself beneath Shabbos by desecrating it, and has therefore alienated himself from what made his people special - that their lives were holier than Shabbos, by keeping it. Only a person who cuts himself off by desecrating Shabbos is suitable to be put to death in the name of Shabbos, so we see that it is not counter intuitive at all to put someone to death in the name of Shabbos.

This shows the level of detail in the Pasuk, that the Torah explains the mechanics of why someone is put to death for breaking Shabbos.

Geshmack!

Thought for the Week

2010-02-26T14:15:00.000Z

“Do not quarrel with a man without cause if he has done you no harm” (Mishlei 3:30)

Quarrelling can become a passion. No matter what the object may be, a quarrelsome person enjoys making retorts. He likes to be right always and to have the last word; he quarrels for the sake of quarrelling. Be aware of such a tendency. If you are forced to have a dispute with someone, then it should be solely because by his behaviour he has given you good reason for it

It also honours a man to remain calm and not let himself be drawn into a quarrel even if he has a good cause for it. Only a fool does not avoid dispute, and thereby he makes his foolishness obvious.

'From the Wisdom of Mishlei - R'Hirsch'

Torah and the Kehuna

2010-02-26T14:12:00.000Z

“And you will command the children of Israel that they shall take for you clear olive oil, crushed, for illumination, to light a continual flame.”

This commandment is addressed to Moshe, yet is a change in the way that ה has been giving instructions until now, where the word va'tisa has been used instead. So why suddenly change to אתה תצוה?

The Ramban answers that Moshe had a special responsibility when it came to the oil of the Menorah. This is further emphasised by Rav Elie Munk, in his commentary on Chumash, Kol HaTorah, where he quotes the Zohar who asks a question on the grammatical construction of the pasuk. The word ואתה (and you) seems extraneous, as תצוה itself means ‘you will command’. He answers that by addressing Moshe so specifically, ה is giving him authority over the whole of the B’nei Yisrael, which notably includes Aharon and his sons.

The emphasis placed on Moshe recalls ה’s original intention to make Moshe the Kohein Gadol, which is explained in Gemara Zevachim, (102a), “and Hashem’s wrath burned against Moshe” (Shemot 4:14), Rabbi Yehoshua ben Karcha said: Every time ‘charon af’, ‘burning wrath’ is mentioned in the Torah, it leaves a permanent mark, with the exception of this occasion. Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said: this occasion also left a permanent mark, for it says [in the same pasuk] “Is there not Aharon your brother, the Levite”. It doesn’t say he was a Kohein [but a Levi]. So Hashem said: I said you would be a Kohein, and he a Levi, now he will be a Kohein and you a Levi. The Chachamim said: Moshe never served as a Kohein except for in the seven days of building the Mishkan.” To leave no doubt as to the reason for Moshe’s apparent demotion, the seven days he spent as Kohein Gadol parallel the seven days he spent protesting at the Burning Bush.

The Midrash (Shemot Rabbah, ch.37) says that whenה told Moshe to appoint Aharon as Kohein Gadol he resented it. The Ibn Ezra seems to suggest that actually, Moshe was glad to remove himself from the responsibilities of the Kehunah, as he had enough duties as head of the Judiciary. However, Rav Munk suggests that even if Moshe had accepted ה’s instructions immediately, he would still not have been able to take the post of Kohein Gadol as a result of killing the Egyptian taskmaster, as a Kohein who has killed another person cannot serve in the Mishkan.

As a result of Aharon’s appointment as Kohen Gadol there was a “separation of powers” established between the authority of the Kehunah and that of the Judiciary, embodied by Aharon and Moshe respectively. Moshe certainly represented the judiciary, as Rashi says in D’varim (33:21), on the words צדקת ה' עשה.

Where he states that Moshe was the object of this statement. A further indication of Moshe’s status as the head of the judiciary is that he is told by‘ה to announce Aharon’s appointment as Kohein Gadol, a task which in future would go to the head of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high court.

All of this comes from the specific addressing of Moshe through the word v’ata which appears three times in the opening five pesukim of Tetzaveh. This repetitive stressing of Moshe’s remaining important responsibilities served to revitalise him. The Chatam Sofer offers a different explanation for the repetition of v’ata, which is not necessarily incompatible with that of Rav Munk. He points out that v’ata is mentioned five times in the next few Perakim, three times in Tetzaveh, and twice in Ki Tisa, and says that each one represents a historical era or event.

The first occurrence, v’ata tetzaveh, describes the purity of the Menorah, and is symbolic of one of the most blissful periods of Jewish history, from Yitziat Mitzrayim to the destruction of the first beit hamikdash.

The second v’ata orders Moshe to take Aharon and his son this alludes to Chanukah, a miracle facilitated by the descendants of Aharon.

The third v’ata is followed by the advice mar d’ror which alludes to the miracle of Purim. The Gemara in Chullin (139b) says that mar d’ror is a hint from the Torah about Mordechai.

The fourth v’ata is “V’ata tedaber el kol chachmei lev” is a reference to the time of the Mashiach, when the world will be filled with wisdom and knowledge of ה.

The final v’ata is a reference to Olam Haba, a universe of rest and peace – an eternal Sabbath - the commandment is to keep Shabbat.

Returning to the original point, the fact is that Moshe, through the accentuation of his role as teacher and judge, came to realise that the Torah is more precious than the Kehunah, as it is accessible to all Jews, not just those of certain lineage.

“Torah Tzivah Lanu Moshe, Morsha Keheilet Yaakov” - the Torah is available to any Jew, and this is the great achievement of Moshe Rabbeinu.

By Michael Deutsch

Where is Moshe?

2010-02-26T14:09:00.001Z

One of the most famous pieces of the Baal HaTurim appears in this Parashah. He points out that Moshe's name is not mentioned in this Parsha. However, once Moshe is introduced in Shemot, every Parsha has Moshe's name in it. (The Ittur Bikkurim points out that while some other Parshiot omit Moshe's name, they are all monologues by Moshe. Tetzaveh, therefore, is the only Parsha said by Hashem to Moshe without Moshe's name being mentioned.)

The Baal HaTurim explains that when Moshe is arguing with Hashem to save and forgive Bnei Yisroel, he says that if Hashem wipes out Bnei Yisrael, his own name should be wiped out as well. As we know, Hashem does forgive Bnei Yisrael but the curse of a tzaddik is fulfilled even if the condition is not fulfilled. Therefore, to carry out the curse, Moshe's name is "wiped out"from this Parsha.

There are many questions on this, the most obvious being, why this Parsha? The episode of the threat to wipe out Bnei Yisrael only takes place in Ki Tisah, next week? The Peirush HaRosh (quoting R' Dan Ashkenazi) answers that in the conversation, Moshe says, wipe me out from Your book that You have written. Therefore, it implies a book that You have just written i.e. the previous Parsha: Tetzaveh.

The Vilna Gaon points out two things. First, he says that the date of Moshe's death - 7 Adar - normally falls in the week of Tetzaveh. Secondly, he says that whilst Moshe's open name is omitted, by writing out the letters of Moshe's name, mem, shin, heh, we can see that removing the first letter of each (i.e. the open name) the gematria of the hidden part is 101, the same as the number of pesukim in this week's Parsha.

Both of the points of the Vilna Gaon seem hard to understand. Why should Moshe's name be hinted at in this fashion?

This Parsha deals with the laws of the Kohanim. The power of Aharon came to him through the Torah. (R' Yosef Ya'avetz says that the crown of kingship and priesthood depend on that of Torah.) The Torah was received and transmitted by Moshe.

R' Zadok HaCohen says that the Torah mentions names to describe people's core nature. Moshe Rabeinu was not involved much in the jobs of theKohanim. Therefore, his name is not mentioned in this Parsha. However, via the hidden force of Torah, Kohanim received power, so too, when describing Aharon's jobs, Moshe's hidden involvement is hinted at.

Peace of Mind

2010-02-26T14:05:00.001Z

The Megillah states that at the end of the Purim story, ‘Mordechai was acceptable to most of his brethren’. Surely the whole Jewish community should have been grateful to Mordechai and he should have been very popular?!

Rashi explains that at the beginning of the whole episode, Mordechai was an effective spiritual leader for the Jewish people. During the rise of Hamman, Mordechai was a good example to the rest of the Jewish nation, refusing to bow down to Hamman. However, once peace had returned to the land, Mordechai took an official role in the government and tried to involve himself in politics. Rashi says that because of that, Mordechai lost some popularity. The Gemara in Megillah says that part of the Sanhedrin parted from him and disapproved of his Bittul Torah. Once the national need for salvation had been satisfied, Mordechai should have returned to learning Torah. Rabbis are meant to learn, teach and live Torah. A failure to do so is wrong. Politicians and business leaders are meant to run communal affairs using knowledge and decisions of the Rabbis. Holy people, items and actions should not be distracted by mundane necessities. This is also seen near the beginning of the Megillah when the Jews attend the feast of Achashverosh and are punished for doing so.

The obvious question is what it was that the Jews had actually done wrong? As the Megillah says, Achashverosh had arranged for there to be food to suit everyone who was there. Why was it so terrible that the Jewish people went to a banquet and ate Glatt Kosher food? Why did we deserve the whole of the Purim story? The answer given is that whilst the food was 100% Kosher, the cause of celebration, and the environment were able to taint the food we ate. If one does the right action with wrong intentions, even the action becomes a bad deed. This fits in with the point that holy actions should not be tainted with unholy intentions. We say, “He who makes peace in the heavens, he shall make peace upon us and upon all of Israel” (Kaddish). The Chafetz Chaim asked, in what way is there peace in the heavens? Surely, with millions of colossal speeding balls of burning gas hurtling around past planets and meteors, the heavens are nothing like peaceful!

Why then does it use that as an example of peace?

Answers the Chafetz Chaim that we misunderstand the true meaning of peace. Peace is not when nothing is happening and everything is quiet. Peace is when everything is doing its proper job. Therefore, since every natural object in the universe is created for a purpose, the planetary movements are exactly as they are meant to be with every lump of rock following the perfect trajectory for its own purpose. So too, Mordechai should have left politics for politicians, and for eating Kosher for the wrong reasons, we deserved punishment. When everyone does their own task, then there will be ultimate peace and the coming of Moshiach.

A’Freilechen Purim and drink in moderation,

Avi

What is money for?

2010-02-09T14:37:00.000Z

In the part of the Parsha that discusses the way one should treat others, the monetary law mentioned explains that one must take care of the needy. The pasuk (22:24) says אִם כֶּסֶף תַּלְוֶה אֶת עַמִּי אֶת הֶעָנִי עִמָּךְ...... - When you lend money to My people, to the poor person with you....

There is a slight difficulty in interpreting the word עִמָּךְ - with you - in the context. There are explanations by the Alshich, Vilna Gaon, and Kli Yakar, among others, regarding the way money and charity are perceived.

The Alshich (biography here) explains that money is not ours, it is merely deposited with us by G-d. We are given the privilege of having money in order to share it with people who are less fortunate. He explains that the pasuk is telling us that אִם כֶּסֶף תַּלְוֶה אֶת עַמִּי - when we lend money - אֶת הֶעָנִי עִמָּךְ - it belongs to the poor, it just happens to be with you. This is a lesson we can certainly take aboard, that nothing is really "ours", and we should therefore take great responsibility and care for it.

The Vilna Gaon (biography here) explains that the pasuk is alluding to a standard monetary law: loans are done before witnesses to prevent unscrupulous activity, whereas charity is done in solitude, and no-one needs to know. אִם כֶּסֶף תַּלְוֶה - When you lend money - אֶת עַמִּי - do so before My people - אֶת הֶעָנִי - the poor however - עִמָּךְ - do it alone. This is certainly the correct way to give charity, in secret.

The Kli Yakar (biography here) explains that when a person gives charity or a charitable loan, all good deeds and benefits resultant from it are credited to the person who financed the good deeds and actions. אִם כֶּסֶף תַּלְוֶה אֶת עַמִּי אֶת הֶעָנִי - If you lend/give money to my people or the needy - עִמָּךְ (all the merits that result) are with you too!

We can certainly incorporate all these ideas when we give charity, that the money is not ours to begin with, that we should do it in secret, and that the merit of charity does not stop once you've given it, you still receive all resultant merits performed as a result of your kindness.

Cross posted on Geshmack Dvar Torah of the Week

Questions, Yes. Contempt, No.

2010-01-21T23:30:00.001Z

It shall be that when your children say to you tomorrow, “What is this service to you?” You shall say, “It is a Pesach feast-offering to Hashem, Who passed over the houses of the Children of Israel when he smote the Egyptians” (12:26-27)

According to the Haggadah, this is the question posed by the “wicked son”. However, whereas the Torah gives this response shown in the Pesukim above, the Haggadah makes no mention of this. Rather, it says to rebuff him with a statement “Had you been in Egypt, you would not have been delivered.”

If you look at the wording of the Pesukim (13:14), it says “and it shall be when your son will ask you tomorrow, “What is this?” you shall say to him, “with a strong hand Hashem removed us from Egypt”.

"...כי ישאלך בנך מחר לאמר מה זאת ואמרת אליו"

The Pasuk does not say “when your children will say to you” but when “your children will ask you”, it also does not say “you shall say” rather “you shall say to him”.

A question deserves an answer. The wicked son is not asking a question; he is making a statement. In a jeering manner he is saying, not asking, “Of what use is this ancient, obsolete ritual to you anyway”. He is not interested in an answer, so there is no point in giving him one. Shlomo Hamelech says:

(It is possible to skip out this bit and still sort of understand the Dvar, I say sort of because R'Hirsch’s eloquence explains the concepts amazingly well - better than I do later on)
(If you are skipping out - look at the middle Mishlei quote, (18:2) that pasuk is needed)

If you just let me quote a couple of Pesukim here:

לא יאהב לץ הוכח לו
אל חכמים לא ילך
“A scoffer does not like to be reproved;
He will not go to the wise.”
לא יחפץ כסיל בתבונה
כי אם בהתגלות לבו
“A conceited fool has no desire for understanding;
but only wants to express his own view.”
למה זה מכיר ביד כסיל
לקנות חכמה ולב אין
“What good are the means in the hand of the conceited fool
To purchase wisdom, when his heart is not in it.”

(15:12), (18:2), (17:16)

R’Hirsch say something on here on these Pesukim if you let me , I will just quote straight from the Sefer - His meaning is articulated much better than I could if I was paraphrasing:

Two characters according to Mishlei, will hardly succeed in gaining wisdom: Letzim and K’sillim. For the letz everything which transcends the concrete and the sensual is fantasy: whatever is ethical, holy, relating to Hashem, is the target of his ridicule. A doctrine which demands sacrificing palpable, sensual advantages and pleasures for ethical ideals, seems to him an absurd pretension and the followers of such a doctrine who find serenity and happiness in its fulfilment , appear to him as laughable fools.

Yet all this is only on the surface of the man. No matter how able a demagogue he may be in the circle of an attentive audience by indulging in contemptuous irony, deadening every feeling of reverence in the hearts of his companions, his own confidence is not quite so firmly established. He is afraid that some day he may be taught better, and therefore he fears, indeed hates, to be reproved.

Another, perhaps even larger, group of people who are usually lost to wisdom are the K’sillim. A K’sil may posses a good mind. He may even have had some education. However, he is so pleased with his own mental faculties and his smattering of learning that he is convinced of the absolute infallibility of his own views. Such people have not the slightest doubt that by themselves they are able to form a judgement, and have no need for further instruction that anyone, let alone from a higher authority. While a person of insight is aware of the limits of his knowledge and of human intelligence in general, a prideful K’sil is fully satisfied with his own unwisdom; he never even tries to learn the facts. The only thing he is interested in is to ‘sell’ his own opinion, which to him is the highest, most irrefutable one. His heart is so completely filled with his own vain pride that there is no room left for anyone else.

However when there are scoffers around who depreciate the Torah, you should reinforce your own views and say, to one another “it is a Pesach offering to Hashem”.

The author of the Haggadah analyzed the text of the Torah carefully, and his interpretation teaches us not to get involved in a discussion with someone who is not interested in learning, but is merely provocative. Also, when there are threats to our principles, we should stand together in mutual reinforcement of our beliefs.

Shabbat Shalom,

eli :)

There are many more things to say on this, and I will B"zh comment/edit the post for those who wish to read it.

The extra ideas should tie in the two varying concepts of Letz and K'sil so both are expressively evident in the wicked son's question and I will also say over a Dvar Torah I heard today from Gavriel Rosen on why it says כי ישאלך בנך מחר - concerning the wise son and not by the wicked son in the Haggadah.

Omniscience and Divine Providence

2010-01-21T22:10:00.001Z

“In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month in the evening shall you eat matzot,until the twenty-first day of the month in the evening’ - For Ivrit: (12:18)

Although in the Haggadah we say that we eat matzah on Pesach because Bnei Yisrael left Egypt in such haste that their dough did not have a chance to rise, the fact is that on the first day of Nissan, Hashem instructed that matzah be eaten on Pesach.

Just what is the significance of matzah that made it relevant to Pesach even before Yitziat Mitzrayim? Furthermore, normally, the Halacha is that if a small piece of non-kosher food is accidentally mixed into a batch of kosher food, if the ratio of kosher to non-kosher is greater than 60:1, the food is kosher. This is not so in regard to chametz. A miniscule fragment of chametz that falls into a vat of thousands of gallons renders the entire vat prohibited. What is there about the prohibition of chametz that makes it more stringent than other forbidden foods.

The Bnei Yissaschar provides an answer. Matzah and chametz symbolize two opposite attitudes. In the baking of matzah, there is someone in control, manipulating the matzah from the moment water is added to the flour until it is baked. Nothing happens to it spontaneously. With chametz, on the other hand, the dough is set aside for a period of time and allowed to rise by itself. The dough undergoes a significant change spontaneously, without anyone making it happen.

Judaism believes that nothing in the world happens of itself. At every moment, Hashem is in control of the world. Except for decisions on moral and ethical behaviour, for which a person has freedom of choice, everything else is ordained by Hashem. Laws of nature are principles by which Hashem manages the world. Why things happen the way they do is beyond our ability to understand, because we cannot fathom the Divine wisdom. But we must know that nothing, even the smallest occurrence that is not a matter of free will, is controlled by Hashem.

A person can be enslaved to his own drives as well as a taskmaster. Ironically, someone who thinks he has control of his fate is not truly free. He is driven to acts that are futile, because whatever is destined to be will be. This attitude is particularly evident in Yechezkel (11:3) where the people said “the city is a cauldron and we are the meat”, a metaphor insinuating a total lack of Divine intervention in worldly events.

The Chofetz Chaim gave a parable of person who was travelling by train, and was pushing against the wall of the compartment. When questioned he explained that ‘he was trying to make the train go faster’. His act is as futile as that of the person who tries to earn more money by working longer hours. A person can be truly free only if he is free of the drives that dominate him.

Matzah, therefore, is the bread of freedom because it represents total control by its maker, with nothing occurring on its own. The message of matzah is that nothing in the world occurs unless Hashem decrees it. “A person’s earnings are decreed on Rosh Hashanah” (Bava Basra 10a). If a person really believes this, he will not be enslaved by an insatiable drive to make more.

In celebrating our freedom from enslavement, which includes being a slave to one’s drives, we eat matzah. Even the tiniest morsel of chametz, which symbolizes spontaneous happenings, is forbidden. To believe that there is anything, however miniscule it may be, that is beyond the control of Hashem is antithetical to true freedom.

One might ask, if matzah represents Hashgacha Pratis (Divine Providence), why are we not required to eat matzah all year round? Why is chametz permitted at all?

The answer is that once we have reinforced our faith in Hashgacha Pratis by eating matzah on Pesach, we have been given guidelines on how to protect ourselves from the concept of spontaneity, symbolized by matzah.

The Torah states that meal-offerings on the Mizbeach were not permitted to be chametz. There are two exceptions to this rule: the offering of Shtei Halechem (two loaves of chametz) on Shavout and the ten loaves of chametz which accompanied the Korban Todah, the thankfulness offering.

On Shavuot, which commemorates the giving of the Torah when we rededicate ourselves to its study and observance, the offering is one of chametz. If we study Torah diligently and observe the Mitzvot, we can avoid the error of spontaneity. Similarly, if we cultivate the middah of gratitude and thank Hashem for everything, we are attesting that everything comes from Him. This allows us to eat chametz all year round and not to forget the important principle of the matzah of Pesach.

That:

בכל מקום עיני ה
+
שאול ובדון נגד ה

“the eyes of Hashem are in every place”

and “the grave and decay are manifest to Hashem”.

Shabbat Shalom.

Just Jump Right In

2010-01-21T22:06:00.001Z

The posuk (יב.יא) when speaking about the way that the קרבן פסח should be eaten, says: ואכלתם אותו בחפזון – it should be eaten “with haste” the תרגום uses the word “בבהילו”. The word בהלה usually has connotations of the confusion that accompanies haste. On the surface this seems quite understandable. Hashem wanted the Jews to be ready to leave מצרים as soon as the time came, and so they were told to eat their קרבן quickly. After a little thought, though, this is not so simple. The use of the wordבהלה usually has very negative implications. The opening words of the קללות in פרשת בחוקותי are: והקדתי עליכם בהלה - Hashem will cause panic and confusion. Besides, we are constantly taught by the בעלי מוסר the importance of מנוחת הנפש – being calm and collected. Our thoughts, words and actions should be carefully measured. A mensch is in control of himself at all times, he will not act impulsively even when under pressure.

The question is, why would Hashem instruct the Jews to eat the קרבן with בהלה – a haste bordering on confusion. Haste and confusion should be the last thing we want at this extraordinary time of יציאת מצרים . The birth of the Jewish nation should surely be at a time of total tranquillity and peace of mind, not turmoil and confusion?

The answer to this is that of course, the highest ideal is to think carefully before we speak or act. Impulsive behaviour is something to be seriously avoided. And yet, there are times when too much contemplation is not the right thing. This is especially true when it comes to serving Hashem and doing מצות. The שטן is constantly on the lookout for someone with a little enthusiasm forמצות . Theשטן will pounce on him at once. “Come on” the שטן will say, “your plan will never work, just think about all the complications this idea of yours will involve. Just forget it and get on with your life.” And it’s true, usually if you think too much about it, it won’t happen. The שטן will have succeeded to put a damper on your enthusiasm. It’s like going swimming in a pool that’s not been heated properly. If you try to put your toe in to test the water – you’ll never want to go in, it feels so cold. If you think too much about it, you’ll never go in. The only way is – just jump in.

So sometimes you just have to be a bit hasty. If you’re too calm and collected the excitement will evaporate. And, yes, it was particularly at this momentous and crucial time, the birth of the Jewish nation, that excitement, enthusiasm and even a little haste and impulsiveness, were the right things.

By Rabbi Cohen

A First-Class Ticket

2010-01-20T23:14:00.002Z

This week's story is here! Read it, love it and comment (about) it.

A First-Class Ticket

Around the turn of the twentieth century, Vladimir, an illiterate and unworldly Siberian peasant struck it rich. One day he was offered a very lucrative business proposition. Closing the deal, however, required his presence in Moscow.
Moscow. He was pretty sure that a horse - even the sturdiest his village had to offer - would not be able to make the trip of several thousand kilometers. Some of the more sophisticated residents of the town came to his rescue, advising him about the existence of a new mode of transportation - a "train." If he were to travel to Novosibirsk, the closest large city, he would be able to catch a train to Moscow.

Consequently, one fine day found Vladimir in the central train station of Novosibirsk. When he informed the lady behind the ticket counter of his intended destination, she asked him what sort of ticket he wished to purchase. Observing his confusion, she told him that he could purchase a first, second, or third class ticket. A third class ticket, she explained, offered absolutely no amenities, and didn't even guarantee a spot on the train. If the arriving train was already filled to capacity, he would have to wait for the next one. A second class ticket offered a greater chance of a spot on the train, along with more comfortable accommodations. A first class ticket came with a guaranteed seat, and all amenities necessary to ensure a luxurious and comfortable journey.

Money was hardly an issue, so first class it would be. As it turned out, the train would not arrive for another few days. Vladimir noted the date and time of its anticipated arrival, arranged for lodgings in the interim, and arrived back at the station two hours early, since this was his first time attempting such a journey. He decided to just follow the flow, assuming that he would be fine as long as he copied exactly what his fellow travelers were doing.

The train arrived. After his initial shock at seeing such a monstrously large chain of cars, Vladimir regained his composure and scanned the terminal to see what to do. As it was early, most of the passengers had not yet arrived, but he noticed three passengers boarding the very last car on the train. He followed them into the car, and when each one climbed beneath one of the benches in the car, he did the same. Unfortunately, he wasn't fully familiar with proper stowaway protocol, and his feet jutted out across the aisle of the third class car.

It was dark and lonely beneath the bench, and Vladimir quickly dozed off. He didn't feel the train start to move, and didn't hear the conductor entering the car. He did, however, feel a sharp kick to his shins, and the startled peasant was expertly hoisted out by the burly conductor.

"You moron, you think this is a free ride?" he bellowed. "You need a ticket to ride this train!"

"What's the problem, sir," Vladimir meekly responded. "I have a ticket."

The fellow travelers on the train car burst out laughing at this ludicrous claim. Their laughter only intensified when he started peeling off layer after layer of clothing, starting with his expensive fur coat, clearly playing for time. But much to their astonishment he pulled out a ticket - a first class ticket no less!

After verifying that the ticket was indeed authentic, the conductor, in a distinctly humbled tone of voice, asked the obvious: "Sir, you have an expensive first class ticket; please tell me why you are lying under a bench in the third class car?!"

"Because that's what the others were doing..." was the embarrassed response.

We too travel through life's long journey. At Har Sinai, we were given a first class ticket through it, ensuring the optimum comfort and amenities. One day the Conductor will want to know: Did we ride in the first-class carriage or follow the crowd and be left under the third-class benches? (adapted from chabad.org)

A Short Break:

2010-01-17T17:09:00.004Z

We will be away over half term - we will be back in two weeks.

The Jewish Warrior and Paths of Peace

2010-01-14T23:28:00.002Z

An extra Dvar Torah that hasn't been included in the Living Torah this week - only at our blog do you get extras :)

“And Aharon's staff swallowed their staffs.” (Shemot 7:12)

God said: "If Aharon's serpent will swallow the serpents of the Egyptians, there will be nothing remarkable in that, for serpents normally swallow each other. Therefore let it resume its original form and then swallow their serpents" (Midrash Rabbah).

The Torah's ways are ways of pleasantness, and all its paths are peace -

"דרכיה דרכי נעם וכל נתיבתיה שלום"

(Mishlei 3:17)

Our purpose in this world is to create light, not to battle darkness. Nevertheless, there are times when we are forced to resort to battle, when we must vanquish those who seek to vanquish us. Thus Moshe, the gentle shepherd of Israel, and Aharon, the ultimate man of peace, find themselves in the role of "judge and chastiser of Pharaoh," crushing the might of Egypt and obliterating its icons and myths.

Here we find the lesson to be derived from the fact that Aharon's rod swallowed the "serpents of the Egyptians" after it had reverted back to its original form, rather than as a serpent itself. For even when waging a war, the Jew is not a warrior. Even when he consumes the serpents of the enemy, he is not a serpent himself, spewing poison and hate. His instrument of vengeance is as devoid of vengeful feeling as a petrified, inanimate rod, as cold to the rage of war as a lifeless stick.

By the Lubavitcher Rebbe.

Some Lessons of Snow

2010-01-14T23:10:00.001Z

[All italics represent additions to the standard text found in the pamphlet.]

This is my 1st post that hasn't been published in the Living Torah beforehand - all the other posts uptil now I simply pasted in when I set the blog up, as I was searching for a good dvar torah for my 'first week' I came across this written by Rabbi Hoffmann. I love the lesson we can learn from it however I have some questions on it, which I'll outline at the end. Help with straightening it out will be much appreciated. (an email has also been sent to R.Hoffmann to ask him)

So: Local readers will know that the snow has been a prominent feature of the last 2 weeks / week and an half. It is strange how snow at the same time can disrupt our lives but still bring simcha to everyone.

Snow: a natural occurrence. Mishlei tell us that we can learn a message from all things because the very essence of חכמה is from Hashem and the share which we are allotted is only a faint echo emanating from the divine חכמה, so it is therefore possible to learn from everything because all creation, all nature has that Divine echo.

But how do we relate snow to this week’s Parasha? Snow, in Lashon HaKodesh, is "שלג". The three Hebrew letters that make up the word שלג are ג - ל - ש. It is asked that why did Esther invite Haman to join her with king Achashveirosh at her feast? There is a Pasuk in Mishlei (16:18) that says:

לפני שבר גאון
ולפני כלשון גבה רוח
“Pride goes before a calamity
and a haughtiness of spirit before a fall”

Simply, this means that at times, Hashem grants greatness to the wicked only to make their ultimate downfall that much harder to bear. One who falls from a low place to an even lower place will likely be injured. But one who falls from a high peak to a deep canyon will be mortally wounded.

The Malbim comments on this Pasuk and the one it precedes that haughtiness of spirit is stage before pride: a tendency to superiority that has not yet been stamped out and at this stage it is easy to fall into real arrogance, which Hashem detests and punishes severely. The humble person on the other hand recognizes human limitations and sees not reason for pride. Esther saw the downfall of Haman drawing near, and, in order to make his downfall all the more painful, she granted him an exclusive invitation to her feast.

There is, however, explains the Bobover Rebbe ztl a deeper explanation of this concept of "לפני שבר גאון/The greatness before the fall." The Gemara (Berachot 9b) quotes in the name of Rabbi Yochanan, "One should always run to greet a king. Not just a Jewish king, but even a gentile king. In order that, if he will merit to see the coming of Mashiach and the renewal of the kingship of Beit David, he will be able to appreciate the difference between ‘our’ kings and ‘their’ kings. Jewish leaders have always been the epitome of humility. They never sought out positions of leadership, and only consented to take such positions after much communal pressure. How different is this from the many dictators of world history who actively pursued their positions of power, and, having attained their goal, abused their positions to the denigration of those beneath them, and displayed unspoken arrogance and self-admiration.

Contrast, for example, Moshe Rabbeinu with Pharaoh. Moshe, even after being told by Hashem to go and lead Bnei Yisrael, said (3:11 – see Pasuk above), "Who am I to go before Pharaoh and to take the Jews out of Mitzrayim?" He saw himself as totally unworthy of the task. Pharaoh, on the other hand, took his power so sincerely that he set out to convince his nation that he himself was a god, as we can see in Yechezkel 29:3, "That he (Pharaoh) has said, 'My river (the Nile) is my own; I have made it for myself.'"

Greatness, like many things in life, is really a test of one's character. Will we attribute our power and our accomplishments to our own strengths and talents, or will we be able to recognize that whatever greatness we have, has been given to us by Hashem, the source of all blessing and power. If we are able to attributes our successes to Hashem and then we need not fear from the "greatness before the fall." But if we fail the test, and our successes cause us to indulge in smug self-admiration and self-glorification, rest assured that our ‘prominence’ will be no more than a prelude to the bone-jolting fall that looms menacingly in the distance.

So, the letters of שלג: ג - ל - ש, comprise the first three letters of the Pasuk, "לפני שבר גאון/The greatness comes before the fall." Perhaps, like the snow, the "great" people of the world are at first elevated to the heavens, where they are admired and idolized. They are like the beautiful snowflake in its cloud, which, in its heavenly abode, thinks the world of itself. Soon, though, it will be rudely tossed to the earth, where it will be trampled, turn to slush, melt and dissolve away.

Regarding the humble leaders of our nation, however, Shlomo Hamelech says (31:21), "Her house does not fear from שלג." Those who accept their greatness with humility and modesty need not fear from "לפני שבר גאון ".

In the name of Rabbi Hoffmann

My problem was that that last pasuk quoted seems to be in regard to the Eshet Chail, not our leaders - I haven't seen any connection between the two pesukim or indication that it could be to do with humility.
From what the Vilna Gaon says in referrence to a pasuk in Tehillim (68:15) and then Yeshaya (1:18) then you can link it to our leaders but not really to humility. Sheleg acc to the Vilna Gaon is referring to din of geheinom or a din chazak where your sins are turned from darkness to whiteness i.e. forgiven.
But still no connection apart from Shin, Lamed and Gimmel to לפני שבר גאון. So if anyone has an answer I will be much obliged. :)

Shabbat Shalom,
eli

‘Showing The Nile The Gratitude It Deserved’

2010-01-14T22:30:00.003Z

Parshas Va’era contains the bulk of the Ten Plagues, beginning with the plague of Blood and continuing up to the plague of Locusts. The plagues begin with G-d's command to Moshe: "Say to Aaron, 'Take your staff and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt; over their rivers, over their canals, over their ponds, and over all their gatherings of water, and they shall become blood; there shall be blood in all the land of Egypt, and in the wood and in the stones.'" [Shemos 7:19]

Rashi on this Posuk teaches that Aaron, rather than Moshe, was commanded to initiate this plague because the Nile protected Moshe when he was thrown into it as an infant. Therefore, Aaron initiated the plague of Blood and the plague of Frogs (in which the Nile was also smitten). The Gemara comments on this: A person should not cast stones into the well from which he has drunk.

This is the principle of Hakaras HaTov [recognizing a favor]. We learn from here that Hakaras HaTov applies even when the doer of the favor is only doing what he is supposed to do anyway. The Nile merely floated the basket. That is the nature of water. It is a law of physics that something lighter than water floats on water. The Nile thus did not go out of its way to do anything special for Moshe. It just did what it has been doing since the beginning of time.

And yet, we still learn from here that there is an obligation of Hakaras HaTov. This dispels a common practice among people. It is the nature of people to say: "Why do I need to say 'Thank you'? Why do I need to have HaKaros HaTov? –- He had to do it anyway!"

Hakaras HaTov is not measured by the benefactor's efforts. It is measured by the impact on the recipient. When someone benefits from someone else – whether the benefactor did or did not need to provide the benefit, he did or did not have to do it, whether it was or was not a bother for him, the beneficiary has a responsibility to recognize that he owes a debt of gratitude. The proof is the Nile River. It merely did what water does and yet Moshe Rabbeinu felt a sense of Hakaras HaTov.

I recall many years ago when driving through Hackney to Stamford Hill together with my wife, we saw a neighbour of ours, a lady called Rebbeten Semiatycki a’’h standing by the bus stop. We naturally pulled over to offer her a lift as we were going her way in any case. Not surprisingly, she thanked us for stopping for her, and we replied that it was really no bother being that we lived in the same road!

What was surprising however, was that for the next 25 years till she recently passed away, whenever we met her – she ALWAYS said ‘thank you’ for that lift! When we questioned her as to why she always felt the need to thank us, she said that the Torah obligates us to always be grateful for any favour shown to us, even if it was no bother.

So we see that there are people in our generation who live according to the lesson that Moshe Rabbeinu taught us – always to show gratitude to those who help us, and ultimately this will bring us to show gratitude to Hashem who is the Source of all our blessings!

Based on a Shiur by Rabbi Y. Frand – with a conclusion by Rabbi B. Katz.

Me too!

2010-01-14T00:01:00.003Z

After Hashem sends down the hail that destroyed all the vegetation of Egypt, Paroh calls for Moshe and Ahron and says "ה' הַצַּדִּיק וַאֲנִי וְעַמִּי הָרְשָׁעִים" This is generally translated as– Hashem is righteous, וַאֲנִי וְעַמִּי הָרְשָׁעִים – and I and my people are wicked. But this pasuk can be split up in a different way, which results in a change in its meaning; !ה' הַצַּדִּיק וַאֲנִי -וְעַמִּי הָרְשָׁעִים – Hashem is righteous - as am I! וְעַמִּי הָרְשָׁעִים – and it is my people who are wicked!" . Paroh is faking innocence – and attempting to side with Hashem, and claims it is his people whom are wicked, not he! In addition, if we take out וַאֲנִי, the roshei teivos (initials) of the remaining four words spell Hashem’s 4 letter name. The וַאֲנִי is in the center of this; it is interrupting the shem Hashem. He is claiming parity with and within G-d's Name!

Paroh continues and tells Moshe that he will allow bnei yisrael to go; and Hashem stopped the hail, yet Parah did not keep his word, and did not allow them to leave. Hashem says to Moshe in the first pasuk of next week's sedra "בֹּא אֶל פַּרְעֹה כִּי אֲנִי הִכְבַּדְתִּי אֶת לִבּוֹ וְאֶת לֵב עֲבָדָיו לְמַעַן שִׁתִי אֹתֹתַי אֵלֶּה בְּקִרְבּוֹ - The Lord said to Moses: "Come to Paroh, for I have hardened his heart and the heart of his servants, in order that I may place these signs of Mine in his midst" (10:1).

There is a problem with this that is not evident from a translation. Why does Hashem say כִּי אֲנִי הִכְבַּדְתִּי? The אֲנִי is superfluous , as הִכְבַּדְתִּי is in the first person, so there must be more to it than meets the eye. Literally, כִּי אֲנִי הִכְבַּדְתִּי means because of אֲנִי I have hardened – Hashem is saying that it is because of Paroh’s arrogance and usage of the word אֲנִי in 9:27 that הִכְבַּדְתִּי – I have hardened his heart so that שִׁתִי אֹתֹתַי אֵלֶּה בְּקִרְבּוֹ. Except, אֹתֹתַי can mean My signs or My letters. Hashem hardened Pharoah’s heart so that he can see ‘My letters’ in his midst. Which letters are we talking about? The letters that make up the name of Hashem which Pharoah had previously attempted to infiltrate!

So in essence, because of אֲנִי, I have hardened their hearts to show my letters ie G-d's name, with all His power, and showing it in their midst, showing how brilliant the Torah is, that it has so many levels of interpretation by just reading the words again.

Cross posted on http://geshmacktorah.blogspot.com/

A Man Thinks, and G-d Laughs

2010-01-07T21:04:00.001Z

"כָל־הַבֵן הַיִלוֹד הַיְארָה תַשְלִיכֻהוּ"

[כא - א]
“… ‘Every son that will be born - into the river you shall throw him!’ ...”

The Pasuk says that Pharaoh tried different methods to stem the tide of the Jewish population explosion. His first attempt was his instructions to the Jewish midwives to kill all the boys and save the girls.

However, Pharaoh saw that this did not work, so he invented another idea: "All sons that are born shall be thrown into the river...". Where did he get this idea from? Isn't there a more effective way than throwing the babies into the Nile?

The answer is that Pharaoh wasn't a fool. He was no reactionary; he acted on the advice of his advisers. Chazal tell us, based on the Gemara [Sanhedrin 101b] that the astrologers of Pharaoh saw that the saviour of Israel would meet his downfall through water. Therefore, Pharaoh, who had this inside ‘intelligence’ decided to throw the Jewish babies and eventually all boys into the Nile, in order to nip this pestilence in the bud and pre-empt and outwit the 'Jewish problem.'

The Steipler Gaon says that this act is a living example of a Pasuk in Mishlei:

רַבוֹת מַחֲשָבוֹת בְלֶב־אִיש

וַעֲצַת ה‘ הִיא תָקוּם

"Many are the thoughts/ideas in the heart of man;

but Hashem's plan will be established" [19:21].

The Malbim in his commentary on this Pasuk writes that a human being believes himself to be full of possibilities, potential modes of thought and courses of action, to choose as he wills. Yet the single counsel or plan that actually goes into practical effect is often decided by Hashem overriding a man’s apparent freedom.

How ironic it is that the plan that was supposed to kill the saviour of Israel is in fact none other than the spark that sets Moshe on his journey. The plan, which was implemented on the advice of Pharaohs’ expert advisers, did not kill the saviour of Israel, it had the opposite effect. Moshe was placed into in his flimsy basket made of cheap inferior wood and was retrieved by none other than Pharaoh’s own daughter who took this Moshe into -- of all places -- Pharaohs’ household. He was saved by, and nurtured in, Pharaoh’s house. He was supported by Pharaoh’s money. He was educated at Pharaoh’s expense. He was saved by the very plan that was intended to kill the Jewish saviour.

This is not only true with Pharaoh. We each have our own ideas, plans and calculations. We think we are going to be smart. We think we are going to outwit somebody. Foolishness! Our machinations are all for nothing.

There is an amazing gematria quoted in the name of Rav Auerbach ztl regarding these two plans:

Pharaoh was afraid:

הָבָה נִתְחַכְמָה לוֹ פֶן־יִרְבֶה

“Let's come up with a plan lest they increase in population...”.

The numerical value of this phrase is 12+523+36+130+217 = 918.

Pharaoh wanted to bring down our population figures, however Hashem had a different plan:

…וַיאמֶר לָהֶם אֱלקִים פְרוּ וּרְבוּ -

“and G-d said to them: Be fruitful and multiply”.

The numerical value of this phrase is 257+75+86+286+214 = 918.

Similarly, when the first plan failed Pharaoh orders:

כָל־הַבֵן הַיִלוֹד הַיְארָה תַשְלִיכֻהוּ

“all males born shall be thrown into the river.”

The numerical value of this phrase is 50+57+55+221+771 = 1154.

This plan also failed. Quoting the very same Pasuk in Mishlei used above:

"Many are the thoughts in the heart of man, but Hashem’s plan prevails",

וַעֲצַת ה הִיא תָקוּם

= 566+26+16+546 = 1154.

Ah!

A Brother's Love

2010-01-07T20:58:00.000Z

“Blessed are you Hashem, our G-D, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with the holiness of Aaron, and has commanded us to bless his people Israel, with love”

At a glance the blessing which the Kohanim recite before bestowing their blessings upon the congregation, which outside the land of Israel, takes place only on festivals seems fairly straight forward. However, upon closer examination, this blessing, - which is a Birkat mitzvah, a blessing prior to doing a mitzvah – seems unusual on 2 different accounts. Firstly, in a usual blessing of this nature, we simply state “… who has sanctified us with his commandments, and has commanded us”, yet in this particular blessing, the Kohanim mention “the holiness of Aaron,” their ancestor. Additionally, and perhaps even stranger, the blessing is ended with the word the word “be-ahava”, “with love”. In no other blessing over any mitzvah whatsoever do we find any other adjective within the Berachah! We do not say “… and has commanded us regarding washing the hands with purity, or with joy”. In no other blessings do we find that we need to describe a facet of the mitzvah we are about to perform. So why is this blessing so anomalous, and what are the reasons behind these changes?

The answer lies in a pasuk in this week’s Sedrah, as explained by the following Gemara, in Mesechet Shabbat, (דף קלט, amud א – 139 A). There is a Pasuk in Parshat Tetzaveh (Perek כח, Pasuk ל; chapter 28, verse 30) which says Aaron must put the urim v’tumim “al libo” - “upon his heart”. The Gemara wants to know why “on his heart” and how did Aaron merit this great reward of having it “upon his heart”?

In this week’s Sedrah, in chapter 3, G-d appears to Moshe, and commands him to go to the land of Egypt, speak to Pharaoh, and lead the Jewish people out of Egypt. At that point, Moshe says something truly remarkable, and is almost unrepeated in the 1000 year history of Jewish prophets. He says no. In fact, when G-d gives him a clear and unambiguous instruction, he refuses 5 times! However, Hashem says something to him, and according to Rashi on that pasuk, it was this that made Moshe finally acquiesce and go to Egypt. This pasuk (chapter 4, verse 14) reads: “is there not Aaron your brother, the Levite? … Behold, he is going out to meet you, and when he sees you he will rejoice in his heart”. Moshe was only refusing G-D’s word, according to Rashi, because he thought it would cause Aaron to be upset that the younger brother was chosen over him, and he wasn’t willing to cause his brother grievance. However, as soon as he was reassured that Aaron would be happy, not just externally, but “he will rejoice in his heart”, then Moshe agreed to go along with it.

Herein lies the answer to the Gemara, and the reason why the Berachah for Birkat Kohanim has those special features. Aaron displayed here a unique character trait, he was genuinely happy for another person even when that person was promoted over him! This shows us the total opposite of jealousy, and personifies the total pursuit of harmony. The Kohanim, as they ascend to bless the congregation, recall this incredible character trait of Aaron to give selflessly, and not to be jealous of others. The word “with love” at the end of their blessing emphasises this exact attribute, and when conferring this blessing, they remind themselves of this essential quality to give and not to envy others. Additionally, this is the answer given in the Gemara. That very “heart” which was glad for his younger brother, which was so willing to sacrifice his own glory, merited the honour of having the “breastplate of justice” on that very generous and selfless heart.

The Mishna in Pirkei Avot (chapter 1, Mishna 12) says:
“be like the disciples of Aaron, loving peace, pursuing peace, loving people…”. How often, in a society such as ours, do we allow petty jealousies to get in the way of building successful relationships with our friends, families and colleagues? How often do we see someone else’s success as a threat to our own, and immediately start resenting them? Here is an example of Aaron, who was a very righteous man in his own right, seeing his brother being picked over him for leadership. The seemingly natural course would be of extreme jealousy and even hatred from Aaron. Quite the reverse, as we see the exact opposite, with Aaron being happy for his younger brother. Genuinely happy. This is a perfect example of how to “pursue peace”, by overcoming our natural “sink or swim” instinct, and truly rejoicing in the successes of others. “Be like the disciples of Aaron.” That is indeed a level we should all strive for.

By J.J. Kimche

A Short Break:

2010-01-07T20:52:00.001Z

We will be away over half term - we will be back in two weeks.

The Light of Eternity

2010-01-07T20:49:00.000Z

מא - לג] - ״יֵרֶה פַרְעה אִיש נָבון וְחכם״]
...pharaoh seek out a discerning and wise man...”

There is a Gemara in Mesechet Shabbat that says that “one who is accustomed with a candle will have children who are Bnei Torah or Torah Scholars.” Rashi comments on this Gemara and says that the candle refers to the candles of Shabbat and the candles of Chanukah.

A simple explanation of this would be that those who perform the mitzvah of Shabbat and Chanukah candles will have the reward stated in the Gemara.

The Maharal differs to the aforementioned Pshat and explains that the candle is, in the language of symbolism, representative of the whole world. In order to explain the statement he paraphrases it as: “one who is accustomed to looking at the whole world as a candle will have children who are Bnei Torah.” But what does it mean to look at the whole world as a candle? There is a Pasuk in Mishlei that says:

"כי נר מצוה ותורה אור"

"The candle is a mitzvah and Torah is light."

The individual commandment is compared to a lamp which requires oil and a wick in order to burn, similarly a mitzvah only has force as long as a man’s spirit is contained in his body. The Torah on the other hand is light itself, general and intangible, radiating in a man’s spirit long after his death.

As the mitzvah candle of Shabbat or Chanukah burns down and the flames are dancing their last we might be tempted to ask ourselves, “what have we really gained or what is accomplished through this act of lighting? The good oil is gone and the money spent but what actually remains?”

The Maharal states that although the oil has been consumed the light generated from the candle continues to run its eternal course. It goes on forever. So what have we accomplished by performing this mitzvah? We have in reality taken a piece of this temporal world and unlocked its eternal essence. We have taken a physical action and elevated it into a spiritual realm.

This answers our original question of how does one look at the whole world as a candle – he simply sees the world as being packed with endless spiritual potential. Any item, each person and every single moment is dense with limitless possibility. One who is able to ‘see’ the spiritual light of Torah is one who can see the opportunity for Mitzvot in our banal physical actions.

R’Elyah Lopian compares this world to the years of plenty, and the Next World to the years of famine. (Pharaoh’s dream) Only in this world do we have almost endless opportunities to study Torah and perform its commandments. In the Next World, no such opportunity exists; it is a time of famine. We tend to think that this life is forever and we will always be able to do Mitzvot and store away spiritual provisions for later. It takes wisdom to envision a time when we will not be able to add to our storehouse of merit. If we remember the famine of Mitzvot that exists in the Next World, we will use our time wisely.

This is the lesson that can be learnt from Yosef’s words when he says to Pharaoh “seek out a wise and discerning man and set him over the land of Egypt.” Only a wise man could comprehend the dangers of the famine that lay ahead whilst still living in a time of abundant plenty. It is interesting to note that the words used to describe this character are נָבון and חָכַם (see Pasuk above) – Mishlei tells us (see issue 314 - or my post on Bereishit) that a person who has these qualities is someone who is able to see the light of creation, the light of torah; someone who looks at the whole world as a candle.

My favourite dvar so far - very geshmaldik :)

The Best Insurance

2010-01-07T20:30:00.000Z

Towards the end of the 4th aliyah, Yosef, unrecognized by his brothers, recognizes them when they come to buy food. He accuses them of treachery and imprisons them for three days. In the 5th aliyah, Yosef demands that Binyamin be brought to Egypt and keeps Shimon as a hostage. The brothers relate their adventure to Yaakov who refuses to send Binyamin. The increasing famine forces Yaakov to concede to Yehuda's guarantee that Binyamin will be safe, and the brothers return to Egypt. However two of the twelve tribes gamble on 2 of the most precious things in order that they will bring back Binyamin alive and well to Yaakov. In Perek 42, Pasuk 37 Reuven says “You may put my two sons to death if I do not bring him to you.” Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Zalaznik asks: Whatever possessed Reuven to put his sons’ lives on the line? How could he be so sure that he would not fail to return with Binyamin?

Also, in Perek 43, Pasuk 9, Yehuda says “I will guarantee him, you may demand him from my hand. If I do not bring him to you and present him to you, then I will have sinned against you for always,” Rashi explains that Yehuda was undertaking here to forfeit his share in the next world should he fail to bring back Binyamin. Why was this necessary? Surely Yaakov knew that Yehuda will try his best to bring back Binyamin safely, guarantee or not. So why do both Yehuda and Reuven forfeit such precious things to their father?

With the case of Reuven, the Gemara (Bava Kama 50a) tells the story of Nechunia Chofer Sichin, a righteous individual who was in the habit of excavating water holes for the public use. Once, his daughter fell into such a pit and Nechunia assured everyone that she would remain unscathed. How could he be so sure? The answer is that it would be inconceivable that the very thing that he provided for the public good should cause grief to him. The same is true with Reuven. He knew that the sons of one such as he, exerted himself in saving Yosef from certain death, could not possibly fall victim to a similar fate, therefore he made their lives dependent of his returning of Binyamin, for by doing so, he was ensuring G-D would grant him success.

In the case of Yehuda the Shem Meshumuel explains that if a person is working towards an important goal, he won’t quite give it his all, as he is liable to lose heart along the way, unless success is critical. In that case, however difficult it is to succeed, he will pursue it tenaciously andreach deep into himself to discover hidden strengths and talent that will carry him success. This is what Yehuda was doing by agreeing to forfeit his share in the next world; he was exposing himself to peril of the highest order. He also did this so Yaakov could be calmer, as he knew for certain that Yehuda will try his upmost to bring Binyamin back as he would extend himself to the very limits of his ability and beyond, to return Binyamin – even in situations that he might have otherwise deemed hopeless had not so much been at stake.

(Dvar torah brought from Talelei Oros by Rabbi Yissachar Dov Rubin)

Shabbat Shalom

By Alex Klinger

Guest Post by Avi Greenberg - Chanukah Dvar Torah

2010-01-07T20:24:00.001Z

We have tried to bring a couple of interesting discussions about some the particular details of the lighting of the Chanukah candles. Both are taken from the Sefer, Merapsin Igri.

Why Light?

The Medrash Tanchuma says that the Menorah in the Bet Hamikdash was kept alight by a miracle. They used to light it at the beginning of the year and it would stay lit for the whole year!
The Chidushei Harim asked a question on this. Surely there is a mitzvah to light the Menorah every day. If it was alight for the whole year, surely they weren't fulfilling the mitzvah of lighting the Menorah every day?

He answers that they added some oil each day and this counted as if they had relit it.
However, there is a problem with this. In the Shulchan Aruch we learn that on Chanukah we must light the Chanukiah with enough oil for it to burn half an hour. If not enough was added, we may not pour in more whilst it is burning, as it would have no effect. Rather, you would have to blow it out and start again.

Surely, according to what the Chidushei Harim explained, adding oil counts as relighting. If so, why does it not work on Chanukah?

Answers HaRav Moshe Feinstein that the two separate lightings are for two separate reasons; in the Bet Hamikdash the Mitzvah was merely to light the candles whereas on Chanukah we want to create Pirsumei Nisah - publicizing the miracle.

In a case where we need only light candles, by prolonging the time of their burning it is like we are lighting them.

However, the Chanukah candles are meant to symbolise the miracle performed by Hashem when he kept the Menorah burning on the little amount of oil. If we have to refill the oil, how does this send out
the message of Hashem's ability to prolong the burning of the Menorah lights? It ruins the whole point of lighting candles. We therefore make sure that they will be seen to burn for long enough on their own.

Whoops, I forgot to light...

The Taz writes that if one brought in Shabbat and then realized that he had to light his Menorah, he should ask a relative to light his candles for him.
However, we have a principle that one may not appoint a Shaliach - messenger - for something one cannot do one's self. If so, how can you ask someone to light the candles when it is already Shabbat for you?

Rav Chaim Kaniefski answers that there is an opinion that the obligation of candle lighting is that each house needs lights. According to this opinion, the Taz fits in well as he isn't appointing his relative as a Shaliach rather he is just ensuring that the house has lit candles.

Alternatively, Rav Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg answers that we misunderstood when you may not appoint a Shaliach. It only applies if you would be unable to do the actual deed e.g. trying to become engaged with a married lady. In that case one may not appoint a Shaliach to carry out the engagement, as he himself could not actually do so himself.

On the other hand, in our case, he is able to light the candles. He could easily light them. However, it happens to be that he has brought in Shabbat already. Therefore he may not light the candles himself, but rather he may appoint a Shaliach.

Hope you all enjoyed that and a mazal tov to Boaz Gaventa on his Bar Mitzvah.
Avi Greenberg - Literary Editor

The Completion of Actions

2010-01-07T20:20:00.000Z

Towards the beginning of Parshat Vayeshev, we read about the infamous plot of the brothers to take Yosef's life and to tell their father Yaacov that he was killed by a wild animal. We know that in the end this plan was not carried out, but instead it was replaced with Yehudah's idea to sell Yosef to merchants who were passing by on their way to Egypt. Rashi (38:1) tells us that this sugges-tion was the beginning of Yehudah's down-fall, which is why the next portion of the Torah tells us about his sin with Tamar. However, we must ask the following question: What was so terrible about what Yehudah did? He may have put forth the idea to sell Yosef, but at least he saved him from being killed! Why do the Torah, and Chazal, speak in harsher terms about Yehudah than they do regarding the rest of the brothers, who were seemingly just as, if not even more, responsible for what occurred to Yosef? Yehudah at least did something!

The answer to this question is one which gives us a life message and life lesson, which we must always remember. It is true that Yehudah began the process of saving Yosef by stopping the brothers killing him, but he did not finish the process. As Rashi (38:1) tells us, after the brothers saw how distraught their father Yaacov was over the reported death of Yosef, they said to Yehudah: “You told us to sell him. Had you told us to return him, we would have listened to you!” Yehudah took the initiative to do something about the situation with Yosef that he saw unfolding before him. However, when a person acts he must make it his business to finish that which he begins. Yehudah was a leader among the brothers, and as a leader he was completely correct in taking control and insisting that Yosef not be killed. But a true leader also knows that seeing things to their completion is a virtue. The Midrash (Bereishis Rabbah 85:4) warns us about the harsh punishment that comes to a person who only does things in a halfway manner, based on this episode of Yehudah and Yosef. Yehudah may have done the right thing in saving Yosef, but he did not finish the job.

This lesson is not only applicable in the realm of doing mitzvos. Striving to be an “adam hashalem”, a complete person, demands that we try to make all of our actions and pursuits “complete” as well. This means learning to stick with things until they are completed, and not to abandon them in the middle in order to begin other schemes, which in turn we might not finish. Taking things one at a time, but fully completing them, that should be our goal in life!

By Sammy Epstein

The Reflection of Intention

2010-01-07T20:13:00.001Z

“He went ahead of them, he prostrated himself to the earth seven times, until he approached his brother. Esav ran to meet him. He hugged him and fell on his neck and kissed him, and they both

[לג - ג-ד]

Please reference to these pesukim for the Ivrit - adding it in was not working at time of upload.

A superficial reading of these Pesukim raises the question of if Yaakov had already reached his brother, why did Esav need to run towards him?

There is a nuance in this Pasuk that should be noted. It reads “ad

gishto ad achiv”, until he reached until his brother,” whereas it would seem to be grammatically correct to say ad gishto el achiv, until he reached up to his brother.

This nuance provides the answer for the first question. If we were to look at Rivkah's words to Yaakov when she instructed him to go to Lavan we see that there seems to be a redundant Pasuk. First it says “ and remain with him until your brother's anger against you subsides”, then in the next Pasuk again it says “until your brother's anger against you subsides”. Some commentaries point out the second Pasuk lends itself to the translation “until the anger of your brother subsides from you”.
But how was Yaakov to know when Esav's anger had subsided?

They bring a Pasuk from Mishlei which says:

כמים הפנים לפנים כן לב האדם לאדם

“As in water face answers to face, so the heart of a man to a man.”

(Exact translation varies but the essence tends to remain the same.)

You can gauge how a person feels towards you by how you feel towards him. Rivkah was, therefore, saying, “Remain with him a short while until your brother's wraths subsides,” and you will know that this has happened “when the anger subsides from you,” i.e. when you no longer feel animosity towards him.
The Pasuk solves the problem with the Pesukim by Rivkah's words, but still does not appear to explain the problems written above.

Malbim writes on the Pasuk in Mishlei that as the heart pumps back into the system the blood it receives, thus maintaining life. Water reflects back to a person the countenance that he presents; and the heart reflects a person's thoughts and impulses, presaging good or evil results. So too a Talmid Torah will bring his community Heaven's blessings of abundance for the merit of sustaining him.
The Pasuk in Mishlei is telling us how to convert an adversary to a friend: do your utmost to feel positively towards him and the chances are he will begin to feel positively towards you. If you see him in a positive light your actions towards him are likely to be different just as your perception towards him has altered. When he associates positive behavior with you then he is much more likely to reciprocate positively to you.

When Yaakov saw Esav approaching, “he bowed earthward seven times,” from a distance, each time decreasing his anger towards Esav, “until he reached until his brother,” i.e. until he reached a feeling of brotherly affection for Esav. By following the Pasuk in Mishlei, he thereby caused Esav to feel positively toward him, so that “Esav ran towards him, embraced him, fell upon his neck and kissed him.”

Yaakov's Vision

2010-01-07T19:48:00.000Z

In this week's sedrah, we read how Yaakov, after ferrying his family across the ford of Yabok, returns alone to the other side - Chazal say that this was to pick up small jugs that he had left behind - where he is confronted by a man. This man is identified by Chazal as being the Saro shel Eisav – the angel of Eisav, named Samael and, since Eisav epitomises evil, this was the yetzer hora – the evil inclination itself. Yaakov wrestles with this man until daybreak, upon which the man, seeing that he cannot defeat Yaakov, asks Yaakov to let him go. Chazal tell us that since this man was an angel he had to go and sing before Hashem at daybreak. Yaakov refuses to let the man go unless the man blesses him, so the man blesses him, changing Yaakov’s name to Yisroel. Then a most interesting exchange takes place between Yaakov and the man. Yaakov asks the man his name and the man enigmatically replies "Why do you ask my name?" The man then blesses Yaakov and leaves.

This exchange leaves us with two questions. First, why did Yaakov inquire as to the man's name; and second, why did the man respond "Why do you ask my name?"

Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch points out that the Hebrew word for name is shem, which is related to the word sham which means there. The word sham defines the physical location of something, and the word shem defines the essence of something. Rav Leib Chasman uses similar reasoning to answer our two questions. When Yaakov asked the man his name, he was seeking a definition of his essence, he wanted to know what the yetzer hara truly was so he could combat it. This is why, Rav Leib Chasman continues, the yetzer hara responded "Why do you ask my name?" Samael meant there really is no purpose in your asking my name. The yetzer hara is not an actual existence rather a figment of people's imagination, it blinds, tricks and manipulates people, but in reality has no essence – and therefore cannot actually have a name.

This connects beautifully with the Kli Yakar's explanation of Samael’s name. He says that the name Samael comes from the word Sumah which means blind - since Samael’s duty is to blind us from seeing actual reality and thereby lead us to sin. The Kli Yakar also points out that there is a further indirect allusion in Samael’s name. In 'AtBash' (a method of viewing hinted details from words in the Torah by swapping the last letter of the alphabet for the first, and the penultimate letter of the alphabet for the second etc.) Samael spells anavim which mean grapes, grapes are used to make wine which too blinds people from seeing reality. It is also interesting to note, that Samael came to Yaakov at night, a time where physically things are harder to see, and greater faith in G-d is required (see Rashi Tehillim 92:2). It was at this time that the yetzer hara attacked. Perhaps, this is an additional reason why Samael requested to leave at daybreak, when the obscurity of the night had began to lift and it was clearer to see.

Shabbat Shalom

By Gavriel Rosen.

The Ladder Of Life

2010-01-07T18:29:00.002Z

והנה סלם מצב ארצה וראשו מגיע השמימה
יב-כח

The Baal Haturim points out that the gematria (numerical value) of סלם, ladder, also equals that of עוני, poverty. Poverty and wealth are often cyclical and life is a ladder. Some climb up and achieve ממון (money = 136) while others fall into עוני (poverty = 136).

Mishlei speaks at length about the relationship between the rich and the poor. In Perek [כב - ב], it describes how when two people meet they are both travelling towards the starting point of the other. The rich goes downhill and the poor goes upwards.

עשיר ורש נפגשו
עשה כלם ה׳
Rich and Poor meet,
Hashem is the Maker of them all.

Observing this simultaneous occurrence it is possible to conclude that man’s destiny lies neither in wealth nor poverty. Both conditions are equally necessary in Hashem’s purposes for human society as a whole, and even for the fulfillment of our own individual tasks. Only one who proves himself both on the ascending and on the descending path of ‘fate’ can reach the pinnacle of perfection that is attainable on this earth. The Pesukim here are speaking of a more metaphorical meeting whereas elsewhere they talk of an actual physical meeting.

If a poor man on his way up and a crafty, cunning man, going downhill, meet on the way, Hashem removes the scales from their eyes. [כט - יג]

רש ואיש תכיכם נפגשו
מאיר עיני שניהם ה׳
If a poor man and an artful man meet,
Hashem gives the eyes of both illumination.

The poor man, who witnesses the descent of the artful one, is warned to hold on to honesty, simplicity and probity, because he sees that it is the lack of these qualities which cause the downfall of the cunning operator. He is advised to take the warning and internalize it – this warning need not only be from the actions of a colleague or acquaintance. Rather, it can be learnt from any figure in the public eye that has fallen from grace due to a dishonest approach to life. The latter, on the other hand, can learn from the ascent of the poor man that it will be useless to redouble his crafty tricks in order to climb up again. On the contrary, he would do better to shed his bad habits, which could not even help him at the top when he was there already. How much less can they enable him to make a truly lasting ascent. He can see for himself that the man of small means is on his way up without craft or cunning. We hope that he should learn that honesty, simplicity and integrity are the fundamental rungs on the ladder.

According to the Yismach Moshe however, Yaakov’s ladder is a metaphor for man himself. Corporeal man formed out of the ground, is set earthward. Nevertheless he is blessed with a Godly soul; hence, the apex of his being reaches heavenward. When man allows his physical needs and existence to dominate him, they drag him downward and he becomes set downward. If, however, he imbues his physical existence with meaning and infuses his life with the spirit of Torah, then the ladder can reach the greatest heights.

The Chofetz Chaim expands on the analogy of man as a ladder. He tells us that the ladder of life has very delicate rungs. One either continues to rise or he automatically falls. If one tries to remain stationary, balancing on a single rung, it breaks and he plummets earthward. Everything is dependent on man; if he does not go up he falls. The angels ascend or descend on him.

L'Shem Shamayim

2010-01-07T18:11:00.001Z

"ויהי בערב ויקח את־לאה בתו ויבא אותו אליו ויבא אליה"

[כג-כט]

"And it was in the evening, that he took Leah his daughter and brought her to him; and he came to her"

Here is the famous story of how Yaakov worked for Lavan for seven years in order to marry Rachel his daughter but Lavan swaps Rachel for Leah, trickingYaakov into marrying her. Lavan is known for his trickery and deceit. The Midrash tells us how Leah tricked Yaakov into believing that she was Rachel. Such a wedding could surely be annulled yet after this, a time when anyone else would surely lose their temper, Yaakov agrees to continue working for Lavan for another fourteen years. Why was Yaakov so accepting of the lies he was fed from both Lavan and Leah?

The Etz Yosef says that Yaakov asked Leah how she could lie to him and not admit her father's deceit. She replies that she learnt the example from a Tzaddik- Yaakov himself - who also used deceit to impersonate his sibling, Esav before Yitzchak. Said Leah, just as you were told by your mother Rivka to be deceitful l'shem shamayim, so was I told to be deceitful by my father and I believe this to be l'shem shamayim. The Bereishit Raba says that Leah davened not to marry Esav. The Midrash points out the power of Leah's tefillot that she did marry Yaakov, thus confirming that the marriage was l'shem shamayim. therefore, Yaakov accepted the deceit from Leah. But Lavan, surely, had not tricked him l'shem shamayim, after all, we know that Lavan was an idolater.

One answer is as follows: At the time of the trickery, Yaakov managed to see the good in what had happened. R'Aharon Kotler said, Yaakov somehow knew that the person he had just married was spiritually destined for him. On this occasion, he let Lavan off, assuming that the decision was from Hashem, using Lavan as a shaliach. Lavan then says, after the week of Leah's wedding, you can have Rachel too.

Here too, Lavan was deceitful, only giving Rachel with the proviso that Yaakov would work another seven years. Here too, Yaakov remains quiet he thought, this too was the work of Hashem.

Many years later, eleven of the twelve shevatim have been born and Yaakov decides to leave Lavan's house quickly in his absence. Rachel seizes the opportunity to steal Lavan's idols. Lavan pursues Yaakov and upon catching him, he demands to search his family's possessions for his idols. Rachel had hidden them under the saddle of the camel which she sat on. She asked Lavan not to make her get up as she was pregnant and getting off a camel wouldn't have been so easy. Yaakov had worked for Lavan, never taking anything from his home. Yaakov's attribute was 'emet', truth and honesty so why would he ever take Lavan's idols? Yaakov assumed that Lavan was just pretending to look for his idols, deceiving Yaakov into letting him rummage through all his possessions to find anything taken from his home. At this, Yaakov can excuse Lavan's actions no more and says (31:37): When you rummaged through my things, what did you find of all your household objects?

After this act of deceit, Yaakov can no longer look positively upon Lavan and realises that he is a trickster. Yaakov therefore continues his rebuke adding (31:41): I served you these fourteen years for your two daughters. Yaakov also mentions other occasions when Lavan was less than honest. This shows that Yaakov did not rebuke Lavan when there was even the unlikely chance that it was l'shem shamayim. But, when it was clearly Lavan's trickery, Yaakov delivered the rebuke for all of Lavan's lies as he deserved.

By Ari Levy

A Trusty Path

2010-01-07T18:04:00.002Z

"שני חיי שרה"

"the years of Sarah's life" - [א-כג]

רשי says that the Torah repeats the phrase to teach us that all of Sarah's years were good.
This assessment sounds astounding. She suffered the pain of childlessness until the age of 90. The famine that forced her and Avraham out of Eretz Yisrael and her debasing incidents with Pharaoh and Avimelech certainly don't qualify as 'good times'. How can the Torah say that all of her years were equally good?

HaDerash V'Halyun and R'Zusia of Anipoli suggest that the Torah speaks of Sarah's perception of reality. Her motto throughout her years, no matter the circumstances, was 'גם זה לטוב' – 'this too is for the good'. Whatever befell her, she followed the path advocated by our Rabbanim, who taught that one should bless Hashem for the perceived evil just as for the perceived good. Since all the circumstances of her life came from Hashem, she viewed them all as equally good.

Techeilet Mordechai offers a different perspective. Most people experience periods in their lives when they feel driven and motivated to serve Hashem, as well as times when spiritual matters hold little appeal. They compartmentalize their activities into convenient categories of mundane and spiritual. The truly righteous, however, understand the secret of the Pesukim in Mishlei which say:

בטח אל־ה בכל־לבך
ואל בינתך אל־תשען׃
בכל דרכיך דעהו
והוא ואישר ארחתיך

“Trust in Hashem with your whole heart, and do not lean upon your own understanding.
In all your own ways acknowledge Him, and he will direct your paths aright.”

There are several people who comment on these Pesukim. The Malbim writes that if a man will try to 'know Hashem', if he tries to imitate him in the major facets of the godly personality, in the large 'ways' of compassion, generosity, humility, truth etc. Then he assures the man that the detailed 'paths' of the commandments, the how, when and where of doing, rather than being, will follow smoothly and correctly.

R'Hirsch notes that the passage begins not 'בטח בה' but 'בטח אל־ה' - not to have reliance on whatever Hashem has already granted, but to trust Hashem, to be confident about what He has in store for us. It means that we should build our entire future upon Hashem, to be unshakeable in our conviction that we can reach our goal in life only with Hashem, from Hashem and by Hashem's help. Hence we should ask ourselves at every step whether the aims we seek and the means by which we try to attain them are in keeping with Hashem's will, to such an extent that we may hopefully expect his assistance. This is the attitude which according to Mishlei is fundamental to the tzaddik's thinking.

The Rambam explains that all of life's activities are opportunities to serve Hashem. Business affairs, sleeping, eating and all other seemingly mundane pursuits can be transformed into vehicles for spiritual growth. Music, art, humour and other seemingly worldly pleasures can be employed to place one in a frame of mind conducive to torah study and mitzvah observance. From this perspective, every minute of life can be used to attain the goodness of a closer relationship with Hashem.
All of Sarah's days were good because every moment of her life was filled with meaning.

Rivka's Intentions

2010-01-07T17:57:00.000Z

“ וַיִּקְרְאוּ לְרִּבְקָה וַיאמְרוּ אֵלֶיהָ הֲתֵלְכי עם - הָאִּישׁ הַזֶה; וַתּאמֶר אֵלֵךְ ”
“And they called to Rivka and said to her, ''Will you go with this man?'' And she said, ''I will go.''

The Midrash [Yalkut Tehillim 795] says that Hashem took Israel out of Egypt as a reward for the deeds of the Imahot: Sarah, Rivka, Rachel and Leah. For each of the Imahot, it men-tions a great deed that she did, and when it comes to Rivka, it says because she said, ''I will go''. (See pasuk above). The Divrei Yoel asks what the connection is between Rivka's willingness to go to marry Yitzchak and the Exodus from Egypt?

On the words ''I will go'', Rashi comments, ''On my own, even if you do not want''. Lavan was willing to let Rivka go; he had already told Eliezer ''We cannot speak to you evil or good. Behold, Rivka is before you, take her and go, and let her be a wife to your master's son, as Hashem spoke.'' But Rivka realized that when a wicked man gives something or accomplishes something, he has a certain power over it. When one receives a gift from another, he becomes obliged to the giver. Rivka's marriage to Yitzchak was destined to give rise to the entire Jewish people. She did not want Lavan to play any role in this great accomplishment. Therefore, Rivka said. 'I want to go on my own, even if you don't want me to''.

In this vein, we can explain the words at the beginning of the Haggadah, ''If the Holy One, blessed is He, had not taken our fathers from Egypt , we and our children's children would be enslaved [meshubadim] to Pharaoh in Egypt''. Seemingly, says the Divrei Yoel, this is obvious. Who would have taken us out if not Hashem? But the answer is that after suffering through the first five plagues, Pharaoh would have let the Jewish people go, if Hashem had not hardened his heart during the sixth plague. The reason that Hashem hardened his heart is that He did not want the wicked Pharaoh to have any hand in the great beginning of our holy people. Hashem made sure that we left not through Pharaoh's graciousness, but ''with a strong hand'', against Pharaoh's will. ''If the Holy One, blessed is He, had not taken our fathers out'' i.e. had He allowed Pharaoh to be the one to let us out then we would be ''meshubadim''- obliged, grateful, under the influence of Pharaoh, even today.

Thus, the Midrash tells us that in reward for Rivka's concern that Lavan should not have a hand in creating the Jewish people, Hashem made sure that Pharaoh did not have a hand in the Exodus from Egypt; rather, Hashem Himself took us out with a strong hand.

Anonymous Author.

The Light Within

2010-01-07T17:45:00.002Z

"המלט על נפשך"

"Flee for your life..." [יט“יז] - Vayeira

"כפר נפש איש עשהו"

"The ransom of a man's soul are his riches" [יג“ח] - Mishlei

רשי says on this Pasuk that the angel was telling Lot that it was enough him to save lives and that he should not bemoan the loss of his money. It appears that Lot delayed leaving the city in order to rescue his financial interests. Tosefta in Sanhedrin also talks about this point—the words 'for your life' appear to be superfluous indicating that Lots intentions were to save something other than his life. E.g. his money.

I think that the לשון of the Pasuk can teach us something very important - a lesson directed at our approach to wealth and the material world. How often in our lives do we confuse our priorities, how frequently do we question what the purpose of the material world really is?
A look at a Pasuk in Mishlei can help us with our understanding of the proper use of our material pos-sessions. (See above).

Hashem put man on this earth and spread the world at his feet. What is a man's כפר נפש , atonement for his soul, his ransom for his existence, if not the conversion of the worlds transitory goods into spiritual, ethical and timeless treasures. What is it that justifies mans existence? Certainly not the accumulation of material possessions, but rather the right and proper use of the means and abilities at our disposal. According to Mishlei the proper use of our possessions is to implant on earth the values of truth, morality, love and justice, (See Thought for the Week) and then to cultivate them with everything in our power and means.

An act of self-preservation can become the fulfilment of duty towards Hashem through the proper use of our possessions.

This is what כפר נפש איש עשהו means: the justification to live in time and eternity is gained by dispensing charity. A man's real wealth, accordingly, is the money he has used for the benefit of his soul. The part of his property which he gives to others sanctifies even that part which he keeps and uses for himself, provided he uses it to be able to apply his energies even more properly and beneficially.

How many times in our lives do we forget what it is that makes a man rich - how many people believe themselves to be rich but in fact have nothing of value and how many others think themselves to be poor but possess immeasurable and imperishable fortunes.

Lot did not have his priorities in the correct order - he was running to save his money. It could be that he had the intention of saving it in order that he be able to do good with it - but we see from the Pasuk that this it can't be so. The words 'your life' could mean that he was being shown where he was fundamentally confused and that he should have his priorities in the correct order. It is all very well having good intentions but in our lives we need to know what the Ikar is - that if our life is in danger, mate-rial goods have no value regardless of their purpose. This is where Lot was wrong he placed the material over the spiritual, his money over his life.

Seeing Salt

2010-01-07T17:40:00.000Z

In this week's Parasha, Lot's wife is the victim of a salt. We read in Perek 19 Pasuk 26:

"ותבט אשתו מאחריו ותהי נציב מלח ."

Rashi, seeking to explain why salt of all things was used to punish her, comments "she sinned with salt and so was stricken with salt”. He quotes further a Medrash about Lot's wife criticizing Lot for welcoming guests into their house. She then went and borrowing salt from her neighbours, making a point about how it was for guests - Sodom having strict laws against having guests. But Rashi seems to have made things worse. Surely we were told by the Pasuk itself that she was punished for looking backwards at Sodom, which she had been commanded not to do (see Pasuk 17 earlier)? Why is the sin with salt relevant to this?

[I once heard my father talking about Korach's sons.] We know that as the ground opened up to swallow Korach et al, his sons did teshuva and were caught on a ledge under the ground. There is a Gemara that says they stand there still, singing "Moshe is true and his Torah is true, and we are liars" (using a poetic third-person for "we"). Obvious question: if they are standing singing that, why are they still down there? Why does Hashem not let them out?

The answer is that we should read the Gemara better. It should go, "Moshe is true and his Torah is true." "And they - Korach's sons - are liars." They stand there singing, but they still don't quite
believe. They know how to do teshuva; they accepted that they are wrong. But their teshuva is not - yet - a complete teshuva.

The same is true about Lot's wife. If you think about it, being turned into a pillar of salt is a rather harsh punishment for looking back at a fantastic fireworks display! But think a bit further and you'll realise what the meaning of the angel's command was. When someone "looks back" at something they're running away from, it's a sign of regret at what they're leaving behind. Lot's wife wasn't glancing back; she was staring at the home she was leaving, unwilling to let it go. You can take Lot's wife out of Sodom, but you can't take the Sodom out of Lot's wife. And so, she was punished just as the rest of Sodom were punished.

It should now become clear what Rashi was get-ting at by mentioning the sin with salt. Lot's wife was not being punished for looking back; she was being punished because she looked back for the sins she did in Sodom... and that was through salt.

Problem salted.

By Yisroel Greenberg - Former Editor

Our Ability to Learn

2010-01-07T12:38:00.006Z

"ומלכי־צדק מלך שלם הוציא לכם ויין והוא כהן לקל עליון"

"Malchizedek, King of Shalem, brought out bread and wine; he was a priest of G-d the Most High"

[יח - יד ]

According רשי really מלכי־צדק is giving the bread and wine to אברהם to show that he understood that he was justified in killing his ancestors – a conciliatory gesture. However there is another opinion said in the name of R’Meir of Premishlan that states that this meeting was actually an exchange of wisdom.

At first this thought seems quite difficult to understand; where is the exchange shown in the Pasuk, it doesn’t seem to fit it.

A look at a Pasuk in Pirkei Avot helps to start explaining this idea of R’Meir:

"איזהו חכם? הלומד מכל אדם"

This Pasuk is telling us that a truly wise person is able to derive from every person he meets a lesson relevant to his own life. Someone who is able to be on the correct level, to be humble enough to know that he is not all-knowing and that others can teach him many important lessons.

Sefer Mishlei even goes further than this and says that not only from man should he be in-spired but from the natural world as well. For surely the very essence of חכמה is from Hashem; the share which man is allotted is only a faint echo emanating from the divine חכמה . It is therefore possible to learn from everything because all creation has that Divine echo.

However the question still stands – it may be that אברהם was gaining some insight from this meeting but why is it called an exchange?

The Gemara tells us that Malchizedek was actually Shem, the son of Noach (Nedarim 32). Of Yeshivat Shem and Eber, where they learned the divine teachings transmitted by Adam. This is the very same Yeshiva where Yaakov studied for a fourteen year period. אברהם was known for his extraordinary service to Hashem – exemplified by his unparalleled Hachnasat Orchim. When these two tzaddikim met, each tried to glean something from the other, אברהם sought to acquire Torah teachings from Shem, and Shem tried to learn about the mitzvah of Hachnasat Orchim.

The Pasuk tries to tell us that ‘Malchizedek, king of Shalem, took forth bread and wine’ – meaning that he learned from אברהם the mitzvah of providing bread and wine to travellers in order to properly fulfil the mitzvah of Hachnasat Orchim. And אברהם took from him the teaching of being a priest to Hashem – of serving Hashem through Torah.

Perfect Perfection

2010-01-07T12:32:00.007Z

In every day life, one always has the option of looking at anything from two, seemingly contradictory perspectives. For example, a person may look at a glass as being either half full or indeed half empty.

In looking at the glass as half full, one is looking at the glass as being a vessel in which a substance may be held. The glass itself is an object and it holds an object. However, when looking at the half empty glass, it is seen as a vessel with something missing from it. It is seemingly damaged.
A similar concept can be seen in looking at the mitzvah of circumcision, given to Avram towards the end of this week's Parasha.

Hashem tells Avram “I am the Almighty G-d! Come close to me in worship (through circumcision) and be perfect.”

The Mishna explains that the mitzvah of circumci-sion is greater than all other mitzvot, for with all the other mitzvot Avraham our father did, he was not called perfect until he circumcised himself.

The Talmud explains further. Rebbi said circumcision is great, for there was no one who occupied himself with mitzvot so much as Avraham our father, yet he was only called perfect because of his circumcision.
At first glance, the Mishna and Talmud appear to be the same, as explained by the Torat Menachem. However, there is a subtle but significant difference between them. The Mishna states, with all mitzvot Avraham did, he was not called perfect until he circumcised himself. This suggests that the circumcision was the climax of his divine service.

On the other hand, the Talmud stresses that he was only called perfect because of his circumcision, suggesting that the act of circumcision alone brought his perfection, regardless of his prior acts of kindness. In other words, the Mishna sees circumcision as the pinnacle of Avraham's service, whilst the Talmud sees it as an attained perfection through circumci-sion alone, regardless of previous efforts.

Perfection can suggest two distinct qualities:
a) the lack of imperfection – no negative.
b) choiceness and wholeness – only positive.

The Mishna alludes to the former. The absence of the foreskin is the quality of perfection i.e. so long as Avraham remained uncircumcised; he harboured a negative quality which made him appear negative. However, the Talmud chose to stress the additional choiceness and wholeness which circumcision con-ferred on Avraham i.e. the positive effects of circumcision. These unique qualities were endowed upon him as a result of circumcision alone. He was called perfect because of his circumcision.

This fits in with the glass analogy. The Mishna seems to describe Avraham, prior to circumcision, as an incomplete vessel (the half empty glass). Whereas the Talmud describes Avraham as a vessel which can, itself, hold perfection (a half full glass).

We each have an option to look at life in both a positive or negative way. However, the real lesson is to look at life in both the positive and negative ways and learn out positively how to complete our Avodat Hashem, our service to Hashem, in the best way possible

By Daniel Lefkowitz - Last year's editor of the Living Torah.

Theft and Humility

2010-01-07T12:20:00.004Z

רשי comments that the sin of robbery was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Although society at the time of the flood was rampantly committing gross iniquities such as idolatry, murder and immorality, it was the sin of stealing that sealed their fate. This begs the question of why was robbery viewed as such a powerful indictment?

The Gemara in Bava Metzia says that there are two types of robbers: A גנב and a גזלן . A גנב is someone who steals by night and a גזלן is one who steals by day. At first glance it seems that the Gemara is just categorizing different kinds of robbers according to when they commit the act. However there is a fundamental difference be-tween the two; the גזלן exhibits no יראת שמים and runs amok in broad daylight. The גנב is half way there - he at least exhibits יראת אדם , although he also has no יראת ה

רשי uses the term גזל to describe the sin of דור המבול.

There is a Pasuk in Mishlei that discusses יראת שמים (see above - this Pasuk is literally translated as “In the wake of humility comes fear of Hashem”). According to R‟Hirsch (The Wisdom of Mishlei) there is no higher, more ennobling virtue than ענוה - the mindset in which someone is totally unconscious of his own importance. What-ever the ענו may be, possess, desire or even accomplish, it is never of his own making; it is exclusively the product of a higher Being. According to Mishlei, the immediate effect of ענוה is יראת ה . In the sense of person's inner conviction יראת ה is actually synonymous with ענוה , in fact ענוה without יראת ה is entirely inconceivable. ענוה is the purest expression of true יראה . But in the sense of the stamp upon a life led in obedience to Hashem then יראת ה is the direct consequence of ענוה – which automatically resolves itself into the fulfilment of Hashem's will. The two concepts have a symbiotic relationship.

However there is a question on this from the con-tinuation of the Pasuk in Mishlei, there it says that יראת ה‘ is not the only consequence of ענוה . It also mentions that עשר (wealth) is a natural consequence, – even though the acquisition of riches was never further from the direct intention and endeavours of the ענו . To answer this there is a famous quote from Pirkei Avot that says

"איזהו עשיר השמח בחלקו" - "he who is satisfied with that which is allotted to him is considered rich".

It follows that the humblest person on earth is also the richest - he always has what he needs. עשר truly is the logical reward for ענוה . Someone who has humility has no need to steal.
However this discussion of ענוה , יראת שמים and גזלה does not answer our original question. Although clearly the attitude of a גזלן is contrary to all Torah values, how is it worse than the three cardinal sins (idolatry, murder and immorality) that were committed on a daily basis by that generation?

The Avnei Nezer answers that in a certain sense theft really encompasses aspects of all three sins, one who truly believes in Hashem knows that everything he has is because He wants him to have it (ענוה ). Therefore, in a subtle sense, one who robs his fellow is like an idolater, for he be-lieves that he must take destiny into his own hands. One who forces others to give him their property and then derives enjoyment from it, is to a degree comparable to an adulterer, for obvious reasons. Theft is also related to murder, for theft of someones property may impoverish him and harm him emotionally. Thus theft was the sin that doomed the world.

Stand By Your Word

2010-01-07T12:16:00.004Z

"וַּיאֹּמֶּר יְהוָּה לְנח באֹּ אַּתָּה וְכָּל בֵּיתְךָ אֶּל הַּתֵּבָּה: כִּי - אתְֹּךָ רָּאִּיתִּי צַּדִּיק לְפָּנַּי בַּדוֹר הַּזֶּה"

And Hashem said to Noach: Come, you and your entire household, into the ark, for I have seen you to be a righteous man before Me in this generation.

The Mishna in Bava Metzia [44a] says that a person who goes back on a transaction after the money was given but before the kinyan takes effect is cursed with the following words: ''He who punished the men of the generation of the flood and the men of the generation of the dispersal, will punish whomever does not stand by his word''.

The obvious question is what the connection is between the sins of those wicked generations and the sin of not standing by one's word?

The Divrei Yoel zt''l explains as follows: There is a Midrash Tanchuma in Re'eh that says many people in the time of Noach were as good as Noach, but were wiped out in the flood. Why was Noach chosen to be saved? The Gemara in Sanhedrin 108a says that Noach tried to rebuke the wicked people in his time. But in another place [Midrash Rab-bah 29:1] the commentaries on the Midrash say that Noach did not rebuke the people. We seem to have a contradiction. The Divrei Yoel explains that Noach tried for many years to rebuke them, but then saw that the other Tzadikim were keeping quiet. Noach decided to follow the majority and keep quiet as well. This is the reason why, at the beginning of the Parasha, Noach is called ''a righteous man in his generation''- i.e. he re-buked the people for many generations, whereas later Hashem calls him ''a righteous man before Me in his generation''- i.e. during that last generation prior to the flood, he was only righteous in private, before Hashem, but in public he kept quiet. Since his intentions in following the majority were good, he was saved, but others who were wrong for holding back their rebuke were punished along with the wicked people in the flood.

When a righteous person holds himself back from telling the truth to others in his genera-tion who are mistaken, he is forced at many times to contradict himself - to say words that contradict his actions, or to answer questions in a forced way in order to keep himself from saying certain things. This is called ''not standing by his word''. Thus, one who does not keep his word is cursed like the ''men''- i.e. the righteous people of the generation of the flood, who were punished for not rebuking the wicked of their time.

Written by Yisroel Leib Amdurer.

The Light Within

2010-01-07T12:00:00.007Z

וירא אלקים את האור כי טוב"

The Pasuk above says that Hashem saw that the light was good. Light was the first thing to be created – nothing else existed and yet Hashem saw that the light itself was good. This is rather strange. There must be something intrinsically good about light, even if it has no practical application.

Throughout the year we will have an article focusing primarily on Mishlei – indeed a study of Mishlei can throw some light on this question.

Mishlei was written by Shlomo Hamelech. Mishlei literally means proverbs. Classical philosophers defined a proverb as a collection of metaphorical apothegms by which obscure and profound concepts are made accessible by reference to easily under-standable ideas. At times Mishlei can become very obscure but when studied deeper – true pearls can be seen.

In [כג - ו] of Mishlei it says ”כי נר מצוה ותורה אור“ . The individual commandment is compared to a lamp which requires oil and a wick in order to burn, simi-larly a mitzvah only has force as long a man's spirit is contained in his body. The Torah on the other hand, is light itself, general, diffuse and intangible; radiating in a man's spirit long after his death. Fundamental to both Torah and the Commandments is a proper way of living. In order to appreciate the essence of light, in order to see that the light is good; we need to conduct our day to day lives correctly. This is achieved by listening to reproofs of moral instruction. R‟Hirsch tells us this is precisely what Mishlei is – Musar - warnings that restrain a man from unwise conduct. In the first six Pesukim of Mishlei, as an introduction to the Sefer there are 9 kinds or levels of wisdom shown.

The 1st one is חכמה which literally means wisdom. חכמה splits into תבונה and בינה - understanding and insight. For the 2nd there is שכל which is the mental ability to acquire and keep wisdom. Thirdly דעת meaning knowledge. Fourthly עצה - a plan or design. For the fifth מזימה which can mean consideration or reflection. Finally then there is ערמה meaning shrewdness and תחבולות contrivance.

A study of the mitzvah of לא תחמד through these levels would look like this:
By learning the prohibition we have exercised שכל in order to gain חכמה . If we were to go deeper and were to acknowledge that lusting after forbidden things harms us morally – we have exercised בינה and gained תבונה . Indentifying the nature of possible attractions and our reactions to them would involve us implementing דעה and gaining דעת . If all of these thing leaves us determined to fulfil לא תחמד then we have come across עצה . And then if when reflecting upon our resolution – we devise further plans to remain faithful, then we have used מזימה . Furthermore if we decide not to merely repress our reactions but to avoid the situation altogether then we have used ערמה ethical shrewdness to teach ourselves self-control and limitation. Finally if we were to combine several varying plans of attack in order to fulfil the mitzvah of לא תחמד then we have devised תחבולות - stratagems for victorious endurance.

According to Mishlei the type of character that is formed in this process is called ’ערום - חכם - נבון‘ - this is someone who is able perceive the goodness of light amongst the banality of modern life. A sliver of what Hashem was able to perceive at Bria'at HaOlam.

So as we start the cycle of Parshiot anew- may each and everyone of us become someone who is able to see the light of Torah and be able to understand that sometimes the practical application is not everything - sometimes it is just enough for the light to illuminate our Neshamot.

Nature and Beyond

2010-01-07T11:54:00.004Z

This week's Parsha discusses the very essence of nature, the creation of the world. In Kiddush on Friday night we testify to the fact that Hashem created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. It is interesting to note that it is not just Jews who testify to this event, but that around the world, in every civilisation, Hashem‟s creation is recognised with the seven day week.

Chazal teach us that the number seven is called הטבע מספר, the number of nature. This is reflected in the number of days in a week, the number of weeks in the Sefirat Ha Omer, the number of years in Shmitta, the number of months from Nissan to Tishrei and many other aspects. It is also the number of days in Succot and the number of times we walk around on Ha-shana Rabba with the Arba Minim. The Arba Minim themselves are made up of 7 components; 3 Hadassim, 2 Aravot, a Lulav and an Etrog.

Rabbi Michael L. Munk in, The Wisdom in the Hebrew Alphabet, tells us the following: "The number seven symbolizes the complete pur-pose of human existence, combining the spiritual level of the Sabbath with the physical effort of the week. Going beyond seven, the number eight,הטבע מעל מספר symbolizes man's ability to transcend the limitations of physical existence. Thus, with a gematria of eight ח stands for that which is on a plane above nature, i.e., the meta-physical Divine. (Maharal)."

We read in Hallel " שָמַיִם שָמַיםִ, לָה; והְָאָרֶץ, נָתַן לִבְניֵ - אָדָם" - "The Heavens are for Hashem and the
earth was given to man."

This reflects the challenge of man, namely to raise the spirituality of this world towards heaven. In Yaakov's dream he had a vision of a ladder based on the ground, with the top reaching heaven and angels climbing up and down. From this he understood that the role of man is to elevate the “natural world” to reach the heavenly realm.

As one leaves Yom Kippur, a day when we are like angels, we enter into Succot, when we are surrounded by the mitzvah of Succah and cele-brate זמן שמחתנו - the time of our happiness. Throughout the seven days of the festival we have Hoshaanot, culminating in Hashana Rabba, when we circle the bima seven times. Through this we reach Shemini Atzeret, the day beyond nature.

On Shemini Atzeret we celebrate Simchat Torah when we have seven hakafot. This is the synthe-sis of the natural world with the eighth day, which is beyond nature. The role of Simchat Torah on this day is to demonstrate that through the study of Torah and the keeping of mitzvot we can elevate our spirituality to the realm above nature.

So this Shabbat as we read בראשית and testify as to how Hashem created the heavens and the earth, it is an opportune moment to consider that Hashem bestowed the earth to us and we are charged with raising it to a heavenly plane.

Written By Rabbi D.Meyer