Print Page

 

Breshis
 At the end of the Torah, it says: "in front of the eyes of all Israel". Rashi comments that this refers to Moshe’s act of breaking the tablets. However, we can understand his motive for doing this. The people were not on a high enough spiritual level to receive such holy tablets. The Steipler ‘z’l ties this together with the beginning of Breishis. There also we find that G-d hid the loftier lights of creation for the tzaddikim in the future. Perhaps this is from where Moshe took his lesson and did what he felt was necessary.

 The medrash suggests that an objective of HaShem’s creation was the mitzvah of taking "challah" - the portion of each dough. Why this mitzvah as opposed to others? R’ Chaim, shlita, reasons such : HaShem wanted to create man and woman. If so, he wanted to give them each a personal mitzvah. Women have three that are listed in Chazal. Niddah, challah and candle lighting. Now, niddah was part of the punishment of Chava. Candle lighting is not of Torah origin. Therefore, we are left with challah.

 A medrash says: "Why did Adam HaRishon sin? Because he saw two and not three." What does this puzzling medrash mean? The Vilna Gaon offers an explanation. The Mishna states in Pirke Avos: "Focus on three facts and you won’t sin." One is the birth of the human being from humble origin. Adam, however, was the creation of G-d and therefore was lacking in this one piece of mussar.

 In counting the years of Adam it says the days "he lived". The same expression is found concerning Avrohom Avinu. What is its significance? The Mahril Diskin explains. The medrash tells us that Adam should have lived longer but he relinquished 70 years to Dovid HaMelech. Likewise, Avrohom lived 5 years less so he would not see Eisav leave the fold. He adds that Yaakov too lost 33 years from his life because he cursed Rochel, but concerning Yaakov it does not say "that he lived". This is because we know "Yaakov lo mais" – Yaakov Avinu did not really die.

 Chazal illustrate the awesome power of tshuva by relating the fact that Kayin was able to limit his punishment by doing tshuva. Adam HaRishon was amazed at its power and began to sing. However, we learn an even greater fact about tshuva from the parsha. HaShem twice invited Kayin to do tshuva. First, He explained to him that if he would also rectify his presentation as a "korbon", HaShem would gladly accept it. Second, after Kayin killed his brother, HaShem said, "Where is Hevel your brother"? Rashi comments that HaShem entered into conversation with Kayin in the hope that Kayin would confess and admit his wrongdoing. Although Kayin passed up two opportunities for doing tshuva and only did tshuva the third time, his tshuva was accepted.

 << Back
 

Noach
 Hashem, using strong language, promised to destroy all the inhabitants of the world. Had it not been for Noach, the whole world would have been destroyed. Against such a corrupt society, Noach was still able to remain a tzaddik. What then was the greatness of Avrohom Avinu over Noach? Perhaps, in the time of Noach, there was still a remembrance of the name of Hashem. The people, although corrupt, still remembered Chanoch, and such people. However, it seems, that ten generations later there was no semblance whatever of a mention of G-d's name and Avrohom Avinu on his own had to rediscover the obvious.

 At first Noach is called a tzaddik and a tamim but afterwards only a tzaddik. Explains the Ksav Sofer. The criticism of Noach for not admonishing his generation perhaps only began after the death of Mesushelach. Since Mesushelach was older, the burden of reprimanding the people belonged to him. When he was alive, Noach has complete title. However, once he passed away and the burden shifted to Noach and he did not respond properly, he lost his title of perfection.

 The possuk refers to Nimrod as a hunter. The Noda B’Yhuda was once asked if a Jew is allowed to join in the sport of hunting. He answered that the only two hunters documented by the Torah are Nimrod and Eisav. It is obviously not a Jewish trait. Furthermore, we find in the "Rema" that one greets his friends’ new purchases with "titchadesh", similar to "use in good health". However, this does not apply to leather goods for we recognize that they came from an animal that was once living. Clearly then, we should not hunt just for pleasure. This then is the meaning of "now it is said, like Nimrod, a hunter" – something which was not said about others of our people. (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 The final decree of the generation of the flood was sealed because of theft and people’s conduct in their interpersonal relationships. Where is evidence of this found in the possuk? We are told that there lived among them a great tzaddik, Msushelach. However, he died a week before the great tragedy that befell the world. Usually the death of a tzaddik acts as a kopora for the generation – so why not here? The possuk compares, later in the Torah, the day of Yom Kippur and the death of tzaddikim, both of which act as atonement. Since we are told that Yom Kippur atones only for sins between man and G-d, likewise concerning the tzaddik. This is why Msushelach’s death did not shield and protect, for the people of his generation were involved in transgressions between man and fellow man. (Kvoda Shel Torah).

 "And you will take from all the foods for yourselves that are eaten and gather them to you and it will be for you and them to eat". The expression at the end of the possuk seems redundant. The Vilna Gaon explains that Noach actually gathered only enough food to provide a minimum amount of food for each meal. However, HaShem caused a brocha and there was satisfaction equal to a full course meal. It "will be" for you to eat.

<< Back
 

Lech Lecha
 Hashem tells Avrohom Avinu to leave 1) the land 2) his birthplace 3) his father's house. These are three influences upon a person's life. 1) The land in which he lives, the season's, the area, etc. 2) The immediate environment of friends, neighbors, etc. 3) The family and parents. This then is what Hashem was telling Avrohom Avinu; leave your land and also break off from your social and family influences and then you will be able to fulfill your mission in life.

 All of the mforshim search for a reason why Hashem first commanded Avrohom Avinu about bris mila when he was old at the age of 99. The Ksav Sofer explains very simply. The sublime and secretive hidden importance of bris mila is far beyond our capacity to understand and appreciate.

 Therefore, it is a covenant which we should really initiate at the earliest point in our lives. However, to an Avrohom who well understood and comprehended the value of it, certainly it was fitting that it was given at a later age.

 The name Avrom was changed to Avrohom and one is forbidden to refer to Avrohom using his previous name. However with Yaakov, although his name was changed to Yisroel, he still retained his previous name - why? The Vilna Gaon gave a simple answer. The Sifri defines the two words, "Vihaya" and Yihiye". The first is an indication of an immediate occurrence, whereas the second is a prediction of a future time. HaShem told Avrohom that his name would become Avrohom immediately, "Vihaya". If so, it was a complete name change. Yaakov, on the other hand, was informed that his name would become Yisroel, "Yehiye", not an immediate occurrence, and so not a full name change.

 Avrohom said "you have not given me a child and the person of my house (Eliezer) will inherit me." R’ Moshe z’l’ finds it difficult to assume that the problem of inheritance was a monetary one. He explains, rather, that Avrohom Avinu was depressed at the thought of not having an offspring who could continue his spiritual responsibility of spreading the beliefs of HaShem and the Torah. Now, although Eliezer was a master servant who, in the words of Chazal, drew from the spiritual waters of Avrohom and served those who were thirsty, it was not a spiritual possession for which he would be prepared to risk his life to insure its perpetuation. This is the complaint of Avrohom Avinu; there must always be a Jewish people, the chosen people, who will guard the precious treasure of Torah and who will continue to believe in it. They will insure that it will not be diluted or adulterated. An Eliezer is not sufficient for this task. In short, it must be a "family business".

 Avrohom Avinu refused to take the spoils of war and chose to return them to the King of Sdom. However, he first gave maaser to Malki Tzedek. The king of Sdom announced, "give me the people and you take the spoils." Avrohom refused to take the spoils so that no one should say that Avrohom became rich from the King of Sdom. R’ Chaim, shlita, asks : If the spoils legally belonged to Avrohom; why not take them? If they didn’t, why remove maaser from them? If they did belong to Avrohom, why did the King of Sdom say, "keep them"? He answers that Avrohom had no obligation to return these lost articles to the King of Sdom, hence he removed maaser from them. The King of Sdom assumed, however, that Avrohom would go beyond the letter of the law and do an act of kindness. To this he said, "I forgive you and will forgo the retribution." At this point, Avrohom sensed that the King of Sdom would take credit for the future wealth of Avrohom and therefore proclaimed "it should not be said I caused the wealth of Avrohom".
<< Back
 

Vayera
 The great heritage of the Jewish people and in whose merit we constantly ask Hashem to help us is the Akeida, the binding of Yitzchok. Although there are many aspects to the willingness of Avrohom and Yitzchok to sacrifice, we find an interesting insight of the Chazal. Avrohom prepared for the journey and took a knife with him. The Torah uses a rare word to describe it - "macheles". The root of this word is "ochel", to eat or consume. In his second pshat, Rashi says it is so called because the Jewish people are still "eating" the rewards of this great act of Avrohom. Why did the Torah choose to emphasize this at this point of the episode? It would seem that the fact that Avrohom Avinu prepared even the sharp knife to take on the journey was the true test of his total commitment to the mitzvah of Hashem. It was this extra effort that "feeds" the Jewish soul for all generations.

 The mforshim speak at length about the tefilos of Yitzchok for Rivka to have a child. It discusses the power of a tzaddik, who is the child of a tzaddik. However, if we look at the same problem that plagued Avrohom Avinu, how did Sara merit a child? The Gemora in Bava Kamma 92 explains the sequence of the story of Avimelech to the birth of Yitzchok. Hashem told Avimelech that if you ask for forgiveness, Avrohom will daven for you. Afterwards when he did and Avrohom davened for another person, he was answered first. From here we learn, say Chazal, the best formula for tefilla in every case is to daven for another person. In this case Avrohom was davening for a person who acted improperly and so surely he displayed compassion. As a result, his tefilla was answered.

 In parshas Lech Lecha Avrohom was already informed by HaShem that he and Sarah would bear a child. If so, why didn’t he immediately inform Sarah of the good news? The Ramban seems to imply that the Bris Milah and the arrival of the angels happened so quickly that he did not have the time. This is difficult to believe. Perhaps since it was said to Avrohom in the form of a prophecy, then he did not have a right to reveal it without the command of the Almighty. (Shai L’Moreh).

 Sarah had mentioned the fact that Avrohom was old. HaShem changed the wording to "I am old" so as not to insult Avrohom and to keep the peace between them. Why would Avrohom become angry? It was certainly a fact that he was almost a hundred years old. The Kedushas Levi answers in this way: The Gemora informs us of the love HaShem has for the genuine, sincere prayers of the tzadikim. For this reason they did not have children until late in their lives because HaShem waited for their heart-filled prayers. Although Sarah, who was humble, would not view herself as a tzadekes, she was of a madrega that she should have realized that the only reason Avrohom was old was to encourage the prayers of the tzadkik. His age was not an obstacle. Therefore, HaShem changed the wording to protect her from the embarrassment of not realizing the greatness of Avrohom.

 Avrohom placed the wood for the offering on the shoulders of Yitzchok. However, wasn’t Yitzchok already a holy offering and therefore forbidden to be used for mundane work? The answer is Avrohom acted like Hillel in the Gemora (Pesachim 61). He refrained from actually consecrating Yitzchok as a "korbon" until the last minute so as not to mistakenly use him for mundane work. This is also the reason why when Yitzchok asked his father, "where is the animal for the offering?" Avrohom did not respond, "you are the offering" for then Yitzchok would actually become sanctified as a korbon and this Avrohom wished delay. (M'Shulchan Gevoah).

<< Back
 

Chaya Sora
 Eliezer told Lavan and Besual that Sarah gave birth to a child "after her old age". Now the proper term would be "at her old age". Why this odd term? The answer could be that if we understand the posuk to mean that Sara already was beyond the child-bearing years and miraculously returned to her youth. If so, then she actually gave birth "after her old age". (Imrei Shefer).

 At the end of the parsha it says "Yitzchok was comforted after the death of his mother". Rashi points out that he saw that the same miracles occurred with Rivka as with Sara. Now it was a few years since the passing of Sara. Initially Yitzchok felt depressed that his mother died upon hearing the news of the Akeida, which would perhaps indicate he was at fault. But now that he saw that the girl who was born exactly at the time of his mother's passing was a worthy replacement for his mother, he was comforted and understood that the sun of Sara had to set to enable the rise of Rivka's "sun".

 "Do not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan amongst whom I dwell." Why did Avrohom add the words "amongst whom I dwell"? The Klei Yakar offers the following explanation. Avrohom understood that in the final analyses neither country offered a proper atmosphere for his son Yitzchok. However, he realized that it would be much better to take a wife from a foreign land and bring her to this land. If she had grown up in this land she would continue her close relationship with family and friends and would be greatly influenced by them. If he brought her from another land she would not know the people and their customs. Also, the people of Canaan would resent the fact that they were not "good enough" for Avrohom’s family and would keep their distance. This is why Avrohom emphasized the people "amongst whom I dwell".

 "And to Rivka there was a brother and his name was Lavan". The Chazal present a rule that when referring to tzadikim, "his name was -------" is written, whereas concerning reshaim, "------- was his name" is written. If so, why does this rule change here regarding Lavan? The Or Hachaim answers: Although Chazal say Lavan ran to get some of the gold of Eliezer, the possuk does not mention the gold until after he ran to Eliezer. Therefore the Or Hachaim feels that, on the contrary, Lavan heard all that Rivka told her about this strange person and the strange encounter, and he ran to defend the honor of his sister. Only when he saw the jewelry and heard the entire story did he realize the truth. If so, the Torah gives him the credit he deserves during this episode and refers to him with the respect given to a tzadik, "his name was Lavan".

 The servant of Avrohom is sent on a very special mission - to acquire a wife for Yitzchok. Eliezer was, in his own rights, a tzadik, raised and nurtured by Avrohom himself. There was certainly reason for Eliezer to believe that his own daughter would be worthy of the son Avrohom. Despite this, he proceeds to carry out this task with complete faith and ‘syata d’shmaya’, and immediately sees results. The very first girl is obviously the one. The possuk describes Eliezer as being "amazed and astonished to see how quickly things have developed". However, one could question this translation (used by most mforshim). Rashi commented already concerning the people of the house of Avrohom that they were quite comfortable with angels and miracles. If so, why the complete wonderment? It is probably for this reason that the great commentator "Onkelos" merely translates the possuk, "the man was waiting, quietly to see the fulfillment of his mission." Eliezer’s faith was so simple and so complete that it was just a matter of time before the mission would be accomplished.

 << Back
 

Toldos
 And the children wrestled within and Rivka said if so, why me? Rivka and Yitzchok understood that Avrohom went to great lengths to acquire a wife for Yitzchok only from his own family, probably to assure that their offspring would be "kodesh" and a "tzaddik". However, when she passed the house of idol worship and there was movement, as if to say, there was a personality who would be involved with such activities, she proclaimed, if so, why me? Why did he need to travel so far, if the result is the same? (Imrei Shefer).

 And Yitzchok loved Esav because the trapping (of food) was in the mouth (of Yitzchok). We could however, interpret the possuk differently. The Chazal describe Esav as a glib, smooth talker who was able to convince people of his righteousness. He was one who could trap a person with his tongue. If so, then the possuk would read - Yitzchok loved Esav because he was misled, because Esav trapped with his mouth.

 Because Eisav asked for red soup, he was called "Red" – "Edom". Why is this event considered major enough to warrant a name change? When Eisav was born red, he was suspected of having a tendency towards, and a predisposition to murder. The medrash relates that when Shmul Hanavi saw Dovid the first time he was worried about the same "red" blood-spilling characteristic. HaShem assured him that Dovid would only kill with the sanctions of Sanhedrin. Now when Eisav was born, although there was worry and doubt on the part of Yitzchok, he gave him the benefit of the doubt and named him a nice name, "Eisav", which derives from "oseh", one who accomplishes. Years later when Eisav showed his "true color", he was called Edom. (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 Yitzchok expressed his concern about the identity of the person in front of him. Was he Eisav or Yaakov? The possuk reads "He blessed him", and only after that did he ask, "are you my son Eisav?" – Why? The Kehilas Yitzchok gives a unique answer. Yitzchok reasoned that if he gave a brocha to this "person" and it was construed to be the real brocha, (although it wasn’t) the person would then reveal the truth about his identity. Therefore, it was only afterwards that he asked, "are you my son Eisav?".

 The possuk tells us that Rivka gave Yaakov the precious set of clothing she had with her in the house. Chazal tell us that these were the clothes of Eisav which he had acquired from Nimrod. What was the nature of these clothes? The Gemora in Pesachim 54 traces them to Adam. In fact, the Gemora says that, according to one opinion, these were created Erev Shabbos at bain hashimoshos among the other important items created then. Now Rashi and mforshim explained that every type of animal and bird was engraved on these clothes. Utilizing this set of clothing Nimrod was able to attract and hunt with ease all the beasts of the field and forest. As a result, they were very desirable and Eisav too used them to become a great hunter. The irony of all of this is the fact that these clothes were given originally to Adam HaRishon to show to the animal world the dominion of man and man’s higher calling. It was to elevate man to realize his special obligation to live as a greater being. And yet these two turned them into some type of costume and masquerade to trick the animals and kill and hunt purely for satisfying pleasures. What an example of the ability of man to take a diamond and use it as a door stop!.

 << Back
 

Vayetzei
 "Im yehiye Elokim imadi". If Elokim will be with me. All the meforshim ask why he required this condition if it said already Hashem was standing near him. The answer could be that Hashem is the Name of mercy and pity whereas Elokim is the Name of judgment without mercy. If so, then Yaakov was already promised by Hashem that he would be granted mercy. Yaakov, however, desired to be assured of the rewards of Hashem also with midas hadin, that he should deserve it even with the letter of the law. This is why he ended with the words "I will separate the maaser for Hashem" because in the merit of maaser one can almost 'demand' a reward. (Imrei Shefer).

 And Yaakov loved Rochel also from (more than) Leah. The word "also" seems to be unnecessary in the context of the possuk. Perhaps, first Yaakov loved Rochel because of her beauty. After the episode with Leah when Rochel assisted her sister and showed great "mesiras nefesh" for her, Yaakov loved her more which was in addition to before "also" (he loved her) from (what she did for) Leah.

 Yaakov Avinu said "this is the house of HaShem and this is the gateway to shomayim". The Gerrer Rebbi ‘z’l at the dedication of Yeshivas Chachmei Lublin of the tzadik R’ Meir Shapiro ‘z’l explained this possuk. The gemora defines "fear of G-d" – yiras shamayim – as the main room or hall, whereas the study of torah is the anteroom or gateway. Yaakov sensed and felt the genuine yiras shamayim in this place and proclaimed "this is Bais Elokim" and this, the last fourteen years he spent learning Torah, was the gateway. He then proceeded to wish and hope that the yeshiva should encompass both torah and yiras shomayim. (Pardes Yosef).

 Yaakov Avinu arrives as a stranger in a strange land and when he sees the shepards gathered, he reprimands them for coming so early. The obvious question to be asked is what right does he, a stranger, have to give "mussar"? The answer can be found in the reason and the method. First, Yaakov was totally honest and ethical in all his dealings as is evident from later in the parsha. Secondly, he prefaced his words with a very important introduction. He called them "my brothers". He convinced them of his sincerity and his pure motive. Only then did he proceed to reason with them. (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 An interesting question would be, "why did HaShem not protect Dina from Shechem (in parshas vayishlach) as He had done previously with Sarah and Rivka, with Paroah and Avimelech? The Chasam Sofer explains this with this weeks parsha. The posuk reads that HaShem was standing by the ladder. However when Yaakov prayed for future assistance, he said "if Elokim will be with me". The meforshim wonder why Yaakov said "if" which indicates his uncertainty as to the Divine help. The answer is that a tzadik does not wish to "bother" HaShem with requests for miracles – he would rather live in a natural world. Elokim is the name implying the way of nature. Hence, Yaakov was not sure what form the heavenly help would take, HaShem or Elokim. HaShem granted his wish and Dina was saved by a "natural" miracle, without the need to tamper with nature as happens with outright miracles.

 "And HaShem remembered Rochel and heard her prayers". In this one possuk we find the ingredients for success in our endeavors. HaShem remembered Rochel. Rashi comments that He remembered the devotion that she displayed for her sister Leah, the special merit she had. The Sforno comments He remembered her efforts to have children, by giving her maid servants, and with the "dudaim". However, even with all of this, HaShem needed to hear her prayers. This is the comment of the Or HaChaim. The three ingredients would be: a) merits and deeds b) effort, "hishtadlus" c) davening.

 << Back
 

Vayishlach
 The possuk says I delayed until now. Yaakov proclaimed his piety in the house of Lavan, "I kept the mitzvos", but ended his statement with the words, "until now". What is the meaning of the expression "now"? The Baal Haturim explains. Esav was prepared for war with Yaakov. He said, "if you are so confident, come wage war with me now". To this Yaakov answered with a prediction of the future contained in the letters of the word "atah" (now). The letter "iyin" is the seventy years of the exile of Bavel. The "tuv" is the 400 years of the "galus" Egypt and the "heh" is the five (thousand) years until the last thousand when the Moshiach will come to judge the mountain of Esav.

 The Brisker Rav understood from the comment of Rashi "the camp will escape because I will wage war against Esav" that Yaakov was confident he could defeat Esav in war. Nevertheless he tried to avoid confrontation and opted for the other two choices, gifts and honor, or a peace settlement. From this, he concludes, the way for Bnei Yisroel to deal with the enemy is to first engage in dialogue before resorting to physical strength, even in a situation of superiority.

 And the malach wrestled with Yaakov – Chazal tell us this was the minister of Esav who came to fight with Yisroel. They add, that so it is in every generation – the evil struggles with the holy ones for dominion. R’ Elchonon ‘z’l asks "why didn’t he come and fight against Avrohom and Yitzchok as he did with Yakov?" He answers that the Chazal tell us that Hashem will forgive and overlook all types of sins, from the easiest to the most severe. However, He will not forgive the sin of spending idle time instead of learning Torah. The reason, he explains, is that one can count upon the strength of the warrior in all cases, as long as he has his weapons. Once he loses his weapons, the war is lost. The Torah is the weapon of the Jewish people. Avrohom possessed chesed – kindness. Yitzchok embodied true service to HaShem. But, only Yaakov was the personification of Torah study, the weapons of the Bnei Yisroel. To this end, the angel put all his efforts into trying to disarm the Jewish people of their precious weapon, the Torah.

 When Yaakov was rehearsing the language to be used by the messengers when talking to Esav he referred to his brother as "my master" and himself as "your servant". The problem is that this was used even before the dictation of the exact message. Why was it necessary to belittle himself even before the message, in front of the messengers? The answer could be found in the statement expressed by Yaakov, "exactly as I spoke, you should say to Esav." Yaakov meant to inform Esav that even when Yaakov spoke to the plain messengers, he was careful to give proper respect, showing his true obedience to his older brother. (Shai L’Torah).

 A fascinating idea is given by the Chasam Sofer as to why Chanucah was not affixed as a day for simcha and seudos. In Seder Hadoros, the passing of Yaakov Avinu is reported as being the first day of Sukkos. If so, the seventy days of mourning ended on the first day of Chanucah. Therefore, the Chachamim did not see fit to establish it as a festive day.

 The essence of Chanucah is days of Hallel to HaShem Yisborach. The only other action of mitzva we are commanded to do is the lighting of the menora. This is to publicize the miracle, but the main objective is the joy and Hallel. Every other Yom Tov contains an element of eating, drinking and physical enjoyment. Perhaps for this reason the Rambam chose to detail all the laws and customs of Hallel in Hilchos Chanucah, as opposed to another Yom Tov.

 << Back
 

Vayeshev
 Yosef refused the advances of the wife of Potifera. The possuk reads "he refused and said 'my master has totally entrusted me with the house-how could I do such a thing and sin to G-d?'" How could he give the impression that if not for the fact that it wasn’t ethical he would transgress the word of HaShem? The answer could be found in a different interpretation of the possuk. Yosef was saying that, on the contrary, the master was totally oblivious to the doings within the house and it would be quite easy for Yosef to transgress but – "I can’t transgress the word of HaShem". This is related to the Chazal that one should always say the sin is possible but I can’t go against the word of HaShem. This way he will never have an excuse not to listen to HaShem. (Mishulchan Gevoah).
A rav told R’ Chaim Ozer z’l the following story. Through false accusations this rav was placed in jail without any justice or judgement. The rav received a chance to plead his case in front of the minister of justice but only for ten minutes. This is what he said. The original Jewish inmate was Yosef. The possuk says "he was placed in jail with the other captives and he was there in jail". Why does it say again he was in jail? Also, why does it state the jail "where the captives were?" Also why did Yosef ask to "taken out of this place". Why not ask for full freedom? The rav continued and said there are two types of people placed in jail, one who had a case or suspicion against him, but has hope to be vindicated. On the other hand, one who is just thrown into jail to remain there forever has no hope to ever be released. This explains the psukim. "He was in jail" for good with no reprieve, therefore he only asked "take me from this place" and at least, place me with people who have a chance. The minister nodded his head in agreement. (Har Tzvi).

<< Back
 

Miketz
 When Yosef interpreted the dream of Paroh, he added a piece of advice. Paroh should appoint someone to be a manager over the affairs of state, namely Yosef. The simple question is "what did this have to do with the dream?" We could answer with a "moshol". Two rich people arrive at a train station and are met by a band playing music. Each one claims the band is there to honor him and not for the other one. Seeing a poor Jew standing near the platform, they decide to ask him to settle the dispute. To enlist his aid they immediately give him a certain amount of money. So, they ask, "for whose sake did this band come, mine or his?" The poor man answers, "for my sake it came because I needed money for Pesach!" So too, Yosef said to Paroh, "the dreams did not come for you or for your land, but for my sake, to take me from this prison and to give me a prestigious position". (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 "And Yosef remembered the dreams he had dreamt for them". The words "for them" seem improper. The K’sav Sofer answers. When one bows down to a person because he needs a favor, this does not indicate any great honor given that person – it is honor given to his position and ability to be of assistance. If one bows without expecting a favor, then he is bowing to give honor to the person in power. The dreams of Yosef had been about the grain and food and indicated the fact that Yosef would be a provider for his family. The bowing of the brothers did not elevate him over the brothers. This is why when Yosef expressed it as "bowing to me", Yaakov became enraged. The bowing was to the power, not the man. Now, when Yosef saw it was true he said, "the dreams he dreamt for them" - it was for their sake, not to his credit or honor.

 And it was at the end of two years of days. Rabenu Bachaya explains two complete years of days. The Chasam Sofer explains that two years of the solar calendar is 730 days. Yosef said to the butler "im zechartani" - if you remember me. The numerical value of the two words is 728 which is the same as "tischach" – forget, and if you add the two words themselves, it adds up to 730.

 Yaakov commanded his sons when they were forced to return to Egypt for food to "take from the (zimras) song of the land, a present to the man." It lists certain precious spices which Eretz Yisroel was famous for and the people would "sing their praises". This does not deviate from the literal translation of a "song of the land". Here we see the wisdom of our father Yaakov. As Sforno explains they realized the man (Yosef) was not hungry for money and it wasn’t necessary to bring a gift such as the likes of the gift he sent to Eisav. However, it must be something rare and precious, hence these spices. However, by using the word "zimras" he was hinting to the sons to show a certain amount of joy and cheer and to appeal to that lighter side of this demanding person and that will bring results. This small amount of diplomacy was the wisdom of Yaakov Avinu.

 And Paroh was standing above the Nile. The Medrash comments that an evil person is above his god. The Nile being the god of the Egyptians. This means the evil one is not ready to accept everything G-d says but wishes to choose. It is for this person that Paroh in the time of Yosef was quite willing to accept the word of G-d that Yosef brought for it was to his advantage. Not so with the Paroh in the time of Moshe who wished to force him to free the Jewish people - he questioned - who is HaShem.(M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 << Back
 

Vayigash
 Yaakov said "I will go down and see Yosef before I die". One could ask, isn't this a contradiction to the statement we say in the Hagaddah that he was forced to go down by the word of Hashem? Some answer that the statement of Yaakov here meant he would go see Yosef and then return. Perhaps we could explain it differently. The Hagaddah refers to the whole sequence of events which was quite obvious to Yaakov that he was being carried by divine intervention to Egypt and he now was saying the following. I will go down with full faith and conviction that all will turn out the way the Almighty wishes. Yes, he was forced but he committed himself to the hashgacha of Hashem.

 At the end of parshas Miketz when the cup was found in the bag of Binyomin, the ruler Yosef claimed him as a servant. The brothers seemingly created a worse situation by suggesting death for the one who stole the cup. If so, how could Yehuda and the brothers have the audacity to now beg for his freedom when they self imposed the penalty upon him? The answer can be found in the carefully worded statement of Yehuda. "You are like Paraoh. Therefore your words are scrutinized and not to be taken lightly. You firmly stated that the child should stay and ‘you go in peace home to your father’. Now this is surely an impossibility. Yehuda then cleverly began to describe how Yaakov’s life and his peace of mind was tied up with the well being of Binyomin. Therefore it would be impossible to fulfill the command to return home in peace, without Binyomin. Therefore, although it sounded like a review of past history, it was really a very moving plea for the health of their aged father, and brought Yosef to tears. (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 Yehuda quoted the words of Yaakov and his refusal to send Binyomin. He emphasized Yaakov’s overprotection of Binyomin. Why would this have a bearing upon the facts that Binyomin was discovered to be a thief? The Bais HaLevi offers the following. When a thief is punished, the pain is suffered also by the parents and family. Why should this be so? The answer could be that they were not protective enough and were not proper disciplinarians and allowed him a free hand which led to his involvement with crime. Yehuda claimed, then, that Yaakov did not deserve a punishment since he was so careful not to allow this son freedom to roam about and, on the contrary, Yosef forced him to send Binyomin.

 When Yosef beseeched Yaakov to come down to Egypt, Yaakov proceeded, in the words of the Chumash, to offer karbonos to the G-d of his father Yitzchok. Why didn’t he also mention Avrohom? The Kedushas Levi offers a simple solution. As we see from the psukim and the Chazal, Yaakov did not really wish to leave Eretz Yisroel and live in Egypt. Of course he was ready to listen to the command of HaShem. Now, he knew that in a similar situation Avrohom was allowed to leave the land and Yitzchok was admonished not to leave the land. By using the concept of the "G-d of Yitzchok" he hoped to receive the same results.

 It would seem that, although Yosef attained prominence as an administrator of Egypt, he in reality was endangering the Jewish people by causing all the anguish to the Egyptian people. True, he did everything for their benefit but still he was domineering. How did he remedy this problem? In the psukim we see the brilliance of Yosef. He never once forced the people or even suggested the next step. Rather he allowed them to suggest their own fate. They offered to be slaves to Paroah and he accepted. They never could claim Yosef was the cause of their pain. According to the Ramban, Yosef did not even accept their offer to be slaves but opted to have them as share croppers. The end of the parsha then is giving us helpful advice how a Jew should manage the affairs of state when in a prominent position.

<< Back
 

Vayechi
 Before Yaakov Avinu even begins to explain its purpose he asks Yosef to swear. So adamant and intent is Yaakov not to be buried in Egypt that he is nervous and worried about its prospects. He even phrases the wish as "don't bury me in Egypt" which is even of greater importance to him than being buried in Eretz Yisroel - why? Upon scrutinizing the life of Yaakov one thing becomes clear; his was a life of trials and tribulations of the greatest degree. However, it could be said, that the last seventeen years of his life when he lived in peace, tranquility, prosperity and with his whole family at hand, were the greatest test of the righteousness of Yaakov Avinu. This was the test of assimilation, to which so many of our brethren succumbed to in the last two hundred years. This explains the calculated determination of Yaakov - don't allow me and perhaps all my children to remain one minute longer in this land of assimilation.

 A certain Russian officer once questioned R’ Nachumke, why if the Torah states that the staff (Shevet) of leadership will not cease from Yehuda do no Jews hold high positions in the army? R’ Nuchumke answered with a different interpretation of the possuk. Nowadays we are not sure as to which tribe we belong. We have adopted a prestigious name of Yehudim as if we all belong to the distinguished tribe of Yehuda. When Moshiach comes, we will again be united with our respective tribes and families. This then is the meaning of the possuk. The (Shevet) name of tribe will not cease to exist in Yehuda until Moshiach comes and the nations (tribes) will be reunited. (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 In the parsha is the reference to the partnership of Zevulun, the supporter, and Yissacher, the talmid chocham. Both individuals have many obstacles to overcome. Each person is judged according to the trials and tribulations of the times. The Chofetz Chaim related a story about a conference of rabbonim at which the speaker was R’ Zev, the Maggid of Vilna. The Maggid vividly painted a picture of man’s judgement in the world to come. The great leaders of each generation would be chosen to preside as judges over their specific generation. This is a result of the fact that each generation encounters new and different tests and problems. Since these are germaine to that specific time period it is only fitting and proper that a first hand observer of the times should judge. At this point a member of the audience arose and with tears in his eyes said, "Rebbi, since you will probably be the judge of our generation in the world to come, I beg you to tell me now my verdict so I may, at least, strive to do teshuva. Later it won’t be possible."

 Yosef saw that Yaakov had placed his hands incorrectly upon the two children, his left hand upon Menashe, the first born. He reached out to change it but Yaakov refused. He exclaimed, "I know my son, I know". Why did Yosef think otherwise? The answer is quite simple. Many years before this, the exact same episode occurred when Yitzchok was about to give a brocha to the "wrong" son, Esav. Yosef’s grandmother Rivka intervened and the brocha was granted to the deserving son Yaakov. Yosef was convinced that "history was repeating itself." In fact here also the Torah introduces the story with the fact that the "eyes of Yaakov were dim and weak" just as the Torah described the eyes of Yitzchok. Perhaps, then, this explains the double expression, "I know my son, I know". I know what you are thinking about and this is not the case, and I know which son is the most deserving of the brocha.

 Yaakov told the children to gather and said, "I will tell you the future" and then again told them to gather and listen. Chazal tell us that he wished to reveal the time of Moshiach but he was prevented from doing so. Where is this hinted to in the possuk? The Klei Yakar explains. The expression "haosfu" is used in reference to gather into the house, a place secluded from the public domain. This then is a place to reveal a hidden secret. However, then the possuk uses the term "hikovtzu" which would indicate a public gathering. So we see that Yaakov’s original intention was to reveal a secret but later was unable and told the brochos.
<< Back
 

Shemos
 The possuk in the beginning of the parsha reads first in the present tense "these are the names of the B'nei Yisroel that are coming to Egypt". However, it concludes with the phrase "A man and his household came" which is past tense referring to the coming of Yaakov to Egypt. The Chasam Sofer explains: Chazal, quoted in Rashi, comment that the bondage began with the passing of Yaakov. Now elsewhere the Chazal say that the beginning of the bondage corresponded to the death of the last of the brothers. The Gemora states that the shuls and yeshivos will be transported from the diaspora to Eretz Yisroel. If so, then we can imagine them as a "piece of Eretz Yisroel". Since Yaakov relocated his yeshiva in Egypt, as the Gemora in Yoma 28 describes him as an elder learning in yeshiva, then, as long as he was alive the B'nei Yisroel did not totally envision themselves in Galus. After his passing it was as if now they came to Egypt.

 When Moshe refused to go as the messenger of HaShem, he was told "go and this will be the sign that I will send you. I will be with you and you will bring the people out of Egypt; they will serve HaShem on this mountain." Now why was it necessary to give a sign if HaShem was talking directly to Moshe? The answer could be that Moshe’s refusal stemmed from his humility. How could he act in the capacity of redeemer? To this HaShem countered with the statement "I will be with you". On the contrary, HaShem loves the humble and self-effacing individuals. What is the proof of this? Chazal tell us that, although there are many greater and larger mountains than Sinai, HaShem chose this small unassuming mountain upon which to give His Torah. This is the meaning of our possuk: I will be with you, especially you, just as I will choose the humble mountain of Sinai for them to receive the Torah. (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 And it will be if they don’t listen to the first two signs, they will listen to the third. What is the significance of the third sign? When the staff turns into a serpent and the hand becomes sickly white, these are great miracles. However the message they transmit is by no means as clear and consonant with the trials and tribulations of the Jewish people as that of the third. With the third sign, the very waters into which the babies of the Jewish mothers were thrown, the very waters into which these Jewish children’s blood was shed is turned to blood. The moment a Jewish man or woman desires to drink, there is water, but for the Egyptian, the water turns to blood. Only when the Egyptians offer a gift, an atonement to the Jews for his water, are they able to drink. This then captures the essence of all the plagues and all the miracles of Egypt. Therefore, the Torah is confident they will listen to the third sign. (Aznaim l’Torah).

 The parsha seems to imply that Tziporah took a sharp instrument to perform the Bris Milah on her son Eliezer. The Gemora questions this in light of the fact that a woman is not eligible to perform such duties. The Gemora answers by reading the word "vatakach", as she assisted another in taking the knife. Now the problem is evident – who was this other "Jew" who could have performed the mitzva of Milah? Perhaps it was her other son Gershon who was at that time three years old. From here R’ Chaim, shlita, cites a source from the Rambam (ch. 2 – Milah) that a koton, a child, is eligible to perform Bris Milah.

 The possuk describes the union of Amram and Yocheved in anonymous terms. A man went from the house of Levi and took a daughter of Levi. Why did it choose this type of description? The Ramban comments that the word "vayelech" - he went - denotes an initiative in a new direction. When others were complacent, this couple was "on the move". Perhaps, in light of the past performance of Levi and the curse which Yaakov pronounced, the Torah is proclaiming for eternity that Levi was able to harness that energy and that power to take the first step and use it in a constructive manner. Likewise Moshe, the Levi, also was not satisfied sitting in the palace, but "went out" to see the plight of his brethren. Also we could conjecture that his movement with the sheep of Yisro was also deliberate, away into a desert to seek a new initiative.

 These are the names of the B’nei Yisroel that came to Egypt, Yaakov and his family came. Why does the possuk begin with the name Yisroel and end with Yaakov? îäøéì' ãéñ÷éï answers: we know all the greatness we acquired was through our withstanding the trials and tribulations of Egypt. So the possuk relates: we became a distinguished nation with the title B’nei Yisroel, however, it only came about from a difficult beginning as Yaakov.

 HaShem heard the cries of the B’nei Yisroel. Life is filled with trials and tests. Poverty is a test as is wealth. R’ Yisroel Salanter described a circumstance in which wealth could be the greater test. A person with a very high temperature is usually in greater danger than one with a lower temperature. However, the opposite is also possible -, how? The person with the high temperature lives close to a doctor who can care for him- the person with the low temperature doesn’t, he is in greater danger. The person who lives in poverty, although worse off, has a broken heart and cries out to G-d. The wealthy person, on the other hand, is missing the close reliance to HaShem and, in ways, is further away.


<< Back
 

Vaera
 In this weeks Parsha, the name of Moshe’s parents is mentioned, whereas when he was born and as he was growing, they were mentioned anonymously. Darash Moshe, teaches us from this that although the world lit up when Moshe was born and he was brilliant and good, the parents only found true pride when he was already accomplished as the Jewish leader. He points out how important a lesson this is.

 The parsha tells of the water turning to blood. The Egyptians did not have drinking water. Chazal say that the Bnei Yisroel became rich by selling water to them. The Pardes Yosef suggests that this could be the source for the fact that the word "domim" has two translations : "blood" and "money".

 This was the Aaron and Moshe to whom HaShem spoke. The next possuk adds - They were the ones who spoke to Paroh, this was Moshe and Aaron . Rashi comments that at times the Torah places Moshe before Aaron and at times the opposite. In these two p’ssukim, why does it say them in this order? Sfarim answer: Since HaShem speaks more to Moshe, the Torah places Aaron first to show his importance. However, when the Torah discusses speaking to Paroh, since Aaron was the primary spokesman, the Torah places Moshe first to show that he is equal.

 "That is Aaron and Moshe that HaShem told them to take the Bnei Yisroel from Egypt; they were the ones who spoke to Paroh, that is Moshe and Aaron." Rashi comments that the possuk at first places Aaron before Moshe and then Moshe before Aaron to indicate they were equal in status. The Chasam Sofer explains. Aaron’s love for his people and his ability to enhance the shalom was exemplary. Moshe’s ability to wield a staff of miracles was obviously unmatched. Since each had his special "talent", they were equal. Therefore in reference to the Bnei Yisroel, it places Aaron first. In reference to Paroah and the miracles, Moshe comes first.

 "HaShem hardened the heart of Paroah in order to bring more plagues upon the land." The mforshim obviously wonder about the removal of free will from Paroah and each explains this in a different way. One could define it as an increase in Paroah’s pain threshold. HaShem did not remove his free will but rather gave him the stamina and stubbornness to tolerate more and thus could bring more "makos" upon the Egyptians. (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 "There did not die from the animals of Bnei Yisroel until one." This is the literal translation. The implication is that one did die. The Maharil Diskin explains. If the Jewish people owed taxes, one out of every ten animals and he only had ten, one died so as not to enrich Paroah with that one. The possuk hints at this idea. At first it says "from the cattle of Bnei Yisroel not even one died" and later when Paroah sent (to collect) the possuk says "until one".

 The Medrash criticizes Moshe’s statements about the process of redemption. It likens it to the reasoning of Shlomo Hamelech when he insisted the only reason a king could not increase wives is because they would lead him astray and therefore the law did not apply to him. The possuk reads "he should not increase the number of wives and they will not turn his heart." Shlomo Hamelech inserted a "pshat", an interpretation of his own. The possuk has two possible meanings. Don’t increase, but if you do, then beware they should not lead you astray. The lesson is simple. Although in the context of Talmud study this may be a valid mode of thought, whenever one chooses to change the old or lighten the burden, one should not rely just on a "pshat".


<< Back
 

Bo
 The possuk concerning Tefilin states "in order that the Torah of HaShem should be on your lips". The Chofetz Chaim points out that although the Gemora describes the one who does not put on Tefilin as a person lacking basic beliefs, and not really one who subscribes to Jewish philosophy, still the Tefilin themselves are only a preparation for the main theme of the life of a Jew – the Torah. He describes Torah as the lifeline of the Jew, and without it the Jew cannot exist. We have seen that the demise of religious Judaism as the ultimate disappearance of many families from the Jewish scene is directly related to the study of and adherence to the Torah.

 "You should watch the matzos". Rashi quotes two interpretations. One is to guard the matzo from becoming chometz. The second is to guard all mitzvos from becoming stale, that is to say, perform the mitzva immediately. The "Shaloh" explains that it is not two "droshos". The matzo represents the yetzer hatov and the chometz, the yetzer harah. The difference in the spelling of the two words is the letter "heh" which has an opening (as Chazal say, for the Baal Tshuva to re-enter) and it becomes closed up in the "ches" of chometz. The Torah is not just warning us of the singular mitzvah, but a lesson in mitzvos in general. Listen to the yetzer tov, don’t look for the easier way out.

 The importance of Bris Milah is emphasized by the fact that the precious mitzvah of Korbon Pesach cannot be performed by one who is uncircumcised. Also the mitzvah given to the Jews to merit the Geula was milah. And the first mitzvah of Yehoshua was milah. What is the significance of Milah? The Shulchan Aruch directs us to set a place for Eliyahu Hanavi. The source is a Pirke D’R’ Eliezer which recounts the fact that upon the split of the Kingdoms of Israel, the Malchei Yisroel forbid milah. Eliyahu championed the cause by declaring a drought. When Jezebel wanted to kill him, he fled. HaShem said to him "this is the second time you have displayed zealousness on my behalf. I promise you that at every bris the Jews make, you will be present." So we see that milah itself is measure for measure an act of zealousness and "msiras nefesh", the act of shedding ones "blood" for the sake of adhering to His ways. This, then, is how we initiate the child into his role as an observant Jew.

 Paroh asked Moshe, "who are the ones that will go with you"? Moshe answered, "the old and the young will go to serve G-d". Paroh refused - why? The world’s concept of a servant to G-d is an older, mature adult. Moshe introduced to him the Jewish approach which enlists even the children in the performance of a mitzvah. How fitting then, that the resulting mitzvah of yitzias mitzraim, which is the eating of the Pesach offering is incumbent on all members of the household both yound and old as Rashi comments later, "all who are capable of eating are eligible".


<< Back
 

B'Shalach
 And Moshe said to Yehoshua to choose men and engage in war with Amalek. Later we find that the hands of Moshe became heavy during the battle. Rashi comments that the cause for this was the laxity on the part of Moshe in performing the mitzvah of the war against Amalek. He appointed somebody else to do it. The question could be asked. The Chazal tell us many times that the children of Amalek will fall into the hands of the descendants of Yosef. In this case, that would be Yehoshua of the tribe of Ephraim. Furthermore, the Ramban explains Moshe’s reasoning. Moshe would daven and give the people a morale boost while Yehoshua would fight. Yet, still Moshe was punished? Although he would not fight the battle, he could have appointed the generals. From here we are taught that one most carry out every part of a mitzvah to his fullest capacity before he relinquishes it to another person.

 Chazal say that the maidservant saw great revelations at the Yam Suf and exclaimed, "This is my G-d". How did the Chazal know it was the maidservant, not one of the leaders of Klal Yisroel? The possuk continues, "The G-d of my fathers." Now a Jew would always introduce "my fathers" since they were the first to recognize HaShem and only afterwards say "my G-d". Since the possuk began with "my G-d" it was obviously said by a convert, a maidservant who could not proclaim "G-d of my fathers". (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 In the parsha it tells of the waters of Mara which were bitter. Moshe cast a stick into them and they sweetened. The possuk, however, then refers us to the mitzvah of Torah study and the adherence to mitzvos. HaShem promises us that if we keep His mitzvos none of the sicknesses of Egypt will harm us. How do we understand this sequence of statements? The "Netziv" explains that the nation at that time was a nation of Torah study. They had not yet come to Eretz Yisroel to tend to their livelihoods. Moshe told them that HaShem will care for them but only the necessities. They would be protected from sickness but would not enjoy the luxuries of life. This is all understood with the final statement – "I am HaShem who heals you". This is the way of Torah, bread and water. He compares those who study Torah to the soldiers of a king who are provided for but not in an extravagant way.

 "They complained against Moshe and Aaron in the wilderness". Why was the complaint about the lack of food denoted with the extra word "bamidbar", in the wilderness? The Maharil Diskind explains. Rashi tells us that it was just at that time that the matzos which they had brought from Egypt ran out and they had no food to eat. This, then, was their complaint. Why didn’t you lead us to a place where we could, at least, buy provisions? At least to "Eilim" where they could have cut dates to sustain them, not in the wilderness. They were insinuating that the itinerary for the traveling was credited to Moshe and Aaron and they criticized them. To this Moshe answered "you will see that HaShem took you from Egypt". He will tend to everything.

 With the wind of HaShem’s power the waters piled up. The Vilna Gaon, makes an astounding observation. Man is but a pile of matter, a pile of clay. He is motionless and unable to think or reason. HaShem blew into man the source of life and he became animated. Here also, the wind of HaShem gave life to the waters and they piled up by themselves. This then is the meaning of the targum Chachimu Mia,"the waters acquired wisdom".

 Why are you davening? Speak to Bnei Yisroel and they should travel, HaShem was telling Moshe. Although the Tefilot of a Tzadik are great and effective on behalf of another person, the commitment of the Bnei Yisroel to move forward and place their faith in HaShem would be even more beneficial (R' Yosef Mislotzek).


<< Back
 

Yisro
 The possuk tells us that they camped at the mountain. The Chazal comment that they were united as one. The Brisker Rav connects this to the fact that they said they would perform the mitzvos even before they understood "naaseh v’nishama". Just as each human being is different in appearance, so they are different in their conceptual understanding. He says that it would be impossible to come to a situation of unity if not for the fact that they unconditionally accepted the mitzvos. He explains that phrase in the "zemer" "uvau chulam b’vris yachad" – they came together in the covenant "naaseh v’nishma amru kiechad" because they said, "we will do" before we will understand.

 It is told about the Vilna Gaon that one time he spoke about the famous ger tzedek of Vilna, Pototzki, and spoke of the praise of the gerim in klal Yisroel. Chazal say that the Jewish people are on a higher level than "malachim". The angels are able to pronounce Hashem’s name after three words: "Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh", whereas we are able to pronounce it after two words: "Shma Yisroel". In this parsha, Yisro, we see that the ger Yisro said "Baruch HaShem", which means he was able to say the Name after one word.

 And you will be a treasure among nations because the whole world is mine.

 "If you will do this (the plan of Yisro), you will be able to stand". The simple interpretation is that Moshe will have the strength to control the situation. R’ Chaim, shlita, explains this in a lighter sense. The Chazal rule that the judges in a Bais Din are to be seated and the parties in the case should stand. If so, now that Moshe spent the whole day as a judge, he would be seated. "Therefore", Yisro said, "if you follow my plan you will ‘be able to stand’".

 The Chazal say that all that Bnei Yisroel live with is nurtured from their belief in HaShem. Why is this so? There is a famous question posed by many mforshim. How can we say there is no reward in this world? If we work, then we deserve wages. One is not allowed to delay paying his workers, and certainly HaShem would adhere to this law. The answer is that the Gemora in Bava Metzia exempts an employer from this responsibility if the hiring is done through a third party. This then is the explanation of the Chazal. All the other mitzvos were related to us through Moshe, but not the first two, which embody the basic "emunah", belief, in Hashem. Therefore, the Bnei Yisroel lives off this belief.

 We are commanded "not to take the Name of HaShem in vain". In the Chazal and Rambam, this is referring to swearing a nonsensical type of oath. To use the Name of HaShem to swear that gold is gold or such is an example of this. From this we see that it is not only the idea of "wasting" the "Name" in such a format, but the whole idea of using the Name in one’s everyday activity to the extent that it becomes cheap and is used to support one’s every statement - a great lesson in the respect and honor one must give.


<< Back
 

Mishpotim
 One of the various laws mentioned in this parsha is the law of one who causes his Canaani slave to lose a limb. The punishment is that the servant becomes a free man and a full Jew. In Gittin the Gemora relates a discussion as to whether it is beneficial for a slave to be freed. On the one hand, he becomes a full Jew and a free man. On the other hand, he was accustomed to a loose, unrestricted life and now has to conform to a strict life of mitzvos. If we follow the opinion that it is not beneficial, why would the Torah "punish" this person who has lost a limb, to be further abused? The Maharitz Chayos answers that in this situation where he has been mistreated all agree it is beneficial. Another answer is that the Torah is written to present the truth and the essence of life. Therefore, the Gemora is discussing an issue in the time of the Mishna, which depends on the psychology of the people involved, but the Torah is telling the absolute truth and the reality of this world. From this we learn to view the world only through the eyes of the Torah. (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 "If you will lend money to my people, the poor man with you". The Gemora criticizes greatly one who lends money without having proper witnesses to the loan. This is to ensure the honesty and integrity of the two parties. On the other hand, tzedaka should be given privately without fanfare or witnesses. The Vilna Gaon explains our possuk with this in mind. If one lends money – have people involved, but for the poor – only with you, not to be publicized.

 R’ Yaakov ‘z’l in the end of this week’s parsha presents a very beautiful essay about the different aspects of Torah study through the generations. He points out the oddity that the prohibitions on recording the oral law and reciting orally the written law have almost disappeared. How could this be? He explains: the mode of education has passed from the father as the rebbi to having a structured school system as the Rambam records. Also the age that one begins Gemora has changed and is earlier - why is this? He answers that the Gemora has become as the written law and the Mforshim as the oral law. All of this, he explains, was necessary to safeguard the Torah and its teachings, and this is the essence of "a time to do for HaShem".


<< Back
 

Teruma
 The Parsha relates all the materials and blueprints of the construction of the Mishkan in the desert. Obviously it was an exciting time in the history of the world. Did they have prior knowledge of this great event? The Gemora in Kesubos (628) tells a story of Rabeinu Hakadosh who had planned a wedding at a later date and then rescheduled it for an earlier date. When questioned about the change, the answer was given that it could be likened to Hashem who originally stated in Shiras HaYam "He will bring you and plant you on the ‘mountain’, which will contain the Bais HaMikdosh". Yet these were a "change of plans" and they built a Mishkon in the midbar. The Maharsha explains that the Torah was a document of Kiddushin, betrothel and mishkon was the chupa. Why then were they not informed of this great moment when the divine spirit filled them and inspired them to sing Shira? The Divrei Yoel explains. The perfect opportune time to build the Mishkon was surely after the receiving of the Torah when the people proclamied "Naaseh ViNishma". It was then that their hearts were cleaned of the Yetzer Hara and the Shchina could be among them. The Gemora Shabbos (89) tells of the plight of the Satan at that time he was busy searching for ways to disrupt the tranquility of the moment. Therefore it was necessary to give the Torah quietly and indiscreetly not to allow the Satan to interfere (Sanhedrin 26). Likewise we find the rise of Dovid to be Melech was also shrouded in secrecy. Until the last moment the law of Amoni and not Amonis was not known. It was because of this that Hashem did not reveal to the people the major event of the Mishkon for it would be necessary to also reveal the nature of the preparation for such a high level of existence, the receiving of the Torah. So too explains the actions of Rebeinu HaKadosh who comes from the house of Dovid who conducted his affairs similar to his creator. He did not want the Satan to interfere with a holy festive occasion.


 << Back
 

Titzave
 The "mehil" was like a "talit katan" and had bells and ornament pomegranates on the edge. The gemara in arachim teaches that it atones for lashon arah, for it is a devar shebakol. The Chafetz Chaim elaborates upon this theme. It was completely the color of  tchelet which is a reminder of the heavens and the kiseh a kavod for lashon harah reaches all the way to the kiseh a kavod (Tana Dvei Eliahu).

 "You Moshe, should bring close Aaron and his sons". Why isn’t the command stated with the words "appoint", why "bring close"? Moshe was greatly respected by the Jewish people. If another appointment would be made, maybe the people wouldn’t accord him the same respect. If, however, they would see that Moshe "brings him close" and discusses problems with him, this will elevate the new person in the eyes of the people. (Beit Yitzchak).

<< Back
 

Ki Sisa
 In this weeks parsha before the epic episode of the Golden Calf there are four subjects which are introduced: 1) the half shekel 2) the washing utensils 3) the anointing oil 4) the incense or kitores. Why are these used to introduce this terrible story of our failing as a nation? The half shekel, of course, acts as atonement, but what of the others? Perhaps it is a lesson we are being taught about what brings about an "agel". The washing before the service in the Mikdosh represents the sanctification of our deeds. The anointing of ourselves and our vessels represents the dedication of ourselves and our deeds. And the kitores is the "sweet smell" and love with which we perform our responsibilities. Perhaps if we always have these as preparations we will never create an "agel". On the contrary, it is followed by a command of Mishkon and Shabbos, sanctity of place and time.

 The people saw that Moshe was slow in returning and they made the calf of gold. We all stand in amazement how a people who had just recently uttered the memorable words "naaseh v’nishma" could stumble and fall from such a high pedestal. The Bais Halevi answers. They had achieved a most lofty level of performance of mitzvos. At the same time, their perception and insights into the mystical and hidden ways of the Torah were enhanced. However, here lies their mistake. When one wishes to create a dwelling place for G-d without being duly commanded and without proper supervision, instead of a Mishkon, one could conceivably create a calf of gold.

 Three thousand people died because of the Golden Calf. The Medrash comments "five times the value is paid for (stealing and selling) the ox." What is the meaning of this odd statement? The Vilna Gaon explains. The Medrash explains on the possuk in Koheles "one in a thousand men I found, but not one woman amongst them". This refers to the Golden Calf. One out of a thousand sinned and no women were among the sinners. Now the question is obvious – if they were 600,000 in number, then one of a thousand would be 600 - so why three thousand? To this the other Medrash answers that five times paid for the ox (calf). Five times 600 are 3000.

 "The rich will not increase and the poor will not decrease from the half shekel." The Chasam Sofer offers a novel p’shat. Although there is no real reward in this world for mitzvos, we are told to give a tenth to charity and it will increase our wealth. "Aser bishvil shetisasher". In the case of the half shekel, however, it was purely as an atonement. Therefore the Torah tells us the rich will not increase - i.e. they will not get richer (from giving the half shekel) but also the poor will not decrease (their wealth), for a mitzva always protects one from loss.


<< Back
 

Vayakhel-Pekudei
 R’ Shneur Kotler ‘z’l pointed out a unique factor in the building of the Mishkon. In Parshas Teruma, the request for materials precedes the purpose given, which is to build a mikdosh. Should it not be in the reverse? He explains that, unlike other construction, the "kavana", the intentions of the donors, had a direct impact on the final product, the Mishkon. Therefore, the full heart and mind of the people resulted in a bigger Mishkon. This is why the nisiim were reprimanded for thinking the Mishkon could be incomplete. As long as the hearts and minds were complete, the Mishkon would be complete. (M’Shulchan Gevoah).

 Mishkon Hoedus – Rashi explains that the Mishkon was a testimony that Hashem forgave the Bnei Yisroel for the Calf. The Sfas Emes explains. The sign was the "luchos Hoedus" – the tablets of testimony, the Torah itself. This was the "eid" or crown that they received on Sinai, an understanding of Torah, a radiance which settled on each one individually. Therefore, there was no necessity for an Aron or a Mishkon. However, after the sin, the Gemora explains that all this was removed and given to Moshe Rabenu. This was his special shine and the "ohel" or tent or shine that he removed from the people? Hence the "ohel Moed" the tent of meeting, a place to receive this special radiance at certain predetermined times.


<< Back
 

Vayikra
 The person who brings a "goat" as a sin offering is referred to as the one the Kohain will atone for and he will be forgiven. Usually this phrase is completed with the words "forgiven for his sin". Why were the words "for his sin" deleted in this case? R’ Yehoshua Leib ‘z’l answers. The Gemora points out that we pray and confess silently not to cause additional embarrassment. Likewise the bloods of the plain korbon olah and the chatos, the sin offering, were sprinkled in the same place, so as not to cause embarrassment. Now a person who is obligated in a sin offering could opt for a sheep which could be mistaken for an "olah" offering and disguise his identity as a sinner. The one who chose to bring a goat is advertising his iniquity and his desire for atonement. Therefore the embarrassment alone acts as a cleanser of sin. So even before he actually offers the korbon, the reference to sin is deleted.

 The Medrash repeats many times the fact that of all the 600,000 Jews in the midbar, Hashem only called Moshe. Vayikra el Moshe. If we would analyze the greatest attribute of Moshe, obviously it would be his humility. The Kedushas Levi says that the letter "alef" is small in the word Vayikra to denote that the reason why Hashem called to Moshe was because he was "small" and humble.

 The poor man who cannot afford to bring an animal offering is allowed, in certain situations, to bring instead two birds, one a chatos, a sin offering, and one an "olah". The Gemora in Chulin emphasizes that the olah also must be brought during the day. The Rashba questions the validity of the text, for are not all offerings brought only during the day? R' Meir Simcha answers. The E'bn Ezra explains that since the "chatos ha'of" has no portion that is burnt on the alter - the olah is "its portion". Now since the portions of a korbon can be burnt all night, one might also think that this offering could be brought at night. Therefore the Torah dispels this idea. It is told that when R’ Meir Simcha fell asleep after having said this thought, he dreamt that the heavenly Yeshiva was extolling its clarity and truth.


<< Back
 

Tzav
ויאמר אל אהרון קח לך עגל בן בקר

 ופרש"י להודיע שמכפר לו ע"י עגל זה על מעשה העגל שעשה

 On the eighth day of the dedication of the Mishkon, Aaron brought, as an offering, a calf to atone for, in the words of Rashi, “the calf which he made”. The question is, already in the seven days, before this final special eighth day, a bull was brought as an atonement for the golden calf (shmos 29:1)? מהרי"ל דיסקין answers that the offerings during the seven days were the atonement offered by the congregation as a cleansing process for the Kohanim and the mizbeach. Here, however, represented the personal offering of Aaron to atone for the fact that he made the calf, although he was not held responsible, he was still the conduit for it. That is the meaning of Rashi, the calf he made, not the sin of the calf.

 Each Kohain, upon his induction to serve in the Bais HaMikdosh, would bring a מנחת חינוך, a mincha offering of installation. The very same korbon was brought each day by the Kohain Gadol, although with another name מנחת חביתים. The שפת אמת suggests that, although there is a question in the Gemora, as to whether the Kohanim are servants of the people or of HaShem, the Kohain Gadol is likened to a מלאך, an angel, and certainly a servant of HaShem, and thereby, renews the Kedusha each day. Also the Gemora in Krisus points out, in a miracle, the drops of anointing oil remained on the beard of Aaron and continued for generations to enlighten the Kohain Gadol with renewed kedusha each day. Therefore, he required this korbon each day of his life.


<< Back
 

Shemini
 In the parsha is the tragic passing of the sons of Aaron during the festivities of the dedication of the Mishkon. Although it would seem an impossible task for Moshe to comfort his brother as such a time, he expresses almost admiration for him and the greatness of the sons who died. The Dubno Maggid describes this scene with a simple parable. A child comes home from school very upset. The Rebbi scolded and reprimanded me and not another boy who was equally guilty and equally responsible. A smile forms on the face of the father who is quick to point out to his son the great compliment the Rebbi had paid him. You see, said the father, obviously the Rebbi realizes your value and your abilities and therefore chose you to direct as a student. The other boy was a lost case and not worthy of the Rebbi’s rebuke. This, said the Maggid, is the essence of the holiness of the children of Aaron, the comforting words of Moshe.

 The possuk points to the “chazir”, the pig, as one of the species of non-kosher animals. Oddly enough the word itself means to return – “chozer”. The Chazal inform us that in the future it will be a kosher animal. Now we know that the Torah will not change an iota, so how could this be? The Or Hachaim answers that the biological nature will change and it will begin to chew its cud. The Chofetz Chaim comments that this shows that the signs are the reason for the fact that it is “tomei” and not its species or such. (M’Shulchan Gevoah) Perhaps the lesson here is that one is never intrinsically bad or evil, only he is influenced by his character traits. If these can be recycled to a better posture, one can become a “chozer betshuva”. There is always a small bridge between “chazir” and “chozer”.

 Aaron lifted his hands and blessed the people. Rashi interprets this to be the three blessings of the Kohanim. The Baal Haturim relates them to the three different offerings brought on that day. “He will guard you”, “viyishmorecha”, this is guarding us from sin, the chatos. “He will shine upon you”, “yaer”, this is the reference to the Olah, to ascend to Yerushalayim so Hashem could show his shechina to you. Finally, “shalom”, peace, this is certainly the “shlomim” offering which is the peace and perfection granted to the one who brings it.

 וישא אהרון את ידיו אל העם ויברכם
 ופרש"י ויברכם ברכת כהנים יברכך יאר ישא

 Rashi explains the brocha of Aaron was the familiar Birkas Kohanim and proceeds to list them. Why was this necessary? הר צבי explains that perhaps Aaron on his own composed these brochos and HaShem incorporated them into Torah. With this he explains the language of האמורה מפי אהרון in Birkas Kohanim. Although we say the brochos are in the Torah, we attribute them to the mouth of Aaron, for that is where they originated.

 Last weeks parsha carefully described all the actions, service and korbonos of the seven days of miluim. This week we encounter the famous eighth and final day, the special day of inauguration. It begins with Moshe calling Aaron and informing him of the duties of the eighth day. It seems that Aaron had no advance notice. Why wasn’t he given a time to prepare korbonos like we are told concerning the tamid offering? R’ Moshe זצ"ל comments that from here we are taught a lesson that there are times that one must be prepared to go from one mitzva immediately to a second mitzva without any preparation.

 ויתנו בהן אש וישמימו עליו קטורת

 There is a change of language evident in the possuk. First it uses the expression ויתנו for the אש and then וישמימו for the קטורת? In כבודה של התורה an answer is given. The Gemora in Menochos explains the word שימה as placing less than a required amount. If so, although they brought an uncalled for ketores, but since it was not a required amount, they were not liable. This explains the need for other causes for the passing of Bnei Aaron as is found in Medrash.


<< Back
 

Tazria
 Rashi explains that, if one did not have both signs of צרעת, and he is quarantined for the week, if the white on the skin does not diminish, that person is deemed a מצורע. The רמב"ן counters that the Gemora implies only if it should spread. ר' משה ז"ל suggests that Rashi, perhaps, is reading into the simple p’shat of the possuk. Although it is not the real interpretation, it is at least implied to be a lesson to us. The spreading indicates the ill effect one has upon a friend when he does not conduct himself properly. The sign of not spreading, but also not diminishing is a reference to one who is also a מצורע and must be thought of as such, but since he doesn’t affect others, he doesn’t receive the full punishment of isolation, etc. So the Torah has driven home this message by its choice of words.

 The Chofetz Chaim once gave a pithy moshol about the power of the tongue to convolute ones actions or to control ones actions. A person enters a factory which has 248 different pieces of machinery. After being impressed by all the ingenious work of the machinery and also the expense, he is shown the most important machine, which is the power source for all the other machines. So, he said, the tongue is the power switch for all our limbs and controls all our actions.

 The possuk implies that if the צרעת spreads over the whole body the person is, on the contrary, טהור. It seems to defy logic. The אזנים לתורה offers a solution. There is an internal sickness called צרעת and there are the external signs of צרעת which indicate a spiritual dilemma. For a person to have every limb filled with צרעת indicating that he has no mitzvos, nothing positive to redeem, at least one limb, is hard to believe. Every Jew has some mitzvos. Therefore we attribute the malady to a real sickness, not a spiritual one.

 The Zohar relates that one who is not careful with oneg on Shabbos will cause a reversal of the letters to spell “negah”, or tzoraas. The Sfas Emes traces the letters to “Eden” “Na’har” “Gan” the reference to Adam being placed to guard the Gan Eden. Likewise man is to be in control of his mind, body and speech. Therefore, part of the purification process of the metzora is to sprinkle onto the hand, ear, and foot to dedicate his whole being to restoration of their sanctity. So also the opposite of the “closing” or quarantine of the metzora is the expansion on Shabbos of the Neshama to include the Neshama Yesira, the extra neshama of Shabbos.

 Possuk 33 is the possuk directing the one whom has tzoraas on the place of hair to shave around it. This could alude to the custom to shave on the 33rd day of the Omer. The “Gimmel” is large alluding to the three days before Shavuos when some have the custom to complete their sfira and shave. The psukim 13-14-15 have 49 words referring to the custom not to shave the entire time of sfira. (Pardes Yosef).

 The Chasam Sofer explains the need for the process of the birds and all the karbonos even after the metzora has experienced the pain and humility of the sickness itself. He says that since the person did not initiate his own path of tshuva but rather needed the intervention of Hashem and His punishment, for that alone he requires an extra and added atonement, supplied by the purification process.

 Rashi emphasizes the fact that the creatures were created before man to temper the arrogance of man – “see even the fly was before you”. On the other hand, man was created with a “prepared table” - a complete world at his disposal. The Ksav Sofer explains. The Mishna says “one who honors the Torah, he is honored by the creatures”. In reality the animals are stronger, faster and more independent than man. In this respect mankind has difficulty in boasting. However, man has a higher and nobler calling. His is the task of perfection through performance of Torah and mitzvos. This then is the meaning. One who honors the Torah is automatically elevated over all the other creatures. However, if he chooses to follow their lifestyle then, we say to him, even the fly was created superior.

<< Back

Metzora
 1. A first born male, both paternal or maternal should fast on erev Pesach to commemorate the miracle of the first born being saved from the plague. This includes also Kohanim and Leviim.
 2. If one suffers even a slight headache he can break the fast. Also if one will not be able to eat the matzos at night properly, he should not fast. In either case, he should eat lightly.
 3. At his Shmone Esrei at mincha he would mention "anenu"
 4. The custom was for a father who is not a bchor himself to fast on behalf of his first born son (over a month old)! If the father is a bchor the mother would fast.
 5. It has become almost a custom for the first born to participate in a seudas mitzvah to exempt them from fasting. This year being a long day it is surely advisable not to fast under any circumstance, but to participate in a siyum.
 6. Past the fixed times one, of course, does not eat chometz. We also do not eat egg matzo past that time.
 7. The original rule was not to eat any matzo which could be used at night, from daybreak erev Pesach. Some now refrain even from Rosh Chodesh. This does not include matzo which is chometz.
 8. Leave over some real chometz to burn. Don’t pour on it some liquid or lighter fluid which would render it inedible, before you set fire to it.
 9. The rest of the day one may eat cooked items made with matzo meal but not something baked.
 10. Showers, haircuts and general preparation of the Seder should be tended to during the day. Remember the Seder starts late this year and the table should be set, ready to start when you come home.
 11. If possible, the chores should be divided in a way each member of the household should be able to nap during the day.
 12. Remember to recite the order of Korban Pesach before or after mincha.
<< Back

Achrei Mos
 Concerning the Kohain Gadol on Yom Kippur when he enters the Kodesh it says "no man should be present when he enters". "Har Tzvi" suggests that this is a source for the fact that the Yomim Noraim liturgy focuses only on our relationship with HaShem and there is no place for requests for health or family, etc. "No man" is present, only HaShem is the focus.

 The Vilna Gaon insists that Aaron HaKohain was permitted to enter the Kodesh at all times, provided he followed the procedure prescribed in this parsha. The later Kohanim, however, were restricted access except for Yom Kippur. Reb Yaakov ‘z’l offers a proof to this position. The Gemora Gittin relates that this parsha was taught on the day of the inauguration of the Mishkon. Rashi points out the problem that it wasn’t applicable until Yom Kippur. According to the Gaon, it actually was applicable even then.

 The Chassam Sofer skillfully describes the difference between the Bnei Aaron and Moshe Rabeinu. Moshe, upon encountering HaShem the very first time, hid his face and only gradually rose in levels of kedusha. It was because of this humility and patience that he deserved and was rewarded with honor and greatness. Nadav and Avihu, on the other hand, were too anxious and too quick to break through beyond their capacities. Eventually they were punished.

 The parsha ends with a call to the Jewish people to create fences to avoid the pitfalls of sin and transgression. The possuk then proceeds to give four reasons for keeping these restrictions and fences. A) "statutes" - laws which defy our logic. One might begin to look at these laws as illogical. B) "that were done (by those) before you" - it is already part of society, one might therefore succumb - Ebn Ezra C) "Don’t defile yourself" - Or HaChaim points out that even unintentionally these sins defile the person. D) "I am HaShem your G-d" - Rashi says I am your G-d only on condition you keep these laws of purity.

<< Back

Kedoshim
 The first three years after a tree begins to grow, any fruits it might produce are forbidden to be eaten. The fruits of the fourth year are to be eaten in Yerushalayim. Although the laws are similar to the laws of ma’aser sheni which also must be eaten there, the Nitziv explains the difference in purpose. The possuk about ma’aser sheni focuses on the learning experience involved with coming to Yerushalayim and increasing ones yiras shamayim. Here, however, concerning Revii, the fourth year fruits, the possuk emphasizes this as an act of praise to HaShem, that we bless and thank the Almighty for our fruits and the future growth. This is why, he explains, these p’sukim about Revii are the source for all the brochos we recite before we partake of any food.
In Kedoshim, concerning shatnez (wearing a mixture of wool and linen) it states "It should not cover you as clothing" and is positioned next to mixing seeds of two species in the planting process. In Devarim, the possuk states "You should not wear shatnez" and is positioned next to the prohibition of hitching two different types of animals and plowing with them. The Meshech Chochma explains. The Rambam says if Reuven places shatnez on Shimon and both are aware of it, only the one who wears it is punished. If, however, the one wearing it is not aware of its being shatnez, the one who placed it is punishable. Here, in Vayikra, it is discussing a case of a complete mixture which is not readily visible, like two seeds growing together in a field. Hence, the statement is in third person or referring to the clothing being placed. In Devarim, the case is a visible one, like two animals hitched to a plow. Hence the emphasis is on the one who is wearing it and said in second person.
Concerning leaving a portion of the field for the poor the possuk reads, "don’t completely destroy (harvest) the field". It uses an expression which usually means destruction. The Panim Yafos explains with a Gemora in Shabbos (Kuf Yud Chet) The brocho of Klall Yisroel is without boundary or border. If one never harvests the field all the way to the border, it is always in the middle of the field and the brocho takes effect. If, however, one completes until the border then, chas v’shalom, the destruction sets in, not brocha.
One is obligated to rise to show respect to an older person. However, concerning one who is knowledgeable in Torah, the possuk says to "give honor and beauty to the "zokain". The first part is concerning any older person, for as the Gemora points out, that older person has lived through life’s many experiences. For this we show respect by standing up for him. However, the Torah scholar deserves even more. For him we are obligated to treat with the same respect we are to show a parent. This explains the two parts of the possuk in Kedoshim 19:32. (Klei Yakar).
Twice the possuk in Kedoshim instructs us to love another Jew as oneself. Once concerning our friend, neighbor or any one born a Jew. The second, however, is in reference to a convert, a ger, "love him as yourself" 19:34. This demonstrates to what extent the Torah expects us to embrace the ger, to the same love we show for all Jews, with no exception.
<< Back

Emor