Parshat Lech L'Cha
After Avram was victorious in his battle and freed Lot and others from S'dom, we find the king of S'dom telling Avram to return the people but keep the money. In 14:23 Avram rejects that request by saying, "אִם-מִחוּט וְעַד שְׂרוֹךְ-נַעַל, וְאִם-אֶקַּח מִכָּל-אֲשֶׁר-לָךְ; וְלֹא תֹאמַר, אֲנִי הֶעֱשַׁרְתִּי אֶת-אַבְרָם." I will not take anything, from a thread to a shoelace of what is yours, so you should not say I made Avram wealthy.
Rashi adds that the reason Avram was insistent on this was because Hashem had promised Avram great wealth, so it must come from Hashem and not from the king of S'dom.
Maybe this was how Hashem planned to make Avram wealthy? Did Avram expect a pot of gold to fall from heavan? Clearly Hashem woudl find a natural way to make Avram wealthy, and maybe this incident with the king of S'dom was that method? How could Avram reject this request based on the above logic?
A person has to be acreful to not just do the right thing but also to make the right impression.
For Avram to accede to the request of the king of S'dom, that would leave open in people's minds the possibility that it came from the gemerosity of S'dom rather than from Hashem and His blessing. Sure, maybe this was how Hashem wanted to give it to Avram, but Avram could not allow anyone to think that maybe it was not from hashem but from S'dom. By accepting the wealth from the king in this fashion, it would not close the door 100% but would leave rooom for an alternate explanation.
Avram was all abotu kiddush Hashem. There is no way he could accept that wealth and have people possibly think that he was made wealthy by S'dom rather than by Hashem.
Friday, October 19, 2007
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Noah: which is worse
Parshat No'ah
In 11:9 after the story of the Tower of Babel, it says "from there Hashem scattered them throughout the land".
Rashi compares the Generation of the Flood to the Generation of the Tower of Babel. he concludes that despite the Babel people being evil, because they rebelled against God, they were not as bad as the Flood people. Rashi comes to this conclusion because the Flood people were destroyed while the Babel people were only scattered. From this Rashi learns that dissent and dispute is worse because the Tower people had peace with each other and that is what saved them.
I would like to add that dispute with fellow man is much worse than rebelling against God. This is similar to our concept of repentance. If one commits sins against God, he can repent and request,, and receive, forgiveness. But when he sins against his fellow man, we know that it is much more difficult to receive that forgiveness.
One must be extremely careful in his dealings with other people.
In 11:9 after the story of the Tower of Babel, it says "from there Hashem scattered them throughout the land".
Rashi compares the Generation of the Flood to the Generation of the Tower of Babel. he concludes that despite the Babel people being evil, because they rebelled against God, they were not as bad as the Flood people. Rashi comes to this conclusion because the Flood people were destroyed while the Babel people were only scattered. From this Rashi learns that dissent and dispute is worse because the Tower people had peace with each other and that is what saved them.
I would like to add that dispute with fellow man is much worse than rebelling against God. This is similar to our concept of repentance. If one commits sins against God, he can repent and request,, and receive, forgiveness. But when he sins against his fellow man, we know that it is much more difficult to receive that forgiveness.
One must be extremely careful in his dealings with other people.
Noah: leadership like Moses
Parshat No'ah
In 8:8-9 it says he sent the dove from him... the dove found nowhere to set down and returned to the ark, and Noah sent forth his hand and took her and brought her back in...
Why was this dove so high maintenance? The raven was sent out and it came back in on its own when it could not find land. The dove later was sent out and came back on its own with an olive branch. This time the dove was sent out from him - meaning Noah sort of urged it out and helped it leave, and when it came back he had to retrieve it and assist its re-entry.
According to the Ohr Hachaim, the dove was very weary from its trip. It had not found land and had not set down even to rest for 7 days.So when the dove came back in, Noah knew it was very tired because it had not rested in 7 days and therefore helped it back in.The first time it was the raven which is a much stronger bird, so it did not need help (and possibly it did not travel far according to the midrash). The later time the dove had returned holding a branch meaning it had found a resting spot so it was not tired.
See Noah's sensitivity to his surroundings. He was aware the bird was tired. I have no idea how one can look at a bird and see that it is weary. I do not know what a tired bird looks like.
But Noah was sensitive to it. Sure, it was only a matter of another meter. How much help did Noah really offer it anyway? Could the bird not make it back the last meter or two (how far could Noah have reached anyway to grab it) that Noah needed to assist it? Sure the bird probably would have made it anyway.
But Noah was sensitive to his surroundings and knew that even if it is only a small bit, he could still relieve the bird, just a bit, of his weariness.
This is why Noah was great. While everyone else around him was stealing and seeped uin immorality, he was acutely aware of even the slightest discomfort another was experiencing and he figured out how to help relieve that discomfort.
I would like to add that this is similar to how Hashem chose Moshe to lead Israel out of Egypt and later how he chose David and other prophets. They were shepherds. Hashem saw the great level of sensitivity they had when relating to their sheep. When Hashem saw how Moshe helped his sheep eat, He chose Moshe because only someone that sensitive to the needs of others, even animals, can lead a people without his own selfish needs getting in the way.
Noah was the same. When everyone else was looking out for themselves, Noah was sensitive to others. That is why Hashem chose to save Noah and through him to rebuild the world.
In 8:8-9 it says he sent the dove from him... the dove found nowhere to set down and returned to the ark, and Noah sent forth his hand and took her and brought her back in...
Why was this dove so high maintenance? The raven was sent out and it came back in on its own when it could not find land. The dove later was sent out and came back on its own with an olive branch. This time the dove was sent out from him - meaning Noah sort of urged it out and helped it leave, and when it came back he had to retrieve it and assist its re-entry.
According to the Ohr Hachaim, the dove was very weary from its trip. It had not found land and had not set down even to rest for 7 days.So when the dove came back in, Noah knew it was very tired because it had not rested in 7 days and therefore helped it back in.The first time it was the raven which is a much stronger bird, so it did not need help (and possibly it did not travel far according to the midrash). The later time the dove had returned holding a branch meaning it had found a resting spot so it was not tired.
See Noah's sensitivity to his surroundings. He was aware the bird was tired. I have no idea how one can look at a bird and see that it is weary. I do not know what a tired bird looks like.
But Noah was sensitive to it. Sure, it was only a matter of another meter. How much help did Noah really offer it anyway? Could the bird not make it back the last meter or two (how far could Noah have reached anyway to grab it) that Noah needed to assist it? Sure the bird probably would have made it anyway.
But Noah was sensitive to his surroundings and knew that even if it is only a small bit, he could still relieve the bird, just a bit, of his weariness.
This is why Noah was great. While everyone else around him was stealing and seeped uin immorality, he was acutely aware of even the slightest discomfort another was experiencing and he figured out how to help relieve that discomfort.
I would like to add that this is similar to how Hashem chose Moshe to lead Israel out of Egypt and later how he chose David and other prophets. They were shepherds. Hashem saw the great level of sensitivity they had when relating to their sheep. When Hashem saw how Moshe helped his sheep eat, He chose Moshe because only someone that sensitive to the needs of others, even animals, can lead a people without his own selfish needs getting in the way.
Noah was the same. When everyone else was looking out for themselves, Noah was sensitive to others. That is why Hashem chose to save Noah and through him to rebuild the world.
Noah: a man of faith in mankind
Parshat No'ah
In 7:7 it says Noah and family went into the ark "מפני מי המבול" - because of the waters of the flood.
Rashi says Noah was a man of little faith. Sure, he was righteous and moral and did what God told him (build an ark), but he did not really believe the flood would come until he was forced to go into the ark because of the waters.
I would like to suggest another reason why Noah waited until the waters were right there before he went into the ark. I think he wanted to give the people as much time as possible and as many chances as possible to repent and join him. Once he would go in and shut the door, that is it. They would not be able to get in. By delaying his entry to the last possible moment, he was giving them more time and more opportunities to repent and join him in the ark.
Whether he was man of little faith or not I do not know (Rashi says he was), but I think he loved mankind and tried to give them an extra chance even if it meant his only going in at the last minute and putting himself at risk.
In 7:7 it says Noah and family went into the ark "מפני מי המבול" - because of the waters of the flood.
Rashi says Noah was a man of little faith. Sure, he was righteous and moral and did what God told him (build an ark), but he did not really believe the flood would come until he was forced to go into the ark because of the waters.
I would like to suggest another reason why Noah waited until the waters were right there before he went into the ark. I think he wanted to give the people as much time as possible and as many chances as possible to repent and join him. Once he would go in and shut the door, that is it. They would not be able to get in. By delaying his entry to the last possible moment, he was giving them more time and more opportunities to repent and join him in the ark.
Whether he was man of little faith or not I do not know (Rashi says he was), but I think he loved mankind and tried to give them an extra chance even if it meant his only going in at the last minute and putting himself at risk.
Noah: which animals to take in
Parshat No'ah
In 7:2-3 God tells Noah about taking 7 pairs of pure animals into the ark and 2 of impure animals.
My question is how would Noah know which animals were considered pure and which were considered impure - those rules were only given much later. At that point they would have had no idea, as no animal could be eaten - even the pure ones. So could Noah have known what to take, and what ramification would such a distinction have had?
Anybody?
In 7:2-3 God tells Noah about taking 7 pairs of pure animals into the ark and 2 of impure animals.
My question is how would Noah know which animals were considered pure and which were considered impure - those rules were only given much later. At that point they would have had no idea, as no animal could be eaten - even the pure ones. So could Noah have known what to take, and what ramification would such a distinction have had?
Anybody?
Saturday, October 06, 2007
B'Reishis: blaming others
Parshat B'Reishis
We find the snake tricking Chava into eating from the Tree of Knowledge, and she proceeds to get Adam to eat. Hashem comes looking for them. He comes to Adam in the Garden of Eden and asks him why he ate from the Tree he was not supposed to eat from?
Adam blames it on Chava. She made me do it.
Hashem approaches Chava and asks why she did it. She blames the snake. he made me do it.
Hashem approaches the snake and tells him off. he then curses the snake, goes back and curses Chava and then Adam.
This is a good lesson. I said to my kids - What happens if Tzvi writes on the wall. I come to him and scream at him, "What's going on??!! Why'd you do that!!??"
Tzvi says, "Mickey told me to do it."
I go to Mickey and ask what happened. He blames it on Nachum.
So I go to Nachum. In the end they all get punished.
It does not help to blame others.
It is the natural reaction. Adam blamed Chava who blamed Snake.
But it got them nowhere. They all got punished.
I wonder what would have happened had Adam just said, "Sorry God. I know I did something wrong. Please forgive me. I will try to do better next time" instead of blaming others. Would he have gotten the same punishment? Would Hashem still have chased down Chava and the snake? I do not know.
But I do know that they all tried to blame someone else and in the end they all got punished for it.
We find the snake tricking Chava into eating from the Tree of Knowledge, and she proceeds to get Adam to eat. Hashem comes looking for them. He comes to Adam in the Garden of Eden and asks him why he ate from the Tree he was not supposed to eat from?
Adam blames it on Chava. She made me do it.
Hashem approaches Chava and asks why she did it. She blames the snake. he made me do it.
Hashem approaches the snake and tells him off. he then curses the snake, goes back and curses Chava and then Adam.
This is a good lesson. I said to my kids - What happens if Tzvi writes on the wall. I come to him and scream at him, "What's going on??!! Why'd you do that!!??"
Tzvi says, "Mickey told me to do it."
I go to Mickey and ask what happened. He blames it on Nachum.
So I go to Nachum. In the end they all get punished.
It does not help to blame others.
It is the natural reaction. Adam blamed Chava who blamed Snake.
But it got them nowhere. They all got punished.
I wonder what would have happened had Adam just said, "Sorry God. I know I did something wrong. Please forgive me. I will try to do better next time" instead of blaming others. Would he have gotten the same punishment? Would Hashem still have chased down Chava and the snake? I do not know.
But I do know that they all tried to blame someone else and in the end they all got punished for it.
Breishis: coincidence?
Parshat B'Reishis
It is very rare to find in the Torah two people with the same name. In Breishis we find two people named Lemech. One is a descendant of Kayin, and the second is the descendant of Shes.
The Lemech of Kayin had a child named Naama. The Lemech of Shes had a child named Noah.
Noah eventually married Naama and the two of them (and their children) were the only people to eventually survive the flood that destroyed the world.
I am sure it is not a coincidence that they are both children of two different people named Lemech, a very rare occurrence on its own. That they both had a father named Lemech and they married each other and survived the flood makes the whole thing even rarer.
What is the significance of both having a father named Lemech?
Anybody?
It is very rare to find in the Torah two people with the same name. In Breishis we find two people named Lemech. One is a descendant of Kayin, and the second is the descendant of Shes.
The Lemech of Kayin had a child named Naama. The Lemech of Shes had a child named Noah.
Noah eventually married Naama and the two of them (and their children) were the only people to eventually survive the flood that destroyed the world.
I am sure it is not a coincidence that they are both children of two different people named Lemech, a very rare occurrence on its own. That they both had a father named Lemech and they married each other and survived the flood makes the whole thing even rarer.
What is the significance of both having a father named Lemech?
Anybody?
B'Reishis: bad birth control
Parshat B'Reishis
The passuk says that Lemech married two wives, Ada and Tzila. Rashi tells us that in that generation they would marry two wives, one for the purpose of having children and the second for her beauty and for sexual relations. They would give the second wife a "kos shel ikrin" (some form of birth control) to make her sterile.
Ada was the wife for having children and Tzila was for her beauty.
My question is: two verses later we see Tzila having children. What happened to the kos shel ikrin that made her sterile? How could she have children?
The only anwers I have is that 1) it was birth control that did not work or 2) Tzila said she took the borth control but really she did not.
Anybody got anything better?
The passuk says that Lemech married two wives, Ada and Tzila. Rashi tells us that in that generation they would marry two wives, one for the purpose of having children and the second for her beauty and for sexual relations. They would give the second wife a "kos shel ikrin" (some form of birth control) to make her sterile.
Ada was the wife for having children and Tzila was for her beauty.
My question is: two verses later we see Tzila having children. What happened to the kos shel ikrin that made her sterile? How could she have children?
The only anwers I have is that 1) it was birth control that did not work or 2) Tzila said she took the borth control but really she did not.
Anybody got anything better?
Sunday, September 23, 2007
V'zos habrachah: learning or working
V'Zos Ha'Brachah
Moshe is blessing the tribes before they enter into the Land of Israel without him. In 33:18 it says, "שמח זבלון בצאתך ויששכר באהליך" - Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out, and, Issachar, in your tents.
Rashi says that Zevulun is mentioned first because he supported Yissachar, ergo Yissachar's Torah was only via the merit of Zevulun.
Our society has become one in which we do not give the due respect to those who support Torah. We consider them to be necessary, but on a lower level. Those learnign Torah, we think, are doing a higher calling and are the pinnacle of Judaism. Those who work are lower class of sorts.
The Torah says otherwise. The Torah puts Zevulun, the merchant, before Yissachar. The Torah says that those who support Torah are at least of equal calling, if not greater. Zevulun was mentioned first because he enables Yissachar to learn.
Moshe is blessing the tribes before they enter into the Land of Israel without him. In 33:18 it says, "שמח זבלון בצאתך ויששכר באהליך" - Rejoice, Zebulun, in your going out, and, Issachar, in your tents.
Rashi says that Zevulun is mentioned first because he supported Yissachar, ergo Yissachar's Torah was only via the merit of Zevulun.
Our society has become one in which we do not give the due respect to those who support Torah. We consider them to be necessary, but on a lower level. Those learnign Torah, we think, are doing a higher calling and are the pinnacle of Judaism. Those who work are lower class of sorts.
The Torah says otherwise. The Torah puts Zevulun, the merchant, before Yissachar. The Torah says that those who support Torah are at least of equal calling, if not greater. Zevulun was mentioned first because he enables Yissachar to learn.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Ha'azinu: studying history
Parshat Ha'Azinu
In 32:7 the "song" says "Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations; ask your father, and he will tell you, your elders, and they will tell you."
You have to study history and understand the events of the earlier generations. Contemplate the miracles. And the passuk adds to ask your father, ask the elders.
You can study history from the books and still get all the technical details of your history. The major events will be transmitted fine like that.
But that is not enough. You have to also ask your father for his stories. Ask the elders what they know and what they have seen. They will give you a picture of our history that the books are not able to give.
If you want to learn, for example, about the holocaust, by all means, get a few good books and read up on the Holocaust. But that will still not give you the full picture. Speak to your grandmother. Find other survivors. Ask the children of a survivor. You will get the stories and the small details you just cannot get in the books. They will transmit what really happened. What life was really like.
The same is true with any historic event. Study the history. Learn your roots. And speak to the elders. Find out everything, from the greater picture to the smaller details and stories.
In 32:7 the "song" says "Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations; ask your father, and he will tell you, your elders, and they will tell you."
You have to study history and understand the events of the earlier generations. Contemplate the miracles. And the passuk adds to ask your father, ask the elders.
You can study history from the books and still get all the technical details of your history. The major events will be transmitted fine like that.
But that is not enough. You have to also ask your father for his stories. Ask the elders what they know and what they have seen. They will give you a picture of our history that the books are not able to give.
If you want to learn, for example, about the holocaust, by all means, get a few good books and read up on the Holocaust. But that will still not give you the full picture. Speak to your grandmother. Find other survivors. Ask the children of a survivor. You will get the stories and the small details you just cannot get in the books. They will transmit what really happened. What life was really like.
The same is true with any historic event. Study the history. Learn your roots. And speak to the elders. Find out everything, from the greater picture to the smaller details and stories.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Va'Yelech: leading via the Torah
Parshat Va'Yelech
The whole transfer of power from Moshe to Yehoshua was intermingled with Moshes writing down the "shira" and the Torah.
In 31:7-9, Moshe calls Yehoshua and gives him a motivational speech (be strong...) and then Moshe writes the Torah.
In 31:14-19, Moshe and Yehoshua get some instructions from Hashem for the passing of the baton, "And now write the shira and teach it to Israel..."
I think the success of the transfer of power was predicated on Moshe being able to show Yehoshua that an integral part of his leadership is remaining true to and incorporating the Torah as a basis for life. It is not just he, Yehoshua, who needs to be powerful and smart and strong, etc in order to lead the nation into Israel. Rather that strength, that leadership comes from the Torah. It comes from Hashem. It comes from leading with the values of the Torah.
Moshe is showing Yehoshua that if his foundation is the Torah, if his every move is based on the Torah, if the Torah is so ingrained in him, then he will be able to lead Israel successfully.
The whole transfer of power from Moshe to Yehoshua was intermingled with Moshes writing down the "shira" and the Torah.
In 31:7-9, Moshe calls Yehoshua and gives him a motivational speech (be strong...) and then Moshe writes the Torah.
In 31:14-19, Moshe and Yehoshua get some instructions from Hashem for the passing of the baton, "And now write the shira and teach it to Israel..."
I think the success of the transfer of power was predicated on Moshe being able to show Yehoshua that an integral part of his leadership is remaining true to and incorporating the Torah as a basis for life. It is not just he, Yehoshua, who needs to be powerful and smart and strong, etc in order to lead the nation into Israel. Rather that strength, that leadership comes from the Torah. It comes from Hashem. It comes from leading with the values of the Torah.
Moshe is showing Yehoshua that if his foundation is the Torah, if his every move is based on the Torah, if the Torah is so ingrained in him, then he will be able to lead Israel successfully.
N'Tzavim: learning in chu"l
Parshat N'Tzavim
In 30:12-13 the Torah says, "לֹא בַשָּׁמַיִם, הִוא: לֵאמֹר, מִי יַעֲלֶה-לָּנוּ הַשָּׁמַיְמָה וְיִקָּחֶהָ לָּנוּ, וְיַשְׁמִעֵנוּ אֹתָהּ, וְנַעֲשֶׂנָּה. וְלֹא-מֵעֵבֶר לַיָּם, הִוא: לֵאמֹר, מִי יַעֲבָר-לָנוּ אֶל-עֵבֶר הַיָּם וְיִקָּחֶהָ לָּנוּ, וְיַשְׁמִעֵנוּ אֹתָהּ, וְנַעֲשֶׂנָּה" meaning "It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say: 'Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?' Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say: 'Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?"
It is not just a matter of where you can learn better. It is not just saying, dont say I have to cross the ocean to learn Torah, rather you can even learn it where you are (in eretz yisrael).
No. The passuk says ,"and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?"
Some say I can learn better in the US so I will not come to Israel, or some even leave Israel saying he can learn better in the US.
But it is not a matter of where you can learn better (or should I say, where you think/claim you can learn better). Rather, where better will you be able to perform the mitzvos. Where better will you be able to learn and put into action that learning in the form of mitzva observance. For that one need not leave Israel. There is no place better for mitzva observance than in the Land of Israel. There are tens of mitzvos one is simply unable to perform just by the nature of his being abroad.
In 30:12-13 the Torah says, "לֹא בַשָּׁמַיִם, הִוא: לֵאמֹר, מִי יַעֲלֶה-לָּנוּ הַשָּׁמַיְמָה וְיִקָּחֶהָ לָּנוּ, וְיַשְׁמִעֵנוּ אֹתָהּ, וְנַעֲשֶׂנָּה. וְלֹא-מֵעֵבֶר לַיָּם, הִוא: לֵאמֹר, מִי יַעֲבָר-לָנוּ אֶל-עֵבֶר הַיָּם וְיִקָּחֶהָ לָּנוּ, וְיַשְׁמִעֵנוּ אֹתָהּ, וְנַעֲשֶׂנָּה" meaning "It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say: 'Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?' Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say: 'Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?"
It is not just a matter of where you can learn better. It is not just saying, dont say I have to cross the ocean to learn Torah, rather you can even learn it where you are (in eretz yisrael).
No. The passuk says ,"and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?"
Some say I can learn better in the US so I will not come to Israel, or some even leave Israel saying he can learn better in the US.
But it is not a matter of where you can learn better (or should I say, where you think/claim you can learn better). Rather, where better will you be able to perform the mitzvos. Where better will you be able to learn and put into action that learning in the form of mitzva observance. For that one need not leave Israel. There is no place better for mitzva observance than in the Land of Israel. There are tens of mitzvos one is simply unable to perform just by the nature of his being abroad.
וישמענו אותה ונעשנה
The learning on its own is important. But it is not the ikkar - the main aspect of Jewish life. If one can learn better abroad, then it might be a valid reason to remain outside of Israel. But the passuk is saying that one cannot claim that he will perform the mitzvos better abroad.
Ki karov aylecha hadavar m'od....
There is nowhere better to learn Torah and perform mitzvos than in Eretz Yisrael
The learning on its own is important. But it is not the ikkar - the main aspect of Jewish life. If one can learn better abroad, then it might be a valid reason to remain outside of Israel. But the passuk is saying that one cannot claim that he will perform the mitzvos better abroad.
Ki karov aylecha hadavar m'od....
There is nowhere better to learn Torah and perform mitzvos than in Eretz Yisrael
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Ki Savo: putting things into perspective
Parshat Ki Savo
In 29: 4-5 as Moshe is describing how he led them through the desert, and Hashem performed miracles, etc.. he says our clothes did not wear out... You did not eat bread, wine and beer you did not drink..
Why not just say Hashem took care of your needs by providing the manna every day? Why mention the foods they did not eat? The miracle was the giving of the manna - why not mention it?
We get used to what we have and consider them necessities. I heard once a saying that what we consider a luxury, our children will consider a necessity. What they consider a luxury, their children will consider a necessity..
Hashem fed us the manna for 40 years in the desert.That showed us we could rely on Him to provide for our needs. That was a very important lesson, especially now that they are going into Eretz Yisrael and going to have lead normal lives.
But here Moshe wanted to point out a different lesson from the same incident. He tells us that we need to approach the incident with an attitude of "Look at what I survived without". All those things I thought were necessary for my daily survival - look at that, I survived 40 years with them. I did not get a new suit every year or two. I did not get new sneakers. I did not have my special foods and drinks. No cranberry juice or Cherry Coke. No steak and Italian breads.
"You did not eat bread or drink wine in the desert" - and you survived without them.
You need to realize what is really a necessity and what is a luxury and look at things properly and with the proper priorities and attitude. Keep things in proportion and do not give too much importance to things that are not really so important.
It is not just that Hashem took care of us, but He also showed us that we can survive without the things we thought were important.
In 29: 4-5 as Moshe is describing how he led them through the desert, and Hashem performed miracles, etc.. he says our clothes did not wear out... You did not eat bread, wine and beer you did not drink..
Why not just say Hashem took care of your needs by providing the manna every day? Why mention the foods they did not eat? The miracle was the giving of the manna - why not mention it?
We get used to what we have and consider them necessities. I heard once a saying that what we consider a luxury, our children will consider a necessity. What they consider a luxury, their children will consider a necessity..
Hashem fed us the manna for 40 years in the desert.That showed us we could rely on Him to provide for our needs. That was a very important lesson, especially now that they are going into Eretz Yisrael and going to have lead normal lives.
But here Moshe wanted to point out a different lesson from the same incident. He tells us that we need to approach the incident with an attitude of "Look at what I survived without". All those things I thought were necessary for my daily survival - look at that, I survived 40 years with them. I did not get a new suit every year or two. I did not get new sneakers. I did not have my special foods and drinks. No cranberry juice or Cherry Coke. No steak and Italian breads.
"You did not eat bread or drink wine in the desert" - and you survived without them.
You need to realize what is really a necessity and what is a luxury and look at things properly and with the proper priorities and attitude. Keep things in proportion and do not give too much importance to things that are not really so important.
It is not just that Hashem took care of us, but He also showed us that we can survive without the things we thought were important.
Ki Savo: serving with joy
Parshat Ki Savo
While the Torah is writing about how the people were commanded to write the Trah on stones by the Jordan River and build an altar, etc. it adds in 27:7 וזבחת שלמים ואכלת שם ושמחת לפני ... - you should slaught sacrifices and eat there and rejoice before Hashem.. and then it gets right back to saying that they should write the Torah on the stones.
What does this happiness have to do with what's going - writing down the commandments, etc.? Why is this mentioned right here in the middle of this discussion?
I think this shows how integral joy and happiness is in the serving of Hashem and fulfilling the Torah. As it is telling us to write and keep the Torah it is telling us we have to be joyous.
This thought is enhanced by what is written in the "tochacha" in 28:47 where it tells us the various punishments that will befall the nation in the even that they do not keep the Torah. It says there, "Because you did not serve Hashem with simcha" - Even if you did serve Hashem, but if you do not do it with the joy and happiness, that means it is lacking in its dedication and truth.
A vital component of service is the joy.
While the Torah is writing about how the people were commanded to write the Trah on stones by the Jordan River and build an altar, etc. it adds in 27:7 וזבחת שלמים ואכלת שם ושמחת לפני ... - you should slaught sacrifices and eat there and rejoice before Hashem.. and then it gets right back to saying that they should write the Torah on the stones.
What does this happiness have to do with what's going - writing down the commandments, etc.? Why is this mentioned right here in the middle of this discussion?
I think this shows how integral joy and happiness is in the serving of Hashem and fulfilling the Torah. As it is telling us to write and keep the Torah it is telling us we have to be joyous.
This thought is enhanced by what is written in the "tochacha" in 28:47 where it tells us the various punishments that will befall the nation in the even that they do not keep the Torah. It says there, "Because you did not serve Hashem with simcha" - Even if you did serve Hashem, but if you do not do it with the joy and happiness, that means it is lacking in its dedication and truth.
A vital component of service is the joy.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Ki Seitzei: znus and adultery
Parshat Ki Seitzei
In 22:21:22 we go through various situations of adultery and rape, etc.
When the husband accuses the wife of not being a virgin, and they subsequently find the claim to be true, the Torah says she did a depraved deed and gets punishment of death. The Torah then says , "ובערת הרע מקרבך" - you should remove the evil from amongst you.
When the man has an affair with a married woman, they both get killed. There the passuk says, "ובערת הרע מישראל" - you should remove the evil from Israel.
What is the difference? Why does znus have to be removed from amongst you, while adultery has to be removed from all of Israel?
I do not have a good answer, so leave your suggestions in the comments.
The thought I did have is that adultery is a more serious offense than znus. Therefore the effect it has is not just on you and your community, but on all of Israel. Znus is more private and the offense is not as great. Therefore the effect it has on the people is more limited.
Any thoughts?
In 22:21:22 we go through various situations of adultery and rape, etc.
When the husband accuses the wife of not being a virgin, and they subsequently find the claim to be true, the Torah says she did a depraved deed and gets punishment of death. The Torah then says , "ובערת הרע מקרבך" - you should remove the evil from amongst you.
When the man has an affair with a married woman, they both get killed. There the passuk says, "ובערת הרע מישראל" - you should remove the evil from Israel.
What is the difference? Why does znus have to be removed from amongst you, while adultery has to be removed from all of Israel?
I do not have a good answer, so leave your suggestions in the comments.
The thought I did have is that adultery is a more serious offense than znus. Therefore the effect it has is not just on you and your community, but on all of Israel. Znus is more private and the offense is not as great. Therefore the effect it has on the people is more limited.
Any thoughts?
Ki Seitzei: biting your lip
Parshat Ki Seitzei
In 21:11 the Torah allows us to take a captive woman from battle as a wife. This was called אשת יפת תואר.
Rashi says that had the Torah not allowed it, this man would have married her anyway, despite the prohibition - so the Torah allowed it. But you should know it is not a healthy relationship and he will end up hating her and having a rebellious child, etc.
Sometimes a person has to bite his lip and keep silent even if he knows someone is doing something wrong and dangerous, and even if you know that that person will regret it later. Sometimes people need to make their own mistakes and learn on their own.
The Torah here does not even suggest don't do it, it is a bad idea and will end badly for you. It just says you want to marry her, go ahead. The Torah is keeping silent on the pitfalls in this situation because it knows the desire is so strong, no matter what it says this man will go ahead and marry her anyway. He needs to learn on his own how bad the situation is, and maybe others will learn the lesson from seeing his mistake. But the Torah stays silent. And sometimes, so must we.
In 21:11 the Torah allows us to take a captive woman from battle as a wife. This was called אשת יפת תואר.
Rashi says that had the Torah not allowed it, this man would have married her anyway, despite the prohibition - so the Torah allowed it. But you should know it is not a healthy relationship and he will end up hating her and having a rebellious child, etc.
Sometimes a person has to bite his lip and keep silent even if he knows someone is doing something wrong and dangerous, and even if you know that that person will regret it later. Sometimes people need to make their own mistakes and learn on their own.
The Torah here does not even suggest don't do it, it is a bad idea and will end badly for you. It just says you want to marry her, go ahead. The Torah is keeping silent on the pitfalls in this situation because it knows the desire is so strong, no matter what it says this man will go ahead and marry her anyway. He needs to learn on his own how bad the situation is, and maybe others will learn the lesson from seeing his mistake. But the Torah stays silent. And sometimes, so must we.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Shoftim:
Parshat Shoftim
The Torah tells us that when you appoint a king, he should not accumulate horses or wives. In 17:17 it says, "וכסף וזהב לא ירבה לו מאד" - silver and gold he should not accumulate too much. By the others it just says not too accumulate to many but by money it adds the word מאד - too much.
What is the difference between them that money gets a stronger warning?
It costs a lot of money, and requires a lot of money, to run a country and government. A king does not require a lot of wives. He does not even require so many horses (some for his army, but not so much). But he does need a lot of money.
This is alluded to in Rashi who brings a drasha that he should not have an abundance of money - for himself, but for "achsanya" it is ok. "Achsanya" is defined as money needed to pay for army and servants and the like - i.e. basic functioning of government and the necessary services for the country.
So it is ok for him to accumulate the great sums of money he will need for the functioning of the government, just not for personal needs.
So a king needs a lot of money for the functioning of his government, but he should not look to accumulate too much (מאד). It will become a burden on the nation (via taxes). He should not be looking to increase his personal wealth by being king.
The Torah tells us that when you appoint a king, he should not accumulate horses or wives. In 17:17 it says, "וכסף וזהב לא ירבה לו מאד" - silver and gold he should not accumulate too much. By the others it just says not too accumulate to many but by money it adds the word מאד - too much.
What is the difference between them that money gets a stronger warning?
It costs a lot of money, and requires a lot of money, to run a country and government. A king does not require a lot of wives. He does not even require so many horses (some for his army, but not so much). But he does need a lot of money.
This is alluded to in Rashi who brings a drasha that he should not have an abundance of money - for himself, but for "achsanya" it is ok. "Achsanya" is defined as money needed to pay for army and servants and the like - i.e. basic functioning of government and the necessary services for the country.
So it is ok for him to accumulate the great sums of money he will need for the functioning of the government, just not for personal needs.
So a king needs a lot of money for the functioning of his government, but he should not look to accumulate too much (מאד). It will become a burden on the nation (via taxes). He should not be looking to increase his personal wealth by being king.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Re'Eh: Eretz Yisrael and mitzvos
Parshat Re'Eh
In various sections of the parsha, and of neighboring parshiyot, we are introduced with intros such as "When you enter the Land of Israel" or "When Hashem expands your borders" etc.. and the Torah proceeds to explain various mitzvos.
I think this indicates to us how important Eretz Yisrael is as a prerequisite to fulfilling the mitzvos properly.
Some of the mitzvos described in these pesukim are mitzvos related to eretz yisrael, but just as often they are general mitzvos, yet the Torah connects them to our being in Eretz Yisrael.
Being in Eretz Yisrael is the way to fulfill all the mitzvos properly and completely.
In various sections of the parsha, and of neighboring parshiyot, we are introduced with intros such as "When you enter the Land of Israel" or "When Hashem expands your borders" etc.. and the Torah proceeds to explain various mitzvos.
I think this indicates to us how important Eretz Yisrael is as a prerequisite to fulfilling the mitzvos properly.
Some of the mitzvos described in these pesukim are mitzvos related to eretz yisrael, but just as often they are general mitzvos, yet the Torah connects them to our being in Eretz Yisrael.
Being in Eretz Yisrael is the way to fulfill all the mitzvos properly and completely.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Eikev: that's all He wants from us?
Parshat Eikev
in 10:12-13 Moshe tells the people "What does Hashem want from you?just to fear Him, to go in His ways, to serve Him...to do the commandments... for your good"
Oh, that's it? Just to fear and serve Him? Oh, that's not such a big deal!!??All He wants from us is to keep the 613 commandments as written in the Torah and explained in the voluminous Talmud and codified in the voluminous shulchan aruch? That's it? Why didn't you say so??!! That's nothing!! So easy!! All we have to do is fear Him??!!
I think the key word is the concluding words of the verse "fro your good".
It is like a studious student in college. Sure he has plenty of work to do, homework, lessons, study, tests, labs, internships, etc. to get his good grades and succeed. But he does not think of it as so hard. He knows it is all for his benefit so he does it because he needs to do it for the success he is looking for in the future.
But we are more like the non-studious student. He looks at the work and does not realize that it is their for his benefit. He complains that it is too hard or the teacher gives too much work. Everything is a big deal.
It is a matter of approach and attitude. If we approach the Torah and mitzvos like the studious guy, with the knowledge that it is really for our own benefit, than it is easy. All He wants from us is x, y and z. But if we approach it looking just to get it done, than it is hard.
in 10:12-13 Moshe tells the people "What does Hashem want from you?just to fear Him, to go in His ways, to serve Him...to do the commandments... for your good"
Oh, that's it? Just to fear and serve Him? Oh, that's not such a big deal!!??All He wants from us is to keep the 613 commandments as written in the Torah and explained in the voluminous Talmud and codified in the voluminous shulchan aruch? That's it? Why didn't you say so??!! That's nothing!! So easy!! All we have to do is fear Him??!!
I think the key word is the concluding words of the verse "fro your good".
It is like a studious student in college. Sure he has plenty of work to do, homework, lessons, study, tests, labs, internships, etc. to get his good grades and succeed. But he does not think of it as so hard. He knows it is all for his benefit so he does it because he needs to do it for the success he is looking for in the future.
But we are more like the non-studious student. He looks at the work and does not realize that it is their for his benefit. He complains that it is too hard or the teacher gives too much work. Everything is a big deal.
It is a matter of approach and attitude. If we approach the Torah and mitzvos like the studious guy, with the knowledge that it is really for our own benefit, than it is easy. All He wants from us is x, y and z. But if we approach it looking just to get it done, than it is hard.
Eikev: not all at once
Parshat Eikev
In 7:22 the passuk tells us that Hashem will remove the nations [from the Land of Israel] little by little. You should not get rid of them too quickly, lest the wild animals should become abundant and overtake you.
When you take on a big project, you have to do it slowly. You go through stages of planning and deployment. You don't just do it in one day. A recipe for failure is trying to do something, especially something big, too quickly.
Everything needs planning and consideration. Take things slowly. Do things with planning and deliberation. If you do it without getting too excited and anxious, but have patience and thoroughness, you can be successful in your efforts.
In 7:22 the passuk tells us that Hashem will remove the nations [from the Land of Israel] little by little. You should not get rid of them too quickly, lest the wild animals should become abundant and overtake you.
When you take on a big project, you have to do it slowly. You go through stages of planning and deployment. You don't just do it in one day. A recipe for failure is trying to do something, especially something big, too quickly.
Everything needs planning and consideration. Take things slowly. Do things with planning and deliberation. If you do it without getting too excited and anxious, but have patience and thoroughness, you can be successful in your efforts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
