If God Owns the Whole Universe, Why do I have to Give Him My Hard Earned?
“And Hashem spoke to Moshe to say: “Speak to the Bnei Yisroel and take for me trumoh, from each man whose heart volunteers him take my trumoh”” Shemos 25:1-2
“And make for me a Mikdosh, and I will dwell amongst you.” Shemos 25:8
Hashem tells Moshe to take building materials from any one who volunteers them.
After telling him this, He tells him to build a Mikdosh and Hashem will thus dwell amongst Bnei Yisroel.
Onkelos translates Trumoh as a separating; the posuk says that anyone who wants to donate should “separate a separating.” This repetition could indicate that this donation has to be actively separated – there has to be an action of separation, and that once separated, the materials have to be set aside for their holy purpose.
The word Mikdosh is a derivation of Kodesh, “holy” or literally, set aside, (Something holy is set aside for holy purposes).
Rashi explains the phrase, “And make for me a Mikdosh” as meaning “Make in my name a holy/separated house”. Thus, once a “house”, set aside for godly purposes, is made for Hashem, then he will dwell amongst us.
Why without a Mikdosh will Hashem refrain from dwelling amongst us?
Why do the contributions have to be volunteered? Moshe had the status of King over the Jewish People in the desert; he could have raised a tax to acquire the required materials!
I should like to suggest by means of an answer, that to build a sanctuary for God in this world and allow His Shechinah to dwell amongst us, (in whatever sense that means – we talk about Shechinah a lot but that doesn’t make it a simple concept), will result in great closeness to Him. To achieve a sense of closeness to any person, requires a will to do so. All the more so, to achieve this sense of closeness to Hashem, who’s so beyond our comprehension, needs a will on our part. To attempt to cause Him to “dwell” amongst us in this world with a compulsory tax, extracted from everybody against their will can’t work! Therefore the materials had to be donated; a will had to be there on the part of Bnei Yisroel.
Rabbi Shmuel Birenbaum (of blessed memory – Rosh Yeshiva of Mir in America) explains in B’krai Shmoi why the request for contributions preceded the command to build a Mikdosh and the explanation of what that Mikdosh will result in. Were the whole nation to know for what a great purpose they were donating from their hard earned wealth, this may allow ulterior motives to creep into the giving. A request for donations “from the heart” will ensure that only love of God will motivate the givers.
R’ Shmuel uses this to demonstrate the greatness of the act of building the Mishkon; the whole of the heavens and the Earth can’t provide a dwelling for His Shechinah and yet in our parsha Hashem instructs Moshe to do just that! Not only this, but it has to be funded by people giving away the booty which they had traveled across Egypt and the shore of the Yam Suf to collect, for an unknown purpose, in the name of Hashem!
I think that this can also be used to develop my answer above; that the donations were to be motivated purely by an expression of love for Hashem.
Note:
(The Brisker Rov also deals with why the materials had to be donated before the commandment of building the Mikdosh.
The Halocho is that the Mikdish has to be built with communal funds, belonging to the whole of Klal Yisroel, by the whole of the nation. Therefore the materials had to be donated by the respective individuals to the communal funds, then sanctified and used for the building).
A (very) brief biography of HaRav Shmuel Birnbam can be found at my other blog, Jewish Fundamentalim.
Jewishfundamentalim.blogspot.com
(See link in links box)
Tuesday 24 February 2009
Tuesday 17 February 2009
Parshas Mishpotim
Money, Money, Money
“And these are the statutes that you shall put before yourselves.” Shemos 21:1
Onkelos translates this verse as “And these are the laws that you shall order before yourselves” This adds an element of a requirement of orderliness and arrangement of the commandments taught in the parsha.
This leads into Rashi’s explanation that Hashem told Moshe that these laws should not be studied until known, rather the reasons and explanations of the laws have to be studied, the word “Tasim”, (which I translated as “put”) connotes that these laws should be like a set table ready for a person to eat from. That is, everybody should be well versed in these laws and understand them fully, not just in terms of practical halacha but to understand the fundamental underlying principles.
Does this exhortation apply exclusively to the mitzvos of this parsha or to all of the mitzvos of the Torah? (Perhaps a binyan av could tell us to apply this concept across the Torah – the Torah chose to put this posuk here but intended it to apply generally, just as it applies here, it applies everywhere unless otherwise indicated).
Why were these financial laws chosen for this exhortation?
The Ponim Yafos, (Rabbi Pinchas HaLevy Horowitz of Frankfurt), quotes the Gemoro at the end of Bava Basra, (175a), to illustrate this verse: “Rabbi Yishmael says, “One who wishes to become wise should involve himself in monetary laws, for there is no connectedness in the Torah greater than in these laws and they are like an abundant well”.
He continues to explain that all monetary laws are based on concepts which can be arrived at through analysis, (wisdom and sense), and are similar to one another. This is not the case with other Mitzvos which have laws that are specific to that particular Mitzvah and the principles don’t necessarily transfer to other areas of halocho.
According to this, the Torah specified that these monetary laws expressed in the Parsha should be studied diligently in order to understand the underlying principles, since the Mitzvos expressed here are precisely those which will lead to wisdom if studied correctly.
However, this is not the simple understanding of the verse, rather a drosh, (allegorical interpretation). Therefore it is still possible to say that in “simple” pshat terms the verse applies to all Mitzvos.
The Nefesh HaChaim and the the Ramo (in the introduction to his commentary on Megilas Ester), (and probably several other seforim which I havn’t seen), explain that the Torah takes on an outer dressing appropriate to that spiritual world in which it is in. Thus in our physical world, it deals with physical matters, such as monetary law and the stories of the fathers of the Nation of Yisroel, the dressing of the spiritual principles, applying them to this world . The Torah in the highest spiritual planes is without this dressing, and that which is allegorical in the Torah as given to us is the simple meaning there. (I’m not saying that I understand this, or that it’s simple!)
The Chida, (Rabbi Chaim Yosef David Azulay), writes in Nachal Kedomim, that each word and letter of Torah has many hidden meanings which were transmitted to Moshe by Hashem. The vav of “v’eleh”, (the “and” of the “And these…”), indicates that “these statutes” are in addition to something else. The Chida explains this something else as referring to the hidden meanings of the Torah, as opposed to the “dressing” to apply it to our world denoted by the eleh, (these). These laws, as the dressing of the Torah for our world are what are placed in front of us, written expressly in the Torah. The hidden meanings, in this world are reserved for certain worthy individuals. The revealed Torah is what we are required to toil in, in order to adhere to Hashem’s Mitzvos in this world and is the primary means of connecting with Hashem. The hidden is for those who have already mastered the revealed – no matter how exciting the hidden part of Torah may seem.
According to this, the admonition to become fully expert in the laws and their workings would apply to the whole of the Torah, there is no reason that this should apply to monetary law more than any other area, (although perhaps monetary halocho is Mitzvos at their most worldly).
This would appear to conflict with the Ponim Yafos, however, more than one allegorical meaning can exist in any given verse, since this is anyway not the simple literal meaning of that verse. Two contradicting literal readings cannot coexist, but drosh anyway presupposes several interpretations.
This was fun, but didn’t answer the questions above!
The Ikar Sifsei Chachomim understands Rashi’s explanation of “place” as referring to gaining the greatest expertise and understanding as being necessitated by the unusual word “put”, rather than the usual “Hashem spoke” or “said”. Since the Torah has changed its language here, there must be an additional connotation beyond the regular transmitting of law from Hashem to Moshe, thus the explanation of the verse as an exhortation to understand the reasoning of the Torah.
Of course, we can still ask whether the change in language indicates something particular to this parsha, or something general, applicable to the whole Torah.
Perhaps, we can use the allegorical interpretations of the Ponim Yafos and the Chida on a pshat, (literal), level.
The Torah wanted to exhort us to delve into the reasoning of the Torah in all laws. According to the Nefesh HaChaim, this amounts to instant deveikus, (closeness), to Hashem. Why should this be restricted to monetary halocho? Thus the v’eleh will tell us to gain understanding on the laws which have been put before us – the revealed Torah as a whole. However, the Torah chose the parsha of the monetary laws for this exhortation because of their interconnectedness and their lending themselves to the development of wisdom and technique in Torah study. (It could be that the Torah indicates this as a starting point in Torah study; yeshivos focus on the masechtos dealing with these laws, leaving intensive study of other areas of halocho for students already versed in monetary halocho).
Thus, two apparently allegorical interpretations of the verse have been combined to understand the pshat!
Gut Shabbos
“And these are the statutes that you shall put before yourselves.” Shemos 21:1
Onkelos translates this verse as “And these are the laws that you shall order before yourselves” This adds an element of a requirement of orderliness and arrangement of the commandments taught in the parsha.
This leads into Rashi’s explanation that Hashem told Moshe that these laws should not be studied until known, rather the reasons and explanations of the laws have to be studied, the word “Tasim”, (which I translated as “put”) connotes that these laws should be like a set table ready for a person to eat from. That is, everybody should be well versed in these laws and understand them fully, not just in terms of practical halacha but to understand the fundamental underlying principles.
Does this exhortation apply exclusively to the mitzvos of this parsha or to all of the mitzvos of the Torah? (Perhaps a binyan av could tell us to apply this concept across the Torah – the Torah chose to put this posuk here but intended it to apply generally, just as it applies here, it applies everywhere unless otherwise indicated).
Why were these financial laws chosen for this exhortation?
The Ponim Yafos, (Rabbi Pinchas HaLevy Horowitz of Frankfurt), quotes the Gemoro at the end of Bava Basra, (175a), to illustrate this verse: “Rabbi Yishmael says, “One who wishes to become wise should involve himself in monetary laws, for there is no connectedness in the Torah greater than in these laws and they are like an abundant well”.
He continues to explain that all monetary laws are based on concepts which can be arrived at through analysis, (wisdom and sense), and are similar to one another. This is not the case with other Mitzvos which have laws that are specific to that particular Mitzvah and the principles don’t necessarily transfer to other areas of halocho.
According to this, the Torah specified that these monetary laws expressed in the Parsha should be studied diligently in order to understand the underlying principles, since the Mitzvos expressed here are precisely those which will lead to wisdom if studied correctly.
However, this is not the simple understanding of the verse, rather a drosh, (allegorical interpretation). Therefore it is still possible to say that in “simple” pshat terms the verse applies to all Mitzvos.
The Nefesh HaChaim and the the Ramo (in the introduction to his commentary on Megilas Ester), (and probably several other seforim which I havn’t seen), explain that the Torah takes on an outer dressing appropriate to that spiritual world in which it is in. Thus in our physical world, it deals with physical matters, such as monetary law and the stories of the fathers of the Nation of Yisroel, the dressing of the spiritual principles, applying them to this world . The Torah in the highest spiritual planes is without this dressing, and that which is allegorical in the Torah as given to us is the simple meaning there. (I’m not saying that I understand this, or that it’s simple!)
The Chida, (Rabbi Chaim Yosef David Azulay), writes in Nachal Kedomim, that each word and letter of Torah has many hidden meanings which were transmitted to Moshe by Hashem. The vav of “v’eleh”, (the “and” of the “And these…”), indicates that “these statutes” are in addition to something else. The Chida explains this something else as referring to the hidden meanings of the Torah, as opposed to the “dressing” to apply it to our world denoted by the eleh, (these). These laws, as the dressing of the Torah for our world are what are placed in front of us, written expressly in the Torah. The hidden meanings, in this world are reserved for certain worthy individuals. The revealed Torah is what we are required to toil in, in order to adhere to Hashem’s Mitzvos in this world and is the primary means of connecting with Hashem. The hidden is for those who have already mastered the revealed – no matter how exciting the hidden part of Torah may seem.
According to this, the admonition to become fully expert in the laws and their workings would apply to the whole of the Torah, there is no reason that this should apply to monetary law more than any other area, (although perhaps monetary halocho is Mitzvos at their most worldly).
This would appear to conflict with the Ponim Yafos, however, more than one allegorical meaning can exist in any given verse, since this is anyway not the simple literal meaning of that verse. Two contradicting literal readings cannot coexist, but drosh anyway presupposes several interpretations.
This was fun, but didn’t answer the questions above!
The Ikar Sifsei Chachomim understands Rashi’s explanation of “place” as referring to gaining the greatest expertise and understanding as being necessitated by the unusual word “put”, rather than the usual “Hashem spoke” or “said”. Since the Torah has changed its language here, there must be an additional connotation beyond the regular transmitting of law from Hashem to Moshe, thus the explanation of the verse as an exhortation to understand the reasoning of the Torah.
Of course, we can still ask whether the change in language indicates something particular to this parsha, or something general, applicable to the whole Torah.
Perhaps, we can use the allegorical interpretations of the Ponim Yafos and the Chida on a pshat, (literal), level.
The Torah wanted to exhort us to delve into the reasoning of the Torah in all laws. According to the Nefesh HaChaim, this amounts to instant deveikus, (closeness), to Hashem. Why should this be restricted to monetary halocho? Thus the v’eleh will tell us to gain understanding on the laws which have been put before us – the revealed Torah as a whole. However, the Torah chose the parsha of the monetary laws for this exhortation because of their interconnectedness and their lending themselves to the development of wisdom and technique in Torah study. (It could be that the Torah indicates this as a starting point in Torah study; yeshivos focus on the masechtos dealing with these laws, leaving intensive study of other areas of halocho for students already versed in monetary halocho).
Thus, two apparently allegorical interpretations of the verse have been combined to understand the pshat!
Gut Shabbos
Tuesday 10 February 2009
Yisro
“And Yisro the priest of Midian, the father-in-law of Moshe heard all that Elokim had done to Moshe and to Yisroel His people, for Hashem had taken Yisroel out of Egypt.” (Shemos, 18:1)
………………….
“And Yisro, the father-in-law of Moshe, and his, (Moshe’s) children and his wife came to Moshe, to the desert, where he had encamped at the mountain of Elokim.” (Shemos, 18:5)
Rashi writes on “And Yisro… heard”, “What did he hear to motivate him to come? The splitting of the sea and the battle with Amalek.”
This explanation of Rashi is based on the Gemoro in Zevochim, 116a: “What did Yisro hear to motivate him to come and convert? Rabbi Yehoshua says, “The battle with Amalek is what he heard that motivated him to come, etc.” Rabbi Elazar Hamodai says, “Matan Torah is what he heard that motivated him to come, (etc)” Rabbi Elazar says, “Krias Yam Suf (the splitting of the sea) is what motivated him to come, etc.”
All three of the Tanaim, quote from verses to support their opinions. (Our focus is on Rashi, therefore I havn’t quoted the whole piece).
We can see from this, that Rashi has combined the reasons of R’ Yehoshua and R’ Elazar, leaving aside the explanation of R’ Elazar Hamodai.
The Maharal writing in his commentary on Rashi, Gur Aryeh, explains that the miracle that motivated Yisro to travel to Moshe could not have been any of the ten plagues because they took place over a period of one year, he could have come several months before he did. In addition, it can’t be that only after hearing of all ten he was motivated to come, because if one was insufficient, two or more of the same magnitude of miracle would also be insufficient, (we’ll come back to this later).
The Maharal explains that Rashi doesn’t quote the opinion of R’ Elazar Hamodai because the parsha of Yisro’s arrival is related before Matan Torah. Thus his opinion is not in line with the simplest meaning of the text, (we try to keep the Torah chronological unless there is need to say that an earlier passage happened after a later one – the principle “there is no earlier and later in the Torah” is not a line of first resort, hence for example Bereishis is accepted as taking place before Shemos), Yisro couldn’t have heard about it because it hadn’t happened yet. (R’ Elazar Hamodai has reasons for moving away from the simplest meaning and invoking “there is no earlier and later in the Torah”, but Rashi focuses on the simplest meaning and explanation in his commentary).
Now we’re left with the splitting of the sea and the battle with Amalek. The battle with Amalek immediately precedes the Parsha of Yisro’s arrival and therefore is the most simple explanation contextually. However, the end of the verse, (18:1), says, “for Hashem had taken Yisroel out of Egypt”, therefore the Krias Yam Suf, the greatest of all the miracles involved in the escape from Egypt, (as Rashi says), must also be included in the reason for Yisro coming.
Therefore we can see from this that Rabbi Elazar Hamodai says that Matan Torah and Krias Yam Suf were what inspired Yisro to come, and Rabbi Yehoshua says that it was the battle with Amalek and Krias Yam Suf.
Krias Yam Suf demonstrated a total control of Hashem over the land – all of the waters in the world split to reveal dry land. During the battle with Amelek the sun stood still, demonstrating a total control of Hashem over the heavens. These were both of greater magnitude than anything which had occurred during the ten plagues. They were all localized and demonstrated control of only one aspect of creation at a time, something which idolaters also attribute to their idols, (if every polytheistic pantheon there is a god of thunder, a god of the seas etc.). Therefore in the Egyptian plagues there was no unarguable proof as to the greatness of Hashem.
However, these two miracles together demonstrated a comprehensive control over the heavens and the earth.
Therefore, Rabbi Elazar holds that the demonstration of total mastery over the earth was sufficient to inspire Yisro to join Klal Yisroel, Rabbi Yehoshua holds that only after an additional demonstration of mastery over the heaves as well was Yisro motivated to do so. (Rabbi Elazar Hamodai holds that Matan Torah, demonstrating mastery over Olam Haba and spirituality was required in addition to convince Yisro).
So, returning to Rashi, he explains that the demonstration of Hashem’s mastery over the heavens and the earth, being the two simplest ways of explaining the verse, (in addition to the most tangible – Yisro could see the land/water and sky, Torah doesn’t have a physical manifestation), together motivated Yisro to come.
We may not see open miracles in our times, but, someone sensitive to spirituality can appreciate many instances of Divine influence in our lives, in the lives of others and in the life of Klal Yisroel as a whole.
The Torah, Nevi’im and Kesuvim tell us of the open miracles that Hashem performed for our fathers.
When Yisro heard of these miracles, he left his land, religion and culture to convert, all the more so, we can leave behind the alien mindsets which we have acquired during the long torment of our exile and strengthen ourselves towards greater faith and trust in Hashem by contemplating both the miracles of the Torah and the miracles we see today.
………………….
“And Yisro, the father-in-law of Moshe, and his, (Moshe’s) children and his wife came to Moshe, to the desert, where he had encamped at the mountain of Elokim.” (Shemos, 18:5)
Rashi writes on “And Yisro… heard”, “What did he hear to motivate him to come? The splitting of the sea and the battle with Amalek.”
This explanation of Rashi is based on the Gemoro in Zevochim, 116a: “What did Yisro hear to motivate him to come and convert? Rabbi Yehoshua says, “The battle with Amalek is what he heard that motivated him to come, etc.” Rabbi Elazar Hamodai says, “Matan Torah is what he heard that motivated him to come, (etc)” Rabbi Elazar says, “Krias Yam Suf (the splitting of the sea) is what motivated him to come, etc.”
All three of the Tanaim, quote from verses to support their opinions. (Our focus is on Rashi, therefore I havn’t quoted the whole piece).
We can see from this, that Rashi has combined the reasons of R’ Yehoshua and R’ Elazar, leaving aside the explanation of R’ Elazar Hamodai.
The Maharal writing in his commentary on Rashi, Gur Aryeh, explains that the miracle that motivated Yisro to travel to Moshe could not have been any of the ten plagues because they took place over a period of one year, he could have come several months before he did. In addition, it can’t be that only after hearing of all ten he was motivated to come, because if one was insufficient, two or more of the same magnitude of miracle would also be insufficient, (we’ll come back to this later).
The Maharal explains that Rashi doesn’t quote the opinion of R’ Elazar Hamodai because the parsha of Yisro’s arrival is related before Matan Torah. Thus his opinion is not in line with the simplest meaning of the text, (we try to keep the Torah chronological unless there is need to say that an earlier passage happened after a later one – the principle “there is no earlier and later in the Torah” is not a line of first resort, hence for example Bereishis is accepted as taking place before Shemos), Yisro couldn’t have heard about it because it hadn’t happened yet. (R’ Elazar Hamodai has reasons for moving away from the simplest meaning and invoking “there is no earlier and later in the Torah”, but Rashi focuses on the simplest meaning and explanation in his commentary).
Now we’re left with the splitting of the sea and the battle with Amalek. The battle with Amalek immediately precedes the Parsha of Yisro’s arrival and therefore is the most simple explanation contextually. However, the end of the verse, (18:1), says, “for Hashem had taken Yisroel out of Egypt”, therefore the Krias Yam Suf, the greatest of all the miracles involved in the escape from Egypt, (as Rashi says), must also be included in the reason for Yisro coming.
Therefore we can see from this that Rabbi Elazar Hamodai says that Matan Torah and Krias Yam Suf were what inspired Yisro to come, and Rabbi Yehoshua says that it was the battle with Amalek and Krias Yam Suf.
Krias Yam Suf demonstrated a total control of Hashem over the land – all of the waters in the world split to reveal dry land. During the battle with Amelek the sun stood still, demonstrating a total control of Hashem over the heavens. These were both of greater magnitude than anything which had occurred during the ten plagues. They were all localized and demonstrated control of only one aspect of creation at a time, something which idolaters also attribute to their idols, (if every polytheistic pantheon there is a god of thunder, a god of the seas etc.). Therefore in the Egyptian plagues there was no unarguable proof as to the greatness of Hashem.
However, these two miracles together demonstrated a comprehensive control over the heavens and the earth.
Therefore, Rabbi Elazar holds that the demonstration of total mastery over the earth was sufficient to inspire Yisro to join Klal Yisroel, Rabbi Yehoshua holds that only after an additional demonstration of mastery over the heaves as well was Yisro motivated to do so. (Rabbi Elazar Hamodai holds that Matan Torah, demonstrating mastery over Olam Haba and spirituality was required in addition to convince Yisro).
So, returning to Rashi, he explains that the demonstration of Hashem’s mastery over the heavens and the earth, being the two simplest ways of explaining the verse, (in addition to the most tangible – Yisro could see the land/water and sky, Torah doesn’t have a physical manifestation), together motivated Yisro to come.
We may not see open miracles in our times, but, someone sensitive to spirituality can appreciate many instances of Divine influence in our lives, in the lives of others and in the life of Klal Yisroel as a whole.
The Torah, Nevi’im and Kesuvim tell us of the open miracles that Hashem performed for our fathers.
When Yisro heard of these miracles, he left his land, religion and culture to convert, all the more so, we can leave behind the alien mindsets which we have acquired during the long torment of our exile and strengthen ourselves towards greater faith and trust in Hashem by contemplating both the miracles of the Torah and the miracles we see today.
Monday 9 February 2009
Sunday 1 February 2009
Parshas B'shalach
Oi Vay!
“And it was, (Vayhi), as Paroh sent the people (out of Egypt)…..”
Chazal, (the sages of the Talmud), tell us that “Vay” – “And it…” is a loshon tzar; a linguistic device to indicate trouble and upset.
Therefore whenever a passage begins with the (vav/kometz/yud) “Vay..” prefix, something is wrong!
The most famous example is at the start of the Megilla, “And it was in the days of Achashverush…”, “Vayhi bimey Achashverush…” (Please excuse the transliterations, the site won’t let me paste Hebrew in from Word).
There the verse introduces us to the tale of the attempted genocide against the Jewish nation.
In the context of our parsha however, with the downtrodden children of Yakov Avinu, finally led out of the land of their enslavement as free men/women/people, what trouble and upset was there?! Wasn’t this a moment of unparalleled joy?
This is the question of R’ Yehonason Eibshitz in his work Tiferes Yehonason.
He explains that “the people”, (“Ha’am”), refers to the mixed multitude, or the Eiruv Rav, the large group of members of other nations, also enslaved in Egypt that left together with Yisroel.
The Egyptians were the world leaders in sorcery, R Yehonason explains, (and I have also heard in the name of the Gr”a), that Egyptian sorcerers were able to prevent slaves from leaving Egypt through their sorcery: The Eiruv Rav was only able to leave with Paroh’s permission.
But why would Paroh give everyone permission to leave? Just because Yisroel were leaving, did that call for giving up and letting everybody go?!
Rather, explains Rabbi Eibshitz, after being decidedly beaten by Hashem in the game of wills, Paroh knowingly did this in order to reduce Hashem’s Glory: If just Yisroel had left, it would have clearly been the work of God. If everybody left, the miracles of the plagues could be attributed to the idols of the other nations as well!
If the followers of idolatry also left en mass, how can you be sure that Hashem performed miracles on behalf of the Jewish people? Maybe it was the idols weighing in for their worshippers, either on their own or together with Hashem?
Thus Moshe and the whole Nation of Israel were upset, at what was supposed to be the moment of national relief and celebration, God’s honor had been reduced through Paroh’s latest scheme!
Why should they have been so upset though? Who cares about Hashem’s glory?!
The Chasam Sofer writes in one of his drashos, that, anyone who’s heart is completely with Hashem is able to perceive the spiritual feeling of mourning during the period of the three weeks between 17 Tamuz and 9 Av. Such people don’t need laws of mourning during this period, they are in sincere mourning anyway!
The hearts of Moshe and Klal Yisroel were at this point completely with Hashem, they could perceive this reduction in God’s glory! Thus they were pained by this to the extent that even at the moment of their freedom, they were preoccupied with this scheme of Paroh.
Most of us today do not feel pained at any reductions in God’s glory, it’s not an easy task in our generation! However, if we can at least realize that when Hashem’s honor is under attack se should feel upset, then this could be a start towards “resensitizing” ourselves to Hashem and spirituality!
Then there's Labor, the party that, at Camp David in 2000 and in the subsequent final months of president Clinton's administration, sought and failed to achieve a permanent agreement with the Yasser Arafat-led PA. I don't know whether, even as a junior coalition partner, it would push for further concessions than those considered by Barak back then. Those concessions, it will be recalled, fell some way short of the parameters apparently contemplated by Olmert in recent months. enders have warned that the is unlikely to recover this year, despite the government's suggestions that lending should be returned to 2007 levels.ohousing market unemployment foreign exvhange personal finaince
“And it was, (Vayhi), as Paroh sent the people (out of Egypt)…..”
Chazal, (the sages of the Talmud), tell us that “Vay” – “And it…” is a loshon tzar; a linguistic device to indicate trouble and upset.
Therefore whenever a passage begins with the (vav/kometz/yud) “Vay..” prefix, something is wrong!
The most famous example is at the start of the Megilla, “And it was in the days of Achashverush…”, “Vayhi bimey Achashverush…” (Please excuse the transliterations, the site won’t let me paste Hebrew in from Word).
There the verse introduces us to the tale of the attempted genocide against the Jewish nation.
In the context of our parsha however, with the downtrodden children of Yakov Avinu, finally led out of the land of their enslavement as free men/women/people, what trouble and upset was there?! Wasn’t this a moment of unparalleled joy?
This is the question of R’ Yehonason Eibshitz in his work Tiferes Yehonason.
He explains that “the people”, (“Ha’am”), refers to the mixed multitude, or the Eiruv Rav, the large group of members of other nations, also enslaved in Egypt that left together with Yisroel.
The Egyptians were the world leaders in sorcery, R Yehonason explains, (and I have also heard in the name of the Gr”a), that Egyptian sorcerers were able to prevent slaves from leaving Egypt through their sorcery: The Eiruv Rav was only able to leave with Paroh’s permission.
But why would Paroh give everyone permission to leave? Just because Yisroel were leaving, did that call for giving up and letting everybody go?!
Rather, explains Rabbi Eibshitz, after being decidedly beaten by Hashem in the game of wills, Paroh knowingly did this in order to reduce Hashem’s Glory: If just Yisroel had left, it would have clearly been the work of God. If everybody left, the miracles of the plagues could be attributed to the idols of the other nations as well!
If the followers of idolatry also left en mass, how can you be sure that Hashem performed miracles on behalf of the Jewish people? Maybe it was the idols weighing in for their worshippers, either on their own or together with Hashem?
Thus Moshe and the whole Nation of Israel were upset, at what was supposed to be the moment of national relief and celebration, God’s honor had been reduced through Paroh’s latest scheme!
Why should they have been so upset though? Who cares about Hashem’s glory?!
The Chasam Sofer writes in one of his drashos, that, anyone who’s heart is completely with Hashem is able to perceive the spiritual feeling of mourning during the period of the three weeks between 17 Tamuz and 9 Av. Such people don’t need laws of mourning during this period, they are in sincere mourning anyway!
The hearts of Moshe and Klal Yisroel were at this point completely with Hashem, they could perceive this reduction in God’s glory! Thus they were pained by this to the extent that even at the moment of their freedom, they were preoccupied with this scheme of Paroh.
Most of us today do not feel pained at any reductions in God’s glory, it’s not an easy task in our generation! However, if we can at least realize that when Hashem’s honor is under attack se should feel upset, then this could be a start towards “resensitizing” ourselves to Hashem and spirituality!
Then there's Labor, the party that, at Camp David in 2000 and in the subsequent final months of president Clinton's administration, sought and failed to achieve a permanent agreement with the Yasser Arafat-led PA. I don't know whether, even as a junior coalition partner, it would push for further concessions than those considered by Barak back then. Those concessions, it will be recalled, fell some way short of the parameters apparently contemplated by Olmert in recent months. enders have warned that the is unlikely to recover this year, despite the government's suggestions that lending should be returned to 2007 levels.ohousing market unemployment foreign exvhange personal finaince
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
