Parshas Mishpatim
In 24:14 it says, "והנה אהרן וחור עמכם מי בעל דברים יגש אליהם" - Behold Aharon and Hur are with you. Whomever is part of a dispute should approach them.
Moshe was not going away for a long time. He was going for 40 days. Couldn't they just wait until he got back if they would need a beis din? They probably would have no need for it anyway, because "theyw ere all camped as one" - they were not fighting.. so whyw as it so important for Moshe to appoint Aharon and Hur as the people in charge?
A leader cannot leave things vague.
If Moshe was away and was needed, it would create chaos among the people. He had to be very careful to appoint replacements, even though his departure is only temporary and short-term. Even if just for appearance sake, so the people would know that they have not been abandoned.
A leader has to make sure the people are taken care of, and he has to make sure the people feel they are being taken care of.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Mishpatim: Don't play with fire
Parshas Mishpatim
In 22:5 it says, "כי תצא אש ומצא קוצים ונאכל גדיש..." - When a fire goes out and finds thorns and the silo will be consumed....
When you light a fire, it is going to do damage. It will find something to burn.
A person has to be careful with his anger, and with his fire. As soon as he lights it, as soon as he lets his anger get out, it is very hard to control. Once let out, it is sure to do damage.
In 22:5 it says, "כי תצא אש ומצא קוצים ונאכל גדיש..." - When a fire goes out and finds thorns and the silo will be consumed....
When you light a fire, it is going to do damage. It will find something to burn.
A person has to be careful with his anger, and with his fire. As soon as he lights it, as soon as he lets his anger get out, it is very hard to control. Once let out, it is sure to do damage.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Yisro: coveting for its own sake
Parshat Yisro
In 20:13-14 the Torah says, "לא תרצח לא תנאף... לא תחמוד" - do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal.. do not covet that which belongs to others.."
I would think that "do not covet" should be placed earlier in that list. After all, coveting somebody else's stuff is what leads to stealing, it can lead to murder and adultery... so why is "do not covet" mentioned last? In order it should be first!?
The Torah is giving us a value - do not covet that which is in someone else's possession.
If the Torah would write that first, a person could understand that coveting is bad because it leads to theft, murder and adultery. In other words, if he feels strong enough to withstand, or if he puts safeguards in place to control himself, he will allow himself to covet as he knows he will not steal.
So the Torah puts it on its own. Do not steal, do not murder, do not commit adultery... and do not covet. Even if coveting will not lead you to the other transgressions, on its own it is bad.
In 20:13-14 the Torah says, "לא תרצח לא תנאף... לא תחמוד" - do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal.. do not covet that which belongs to others.."
I would think that "do not covet" should be placed earlier in that list. After all, coveting somebody else's stuff is what leads to stealing, it can lead to murder and adultery... so why is "do not covet" mentioned last? In order it should be first!?
The Torah is giving us a value - do not covet that which is in someone else's possession.
If the Torah would write that first, a person could understand that coveting is bad because it leads to theft, murder and adultery. In other words, if he feels strong enough to withstand, or if he puts safeguards in place to control himself, he will allow himself to covet as he knows he will not steal.
So the Torah puts it on its own. Do not steal, do not murder, do not commit adultery... and do not covet. Even if coveting will not lead you to the other transgressions, on its own it is bad.
Yisro: second or first
Parshat Yisro
In 18:4 it says "ושם האחד אליעזר" - the name of the one is Eliezer. Eliezer was the second child, so why does it not say "the name of the second was Eliezer"?
Even though in the order of children he was born second, but Eliezer was not "second" to Gershom in any respect. The Torah gives equal importance to both children, to both Gershom and Eliezer.
We should treat all our children with equal respect and not treat was as "number one" and another as being "second" No child should feel as if he is second class.
In 18:4 it says "ושם האחד אליעזר" - the name of the one is Eliezer. Eliezer was the second child, so why does it not say "the name of the second was Eliezer"?
Even though in the order of children he was born second, but Eliezer was not "second" to Gershom in any respect. The Torah gives equal importance to both children, to both Gershom and Eliezer.
We should treat all our children with equal respect and not treat was as "number one" and another as being "second" No child should feel as if he is second class.
Yisro: perspective or fact
Parshat Yisro
In 18:3-4 the Torah tells us about Moshe's two children. It says, "אשר שם האחד גרשם כי אמר... ושם האחד אליעזר כי אלקי אבי"
Why by Gershom does it say "And ones name was Gershom because he said..." while by Eliezer it says his "name was Eliezer because God saved us.." why not "because he said" by Eliezer as well?
There is a difference between perspective and fact.
By Gershom's birth, Moshe felt like an outsider. he felt like a stranger in a strange land. Even if he had received citizenship and had been there for a long time and was not considered a stranger, he still felt like a stranger. So he named his child Gershom because he said he was a stranger in a strange land. It was based on his perspective.
When he named Eliezer, it was based on fact, not perspective. Moshe said, I was n danger and Hashem saved me. So he named his kid Eliezer. It was not a matter of perspective, so it is not his viewpoint that is the basis for the name.
In 18:3-4 the Torah tells us about Moshe's two children. It says, "אשר שם האחד גרשם כי אמר... ושם האחד אליעזר כי אלקי אבי"
Why by Gershom does it say "And ones name was Gershom because he said..." while by Eliezer it says his "name was Eliezer because God saved us.." why not "because he said" by Eliezer as well?
There is a difference between perspective and fact.
By Gershom's birth, Moshe felt like an outsider. he felt like a stranger in a strange land. Even if he had received citizenship and had been there for a long time and was not considered a stranger, he still felt like a stranger. So he named his child Gershom because he said he was a stranger in a strange land. It was based on his perspective.
When he named Eliezer, it was based on fact, not perspective. Moshe said, I was n danger and Hashem saved me. So he named his kid Eliezer. It was not a matter of perspective, so it is not his viewpoint that is the basis for the name.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
B'Shalah: watching from the sidelines
Parshat B'Shalah
After the splitting of the sea, the pasusk tells us in 14:31 "ויאמינו בה' ובמשה עבדו" - and they believed in Hashem and Moshe His servant.
It took them this long to come to the level of believing in Hashem? Only now do they see His strength because He split the sea - what about the various plagues they witnessed with all the relevant miracles? What about specifically the Plague of the First-Born where Hashem's tremendous strong hand was on display?
Why only now?
There is a difference between watching something and being a part of it.
Until now, with all teh plagues, all the signs, all the discussions, the Jews were on the sidelines. They were watching God take it out on the Egyptians. Sure they had faith in Hashem because of all they had witnessed.
By the splitting of the sea it was a whole new experience. They were part of it. They were being chased. They walked through the split sea. It was not just watching something happen to someone else. They were now a part of it. they experienced the "strong hand" first hand. Now they came to a whole new level of recognition and faith.
Being active, being part of an experience is different than just watching it happen from the side. That is what brought them to the level of emunah now that it says "And they believed in Hashem and Moshe His servant"
After the splitting of the sea, the pasusk tells us in 14:31 "ויאמינו בה' ובמשה עבדו" - and they believed in Hashem and Moshe His servant.
It took them this long to come to the level of believing in Hashem? Only now do they see His strength because He split the sea - what about the various plagues they witnessed with all the relevant miracles? What about specifically the Plague of the First-Born where Hashem's tremendous strong hand was on display?
Why only now?
There is a difference between watching something and being a part of it.
Until now, with all teh plagues, all the signs, all the discussions, the Jews were on the sidelines. They were watching God take it out on the Egyptians. Sure they had faith in Hashem because of all they had witnessed.
By the splitting of the sea it was a whole new experience. They were part of it. They were being chased. They walked through the split sea. It was not just watching something happen to someone else. They were now a part of it. they experienced the "strong hand" first hand. Now they came to a whole new level of recognition and faith.
Being active, being part of an experience is different than just watching it happen from the side. That is what brought them to the level of emunah now that it says "And they believed in Hashem and Moshe His servant"
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Bo: the mighty hand
Parshat Bo
In 13:3,9,14,15,17, etc. the passuk says "For with a mighty hand I brought you out of Egypt".
Why keep repeating so many times that He took us out with a mighty hand? we got the point already! And why is it so relevant? The Torah is giving us a few mitzvos, why not just say "remember I took you out of Egypt, why the "mighty hand" so many times?
Strength is obviously an important facet of rule and leadership. Strength is deterrence. That strength is what kept most of the hostile nations away from attacking the Jews in the desert. the strength had to be stressed to keep everyone else at bay.
Strength is important, and not just to the outside. It is also important internally. People rally around and follow a strong leader. In the psukim here it is being used internally. It is being used to explain the reason for the mitzvos being given here; tefillin, redeeming the first-born, Pesach. We need to see the strength of our leader and that gives us what to follow. Nobody wants to follow a weak leader. By knowing that we put on tefillin because of the strong hand, it gives us reason to continue putting on tefillin.
In 13:3,9,14,15,17, etc. the passuk says "For with a mighty hand I brought you out of Egypt".
Why keep repeating so many times that He took us out with a mighty hand? we got the point already! And why is it so relevant? The Torah is giving us a few mitzvos, why not just say "remember I took you out of Egypt, why the "mighty hand" so many times?
Strength is obviously an important facet of rule and leadership. Strength is deterrence. That strength is what kept most of the hostile nations away from attacking the Jews in the desert. the strength had to be stressed to keep everyone else at bay.
Strength is important, and not just to the outside. It is also important internally. People rally around and follow a strong leader. In the psukim here it is being used internally. It is being used to explain the reason for the mitzvos being given here; tefillin, redeeming the first-born, Pesach. We need to see the strength of our leader and that gives us what to follow. Nobody wants to follow a weak leader. By knowing that we put on tefillin because of the strong hand, it gives us reason to continue putting on tefillin.
Bo: Let my people go!
Parshat Bo
Why did Moshe need to keep using the cover story of "Let us go out to the desert for three days to worship our God" - why not just say "Let us go free", or the more popular "Let my people go!"?
Pharoah knew what Moshe really wanted as he said in 10:11 that only the men should go - he knew they really just wanted and were planning to leave under the guise of religious ceremony, and Moshe probably knew he knew. So why the game of "let us go serve our God for three days"?
I can understand initially they asked for three days because maybe then asking to leave was too much and there was no way Pharoah would have ever approved. But now, after a number of plagues have already decimated Egypt? After so much hositility? Just say "Let my people go!"???
Anybody?
Why did Moshe need to keep using the cover story of "Let us go out to the desert for three days to worship our God" - why not just say "Let us go free", or the more popular "Let my people go!"?
Pharoah knew what Moshe really wanted as he said in 10:11 that only the men should go - he knew they really just wanted and were planning to leave under the guise of religious ceremony, and Moshe probably knew he knew. So why the game of "let us go serve our God for three days"?
I can understand initially they asked for three days because maybe then asking to leave was too much and there was no way Pharoah would have ever approved. But now, after a number of plagues have already decimated Egypt? After so much hositility? Just say "Let my people go!"???
Anybody?
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Va'Eira: hakaras hatov is forever
Parshat Va'Eira
Hashem told Moshe that Aharon should strike the ground. Rashi says the reason is because the ground had protected Moshe so it would be inappropriate for Moshe to strike the ground.
Was gratitude to an inanimate object so important that the leadership situation had to be altered, even temporarily, because of it? The plagues could have been considered such an important goal and need that perhaps that should have overridden the necessity of gratitude? I am sure, anyways, that had they been asked, the Nile and the ground would have agreed to allow Moshe to perform the plagues, considering how important the job was.
Hakaras Ha'Tov, gratitude, is not just "Thank you" and then you move on with your life. Hakaras HaTov is forever. Hakaras Ha'Tov creates a new relationship - it is something that cannot be ignored, even if there is somethin g important happening.
Moshe could not strike the ground, he could not strike the water, even though the purpose was very important. He could not do it because he had this unique relationship with those that had saved him.
If something needed to be done that is in contrast and conflict with that relationship, he could not just ignore the relationship and perform the act, an alternate method had to be found.
Hashem told Moshe that Aharon should strike the ground. Rashi says the reason is because the ground had protected Moshe so it would be inappropriate for Moshe to strike the ground.
Was gratitude to an inanimate object so important that the leadership situation had to be altered, even temporarily, because of it? The plagues could have been considered such an important goal and need that perhaps that should have overridden the necessity of gratitude? I am sure, anyways, that had they been asked, the Nile and the ground would have agreed to allow Moshe to perform the plagues, considering how important the job was.
Hakaras Ha'Tov, gratitude, is not just "Thank you" and then you move on with your life. Hakaras HaTov is forever. Hakaras Ha'Tov creates a new relationship - it is something that cannot be ignored, even if there is somethin g important happening.
Moshe could not strike the ground, he could not strike the water, even though the purpose was very important. He could not do it because he had this unique relationship with those that had saved him.
If something needed to be done that is in contrast and conflict with that relationship, he could not just ignore the relationship and perform the act, an alternate method had to be found.
Va'eira: the graveyard is full of people who thought they were irreplaceable
Parshat Va'eira
We find that some of the plagues and earlier tricks used to sway people and/or Pharoah were performed by Aharon rather than by Moshe. Hashem specifically told Moshe on those occassions that Aharon should be the one to effect the specific plague.
It is true that these situations were symbols of gratitude - the earth had protected Moshe when he struck the Egyptian, so he hsould nto strike the earth. The Nile had protected Moshe when he was a baby, so he should not strike the waters, etc.. So Aharon performed those.
But it also shows us that the specific person is not so important. Moshe, in this case, was chosen to lead Israel out of Egypt because of specific qualities he had within him. But Hashem bringing these plagues via Aharon instead of via Moshe shows that Moshe was just as replaceable as anyone else. Hashem was not bound to Moshe.
The saying goes, "The graveyard is full of people who thought they were irreplaceable" (it is sourced as "Unknown").
Moshe was important and was an important part of the plan and an important part of the exodus from Egypt. But Hashem shows that if necessary, other people can fill the spot. It was not dependant on Moshe.
Aside from this being a lesson to Moshe or to each one of us individually that we are replaceable, it was a message to Pharoah that Moshe is leading the show here, but he is not really so important. If you think you can knock Moshe off and derail the whole thing, he is easily replaced.
We find that some of the plagues and earlier tricks used to sway people and/or Pharoah were performed by Aharon rather than by Moshe. Hashem specifically told Moshe on those occassions that Aharon should be the one to effect the specific plague.
It is true that these situations were symbols of gratitude - the earth had protected Moshe when he struck the Egyptian, so he hsould nto strike the earth. The Nile had protected Moshe when he was a baby, so he should not strike the waters, etc.. So Aharon performed those.
But it also shows us that the specific person is not so important. Moshe, in this case, was chosen to lead Israel out of Egypt because of specific qualities he had within him. But Hashem bringing these plagues via Aharon instead of via Moshe shows that Moshe was just as replaceable as anyone else. Hashem was not bound to Moshe.
The saying goes, "The graveyard is full of people who thought they were irreplaceable" (it is sourced as "Unknown").
Moshe was important and was an important part of the plan and an important part of the exodus from Egypt. But Hashem shows that if necessary, other people can fill the spot. It was not dependant on Moshe.
Aside from this being a lesson to Moshe or to each one of us individually that we are replaceable, it was a message to Pharoah that Moshe is leading the show here, but he is not really so important. If you think you can knock Moshe off and derail the whole thing, he is easily replaced.
Va'Eira: never pay in advance
Parshat Va'Eira
During the plagues, a number of times Pharoah acquiesced to letting the people leave Egypt due to the harshness of the plague. He would call in Moshe and say "Fine, I will let you go pray to your God" or "I will let you go free" then he would say "Just pray to get rid of the plague".
Moshe would then beseech Hashem to remove the plague. Subsequently, Pharoah would rescind his initial agreement.
I see 2 lessons in this:
1. An agreement arrived at under duress is easily reversed. Aftyer Pharoah rescinded we do not find Moshe goign to protest and saying but you agreed, etc. Pharoah rescinded claiming he was forced to agree, and there was nothing to protest.
2. Never pay in advance of receiving the goods and services. Moshe would pray, the plague would be removed, and Pharoah would not let them out. Moshe should have said "I will pray for you when we are two days away", but he prayed first and then relied on Pharoah's goodwill to keep his word, which he never did.
During the plagues, a number of times Pharoah acquiesced to letting the people leave Egypt due to the harshness of the plague. He would call in Moshe and say "Fine, I will let you go pray to your God" or "I will let you go free" then he would say "Just pray to get rid of the plague".
Moshe would then beseech Hashem to remove the plague. Subsequently, Pharoah would rescind his initial agreement.
I see 2 lessons in this:
1. An agreement arrived at under duress is easily reversed. Aftyer Pharoah rescinded we do not find Moshe goign to protest and saying but you agreed, etc. Pharoah rescinded claiming he was forced to agree, and there was nothing to protest.
2. Never pay in advance of receiving the goods and services. Moshe would pray, the plague would be removed, and Pharoah would not let them out. Moshe should have said "I will pray for you when we are two days away", but he prayed first and then relied on Pharoah's goodwill to keep his word, which he never did.
Va'Eira: choosing to be blind
Parshat Va'Eira
When Moshe and Aharon brought forth the various plagues, we sometimes find that the Egyptian wizards performed the same plague so as to show that Moshe's plague was just plain witchcraft rather than an act of God.
We find examples of this in 7:22 and 8:3 among other places.
People choose to be blind. They choose to reject what they see and understand, if it is not convenient. Moshe and Aharon were not performing magic tricks. They were not saying look how pwerful we are, we can do this trick or that trick. They were transmitting messages from Hashem and the specific magic "tricks" they performed were messages, signs and warnings for Pharoah.
Yet Pharoah chose to ignore it all simply because his magicians were able to replicate some of the specific tricks.
Note that they were not able to reverse the "magic" and turn the Nile River back into water from blood, or remove the frogs. Just the fact that they could replicate, at least in part, the "magic" that allowed Pharoah to remain in denial and choose to ignore what he saw.
The old adage "Seeing is Believing" is not really true. A person sees what he wants to see and hears what he wants to hear. Hashem can be sending you direct messages, but if you refuse to open your eyes and your mind, you can deny having ever received them.
When Moshe and Aharon brought forth the various plagues, we sometimes find that the Egyptian wizards performed the same plague so as to show that Moshe's plague was just plain witchcraft rather than an act of God.
We find examples of this in 7:22 and 8:3 among other places.
People choose to be blind. They choose to reject what they see and understand, if it is not convenient. Moshe and Aharon were not performing magic tricks. They were not saying look how pwerful we are, we can do this trick or that trick. They were transmitting messages from Hashem and the specific magic "tricks" they performed were messages, signs and warnings for Pharoah.
Yet Pharoah chose to ignore it all simply because his magicians were able to replicate some of the specific tricks.
Note that they were not able to reverse the "magic" and turn the Nile River back into water from blood, or remove the frogs. Just the fact that they could replicate, at least in part, the "magic" that allowed Pharoah to remain in denial and choose to ignore what he saw.
The old adage "Seeing is Believing" is not really true. A person sees what he wants to see and hears what he wants to hear. Hashem can be sending you direct messages, but if you refuse to open your eyes and your mind, you can deny having ever received them.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Shmos: keeping it secret
Parshat Shmos
In 4:18, after Hashem gives Moshe instructions about going back to Egypt and talking to Pharoah, etc... Moshe goes back to his family and Yisro and he tells them he has to go back to Egypt to see how they are doing there....
Why did he not tell them the truth? Was he afraid they would not believe him? would they try to talk him out of it? would they think he was crazy?
This shows us that when a person has a plan, when he is working on a big project, don't tell people what you are doing. Even those close to you. They will steal your thunder, they will try to talk you out of it, they will ruin it somehow. Get the project rolling and then tell them when they can no longer ruin it for you.
Anybody?
In 4:18, after Hashem gives Moshe instructions about going back to Egypt and talking to Pharoah, etc... Moshe goes back to his family and Yisro and he tells them he has to go back to Egypt to see how they are doing there....
Why did he not tell them the truth? Was he afraid they would not believe him? would they try to talk him out of it? would they think he was crazy?
This shows us that when a person has a plan, when he is working on a big project, don't tell people what you are doing. Even those close to you. They will steal your thunder, they will try to talk you out of it, they will ruin it somehow. Get the project rolling and then tell them when they can no longer ruin it for you.
Anybody?
Shmos: gotta know when to hold 'em
Parshat Shmos
Moshe was given a series of three signs (previously mentioned as tricks, or magic tricks) with which to convince the people of Israel to trust in him and follow him. First he would use one sign, and of they still do not believe then the second, then the third.
If the third sign was the mother load and that was so strong it would do the job the first two could not do, why not just use the third sign right away? Why bother with the first two at all?
You never reveal your best hand until it is necessary. Sign #3 represented a very powerful message. It carried a very strong threat to the Egyptians and represented a very bold move by the Hebrews. You do not want to give that away unless it is absolutely necessary.
First try other things, then if it is still necessary, go for the nuclear attack.
Moshe was given a series of three signs (previously mentioned as tricks, or magic tricks) with which to convince the people of Israel to trust in him and follow him. First he would use one sign, and of they still do not believe then the second, then the third.
If the third sign was the mother load and that was so strong it would do the job the first two could not do, why not just use the third sign right away? Why bother with the first two at all?
You never reveal your best hand until it is necessary. Sign #3 represented a very powerful message. It carried a very strong threat to the Egyptians and represented a very bold move by the Hebrews. You do not want to give that away unless it is absolutely necessary.
First try other things, then if it is still necessary, go for the nuclear attack.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Shmos: attacking a national symbol
Parshat Shmos
In 4:9 we find Hashem had just performed two signs for Moshe for him to relate to the people to gain their trust. Now the passuk says, and if they still do not believe you here is a third trick, as He explains to Moshe to turn some water from the Nile to blood in front of them.
if they do not believe after the first two, why would they believe after the third?
And anyways, why would any "magic trick" help to gain their trust - they are living in Egypt. Egypt is the center of the world for magic and black arts. Why should they be impressed just because Moshe can pull off a couple of stunts?
I would say it was not the magic that was important to sway the people. Anybody could do magic. It was the symbols and meanings behind it that were important. The third trick is one where Moshe takes water from the Nile and turns it to blood.
Moshe, by doing that, is openly and brazenly attacking the national symbol of Egypt. Rashi goes further and says Hashem was sending a message by this trick that He would attack and destroy the gods of Egypt first (the Nile was respected as a god).
The idea si that the specific action had meaning and was not just a simple magic trick. Each of the three tricks had increasingly powerful messages, so someone who had more faith might be swayed at the first trick, someone else at the second, and those who still did not believe after two tricks, would definitely be swayed by the third, with the most powerful message. No matter how stubborn they were, they could not ignore message #3.
Moshe being brazen enough to attack Egypt at its national symbol is a powerful message.
In 4:9 we find Hashem had just performed two signs for Moshe for him to relate to the people to gain their trust. Now the passuk says, and if they still do not believe you here is a third trick, as He explains to Moshe to turn some water from the Nile to blood in front of them.
if they do not believe after the first two, why would they believe after the third?
And anyways, why would any "magic trick" help to gain their trust - they are living in Egypt. Egypt is the center of the world for magic and black arts. Why should they be impressed just because Moshe can pull off a couple of stunts?
I would say it was not the magic that was important to sway the people. Anybody could do magic. It was the symbols and meanings behind it that were important. The third trick is one where Moshe takes water from the Nile and turns it to blood.
Moshe, by doing that, is openly and brazenly attacking the national symbol of Egypt. Rashi goes further and says Hashem was sending a message by this trick that He would attack and destroy the gods of Egypt first (the Nile was respected as a god).
The idea si that the specific action had meaning and was not just a simple magic trick. Each of the three tricks had increasingly powerful messages, so someone who had more faith might be swayed at the first trick, someone else at the second, and those who still did not believe after two tricks, would definitely be swayed by the third, with the most powerful message. No matter how stubborn they were, they could not ignore message #3.
Moshe being brazen enough to attack Egypt at its national symbol is a powerful message.
Shmos: a land filled with bowling alleys
Parshat Shmos
In 3:8 Hashem contacts Moshe from the Burning Bush and tells him that He hears the cries of the people, and He sees their pain and he will take them out of Egypt. He says "I will bring you to a good land, flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Cnaani, Hiti, Emori, Prizi, Hivi, and Yevusi."
Why mention that it is a place of these people -if he is trying to entice them to follow His lead, he should keep quiet about these nations living there and only tell them later. These nations were hostile - them being in the land means the people know in advance there will be conflicts, wars, and problems as they will try to uproot nations already living there. So why mention it here? It seems counterproductive! This would just scare them off!
Maybe Hashem is mentioning it to show them that He is not bringing them to an empty, desolate land. He is bringing them to an inhabited place. There are homes, there are shopping malls, bowling alleys, baseball fields, everything a person could want. So saying people already live there should not scare them off, but make it even more desirable for them.
In 3:8 Hashem contacts Moshe from the Burning Bush and tells him that He hears the cries of the people, and He sees their pain and he will take them out of Egypt. He says "I will bring you to a good land, flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Cnaani, Hiti, Emori, Prizi, Hivi, and Yevusi."
Why mention that it is a place of these people -if he is trying to entice them to follow His lead, he should keep quiet about these nations living there and only tell them later. These nations were hostile - them being in the land means the people know in advance there will be conflicts, wars, and problems as they will try to uproot nations already living there. So why mention it here? It seems counterproductive! This would just scare them off!
Maybe Hashem is mentioning it to show them that He is not bringing them to an empty, desolate land. He is bringing them to an inhabited place. There are homes, there are shopping malls, bowling alleys, baseball fields, everything a person could want. So saying people already live there should not scare them off, but make it even more desirable for them.
Shmos: big brother government
Parshat Shmos
In 2:12-14 we find Moshe going out from the palace to see the people. He sees an Egyptian man striking a Jew. The passuk says, "ויפן כה וכה וירא כי אין איש....כאשר הרגת את האיש" Moshe turned this way and that, saw there was no person around and he smote the Egyptian... Then he bumps into 2 jews fighting with each other. When he attempts to break up the fight, they ask if he is going to kill them like he killed the Egyptian.
What happened - we know Moshe looked all around to make sure nobody was in sight before he did anything, so how did they know about it?
You can never be sure nobody is looking. If you are going to do something sensitive, unless you are in the privacy of your own home, you have to act with the assumption that somebody might be watching. Even if you look around and take all the protection you possibly can, chances are reasonable that somebody might be watching.
Act accordingly. A person should always be aware that somebody is watching. That somebody might only be Hashem, and you should act appropriately, but even if you are doing nothing wrong, that somebody watching might be not just Hashem but someone human as well.
In 2:12-14 we find Moshe going out from the palace to see the people. He sees an Egyptian man striking a Jew. The passuk says, "ויפן כה וכה וירא כי אין איש....כאשר הרגת את האיש" Moshe turned this way and that, saw there was no person around and he smote the Egyptian... Then he bumps into 2 jews fighting with each other. When he attempts to break up the fight, they ask if he is going to kill them like he killed the Egyptian.
What happened - we know Moshe looked all around to make sure nobody was in sight before he did anything, so how did they know about it?
You can never be sure nobody is looking. If you are going to do something sensitive, unless you are in the privacy of your own home, you have to act with the assumption that somebody might be watching. Even if you look around and take all the protection you possibly can, chances are reasonable that somebody might be watching.
Act accordingly. A person should always be aware that somebody is watching. That somebody might only be Hashem, and you should act appropriately, but even if you are doing nothing wrong, that somebody watching might be not just Hashem but someone human as well.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Va'Yehi: knowing your place
Parshat Va'Yehi
In 50:4-5 we find Yosef asking Pharoah for permission to go and bury his dead father.
1. It says Yosef spoke to the house of Pharoah and requested they pass on his request to Pharoah.
Wasn't Yosef the "Second to the King"? Why did he have to go through Pharoah's secretary for this? why could he not just go right to Pharoah and ask for himself? Yosef just spent about 14 years running Egypt and saving it from collapse in the famine, you would think he had Pharoah's ear and could ask him what he wanted when he wanted...
2. Why did Yosef need Pharoah's permission to go bury his father? Yosef just saved Egypt from collapse. He is second to the king. He is responsible for making the most important decisions in Egypt over the past 14 years or so. And Yosef needs to ask permission to go bury his dead father?
My only suggestion is that despite Yosef's importance, when something becomes personal previous relationships do not matter. Pharoah was concerned to let Yosef leave Egypt. He was concerned about letting Yaakov be buried outside of Egypt. These possibilities held a threat, Pharoah perceived at least, to Egypt. So it did not matter how important Yosef was. With Pharoah perceiving a threat, Yosef's importance was insignificant to him. He made sure to let Yosef know that in this regard he could not move without Pharoah's permission.
It is an important lesson about knowing your place and not thinking you have a free pass based on previous actions.
Anybody have something better?
In 50:4-5 we find Yosef asking Pharoah for permission to go and bury his dead father.
1. It says Yosef spoke to the house of Pharoah and requested they pass on his request to Pharoah.
Wasn't Yosef the "Second to the King"? Why did he have to go through Pharoah's secretary for this? why could he not just go right to Pharoah and ask for himself? Yosef just spent about 14 years running Egypt and saving it from collapse in the famine, you would think he had Pharoah's ear and could ask him what he wanted when he wanted...
2. Why did Yosef need Pharoah's permission to go bury his father? Yosef just saved Egypt from collapse. He is second to the king. He is responsible for making the most important decisions in Egypt over the past 14 years or so. And Yosef needs to ask permission to go bury his dead father?
My only suggestion is that despite Yosef's importance, when something becomes personal previous relationships do not matter. Pharoah was concerned to let Yosef leave Egypt. He was concerned about letting Yaakov be buried outside of Egypt. These possibilities held a threat, Pharoah perceived at least, to Egypt. So it did not matter how important Yosef was. With Pharoah perceiving a threat, Yosef's importance was insignificant to him. He made sure to let Yosef know that in this regard he could not move without Pharoah's permission.
It is an important lesson about knowing your place and not thinking you have a free pass based on previous actions.
Anybody have something better?
Va'Yehi: why shchem?
Parshat Va'Yehi
in 48:21 Yaakov tells Yosef, "ואני נתתי שכם אחד על אחיך" and Rashi explains that he actually gave to Yosef the city of Shchem which was above his regular portion which he was to receive.
Why Shchem? He could have given Yosef a different city as a gift. Why Shchem? Shchem, if it should have gone to anybody outside his inheritance, should maybe have gone to Shimon or Levi who destroyed it to save their sisters honor. Why would Yaakov give Shchem to Yosef?
Also, I looked at a map (not a great one) delineating the portions of the tribal divisions in Israel. Shchem is inside the portion of Menashe. So it was not really above and beyond the inheritance of Yosef. It was part of his portion anyways? Unless you say that the area of Shchem was not supposed to be part of Menashe (I guess it would have gone to Binyamin whose region borders Menashe's) but more land was included for contiguity between the rest of Menashe and Shchem...
Anybody?
in 48:21 Yaakov tells Yosef, "ואני נתתי שכם אחד על אחיך" and Rashi explains that he actually gave to Yosef the city of Shchem which was above his regular portion which he was to receive.
Why Shchem? He could have given Yosef a different city as a gift. Why Shchem? Shchem, if it should have gone to anybody outside his inheritance, should maybe have gone to Shimon or Levi who destroyed it to save their sisters honor. Why would Yaakov give Shchem to Yosef?
Also, I looked at a map (not a great one) delineating the portions of the tribal divisions in Israel. Shchem is inside the portion of Menashe. So it was not really above and beyond the inheritance of Yosef. It was part of his portion anyways? Unless you say that the area of Shchem was not supposed to be part of Menashe (I guess it would have gone to Binyamin whose region borders Menashe's) but more land was included for contiguity between the rest of Menashe and Shchem...
Anybody?
Va'Yehi: letting opportunity slip away
Parshat Va'Yehi
In 48:1, Yosef finds out that his father is nearing the time of his death. He takes his two sons and goes to visit Yaakov and receive brachos from him.
We do not find any of the other sons bringing their kids for brachos, though we do find Yaakov gathering his sons and giving them brachos.
But here we find Yosef doing something none of the other brothers did. Yosef saw an opportunity and realized that it was slipping away. In a little while there would never be this opportunity again. If he wanted it to happen, he had to act right away. If he wanted to make sure his sons would get blessings from their grandfather Yaakov, he had to go right now.
Yosef realized this. Maybe he was the only one of the sons who realized it, or who had the perception to act and to take advantage of such an opportunity.
We can learn from Yosef about the importance of recognizing and being aware of the situation, and not letting opportunity slip away.
In 48:1, Yosef finds out that his father is nearing the time of his death. He takes his two sons and goes to visit Yaakov and receive brachos from him.
We do not find any of the other sons bringing their kids for brachos, though we do find Yaakov gathering his sons and giving them brachos.
But here we find Yosef doing something none of the other brothers did. Yosef saw an opportunity and realized that it was slipping away. In a little while there would never be this opportunity again. If he wanted it to happen, he had to act right away. If he wanted to make sure his sons would get blessings from their grandfather Yaakov, he had to go right now.
Yosef realized this. Maybe he was the only one of the sons who realized it, or who had the perception to act and to take advantage of such an opportunity.
We can learn from Yosef about the importance of recognizing and being aware of the situation, and not letting opportunity slip away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
