tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-89556812024-03-07T09:59:58.064-06:00HavolimAS OF DECEMBER 2013, NEW DIVREI TORAH WILL NOT BE POSTED HERE; THEY WILL BE POSTED AT MY OTHER WEBSITE, BEIS VAAD, beisvaad.blogspot.com Existing posts on this website will not be updated, and if there will be any new posts here, while they will be Torah-oriented, will not be yeshivish.Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.comBlogger664125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-744370165234222332022-11-07T08:11:00.008-06:002022-11-14T10:52:39.930-06:00Breaking the Cold Grip of the Dead<p><span style="font-size: medium;">The gist of what follows is that it is a serious offense to the Torah if one's life is spent fulfilling mitzvos out of habit, or in imitation of one's ancestors or of respected predecessors. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I know from experience that some people are offended by several aspects of what follows. </span></p><p><b style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">1. Doing mitzvos only out of veneration of your ancestors and teachers.</b></p><div style="background-color: white; clear: both;"><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>A.</b></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ספורנו דברים כ"ח י"ד</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ולא תסור מכל הדברים אשר אנכי מצוה אתכם היום ימין ושמאל</b> </span><span style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">– שלא ישנו את מצות האל יתברך, בפרט ענין המשפט, ולא ימירו את שאר המצות במנהגי הדיוט ומצות אנשים מלומדה, כל שכן כשיעשו זה לכבוד קדמונים, שהנהיגו אותם המנהגים לא לכבוד קונם ולא לשמור מצותיו, כי בזה האופן אין לך ״ללכת אחרי אלהים אחרים לעבדם״ גדול מזה, בחדוש דת לכבוד קדמונים, אשר נחשבו אלהים שופטים בארץ (ע״פ תהלים נ״ח:י״ב).</span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">הרב שמחה זיסל ברוידא: </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ולא תסור מכל־הדברים אשר אנכי מצוה אתכם היום ימין ושמאול ללכת אחרי אלהים אחרים לעבדם</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> יש להבין דכי קאמר "לא תסור וכו' ימין ושמאל" הרי משמע שאפילו זיז כלשהו מצווה שלא יסור, ואח"כ גומר " ללכת אחרי אלהים אחרים", שזה כבר הסרה גמורה ומוחלטת.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויעויין בספורנו מש"כ לבאר ד"אחרי אלוהים אחרים" קאי על העובדים "מצוות אנשים מלומדה" דזה עובד מחמת שכן עשו אבותיו, וכן נהגו כולם וכך התרגל. ונמצא דאינו עובד את השם אלא את האנשים שהנהיגו כן ו"אלהים אחרים מיקרי".</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">ודבר זה נורא למעיין, ומשמע דכל הברית הזה בא שנעבוד את ה' מבלי הסרה כלשהו ימין ושמאל, דכל שסר ימין ושמאל והיינו קצת </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; text-align: left;">"מלומדה" מקרי כעובד אלהים אחרים.</span></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">I am not convinced that the Sforno means exactly what R' Broide says, especially since the end of the sentence beginning with </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">כי בזה האופן</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> is not in many prints of the Sforno. But it really doesn't matter whether the Sforno meant it - if Reb Simcha Zissel Broide says it, it is important enough.</span></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>B.</b></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">The dictum of </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; text-align: right;">חייב אדם לומר בלשון רבו has to be applied with seichel.</span></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large; text-align: right;"><br /></span></div><div style="clear: both; direction: rtl;"><div style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> עדויות פ"א מ"ג -</span></div><div style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">הלל אומר, מלא הין מים שאובין פוסלין את המקוה, [ אלא ] שאדם חייב לומר בלשון רבו</span></div><div style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">רע"ב</span></div><div style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">שחייב אדם לומר בלשון רבו - כלומר, הין אינו לשון משנה אלא לשון תורה, אלא כך שמע מרבותיו שמעיה ואבטליון. ורמב"ם קבל מאביו ז"ל שמפני שהיו שמעיה ואבטליון גרי צדק לא היו יכולין להוציא מפיהן מלת הין, והיו אומרים אין במקום הין, כדרך בני אדם עד היום שאינם יכולים לחתוך באותיות [אחה"ע], והיה הלל גם הוא אומר אין, כמו שהיו רבותיו שמעיה ואבטליון גרי צדק אומרים</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">However, the Gaon and his Talmid the Chidushei Maharich in Ediyos 1:3 rejects the idea that Hillel was echoing his Rebbi's speech impediment.</span></div><div style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">והקשה הרב הגאון זצ״ל, אם הם אמרו מחמת שלא היו יכולין לחתוך אותיות - יאמר גם הלל שיכול לחתוך אותיות, מאי לשון רבו שייך בזה.</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; text-align: right;">בלשון רבו</span><span style="font-family: helvetica; text-align: right;"> makes sense when it is a style of speech, a choice of words, something the Rebbi chose. It does not make sense if it is an accent or just a personal habit. (</span></span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Instead, the Gaon says the pshat is that his rebbi had to say מלא הין because he couldn't pronounce the hei and it would sound like ein, which seems to mean that 'EIN poslim," so he had to say malei hin, which can not be misunderstood. All Hillel did was use the additional word malei.)</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The point is, even if it's your Rebbe, or your Rebbi Muvhak, don't imitate his chisronos, only his maalos, the aspects of his behavior that can enhance your avodas Hashem, and be astute enough to know the difference.</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>C.</b></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The following is taken from the HTC Likutei Pshatim from 2022 Parshas Lech Lecha.</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">THE REAL THING</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">From Rabbi Yitzchak Sender, author of numerous sefarim, as well as "The Commentator" series.</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אמרי נא אחתי את למען ייטב לי בעבורך וחיתה נפשי בגללך</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">"Please say that you are my sister, so that it may be well with me for your sake, and so that my soul may live because of you." Bereshis 12:13</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rav Aaron Kotler comments on the statement of Chazal that Lot was saved from death in the merit of keeping silent when Avraham told Elimelech that he was Sarah's brother and not revealing that Avraham was really her husband. Why, asks Rav Kotler, did Lot need to rely on this merit to be saved? Wasn't his practice of הכנסת אורחים welcoming guests, even at the risk of his own life in Sodom, enough to save him? After all, this was a great mitzvah. He answers that when Lot was hospitable to guests, he was not doing this from inner conviction, as a mitzvah of chesed, but only in imitation of his uncle Avraham, for he had grown so used to this practice that he did it as a matter of course. But when he refused to reveal Avraham's true relationship with Sarah, at this point he was acting out of conviction, from a wish to save his uncle. This was the "true Lot" and therefore he was rewarded for this action.</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Another illustration of the distinction between imitation and real conviction concerns Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach. He used to attend an elite minyan at the Kosel. The Sh'liach Tzibbur of this special minyan was none other than the famous Rav Zerach Braverman. When this great sage passed away, the minyan continued, with someone else acting as Sh'liach Tzibbur. Soon afterwards, Rav Shlomo Zalman stopped attending this minyan. When asked why, he replied that when Rav Braverman, as Sh'liach Tzibbur, reached a particular point in the prayer of "אהבת עולם"ַ he would make a certain characteristic movement. He had noticed that the new Sh'liach Tzibbur also made this same movement, and this made him realize that the man was simply copying Rav Braverman. Since this minyan was only an imitation of truly heartfelt prayer, he preferred to look for another minyan.</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>(see note 1 at end.)</b></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>D. </b></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I've used this idea in many speeches, often to the annoyance of Bnei Torah who dislike the idea entirely, and even more dislike quoting a goy. I quote either Basho or Jaurès:<br /><br />Matsuo Basho, a very well known Japanese poet/philosopher.<br />"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Seek what they sought."<br />or<br />"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of men of old; seek what they sought."<br /><br />Then, similar, from Jean Jaurès, a French socialist politician and a defender of Dreyfus:<br />"Être fidèle à la tradition, c'est être fidèle à la flamme et non à la cendre"<br />To be faithful to tradition is to be faithful to the flame and not to the ashes.<br /><br />Jaurès' words were paraphrased by Mahler as<br />"Tradition ist die Weitergabe des Feuers und nicht die Anbetung der Asche."<br />Tradition is the handing down of the flame and not the worshipping of ashes.</span><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">We are commanded to bury the dead, and it is assur to preserve their bodies. The past needs to return to dust and earth from which the future can grow. Unlike Christians, we would never dream of putting a cemetery next to a shul. <b>(see note 2 at end.)</b><br /><br />(Rav Lau talks about this combination of fidelity to the past and adapting to new circumstances in his biography, quoting his father in law about the dual meaning of Ya'azov. <a href="http://beisvaad.blogspot.com/2007/02/drasha-for-sheva-brachos-1.html">I posted it in a drasha for a Sheva Brachos.</a>)</span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">*******************************************************************************</span></div></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="font-family: helvetica;">2. Pining for the past instead of marching toward the future.</span></b></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both; font-family: arial;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both; font-family: arial;">(the following is taken from a post from 2017.)</div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both; font-family: arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Why did Lot's wife turn into a pillar of salt? Chazal talk about her unwillingness to share her valuable salt with guests, a stinginess unmitigated by seeing her husband's highly developed trait of hachnasas orchim. Rav Alfie Cherrick told me something he said, something he thought of while learning Melicha (from Reb Ahron Soloveitchik זכר צדיק לברכה, his Rebbi Muvhak,) many years ago.<br /><br />He said that salt is a preservative, and it preserves the past. Lot's wife turned around, she turned wistfully to her past in Sedom when she should have been focused on the gift she was given, the opportunity of spiritual growth. That was the worst thing she could have done at that moment. Don't try to rebuild the past, find a way to build a future.<br /><br />I think his idea is excellent. It's obviously true in the case of Lot's wife, who was leaving the depraved lifestyle of Sedom. But to some extent, it is true for everyone, even those that have a glorious past and live a Torah life. Our past informs and gives direction to our lives, but like all living things, we have to adapt to new circumstances. We have to think about what we can do in the future. The Ribono shel Olam has put you in a new place, do not stagnate, move forward. Even Avraham Avinu was told Lech Lecha, and Rav Ahron Kotler, in his sefer, talks about life being l'maala l'maskil. Move forward and move upward, or fall - retain what is good of your past, and use it as a stepping stone to the future.</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="clear: both;"><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">*********************************************************************************</span></div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>3. Doing mitzvos thoughtlessly knowingly.</b></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Ritva in Rosh Hashanna 16b</span></p><div style="direction: rtl; text-align: start;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וא"ר יצחק שלשה דברים מזכירין עונותיו של אדם, אלו הן .. ועיון תפלה .. : </span></div><div style="direction: rtl; text-align: start;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">תימא דהכא משמע דעיון תפלה מגונה והתם אמרינן אלו דברים שאדם אוכל פירותיהן בעוה"ז והקרן קיימת לעוה"ב וחד מניהו עיון תפלה ובבבא בתרא אמרו (שני) [שלשה] דברים אין אדם נצול מהן בכל יום [הרהור עבירה] ועיון תפלה ואבק לשון הרע וא"כ אין לך אדם שאין מזכירין עונותיו בכל יום ומאי אתא ר' יצחק לאזהורינן ותירצו בתוס' דעיון תפלה לשון א' המתחלק לשלשה ענינים </span></div><div style="direction: rtl; text-align: start;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">כי יש עיון תפלה שהיא מדה רעה והוא המעיין בתפלתו וסומך עליה שתהא מקובלת ומצפה עליה שתתקיים ועליה אמרו כאן שמזכירין עונותיו לפי שמחשבין עליו אם הוא ראוי לכך לקבל תפלתו כמו שהוא סבור וע"ז אמרו בהרואה כל המאריך בתפלתו ומעיין בה סוף בא לידי כאב לב </span></div><div style="direction: rtl; text-align: start;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויש עיון תפלה טוב מאד והוא המעיין ומכוין בתפלתו לאומרה בכונת הלב אבל אינו מצפה שתתקיים וזה שאמר שאוכל פירותיו בעוה"ז והשי"ת משלם לו שאלת צרכיו ששואל באמצעיות והקרן קיימת לו לעוה"ב על מה ששבח בראשונות והודה באחרונות </span></div><div style="direction: rtl; text-align: start;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויש אחר והוא שאינו מכוין ומעיין בתפלתו שמהרהר בדברי העולם ונקרא עיון תפלה ליפוי השם כדרך שקורין למי שאינו רואה סגי נהור וז"ש בב"ב שאין אדם נצול ממנו בכל יום שא"א לאדם שלא יהרהר בדברים בטלים בעת תפלה כמ"ש בירושלמי מיומי לא כוונית יומא חד בעינא לכווני ומנית אפרוחייא ואידך אמר יומא חד בעינא לאכווני ואמינא מאן עייל קומי מלכא אלקפתא או ריש גלותא אמר שמואל אנא מחזיקנא טיבותא לרישאי כד מטי למודים כרע מגרמוי:</span></div><div><div style="clear: both; direction: rtl;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div></div><div style="clear: both; direction: rtl; text-align: start;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rambam in Krias Shma 4:7</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ז כָּל מִי שֶׁהוּא פָּטוּר מִלִּקְרוֹת קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע אִם רָצָה לְהַחֲמִיר עַל עַצְמוֹ לִקְרוֹת קוֹרֵא. וְהוּא שֶׁתְּהֵא דַּעְתּוֹ פְּנוּיָה עָלָיו. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה זֶה הַפָּטוּר מִלִּקְרוֹת מְבֹהָל אֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי לִקְרוֹת עַד שֶׁתִּתְיַשֵּׁב דַּעְתּוֹ עָלָיו:</span></div><div style="clear: both; direction: rtl;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="clear: both; direction: rtl;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ראב"ד עד שתתיישב דעתו עליו. <span>ומה בכך יקרא ויהא כקורא בתורה ולא יהיה כפורק שם שמים מעליו ואין זה דומה לתפלה ואין חוששין עתה ליוהרא שהדבר ידוע לרוב הקוראים והמתפללים שאינה אלא מצות אנשים מלומדה גם בחכמי הגמרא היו אומרין כן מחזיקנא טיבותא לרישאי כי מטינא למודים כרע מנפשיה ואידך אמר דהוה מני דיומסין בגו צלותא ואידך אמר דחשיב מאן ממטי אסא לבי מלכא עכ''ל: </span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b><br /></b></span></div><div style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I think the Rambam's אינו רשאי is because it is excusable if it happens - we are obviously not malochim, and </span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">אין אדם נצול ממנו בכל יום</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">. It is another thing to uncaringly invite it to happen. </span></span></div><div style="clear: both; text-align: center;">************************************************************</div><div style="clear: both;"><br /></div><div style="clear: both;">note 1:</div><div style="clear: both;"><div style="clear: both;">R Anonymous sent this from the Maor VaShemesh - how interesting!</div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;">"והנה יקשה לדרשת הגמ' על מלת דמשק שדולה ומשקה מתורת רבו לאחרים א"כ לאיזה ענין הזכיר אברהם אבינו בהתנצלותו לפני הש"י ובן משק ביתי הוא דמשק אליעזר כי לפי דרשת הגמרא הוא דברי שבח לאליעזר והי' די באמרו מה תתן לי ובן משק ביתי הוא יורש אותי ע"כ נראה שדברי חכמז"ל בגמרא הנ"ל רמזו לנו על ענין אחר שצריך לידע ולהודיע לבני אדם המחברים את עצמם לצדיקים שלא ילמדו את עצמם לעשות כתנועותיהם והנהגותיהם כמצות אנשים מלומדה היינו מפני שהצדיק הוא עושה כך יעשה הוא ג"כ כמוהו כי זה הוא לא טוב מאוד רק שילמד לעשות כפי שכלו באמת לאמתו לעבוד את הש"י בלב נכון. וזה הוא שאמר א"א ובן משק ביתי הוא דמשק אליעזר שדולה ומשקה מתורת רבו לאחרים פי' שדולה ומשקה שלומד אותם לעשות מצות אנשים מלומדה לעשות מה שרבו עושה וזה לא טוב והשיב לו הש"י לא ירשך זה כי אם אשר יצא ממעיך כו'"</div><div style="clear: both;"><br /></div><div style="clear: both;">The next part there demonstrates how the stars were an sign that each of Avraham Avinu's descendants would be disparate, would be their own men, and not only reflections of their Avos.</div></div><div style="clear: both;"><br /></div><div style="clear: both;">note 2:</div><div style="clear: both;">Harav Dr Nachum Stone sent me this perfect Torah Temima on Friday's Tov Me'od.</div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;">ובמ"ר כאן (ב"ר ט , ה) איתא והנה טוב מאד זה המות, ותמהו רבים איך שייך לכנות את המות בשם טוב, ולי קשה עוד מאי שייכות דבר זה בגמר מעשה בראשית.</div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><div style="clear: both;">ונראה בכונת הענין, דאין הכונה על מיתת האדם לבד אלא גם בכלל על הפסד ואבדן כל דבר מהנמצא בעולם, הן בעלי חיים והן דומם וצומח, יען דכל מין כליה כלול בשם מיתה וכמו שאמרו בבבא קמא נד ע"א בשבירת כלים "שבירתן זו היא מיתתן".</div><div style="clear: both;">והביאור הוא, כי לולא היה כל דבר נפסד וכלה בעולם אזי לא הגיעו בני האדם לתכלית השלמות, יען כי מכיון שכל דבר היה מתקיים לנצח לא היו משתדלים להמציא הדבר מחדש ולמצוא בו את השלמות הנמצא, ובהיות כן הנה כל דבר חדוש שאנו רואים בעולם נובע מסבת אבדן והפסד הדבר הקודם לו, ולכן כל דור ודור משלים כחות הבריאה ויסודי הטבע שקבע והטביע הקדוש ברוך הוא בששת ימי הבריאה.</div><div style="clear: both;">וזה הוא שאמר בסוף גמר הבריאה וירא אלהים כי טוב מאד זה המות, כלומר, האבדן וההפסד שבא לעולם הוא גורם עוד להתחדשות והשתלמות הבריאה היסודית, וזה באמת טוב מאד, וגם שייך הענין בגמר הבריאה בששת ימי בראשית, ודו"ק.</div></div><div style="clear: both;"><br /></div><div style="clear: both;"><div style="clear: both;">note 3:</div><div style="clear: both;">I do not understand what Rebbi Eliezer means to say with his unique quality of ולא אמרתי דבר שלא שמעתי מפי רבי מעולם in Sukkah 28b. Why would that be praiseworthy? Does this contradict what we are saying here? Passing over the coincidence that Rebbi Eliezer had the same name as Eved Avraham, it deserves mention that, as the Chidah in his Simchas Haregeal points out, the Ramban by Tanur Achnai in BM 59b says that they did not pasken like Rebbi Eliezer because they said מפי השמועה and he always said כך נראה בעיני!!! The Achronim ask, how could it be that this very Rebbi Eliezer could say these diametrically opposite things? The Chavos Yair says that he never paskened something that he didn't hear, but this was shakla v'taria. Very difficult, because on shakla v'taria you don't become a zaken mamrei. <a href="https://www.sefaria.org/Ben_Yehoyada_on_Sukkah.28a.4?lang=bi">See Ben Yehoyada in Sukkah.</a></div><div style="clear: both;">Here is the Ramban in BM 59b.</div><div dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;">שכיון שלא רצה לחזור ואמר חרוב זה ואמת המים וכותלי בית המדרש ומן השמים יוכיחו מחזי להו כאפקרותא שהיה מחזיק במחלוקת יותר מדאי לפיכך ברכוהו שהם היו אומרים מפי השמועה והוא אומר כך היא בעיני לפיכך לא קבלו ממנו כל ראיות שבעולם ואלו הורה למעשה בזמן הבית היה נעשה זקן ממרא לפיכך החמירו עליו וברכוהו:</div><div style="clear: both;">My guess is that he did not pasken against them. He just said that they are wrong, so it would be a safek, so they could not burn truma. I am not sure that would qualify for being put in cherem or being a zaken mamrei.</div></div><div style="clear: both;"><br /></div><div style="clear: both;">note stam:</div><div style="clear: both;">I said in the beginning that some people strongly disagree with much that appears here. "Some people" includes my father in law, Harav Reuven Feinstein, and one of my sons in law, Harav Avram Lawrence.</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-80192273887057111712022-10-27T00:14:00.007-05:002022-10-27T13:31:49.325-05:00The Difference Between Torah and Chachma<div data-setdir="false" style="background-color: white;"><p> <span style="font-family: arial;">Thank you Rabbi</span><span style="font-family: arial;"> Ari Spiegler of the Beachwood Kehilla. </span></p><div data-setdir="false"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: arial;">I am, Baruch Hashem, a great grandfather. On the basis of the realities of senescence and one or two brushes with death while driving, my wife (Cautious! Not timid!) prefers that we stop on the way and make it a two day trip. On my way from Lakewood to Chicago, I stopped for Shachris at his shul. הולכי דרכים and all that, but it was Rosh Chodesh. Speaking from my own experience, </span><span style="font-family: arial;">it is a warm and welcoming kehilla. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: arial;">I felt like an old member of a shul I was in for the first time. I also enjoyed davening there because of the inspiring architecture - the </span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: arial;">clerestory windows are wonderful at הנץ החמה! The relevance to this post is that Rabbi Spiegler recognized me from this website. It was a real chizuk to meet, in real life, someone that has hana'ah from the thoughts that appear here. So I am posting some of the recent thoughts that I had put into the draft file.</span></div><div data-setdir="false"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div data-setdir="false"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">איכה רבה ב׳:י״ג</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">מלכה ושריה בגוים אין תורה. אם יאמר לך אדם יש חכמה בגוים, תאמן, הדא הוא דכתיב (עובדיה א, ח) והאבדתי חכמים מאדום ותבונה מהר עשו. יש תורה בגוים, אל תאמן, דכתיב: מלכה ושריה בגוים אין תורה.</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div></div><div data-setdir="false"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">What are חכמה and תורה? What distinguishes them, what defines them? It can't be truth, because chochma has to be true. </span></div><div data-setdir="false"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I think the Rambam and the Rav in Mishnayos disagree about the answer to this question. </span></div><div data-setdir="false"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">According to the Rav, the difference is external. Torah is truth received from God. Chochma is truth discerned by man. The only difference is the source; there is no intrinsic difference. </span></div><div data-setdir="false"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">According to the Rambam, Torah by its very nature is something which can only be received in a communication מן השמים; its supernatural character means that it cannot possibly be discerned by the human mind. It can only be understood when given מן השמים. Chochma, on the other hand, can be attained either by human inquiry or by divine inspiration. The difference between Chochma and Torah is intrinsic: I can only speculate, but I would say that Torah deals with the relationship between God and man and all the ramifications of that relationship, while Chochma deals with nature or natural events or human philosophy. I apologize for making a big production out of what may appear to be an insipid thought, but while pshat in the Rambam's distinction is speculative, the machlokes Rambam and Rav is inescapable. </span></div></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">This dull distinction is borne out by several pieces of evidence.</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">There is a rabbinic enactment that Kisvei Kodesh cause tumah (מטמא את הידים) that was instituted to prevent people from storing תרומה near Sifrei Torah, which attracted destructive vermin. (The Torah Temima says that the gzeira of tuma really stems from Chazal's desire that we show awed deference to Sifrei Torah, as indicated by their dire warning against touching a sefer torah with bare hand. To strengthen that issur, they instituted tuma on hands that touch it, and from there the gzeira spread to all kisvei hakodesh.</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אבל אני תמה מי מלל לרבותינו דטומאת ידים בספרים בכלל הוא סניף לגזירת טומאת אוכלין בס"ת, והלא מפורש אמרו בשבת י"ד א', תני, אף ידים הבאות מחמת ספר פוסלות את התרומה משום דר' פרנך דאמר האוחז ס"ת ערום נקבר ערום, א"כ מבואר דטעם וענין אחר הוא גזירת טומאת ידים בס"ת כדי שלא ירגילו לאחוז ס"ת בידים ערומות רק ע"י מפה וכדומה ונמשכה הגזירה לכל כתבי הקודש, וצ"ע רב בזה.)</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Mishna in the third perek of Yadayim brings a lengthy argument about whether Koheles and Shir HaShirim are "Kisvei Hakodesh" in regard to the law of causing tuma to hands, because they might be merely חכמה. .</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: start;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">סֵפֶר שֶׁנִּמְחַק וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּר בּוֹ שְׁמוֹנִים וְחָמֵשׁ אוֹתִיּוֹת, כְּפָרָשַׁת וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן, מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. מְגִלָּה שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ שְׁמוֹנִים וְחָמֵשׁ אוֹתִיּוֹת כְּפָרָשַׁת וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן, מְטַמָּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. כָּל כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים וְקֹהֶלֶת מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, וְקֹהֶלֶת מַחֲלֹקֶת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, קֹהֶלֶת אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם וְשִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים מַחֲלֹקֶת. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, קֹהֶלֶת מִקֻּלֵּי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וּמֵחֻמְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן עַזַּאי, מְקֻבָּל אֲנִי מִפִּי שִׁבְעִים וּשְׁנַיִם זָקֵן, בַּיּוֹם שֶׁהוֹשִׁיבוּ אֶת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה בַּיְשִׁיבָה, שֶׁשִּׁיר הַשִּׁירִים וְקֹהֶלֶת מְטַמְּאִים אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, חַס וְשָׁלוֹם, לֹא נֶחֱלַק אָדָם מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל עַל שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים שֶׁלֹּא תְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, שֶׁאֵין כָּל הָעוֹלָם כֻּלּוֹ כְדַאי כַּיּוֹם שֶׁנִּתַּן בּוֹ שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁכָּל הַכְּתוּבִים קֹדֶשׁ, וְשִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים. וְאִם נֶחְלְקוּ, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא עַל קֹהֶלֶת. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חָמִיו שֶׁל רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, כְּדִבְרֵי בֶן עַזַּאי, כָּךְ נֶחְלְקוּ וְכָךְ גָּמְרוּ:<br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: start;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">In any case, Chazal wanted to delineate what is included in the category of Kisvei HaKodesh, and there was a brouhaha about Shir HaShirim and Koheles. Are they Chochma or Torah?</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr" style="background-color: white;"><div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Rav there explains the defining quality for that appellation.</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>קהלת אינו מטמא את הידים.</b> מפני שחכמתו של שלמה היא, ולא ברוח הקודש נאמרה:</span></div></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">From the Rav, it seems that the only factor is the source. There is no inherent difference. </span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Rambam seems to disagree with the Rav because he paskens that Koheles and Shir Hashirim are metamei "even though they are Chachma."</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">שאר אבות הטומאה ט' ו'</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span>רצועות תפילין עם התפילין וגיליון שבספר שלמעלה ושלמטה שבתחלה ושבסוף כשהן מחוברין לספר. וספר שנמחק ונשתייר בו שמנים וחמש אותיות. ומגילה שכתוב בה מן התורה שמנים וחמש אותיות כפרשת ויהי בנסוע הארון הרי אלו מטמאין את הידים. ולא דברי תורה בלבד <b>אלא כל כתבי הקדש אפילו שיר השירים וקהלת שהן דברי חכמה מטמאין את הידים:</b></span><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">According to the Rav, the two categorizations are mutually exclusive. Either something is from the mind of man or it is a revelation from Hashem. The Rambam, on the other hand, is saying that yes, they are different than other kisvei kodesh in that they are "chochma," but they are kisvei kodesh anyway, and therefore included in the gzeira. According to the Rambam, they overlap.</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">This question is asked by the Chazon Nachum in Mishnayos and the Maaseh Rokeiach on the Rambam and the Aruch HaShulchan, and they all just say they don't get it.</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">מעשה רוקח:</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אכן מ"ש רבינו אפילו שיר השירים וקהלת שהם דברי חכמה וכו' לא ידעתי למה קרי שיר השירים דברי חכמה דהלא ברוח הקודש נאמר וקדש קדשים הוא:</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">חזון נחום:</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">והנה מדברי רז"ל והמפרשים נראה דמחלוקת זה אם קהלת ושיר השירים מטא את הידים או לא תלוי אם נאמר שהוא חכמתו של שלמה או ברוח הקודש נאמרו שאם נאמר שהם חכמתו של שלמה אינה מטמאה ואם נאמר שברוח הקודש מטמאים ועלתה הסכמתם ברוח הקודש נאמרו ולפיכך מטמאים את הידים. ויש לתמוה על הרמב"ם פ"ט מהלכות א"ה שכתב וזה לשומו ולא דברי תורה בלבד אלא כל כתבי הקדש אפילו שיר השירים וקהלת שהן דברי חכמה מטמאין את הידים: ע"כ. והל"ל טעמא משום דברוח הקודש נאמרו וצ"ע</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">Biographical note about the author of the </span><span style="text-align: right;">חזון נחום</span><span style="background-color: transparent;"> : </span></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica;"> הרב אליעזר נחום (תכ"ב - חשון תק"ה; 1662–1744) היה אב בית דין וראש ישיבה בעיר אדריאנופול שבטורקיה. מספר שנים לאחר שעלה לארץ ישראל נבחר לכהן בתפקיד "הראשון לציון", וכיהן בו עד לפטירתו.</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The ערוך השלחן העתיד in שאר אבות הטומאה קמ"א:י asks exactly the same question and also says he does not know. </span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I think there is no question. True, according to the Rav, the only difference between Torah and Chochma is its source. Otherwise they are identical. The machlokes in the mishna is simply where these sefarim came from - were they the product of human thought, or were they transmitted through רוח הקודש. If so, the words of the Rambam do not make sense. The Rambam can not say they are Chochma but were transmitted by Ruach Hakodesh. They are mutually exclusive. But the Rambam holds there it is Chochma if it deals with human perception, whether divinely inspired or the product of man's philosophy. Torah is the source of life. Chochma is an examination of life.</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">This is somewhat like the Aruch HaShulchan in the very end of Choshen Mishpat, in הלכות מעקה. He brings that some hold that you don't make a bracha on putting up a maaka, and explains </span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אלולי דברי הקדמונים ז"ל היה נ"ל טעם מה שלא תקנו ברכות באלו הענינים דאע"ג דהאיש הישראלי מחוייב לעשות גם מצוות שכליות לא מפני השכל אלא מפני צווי הקב"ה כמש"כ והיה עקב תשמעון את המשפטים וגו' כלומר אפילו המשפטים תשמע מה שצותה התורה ולא תעשה מפני שכלך אלא כשארי מצוות השמעיות מ"מ קדושת ישראל אינו ניכר כל כך בהשכליות כמו בהשמעיות כמ"ש חז"ל ביומא [ס"ז:] ולכן לא תקנו ברכות על מצוות שכליות ודרך ארץ שיש מהם בכל אום ולשון ולא תקנו לברך אשר קדשנו במצוותיו אם כי אינם עושים רק מפני השכל מ"מ יש בהם עשיות כאלו</span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I am well aware that to attribute this to the Rambam, of all people, is troubling (especially since he holds you do make a bracha on Maaka.) It would be fine to see this in the Maharal, as below in the piece I have from the Nesivos Olam. But I </span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">have to say it in the Rambam because I </span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica;">do not see any good alternative.</span></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">An alternative pshat in the Rambam: My wife (Malkie. Not a metaphor for Torah here) says that Koheles is all chachma, existential anxiety, the absurdity and Sisyphean meaninglessness of life, with a big however. All is for naught, life is meaningless, BUT in the light of Torah, you realize how meaningful and beautiful life really is. So it's ninety percent chachma, existentialism, and ten percent "However...." The din of tumas yadayim might apply to something that is כולו תורה. Koheles is a dialogue between what appears to be true and what is actually true. As such, you might think it is not "pure" Torah and not subject to the gzeira, קמ"ל.</span></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">My wife's pshat has one advantage: It bothers me, how can there be a machlokes of all these tana'im about Shir HaShirim and Koheles whether they are Torah or Chochma. Look at it! Can't you tell the difference? Did you have any trouble with Ben Sira? Is it so hard to see the difference between Chochma and Torah? But according to my wife's pshat, at least as far as Koheles, everyone knows that it is mostly Chochma leading up to Torah, and the question is how to categorize the amalgam.</span></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Magen Avraham brings from the Levush and the Bach that you make a bracha on reading all Megilos but not on Koheles. The Gaon argues, of course, based on our psak of tumas yadayim. With this Rambam in Shear Avos Hatuma there is a possible explanation: Yes, Koheles is metamei yadayim, but the fact remains that it is, according to the Rambam as I explain it, Chochma that happened to be given beru'ach hakodesh, or according to my wife, mostly Chochma and not Torah. If so, it is different than the other megillos; the ot hers are Torah, and this is Chochma. Now according to the Brisker Rov, the bracha on megillos is not Birkas Hamitzvos, it is because Torah in a tzibbur requires a bracha. If so, it could be argued that according to the Rambam, whatever pshat you say, Koheles is not Torah in the same sense. </span></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">You might cavil that according to the Rambam, the Levush and the Bach ought to say the same, that there is no bracha, by Shir HaShirim. But maybe they hold like the Rambam that Koheles is not Torah like the other Megillos, but unlike the Rambam, they hold like Reb Akiva in the Mishna in Yadayim, that there never was a machlokes by Shir HaShirim, and nobody ever suggested that Shir haShirim was anything other than Torah in the fullest sense. They hold that the machlokes was only by Koheles, and they hold that it is Chochma. In fact, the </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">ערוך השלחן העתיד in שאר אבות הטומאה קמ"א:י</span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;"> does say that we hold like Reb Akiva, not like the Rambam, that the machlokes was only by Koheles, but not by Shir Hashirim.</span></div></div><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Here is the Maharal I mentioned, discussing the enormous difference between חכמה and תורה. (Which happens to be relevant to the next thing on the docket, אסתכל באורייתא וברא עלמא. It's a toss up between that and my great recipe for cornbread and the thorny bracha achrona issues it raises.) </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">https://www.sefaria.org/Netivot_Olam%2C_Netiv_Hatorah.3.2?lang=he</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">נתיבות עולם, נתיב התורה א׳</span></p><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:5" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight heOnly showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:5" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ולכך אמר</b> (משלי ד, ד) "ויורני ויאמר יתמך דברי לבך שמור מצותי וחיה"<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="49"></i>, כי התורה שהיא דברי השם יתברך, תומכת האדם שלא יגיע לידי מיתה, שהתורה מקיימת הכל<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="50"></i>. ואמר "שמור מצותי וחיה" נגד מעשה המצות, כשישמור אותם יש בהם החיים<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="51"></i>. ואמר "ויורני", שהוא לשון הוראה, כמו שנקראת התורה בלשון זה (דברים לג, ד)<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="52"></i>, ולא נקראת בשם 'חכמה', כמו שנקראת שאר חכמה או תבונה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="53"></i>. מפני כי הפרש יש; כי התורה מורה לאדם את הדרך, אשר בדרך ההוא יגיע אל תכליתו האחרון מה שאפשר לאדם להגיעו, הוא אל עולם הבא<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="54"></i>. וזה אין בכח שום חכמה, כי על ידי התורה מגיע האדם אל עולם הבא<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="55"></i>, ולכך ראוי לה דווקא לתורה שם "תורה", שהוא לשון הוראה, שמורה לאדם תכליתו האחרון אשר ראוי לאדם להגיע אליו<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="56"></i>. ולכך אמר "ויורני ויאמר יתמוך דברי לבך", השם יתברך הורה לאדם תכלית האחרון, איך להגיע את האדם אל העולם הבא, כאשר "יתמוך דברי לבך", ואז האדם דבוק בתורה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="57"></i>, המגיע[ה] אל תכליתו, הוא העולם הבא<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="58"></i>. כי כשם שהתורה היא סדר עולם הזה, כך התורה היא סדר עולם הבא, כי הכל נברא בתורה; הן עולם הזה, והן עולם<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="59"></i> הבא<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="60"></i>. ולכך אמר השם יתברך "יתמוך דברי לבך", בזה דבק האדם בעולם הבא, להגיע אל תכליתו האחרון, וזה מבואר<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="61"></i>.</span></span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:6" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight heOnly showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:6" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ובפרק כיצד מעברין</b> (עירובין נד.), אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי, המהלך בדרך ואין לו לויה, יעסוק בתורה, שנאמר (משלי א, ט) "כי לוית חן"<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="62"></i>. חש בראשו יעסוק בתורה, שנאמר (שם) "חן הם לראשך". חש בגרונו יעסוק בתורה, שנאמר (שם) "וענקים לגרגרותיך"<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="63"></i>. חש בבני מעיים יעסוק בתורה, שנאמר (משלי ג, ח) "רפאות תהי לשרך"<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="64"></i>. חש בעצמותיו יעסוק בתורה, שנאמר (שם) "ושקוי לעצמותיך"<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="65"></i>. חש בכל גופו יעסוק בתורה, שנאמר (משלי ד, כב) "ולכל בשרו מרפא". אמר רב יהודה בריה דרבי חייא, בא וראה שלא כמדת הקב"ה מדת בשר ודם; מדת* אדם נותן לחבירו סם, יפה לזה, וקשה לזה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="66"></i>. והקב"ה נותן תורה לישראל סם חיים לכל גופו, שנאמר "ולכל בשרו מרפא", עד כאן.</span></span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:7" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight heOnly showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:7" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>רצה לומר</b> שהדרכים הם בחזקת סכנה (ירושלמי ברכות פ"ד ה"ד), וכמו שהתבאר בפירוש הפרקים<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="67"></i>. וטעם* הדבר שהדרכים הם בחזקת סכנה, כי הדרכים אין שם ישוב האדם<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="68"></i>, ודבר כמו זה הוא נבדל מן עיקר העולם, כי עיקר העולם הוא הישוב<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="69"></i>, ודבר זה יוצא מן הישוב. ולפיכך שולטים שם הפגעים, אשר הם מתנגדים אל העולם<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="70"></i>, ולכך יש לחוש שישלטו בו פגעים<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="71"></i>, אשר אינם מסדר העולם<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="72"></i>. ולפיכך אמר "ההולך בדרך ואין לו לויה", בודאי* כאשר יש לו לויה, הרי הם מתחברים אליו בני אדם, וכיון שיש אצלו אדם, נחשב זה כאילו היה בישוב העולם, ואין נקרא זה שפורש מן הישוב<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="73"></i>. אבל זה שאין לו לויה וחבור אל הישוב, מה יעשה ויהיה לו חבור, יעסוק בתורה, כי התורה סדר שמירת העולם כמו שהתבאר<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="74"></i>. ולכך כאשר התחבר אל התורה, הרי יש לו לויה וחבור אל סדר העולם<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="75"></i>. ושמירת הסדר מציל מן הפגעים אשר לא ישלטו, כי אין הפגעים שולטים רק כאשר פורש מן העולם, כמו שאמרנו, כי לכך "כל הדרכים בחזקת סכנה", אבל כאשר הוא מתחבר אל התורה, יש לו לויה אל סדר העולם, ובשביל זה אינו יוצא מן ישוב העולם, והדבר הזה הוא אל האדם לויה גמורה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="76"></i>. ואם נחשב לאדם לויה כאשר יש לו התחברות אל בני אדם, כי אז אינו נחשב שהוא לעצמו, ולכך כאשר יש בני אדם עמו יש לו לויה, שאז הוא מתחבר אל הבריות שהם העולם<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="77"></i>, ואם דבר זה הוא לויה שלו, כל שכן כאשר יתחבר אל התורה, שהיא סדר כל העולם, ובה נמצא הכל<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="78"></i>, שיש לו לויה גמורה, שמתחבר אל העולם, ואינו נבדל ממנו שיהיו שולטין בו הפגעים<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="79"></i>, ודבר זה מבואר<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="80"></i>.</span></span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:8" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight heOnly showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:8" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ולכך אמר</b> אחריו (עירובין נד.), אם יש לאדם חולה בגופו<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="81"></i>, שכל אשר הוא חולה יוצא מן הסדר<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="82"></i>, יעסוק בתורה, שהיא סדר העולם, ואז האדם אשר היה מקבל חולי, שהוא שנוי, יחזור אל הסדר, שהוא בריאותו<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="83"></i>. ואמר עוד "חש בראשו וכו'", כי כאשר יבא שנוי לגוף, כמו כל הדברים שהם שנויים בגוף<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="84"></i>, על ידי התורה, שהיא סדר העולם, מחזרת את הגוף שהיה בו שנוי אל סדר שלו. כי אל סדר התורה נמשך הכל, כמו שאמרנו<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="85"></i>. ומה שאמר הראש בפני עצמו, מפני שהראש שם השכל<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="86"></i>, והוא קרוב אל התורה בעבור חשיבות הראש<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="87"></i>, הוא ראשון וקודם לקבל רפואה על ידי התורה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="88"></i>. ולפיכך אמר בראשון "חש בראשו יעסוק בתורה"<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="89"></i>.</span></span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:9" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight heOnly showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:9" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ואמר אחר כך</b> (עירובין נד.) "חש בגרונו יעסוק בתורה", הגרון הוא למטה מן הראש אשר שם השכל, והגרון יוצא ממנו הדבור, והגרון כלי אל שכל הדברי<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="90"></i>, והוא למטה מן שכל עיוני<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="91"></i>. ואמר כי אף בזה אם יעסוק בתורה, ימשוך* לו על ידי התורה רפואה, אף כי הוא יותר רחוק מן השכל<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="92"></i>. ואמר עוד "חש בבני מעיו", האבר הזה הוא למטה מן הגרון, כי הגרון שם הדבור השכלי<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="93"></i>. ובני מעיים, כמו ריאה ולב<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="94"></i>, הם כלים* לחיים<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="95"></i>, ולכך הם למטה מן הגרון, ששם השכל הדברי. ואפילו הכי על ידי התורה מקבל רפואה והויה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="96"></i> מן השם יתברך<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="97"></i>.</span></span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:10" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight heOnly showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:10" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ואמר</b> "חש בעצמותיו יעסוק בתורה", העצמות הם למטה מהם, שאינם כמו בני מעיים, שהם כלי ומשכן לרוח חיים<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="98"></i>. אבל אלו הם בנין האדם, שעליו נבנה האדם<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="99"></i>. ואמר שגם העצמות מקבלים רפואה והויה על ידי התורה מן השם יתברך<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="100"></i>. ואמר אחר כך "חש בכל גופו", אף על גב שהוא רחוק יותר, עד שאין דבר נתלה בו כלל, כי אין דומה שאר הגוף לעצמות, כי הם בנין האדם. עד כי אם יש שנוי בכל דבר, התורה של אדם, שהיא סדר העולם, ואחריה ימשך העולם, היא מחזרת האדם אל סדר<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="101"></i> שלו<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="102"></i>. והנה התחיל בראש, שהוא יותר ראשון ויותר קודם* לקבל הויה ורפואה מן השם יתברך, ואחר כך הזכיר הגרון, שהוא למטה הימנו, ואחר כך בני מעיים, ואחר כך העצמות, ואחר כך כל גופו. כי כל אחד ואחד לפי מעלתו הוא קודם לקבל חיים מן השם יתברך<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="103"></i>.</span></span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:11" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight heOnly showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:11" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ואמר כי</b> "בשר ודם נותן סם לחבירו"<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="104"></i>, כי מפני שאי אפשר שלא יהיה לאותו סם איכות; או שהוא קר, או שהוא חם, וכיוצא בזה מן האיכות. ואם הסם ההוא קר, אז מזיק לאברים הקרים. ואם הוא חם, מזיק לאברים החמים<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="105"></i>, כי לא ימלט הסם ההוא מן איכות<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="106"></i>. אבל התורה היא רפואה כללית, כי אין בתורה איכות<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="107"></i>, רק כי היא שכל אלקי העליון*<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="108"></i>. ובשביל כך התורה היא סם חיים ורפואה אל הכל<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="109"></i>. וכמו שהתורה היא רפואה לאדם מן חליו, כך התורה היא רפואה לאדם מכל שאר חסרון<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="110"></i>, כאשר האדם היה מקבל שנוי, התורה מחזרת אותו אל הסדר אשר הוא (-חסרון-) [ראוי] לאדם. כי בתורה נברא העולם (ב"ר א, א), ובה סדר השם יתברך הכל כסדרו הראוי לו, כמו שהתבאר<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="111"></i>, לכך על ידי התורה הוא חוזר אל סדר הראוי. ומפני שבתורה נברא העולם, לכך כאשר יש חסרון בבריאה, יושלם על ידי התורה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="112"></i>, שהיא רפואת* כל הגוף<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="113"></i>.</span></span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:12" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight heOnly showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:12" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ויש לפרש</b><i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="114"></i> כי המאמר הזה רצה לומר, כמו שהתורה מחזרת חולי הגוף אל הסדר כמו שהתבאר, כך התורה מחזרת אנשי חולי הנפש אל הסדר, אף אם יש בהם חולי הנפש<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="115"></i>, התורה היא מחזרת הכל אל סדרו<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="116"></i>. וחולי הנפש כאשר האדם יש לו חסרון בשכלו ובמחשבתו, והחטא במחשבה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="117"></i> הוא בכמה דברים<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="118"></i>. ועוד יש חולי הנפש בכח הדברי<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="119"></i>, שהוא למטה מן השכלי, כאשר ידוע<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="120"></i>. ועוד יש חולי הנפש בכחות הגוף של אדם, שמהם התאוה והקנאה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="121"></i>, וכל הדברים אשר מהם החטא<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="122"></i>. ועוד יש חולי הנפש במעשה, דהיינו פעולת החטא בעצמו<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="123"></i>.</span></span></p></div><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"></p><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:13" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight heOnly showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Netivot Olam, Netiv Hatorah 1:13" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>וכנגד זה</b> אמר (עירובין נד.) "חש בראשו יעסוק בתורה", כי בראש המחשבה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="124"></i>, והתורה היא רפואת חולי הנפש הזה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="125"></i>. ואמר "חש בגרונו יעסוק בתורה", נגד הדבור שהוא בגרון<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="126"></i>, וגם התורה רפואה לחולי הזה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="127"></i>. ואמר עוד "חש בבני מעיו יעסוק בתורה, שנאמר (משלי ג, ח) 'רפאות תהי לשרך'". פירוש "בני מעיו" שבהם לב וכבד<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="128"></i>, אשר הם כחות התאוה והקנאה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="129"></i>, וגם כן התורה רפואה לחולי הנפש הזה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="130"></i>. ואחר כך אמר 'חש בעצמותיו יעסוק בתורה', העצמות הם כלים שעל ידיהם המעשה, כי הבשר בלבד אין פועל המעשה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="131"></i>, אבל המעשה אשר יעשה על ידי העצמות, שהם קשים וחזקים, על ידם המעשה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="132"></i>. והתורה גם כן רפואה לחולי הנפש הזה. כי כאשר יוצא האדם מן הסדר בשנוי אשר יש לו במחשבותיו, מחשבת עבודה זרה, או קנאה בלב, אשר בו הקנאה, והתאוה מן הכבד, וכמו שידוע<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="133"></i>, וגם דבר זה<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="134"></i>, התורה מחזיר אותו אל הסדר. ואחר כך אמר<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="135"></i>, כמו שהתורה רפואה אל חולי הנפש, להחזיר חולי הנפש אל הסדר, כך התורה היא רפואה לגוף, ולכך אמר "חש בכל גופו יעסוק בתורה". ולכך לא כלל האברים המיוחדים, דהיינו הראש והגרון ובני מעיים והעצמות, במה שאמר "חש בכל גופו"<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="136"></i>, רק כי אלו אברים חולי הנפש תלוי בהם, ואחר כך זכר "חש בכל גופו" כנגד הגוף<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="137"></i>, שהתורה היא רפואת הנפש והגוף. וכל זה מפני כי היא סדר ושמירת הכל, ולכך העוסק בתורה אין ראוי שיהיה נמצא [בו] שנוי כלל<i data-commentator="Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman" data-label="138"></i>.</span></span></p></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-56306865234033979402022-03-18T15:16:00.004-05:002022-03-18T16:21:01.731-05:00Tzav. Three He'aros on Zerizus<p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">1. Rashi in the beginning of the parsha:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>צו את אהרן.</b> אֵין צַו אֶלָּא לְשׁוֹן זֵרוּז מִיָּד וּלְדוֹרוֹת; אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, בְּיוֹתֵר צָרִיךְ הַכָּתוּב לְזָרֵז בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ חֶסְרוֹן כִּיס (ספרא):</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rashi in Devarim 1:16:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ואצוה את שפטיכם.</b> אָמַרְתִּי לָהֶם הֱווּ מְתוּנִין בַּדִּין – אִם בָּא דִּין לְפָנֶיךָ פַּעַם אַחַת, שְׁתַּיִם, וְשָׁלוֹשׁ, אַל תֹּאמַר כְּבָר בָּא דִּין זֶה לְפָנַי פְּעָמִים הַרְבֵּה, אֶלָּא הֱיוּ נוֹשְׂאִים וְנוֹתְנִים בּוֹ (שם):</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rav Bergman (Ma'amarim here in Tzav) points out that Mesinus in the context of din means moving slowly - as in Brachos 20a,</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">כי הא דרב אדא בר אהבה חזייה לההיא כותית דהות לבישא כרבלתא בשוקא סבר דבת ישראל היא קם קרעיה מינה אגלאי מילתא דכותית היא שיימוה בארבע מאה זוזי א"ל מה שמך אמרה ליה מתון אמר לה מתון מתון ארבע מאה זוזי שויא:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rashi there:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">מתון מתון - לשון מאתן:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #202122;">ד' מאות - ב' פעמים ב' מאות כלומר השם גרם לי לשון אחר מתון מתון לשון המתנה אם המתנתי הייתי </span><span style="color: #202122;">משתכר ד' מאות זוז:</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #202122;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So what does Tzav connote? Alacrity or deliberation? Rav Bergman answers that there is physical atzlus and there is mental atzlus. A person that is mentally lazy will answer questions by rote. A person that is a mental Zariz will think through the question and the circumstances and quickly review the basis for the psak.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So Zrizus is always speed and alacrity. But in the case of psak, it means to be mentally agile and quick, and to use every iteration of a question as an opportunity to reexamine old certainties.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">2. </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">From Reb Yerucham. The word tzivui was used in regard to the exact same dinim in Tetzaveh. Two ziruzim were needed, exactly as the Mesillas Yesharim says in perek 7. I am widely known as something of an expert on atzlus, so trust me when I tell you that the Ramchal is right. Sometimes you decide something needs to be done, and somehow you congratulate yourself on your strength of character as demonstrated by your decision, and the self-congratulatory satisfaction replaces the actual motivation to get it done. The same happens when you begin a project that takes time and work, and after a day or two..... </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFP23-x5SyWzk0dPYWgVPBIQUFsI1yUUG2ehmsxlvdcLMFoyZK2blYW-3uRYpTZRcxbXA0_70zj7B9HrztncEelyn2TfAdy49EMqv56VeMyZvgn4c4gD_dTokbpBg1haY4RM4Tb0vf8Pp1CRfq9b79NKdzhmD4H4hAAcCRofsott7T2XzZeg/s1246/%D7%90%D7%95%D7%A6%D7%A8%20%D7%94%D7%97%D7%9B%D7%9E%D7%94_143941%20(1).jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><img border="0" data-original-height="425" data-original-width="1246" height="136" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFP23-x5SyWzk0dPYWgVPBIQUFsI1yUUG2ehmsxlvdcLMFoyZK2blYW-3uRYpTZRcxbXA0_70zj7B9HrztncEelyn2TfAdy49EMqv56VeMyZvgn4c4gD_dTokbpBg1haY4RM4Tb0vf8Pp1CRfq9b79NKdzhmD4H4hAAcCRofsott7T2XzZeg/w400-h136/%D7%90%D7%95%D7%A6%D7%A8%20%D7%94%D7%97%D7%9B%D7%9E%D7%94_143941%20(1).jpg" width="400" /></span></a></div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">3. </span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: helvetica;">Reb Moshe, in the new Kol Rom, says that the instruction of zerizus is particularly important in the parsha of Olah. A person brings an olah, which seems to yield very little practical benefit to anyone, and it reminds him that our efforts are not tied to our success. The Ribono shel Olam decides what will succeed and what we will have. A person might use this faith, this sharp spiritual perception, to justify sloth. So the Torah says No, whatever you choose to do for a parnassah, don't do it half heartedly. Do </span><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica;">it with energy and diligence and focus - with Zerizus!</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">(You need to see it inside, but I </span>can't quote it verbatim because A, it's copyrighted, and B, even if I decided it's ok to steal someone's hard work, it's not available online.)</p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-33176175754270273542022-03-17T13:46:00.005-05:002022-03-22T17:28:12.589-05:00Tazria, Vayikra 13:3. A Kohen Must See the Tzara'as.<p><span style="font-size: medium;"> <span>The Torah says that if a nega appears, only a kohen may pasken whether it is Tzara'as. If he is not a Talmid Chacham, he has to take a lamden with him to tell him what to pasken. But the Kohen has to examine the nega'im, and, ultimately, he has to pasken.</span></span></p><div align="center"><div style="text-align: left;"><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div></div><div align="center"><div style="text-align: left;"><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Rabbi Dr. Gary Schreiber<b> </b>pointed out that the avoda of the miluim, the process by which the Kohanim were inaugurated, has similarities to the tahara process of the metzora. If you carefully compare the two, you will find that they have avodos in common which are rarely found elsewhere. He said an excellent, and, I think, new, pshat that explains both connections of Kehuna to Tzara'as.</span></div></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A kohen is subject to the temptation of gaavah, because of his entitlements (the twenty four Matnos Kehuna) and his kedusha (which enables him to do the avodah and requires him to be tahor). Also, Kohanim are aware of everyone’s sins, because whoever brings a korban chatas has to be misvadeh; furthermore, when someone brings a chatas, he has to clearly explain to the Beis Din of the Kohanim why he is bringing it, so they can be sure that the Korban Chatas is indeed required and that it is not chulin ba'azara. So he might say lashon hora. This is a dangerous position to be in: you are born with superior kedusha, Klal Yisrael has to sweat to wrest a living from the earth while you sit at home and get your food-- grain, fruit and meat-- delivered tied with a bow, and you are privy to all their embarrasing failures and sins. It would not be surprising if Kohanim viewed the rest of Klal Yisrael as if they were a bunch of donkeys. This natural tendency to ga'avah and lashon hara can bring Tzara'as.</span><br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So the Torah says that the kohanim must personally look at nega’im. They need to see what the result of gaavah and lashon hara are. This constant visual reinforcement will help them control their yetzer hora. Very few oncologists smoke, and many dermatologists obssesively avoid exposure to sunlight, because day after day they see the deadly results of irresponsible and self destructive behavior; so, too, Kohanim are obligated to closely examine the nega'im of Tzara'as, and this will remind them to eschew the traits that bring Tzara'as - Ga'avah and Lashon Hara.</span><br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span>And this explains why the Avodas HaMilu'im recalls Taharas Metzora. The foundation ritual of Kehuna mirrors the taharas metzora process, so that every kohen will read this parsha and remember that the superior status he was granted brought with it a concomitant danger, and that every day he must be on guard against the temptations of ga'avah and lashon hara. Indeed, this concept is found in the Bracha the Kohanim give Klal Yisrael: Yevarechacha Hashem Veyishmerecha: every blessing brings along a heightened risk and the need for shemira. Kohanim, too, are blessed with many things, and these blessings create the need for greater shemira.<br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(Dr. Schreiber's words:</span><br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"...the similarity between the avoda of the taharas hametzora and the miluim of the kohanim which requires blood placed on the the bohanos of each of them. The kohen will hopefully carry the initial impression with him through his years of avodah and refrain from the failings that lead to one becoming a metzora.")</span><br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Update 2017: R Avrohom Bukspan sent a comment that connects a Medrash on this inyan. Vayikra Rabba 15.</span></span><br /><span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span></span></span><div style="direction: rtl; text-align: right;"><span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">רבי בשם רבי חמא בר חנינא: </span></span></div><div style="direction: rtl; text-align: right;"><span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">צער גדול היה לו למשה בדבר, כך הוא כבודו של אהרן אחי להיות רואה את הנגעים?! </span></span></div><div style="direction: rtl; text-align: right;"><span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">אמר ליה הקב"ה: לא נהנה (אותו) מהם כ"ד מתנות? </span></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span><div style="direction: rtl; text-align: right;"><span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">מתלא אמר: דאכיל בהדי קורא ילקה בהדי קילא, (= האוכל מן הקור לוקה מן הקורה).</span></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span>There are too many pshatim on the words </span><span>דאכיל בהדי קורא so we won't go into that, but, as I responded to Reb Avrohom, </span></span><br /><span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span></span></span><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="font-size: medium;">Very interesting pshat in the Medrash. Pashtus, it means that if a person shares his blessings with you, you can't turn your back on him when he's suffering and say it has nothing to do with you, you have to share his pain as well. But the way you're connecting it to this pshat, it's Chazal's way of describing what Gaavah is all about- that when it comes to taking, you think you're entitled, so that when the man needs sympathy, you don't feel any obligation to him. "I took because I deserve, and it's an honor for him to give me. I owe nothing to him!" So the Torah says, no. It was a gift, and you should be makir tov to the extent that his pain is your pain.</span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Update 2021:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Just to outline the similarities between Taharas Metzora and Chinuch Kohanim and Leviim. Chinuch Leviim is in Behaaloscha, and Kohanim is in Tzav.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">1. Taglachas: </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Metzora, </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">(ויקרא יד, ט) </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וְהָיָה בַיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי יְגַלַּח אֶת כׇּל שְׂעָרוֹ אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ וְאֶת זְקָנוֹ וְאֵת גַּבֹּת עֵינָיו וְאֶת־כׇּל־שְׂעָרוֹ יְגַלֵּחַ </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Leviim <span style="background-color: white;">וְהֶעֱבִירוּ תַעַר עַל כָּל בְּשָׂרָם" (במדבר ח, ז)</span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">2. Kibus:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;">Metzora </span><span style="background-color: white;">וְכִבֶּס אֶת בְּגָדָיו" (ויקרא יד, ט)</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Leviim וְכִבְּסוּ בִגְדֵיהֶם וְהִטֶּהָרוּ" (במדבר שם)</span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">3. Tevilla.</span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">4. Tenufa, by Metzora on his living Korban, by the Leviim on them personally.</span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">5. Dam and Shemen on the persons:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;">Metzora </span><span style="background-color: white; text-align: right;">וְלָקַח הַכֹּהֵן מִדַּם הָאָשָׁם וְנָתַן הַכֹּהֵן עַל תְּנוּךְ אֹזֶן... וכו" (ויקרא יד, יד, י'ז)</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; text-align: right;">וּמִיֶּ֨תֶר הַשֶּׁ֜מֶן אֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־כַּפּ֗וֹ יִתֵּ֤ן הַכֹּהֵן֙ עַל־תְּנ֞וּךְ אֹ֤זֶן הַמִּטַּהֵר֙ הַיְמָנִ֔ית וְעַל־בֹּ֤הֶן יָדוֹ֙ הַיְמָנִ֔ית וְעַל־בֹּ֥הֶן רַגְל֖וֹ הַיְמָנִ֑ית עַ֖ל דַּ֥ם הָאָשָֽׁם׃</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; text-align: right;">Kohanim, </span><span style="background-color: white; text-align: right;">(ויקרא ח, כד-ל)</span>וישחט ויקח משה מדמו ויתן על־תנוך אזן־אהרן הימנית ועל־בהן ידו הימנית ועל־בהן רגלו הימנית</span></p><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Leviticus 8:24" class="segment highlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Leviticus 8:24" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויקרב את־בני אהרן ויתן משה מן־הדם על־תנוך אזנם הימנית ועל־בהן ידם הימנית ועל־בהן רגלם הימנית</span></span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Shemen, by the Kohanim, ויקח משה משמן המשחה ומן־הדם אשר על־המזבח ויז על־אהרן על־בגדיו ועל־בניו ועל־בגדי בניו אתו ויקדש את־אהרן את־בגדיו ואת־בניו ואת־בגדי בניו אתו </span></span></p></div><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">UPDATE 2022.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I just saw an email from R Zweig's yeshiva in Miami. He says that the lesson of davka these three limbs is that a kohen, elevated to Keser Kehuna, holier than every other Jew, needs to be reminded that his is a position of service, not self-aggrandizement. So you put the dam on his hand, leg and ear - The kohen is charged with the work of doing for others, and going to others, and listening to others. The same lesson is taught the Metzora, who needs to change from self centered to sympathetic.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: medium;">His words:</span></p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: xx-small;">In this week’s parsha, we find Hashem giving Moshe instructions for the official installation of Aharon and his sons as kohanim – the priestly class of Bnei Yisroel. Moshe then gathers all of Bnei Yisroel to watch as he follows a step-by-step process for initiating Aharon and his sons as the kohanim.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: x-small;">Aside from the steps that might be expected in the process of elevating their status – immersion in a mikveh, dressing them in priestly vestments, applying and sprinkling the special anointing oil to all the vessels in the Mishkan and to Aharon and his sons as well, etc. – we find a very unusual ritual.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: x-small;">Several sacrifices were offered: a bull was brought as a sin offering, a ram was brought as a burnt offering, and a second ram was brought as a peace offering (see 8:22 and Rashi ad loc). Moshe then applied the blood of the peace offering to Aharon’s and his sons’ right ear lobes, right thumbs, and right big toes.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: x-small;">This ritual is only performed in one other place in the Torah: by the purification of a person who has been struck by tzora’as – commonly (and incorrectly) translated as leprosy.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: x-small;">hat is the meaning of this enigmatic ritual and what is the relationship between initiating the kohanim and cleansing one who has recovered from tzora’as?</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: x-small;">Aharon and his sons were being elevated to a new status over the rest of the Jewish people. They were now receiving forevermore one of the three crowns that Hashem gifted to this world; they were receiving the crown of kehuna. Without proper perspective, being crowned can be a dangerous affair as it can easily lead one to harbor false notions of self-importance. A person can actually begin to believe that he is receiving this honor because there is something intrinsically great about himself.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: x-small;">The unique ritual of placing the blood on the ear lobe, thumb, and big toe is intended to address this issue. The unifying connection between all of these parts of the body is that the ears, fingers, and toes represent the person’s extremities. When a person gets cold, the first parts that are affected are the extremities – namely the ears, fingers, and toes – because they are the furthest from the core of the body. Yet, when a person is asked to point to himself, he always points to his core. Thus, by emphasizing the extremities, this ritual demonstrates that the position is not about them personally, it’s about what they can do for others.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: x-small;">The message they receive is that while being anointed a kohen is an honor, it is more significantly a great and awesome responsibility. The Talmud has a dispute about whether the kohanim are agents of the people to Hashem or agents of Hashem to the people, but everyone agrees that they are merely agents. In other words, they are facilitators not principals. This is the message conveyed by placing the blood on the extremities.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: xx-small;"></span><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: x-small;">This is also true of a person who has been struck by tzora’as. This punishment comes as a consequence of speaking loshon hora. The core motivating force of one who speaks loshon hora is the desire to elevate oneself by putting others down. While every sin contains an element of self-centered behavior, loshon hora is the sin of focusing on the perceived importance of oneself and trying to elevate the opinions of others regarding one’s own self-importance. This is why a person needs a kohen to declare them unclean and the process of purification is the same as the kohen’s initiation. The message they are supposed to receive and internalize is that they need to focus less on themselves and their own importance.</span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;">ADDITIONAL UPDATE 2022</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Dr. R' Hertzka Grinblatt offered another very good explanation for the commonality among Metzora and Kohen and Levi. He said that all three need to be kovei'a themselves in a machaneh.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The Metzora needs to be allowed into Machane Yisrael; the Levi into Machane Levi'ah; the Kohen into Machane Shechina.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">This is a case of תן לחכם ויחכם עוד, and also an application of די לחכימה ברמיזה. Because you can cavil that the Metzora was already muttar to enter the machane after the Shtei Tziporim; and the Levi? He doesn't need any hetter to go into the Har HaBayis. But the point is still excellent. There are three machanos. Each of the three is the place of the parts of Klal Yisrael. For all three of these people, it is part of the process that is KOVEI'A them into their machane position. Again, I can explain it for you, I can not understand it for you. </span></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-86830696495139438692022-03-11T15:29:00.003-06:002022-03-14T13:39:15.019-05:00Vayikra. Nochach and Nistar, Second and Third Person by Korbanos. Ich und Du<p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The instructions of Korbanos are in third person- he. See 1:3, 1:14, 1:10, 3:1 - יקריב אתו, והקריב מן התרים, זכר תמים יקריבנו, אם־זכר אם נקבה תמים יקריבנו . </span></p><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">However, the Korban Mincha is stated in second person- you. See 2:11, 2:12, and 2:13 - אשר תקריבו, קרבן ראשית תקריבו , וכל קרבן מנחתך במלח תמלח. </span><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">In Shmoneh Esrei, all brachos follow the format of Nochach/Nistar, with one exception. Modim could follow the same format and end with Hatov Shemo, veLo na'eh lehodos. But it doesn't. It is stated in second person - hatov shimcha, lecha na'eh lehodos.</span></div></div><div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Reb Yaakov Emden in Beis Yaakov says that the eighteen verses in Yehi chevod correspond to the brachos in Shmoneh Esrei. It has been pointed out that all but one are lashon nistar - the fourth verse, Hashem Shimcha leolam va'ed Hashem Zichrecha ledor vador. It seems that this verse corresponds with Modim. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Why? What is the common denominator?</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rav Bergman (Shaarei Orah/Maamarim/Vayikra) points out that whereas other korbanos yield a benefit to the baalim, this is not true by a minchas nedava. No kapara at all (he quotes the Steipler in Zevachim as stating this) and the baalim never ever eats any of it. Even a Kohen doesn't eat from his own Mincha, because it's kallil. (This is an oddity that I never saw an explanation for until now!) Indeed, when discussing the Minchas Chotei, the Torah does not use the lashon nochach. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Lechoira, you can ask that one of the Menachos mentioned above is the Minchas Ha'Omer, that is mattir Chodosh, which is a tremendous benefit. But, remarkably enough, the Sifra says that the Torah introduces the parsha of Minchas Haomer with Im to teach you that you should be makriv as a nedava, not for the toeles of hetter - ואם תקריב מנחת בכורים!</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ספרא, ויקרא דבורא דנדבה, פרשה יג ב-ג</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">[ב] ר' שמעון אומר "ואם תקריב מנחת בכורים לשם" – זו מנחה באה חובה. יכול נדבה? כשהוא אומר (ויקרא כג, י) "והבאתם את עמר ראשית קצירכם אל הכהן" למד שאינה באה אלא חובה.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">[ג] ואם כן למה נאמר "ואם"? לומר אם אתם מביאים אותה לרצון מעלה אני עליכם כאילו נדבה הבאתם אותה, ואם אין אתם מביאים אותה לרצון מעלה אני עליכם כאילו לא הבאתם אותה אלא לצורך עצמכם.</span></div></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Pretty cool, no?</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rav Bergman has a different mehalach, but I would suggest that the common denominator is that both by Modim and by Korban Mincha, you are not there to get anything. By Modim, you're not saying "Give," you're saying "thank you for what you've given." Sure, there are plenty of unctuous sycophants who only express gratitude to ingratiate themselves, but that is not the intent of the bracha of Modim.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The idea is that in both cases, one is approaching the Ribono shel Olam with absolutely no self interest, only to express respect and love and gratitude. Such a person is a ben bayis, not an outsider, and the relationship is Ich/Du, Lashon Nochach.</span></div></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-73535165322451375072022-02-25T13:51:00.009-06:002022-02-25T15:07:23.804-06:00Vayakhel, Shemos 35:30, 31. Betzalel ben Uri ben Chur l’matei Yehudah....Chochmoh, tvunoh, vodaas.<p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: x-small;">Originally published in 2007. It's very good, so I'm putting it in the front of the line.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Reb Meir Simchah here (Meshech Chochmoh) asks, why does the possuk list Betzalel’s yichus selectively, noting specifically his ancestors Chur and Yehudah.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br />He answers that one is faced with the possibility of the ultimate sacrifice, of martyrdom, close and meticulous rational analysis is untimely. When Nachshon and Shevet Yehudah were faced with the test of whether they would jump into the Red Sea, and when Chur was faced with a mob of hysterics demanding an Eigel, if Nachshon and Chur had indulged in careful critical analysis and deep consideration of the alternatives and ramifications, they never would have moved: they would have suffered from “the paralysis of analysis.” But they had the deeper wisdom and strength to do what needed to be done without hesitation, and what they did echoes throughout all time. He brings an epigram from the Chosid Yaavetz– "analysis saps the strength of the will." </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;"> </span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">דהחקירה תעכב [ברצון הפנימי] מלמסור נפשו על קדוש השם </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">יתברך</span></span></p><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So, middoh k’neged middoh, Hashem filled Betzalel with wisdom. When the time came, and there was a need for careful and prudent wisdom, Hashem granted that as a gift to the descendant of these two people who had shown they knew the limits of chochmoh.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Reb Meir Simcha 35:30</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;">ראו קרא ד' כשם כצלאל כו' כן חור למטה יהודה כו' הענין דמסירת נפש צריך להיות שלא בחקירה והתחכמות יתירה ויהודה מסר עצמו בים במסירת נפש כמו דאיתא בתוספתא דסוטה וכן חור מסר עצמו בעגל דהחקירה תעכב [ברצון פנימי] מלמסור נפשו על קדוש השי"ת כעדות יעב"ץ החסיד לכן אמר שבעבור זה שלא חקרו ולא נתחכמו יותר מדאי לכן וימלא אותו בחכמה ובדעת כו' <b>והבן</b> </div><div><br /></div>Reb Meir Simcha ends his discussion with with “vehovein.” He clearly means to say that his pshat is not just his usual standard of a brilliant and deep vort, or a new iteration of a truism. And the reason is because at first glance, he seems to be advocating imprudence and foolhardiness! This, obviously, is not what he wants us to come away with. We are all too familiar with the delusional extremists whose acts of 'martyrdom' fill the newspapers. What, then, does he mean?<br /><br />The answer is this: Reb Meir Simcha is not saying that there is an <strong>alternative </strong>to prudent wisdom. He is saying that along with chochmas hatorah, you have to develop another kind of chochmoh, and that is the chochmoh of mussor and hashkofoh. This is what the Torah means by "chochmo, tevuna, voda'as. Only when you combine Chochmas Hatorah with the Binoh of mussor and hashkofo do you come to Da'as, the knowledge of what needs to be done right now. If you only have the wisdom of havonas hatorah, you are lacking a crucial part of what a ben Torah must develop. People talk about ‘the fifth shulchon oruch.’ Everyone has their own opinion of what comprises this part of shulchon oruch, and it is usually cited in support of some unsupportable and foolish opinion that contradicts daas torah. In fact, however, this part of Shulchon Oruch is not an alternative to the first four parts. The fifth shulchon oruch is the mussor and hashkofoh that cannot be written on paper. Only if a person knows and understands kol hatorah kuloh, and he also is a godol in hashkofoh and mussor, only then can he trust that his kol demomoh dakoh comes from an inculcated sense of what the right thing to do is.<br /><br />My father (Shlitah) Hareini Kapparas Mishkavo, liked to say that if someone would open a store that sold common sense, it would go bankrupt, because everyone thinks he has plenty of common sense. In fact, though, common sense is a rare and precious commodity. The same is true regarding the Tevunoh VoDa'as the Torah mentions here.<br /><br />In Parshas Titzaveh, 30:7, it says B’heitivo es haneiros yaktirenu. The ketores is brought in middle of the hatovas haneiros. While this is a well known halachah which many of us say before pesukei de'zimra every day, did you ever wonder why this is so? Why must we interrupt the preparation of the menorah in order to burn the ketores? Where do we find a Gzeiras Hakasuv that requires that Oseik Bemitzvah should davka stop in middle to do a different mitzvah? Reb Moshe in the original Dorash Moshe says that a talmid chochom (the menorah) needs to have a sense of smell (the ketores) – to be able to discern that something is wrong even when nothing apparent is evident, to be able to sense when people are using the Torah to trick others into following false philosophies. He brings Sanhedrin 93b about the Melech Hamoshiach who is “morach v’do’in.” He explains that this is not a din of nevu’ah, it is simply a sense that every yorei shomayim develops to some degree.<br /><br />This is what Reb Meir Simcha is talking about. A talmid chochom that does not develop this extra sense, and who relies on just his wisdom, is incomplete, and he should remember that the ketores is an essential part of the hatovas hamenorah.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Here is what bothers me. Why was this quality necessary, or relevant, to davka Betzalel? Of course you need kavana, and chachma, and daas, to fabricate the keilim and invest them with kedusha. As we have said elsewhere, the degree and quality of kavana is an essential part of the keilim and the begadim, no less than in writing a Sefer Torah. But why this particular techunas hanefesh? There was no mesiras nefesh involved here.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">My nephew, Harav Yitzchak Buchalter, suggested the following. We know the story said about the Ramak, who said in a drasha that total bitachon will mean the Ribono shel Olam will take care of you 100%. A simple Jew listened, and sold his horse and wagon, we all know the story. The lesson is that the talmidim of Reb Moshe Cordevero were each and every one a gadol in Chochma and Mussar and Kabbala. But they were not simple Jews, they were great thinkers. As such, they had the problem the Chosid Yaavetz described. When Betzalel made the keilim, he had to have the deep wisdom of the heart, which entails dakusdikkeh kavanos that are entirely outside of a normal person's comprehension. To make the keilim with these kavanos required a faith in siyata dishmaya that the kavanos were exactly as they needed to be, with no sfeikos at all. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> A young medical school student I met, Reb Jacobowitz from Baltimore, said the following, and I think it's superb. Chazal tell us again and again that Betzalel and Ahaliav and indeed all the craftsmen were איש אשר נשאו לבו וכל אשר נדבה רוחו אותו, which means they didn't apprentice, they didn't practice, they were inspired with divine wisdom and skill which expressed itself in their sublime work. As the Ramban says in 35:21,</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">כי לא היה בהם שלמד את המלאכות האלה ממלמד, או מי שאימן בהן ידיו כלל, אבל מצא בטבעו שידע לעשות כן, ויגבה לבו בדרכי ה' (דה''ב יז ו) לבא לפני משה לאמר לו אני אעשה כל אשר אדני דובר </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> If so, the type of chochma needed here is beyond learned chochma. It is the tevunas haleiv that was exemplified by Nachshon and Chur, a direct connection to kedusha and truth. </span></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-63577323733628773502022-02-22T17:40:00.014-06:002022-02-25T13:26:38.612-06:00Ki Sisa, Shemos 34:34. The Masveh and Hiskashrus with a Rebbi<p> <span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Upon returning with the second Luchos, Moshe Rabbeinu was granted a Keren of light, an illumination that bespoke his embodiment of the Torah, as the Kiryas Sefer says in the Hakdama. This light frightened everyone, so he covered his face. He removed the cover only when he spoke to Hashem and when he taught Klal Yisrael what Hashem had imparted to him.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויהי ברדת משה מהר סיני ושני לחת העדת ביד־משה ברדתו מן־ההר ומשה לא־ידע כי קרן עור פניו בדברו אתו</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וירא אהרן וכל־בני ישראל את־משה והנה קרן עור פניו וייראו מגשת אליו</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויקרא אלהם משה וישבו אליו אהרן וכל־הנשאים בעדה וידבר משה אלהם</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ואחרי־כן נגשו כל־בני ישראל ויצום את כל־אשר דבר ה אתו בהר סיני</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויכל משה מדבר אתם ויתן על־פניו מסוה</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ובבא משה לפני ה לדבר אתו יסיר את־המסוה עד־צאתו ויצא ודבר אל־בני ישראל את אשר יצוה</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וראו בני־ישראל את־פני משה כי קרן עור פני משה והשיב משה את־המסוה על־פניו עד־באו לדבר אתו</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Gemara in Chagiga 16a says that one who looks at three things weakens his eyesight: the rainbow, Kohanim during duchening, and a "Nasi." </span></p><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Chagigah 16a:13" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Chagigah 16a:13" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"></span></span></p></div><p></p><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Chagigah 16a:14" class="segment highlight invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Chagigah 16a:14" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">דרש רבי יהודה ברבי נחמני מתורגמניה דריש לקיש: כל המסתכל בשלשה דברים עיניו כהות: בקשת, ובנשיא, ובכהנים. בקשת — דכתיב: ״כמראה הקשת אשר יהיה בענן ביום הגשם הוא מראה דמות כבוד ה׳״. בנשיא — דכתיב: ״ונתת מהודך עליו״. </span></span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Mahrsha there says that this is because they carry with them something of the Ziv HaShechina, and "lo yirani ha'adam vachai," and suma is k'meis.</span></span></p><p class="segmentText" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span class="he" lang="he"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>כל </b>המסתכל בג' דברים עיניו כהות כו'. מקרא לא מייתי אלא דבג' דברים איכא דמות וזיו שכינה והיה קבלה בידו דעיניו כהות במסתכל בהם והא ודאי במסתכל בשכינה ממש א"א להיות חי כמ"ש כי לא יראני האדם וחי אבל הכא במסתכל בדמות וזיו של שכינה קאמר גם שאינו מת מ"מ עונשו שעיניו כהות שהוא דמות מיתה כמ"ש ג' חשובין כמת סומא כו':</span></span></p></div><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">It is clear that this ״ונתת מהודך עליו״ refers to the keren ohr of Moshe, because of the Medrash Tehillim 21, which equates the וייראו מגשת אליו in our parsha by the keren of light with the "וייראו אותו כאשר יראו את משה by Yehoshua and states that this was a result of ונתתה מהודך עליו :</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">מדרש תהלים (בובר) מזמור כא </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">"גָּדוֹל כְּבוֹדוֹ בִּישׁוּעָתֶךָ הוֹד וְהָדָר תְּשַׁוֶּה עָלָיו" (תהלים כא ו) הוד של רב, והדר של תלמיד, כענין שנאמר: "ונתתה מהודך עליו" (במדבר כז כ). מהודך ולא כל הודך. והיכן ניתן לו ליהושע? ר' יודן אמר: בירדן ניתן לו. במשה כתיב: "וייראו מגשת אליו" (שמות לד ל), וביהושע כתיב: "וייראו אותו כאשר יראו את משה" (יהושע ד יד).</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">Question: If the luminous countenance of Moshe Rabbeinu was so fearsome, indeed dangerous, such that he covered it to protect all that saw him, why did he not cover his face when he taught Klal Yisrael Torah?</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Certainly there was the benefit described in the Ramban, that everyone that saw and heard him knew that when he said "I am your God," he was repeating verbatim the words of Hashem, and not his own thoughts. (One might ask, on the contrary, there is a greater concern of misinterpretation when a man that shines with supernal light says "I am your God." I suppose the answer is that because Moshe was careful to cover his face all the time except when giving over Hashem's words, it was clear to everyone that when he had the mask on, he was functioning as Moshe ben Amram, and when he removed his mask he was delivering a message from Hashem.)</span></p><div class="yiv6456237212yqt3718487733" id="yiv6456237212yqt47042" style="background-color: white;"><div class="yiv6456237212segmentText" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">רמב"ן ויקרא י"ח ב</span></div><div class="yiv6456237212segmentText" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וטעם דבר אל בני ישראל ואמרת אליהם אני ה' אלהיכם כאילו הוא אומר "ואמרת אליהם בשמי אני ה' אלהיכם" וכן קדושים תהיו כי קדוש אני ה' אלהיכם (<a class="yiv6456237212refLink" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" shape="rect" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: underline;">ויקרא י״ט:ב׳</a>) ואפשר כי הטעם <b>כי בצאת משה מלפני השם בלא מסוה ויצא ודבר אל בני ישראל את אשר יצוה איננו צריך לומר להם "כה אמר ה'" כי ידוע להם כי רוחו ידבר בו ומלתו על לשונו לא ידבר מעצמו</b> וכן במקומות רבים במשנה תורה כך ידבר כמו והיה אם שמוע תשמעו אל מצותי אשר אנכי מצוה אתכם היום ונתתי מטר ארצכם ונתתי עשב בשדך (<a class="yiv6456237212refLink" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" shape="rect" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: underline;">דברים יא יג</a> טו) ואין משה הנותן מטר על פני ארץ ושולח מים על פני חוצות ומצמיח עשב בשדה אלא ה' יתברך <br clear="none" /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div></div><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">But that does not explain why he couldn't say "Koh Amar Hashem." There has to be a direct reason for removing the mask while teaching Torah.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Reb Moshe, in the new Kol Rom, says that the light was the Hod of Hashra'as HaShechina that rests on those that learn Torah, just that for Moshe it was open and brilliant, and for others, it is internal - </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">האור שקרן מעור פניו של משה הוי הוד של השראת שכינה לאלו שעוסקים בתורה, והוא היה למשה בגלוי ולכל ישראל הוא בפנימיות</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Therefore, when Klal Yisrael was learning Torah, they, too, had this light, and they were worthy to see the light shining from the face of Moshe Rabbeinu.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;">ולכן בעת </span>שלמדו את התורה אצל משה גם להם היה אור זה בפנימיותם, והיו ראויים לראות באור שהיה על פניו.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The idea that this light shines from every oseik baTorah is also found in the Zohar, and it doesn't matter much whether it is the light of Hashra'as HaShechina or the Ohr Haganuz.</span></p><div class="yiv6456237212textRange yiv6456237212basetext" style="background-color: white;"><div class="yiv6456237212text"><div class="yiv6456237212textInner"><div class="yiv6456237212segment yiv6456237212highlight yiv6456237212invisibleHighlight yiv6456237212heOnly yiv6456237212showNamedEntityLinks" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><div class="yiv6456237212segmentText"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span class="yiv6456237212he" lang="he" style="width: 112px;"> (בראשית א׳:ג׳) ויאמר אלהים יהי אור ויהי אור. אמר רבי יוסי, ההוא אור אתגניז ואיהו אזדמן לגבי צדיקיא לעלמא דאתי. כמה דאוקמוה, דכתיב, (תהילים צ״ז:י״א) אור זרוע לצדיק. לצדיק ודאי סתם. וההוא אור לא שמש בעלמא, בר יומא קדמאה. ולבתר אתגניז, ולא שמש יתיר. </span>רבי יהודה אומר, אלמלי אתגניז מכל וכל, לא קאים עלמא אפילו רגעא חדא, אלא אתגניז ואזדרע כהאי זרעא דעביד תולדין וזרעין ואיבין, ומניה אתקיים עלמא. ולית לך יומא, דלא נפיק מניה בעלמא, ומקיים כלא דביה זן קודשא בריך הוא עלמא. ובכל אתר דלעאן באורייתא בליליא, חד חוטא נפיק מההוא אור גניז, ואתמשיך על אינון דלעאן בה</span></div></div></div></div></div><p></p><div class="yiv6456237212yqt8666215117" id="yiv6456237212yqtfd16364" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white;"></div><p></p><div style="background-color: white;"><div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">But even with Reb Moshe's pshat, that when they were learning they were worthy to see the light, that when they were learning it did not frighten or harm them, there has to be a reason why is was necessary for Moshe to take off the mask when he taught them Torah.</span></div><div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; direction: rtl;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The answer, of course, is that a talmid has to see his rebbi when he learns, as the Netziv says in 34:35.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">הוריות י"ב</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">"וכי יתביתו קמי רבכון, חזו לפומיה דרבכון, שנאמר: (ישעיהו ל') והיו עיניך רואות את מוריך".</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">עירובין י"ג</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אמר רבי: האי דמחדדנא מחבראי דחזיתיה לרבי מאיר מאחוריה, ואילו חזיתיה מקמיה הוה מחדדנא טפי — דכתיב: ״והיו עיניך רואות את מוריך״.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">It is true that the Mahrsha sees this as a purely rational, technical idea - that facial expressions communicate more than words alone.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">הוה מחדדנא טפי כו'. דבהסברת פנים הוה מחדדי טפי דיש להבין בקריצת עינים וברמיזת שפתים והיינו רואות את מוריך שמראה לו </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> פנים טפי וק"ל:</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">But others, including the Radbaz, learn that there is more to it.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אמרו בספרי החכמה כי בהיות האדם מתכוון אל רבו ונותן אליו לבו תתקשר נפשו בנפשו ויחול עליו מהשפע אשר עליו ויהיה לו נפש יתירה וזה נקרא אצלם סוד העיבור בחיי שניהם. וזה הוא שנאמר "והיו עיניך רואות את מוריך"</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Radbaz, of course, was among the greatest of the Mekubalim and among the greatest of the poskim. The Arizal learned in his yeshiva, he was on the Beis Din with the Beis Yosef, and in general he was a living Sefer Torah by the standards of his generation of malachim. Every word he says has to be measured like diamonds.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Here you see that he says that in order to understand Torah properly, you need a kesher to a rebbi, and that is created by looking at him and hearing his divrei Torah.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The lesson here is that learning Torah requires a kesher to a Rebbi. When that kesher is created, the light of the Torah that he has is shared with his talmid. This does not happen with a tape recorder or a book. It is personal and intimate. As explained by Rav Chatzkel Levenstein - </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">תלמידי הגה"צ רבי יחזקאל לוונשטיין זצ"ל שאלוהו: מדוע שיחה הנשמעת מטייפרקורדר אינה משפיעה כל כך חזק כמו שיחה ששומעים מפי החכם עצמו? והוא ענה: בשיחה מוקלטת חסר הצלם אלוקים"</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">This concept of creating a kesher with a rebbi in order to be spiritually elevated is found in other sefarim, primarily among the Chasidim, which has been inflated into a serious problem. For example, the Breslevers are famous for saying </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">“הריני מקשר עצמי.., לכל הצדיקים האמיתיים שבדורנו , ולכל הצדיקים האמיתיים שוכני עפר קדושים אשר בארץ המה, ובפרט לרבינו הקדוש, צדיק יסוד עולם, נחל נובע מקור חכמה, רבינו נחמן בן פֵיגֶא, זכותו יגן עלינו, ועל כל ישראל, אמן.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">But it's not only the Breslevers. It is pretty fundamental in Chabad as well. From the Sefer HaTanya:</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">בכל דור ודור יש ראשי אלפי ישראל שנשמותיהם הם בבחינת ראש ומוח לגבי נשמות ההמון ועמי הארץ... יניקת וחיות נפש רוח ונשמה של עמי הארץ הוא מנפש רוח ונשמה של הצדיקים והחכמים, ראשי בני ישראל שבדורם... על ידי דביקה בתלמידי חכמים קשורות נפש ורוח ונשמה של עמי הארץ ומיוחדות במהותן הראשון ושורשם שבחכמה עילאה</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">On the other hand, Reb Chaim in Nefesh HaChaim, describing Avodah Zara deoraysa:</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">נפש החיים שער ג פרק ט</span></div><div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ומהם שהיו משתעבדים ומזבחים ומקטרים לאיזה אדם שראו שכח ממשלת מזלו גדול מאד. בחשבם שע''י השתעבדם ועבודתם אליו יעלה מזלם עם מזלו.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ומהם אף שלא היתה כוונת עבודתם להשפעת הנאות עוה''ז. אבל כוונתם היתה להשיג עי''ז איזה השגות שכלים שחמדו להם. כמו חכמת הקסמים וכיוצא איזה השגות.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ומהם שהתדבקו לעבודת איזה אנשים כדי להמשיך השפעת אמונת אמון ועניני עתידות. וזהו הכל עכומ''ז גמורה. ובכלל לא יהיה לך אלהים אחרים כמ''ש הכל הרמב''ן ז''ל בפירושו על התורה שם. ועיין לק''ת ס''פ נח בענין דור הפלגה:</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ואפילו להשתעבד ולהתדבק באיזה עבודה לבחי' רוה''ק שבאיזה אדם נביא ובעל רוה''ק. גם זה נקרא עכומ''ז ממש. כמו שמצינו בנבוכדנצר שהשתחוה לדניאל. ג''כ לא בעבור שהחזיקו לאלוה בורא כל. אלא שכיון בהשתחויתו להשתעבד ולהתדבק לרוח הקדש שבו. כמ''ש (דניאל ב׳:מ״ו) באדין מלכא נבוכדנצ' נפל על אנפוהי ולדניאל סגיד ומנחה ונחחין וכו' מן קשוט די אלהכון הוא אלם אלהין כו' וגלה רזין. די יכלת למגלא רזא דנה ושם (סי' ד') ועד אחרין על קדמי דניאל כו' ודי רוח אלהין קדישין בי' וכו'. ורז''ל אמרו (סנהדרין צ''ג א') הטעם שלא היה דניאל בעת ציווי ההשתחוי' לצל' שאמר דניאל איזיל מהכא דלא לקיים בי פסילי אלהיהם תשרפון. ונ''נ אמר ג''כ יזיל דניאל מהכא דלא לימרו קליי' לאלהי' בנורא. וע' ז''ח רות ס' ע''ב. ובב''ר פ' ל''ו ובתנחומא ר''פ ויחי וכן אתה מוצ' בדניאל וכו' מה כתיב באדין מלכא נבוכדנצ' וכו' ומנחה ונחחין אמר לנסכא לי' אבל דניאל לא קיבל למה שכשם שנפרעין מעובדי עכומ''ז כך נפרעין מהעכומ''ז עצמה. וכן אמרו שם זה הטע' גם על יעקב אבינו ע''ה שלא רצה ליקבר במצרים הרי שקראו ז''ל ענין זה עכומ''ז. אף שהכוונה היתה לרוח אלהין קדישין דבי'.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I am not competent to decide whether Reb Chaim's definition would cast Breslevers, and to some extent most Chasidim, as ovdei avodah zara deoraysa, and if you can bring rayos from reality, it is apparent that the war against Chasidus is long finished, and they won. But I do know that because of a technicality, it does not matter. Avoda Zara requires specific acts, and talk is not among them. As Reb Chaim goes on to say,</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ועם כי עיקר אזהרת הכתוב על כל העבודה זרה הנ"ל היינו בארבע עבודות דוקא. אמנם עתה שעבודת התפלה ובהשתעבדות כוונת הלב הוא במקום עבודת הקרבן ודאי גם על זה שייך האזהרה וזהו שאמר הכתיב שמות זובח לאלהים יחרם בלתי לה' לבדו היינו שלא לכוין חס ושלום בשום עבודה וענין לאיזה כח פרטי מכחות שקבע הבורא יתברך כי שם אלקים משותף לכל בעל כח פרטי שיהיה כידוע וכמו שנתבאר לעיל רק לכוין לשם העצם המיוחד לו יתברך לבד שפירושו מהוה הכל היינו כללא ומקורא דכל הכחות כולם כנ"ל וזהו שמע ישראל ה' אלקינו ה' אחד רצה לומר שכל הכחות פרטיים שנמשכים מהויי"ה ברוך הוא המה מאוחדים ונקבצים בכחו יתברך שמו כלל מקור אחדותו הוהוא מצד התחברותן יתברך עם העולמות </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Still, one has to wonder. For us Bnei Yeshiva, non-chasidim, followers of the derech of Reb Chaim, is there a problem taking the Radbaz literally? Even if it is not יהרג ואל יעבור, is it not fort a hashkafa that we totally reject?</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The answer is, no, of course not. As Reb Moshe said in the Kol Rom at the beginning, we are talking about a Rebbi Talmid relationship that arises from teaching and learning. The kesher created by this act of lilmod ule'lameid is not Avodah Zara, it is exactly what mesoras Hatorah is meant to be, it is pure Avodas Hashem.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So the answer to the questions we posed is that the mesora of Torah requires a personal, direct, visual, intimate connection between Rebbi and Talmid. Without dwelling on it, the term the Radbaz uses, סוד העיבור, is meant seriously. When that happens, Klal Yisrael had no fear of the "קרן עור פניו" because that "Torah התקשרות" between Rebbi and Talmid elicited within Klal Yisrael the very same Karnei Ohr that Moshe Rabbeinu had. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I once printed these mugs and gave them to certain members of my shiur.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjRwYSjSOnSlK_LBeDTN2M4DK7qpgZfwmwYMeJiAO7kXiOBP1nlhED6OY7ZyYylz5NrdF8jqQGzOaZKON6O588yzKBSCKX-Q2_rp4rXQ4CpZK2d8I85QbnRhIT3ptkA3DlN_CZr71kSALHIaybfOLnLgGokVAT6U38YnITqV9VxaD7qmgOMWmYlzw3d=s550" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="550" data-original-width="550" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjRwYSjSOnSlK_LBeDTN2M4DK7qpgZfwmwYMeJiAO7kXiOBP1nlhED6OY7ZyYylz5NrdF8jqQGzOaZKON6O588yzKBSCKX-Q2_rp4rXQ4CpZK2d8I85QbnRhIT3ptkA3DlN_CZr71kSALHIaybfOLnLgGokVAT6U38YnITqV9VxaD7qmgOMWmYlzw3d=s320" width="320" /></a></div><br /><div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">UPDATE:</div></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I asked two of my grandchildren the question. Their answers are better than mine. One of them, Yaakov Jofen, is named after his great grandfather, Rav Yakov Jofen the Rosh Yeshiva of Beis Yosef in Flatbush. The other is Moshe Eisenberg, named after his great great grandfather, Reb Moshe Feinstein. Yakov said something deep, something his namesake would have enjoyed. Moshe said what Reb Moshe says in his Kol Rom.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Moshe's answer was, like Reb Moshe's that I mentioned above, that the Kedusha of Torah protected them. The light from Moshe Rabbeinu was kedushas haTorah, and when they were learning, that light was in them as well. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">My nephew, Harav Yitzchak Buchalter, added something important to Reb Moshe's answer. He pointed out Rashi in 34:30,</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וייראו מגשת אליו. בֹּא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה גָדוֹל כֹּחָהּ שֶׁל עֲבֵרָה שֶׁעַד שֶׁלֹּא פָשְׁטוּ יְדֵיהֶם בַּעֲבֵרָה מַהוּ אוֹמֵר? וּמַרְאֵה כְּבוֹד ה' כְּאֵשׁ אֹכֶלֶת בְּרֹאשׁ הָהָר לְעֵינֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל (שמות כ"ד) – וְלֹא יְרֵאִים וְלֹא מִזְדַּעְזְעִים, וּמִשֶּׁעָשׂוּ אֶת הָעֵגֶל אַף מִקַּרְנֵי הוֹדוֹ שֶׁל מֹשֶׁה הָיוּ מַרְתִּיעִים וּמִזְדַּעְזְעִים (ספרי):</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rashi/the Sifri is saying that the fear was a consequence of their yerida. It makes perfect sense that when they were שקוע in לימוד התורה that they would be able to look and not be harmed or afraid.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Yaakov's answer I never would have thought of. He said that they were only afraid when "a man" shone with the light of God. But when Moshe was teaching them Hashem's words, he was representing and channeling the Ribono shel Olam, שכינה מדברת מתוך גרונו של משה, and it made perfect sense for him to shine with divine light. Just like it was natural for Har Sinai to be קולות וברקים ועשן ואש, it was natural for Moshe to appear like that. In his swift mashup of an answer, he said that it was both the shock of the uncanny, of the Godlike visage of the Man, and the discomfort that they were merely men while he was the ideal, the perfected man. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></div></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-18865267569506820192021-11-23T11:29:00.031-06:002021-11-28T12:48:46.586-06:00Vayeishev, Breishis 37:3, Ben Zekunim, Chanuka, (and Keats.)<p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Baal Haturim here says that זקונים is an abbreviation for the five orders of Mishnayos that Yaakov had learned with Yosef.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">זקנים. נוטריקון זרעים קדשים נשים ישועות מועד:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #202122;"><span style="background-color: white;">Everyone wants to know why he didn't learn Taharos with him. There are so many 'meileh' (in modern English, "meh,") teirutzim out there: "He was a bachur, so he didn't learn ALL of Taharos with him, because a bachur does not learn Niddah," or "Yaakov saw that Yosef was 100% pure in the middah of Yesod, so there was no need to learn Taharos," or "Taharos requires your own ameilus, not just hearing it from a Rebbi," or "to learn Taharos, you need מי יתן טהור מטמא, and that required that Yosef experience the tumah of Mitzrayim," or </span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;">"he began learning </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: helvetica;">Mishnayos at ten, and at one a year, he only got to five of the six.</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: helvetica;">" </span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I appreciated how Rav Steinman put it in the Ayeles Hashachar. Instead of flailing around with unconvincing answers, he puts a better focus on the question:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="color: black;">הבעל הטורים כתב זקנים נוטריקון זרעים קדשים נשים ישועות מועד ויל"ע אם הי' סיבה שלא למדו גם סדר טהרות או דעדיין לא הספיקו </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"><span><span style="color: black;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">But</span><span style="background-color: transparent;"> </span>still, it seems </span></span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;">לעניות דעתי, that focusing the question on "Why" is off target, and mimeila, the answers are useless. </span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Even if one of those answers would be acceptable, it wouldn't explain the Baal HaTurim. The Baal Haturim could have read Taharos into the word זקונים by writing it מלא and using the vav for "ודעת." Even more, if there was no reason for the Baal Haturim to find this remez davka to five and not six, he should have just skipped it. Who says there has to be a remez to Sidrei Mishnayos, especially if it just doesn't work? </span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The question ought to be, "What was the Baal HaTurim's reason for deciding that this should be a reference to five of the six sidrei Mishhah." </span></p><p><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;">Then I saw what Rav Bergman says in his Shaarei Orah/Maamarim, and I was reminded that </span><b>טבא חדא פלפלתא חריפתא ממלי צנא דקרי</b>. </span></p><p><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rav Bergman doesn't ask why he didn't learn Taharos, he just points out that had Yosef learned Seder Taharos, he would have learned Negaim. Had Yosef learned Nega'im, he would have known the Rambam (Perek 16) in the end of Tzaraas:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>הצרעת </b>הוא שם האמור בשותפות כולל עניינים הרבה שאין דומין זה לזה. שהרי לובן עור האדם קרוי צרעת. ונפילת קצת שיער הראש או הזקן קרוי צרעת. ושינוי עין הבגדים או הבתים קרוי צרעת. </span><span style="font-size: medium; font-weight: 700;">ו</span><span style="font-size: medium; font-weight: 700;">זה השינוי האמור בבגדים ובבתים שקראתו תורה צרעת בשותפות השם אינו ממנהגו של עולם אלא אות ופלא היה בישראל כדי להזהירן מלשון הרע. שהמספר בלשון הרע משתנות קירות ביתו. אם חזר בו יטהר הבית. אם עמד ברשעו עד שהותץ הבית משתנין כלי העור שבביתו שהוא יושב ושוכב עליהן. אם חזר בו יטהרו. ואם עמד ברשעו עד שישרפו משתנין הבגדים שעליו. אם חזר בו יטהרו ואם עמד ברשעו עד שישרפו משתנה עורו ויצטרע ויהיה מובדל ומפורסם לבדו עד שלא יתעסק בשיחת הרשעים שהוא הליצנות ולשון הרע. ועל עניין זה מזהיר בתורה ואומר השמר בנגע הצרעת זכור את אשר עשה י"י אלהיך למרים בדרך. הרי הוא אומר התבוננו מה אירע למרים הנביאה שדיברה באחיה שהיתה גדולה ממנו בשנים וגידלתו על ברכיה וסכנה בעצמה להצילו מן הים והיא לא דברה בגנותו אלא טעתה שהשותו לשאר נביאים והוא לא הקפיד על כל הדברים האלו שנאמר והאיש משה ענו מאד ואע"פ כן מיד נענשה בצרעת קל וחומר לבני אדם הרשעים הטפשים שמרבים לדבר גדולות ונפלאות.</span><span style="font-size: medium;"> לפיכך ראוי למי שרוצה לכוין אורחותיו להתרחק מישיבתן ומלדבר עמהן כדי שלא יתפס אדם ברשת רשעים וסכלותם. וזה דרך ישיבת הלצים הרשעים בתחילה מרבין בדברי הבאי כענין שנאמר וקול כסיל ברוב דברים. ומתוך כך באין לספר בגנות הצדיקים כענין שנאמר תאלמנה שפתי שקר הדוברות על צדיק עתק. ומתוך כך יהיה להן הרגל לדבר בנביאים ולתת דופי בדבריהם כענין שנאמר ויהיו מלעיבים במלאכי האלהים ובוזים דברים ומתעתעים בנביאיו. ומתוך כך באין לדבר באלהים וכופרין בעיקר כענין שנאמר ויחפאו בני ישראל דברים אשר לא כן על י"י אלהיהם. והרי הוא אומר שתו בשמים פיהם ולשונם תהלך בארץ מי גרם להם לשית בשמים פיהם לשונם שהלכה תחילה בארץ. זו היא שיחת הרשעים שגורמת להן ישיבת קרנות וישיבת כנסיות של עמי הארץ וישיבת בתי משתאות עם שותי שכר. אבל שיחת כשרי ישראל אינה אלא בדברי תורה וחכמה. לפיכך הקדוש ברוך הוא עוזר על ידן ומזכה אותן בה. שנאמר אז נדברו יראי י"י איש אל רעהו ויקשב י"י וישמע ויכתב ספר זכרון לפניו ליראי י"י ולחושבי שמו:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Mimeila, you can say that all the Baal HaTurim means is that Yosef was a Ben Zekunim - that he knew everything, but he did not know Taharos as well as he should have. Had he fully understood and embodied the knowledge of Taharos, he would have been more careful about how he spoke about his brothers.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The pshat is one of those classical cases where as soon as you hear the teretz, you say, well of course, I knew that. PSA; </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">You didn't.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Reb Chaim Brown added a thoughtful insight. Instead of using the Rambam, you could simply say that since Taharos is called Da'as in that passuk-</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> (שבת ל'א:, אמר ריש לקיש: מאי דכתיב ״והיה אמונת עתיך חוסן ישועות חכמת ודעת וגו׳״. ״אמונת״ — זה סדר זרעים. ״עתיך״ — זה סדר מועד. ״חוסן״ — זה סדר נשים. ״ישועות״ — זה סדר נזיקין. ״חכמת״ — זה סדר קדשים. <b>״ודעת״ — זה סדר טהרות.</b> ואפילו הכי, ״יראת ה׳ היא אוצרו״.)</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">there must be a fundamental connection between that subject and pshuto kimashma'o, Da'as. </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Gufa Yosef's behavior was a rayah that there was a chisaron in Da'as on his part, and this shows that he was lacking in the yesod of Seder Taharos. (One thing needs to be expanded- what kind of da'as that relates to Taharos would have helped Yosef to avoid antagonizing his brothers.)</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Reb</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> Chaim </span><a href="https://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2013/11/ben-zekunim-taharah-and-chanukah.html" style="font-family: helvetica;">once used this to explain the story of Chanuka</a><span style="font-family: helvetica;">. Since the main pegam of what we call "Yavan" is their anthropocentric and materialistic view of Da'as, it was the purity of the Pach Hashemen that that signalled the success of the Chashmona'im. Tahara, and the Da'as of Torah, is the antithesis of Chochma Yevanis, a da'as that does not stem from Kedusha and Tahara. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">EVEN more - you realize that it is the shemen for the menora we are talking about, the menora that represents Man's understanding of Godly knowledge. So it is perfect - the symbol of the victory over the Greek Da'as of Tumah, is the Shemen that burned in the Menora that symbolizes the Da'as of Tahara. Of course it had to be absolutely tahor!! Da'as Torah is Taharah, and Tahara is Da'as Torah.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">That the Menora symbolizes Da'as of Torah is Aleph Beis. But just to be sure, here are mekoros.</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">ב"ב כ"ה עמוד ב</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">אמר רבי יצחק הרוצה שיחכים ידרים ושיעשיר יצפין וסימניך שלחן בצפון ומנורה בדרום ורבי יהושע בן לוי אמר לעולם ידרים שמתוך שמתחכם מתעשר</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">ברכות נ"ז עמוד א</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">הרואה שמן זית בחלום — יצפה למאור תורה, שנאמר: ״ויקחו אליך שמן זית זך״.</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">פרי צדיק בהעלותך ט:ב</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">ענין הדלקת המנורה הוא שיהיה בא והאיר לי שהוא בחינת אור תורה שבעל פה מצד האדם.</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">נציב העמק דבר שמות כז:כ בדיוק כמו ר' צדוק</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">-באריכות בענין כפתור ופרח ושבעת הקנים</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></span></p><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><p style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">In light of the above, it is ironic that Keats' "<i>Ode on a Grecian Urn</i>," ends with the words </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> </span></span></p><p style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> "Beauty is truth, truth beauty,"—that is all</span></p><p style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know. </span></span></p><p style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Perhaps we would say it differently. Keeping in mind <b>the Pach HaShemen</b>, we would title it "<i>Ode on a Yerushalmi Urn</i>," and we would say</span></span></p><p style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> "Taharah is truth, truth Taharah,"—that is all</span></p><p style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"></span></span></p><p style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know. </span></p></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>__________________________________________________________</b></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">From Reb Chaim Kanievsky: </span></div><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rabbi Reuven Chaim Klein tells us that Rabbi Chaim Tzvi Lehrfeld asked this question to Reb Chaim Kanievsky, and Reb Chaim answered that in early times, Taharos was included in Kodshim. I've seen this elsewhere, but I don't remember the makor that this was the case. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Coincidentally, I came across the scintillatingly luminous new sefer from Artscroll</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> “Rav Chaim Kanievsky on Chumash”. This vort is included, and the singularly gifted translator, who was tasked with elucidating and sourcing the often cryptic words of Rav Chaim, asked his contacts in Beis HaRav whether a source for this assertion could be found. He was told that Rav Chaim said this <u>misevara</u>, and this is how he presented the vort: </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Rav Chaim explained that it seems that originally Kodshim and Taharos were a single Seder; they deal </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">with the same basic set of laws — a requirement to approach that which is sanctified with the utmost </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">purity, whether entering the Mikdash or eating kodesh. Taharos are required for Kodshim, and there is </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">no way to fulfill Kodshim without Taharos. Once the discussions of the Tannaim became numerous, it </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">was decided to split them onto separate Orders. At this juncture, though, they were still united, and </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">therefore Taharos is not mentioned separately.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">It goes without saying that when Reb Chaim Kanievsky says a pshat in the Baal HaTurim, it is as reliable as it would be if the Baal HaTurim said it himself.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Af al pi kein, I think the Baal HaTurim would like Rav Bergman's pshat.</span></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-83151351101740934162021-11-17T12:20:00.004-06:002021-11-18T10:13:16.283-06:00A Puzzling Thought from Reb Akiva Eiger on Mashiv HaRuach<p><span style="font-size: large;">OC 114:5</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;">בימות הגשמים אם לא אמר מוריד הגשם מחזירין אותו.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Reb Akiva Eiger there, sk 5</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;">מחזירים אותו. נלע"ד בליל שבת אם שכח לומר משיב הרוח דאין מחזירי' דהא אם התפלל רק מעין שבע יצא כדאית' בסי' רס"ח במג"א סקט"ו אף בברכות מעין שבע אינו מזכיר גשם א"כ במה שהתפלל סדר התפלה כראוי רק שלא הזכיר גשם הא לא גרע ממעין שבע וצל"ע לדינא:</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">So, he says it may be that if you forget Mashiv HaRuach Friday night, you don't repeat Shmoneh Esrei. Proof - since you can be yotzei Shmoneh Esrei Friday night by listening to the Mei'ein Sheva, and the Mei'ein Sheva does not mention Mashiv HaRuach, you see that Mashiv Haruach is not essential for the nusach of Shmoneh Esrei Friday night. (I've seen this brought lehalacha, because Reb Akiva Eiger's צריך לי עיון is plenty to create a safek brachos.)</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">My question: Why would this be true? Why would missing Mashiv HaRuach for six months mean that you weren't yotzei Shmoneh Esrei, and punkt Friday night it doesn't matter.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The truth is, it's not really a kashe on Reb Akiva Eiger. Once Reb Akiva Eiger pointed out that Mei'ein Sheva does not include Mashiv, and that you're yotzei with Mei'ein Sheva itself, then the question is, if Mei'ein Sheva is really a tefilla gemura, why doesn't it contain Mashiv Haruach? It should!</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">(Please do not tell me "But what about הביננו?" Havineinu is said after the full nusach of the first three, including Mashiv, and followed by the full nusach of the last three.)</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Maybe there's something different about Friday night, but I doubt it, because aderaba, rainfall davka Friday (and Wednesday) night is most propitious. Taanis 23 - </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;">גשמיכם בעתם בלילי רביעיות ובלילי שבתות, שכן מצינו בימי שמעון בן שטח שירדו להם גשמים בלילי רביעיות ובלילי שבתות עד שנעשו חטים ככליות ושעורים כגרעיני זיתים ועדשים כדינרי זהב </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Maybe there's something about ויכולו that alludes to Geshem. If there is, I haven't found it. Yes, the following pesukim mention that no rain had fallen before Adam davenned, but that is not in Vayechulu.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">So I'm stuck. I'd appreciate your thoughts.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">UPDATE:</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The Reb Akiva Eiger is really not well known, so it was a real surprise when Rav Bukspan came up with a tshuva from Rav Wosner exactly on this topic. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Here is the question.</span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZdNHAFVnDVSrKeyLSzlA0WWZBYz5SJyn9baWOtN_nPLmIhCjRjsSEc8XVe5fCMQmeB2tusHMA_ZkL5SpRfkAA5bTba5_7ucTyLOU1QgBRQjHk1q_q_44DzS3JQuv5-vkmtsSM/s928/%25D7%2590%25D7%2595%25D7%25A6%25D7%25A8+%25D7%2594%25D7%2597%25D7%259B%25D7%259E%25D7%2594_106857+%25282%2529.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="321" data-original-width="928" height="139" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZdNHAFVnDVSrKeyLSzlA0WWZBYz5SJyn9baWOtN_nPLmIhCjRjsSEc8XVe5fCMQmeB2tusHMA_ZkL5SpRfkAA5bTba5_7ucTyLOU1QgBRQjHk1q_q_44DzS3JQuv5-vkmtsSM/w400-h139/%25D7%2590%25D7%2595%25D7%25A6%25D7%25A8+%25D7%2594%25D7%2597%25D7%259B%25D7%259E%25D7%2594_106857+%25282%2529.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Someone mistakenly said Ha'el hakadosh in his quiet Shmoneh Esrei, and it was suggested that he doesn't have to repeat because of Reb Akiva Eiger. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>As far as Hamelech, as Rav Wosner says, </span><span>Reb Akiva Eiger's raya for Geshem is not fully applicable to the question of Hamelech. It is true that Reb Akiva Eiger's opinion in 583:3 is that if you say Ha'eil instead of Hamelech in מעין שבע you do not have to repeat it, but mei'ikar hadin you are supposed to say Hamelech, unlike Geshem, which does not appear there at all. So even if you wouldn't have to repeat </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>מעין שבע if you say Ha'Eil hakadosh, it could be this is because there is a kullah in </span><span>מעין שבע to the extent of not requiring repetition bedieved, but that does not apply to the personal Shmoneh Esrei. Whereas the fact that Geshem is not there at all indicates that mentioning Geshem is not important on Friday night, not even in the personal Tefilla.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Rav Wosner also addresses the question of Geshem. He says that first, Reb Akiva Eiger's idea is very hard to accept - it is a puzzlement. He is docheh the raya; and I</span><span> </span><span>have to say that his dichui of Reb Akiva Eiger's raya is not very convincing. Who cares that this is the nusach? הא גופא קשה, why is the nusach like that?? Then he says that it s</span><span>eems from the Biur Halacha at the end of רס"ח that he holds not like Reb Akiva Eiger. </span></span><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDtm7fy_L8_NUu4Dg5XF1Q2rHjUUF2Lg_Xp35csRNCTizN0e7HUzV0GjflzCJLHzV2P7h8H7bUAiNedDKT0jIDaJMhGV9Jx4ZXh22uK59DsOmBMqD5U-4MyNXdJTWaNiAQcZie/s996/%25D7%2590%25D7%2595%25D7%25A6%25D7%25A8+%25D7%2594%25D7%2597%25D7%259B%25D7%259E%25D7%2594_106857+%25281%2529.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="996" data-original-width="941" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDtm7fy_L8_NUu4Dg5XF1Q2rHjUUF2Lg_Xp35csRNCTizN0e7HUzV0GjflzCJLHzV2P7h8H7bUAiNedDKT0jIDaJMhGV9Jx4ZXh22uK59DsOmBMqD5U-4MyNXdJTWaNiAQcZie/w378-h400/%25D7%2590%25D7%2595%25D7%25A6%25D7%25A8+%25D7%2594%25D7%2597%25D7%259B%25D7%259E%25D7%2594_106857+%25281%2529.jpg" width="378" /></a></div><br /><p><span style="font-size: medium;">He paskens that you can not rely on Reb Akiva Eiger, certainly not on Hamelech, but also not on Geshem, and you have to repeat Shmoneh Esrei.</span></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-78417109095476676232021-11-16T14:57:00.012-06:002021-11-19T09:15:18.320-06:00Vayishlach, Breishis 32:8. Vayiroh Yaakov me’ohd vayeitzer lo. What did Yaakov Fear?<p><span face="Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #222222;">This was originally posted in 07, and I haven't gotten any smarter. I am adding something Larry (BlackLeibel) Schwartz ע'ה showed me from the Satmarer and several good updates.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span face="Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #222222;"><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;">The passuk says that when Yaakov prepared for his confrontation with Eisav, he was stricken with fear and with terrible trepidation. Why the double expression?</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222;" /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222;">Rashi explains that his yirah was because he might be killed, and his tzarah/distress was because he might have to kill others. </span></span></span></p><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222;">ויירא ויצר. וַיִּירָא שֶׁמָּא יֵהָרֵג, וַיֵּצֶר לוֹ אִם יַהֲרֹג הוּא אֶת אֲחֵרִים (בראשית רבה ותנחומא):</span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222;"><br /></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222;">You </span></span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;">would think that the second half is testament to Jewish rachamim, the recognition that killing a human- no matter how much he deserves it or how immediate his threat is- brutalizes the killer and leaves indelible spiritual trauma. </span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;">Or you might think that it is along the lines of the Gemara (Ber 32b) כהן שהרג את הנפש לא ישא את כפיו, שנאמר (ישעיהו א, טו): “וּבְפָרִשְׂכֶם כַּפֵּיכֶם אַעְלִים עֵינַי מִכֶּם וכו’ יְדֵיכֶם דָּמִים מָלֵאוּ”, or Dovid Hamelech’s preclusion from building his Beis Hamikdash because “דם לרב שפכת ומלחמות גדלות עשית לא תבנה בית לשמי כי דמים רבים שפכת ארצה לפני” </span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222;"><br /></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222;">But you would be wrong. I have not found one mefareish of Rashi– or the Medrash Rashi is based on– that learns pshat like that. The only one that says that derech was Golda Meir. Golda Meir may deserve our love and gratitude for her loving and courageous heart and for what she did for Klal Yisrael, but a mefareish of Chumash she was not. </span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222;"><br /></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #222222;">The pshatim I saw range from his fear of Yitzchok’s reaction to his fear of killing non-combatants, to a fear that the death of one brother would precipitate the death of the other, as per the concern/nevu'ah Rivkah had expressed. </span></span><b style="background-color: white; color: #222222;">Nobody</b><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;"> that I saw says that Yaakov was having nightmares about possibly killing someone who needed killing. I may have missed something, and I would appreciate a mareh makom if you have one.</span></span><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;">Leibel Schwartz ע'ה showed me what the Satmarer brings in his Divrei Yoel from the Ateres Tzvi:</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY9pnA84KV55TJ1aG0jNK7fexOG9ckYHr5RIFp-SjF-VFCk9qnXx_ZFu_58MsnOIqSldaCxDnHUUxaSyzR-fz5NdcggtSbmqXhsCmJ4f9Qr2ONUsk2Xo_dOoz_m_uNZ2DGDIvS/s824/%25D7%2590%25D7%2595%25D7%25A6%25D7%25A8+%25D7%2594%25D7%2597%25D7%259B%25D7%259E%25D7%2594_170737.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="603" data-original-width="824" height="293" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjY9pnA84KV55TJ1aG0jNK7fexOG9ckYHr5RIFp-SjF-VFCk9qnXx_ZFu_58MsnOIqSldaCxDnHUUxaSyzR-fz5NdcggtSbmqXhsCmJ4f9Qr2ONUsk2Xo_dOoz_m_uNZ2DGDIvS/w400-h293/%25D7%2590%25D7%2595%25D7%25A6%25D7%25A8+%25D7%2594%25D7%2597%25D7%259B%25D7%259E%25D7%2594_170737.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><span style="color: #222222;"><span style="background-color: white;">He asks, as we did, what would Yaakov be afraid of? הבא להרגך! and באבוד רשעים רנה! Pshat is that in Eisav were many neshamos of tzadikim, such as Rav Akiva, none of whom would be born if Yaakov killed him, and Yaakov was distressed about preventing these holy neshamos from coming to this world. Or more precisely, ח'ו אם יעקב יהרגם שלא יתענש על ידם. </span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">I guess it's similar to Moshe Rabbeinu's ויפן כה וכה, that when you are using nissim and ruchniyus to eliminate a threat, you have to be sure that you are not interfereing with a potential tzadik in the future. By Moshe, he saw there were none. Here, Yaakov saw there were, so he was in a predicament.</span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">In</span></span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;">any case, you see that he assumes, as we did, that protecting yourself and your family from a violent savage by killing him is nothing to be afraid of.</span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;">UPDATE:</span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;">Rav Moish Pollack called in a he'ara on the Ateres Tzvi. At this point, Eisav's children were already born, so what does it mean that he was afraid to destroy Eisav's descendants? </span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;">Rabbi Pollack is a talmid chacham, and I am assuming that the basis of his question is correct - that no children were born to Eisav later. If so, I would answer that Yaakov really did not have the option of killing only Eisav. A battle would have involved all of Eisav's children, and Yaakov would have had to kill them all to save himself.</span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">Rav Avraham Bukspan directed our attention to a similar drasha on the passuk in Tehillim 142:2, </span></span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">קולי אל ה' אזעק קולי אל ה' אתחנן</span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">The Medrash there says</span></span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">קולי אל ה' אזעק קולי אל ה' אתחנן. למה ב' פעמים קולי. וכן אמר הכתוב (שם נז ב) חנני ה' חנני. ב' פעמים. אלא כך אמר דוד חנני שלא אפול בידו וחנני שלא יפול בידי. וכן קולי אל ה' אזעק שלא אפול בידו קולי אל ה' אתחנן שלא יפול בידי:</span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">The two drashos are certainly mirror images. But if Rav Bukspan meant it as evidence of how Chazal read Yaakov's words here, I disagree. I do not think it is reasonable to compare David HaMelech's fear of harming the Meshiach Hashem, about whom the Ribono shel Olam said </span></span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">וידבר דוד לה' את דברי השירה הזאת ביום הציל ה' אותו מכף כל אויביו ומכף שאול אמר לו הקב"ה לדוד דוד שירה אתה אומר על מפלתו של שאול אלמלי אתה שאול והוא דוד איבדתי כמה דוד מפניו היינו דכתיב (תהלים ז, א) שגיון לדוד אשר שר לה' על דברי כוש בן ימיני וכי כוש שמו והלא שאול שמו אלא מה כושי משונה בעורו אף שאול משונה במעשיו </span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">with Yaakov's confrontation with Eisav. </span></span></span></div></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">REB CHAIM BROWN to the rescue. </span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">Reb Chaim showed me something I would never have found, in that the author is not part of the ASU, the Artscroll Universe. I never heard of him, but he seems to have been a man that was not afraid of controversy. See <a href="https://www.bhol.co.il/forums/topic.asp?cat_id=24&topic_id=825410&forum_id=1364">here</a> and <a href="https://yesod.biu.ac.il/files/yesod/shared/gurfinkel_old_rabaii_in_new_world.pdf">here</a>. </span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">From Harav Chaim Hirschensohn, his sefer <a href="https://www.hebrewbooks.org/2976">נמוקי רש"י - חידושי הרח"ה</a>, page 53b, in the HebrewBooks site page 124:</span></span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica;"><span style="background-color: white;">... </span></span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;">השתדלות המפרשים לבאר מדוע צר לו אם יהרג אחרים, הלא המה רודפים, והבא להרגך השכם והורגו, לא נחוץ כלל, כי גם ההורג בהתר את חבירו צר לו לאדם נכבד שבא לידי מדה זו.</span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;">So I guess it boils down to the old machlokes about whether certain mitzvos, even though required and important, can leave a stain on a person's middos. We've discussed this many times, and <a href="https://beisvaad.blogspot.com/2020/08/shoftim-devarim-1913-when-pity-is.html">in this post </a>I have a link to other places plus something from Reb Chaim on the subject. (There's a whole world out there - the Or HaChaim, the Shiurei Da'as, Reb Aharon, lhbchlch Rav Sternbuch, and others.) Rav Hirschensohn's use of the idea to explain the words of Chazal here is novel, but it is no longer only Golda Meir.</span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;">Reb Chaim also showed me <a href="https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14083&st=&pgnum=156">the Ksav Sofer</a> that says pshat in the passuk is that Yaakov was bichlal not afraid of getting killed. He had a havtacha. He was afraid that he would have to kill Eisav, and as a result, it would distance him from the Ribono shel Olam and he would end up dying as a result of that richuk. This is all based on the Gemara in Shabbos 149b, </span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;"><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;">וְאָמַר רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בְּרֵיהּ דְּבַת יַעֲקֹב: כָּל שֶׁחֲבֵירוֹ נֶעֱנָשׁ עַל יָדוֹ — אֵין מַכְנִיסִין אוֹתוֹ בִּמְחִיצָתוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא. מְנָלַן? ...</div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;">מֵהָכָא: ״גַּם עֲנוֹשׁ לַצַּדִּיק לֹא טוֹב״, אֵין ״לֹא טוֹב״ אֶלָּא רָע, וּכְתִיב: ״כִּי לֹא אֵל חָפֵץ רֶשַׁע אָתָּה לֹא יְגוּרְךָ רָע״ — צַדִּיק אַתָּה ה׳ וְלֹא יָגוּר בִּמְגוּרְךָ רָע. </div><div><br /></div><div>So the idea is that it didn't bother him a ki hu zeh that he might have to kill Eisav. What bothered him was being the instrument of middas hadin that brings death to others. (This did not bother Moshe Rabbeinu when he brought the makkos, and it did not bother Moshe or Dovid or Avraham Avinu when they engaged in several wars. Perhaps the difference is whether you're in the War Room or on the battlefield.) (That Ksav Sofer is also fascinating because in the second half of the paragraph he quotes Reb Yonasan Eibschutz's Luchos Ha'Eidus, where he bitterly complains about the horrible injustice of being a nirdaf from the Chacham Tzvi for the vile and unfounded accusation of following Shabtai Tzvi. It begins on page 148 of the לוחות העדות. I have it in the Otzar, but otherwise it's not available online.)</div></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="background-color: white;">UPDATE:</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="background-color: white;">Rav Bukspan sent me this geshmakkeh insight into what Chazal meant when they said </span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica; text-align: right;">וַיֵּצֶר לוֹ אִם יַהֲרֹג הוּא אֶת <b>אֲחֵרִים</b></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: helvetica; text-align: right;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;">. and relating to the Ateres Tzvi.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial;">AGADAH: CONCERN FOR "ACHERIM" </span></div><div><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="background-color: white;"><div>QUESTION: The Gemara explains that the Mishnah often refers to Rebbi Meir as "Acherim," because Rebbi, the redactor of the Mishnah, did not want to refer to Rebbi Meir by his name. Rebbi Meir had attempted to unseat Rebbi's father, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel, from his position as Nasi, and therefore Rebbi, in deference to his family's honor, referred to Rebbi Meir as "Acherim."</div><div>Rav Naftali Maryles (1828-1890), the Rov of Litovisk and the son of the Yoruslaver Rebbe, Rav Shimon Maryles zt'l, points out that this Gemara reveals a deeper meaning behind the words of Rashi in Parshas Vayishlach. The Torah (Bereishis 32:8) says that when Yakov heard of Esav's impending approach, "he became very afraid, and he was distressed." Rashi explains that he became "afraid" lest he be killed, and he was "distressed" lest he kill others ("Im Yaharog Hu Es Acherim"). Why, though, was Yakov worried that he would have to kill someone else? Yakov was being pursued by Esav, who wanted to kill him, and the Torah teaches that if one person is being mortally pursued by another, then he is bidden to kill the pursuer in order to protect his own life! Why, then, was Yakov concerned?</div><div>Also, why does Rashi say that Yakov was afraid that "he would have to kill others (Acherim)"? He should have said that Yakov was afraid that "he would have to kill Esav"! Maharal)</div><div>ANSWER: The Gemara in Gitin (56a) relates that one of the Roman leaders, Niron (the Caesar Nero), converted and became Jewish, and one of his descendants was Rebbi Meir. The Romans descended from Esav, as Rashi points out at the end of Vayishlach. Rashi, therefore, is saying that Yakov was distressed that he might be forced to kill Esav and thereby prevent the birth of Rebbi Meir, who was called "Acherim"!</div><div>Rav Naftali of Litovisk points out that a similar theme is found in Rashi in Parshas Shemos (2:12). The Torah there teaches that before Moshe Rabeinu killed the Egyptian slave-master, he looked to all sides to make sure "that there was no one." Rashi explains that this means that he looked into the future to make sure that none of the future descendants of this Egyptian would ever convert and become Jewish, and only then did he kill him. (Sefer Ayalah Sheluchah, Parshas Shemos, republished in 2001 by his descendant, Rabbi Ari Maryles. See also Peninim Yekarim, Parshas Vayishlach, and Kanah Avraham.)</div></span></span></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-49048318660209106982021-10-23T21:36:00.010-05:002021-10-24T16:27:42.589-05:00Vayeira, Worshipping the Dust on Their Feet<p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">Rashi 18:4</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ורחצו רגליכם.</b> כַּסָּבוּר שֶׁהֵם עַרְבִיִּים שֶׁמִּשְׁתַּחֲוִים לַאֲבַק רַגְלֵיהֶם וִהִקְפִּיד שֶׁלֹא לְהַכְנִיס עֲ"זָ לְבֵיתוֹ;</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">This morning, someone asked me what that means. Simple enough; why would anyone worship the dust on their feet? Not stam the Earth, davka the dust on their feet.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I'm told that some say they didn't worship just dust, but it was dust from their Beis Avodah Zarah. That's fine, but that is not what Rashi says, and it is not what the Gemara in BM says, or Rashi in Kiddushin that brings it as well. Instead of saying it's not shver according to X or Y, let's focus on explaining what it means according to the Gemara and Rashi.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I suggested that it was a form of ancestor worship. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">The concept is not uncommon. </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman";"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">The Brittanica says that "</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Ancestor worship, prevalent in preliterate societies, is obeisance to the spirits of the dead." I believe that it persists even today in spiritually primitive countries, such as China, and certainly in obdurately uncivilized countries such as Haiti and Togo. </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">As applies to dust, of course we have Breishis 3:19, עפר אתה ואל עפר תשוב. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">See also </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">Shabbos 113b, that eating the dirt of Bavel is like eating one's ancestors. </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אמר ר' אמי כל האוכל מעפרה של בבל כאילו אוכל מבשר אבותיו </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rashi</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">מבשר אבותיו. שמתו שם בגולה</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">And Hamlet act five:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">“Imperious Caesar, dead and turned to clay,</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Might stop a hole to keep the wind away.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Oh, that that earth, which kept the world in awe,</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Should patch a wall t'expel the winter’s flaw!”</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Perhaps the people of Avraham Avinu's time time worshipped their ancestors, and saw the dust that clung to their feet as the dust of their ancestors magically adhering to them.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">If I were to attempt relevance, I would suggest that when we go to kivrei tzadikim, we should not ask the niftarim to give us what we need. This is both Avoda Zara and doreish el hameisim, and, as such, is best avoided. At most, (see <a href="https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=4745&pgnum=172">Minchas Elazar 1:68</a>, but see </span><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=922&st=&pgnum=190" style="font-family: helvetica;">Igros OC 5:143:6</a><span style="font-family: helvetica;">)</span><span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> we might ask them to intercede with tefilla to the Ribono shel Olam on our behalf. So pay your respects, and remember that all the tefillos at that makom kadosh are to the Ribono shel Olam,</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> instead of being משתחוה לאבק רגליך.</span></span></span></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-3169572529589807492021-10-18T09:32:00.009-05:002021-10-20T10:57:42.209-05:00Vayeira, Breishis 19:19. Are We Graded on a Curve?<p><span style="font-size: medium;"> <span style="font-family: helvetica;">Lot sought refuge as he fled from the destruction of S'dom. The angels suggested that he find refuge in the mountain, but he did not accept their advice. Something about "the mountain" frightened him. The Medrash </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">(50:11)</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">explains that it was no mountain he was afraid of; "mountain" means Avraham. The angels were suggesting that he go back to his uncle, that he rejoin Avraham. But Lot was afraid to do so, and the rationale for his fear was echoed by the Tzarfis woman in the time of Eliahu. When her son died, the Tzarfis woman came to Eliahu, and she said "Eliahu, until you began visiting me, God saw my actions and those of my neighbors and by comparison I was a holy woman. Now that you visit me, God sees my failings, and this caused my son to die." Here, Lot said, "While I was in Sdom, I was, compared to them, a holy man. If I were to rejoin Avraham, I would not survive."</span></span></p><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rashi here brings the Medrash.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>פן תדבקני הרעה.</b> כְּשֶׁהָיִיתִי אֵצֶל אַנְשֵׁי סְדוֹם הָיָה הַקָּבָּ"ה רוֹאֶה מַעֲשַׂי וּמַעֲשֵׂה בְנֵי הָעִיר, וְהָיִיתִי נִרְאֶה צַדִּיק וּכְדַאי לְהִנָּצֵל, וּכְשֶׁאָבֹא אֵצֶל צַדִּיק אֲנִי כְרָשָׁע, וְכֵן אָמְרָה הַצָּרְפִית לְאֵלִיָּהוּ בָּאתָ אֵלַי לְהַזְכִּיר אֶת עֲוֹנִי (מלכים א י"ז), עַד שֶׁלֹא בָאתָ אֶצְלִי הָיָה הַקָּבָּ"ה רוֹאֶה מַעֲשַׂי וּמַעֲשֵׂה עַמִּי, וַאֲנִי צַדֶּקֶת בֵּינֵיהֶם, וּמִשֶּׁבָּאתָ אֶצְלִי, לְפִי מַעֲשֶׂיךָ אֲנִי רְשָׁעָה:</span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><div style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">The Shem MiShmuel uses this to explain a parsha in Eikev, </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Devarim 9:4:</span></span></div><div style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><p dir="rtl" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: right;">אל תאמר בלבבך בהדף ה' אלקיך אתם מלפניך לאמר בצדקתי הביאני ה' לרשת את הארץ הזאת וברשעת הגוים האלה ה' מורישם מפניך. </p><p dir="rtl" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: right;">לא בצדקתך ובישר לבבך אתה בא לרשת את ארצם כי ברשעת הגוים האלה ה' אלקיך מורישם מפניך </p><p dir="rtl" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: right;">ולמען הקים את הדבר אשר נשבע ה' לאבתיך לאברהם ליצחק וליעקב</p><p dir="rtl" style="direction: ltr; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Do not think, when Hashem drives away the Canaanites from before you, "Because I am righteous Hashem brought me here to inherit this land and because the original residents were wicked Hashem disinherits them." No, it is not that you are righteous, it is because they are wicked, and because Hashem promised the land to your forefathers.</p><p dir="rtl" style="direction: ltr; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><br /></p><p dir="rtl" style="direction: ltr; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">He brings this Medrash to explain what error they were being warned about, what the <span style="text-align: right;">אל תאמר בלבבך</span><span style="text-align: right;"> was</span>.<span style="background-color: transparent;"> Hashem told us "Don't think that the Canaanites are going to die because when you arrive the contrast between your spiritual greatness and their relative failings will tip the scale against them. You're not so special. They were just fundamentally wicked people who deserved to be eliminated irrespective of your presence."</span></p></span></div></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The idea that the <span style="text-align: right;">צרפית was afraid of being judged negatively because of the contrast between her and Eliahu is also stated in Tosfos in Kiddushin 71a in the name of Avrahan Ger (discussing </span>קשים גרים לישראל כספחת on the previous daf. Interestingly, Tosfos hedges the concept by saying </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">שמתוך שהוא צדיק גמור <b>היה נראה לה </b>שמזכיר השם עונה</span></div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Reb Chaim Brown showed me this idea in the Ohr HaChaim by Kayin and Hevel:</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span face="Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: justify;">אכן הכוונה היא להיות כי קין נתקנא בהבל בחושבו כי הוא סיבה להשפלתו כי באמצעותו הוכר אופלו, וחשב כי כשלא יהיה הבל במציאות יתרצה ה׳ בקין כי אין עוד אחר לבחור בו, וחשב להורגו,</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; text-align: justify;" /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Let's think about this, a concept that the Tzarfis woman and Lot assumed to be true, and that Hashem had to tell us was not the reason for the elimination of the Canaanites. It appears to mean that people are judged by comparison to the others in their community. That means that the standard of justice is relative to the other people that are being judged. That means that Hashem grades us on a curve.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I choose that expression intentionally. One might read the Medrash and nod his head and agree. But when you realize that this is exactly what grading on a curve is all about, it becomes untenable. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As I understand it, the rationale of grading on a curve is as follows: Prospective employers have an idea of the general quality of the students and the education at any given institution. But they want, and are entitled, to know where an individual student stands within that segment. The only way to rank students is through a curve- these are the best, these are average, and these are on the lower side. This makes perfect sense in a market. It makes absolutely no sense when it comes to Schar ve'Onesh. Another reason to grade on a curve is when the instructor is inexperienced, or emotionally unfit, and might not be educating the students effectively, or the teacher is excessively strict or lenient. If very few students do well on the examination, the problem lies with the teacher, and the students should not be penalized. </span>This is even less applicable to heavenly judgment.<div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div></span></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Let me make this more clear with an analogy to the Special Olympics. If you put the winner of the Special Olympics on the medal stand with the winner of the regular Olympics, would anyone denigrate or deride the former? I hope not. You judge the athlete's achievement by his effort and skill in overcoming, in using what he has, not in comparison to the uniquely gifted and physically perfect athlete. It is an entirely different metric. When we say "מתי יגיעו מעשי למעשי אבותי" you don't mean that you should speak to the Ribono shel Olam באספקלריא המאירה or do an akeida on your son. You mean that are the best possible Zeesheh.</span></div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Reb Moshe, in the Fishelis'es wonderful new Kol Rom, says (Shemos 6:26)</span><br /><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 40px 0px 0px; padding: 0px;"><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">דאע"ג שמשה רבנו היה יותר גדול מאהרן, מ"מ היו שקולים במה שכל אחד עבד את ה' בכל כשרונותיו וכוחותיו שהיו לו.</span></div></blockquote><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 40px 0px 0px; padding: 0px;"><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">והנה כל אדם נולד עם כשרונות וכוחות ואין בזה כל מעלה, כי זו מתנת שמים, אבל כל אחד צריך לעבוד ולשפר את עצמו, ולראות שיקיים את מצורה והמצות בכל כוחותיו, וזה כל תפקידו בעולם.</span></div></blockquote><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 40px 0px 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">And Reb Chaim Brown said "pshat in the Yalkut on Shir haShirim 7:6 הדלים שברשים הם חביבים לפני כדניאל is because there is relative judgment -- in context of his challenges, the 'dal' may deserve as much credit for whatever he does as Daniel, even though on an absolute scale there is no comparison."</span></blockquote></blockquote><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"></span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"></span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It might be that Chazal are telling us that the idea is totally false, that what the Isha Hatzarfis and Lot thought, and what Bnei Yisrael might have thought, was simply wrong. But I do not believe this is true. We can make mistakes on our own, and if Chazal tell us what some biblical figures were thinking, unless they tell us clearly that they are talking about something which is false, it should be taken seriously.</span></span></div></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The initial response I get from people is that Chazal are talking about people who consciously refuse to be influenced by the righteous people to whom they are exposed. They could and should be inspired by them, and emulate them, and their refusal to allow righteousness and spirituality to affect them is a terrible sin, it is an affront to Hashem. You have before you an example of what you ought to be, you have a teacher, and you affect deliberate blindness? That is a terrible sin.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is certainly true. We are told טוב לצדיק טוב לשכנו, and אוי לרשע ואוי לשכנו (see Rashi Bamidbar 23:29 and 38,) and that means that it is good and wise to associate with a Tzadik because he will influence you to be better, and it is dangerous to associate with a Rasha, because he will influence you to become a rasha like him. It stands to reason that if, despite אוי לרשע ואוי לשכנו, one overcomes the influence of his neighbor the Rasha, and remains a tzadik, as Noach did (see Rashi Breishis 6:9 and Sanhedrin 108a,) it is a tremendous merit; if, despite טוב לצדיק טוב לשכנו, a person rejects the influence of a Tzadik and remains a rasha, it is a terrible sin.</span><br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But I don't believe that this explains our Medrash. Lot is one thing: the Isha Hatzarfis is something else entirely. Everything we know about her tells us that she was a holy and righteous person. Hashem sent Eliahu to find shelter in her home, and she merited an awe-inspiring miracle. We have absolutely no right to say that she did not allow Eliahu's presence to inspire her or elevate her spirituality. On the contrary. The operative principal ought to be טוב לצדיק טוב לשכנו.</span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So what is the pshat in the Medrash?</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Here are some interpretations that we found reasonable.</span><br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. In the censuses in the Midbar, Shevet Levi was the smallest of the tribes. One of the reasons is that their work in the Midbar involved a constant presence in the Mishkan and the carrying of the holy utensils (see, e.g., Rashi in Vayeitzei, Breishis 29:35.) If a Levi was carrying the Aron Kodesh, and his mind wandered, and for a moment he thought about something trivial or foolish, he would die on the spot. Similarly, a Kohen Gadol, while in the Kodesh Kadashim, had absolutely no leeway. Any infinitesimal failure or distraction would be immediately fatal. Being in the area of such holiness creates a condition of Middas Hadin. The same may be true of the environment of a Tzadik, who embodies the kedusha of the Beis Hamikdash.</span><br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. Similarly, we have a passuk in our parsha that says that the degree of Hashgacha on Eretz Yisrael is qualitatively different than that of the Hashgacha on the rest of the world. Devarim 11:11-12 <span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">והארץ אשר אתם עברים שמה לרשתה ארץ הרים ובקעת למטר השמים תשתה מים. ארץ אשר ה' אלהיך דרש אתה תמיד עיני ה' אלקיך בה מרשית השנה ועד אחרית שנה.</span> If so, we might say that the degree of Hashgach in the proximity of a tzadik is far greater. Greater Hashgacha means close scrutiny, the kind of examination that every person eventually undergoes, but usually only at the judgment of Beis Din shel Maalah in the Olam Ha'emes after death. Behavior that would otherwise pass might not survive this kind of close scrutiny.</span><br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">I personally don't like this pshat. To say that being near a tzadik is like walking under a קיר נטוי to the extent that it operates to turn upside down the whole concept of טוב לצדיק טוב לשכנו, and that there is some chiluk between them, doesn't appeal to me. If you like it, זאלסטו זיין געזונט</span><br /><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br /></span><span face="Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3. The Chazon Ish says that in our time, people can be defended on the basis of תינוק שנשבה. </span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Life is so confusing, there was an absolute hester panim during the Holocaust, tefilla is totally ignored during the pandemic, and whenever an adam gadol offers guidance others say the opposite. But when you have Eliahu Hanavi in your house, you no longer have a din of <span style="color: black; text-align: left;">תינוק שנשבה</span>. </span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">4. When a tzadik lives near you, you realize that you could be greater, that you should grow. Unfortunately, inertia makes growth difficult. Even if we know we ought to change, it is difficult to act upon what we know. Sometimes, people only change in reaction to a traumatic event that forces them to reexamine their lives. In cases like that, Hashem might help that person take that difficult step by shaking them up, by bringing difficult challenges to them.</span></span></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-20182514694913138752021-10-17T13:32:00.011-05:002022-11-04T14:04:33.734-05:00Lech Lecha, Breishis 14:19, Konei Shamayim Va'aretz<p><span style="font-size: medium;"> <span style="font-family: helvetica;">There are several words in davening that we assume are being used in their usual sense, but actually they mean something else in davening. For example, in Birkos Krias shma, פינות צבאיו קדושים. </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">What are these Pinos?</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> Corners? </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">In Musaf on Shabbos, ציויתה פירושיה עם סידורי נסכיה. What are these Nesachim that are specific to Shabbos? The nesachim that come with Korbanos are not associated with Shabbos in particular. What is the "סוד" of סוד שיח/שיח סוד in kedusha in musaf? I was reminded of this when, in this week's parsha, Malkitzedek met Avraham Avinu.</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וַֽיְבָרְכֵ֖הוּ וַיֹּאמַ֑ר בָּר֤וּךְ אַבְרָם֙ לְאֵ֣ל עֶלְי֔וֹן קֹנֵ֖ה שָׁמַ֥יִם וָאָֽרֶץ׃</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Avraham repeated these words in passuk 22, and this is the nusach we use in Shmoneh Esrei, וקונה הכל. What is this kinyan?</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Pashut pshat, Rashi says that קונה is a synonym for "creator," "Who created." So in Shmoneh Esrei, וקונה הכל means "Who created all." Some Rishonim explain it means "Who possesses." </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">(It is important to realize that discussion among the Rishonim certainly was a discussion among the Tanaim and Amoraim: For example, remember the Gemara in Rosh Hashanna 31a:</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">תניא רבי יהודה אומר משום ר"ע בראשון מה היו אומרים לה' הארץ ומלואה על שם שקנה והקנה ושליט בעולמו)</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">This association of creating and owning is reminiscent of what the achronim say on the sugya of אומן קונה בשבח כלי - that there is no greater kinyan than having created something. This is not like the Ketzos in 306, who holds that אומן קונה בשבח כלי is just a shibud, but other achronim learn that it is a kinyan gamur. So much so it leads to the Pnei Yehoshua's question that how can a קטן write a גט or make מצה, even if גדול עומד על גבו? If אומן קונה בשבח כלי he will automatically become the baalim of the get or the matza, and he can't be makneh, so the </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">גט</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">or the </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">מצה</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;"> will be passul mideoraysa. Obviously, the Pnei Yehoshua holds that it is a kinyan gamur and not just a zeitigeh shibud.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">And even if you say like the Ketzos, I think that might be true where you are improving existing objects. But when you create something entirely new, something with a totally new איכות, maybe the Ketzos would agree that the biggest possible kinyan is יצירה. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Brisker Rov uses this to explain why, in Shemos 31:2, on the passuk ראה קראתי בשם בצלאל בן אורי בן חור למטה יהודה the Gemara in San 69b tells us that he was 13. We would say that the point is that he couldn't possibly have acquired such skills on his own and that his skills were clearly a divine gift. But the Brisker Rov explains (see, for example, Shai LaTorah I 166)</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> דכיון דבכלל הוא ש"אומן קונה בשבח כלי" ועל כן היה צריך בצלאל למוסרו אח"כ לציבור, ואם היה בצלאל קטן לא היה יכול למוסרו לציבור.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Having said all this, I think that the best evidence of the meaning of the word קונה in this context, is what Chava said when she gave birth to Kayin. Breishis 4:4</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וְהָ֣אָדָ֔ם יָדַ֖ע אֶת חַוָּ֣ה אִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וַתַּ֙הַר֙ וַתֵּ֣לֶד אֶת קַ֔יִן וַתֹּ֕אמֶר קָנִ֥יתִי אִ֖ישׁ אֶת ה'.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">What does Kanisi mean? Does it mean she owned him? No. It can not mean anything other than "I have created a man, together with the Ribono shel Olam." Why the meforshei haTorah by Avimelech brings rayos from all over Tanach and Mishnayos, but do not bring this raya from the first time the word Kinyan appears, back in the beginning of Parshas Breishis, I do not know, and I suspect that someone is going to explain to me why I am completely off the track, because the if it were a raya, it would be the first thing the Rishonim bring. Fool's paradise it may be, but for the moment I think it is an excellent and clear proof. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">If I were working on Sheva Brachos Torah, I would point out that someone, whoever wrote בורא עולם בקנין השלם זה הבנין, (first mentioned by Rabbeinu Nissim Gaon,) was thinking about the interplay of קנין and בריאה, but I'll leave that to others.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">Note </span></b><span style="font-size: medium;">regarding the words in the first paragraph:</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">פינות צבאיו means "the great ones of His hosts." Based on שמואל א', י"ד ל"ח, according to the Rokeach.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">סידורי נסכיה refers (אבודרהם) to the Lechem Hapanim, and פירושיה, most people say it means the numerous הלכות למשה מסיני -not a very good pshat- but here's the Aruch Hashulchan in 286:2 who says an interesting pshat, whether you accept it or not.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">'צוית פירושיה עם סידורי נסכיה' - והוא על פרשה 'צו את בני ישראל', ששם מפורש קרבן שבת, 'צוית קרבנותיה' - המפורשים בה, 'עם סידורי נסכיה' - הם שש מערכות של לחם הפנים, ותרגומו שית סידרין, ונסכיה מלשון 'קשות הנסך' (ב"י). ויותר היה נראה לומר 'פירושיה' בשין שמאלית, לשון 'ויפרוש את האהל על המשכן', וכן כאן פרישת לחם הפנים על השלחן, עם סידורי נסכיה - הם הבזיכין, שהם קשות הנסך.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" data-mce-style="text-align: justify; line-height: 150%; margin: 12.0pt 0cm .0001pt 0cm;" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 21px; margin: 12pt 0cm 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">סוד in </span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">סוד שיח is not a secret, it just means "council." Please pay attention - council, not counsel. See Tehillim 55:15 אשר יחדיו נמתיק סוד, Yirmiahu 15:17 לא ישבתי בסוד משחקים, and Breishis 49:6, בסודם על תבוא נפשי. I would guess that Nusach Ashkenaz made it סוד שיח instead of שיח סוד שרפי קודש in order to imply a secondary connotation of enigmatic or inscrutable, but the pashut pshat is council.</span></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-18388035620951707202021-10-17T12:03:00.006-05:002021-10-17T22:17:25.447-05:00...but if I were, I'd be frummer than you.<p> <span style="font-size: medium;">This is an oft-repeated classic. An irreligious person says, "You frummies are hypocrites. You avoid biur by selling your Chametz, you sell your businesses to goyim before Shabbos, you circumvent the issur sirus by giving your animals to goyim, by מודר הנאה in Nedarim 43, so many places. You are just playing games. I am not Frum. But if I were frum, I would be frummer than you."</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">What surprised me was that Mohammed said it and it is apparently recorded in the Quran. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.memri.org/reports/saudi-childrens-cartoon-depicts-quranic-story-which-allah-transforms-jews-apes">Here's the story and the resulting brouhaha.</a></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">https://www.memri.org/reports/saudi-childrens-cartoon-depicts-quranic-story-which-allah-transforms-jews-apes</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The gist of the story being that Allah commanded a village of Jews to refrain from fishing on Shabbos, and tested them by sending fish only on Saturday. Some withstood the test, but others, those tricksy Jews... put nets in the water on Friday and retrieved them on Sunday! Some Jews condemned this behavior. Others said it was nobody's business - live and let live. So Allah came down, and turned the sinners into apes, and then they died. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">This story was presented in cartoon form on a Saudi website, and people complained about it. My own dear wife was offended.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I was not offended at all. It doesn't bother me for others to say that the Ribono shel Olam gave the Jews Taryag mitzvos, and when they don't keep them, they are punished. What are they saying that we don't say? He did not say that Jews are Apes, he said that Allah punished mechallelei Shabbos by turning them into Apes. That's ok for me. But several things did surprise me.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">1. Apparently, Mohammed recognized that the Ribono shel Olam is makpid that Jews should keep Shabbos on Saturday and not do melacha, although he did not make it part of Islam. He probably was concerned about עכו"ם ששבת. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I believe that this attitude persists in Islam today. First you have<a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/3/25/israels-trick-to-bypass-chametz-ban-for-passover"> this article in Al Jazeera</a> making light of the hetter of mechiras chametz. Then there is the story involving Marwan Barghouti. As I heard it, a guard was eating a sandwich on Pesach. He asked, but it's Pesach, I thought Jews do not eat bread on Pesach. The guard answered that that's only the Chareidim in Bnei Brak, but he doesn't believe any of that. Barghouti said that until then, he was always worried that the Jews had a God given right to Israel, it was their covenant with God. But now that he saw that the Jews</span><span style="font-size: large;"> </span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>weren't keeping any covenants,</span><span> </span><span> they were not following such basic things as not eating bread on Pesach, and he decided that eventually, if the Arabs make it hard enough, the Jews will just go away.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">2. I see an implication here that although he imitated Yahadus in many ways, or had a mesora from Avrohom Avinu, perhaps one of the reasons he did not simply embrace Yiddishkeit was his perception that the practice of Judaism in his day was not sincere or pure. He found the practice of haaramos offensive, similar to the early Christian criticism of the Pharisees.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">3. He held that this practice was a trick. This implies, to me, that it's not the pshat that he interpreted the Torah like lehavdil Beis Shammai's (17a) shvisas keilim. Beis Shammai's shvisas keilim is not a chiyuv missah, it is a separate din that besides issur melacha, your keilim have to shoveis as well. And even Beis Shammai agrees that if you're mafkir, you're ok. That's not what bothered Mohammed. He did not think about the din of shvisas keilim, he assumed that the issur is only on the gavra. What seems to have bothered him was the "spirit" of the law. If Allah said not to fish on Shabbos, then you should not arrange that your fishing is getting done on Shabbos.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">As I said, it was the classic "...I would be frummer than you fakers, my Shabbos would be special."</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I'm looking forward to seeing what the Muslims do about Imitation Pork, which the OU just decined giving a hechsher. (I once thought about creating a hechsher or a restaurant that specialized in just such products. I was going to call it FLAG Kosher. Flag stands for "Fress Like a Goy.")</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I did see <a href="https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/food/articles/is-it-kosher-to-eat-fake-pork">this in Tablet Magazine</a>:</span></p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Recently, Slate staff writer Aymann Ismail wrote an article about how Impossible Pork and similar products are “testing his faith” as a Muslim by offering a tempting loophole against Islam’s prohibition against pork, but not exactly fulfilling the spirit of the law. “Our community is bound by rules meant to keep us from what hurts us,” he wrote. “But doesn’t Impossible Pork ragu sound damn delicious? Besides, God is merciful.”</span></p></blockquote><p><br /></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-54569634015588793172021-10-06T13:45:00.013-05:002021-10-10T21:48:46.078-05:00Let Us Make Man<p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I enjoy reading divrei Torah from רבי מרדכי מלכא, Rav of Elad, and I want to share and expand upon <a href="https://www.bhol.co.il/news/187252">something he said on Parshas Breishis</a>. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">He discusses the use of the plural in the creation of Adam. 1:26, נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו. Rashi brings that it is a lesson about honoring the powerless - Hashem spoke as if He consulted and included the Malachim in the creation of Man. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Why, then, does this plural appear only by the creation of Adam? <a href="https://www.sefaria.org/Bereishit_Rabbah.1.3?lang=he&with=all&lang2=he">Bishlema according to Rebbi Chanina that the Malachim were created on Thursday</a>, of course Hashem consulted with them only on Friday when He created Man. But according to Rav Yochanan that they were created on Monday, why is it only on Friday that the Torah teaches this lesson of humility by saying Hashem consulted with them? </span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">(A large part of my restatement of Rav Malka's answer is based on Pico Della Mirandola's words in </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-family: helvetica;"><a href="http://bactra.org/Mirandola/">Oration on the Dignity of Man</a>. This is a personal quirk and in no way reflects upon Rav Malka.)</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rav Malka answers that the nature of all other creatures is defined and restricted within laws which Hashem laid down; but Adam was given no specific and authentic visage, nor endowment properly his own, in order that whatever place, whatever form, whatever gifts he may, with premeditation, select, these same he may have and possess through his own judgement and decision. Adam is impeded by no such definitive restrictions as the "beast machine," and may, by his own free will, trace for himself the lineaments of his own nature. Adam was placed at the very center of the world, so that from that vantage point he may with greater ease glance round about on all that the world contains. <b>Adam, Man, is a creature neither of heaven nor of earth, neither mortal nor immortal, in order that he may, as the free shaper of his own being, fashion himself in the form he may choose.</b> It is in his power to descend to the lower, brutish forms of life; he will be able, through his own decision, to rise again to the superior orders whose life is divine.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Hashem made men partners in their own creation. As Hashem began to form Adam, He said, We - I, God, and you, Baal Bechira I am about to form - together we shall create a man.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px;"><span face="sans-serif"><span style="color: #202122; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px;"><span face="sans-serif" style="color: #202122;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rav Malka's words: (excerpt)</span></span></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px;"><span face="sans-serif" style="color: #202122;"><span style="font-size: 14px;"><br /></span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span face="sans-serif" style="color: #202122;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">בראשית פרשת בראשית פרק א פסוק כו</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויאמר אלהים נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו וירדו בדגת הים ובעוף השמים ובבהמה ובכל הארץ ובכל הרמש הרמש על הארץ</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span face="sans-serif" style="color: #202122;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">שואלים חז"ל מה השתנה בריאת האדם מכל הבריאה שבכל הבריאה נאמר ויאמר אלוקים יהיה וכו' בלשון יחיד וכאן בבריאת </span></span><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica;">האדם נאמר בלשון רבים נעשה אדם?</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span face="sans-serif" style="color: #202122;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">ופרש"י על בראשית פרק א פסוק כו וז"ל נעשה אדם אע"פ שלא סייעוהו ביצירתו ויש מקום למינים לרדות לא נמנע הכתוב </span></span><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica;">מללמד דרך ארץ ומדת ענוה שיהא הגדול נמלך ונוטל רשות מן הקטן, ואם כתב אעשה אדם לא למדנו שהיה מדבר עם בית </span><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica;">דינו אלא עם עצמו. ותשובתו כתובה בצדו ויברא את האדם ולא כתיב ויבראו: בצלמנו בדפוס שלנו: כדמותינו להבין </span><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica;">ולהשכיל: וירדו בדגת הים יש בלשון הזה לשון רידוי ולשון ירידה זכה רודה בחיות ובהמות לא זכה נעשה ירוד לפניהם והחיה</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span face="sans-serif" style="color: #202122;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">מושלת בו עכ"ל: וכ"כ בבראשית רבה פרשה ח.</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="color: #202122; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>תכלית האדם לעשות את עצמו:</b></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span face="sans-serif" style="color: #202122;">והנלע"ד כונת התורה ללמדנו יסוד גדול מהו התכלית בבריאת האדם, והוא שמצד אחד האדם נברא בשיא השלימות כעדות </span><span style="color: #202122;">הקב"ה שגופו מלא חכמה, אך מאידך נאמר אדם עיר פרא יולד, והיינו שהחלק הרוחני שבאדם קרי מידות ודרך ארץ תורה </span><span face="sans-serif" style="color: #202122;">ומצות אין בו כלום והכל תלוי במעשיו של האדם, ולכן אפילו שמבחינת הגשמיות של הגוף אין יותר מושלם ממעשיו של </span><span style="color: #202122;">הקב"ה, אך אם ח"ו לא יעבוד האדם על מידותיו ויאמץ לעצמו קיום התורה והמצות הרי שאותו גוף יכול להיות חורבן לעולם </span><span style="color: #202122;">כמו היטלר ימש"ו, ומאידך כאשר יאמץ לעצמו תורה ומצות ומעש"ט ומידות ודרך ארץ יכול להיות שותף לבנין העולם ולהיות </span><span style="color: #202122;">נזר הבריאה. </span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #202122;">ובזה יובן היטב שהתורה מתיחסת לשלימות הבריאה ובאמת והנה טוב מאוד, אך ב"ה וב"ש התיחסו לחלק </span><span style="color: #202122;">הרוחני שזה תפקידו ותכליתו אשר מוטל על האדם לרכוש במשך חיו, וכיון שהנסיונות קשים הרי שיש יותר סיכוי לכישלון </span><span style="color: #202122;">יותר מהצלחה מפני התאות הגופניות, לכן הגיעו למסקנה לאחר שנתיים ומחצה שיותר טוב אילו לא נברא אך עכשיו שנברא </span><span style="color: #202122;">יפשפש או ימשמש במעשיו. </span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="color: #202122;">ובזה יובן היטב שכל זה נרמז בבריאת האדם שנאמר בלשון נעשה שהוא לשון רבים, הכונה </span><span style="color: #202122;">שהקב"ה פונה לכ</span><span style="color: #202122;">ל אדם ואדם או מצוה לכל אדם בו ביחד נעשה את האדם אני יוצר את הגוף אך אתה תייצר את התוכן </span><span style="color: #202122;">הרוחני ורק אז מגיע האדם לתכליתו, ועי"ז זוכה וירדו בדגת הים ועוף השמים וכו' כיון שהופך להיות נזר הבריאה, וכמ"ש </span><span style="color: #202122;">רש"י וירדו יש למילה משמעות כפולה זכה האדם יהיה מלשון רדיה שלטון על הבריאה, ואם לא זכה הוא מלשון ירידה </span><span style="color: #202122;">והבריאה והבהמה שולטת עליו כפרש"י.</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: right;"><br /></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: left;">Using Pico's words to explain R Malka's thought and his pshat in the passuk is not, chas veshalom, intended to imply any parity. R Malka is a talmid chacham and yrei shamayim, and Pico, lehavdil, was a Catholic, albeit very independent. He was a brilliant and serious scholar who was variously famous and notorious for his independent thinking - "<a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pico-della-mirandola/">Pico was also remarkably original—indeed, idiosyncratic. ... deliberately esoteric and aggressively recondite...</a>" . His writings are full of apikorsus and minus, but after all that is subtracted, there are some things worth reading.</p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: left;"><br /></p><p style="background-color: white; margin: 0.5em 0px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">Avrohom wrote a comment informing me that I am not the first frum Jew in this century to quote this very paragraph from Mirandola. </span><a href="https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation-5770-bereishit-g-ds-supreme-call-to-humankind/" style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">Rabbi Sachs does exactly this</a><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">, with exactly this paragraph, and also quotes Rav Yosef Ber as saying essentially the same thing (</span><span style="background-color: transparent; font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">in Halakhic Man: “The most fundamental principle of all is that man must create himself. It is this idea that Judaism introduced into the world.”) </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">The only thing none of them does, </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">and I can not imagine why they did not make that last step, is to use it to explain that passuk </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large; text-align: right;">נעשה אדם</span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large; text-align: right;"> </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large; text-align: right;">as Rav Malka does!</span></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-29460762065645220092021-09-14T14:48:00.008-05:002021-09-16T21:26:42.683-05:00Haazinu. The Rock! His Deeds are Perfect.<p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> <span><span style="font-family: helvetica; text-align: right;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> </span><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-family: helvetica;">הצור תמים פעלו כי כל דרכיו משפ</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">ט </span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">אל אמונה ואין עול </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">צדיק וישר הוא </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span class="en" lang="en">The Rock!—His deeds are perfect, </span>Yea, all His ways are just;</span></p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span class="en" lang="en">A faithful God, never false, </span>True and upright is He.</span><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Just out of the goodness of his heart, Michael Kirshner, the owner of Star Catering, provides a kiddush in the shul kitchen after the early minyan. I prefer to make kiddush at home, so I can eat something with my wife, but sometimes I go in to catch up on local news. Last week, I jokingly said to Michael, "Since you're sponsoring the kiddush, you really should say a dvar Torah." He shrugged and said "I'm not sponsoring! 'Ploni' is sponsoring this week!" </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I'm not friendly enough with Ploni to needle him for not saying a dvar Torah. But he said "I have something I want to say." And this is what he said.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">"I just spent Rosh Hashannah in West Palm Beach, and after Maariv, we wished each other "לשנה טובה תכתב ותחתם לאלתר לחיים טובים ולשלום" and we went home. A while later, one person's wife came knocking on the Rabbi's door, because her husband had not come home. They went to look for him, and they found out that he had been hit by a car crossing the street and was killed on the spot. This young man, his name is Baruch, he was an unbelievable baal chesed. Many people come to the local hospital for medical procedures, and they stay at Gershon Bassman's (also at the kiddush,) Hachnasas Orchim, and Baruch would drop everything he was doing to take care of them - he picked them up, he found them food that was up to their kashrus standards - just Chalav Yisrael was not enough, one guy needed Super Chalav Yisrael - and he gladly did whatever he could to make them comfortable. And just after I wished him le'alter lechaim, he got killed crossing the street." <br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">And now, Rabbi Eisenberg is going to tell us how the Ribono shel Olam could do such a thing to this tzadik and to his family on Rosh Hashannah."</span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">To make terrible even worse, this shul in West Palm Beach is across the street from Century Village, and there's an island in middle of the street. There is traffic on the street directly in front of Century Village, and there's a stoplight, but there's very little traffic on the street in front of the shul. So the light changes to go right and left out of Century Village, but you don't get a green to cross in front of the shul unless you press a button. So they have a security guard, who waits for the people and presses the button so they can safely cross. Baruch always stayed after davening to put sefarim back and straighten the place out, just for kavod beis haknesses. Rosh Hashannah night, the shul was full and people are in a hurry to get home, so he had extra straightening out to do, and by the time he finished, the security guard had left. That is why he was hit by the car - because on Rosh Hashannah night, he stayed late so that the mispallelim the next day would come in to a clean and beautiful shul.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">This man, Ploni, had suffered a personal tragedy several months ago. His son, who lived in Detroit, was a rebbi, he learned Daf Yomi five times a day, and, as Rav Bakst said in his hesped, he was not just a Baal Chesed, he was beyond any definition of Baal Chesed, he was a gadol in chesed. A young man, he died while learning the daf yomi. After he said what happened to Baruch on Rosh Hashannah, he said that since his son died, his heart has been a block of ice. So you realize that when he threw this question at me, it was not just because of Baruch. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I was not in a good place. I had lightheartedly pushed someone to say a vort, as a result this man said what was on his heart, and then he throws the question at me, the question that bothered Moshe Rabbeinu and Iyov and all the tzadikim since Briyas Haolam.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">In Melachim I 18:37, Eliahu prayed for a neis to show Hashem's power over the Neviei haBaal on Har HaCarmel and said</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ענני ה' ענני וידעו העם הזה כי אתה ה' האלהים ואתה הסבת את לבם אחרנית</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rashi explains, </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>וְאַתָּה הֲסִבֹּתָ אֶת לִבָּם.</b> נָתַתָּ לָהֶם מָקוֹם לָסוּר מֵאַחֲרֶיךָ, וּבְיָדְךָ הָיָה לְהָכִין לְבָבָם אֵלֶיךָ. וּמִדְרַשׁ אַגָּדָה: אִם לֹא תַּעֲנֵנִי, אַף אֲנִי אֶהְיֶה כּוֹפֵר וְאוֹמֵר, אַתָּה הֲסִבּוֹתָ אֶת לִבָּם, וְכֵן אָמַר משֶׁה: אִם כְּמוֹת כָּל הָאָדָם יְמוּתוּן אֵלֶּה, אַף אֲנִי כּוֹפֵר וְאוֹמֵר, לֹא ה' שְׁלָחַנִי לְדַבֵּר אֶת הַתּוֹרָה וְהַמִּצְוֹת, וְכָךְ אָמַר מִיכַיְהוּ: אִם שׁוֹב תָּשׁוּב בְּשָׁלוֹם, לֹא דִּבֵּר ה' בִּי.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Ribono shel Olam will not put a man in a position where he can not be expected to withstand the Sattan, the Yetzer Hara. I think that in Beis Din shel Maalah, they decided that this Ploni had experienced things that would make it unfair to expect him to remain a maamin, and I had been maneuvered into the position to tell him what he needed to hear, to deliver a message that might help him deal with the terrible and tragic things he had seen. </span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">My mother in law, Rebbitzen Shelia Feinstein, עליה השלום, was a passenger in a car that had an accident. <span face=""helvetica neue" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"> When the first responders came and took her out of the car, she sat down waiting for the ambulance, and she asked my father in law Shlitah, "We're on our way home from a Bris and Nichum Aveilim. It says that שלוחי מצוה אינן ניזקין. How could something like this have happened?" Soon after being taken by the ambulance, she lost consciousness and passed away ten days later, never having fully awoken. </span></span></div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span face=""helvetica neue" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif" style="background-color: white;"><div style="direction: ltr;"><br /></div></span><span style="background-color: white;"><div style="direction: ltr;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">My son Harav Shlomo said in Reb Chaim Kanievsky's name that when a person's allotted years come to an end, (or if for whatever reason his time has come,) if that person was a tzadik the Ribono shel Olam will arrange that he will die in the midst of doing a Mitzva. It's not the pshat that the mitzva was not meigin. The pshat is that a mitzvah is meigin on a live person, but it is not meigin on a gavra ketilla. If the person has to die no matter what. Hashem gives him the great zechus of dying mitoch dvar mitzvah.</span></div><div style="direction: ltr;"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><br /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><div><span style="background-color: transparent;">ויבוא אברהם לספוד לשרה (בראשית כ"ג ב') פירש רש"י שעל ידי בשורת העקידה מתה שרה. ויש לעיין הא קי"ל שלוחי מצוה אין נזוקין ולמה סבבו מן השמים שתמות עי"ז, </span></div><div><span style="background-color: transparent;">וכעין זה יש להקשות בריש מדרש אסתר גבי אנשי אלכסנדריא שאמרו נדליק או לא נדליק ואמרו נדליק וכל דבעי ימטי עלן ועי"ז נתגלגל שנהרגו כולן, וקשה נהי שהיו חייבים עונש כדאמר בגמ' דעברו על לא תוסיפון לשוב וגו' אבל למה גלגלו שימותו דוקא ע"י מצוה שמסרו נפשם על זה. וכן קשה בשבת קי"ח ב' יהי חלקי ממתי בדרך מצוה וקשה הא שלוחי מצוה אינן ניזוקין. וקשה לומר דכל הני מקרי שכיח הזיקא. </span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;">ונראה דהא דשלוחי מצוה אינן נזוקין היינו דהמצוה לא תגרום להם שום היזק, אבל אם הגיע זמנו למות בלא"ה, א"כ אדרבה זכות הוא לו שמסבבין מן השמים מיתתו ע"י מצוה, דהוי כמוסר נפשו על קידוש ה'. ולכן אנשי אלכסנדריא שהגיע זמנם ליענש ולפי שהיו צדיקים סבבו מן השמים שימותו ע"י מצוה, דהוי כמסרו נפשם עבור המצוה, דשכרו מרובה מאד, וכן הענין בשרה וכן בהא דכל כתבי, ובזה יתיישב בכמה דוכתי. <br /></span></div><div><br style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;" /></div></div></span><span face=""helvetica neue" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif" style="background-color: white;"><div style="direction: ltr;">(See addendum for text of the Medrash about the Jews of Alexandria.)</div><div style="direction: ltr;"><br /></div></span><span style="background-color: white;"><div style="direction: ltr;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">R' Shlomo added that it seems to him that it would not be stam a mitzva, it would be a mitzva that specifically reflects that person's gadlus in Avodah. (He said that in his grandmother's case, her gadlus was helping people make an honest assessment of who they are and what they are capable of doing, of making an honest cheshbon hanefesh. This is the greatest chesed anyone can do for another, holding up a mirror so they can see who they truly are and what they can become, like the Brachos of Yaakov and of Moshe Rabbeinu. If her time had come, how appropriate it was that it came while she was oseik in a mitzvah that is a chesed with the living and with the dead, nichum aveilim.)</span></div></span><span face=""helvetica neue" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif" style="background-color: white;"><div style="direction: ltr;"><br /></div></span><span face=""helvetica neue" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif" style="background-color: white;"><div style="direction: ltr;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">Sara did not die before her time. Sarah's years were over and her time had come. The Satan just used the Akeida as the instrument of bringing about that death (borrowing Reb Yaakov Kamenetzky's words as brought in the Tallelei Oros page 248. Reb Yaakov adds that this is why the words Chayei Sara are repeated - this was the number of years she was allotted and her time had come. When she was born, she was given 127 years. Those years had run out. This is also brought in the Kol Rom as something Reb Yaakov said to Reb Moshe when he came to be menachem aveil at his Shiva on his sister, Rebbitzen Small. I also just saw it in the Emes L'Yaakov, where he proves this is true, because later it says that when Yitzchak turned 123, he realized that he had to get moving on a shidduch for Yaakov, because a man needs to worry when he reaches a parent's age of death, and it was a couple of years before his mother's life span. All this proves that her death was not the result of a malicious act of the Satan, it was her predestined lifespan.)</span></div><div style="direction: ltr;"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><br /></span></div><div style="direction: ltr;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">Please note: According to Reb Chaim, this applies not only when a man reaches the end of his alloted years. In the case of the men of Alexandria, Hashem had made a gzeira that because the community was founded in contradiction to the passuk prohibiting choosing to settle in Egypt, it was to be destroyed; despite that sin, and in balance, they were tzadikim. Although the destruction and death was inevitable, Hashem chose such circumstances that allowed them to die al kiddush Hashem.</span></div></span><span face=""helvetica neue" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif" style="background-color: white;"><div style="direction: ltr;"><br /></div></span><span face=""helvetica neue" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif" style="background-color: white;"><div style="direction: ltr;">When a man's time comes, there are many ways to die. He might die in middle of something absurd or embarrasing. One beautiful soul I know died of a heart attack in the shower, and remained there for twelve hours under a spray of hot water. Another person was shot and killed in middle of the night on Yomtov while playing Pokemon in the park off of Lake Shore Drive. But there are a lucky few, yedidei Hashem, whose end draws close, and the Ribono shel Olam gives them the opportunity to do a perfect mitzvah with ahava and dveikus just as their time runs out. As Rav Avraham Bukspan said, </div></span></span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span face=""helvetica neue" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif" style="background-color: white;"><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;">רגלוהי דבר איניש אינון ערבין ביה - לאתר דמיתבעי תמן מובילין יתיה..</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="font-size: large; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div dir="rtl" style="font-size: large; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Addendum: </div><div style="text-align: left;">This is the Medrash (Eicha 4:22) Reb Chaim Kanievsky brought.</div><div dir="rtl" style="font-size: large; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div dir="rtl" style="font-size: large; text-align: right;">קַלִּים הָיוּ רֹדְפֵינוּ מִנִּשְׁרֵי שָׁמָיִם, טְרַכִינוּס שְׁחִיק עֲצָמוֹת יָלְדָה אִשְׁתּוֹ בְּלֵיל תִּשְׁעָה בְּאָב, וְהָיוּ כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲבֵלִים. נִשְׁתַּתֵּק הַוְּלַד בַּחֲנֻכָּה, אָמְרוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל נַדְלִיק, אוֹ לֹא נַדְלִיק, אָמְרוּ, נַדְלִיק, וְכָל מַה דְּבָעֵי לִימְטֵי עֲלָן יִמְטֵא. אַדְלִיקוּ, אֲזַלוּן וַאֲמָרוּן לִישָׁן בִּישׁ לְאִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁל טְרַכִינוּס, אִילֵין יְהוּדָאִין כַּד יְלִידַת הֲווֹן מִתְאַבְּלִין, וְכַד מַיְית וְלָדָא אַדְלִיקוּ בּוֹצִינַיָיא. שָׁלְחָה וְכָתְבָה לְבַעְלָהּ, עַד דְּאַתְּ מַכְבֵּשׁ בַּרְבָּרְיִין בֹּא וּכְבשׁ אִילֵין יְהוּדָאין דְּמָרְדוּ בָךְ, סְלִיק לְאִילְפָא וַחֲשִׁיב לְמֵיתֵי בַּעֲשָׂרָה יוֹמִין וְאַיְיתִיתֵיהּ רוּחָא בְּחַמְשָׁא יוֹמִין, אֲתָא וְאַשְׁכְּחִינוּן דַּהֲווֹ עָסְקִין בַּהֲדֵין פְּסוּקָא <small>(<a class="refLink" data-ref="Deuteronomy 28:49" href="/Deuteronomy.28.49">דברים כח, מט</a>)</small>: יִשָֹּׂא ה' עָלֶיךָ גּוֹי מֵרָחֹק מִקְצֵה הָאָרֶץ כַּאֲשֶׁר יִדְאֶה הַנָּשֶׁר, אֲמַר לְהוּ אֲנָא הוּא נִשְׁרָא דַּחֲשֵׁיבִית לְמֵיתֵי בְּעַשְׂרָה יוֹמִין וְאַיְיתֵתַנִי רוּחָא בְּחַמְשָׁא יוֹמִין, הִקִּיפָן לִגְיוֹנוֹתָיו וַהֲרָגָן. אָמַר לַנָּשִׁים הִשָּׁמְעוּ לְלִגְיוֹנוֹתַי וְאִם לָאו אֲנִי עוֹשֶׂה לָכֶם כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁעָשִׂיתִי לָאֲנָשִׁים, אָמְרוּ עֲבֵיד בְּאַרְעָאֵי מַה דְּעַבַדְתְּ בְּעִילָאֵי, מִיָּד הִקִּיפָן לִגְיוֹנוֹתָיו וַהֲרָגָן, וְנִתְעָרְבוּ דָּמִים שֶׁל אֵלּוּ בְּדָמִים שֶׁל אֵלּוּ, וְהָיָה הַדָּם בּוֹקֵעַ וְהוֹלֵךְ עַד שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לְקִיפְרוֹס נָהָר.</div></span></span>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-46330640157436100222021-08-29T12:27:00.023-05:002021-09-06T15:05:04.704-05:00Rhyme<p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2UF2P3xtWOuIQwU2RDymsdHaGFEOu1VrFRm6DRPFHw1yJs9SBYoyh1HRzwIMOPxmAaCf40GvMkJ8xw6FLopYjnDWBdn-rDVujSdU3_bw_0rHhhizsFDxLB8MfK4P2R_DEWyiB/s148/Embroidery+Letter+T.jpg" style="clear: left; display: inline; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-size: large;"><img border="0" data-original-height="117" data-original-width="148" height="117" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2UF2P3xtWOuIQwU2RDymsdHaGFEOu1VrFRm6DRPFHw1yJs9SBYoyh1HRzwIMOPxmAaCf40GvMkJ8xw6FLopYjnDWBdn-rDVujSdU3_bw_0rHhhizsFDxLB8MfK4P2R_DEWyiB/s0/Embroidery+Letter+T.jpg" width="148" /></span></a><span style="color: #f9cb9c; font-family: Great Vibes;"><span style="font-size: x-large;">here</span> </span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">are very few rhyming verses in Tanach.</span><span style="font-family: Great Vibes;"> </span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> <span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Some </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span>scholars, </span></span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">such as LaSor in his <i>Old Testament Survey (p. </i>236) </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">whom I cite</span></span> only because he is wrong, </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">say there are essentially none. </span></span></div><p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKLJWA5aDOa_eqmUw0TFh4NYTxkp4jObk13RX_aOAFh7tqiLCT4FjHY9E5Sk-WMERJzIbet2N4b4R8eD4wvsLDuJIYj1j1nShw7cYbbYif1FKN6AWg_6JBynK5O7kUwDrSnrK3/s667/Screenshot+2021-08-29+113506.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><img border="0" data-original-height="318" data-original-width="667" height="306" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKLJWA5aDOa_eqmUw0TFh4NYTxkp4jObk13RX_aOAFh7tqiLCT4FjHY9E5Sk-WMERJzIbet2N4b4R8eD4wvsLDuJIYj1j1nShw7cYbbYif1FKN6AWg_6JBynK5O7kUwDrSnrK3/w640-h306/Screenshot+2021-08-29+113506.png" width="640" /></span></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">In fact there are several. There is Lamech's rhymed lamentation, </span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; text-align: -webkit-center;">ויאמר למך לנשיו עדה וצלה שמען קולי</span></span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; text-align: -webkit-center;"> </span></span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; text-align: -webkit-center;">נשי למך האזנה אמרתי </span></span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; text-align: -webkit-center;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; text-align: -webkit-center;">כי איש הרגתי לפצעי </span></span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; text-align: -webkit-center;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; text-align: -webkit-center;">וילד לחברתי</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">There is the ballad in Bamidbar 21:26-30,</span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Numbers 21:26" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Numbers 21:26" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">כי חשבון עיר סיחן </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">מלך האמרי הוא והוא נלחם במלך מואב הראשון </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">ויקח את כל ארצו מידו עד ארנן</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Numbers 21:27" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Numbers 21:27" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">על כן יאמרו המשלים באו חשבון</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">תבנה ותכונן עיר סיחון</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Numbers 21:28" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Numbers 21:28" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">כי־אש יצאה מחשבון </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">להבה מקרית סיחן</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"> אכלה ער מואב בעלי במות ארנן</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Numbers 21:29" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Numbers 21:29" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">או לך מואב אבדת עם־כמוש נתן בניו פליטם ובנתיו בשבית למלך אמרי סיחון</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Numbers 21:30" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Numbers 21:30" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">ונירם אבד חשבון</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"> עד דיבן</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"> ונשים עד נפח אשר עד מידבא</span></p></div></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Tehillim 2:2-5</span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Psalms 2:2" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Psalms 2:2" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">יתיצבו מלכי ארץ ורוזנים נוסדו יחד על יהוה ועל משיחו</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Psalms 2:3" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Psalms 2:3" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">ננתקה את מוֹסְרוֹתֵימוֹ </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">ונשליכה ממנו עֲבֹתֵימוֹ</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Psalms 2:4" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Psalms 2:4" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">יושב בשמים ישחק אדני ילעג לָמוֹ</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Psalms 2:5" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Psalms 2:5" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">אז ידבר אֵלֵימוֹ</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">באפו ובחרונו יְבַהֲלֵמוֹ</span></p></div></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">and the beginning of Eishes Chayil, where the kametz hei is not just because third person feminine singular, as evidenced by ימצא and ולא רע. (Additionally, in the remainder of the perek there are many rhyming words, and most likely they contributed to the lyrical quality of the perek when sung, but it's not the regular metric rhyming I am looking for.</span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Proverbs 31:10" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Proverbs 31:10" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">אשת חיל מי ימצא </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">ורחק מפנינים מכרה</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Proverbs 31:11" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Proverbs 31:11" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">בטח בה לב בעלה </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">ושלל לא יחסר</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Proverbs 31:12" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Proverbs 31:12" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">גמלתהו טוב ולא רע </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">כל ימי חייה</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Proverbs 31:13" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Proverbs 31:13" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">דרשה צמר ופשתים ותעש בחפץ כפיה</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Proverbs 31:14" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Proverbs 31:14" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">היתה כאניות סוחר ממרחק תביא לחמה</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Proverbs 31:15" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Proverbs 31:15" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">ותקם <b></b> בעוד לילה ותתן טרף לביתה</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he"> וחק לנערתיה</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Proverbs 31:16" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Proverbs 31:16" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">זממה שדה ותקחהו מפרי כפיה <span class="mam-kq"><span class="mam-kq-q">נטעה </span></span>כרם</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to Proverbs 31:17" class="segment invisibleHighlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="Proverbs 31:17" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">חגרה בעוז מתניה </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he">ותאמץ זרועתיה</span></p></div></span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">But it is certainly true that the rhyme scheme is rare in Tanach. On the other hand, almost all of our Zemiros and piyutim are written in rhyme.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span>I am curious: When did we begin to use rhyme in kisvei hakodesh? Who was the first? Did he face opposition? I suppose that although not common, the rhyme scheme appears often enough in Tanach to provide precedent. Some say that Hebrew does not naturally lend itself to rhyme, </span><span>while other languages do invite the rhyme scheme. I have </span><span>no opinion on the matter. But if so, what literature influenced our writers to incorporate rhyming into our liturgy?</span></span></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">We all know of the ibn Ezra's criticism of Rav Eliezer HaKalir. In the <a href="https://www.sefaria.org/Ecclesiastes.5.1?lang=he&with=all&lang2=he">beginning of the fifth perek of Koheles</a>, the ibn Ezra lists his complaints about that form of paytanus. (His style of complaint is almost as excited as that of the Yaavetz.) His first complaint is that a tefilla ought to be comprehensible, and not present an impassable mountain range to the reader. He gives the example of a line in a piyut that says </span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ליראי יקפיל, וחדשים יכפיל, ליום זה פור הפיל, ומציון ימלוך</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The ibn Ezra says that this line is hopelessly opaque, and there is no reason for it. But perhaps, he says, the Kalir had to use these words because he wanted it to rhyme? No, he answers. First of all, he says, we never find rhymed tefillos in Tanach, so why is it so important. (Ibn Ezra uses rhyme all the time, but not at the expense of clarity.) Second, if it is that important to you, you ought to find a better way to make it rhyme.</span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ענה אחד מחכמי הדור ואמר, כי חרוז "יקפיל" הצריכו שיאמר "פור הפיל". השיבותיו, <b>כי לא מצאנו הנביאים בכל תפילתם שיעסקו בחרוז</b>. ועוד, כי היה לו לעשות על חרוז אחר; ולמה רכב על פיל? ואותו לארץ יפיל! ואם ראה בחלום שיעשה חרוז על פיל, והוצרך בהקיץ לפתור חלומו – יהיה אומר: "לוחץ יעפיל, להתנשא יפיל, ורמי לב ישפיל, ומציון ימלוך".</span></span></div><div class="separator" dir="rtl" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Note that the ibn Ezra says בכל תפילתם, not that it never appears - but that it never appears in Tefillos.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span>We</span><span> don't really know how long ago Reb Elazar HaKalir lived, so it's hard to use him, and </span><a href="https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%99_%D7%91%D7%9F_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%99#%D7%A4%D7%99%D7%95%D7%98_%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%A3_%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%95%D7%97%D7%A1_%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%99_%D7%91%D7%9F_%D7%99%D7%95%D7%A1%D7%99">Yosi ben Yosi,</a><span> who lived at the time of the Savoraim, in the sixth century, did not use rhyme in his piyutim, only, occasionally, ending each sentence with the same word.</span></span></p></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">According to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhyme">this essay on Wiki,</a> rhyming was very well developed in sixth century Arabic, and at the same time in Ireland, and long before in China. Ireland and China don't have much to do with our discussion, but it appears that rhyming as we know it developed as a high form among the Jews and the Arabs at the same time. </span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The answer is that poetry became popular in Piyutim and Pizmonim and Zemiros in what has become known as The Golden Age of Hebrew Writing. This is from<a href="https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199840731/obo-9780199840731-0055.xml"> an article on the Oxford Bibliography</a>:</span></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Hebrew poetry began flourishing in mid-10th-century Spain (Sefarad, the ancient Jewish name for Spain) and survived there until the 1492 expulsion. Between 950 and 1150 (often referred to as its golden age), Hebrew poetry prospered in Muslim Spain. It was then already widely acknowledged as the indisputable Jewish poetic center. This poetic efflorescence was part of a wider renaissance of Jewish letters (which had its roots in earlier developments in the Orient). Poets were often themselves Talmudic scholars, biblical exegetes, Hebrew grammarians, and Neoplatonic philosophers. But whereas most writings were in Arabic, poetry was uniquely in Hebrew. Poets and audiences belonged to the elite known in scholarship as “the courtier-rabbis.” They were deeply immersed in the Arabic culture and way of life, and some of them served as officers in Muslim courts. As poets, they extensively employed Arabic poetics (genres, themes, prosody, and rhetoric) in both their secular and their liturgical poems. The Arabic influence persisted beyond 1150, at which time the literary center moved to the Jewish communities in the Christian kingdoms of Iberia. In its second period, from the mid-12th century on, liturgical poetry waned, while Kabbalah expanded, and secular poetry receded to give way to narrative compositions in rhymed prose (influenced by the Arabic maqāma and possibly also affected by the rise of European narrative genres). Medieval Hebrew poetry in Spain is evaluated today as one of the highest summits of Hebrew literature (between biblical and modern Hebrew poetry).</span></div></blockquote><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">After writing this, an anonymous comment was sent in with a paragraph from David Berger's "Culture in Collision and Conversation." </span></div><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: justify;">"The beauty of Arabic was a crucial Muslim argument for the superiority of Islam. Since the Quran was the final, perfect revelation, it was also the supreme exemplar of aesthetic excellence, and its language must be the most exalted vehicle for the realization of literary perfection. When Jews compared the richness and flexibility of Arabic vocabulary to the poverty of medieval Hebrew, the Muslims’ argument for the manifest superiority of their revelation undoubtedly hit home with special force...</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: justify;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: justify;">Jews were challenged to demonstrate that even the Hebrew at their disposal was at least as beautiful as Arabic and that Hebrew literature could achieve every bit as much as the literature of medieval Muslims. This created a religious motivation to reproduce the full range of genres and subjects in the Arabic literary repertoire, which meant that even the composition of poetry describing parties devoted to wine, women, men, and song could be enveloped by at least the penumbra of sanctity. There can be no question, of course, that even if the genre was born out of apologetic roots, it took on a life of its own, and not every medieval wine song was preceded by a le-shem yihud; at the same time, every such poem was a conscious expression of Jewish pride, which in the Middle Ages had an indisputably religious coloration.</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: justify;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: justify;">Furthermore, the power and beauty of the religious poetry of the Jews of medieval Spain were surely made possible by the creative encounter with Arabic models. Some of the deepest and most moving expressions of medieval Jewish piety would have been impossible without the inspiration of the secular literature of a competing culture."</span><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; text-align: justify;" /></span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #222222; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white;">On page 39 of his book, Dr Berger points out that among the Jewish writers, the assertion was made that it was the Arabs that learned their skills from the Jews, not the other way around.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">"Consequently, we find the glorification of Hebrew over Arabic and the assertion, ... that Arabic culture, including music, poetry, and rhetoric, was ultimately derived from the Jews."</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">A friend also directed my attention to a book by an (apparent) relative of Rav Avraham ibn Ezra, Moshe ibn Ezra, titled <i style="background-color: white; color: #202122; text-align: left;">Kitab al-Muhadara,</i><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122; text-align: left;"> translated in 1924 to Hebrew by Benzion Halper and titled Shirat Yisrael. In it, he claims that all that is praiseworthy in Arabic literature was based on Greek and Hebrew writings. This must be what Dr Berger was referring to. I plan to read it, and I will bl'n report.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">CONCLUSION:</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">In any case: the answer to our question is that rhyme is occasionally found in Tanach, from Chumash to Mishlei, but it is rare. It was davka in Muslim Spain that rhyme became the dominant form of Slichos and Zemiros and Piyutim. Whether it was the Arabs influenced by the Jews, or the Jews by the Arabs, remains to be seen.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><p><br /><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br /></div><p></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-63616582833284504352021-08-26T11:53:00.003-05:002021-08-26T17:54:19.627-05:00Polygamy in Practice<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">There are many things that are muttar but ought to be avoided, even if the Torah says befeirush that you can do it. The best example is the parsha of יפת תואר, that reminds us that doing something that the Torah is mattir is not always advisable, and can even have pernicious consequences. Similarly, the </span><a href="https://www.sefaria.org/Ramban_on_Leviticus.19.2.1?lang=he" style="font-family: helvetica;">Ramban in Kedoshim</a><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> teaches us the idea of נבל ברשות התורה, that while gluttony is not assur, it is morally and spiritually contemptible. Asking for a king to lead the nation instead of leadership by Neviim is allowed, but, </span><a href="https://www.sefaria.org/I_Samuel.8?lang=he" style="font-family: helvetica;">as Shmuel warned the people</a><span style="font-family: helvetica;">, it was a lamentable decision. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">So too, polygamy (polygyny), is absolutely allowed </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">(21:15) </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">under Torah law - כי תהיין לאיש שתי נשים - but it was never the standard. Polygamy was practiced only when particular circumstances created a special need. </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">I believe that this was because the optimal model of marriage involves a communion of emotion and trust that requires exclusivity. דו פרצופין is very different than three.</span></span></p><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Starting from the beginning, we have Lamech in Breishis 4:19,</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויקח־לו למך שתי נשים שם האחת עדה ושם השנית צלה</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rashi comments that the pre-mabul generations would take two wives; one who was treated like breeding stock, to bear children, and one for pleasure, the beautiful life-consort - the pampered trophy wife - who was sterilized to preserve her youthful appearance. This behavior was viewed as emblematic of the decadent Dor HaMabul. </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>שתי נשים.</b> כָּךְ הָיָה דַּרְכָּן שֶׁל דּוֹר הַמַּבּוּל אַחַת לִפְרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה וְאַחַת לְתַשְׁמִישׁ, זוֹ שֶׁהִיא לְתַשְׁמִישׁ מַשְׁקָהּ כּוֹס שֶׁל עִקָּרִין כְּדֵי שֶׁתֵּעָקֵר וּמְקֻשֶּׁטֶת כְּכַלָּה וּמַאֲכִילָהּ מַעֲדַנִּים, וַחֲבֶרְתָּהּ נְזוּפָה וַאֲבֵלָה כְּאַלְמָנָה, וְזֶהוּ שֶׁפֵּרֵשׁ אִיּוֹב רֹעֶה עֲקָרָה לֹא תֵלֵד וְאַלְמָנָה לֹא יְיֵטִיב (איוב כ"ד), כְּמוֹ שֶׁמְּפֹרָשׁ בְּאַגָּדַת חֵלֶק (וּבִבְ"רַ):</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Then come the Avos Hakedoshim. Neither Avraham Avinu nor Yaakov Avinu took additional wives on their own initiative. It was their primary wife that arranged for their husband to take more wives. Sarah offered Hagar, Rachel ensured that the marriage to Leah would be consummated, Rachel offered Bilha, and Leah offered Zilpah.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">We also find that Lavan viewed the taking of additional wives as an offense against the primary wife, or, in this case, wives. (31:50)</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אם תענה את בנתי ואם תקח נשים על בנתי אין איש עמנו ראה אלהים עד ביני ובינך</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Of course, kings had many wives, but those were to cement political alliances. Perhaps another reason is because <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_sex_scandals_in_the_United_States">political power enflames the libido</a>, and what is adequate for the average man is not enough for a king, similar to the din of Yefas Toar to a victorious warrior.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Gidon</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;"> and Yair Haglili did have many wives, but I think they were exceptions, perhaps because they were shoftim and therefore like kings, or they anticipated becoming kings.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Gideon, the sixth Shofet:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span>שופטים ח:כ"ט </span><span>ולגדעון היו שבעים בנים יצאי ירכו כי נשים רבות היו לו ופילגשו אשר בשכם ילדה לו גם היא בן וישם את שמו אבימלך</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Yair Hagiladi, the eighth Shofet:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span>שופטים י, ג-ה </span><span>וַיָּקָם אַחֲרָיו יָאִיר הַגִּלְעָדִי וַיִּשְׁפֹּט אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנָה. וַיְהִי לוֹ שְׁלֹשִׁים בָּנִים ...</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Rav Reuven Margolios in his sefer <a href="https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=34361&st=&pgnum=14">עוללות Perek 6 "ריבוי נשים" pages 15-18</a> (a book well worth reading!) bri</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">ngs many rayos that חז"ל envisioned the optimal marriage as the personal relationship between one man and one woman. His Pesikta and the Targum are knockouts. Here are his words.</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; overflow: hidden; text-align: right; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>פסיקתא רבתי </b>פסוק מד, שעל המסופר בשמואל א <span class="round_brackets" style="box-sizing: border-box;">(א, א)</span>: וַיְהִי אִישׁ אֶחָד מִן הָרָמָתַיִם צוֹפִים וגו', אמר רבי יונה משום רבי: <b>ואחר כל השבח הזה כתוב בו וְלוֹ שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים <span class="round_brackets" style="box-sizing: border-box;">(שם ב)</span>, ולמה נטל שתי נשים</b> בשביל ויהי לפנינה ילדים ולחנה אין ילדים (שם) כיון שראתה חנה שלא ילדה אמרה אומר לו שיכניס צרתי לביתי ומתוך זה יראה הקב"ה שהכנסתי צרתי לביתי ויפקוד אותי אמר לה הקדוש ברוך הוא חייך (את) חנה הפקדת אצלי נפשות [נפשות] אני משלם (לידך) [ליך] כי פקד ה' את חנה: </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; overflow: hidden; text-align: right; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ב<b>תרגום רות</b> ד, ו, פסוק: לֹא אוּכַל לִגְאָל לִי פֶּן אַשְׁחִית אֶת נַחֲלָתִי, מתורגם: לית אנא יכיל למיפרק לי על דאית לי איתתא לית לי למיסב אוחרניתא עלהי דילמא תהא למצו – מריבה – בביתי, פרוק לך את ארום דלית לך איתתא, וראה בבבא בתרא צא, א, שספרו כי אותו יום שבאה רות המואביה לארץ ישראל מתה אשתו של בועז.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; overflow: hidden; text-align: right; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וכן גם בתקופת רבותינו חכמי המשנה והתלמוד. ראה מו"ק ט, ב: רבי יונתן בן עסמיי ורבי יהודה בן גרים תנו פרשת נדרים בי רבי שמעון בן יוחי… אמר ליה לבריה: בני אדם הללו אנשים של צורה הם, זיל גביהון דליברכוך. אזל, אשכחינהו דקא רמי קראי אהדדי… אמרו ליה: מאי בעית הכא? אמר להו: דאמר לי אבא: זיל גבייהו דליברכוך. אמרו ליה: יהא רעוא דתזרע ולא תחצד… ולא תחזי שתא חדתא. כי אתא לגבי אבוה, אמר ליה: לא מבעיא דברוכי לא בירכן – אבל צעורי מצערן. אמר ליה: מאי אמרו לך? – הכי והכי אמרי לי. אמר ליה: הנך כולהו ברכתא נינהו: תזרע כו' ולא תיחזי שתא חדתא – דלא תמות אנתך ולא תנסב אינתתא אחריתי [ובכוונה ביטאו את ברכתם בסגנון מליצי, שלא יבין ויצטרך לספר לאביו והוא יפתור לו חידתם, ובזה יבורך מפי אביו רבם]. הרי ששני הדברים קשורים זה בזה, ואם לא על ידי מיתת הראשונה בודאי לא יחזי שתא חדתא.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; overflow: hidden; text-align: right; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">בכתובות סב, ב, מסופר: רבי איעסק ליה לבריה בי רבי יוסי בן זימרא [אירס בנו עם בתו של רבי יוסי בן זמרא] כו', יתיב תרתי סרי שני בבי רבי, עד דאתא – איעקרא דביתהו. אמר רבי: היכי נעביד? נגרשה, יאמרו ענייה זו לשוא שימרה! נינסיב איתתא אחריתי, יאמרו: זו אשתו וזו זונתו! בעי עלה רחמי ואיתסיאת <span class="round_brackets" style="box-sizing: border-box;">(ע"כ)</span>. הרי כי קשה היה בעיני רבי שישא אשה עליה, גם כשחשבו שלא תוכל עוד ללדת.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; overflow: hidden; text-align: right; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וראה יבמות לד, ב: כי אתא רבין אמר רבי יוחנן: כל ששהתה אחר <span class="round_brackets" style="box-sizing: border-box;">(מיתת)</span> בעלה עשר שנים ונשאת – שוב אינה יולדת. אמר רב נחמן: לא שנו אלא שאין דעתה להנשא, אבל דעתה להנשא – מתעברת. אמר ליה רבא לבת רב חסדא [אשתו של רבא, רש"י]: קא מרנני רבנן אבתריך [ששהתה עשר שנים אחר בעלה הראשון ואח"כ כשנישאת לרבא ילדה]! אמרה: אנא דעתאי עלך הואי. ובתוס' שם: אמר רבינו תם משום ההיא עובדא דפ"ק דב"ב <span class="round_brackets" style="box-sizing: border-box;">(יב, ב)</span> דאמרה בת רב חסדא תרווייהו קבעינא, <span class="footnote" style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 0; position: relative; top: -0.5em; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://ph.yhb.org.il/plus/14-10-09/#note_1" id="ref_1" style="background-color: transparent; box-shadow: none; box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-line: none;" title=". בבא בתרא יב, ב: "אמר רבי יוחנן: מיום שחרב בית המקדש, ניטלה נבואה מן הנביאים וניתנה לשוטים ולתינוקות… תנוקת – מאי היא? כי הא דבת רב חסדא הוה יתבה בכנפיה דאבוה, הוו יתבי קמיה רבא ורמי בר חמא. אמר לה: מאן מינייהו בעית? אמרה ליה: תרוייהו, אמר רבא: ואנא בתרא".">1</a></span> והיתה מצפה שתתקיים נבואתה, לפי שהיה לרבא אשה אחרת, איחרה לינשא לו <span class="round_brackets" style="box-sizing: border-box;">(ע"כ)</span>. הרי שגם רבא הסובר להלכה כי יכול אדם לשאת אשה על אשתו אי אית ליה למזנייהו <span class="round_brackets" style="box-sizing: border-box;">(יבמות סה, א)</span>, הנה למעשה לא עלתה על דעתו שתינשא לו בת רב חסדא כל עוד אשתו בחיים, אם כי ידע שהיא מיועדת לו.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; overflow: hidden; text-align: right; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ולא רק בחוג גדולי האומה – כי אם גם בכל המוני ישראל לא היה מצוי שתהיינה לאיש שתי נשים יחד, כאשר נווכח מסגנונם בהמסופר <span class="round_brackets" style="box-sizing: border-box;">(סוף תענית)</span> על חגיגות בנות ישראל שהיו יוצאות וחולות בכרמים ואומרות: בחור שא נא עיניך, הנה נקטו: מי שאין לו אשה נפנה לשם.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; overflow: hidden; text-align: right; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וביבמות כה, א: המביא גט ממדינת הים ואומר בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם – לא ישא את אשתו, שחיישינן שמא עיניו נתן בה ולכן יעיד בשקר שנתגרשה, וסיימו שם שאם באותו זמן כשבאו להעיד היו לעדים נשים משלהם, מותרות לינשא להם, באשר לא היה מקום לחשוד כי בהעידו חשב להתירה לעצמו אחרי כי אשתו היתה קיימת אז, ואם אחרי כן מתה אשתו הלוא בהעידו לא ידע מראש שתמות, ולכן עדותו נאמנה. ואלמלי היו רגילים לשאת שתי נשים יחד הרי תמיד יש מקום לחשד שהוא מתכוון לשאת גם אותה; ברור איפוא כי לא היה מצוי בישראל בכל שדרות העם שישא אדם אשה על אשתו.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; overflow: hidden; text-align: right; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וראה בקהלת רבה פרק יא: בַּבֹּקֶר זְרַע אֶת זַרְעֶךָ, רבי יהושע אומר: נשאת אשה בילדותך ומתה – תשא בזקנותיך כו', ולא אמרו כי משום לָעֶרֶב אַל תַּנַּח יָדֶךָ ישא אשה חדשה על אשתו שנזדקנה. ובכתובות עז, סוף ע"א: נשא אשה ושהה עמה עשר שנים ולא ילדה, כופין אותה להוציא, משום דכל כמה דאיתא להא גביה לא נסיב אחריתי. ובכל אלפי מאורעות וסיפורים שבספרות התלמוד אין אנו מוצאים כל הד למציאות זו, מלבד באפוטרופוס אחד שאצל אגריפס המלך, ראה סוכה כו, א. ואולי גם שם היתה איזו סיבה דוגמת דברי הפסיקתא רבתי שהזכרתי על אלקנה אבי שמואל. ומה שאמר רבי אליעזר הגדול <span class="round_brackets" style="box-sizing: border-box;">(סנהדרין סז, ב)</span> ביום פטירתו על הורקנוס בנו: דעתו ודעת אמו נטרפה – הוא בן אשתו השנייה בת אחותו, ראה אבות דרבי נתן פרק טז, אחרי שאשתו הראשונה, אחותו של רבן גמליאל מתה מקודם אחרי פטירת אחיה, ראה בבא מציעא נט, ב, ובהקדמת הגרד"ל לפרקי דרבי אליעזר.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; overflow: hidden; text-align: right; text-overflow: ellipsis;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ברור איפוא כי המסופר במדרש אגדה שי"ב נשים היו לבר קפרא יחד והן פרנסו אותו, הן הן היבמות שעליהן יסופר בירושלמי שהבאתי".</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rav Margolios did not have to mention the other cases of plural marriage in the Gemara, because first of all, they were most likely green card marriages, and anyway the special circumstances are obvious:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">יומא י"ח:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"> רב כי מקלע לדרשיש מכריז מאן הויא ליומא </span>רב נחמן<span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"> כד מקלע לשכנציב מכריז מאן הויא ליומא והתניא </span>ר' אליעזר בן יעקב<span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"> אומר </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;">לא ישא אדם אשה במדינה זו וילך וישא אשה במדינה אחרת שמא יזדווגו זה אצל זה ונמצא אח נושא אחותו (ואב נושא בתו) וממלא כל העולם כולו ממזרות ועל זה נאמר </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;">(ויקרא יט, כט)</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"> ומלאה הארץ זמה אמרי </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;">רבנן קלא אית להו והאמר </span><a href="https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%98%D7%92%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%94:%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%90" style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); color: #0645ad; text-decoration-line: none;" title="קטגוריה:רבא">רבא</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;">תבעוה להנשא ונתפייסה צריכה לישב שבעה נקיים רבנן אודועי הוו מודעו להו מקדם הוו מקדמי ומשדרי שלוחא ואי בעית אימא </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #202122;">יחודי הוו מיחדי להו לפי שאינו דומה מי שיש לו פת בסלו למי שאין לו פת בסלו:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">and the Tosefta Rashi brings in Kiddushin 71a (also Yerushalmi <span style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; text-align: -webkit-right;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit;">יבמות פרק ד הי"ב)</span></span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ור' טרפון היה כהן בתוספתא דכתובות (פ"ה) מעשה בר' טרפון שקדש שלש מאות נשים בשני בצורת כדי להאכילם תרומה:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">In Yevamos 65a there is a machlokes Rav Ami and Rava about marrying a second wife when they are trying to single out the source of an interility problem. Rav Ami says that Wife One is entitled to demand an end to the marriage and despite her instigating the divorce, she is entitled to all the Kesuva payments. Rava argues and says that a man can marry a second wife as long as he can afford to support both of them properly.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium; vertical-align: inherit;">אמר רבי אמי ... שאני אומר כל הנושא אשה על אשתו יוציא ויתן כתובה רבא אמר נושא אדם כמה נשים על אשתו והוא דאית ליה למיזיינינהי</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Ritva says that this machlokes is where Wife One protests. If she is amenable, Rav Assi would not say that the marriage is not countenanced. </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">כל הנושא אשה על אשתו יוציא ויתן כתובה, והא לא מתאמרא ודאי אלא כשהוא שלא ברצון אשתו יוציא ויתן כתובה, ועל הא אתא רבא לומר נושא אדם כמה נשים, אפילו שלא ברצון אשתו, והוא דיכול למיקים בסיפוקיי הו, והלכתא כרבא</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">But that Gemara is talking about circumstances when there is a special need to marry another woman, not just a personal desire to do so, but even so, Rav Assi says that the husband's need does not outweigh the wife's right to a monogamous relationship.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">In fact, we find that Rav once spoke to Rav Assi about marrying more than one wife. Rav said to Rav Assi (Pesachim 113a) not to marry two, but if he has to marry more than one he should marry three. Rav's point is, and there's no reason to think Rav Assi differs, is that lechatchila, one. If circumstances mandate more, or if the wife does not protest, then three is better than two. </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ולא תנסוב תרתי, ואי נסבת תרבי נסיב תלת:</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The Gemara clearly envisions the perfect marriage as involving one man and one woman, as we see in the following maxims.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Yevamos 62b-63a</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אמר רבי תנחום א"ר חנילאי כל אדם שאין לו אשה שרוי בלא שמחה בלא ברכה בלא טובה </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">בלא שמחה דכתיב (דברים יד, כו) ושמחת אתה וביתך בלא ברכה דכתיב (יחזקאל מד, ל) להניח ברכה אל ביתך בלא טובה דכתיב (בראשית ב, יח) לא טוב היות האדם לבדו </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">במערבא אמרי בלא תורה בלא חומה </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">בלא תורה דכתיב (איוב ו, יג) האם אין עזרתי בי ותושיה נדחה ממני בלא חומה דכתיב (ירמיהו לא, כב) נקבה תסובב גבר </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">רבא בר עולא אמר בלא שלום דכתיב (איוב ה, כד) וידעת כי שלום אהלך ופקדת נוך ולא תחטא טזאמר </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><span>ת"ר האוהב את אשתו כגופו והמכבדה יותר מגופו והמדריך בניו ובנותיו בדרך ישרה והמשיאן סמוך לפירקן עליו הכתוב אומר וידעת כי שלום אהלך האוהב את שכיניו והמקרב את קרוביו והנושא את בת אחותו </span><span>והמלוה סלע לעני בשעת דחקו עליו הכתוב אומר (ישעיהו נח, ט) אז תקרא וה' יענה תשוע ויאמר הנני:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Sanhedrin 22a</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">א"ר אליעזר כל המגרש את אשתו ראשונה אפילו מזבח מוריד עליו דמעות שנאמר (מלאכי ב, יג) וזאת שנית תעשו כסות דמעה את מזבח ה' בכי ואנקה מאין עוד פנות אל המנחה ולקחת רצון מידכם וכתיב (מלאכי ב, יד) ואמרתם על מה על כי ה' העיד בינך ובין אשת נעוריך אשר אתה בגדתה בה והיא חברתך ואשת בריתך</span></p><p><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Sotah 17a</span></span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">דריש ר"ע איש ואשה זכו שכינה ביניהן לא זכו אש אוכלתן </span></span></span></p><p><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></span></p><p><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Note: </span></span></span></p><p><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Ron Abrams and Moish Pollak asked me, if polygamy was so rare, why did Rabbeinu Gershom find it necessary to make an unprecedented "cherem" against it? It seems like using a cannon to kill a fly.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="vertical-align: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">The Chasam Sofer (EH 1:1.) suggests that Rabbeinu Gershom's main purpose was to stop forced divorces; In cases where the wife will absolutely refuse the accept a get, the husband might just give up on the divorce, and to have someone that doesn't hate him in the house, he will take another wife. This subverts RG's purpose, because he wanted to ensure that a divorce would be given after proper negotiation. (I assume that this was because </span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">she would only accept the divorce if she was made financially secure.) If her husband could simply wall her off and marry someone else, she loses all her leverage. It was t</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;">o protect his cherem against forced divorce that he prohibited polygamy. </span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ולולי דמסתפינא לחדש דבר שלא הזכירו הגאונים הקדמונים, הוה אמינא דר"ג הרי תיקן שתי תקנות… ונ"ל דהשניה תליא בראשונה – אחר שגזר שלא לגרש בע"כ, ולפעמים ע"כ שלא לרצונו ידור עם נחש בכפיפה אחת, עי"ז ישא אשה על אשתו ויתרבו קטטות בבתי ישראל ועניות מחזירות על הפתחים דלא מצי למיקם בספוקייהו, נמצא תקנתו שלא לגרש בע"כ קלקלה היא, ע"כ חזר ותיקן שלא לישא שתי נשים, אבל אי הו"מ מגרש בע"כ לא הוה גזור</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The point is that it is true that polygamy was rare at the time. But Rabbeinu Gershom needed to prohibit it by force of Cherem because his takana prohibiting forced divorce was to protect women from simply being thrown out of the house into poverty. The woman's leverage was that if the husband did not make divorce liveable, she would refuse the get and the husband would remain without a true spouse. If he could ignore her and just take a second wife, her whole leverage would evaporate. To ensure that scoundrels would not resort to polygamy to subvert his intented protection of women in his takana against forced divorce, he formally eliminated the option of polygamy.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">UPDATE:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I just came across a comment from Rav Yaakov Emden in his booklet against the Frankists and Sabbateans called רסן מתעה. He says in an apparently complimentary manner that the Christians took on certain chumros that prohibited even things that are Muttar to Klal Yisrael. One that he mentions is that they do not take two wives. But as you will see from his remark in his Teshuvos, he did not mean it as worthy of emulation for the Jewish people.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">שאפילו אומות העולם גדרו גדר בעצמן אחר המבול. אין צורך לומר אומת הנוצרים. שהוסיפה לה גדרים להרחיק עצמן אף מן המותר לישראל. אפילו מה שאין ערוה לנו. וגם מה שהתירה תורה.שהרי אף לקחת איש אחד שתי נשים כאחת אינן מתירים. ואחות אשה גם אחר מות אחותה וקרובות זולת זה להם אסורים. </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The רסן מתעה is available on Academia here:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">https://www.academia.edu/10695784/%D7%A8%D7%A1%D7%9F_%D7%9E%D7%AA%D7%A2%D7%94_%D7%9C%D7%A8%D7%91%D7%99_%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%A7%D7%91_%D7%A2%D7%9E%D7%93%D7%9F_-_Resen_Mateh_R._Jacob_Emden</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial; font-size: medium;">But take a gander at his Tshuvos Yaavetz II 15, the famous teshuva that sets forth his positive view of having a pilegesh. He also addresses polygamy, and he says he is inclined to throw out the whole Cheirem of Rabbeinu Gershom on the basis of בחוקותיהם לא תלכו of the Christians. I've made the relevant passages bold.</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="background-color: transparent;"> הראשון האם חל חרם רבנו גרשום על הנשוי אשה שלא יקח פלגש עליה </span><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;">השני האם יש בדבר משום אותה שאמרו דברים המותרים ואחרים נהגו בהם איסור אי אתה רשאי להתירם בפניהם </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;">הראשונה הנוגעת לחרם רגמ"ה מלבד שלא נתפשטה גזירתו בכל הארצות ולא נתקבלה בכל ישראל כי בארצות המערב והמזרח לא חלה כלל רק במדינת אשכנז לבד זה מחמת המציק שאינם מתירים לאדם ליקח יותר משתי נשים שהוא אצלם הנוצרים לעון אשת איש יחשב ונתקיים בנו ויתערבו בגוים וילמדו מעשיהם לכן מהראוי היה לבטלו הלא אמרו שלא גזר אלא עד סוף האלף החמישי ואין לך בתקנה חדשה אלא המפורש בה דהיינו שלא לקחת אשה על אשתו </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;">ולשניה משום דברים המותרים ואחרים נהגו בהם איסור שאי אתה רשאי להתירם בפניהם לא אמרו אלא בכותאי ודדמי להו דמשרכי מילתא אי נמי שנהגו איסור בדבר הידוע להיתר אלא שקבלו עליהם חומרא לסייג וגדר לתורה </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;">והנה הני תרתי ליתנהו בנדון הפלגש האידנא לדידן דכבר נתבאר לעיל דפלגש לא נאסרה כלל במנין ולא נודע שקבלוה לאיסור אדרבא רבו המתירין והיחיד שנמשך אחר דעת הר"מ בטלו דבריו מחמת שאין להם על מה להשען ומה שנמנעו במדינות הללו מפלגש מעצמם ומאליהם נמנעו בחשבם שיש בו איסור ומנהג בטעות אינו מנהג ומתירין אותו בפניהם אם נהגו מחמת שהיו סבורים שהוא אסור ובאמת הוא מותר ולסייג לא קבלוהו מעולם רק מחסרון ידיעה בלבד עשו כן או שהמורה לאסור אף הוא טעה ואמנם האיסור אין בו ואדרבא ההיפך הוא סייג לתורה אי משום להרחיק מן העבירה וגם משום סייג מהפקר והזנות ולמעט בזמה דנשג"ז להוצאת שז"ל מן הבלתי נשואים הנשואים בעת שאין נשותיהם מצויות להם ואם כדי לסייע בקיום מצות עשה הגדולה דפרו ורבו שנמנעת פעמים הרבה אף מן הנשואים בסבת התקשרם לאשה אחת בלבד לכן אין אומה ראויה להרבות בנשים אלא האומה הקדושה לפיכך התירה התורה אותן לאיש הישראלי מפני שאסרה לו הזנות והניאוף וגם אשתו אסורה לו בימים רבים של נדה וזבה ולידה למען יוכל עמוד בהן לפיכך לא לחנם זלהרבות רע ישראל ובדין שיאסרו האומות עליהן יותר ומהראוי היה למנוע כוגם די התירתן תורה מאחת שבלאו הכי הם רבים וא"צ אלא לישוב המדינה מלאסור ליהודי שתי נשים משום איסור דבחקותיהם לא תלכו רק משום שהוא בשב ואל תעשה וגם מחמת הסכנה ליהודים השוכנים בין הערלים כשנושאים נאינו ראה מה שתי נשים הוצרך רבנו גרשום לגזור איסור ה ז שלא מן הדין לכן שכתב הר"ן בתשובה שגזירת רבנו גרשום אקרקפתא דגברי רמי חומרא לומר שאפילו יצא האשכנזי למדינה שאין נוהגים בתקנה זו דרבנו גרשום חל עליו איסור זה ולפי האמת אינו כן כי לא בא לידי תקנה ו אלא מפני סכנת הערלים משא"כ במקום שאין האומות מקפידין ודאי לא גזר להוסיף על דברי תורה מה שאין בו סייג ולא גדר לתורה אלא ההפך ביטול מצוות ומיעוט זרע הקודש חלילה אלא ע"כ לא בא לידי מדה זו אלא מפני האונס וצורך השעה והמקום גורם משא"כ במקום שאין בו חשש סכנת האומות זה פשוט ומוכרח וכן הרבה ממנהגי האשכנזים הלואי שלא היו ולא נבראו בארץ הלזו דנפקי מינייהו חורבא ותקלות גדולות ועצומות בגופי איסורי תורה החמורים לכן לדעתי מצוה רבה לפרסם ההיתר ביחוד בדורנו זה שהכנעני אז בארץ שאוהב את הזמה ובפרט אחר שנתערבו בישראל המופקרים כת שבתי צבי שר הנואפים הרוצים שיכלו הנשמות עם הגופות למען הביא משיח לפי טומאתו עם שפחות חרופות מלבד שאר כתות דבהפקרא ניחא להו דטבא עבדין להו כי היכי דלישבקו איסורא וליכלו היתרא לא ליגעו באיסורי דאורייתא כרת ומיתת בית דין </span></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; direction: rtl; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>והנה לראשונ' הנוגע לגזרת רגמ"ה. מלבד שלא נתפשט' גזרתו בכל הארצות ולא נתקבל' בכל ישראל. כי בארצות המערב והמזרח לא חלה כלל רק במדינת אשכנז לבדה וזה מפני חמת המציק שאינן מתירין לאדם לקחת יותר משתי נשים שהוא אצלם לעון א"א יחשב (ונתקיים בנו בעו"ה ויתערבו בגוים. וגו' לכן מהראוי הי' לבטלו) הלא אמרו שלא גזר אלא עד סוף אלף החמישי ...</b></span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b><br /></b></span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>... אדרב' ההפך הוא סייג לתור' אי משום להרחיק מן העבר' ההפקר והזנות ולמעט בזמה דנשג"ז להוצאת שז"ל ... ואם כדי לסייע בקיום מ"ע הגדול' דפ"ו שנמנעת פעמים הרב' אף מן הנשואים בסבת התקשרם באשה אחת בלבד לכן אין אומה ראוי' להרבות בנשים אלא האומ' הקדוש'. לפיכך התירה התור' אותן לאיש הישראלי מפני שאסר' לו הזנות והנאוף. וגם אשתו אסור' לו בימים רבים של נדה וזבה ולידה למען יוכל עמוד בהן לפיכך לא לחנם התירתן תור'. וגם כדי להרבות זרע ישראל ובדין שיאסרו האומות עליהן יותר מאחת שבלא"ה הם רבים וא"צ אלא לישוב המדינ' <u>ומהראוי הי' למנוע מלאסור ליהודי שתי נשים משום איסור דבחוקותיהם לא תלכו</u>, רק משום שהוא בשב ואל תעשה וגם מחמת הסכנ' ליהודים השוכנים בין הערלים. כשנושאים שתי נשים הוצרך רגמ"ה לגזור איסור זה שלא מן הדין. ולכן אינו נרא' מ"ש הר"ן בתשוב' שגזרת רגמ"ה אקרקף דגברי רמי לומר שאפילו יצא האשכנזי למדינ' שאין נוהגים תקנ' זו דרגמ"ה חל עליו איסור זה ולפי האמת אינו כן כי לא בא לידי תקנ' זו אלא מפני סכנת הערלים. משא"כ במקום שאין האומות מקפידין ודאי לא גזר להוסיף על ד"ת מה שאין בו סייג ולא גדר לתור'. אלא ההפך ובטול מצו' ומעוט זרע הקדוש חליל' אלא ע"כ לא בא לידי מדה זו אלא מפני האונס וצורך שעה. והמקום גורם (אע"פ שקצת אמרו בו ט"א כ"ה העקר ולדברי הכל לא תקן משום סרך האיסור. גם הסכימו הפוסקים פה אחד שבמקום מצו' לא גזר) משא"כ במקום שאין בו חשש סכנת האומות זה פשוט ומוכרח בעצמו. ...</b></span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b><br /></b></span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>... וכן הרב' ממנהגי אשכנזים הלואי שלא היו ולא נבראו בארץ הלזו דנפקי מנייהו חורבא ותקלות גדולות ועצומות בגופי איסורי תור' החמורים.</b></span></span></p><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><co:footnotetable style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; font-family: Arial; font-size: 14px;" xmlns:co="www1.chabadonline.com/alpha1" xmlns:msxsl="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:xslt" xmlns:user="urn:my-scripts"><div cellspacing="0" data-lang="en" id="FootnoteContainer" style="box-sizing: inherit; font-size: 1.2rem; line-height: 17.4px; margin-bottom: 7px;"><div class="group" data-name="" style="box-sizing: inherit; column-gap: 25px; columns: 295px auto;"><div class="footnote" group="" id="footnoteTR7a558598" style="box-sizing: inherit; break-inside: avoid; padding: 2px 2px 3px; text-align: justify;"><div class="footnoteBody" style="box-sizing: inherit; display: table-cell;"><p style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p dir="ltr" style="box-sizing: inherit; font-size: inherit; line-height: 21.6px; margin: 0px; text-align: left;"><br /></p></div></div></div></div></co:footnotetable></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-65293322795746634692021-08-24T11:01:00.007-05:002021-08-26T12:01:41.439-05:00Slabodkeh and Novarodok<p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I can only describe the experience as affecting, in the sense of evoking a strong emotional response, and I'm not sure why.</span></p><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">We have had the honor of hosting Harav Shimon Krasner, the learned and pious author of the Nachlas Shimon, for several weeks every year. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Yesterday, Harav Krasner told me that he had a question. Everyone is familiar with the aphorism "Slabodka taught Gadlus Ha'adam, Novarodok taught shiflus ha'adam." The story of Novarodok that underlines this approach is that they would tell bochurim to go into a pharmacy and ask for a pound of nails. At that time, a pharmacy was not like CVS; it was a respected and professional enterprise focused exclusively on medicine. To walk in and ask herr doctar pharmacist for a pound of nails would elicit an immediate and wrathful reaction. This taught the talmid to never allow others' opinions of him to effect his self image. A man should know who he is, do what he knows is right, and not allow public ridicule to turn him from his path.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rabbi Krasner asked me, "Wouldn't this be a חילול השם? Wouldn't this make people think that bnei Torah, yeshiva bachurim, were fools? Or mechutzafim?" Isn't this the opposite of אשרי אביו שלמדו תורה אשרי רבו שלמדו תורה?</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I told him that he is a talmid of Rav Rudderman, who gave over the Alter's mesora of gadlus ha'adam, so he cannot even comprehend how the Novarodoker mesora is muttar, to say nothing of appropriate.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">But I am looking forward to speaking to my brother in law, an einikel of Rav Avrohom Jofen, to see what he says about this. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">UPDATE. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I am including some comments because they add so much, and I post this to more than one website, and comments at one site do not appear at the other..</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">1. From R Micha Berger:</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">The best response I heard to this, from someone who studied in Novhardok in France, in my own words. He said that this depiction of Novhardok doesn't really pay attention to what they taught and lived, and more used them as a foil to highlight the chiddush in the Alter of Slabodka's derekh.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><div><br /></div><div>Novhardok is less "shiflus ha'adam" than boot camp. In boot camp, the sargeant tears you down, calls you a maggot, and builds you up again stronger and prouder than you were before.</div><div><br /></div><div>Novhardok tool talmidim, replaced their faulty defense processes with a strong core of bitachon, and created men capable of heckling the Communists, standing up life in Siberia, who stayed loyal to Torah when many were abandoning it... And all with smiles, laughter and a simchas hachaim that belies the outsiders' stereotype...</div></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">2. From Menachem:</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Chillul hashem, I'm sure you know, is not ALL about what outsiders perceive, as clearly demonstrated by the gemara (brachos 19b) where, if one is wearing shaatnez he must remove his clothing, "afilu bashuk"- and the gemara actually refers to NOT doing so as chillul hashem! With that in mind, is it possible that if one will be perceived as not stupid, but just utterly out-of-touch with the world around him- that that is not a ch"h at all, no matter what people think of him? An easier-to-palate example would be someone demonstrating publicly that he has never heard of Amazon or Youtube- not a ch"h in my opinion. Can the Novhardok story fall in that category, albeit several madreigos more extreme?</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">3. From Marzipan:</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><div>Thank you for an insightful post, as always. For a few years, I learned Madreigas Ha'adam regularly. It is full of beautiful interpretations of midrashei chazal, and exceedingly down-to-earth and practical. The approach to humans and their foibles is very blunt and real. But not much of shiflus haadam, at least the way the velt bandies about that term. I don't quite understand, because besides being the Alter's own writings, it was used as a mussar sefer in the yeshiva!</div><div>My own conclusion has always been that the hashkafa is much more complex than a simple term can really convey, just as Gadlus Haadam is an oversimplification of the Alter of Slabodka's multi-pronged approach. (Yes, R' Dovid Liebowitz used to say, "I heard one shmuess from the Alter: Gadlus Haadam!")</div><div>Bottom line: Only after a full, in-depth study of ALL of the shmuessen and hashkafos of the founders of these two schools of thought, can we begin to try to understand these terms.</div><div><br /></div><div>To which I replied with an important Beis Yosef:</div><div><div>Marzipan, thank you for the reminder. The fact remains that Novarodok has given and continues to give a great deal to Klal Yisrael. There must be an insight there kepatish yefotzeitz sela, not one monolith "shitta". Witness today's descendants of the family, all gedolim, but if the Alter would see them, he might be taken aback. (Rhetorical understatement.) As one great grandson said, on some things "volt ehr geschvigen," but on others "volt ehr geschriggen." It is very likely that they viewed the local gentiles as irrelevant, as mortal antagonists, that seeking their respect was an absurd and futile effort, or that developing the strength to ignore societal pressure was a primary value that trumped everything else, I don't know. I know that such behavior easily segues into simple azus ponim, as the Beis Yosef says in the beginning of the Tur, where he warns that Azus is like uranium;</div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"> ומ"ש ע"כ הזהיר שתעיז מצחך כנגד המלעיגים ולא תבוש מפני שמדת העזות מגונה מאד כמו שנזכר ואין ראוי להשתמש ממנה כלל אפי' בעבודת השי"ת לדבר דברי עזות כנגד המלעיגים כי יקנה קנין בנפשו להיות אפי' שלא במקום עבודתו יתברך לכך כתב ולא תבוש כלומר אני אומר לך שתעיז מצחך כנגד המלעיגים ואינו לדבר להם דברי עזות אלא לענין שלא תבוש מהם אף על פי שילעיגו עליך</div><div>So maybe R Yosef Yoizel did extreme things. But the mesora he gave over is a gem.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>4. A friend wrote the following, slightly edited for derech eretz.</div></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">"Sadly, there seems to have been a lack of sufficient sensitivity and focus on how "our" behavior might impress and impact the general population outside the walls of the yeshiva. You might remember reading in Professor Stampfer's book on the Lithuanian Yeshivos that the event(s) which triggered the Russian authorities closure of Volozhin were the physical disturbances and public violence perpetrated by the talmedei hayeshiva on the streets of the town during the battle for the succession of the school's leadership between those factions which supported the Netziv and his family against those who favored Reb Chaim Brisker. (The shopkeepers complained over and over to the authorities that the students' behavior was exerting a deleterious impact upon their business and was disturbing the peace of the community). So much for the bochurim... Regarding the adult religious authorities themselves, much has been written on how many of their public policies actively contributed to antisemitic resentment and hostility. ( As examples, I need only mention the Roshei Yeshivas absolute avoidance of talmidim serving in their country's armed forces ( the real reason behind Slabodka's move to Hebron) or of their refusal to teach the fundamentals necessary for active, positive participation in secular society.) Does not the inability of the Torah leaders in Eastern Europe to read, write or communicate fluently in the language of their own countries, countries in which they had been granted legal rights and citizenship, itself constitute a Chillul Hashem? Isn't Rabbi Krasner troubled by the desecration involved in these more widespread patterns of religious behavior? "</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">My friend believes that it is a sin to blindly accept everything earlier generations did, and this is what we mean when we say in vidui "אבל אנחנו ואבותינו חטאנו," that we perpetuate their sins by following them without careful consideration. I think he is wrong. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Also, what he says about the Stampfer book is not precisely true. The primary reason Volozhin was closed was that the Czarist authorities saw the fighting as a symptom of social upheaval that related to Bolshevism and Anarchism. True, in a footnote he mentions that the local storekeepers complained to the authorities that the fighting was keeping customers away and making the city unliveable, but that was not why they closed the yeshiva. They saw the yeshiva as a symptom of rebellion against authority.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">5. I spoke to my brother in law, Rabbi Moshe Faskowitz שליט"א. I am very grateful that he took twenty five minutes of his precious time to explain the Novarodoker shittah. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">He said that he has written an article on this very point, and I hope he can forward it to me. But the gist of his words, and I must say that much is lost in the condensation, was that the story was true, and that such "Peulos" were required of every bachur in Novarodok. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">When his own father was seventeen and a half, the Alter (I believe his yeshiva was in Bialystock at the time) told him to go to a town twenty kilometers away to start a yeshiva ketana, along with another bachur named Bock. He asked, how can we get there? The Alter answered, take a bus. But, he said, we have no money? The Polish bus driver will throw us out! The Alter said, take the bus. So they got on the bus, and told the driver that they need to get to town X, and they have not a penny, but the dean of their school told them to get on the bus and go. So the Polish bus driver said, "So go sit down." And never after that did his father worry about the reaction of people to his behavior when he knows he is doing the right thing.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">As for the pharmacy owner thinking the bachur was either a simpleton or a mechutzaf, he said, mechutzaf is absurd. The bachur would come in and respectfull asked for a pound of nails, no chutzpah, no azus panim. The pharmacist would laugh at him, everyone in the story would laugh at him, and he would say, thank you and walk out. Did they think he was a fool? A simpleton? No. The goyim knew that the yeshiva boys were smart and shrewd. They did think that they were odd and strange, but who cares that the goyim think yeshiva boys are odd? Do we care that they look at someone wearing black frock and black hat in Bnei Brak when it's 106 and say that he is crazy? Do we care when they see a man who doesn't use the eiruv, and his wife does, and she is pushing the twin stroller while he walks alongside, and they say, "What a disgrace, to leave the work to his wife while he does nothing!" No we don't. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">He also reminded me that my father zatza'l used to make fun of me for being so sensitive to what people will think of me. He correctly saw this as a weakness of will. My father did not like people to be weak willed. He was a decisive and intense person, and when he decided to do something, nothing stopped him, not pain, not other people's yiush, not challenge, and certainly not difficulty. He was a chad bedara in Chesed, but unless you were mentally ill, he did not want to look at you if you were self indulgent or lazy.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">My friend (mentioned above in (4) also called me back, and said that nothing my brother in law said means anything to him. He reminded me that my mother said that after Reb Yoizel's wife died, and he wanted to re-marry, almost no shadchanim wanted to get involved, because they felt that to inflict his extreme behavior on a Jewish woman would just not be fair. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Also, there may be some truth to the idea that many bachurim saw the gentile populace as mortal antagonists (which turned out to be true in the vast majority of cases, even among those who professed a friendly relationship with their Jewish neighbors,) who hated them, and worrying about their "losing respect" for Yeshiva Bachurim was not even laughable. </span></div></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So I'm hoping to get Rabbi Faskowitz's article. Until then, let's just remember that in Europe, the hashkafos and way of life of Navorodok and Slabodkeh were utterly incompatible.</span></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-9106012323932867272021-08-03T16:27:00.002-05:002021-08-03T16:27:25.827-05:00Daven as if You Are the Last Fifteen Thousand<p> <span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: large;">Reb Chaim Brown's son, Eliezer, has a blog, and he posted the following from R Mordechai Malka, the Rav of Elad in Israel.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">He found it on Bechadrei, <a href="https://www.bhol.co.il/news/766685">https://www.bhol.co.il/news/766685</a></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> .. מבואר במסכת תענית דף ל ע"ב, וכן במסכת בבא בתרא דף קכא ע"א: אמר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל לא היו ימים טובים לישראל כחמשה עשר באב וכיום הכפורים. בשלמא יום הכפורים משום דאית ביה סליחה ומחילה, יום שניתנו בו לוחות האחרונות. אלא חמשה עשר באב מאי היא? וכו' (אמר) רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן: יום שכלו בו מתי מדבר. דאמר מר עד שלא כלו מתי מדבר לא היה דבור עם משה, שנאמר ויהי כאשר תמו כל אנשי המלחמה למות וידבר ה' אלי, אלי היה הדבור ע"כ. ומבואר במדרש איכה רבה (וילנא) פתיחתות א"ר לוי כל ערב תשעה באב היה משה מוציא כרוז בכל המחנה ואומר צאו לחפור והיו יוצאין וחופרין קברות וישנין בהן, לשחרית היה מוציא כרוז ואומר קומו והפרישו המתים מן החיים והיו עומדים ומוצאין עצמן חמשה עשר אלף בפרוטרוט חסרו שש מאות אלף, ובשנת הארבעים האחרון עשו כן ומצאו עצמן שלמים אמרו דומה שטעינו בחשבון וכן בעשור ובאחד עשר ובשנים עשר ושלשה עשר וארבע עשר, כיון דאיתמלא סיהרא אמרו דומה שהקב"ה ביטל אותה גזירה מעלינו וחזרו ועשאוהו יום טוב.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">א} צריך להבין מדוע עשו אותו יו"ט ומה הדמיון ליו"כ?</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ב} ושמעתי דבר נפלא בשם המשגיח מפונביז' הרה"ג לוינשטיין זצ"ל שהנה לכאורה יש להבין מדוע רק החמש עשרה אלף האחרונים זכו שהגזרה תתבטל מעליהן וכי אחרים לא התפללו להינצל?</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ותירץ שההבדל בין הקודמים לאחרונים כיון שבכל שנה היו מתים ט"ו אלף מתוך עשרות אלפים ששכבו בקברם והרוב היו קמים ורק ט"ו מתוכן לא היו קמים, א"כ בכל פעם ששכבו בקברם עדיין לא היית תפילתם שלמה לתלות עיניהם רק בחסדי השי"ת, כיון שהיית מתגנבת מחשבה בתוך ליבם שהוא מקוה שלא יהיה בין הט"ו אלף שנפטרים אלא יהיה מן הנשארים, אולם הט"ו אלף האחרונים של דור המדבר היה ברור להם שהם לא יקומו ואין שום סיכוי שהן ישארו ואין להם להישען אלא על אביהם שבשמים, רק אז שפכו ליבם באמת ותלו ביטחונם רק בקב"ה לכן התקבלה תפילתם והתבטלה מעליהם הגזירה, ללמדנו את אשר אמר דוד המלך שאמנם קרוב השי"ת לכל קוראיו, אך אינו נענה אלא לכל אשר יקראוהו באמת, והיינו בלב שלם מבלי להישען על חכמתו או גבורתו או דבר אחר, ורק שאין שיתוף ופונה אך ורק לקב"ה זוכה ומתקבלת תפילתו. ולכן אמר מדוע ישיבת מיר שרדה במשך שנות השואה למרות כל גלותה ומעברה ממקום למקום בסכנות גדולות ובתנאים קשים ביותר, ואילו כאשר הגיעו לארה"ב נחרבה, כיון שכאשר היו בגלות תלו כל ביטחונם בהשי"ת והיה להם סייעתא דשמייא, ואילו כאשר הגיעו למקום מבטחים כבר בטחו גם בבני אדם ובעושר ולכן לא נענו וחרבה הישיבה. ובזה מובן מדוע עשו אותו יו"ט כי בו התחולל הנס והתקבלו התפילות וממילא הופך ליום שמסוגל לתפילות כעין יו"כ, ורוב הטעמים בגמרא הן שנתקבלו התפילות של ישראל ולכן זכו להאיר עיניהם להתיר השבטים ושבט בנימין ולהביא לקבורה הרוגי ביתר ולבטל השומרים שמנעו לעלות לרגל.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I had two problems with the vort. First, I did not like R' Levenstein's expression that the Mirrer Yeshiva in America was "כאשר הגיעו לארה"ב נחרבה." Nechreva??? Yes, we all know that the greatest Mirrer talmidim, especially R Leib Malin, felt that R Avraham Kalmanowitz's creation was too Americanized, and they went and founded Beis HaTalmud. But Chorva? Somehow, it didn't sound right.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Second, I disagreed on the idea that the last fifteen thousand davened at all. The same way that the mishna in Brachos says that prayer to change an existing fact is a תפילת שוא, and R Akiva Eiger brings from the Sefer Chasidim that it is not just futile, but actually assur, it seems to me that once the RBSO made a 'neder' or 'Shuva,' prayer to change anything is a waste of time, no less than asking for a neis. My proof is from Moshe Rabbeinu himself. It was only after he thought that the RBSO was mattir neder did the 515 tefillos begin. Evidently, before that he didn't even try to change the Gzeira. the same is true for the Dor Hamidbar. Bishlema before the last year, fine, maybe they davened that they should live and let others be among the fifteen thousand that had to die; or that they should all live until the last year in the Midbar. But in the last year? There was no way out. אשר נשבעתי באפי! They were definitely going to die, so instead of davening, they would have spent their time better saying vidui. Or chazering mishnayos. What's the point of tefilla at that point!</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So I sent my first question, on R Levenstein's expression, to R Malka. Here is my letter.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"> כבוד הרב שליט"א</span></p><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br clear="none" /></span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ראיתי בעלון כבודו </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">(I inserted the relevant paragraph)</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><br /></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ואני מאוד תמה על המילים</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">.. ואילו כאשר הגיעו לארה"ב נחרבה..<br clear="none" /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">.. כאשר הגיעו למקום מבטחים כבר בטחו גם בבני אדם ובעושר ולכן לא נענו וחרבה הישיבה..<br clear="none" /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br clear="none" /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">בבקשה, יואיל נא כבוד רבנו להסביר למה התכוין במילים כדרבנות האלו</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br clear="none" /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">תודה רבה</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br clear="none" /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">אליעזר נחום איזנברג</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">שיקאגא</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ארצות הברית</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">R Malka was kind enough to answer, as follows:</span></div><div style="background-color: white;"><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">בס"ד </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">לכבוד מעלת <span class="yiv1540925070gmail_default">רבי </span>אליעזר נחום איזנברג</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">שלום וברכה וכט"ס.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ראשית. </b>שמחתי שכבודו עיין ולמד את המאמר. </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>שנית. </b>אלו הן דברי המשגיח של פונביז' ולא שלי.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>שלישית.</b> הדבר ברור ומאוד מובן <span class="yiv1540925070gmail_default">שהרי כתוב בתהילים קרוב השם לכל קוראיו "אשר יקראוהו באמת". ללמדנו פעמים רבות האדם קורא ומתפלל להשם אך לא באמת, מאחר וטבעו של אדם לצרף במחשבתו את כל האופוציות הקיימות ביכולתו לפעול בכדי לקדם את בקשתו, כך שיש צירוף של כוח אנוש שהאדם תולה בו את תקוותו ואינה קריאה מכל הלב, ורק כאשר האדם מבין ומפנים שאין עוד מלבדו וגם כל ההשתדלות שלו אינה יכולה להועיל ולפעול כלום לולי רצון השם רק אז תפילתו נענית. וזה המבדיל בין כלל מתי המדבר לשיירי מתי מדבר האחרונים שהקודמים עדיין לא התפללו מעומק הלב מאחר ועדיין תלו אולי הם לא בחשבון אולם האחרונים ידעו בצורה הכי ברורה שאין שום סיכוי להימלט ורק תפילה מעומק הלב אולי תציל ולכן ניצלו. ובדומא לכך מה שהתחולל בישיבת מיר.</span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">He's right, it's a fantastic vort and a wonderful thought about how we ought to be davening. So I told him that I had an interesting story for him: </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">כבוד הרב שליט"א</span></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br clear="none" /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">תודה רבה!</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br clear="none" /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">מעניין מאוד מה שקרה איתי בדבר תורה זאת,</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">הייתי אצל רופא ירא שמים, היה לי בעיא עם הרגל שלי, בדיוק כאב לי העקב, לכבוד פרשת השבוע.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">הוא ביקש שאגיד לו "ווארט," ואמרתי מה שכתבת מהר' לעווענשטין.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">הוא הגיב ברגש ואמר שזה מאוד מתאים לחייו.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">קודם שהמשיך לדבר, אמרתי שזה צריך לי עיון. הקב"ה נשבע שלא יבוא דור המדבר אל הארץ, ולהתפלל במקום שבוע זה כמו צועק על העבר או מתפלל לשנות את הטבע שזה תפילת שוא, ולא רק שוא אלא לרע"א בשם ספר חסידים ממש אסור. והא ראיה, שמשה לא התפלל על עצמו עד שחשב שהקב"ה התיר נדרו. א"כ מוכח שלהתפלל על "אשר נשבעתי באפי" זה ממש יגיעה לריק, ובמיוחד אחרי מ"ט שנים.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">השיב לי הרופא שהוא בן 51, וכשהיה בן 45 אמרו לו כל הרופאים המומחים בעולם שהגיע הזמן לייאש על בנים, שלא אפשר בשום אופן שיוליד בנים, ושממש לא כדאי להמשיך לנסות. והוא החליט בלבו ש"היפלא מה' דבר??" ושדוקא במצב של יאוש הגיע הזמן להתפלל בכל לבו.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">סוף דבר, יש לו בן בן חמש. בדיוק מה שאמרת בשם הרב לעוונשטין.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ממעשה זה למדתי שהכאב שכאב לי העקב, בפרשת עקב, היה מפני שאני הייתי צריך לפגוש בדוקא ברופא זה, ושאגיד לו מה שכתבת, ועי"ז ירפא אותי רפואת הנפש.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br clear="none" /></span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">יישר כוחך </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="background-color: white; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">יתן ה' לכבודו כח ובריאות להמשיך להפיץ מעיינותיו חוצה</span></div><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br clear="none" style="background-color: white;" /></span></p><div class="yiv1540925070yqt0070251720" id="yiv1540925070yqt21293" style="background-color: white;"><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">True story. My heel had been hurting me since Shavuos, and I finally made an appointment with an orthopedist, whom I had never met. He heard of me, and asked me to tell him a vort. I told him the vort, since it was not long after the fifteenth of Av, and he said that it really meant a lot to him. I assumed he just said that as a way of saying "Nice vort, yasher koyach," so I just kept talking, and said that I disagreed with the vort, because there was no point in davening. He then told me why the vort meant so much to him. After decades of fertility intervention, when he was 45 years old, the experts finally told him the time had come to give up. There was no way that he could ever have children, and instead of this interminable difficult and expensive and utterly futile intervention, he needs to come to terms with his reality. He then, and davka then, decided that "אין עוד מלבדו," he needed to go up the ladder to the RBSO, because there was no hope other than an answer outside of mazal and teva and "reality." </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">He then said that he, now 51 years old, he has a five year old son that was born one year after he was told there was absolutely no hope.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Apparently, R Levenstein was right, and I was wrong. I'm not surprised.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">I also told R Malka that I figured out why R Levenstein said חרבה הישיבה. This is because he said what he said in Yiddish. Only a born Yiddish speaker knows that there is a <b>big</b> difference between </span></div><div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">די ישיבה איז חרב געווארען </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">and </span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">זיי האבען א חורבע געמאכט פון די ישיבה.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The first means they destroyed it. The second, which I'm sure is what R Levenstein said, means that they missed a great opportunity, they could have created something magnificent but they used it to create something inferior. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Whoever was saying this over in Hebrew missed that nuance. It was just lost in translation.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">He wrote back, and said that he can see that my explanation may be true. But one thing for sure: He is going to say over the story.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><div class="yiv2519684021gmail_default" dir="rtl" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large; text-align: right;">בס"ד</div><div class="yiv2519684021gmail_default" dir="rtl" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large; text-align: right;">שלום וברכה.</div><div class="yiv2519684021gmail_default" dir="rtl" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large; text-align: right;">יתכן. </div><div class="yiv2519684021gmail_default" dir="rtl" style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large; text-align: right;">אבל ישר כוח על הסיפורים הנפלאים ממש מחזק ובעזרת השם אשתמש בהם לשיעורים. ברוכים תהיו.</div><div style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.3333px;"><div class="yiv2519684021gmail_signature" dir="rtl"><div dir="rtl"><div dir="rtl"><div style="text-align: center;"><strong><span style="color: #000099;">*********************************************************************************************************</span></strong></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #000066; font-size: medium;"><strong>בכבוד רב,</strong></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #000066; font-size: medium;"><strong>לשכת הרב הראשי לאלעד</strong></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><strong><span style="color: #000066; font-size: medium;">הרה"ג מרדכי מלכא שליט"א</span></strong></div><div style="text-align: center;"> </div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.orhamelech.org/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" shape="rect" style="color: blue; cursor: pointer;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #996633; font-size: medium;">www.orhamelech.org</span></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"> </div><div style="text-align: center;"><strong><span style="color: #000066; font-size: medium;">טלפון בית: 03-9096874</span></strong></div><div style="text-align: center;"><strong><span style="color: #000066; font-size: medium;">נייד: 050-6000318</span></strong></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-9282104314227152192021-07-23T17:24:00.002-05:002021-07-23T17:25:43.594-05:00Baalei Mussar<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>I recently was talking to a scion of the Novarodoker dynasty, and I learned a remarkable thing. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I said that my father zatzal was a baal mussar. As years pass after my father's petirah, I realize more and more what a great man he was. I always knew that he saved many lives during the war, and fed and clothed and healed many bnei Torah in Samarkahnd when so many were dying in the streets of exposure and starvation. I always knew that he led a group of Yeshiva-lait from Russia to Soviet Asia - my mother's first notice of my father was at a gathering in Moscow, where the olam was trying to figure out what to do, and she saw his stand up and point to the east and say better to go to Uzbekistan rather than starve in Moscow. I always knew he was from the best talmidim in Slabodkah - he learned bechavrusa for ten years, all day and all night, with Reb Leizer Platzinsky, the alter's grandson, who had his choice of chavrusas. And the Rogatchover said "Der Yekke ken maseches Shabbos!" But only with the passage of time have I realized what a great Baal Mussar he was. He never said a bad or vulgar word or lost his temper, but he was a lion in business and in yashrus. He never took a penny that might not have been his. He dedicated his life to learning Torah and harbotzas Torah. He treated his wife with the greatest respect and deference under very challenging circumstances. A friend of mine, Reb Dov Peikus, is a nephew of Reb Aharon and Rebbitzen Ella Soloveichik, and he lived in their house for a year before his uncle had a dorm. He told me that his uncle never referred to my father by his first name. In all the private conversations in the house, he was always Rabbi Eisenberg. Reb Ahron! Who knew Yerushalmi Baal Peh!</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">When I said this, that I only now realize what a Baal Mussar my father was, the reaction was immediate and dismissive - he was a great man but he was not a Baal Mussar at all.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">So I learned that even, and perhaps especially, in the great Mussar families, the insularity and provincialism that characterizes Jewish communities is alive and well. He was not a Baal Mussar. We are Baalei Mussar. </span></p><p><span style="color: white; font-family: trebuchet; font-size: xx-small;">It's a remarkable thing. Evidently, you can be a noach lichos and noteir eiva and kasheh leratzos and rodeph kavod and betza and meracheik krovim, but you can be a Baal Mussar anyway, because all these things, whether you, ignoramus that you are, realize it or not, are really lesheim shamayim and davka wh</span><span style="color: white; font-family: trebuchet; font-size: xx-small;">at a Baal Mussar should do.</span></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-87414656475454823672021-07-15T18:40:00.012-05:002021-07-23T14:25:28.465-05:00The Holiday Between Shavuos and Rosh HaShanna<p> <span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rab Schwab in Maayan Beis Hashoeiva in Emor (Vayikra 23:22) discusses the Medrash brought there by Rashi.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><b>ובקצרכם.</b> .......... אָמַר ר' אַבְדִּימֵי בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵף, מָה רָאָה הַכָּתוּב לִתְּנָהּ בְאֶמְצַע הָרְגָלִים — פֶּסַח וַעֲצֶרֶת מִכָּאן וְרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים וְחַג מִכָּאן — ? לְלַמֶּדְךָ שֶׁכָּל הַנּוֹתֵן לֶקֶט שִׁכְחָה וּפֵאָה לֶעָנִי כָּרָאוּי, מַעֲלִין עָלָיו כְּאִלּוּ בָּנָה בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ וְהִקְרִיב קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו בְּתוֹכוֹ (ספרא):</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Why does the Torah see fit to interpose the laws of Leket, Shikchah, and Pei'ah, here, in middle of the description of the holidays of the year? To teach you that one who gives matanos properly to aniyim, it is as if the Mikdash was built in his days and he brought his korbanos in the Beis Hamikdash.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Rav Schwab asks, what is the connection between matnos aniyim and binyan habayis? And whatever the connection is, why is it taught specifically here?</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">He answers the second question first. These seemingly incongruous pesukim actually fit here perfectly, because they refer to a holiday that occurs between Shavuos and Rosh HaShannah. That holiday is Tisha Ba'av. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The passuk in Zechariah (8:19) says</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">כה אמר יהוה צבאות צום הרביעי וצום החמישי וצום השביעי וצום העשירי יהיה לבית יהודה לששון ולשמחה ולמעדים טובים והאמת והשלום אהבו</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">What we experience as a day of mourning for the destruction of the Mikdash will transform into a celebration, because the Mikdash will be rebuilt on that very day.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Who will rebuild it? Mashiach ben David. David Hamelech owes his existence to Rus and Boaz. We see in Megillas Rus that their relationship stemmed from the mitzva of Leket Shikcha and Pei'ah, the Matnos Aniyim that are mentioned in this no-longer-incongruous passuk. Thus, the Binyan Habayis directly relates to Matnos Aniyim.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">(Liberties taken, not all from Rav Schwab.) </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">The point is that there is a holiday between Shavuos and Rosh Hashannah, where the Torah inserts these pesukim. But it is a phantom holiday, amorphous and mutable. If Klal Yisrael lovingly cares for the poor and friendless, then it will be a joyful holiday of Binyan Beis Hamikdash. Unfortunately, in our current circumstances, it is a lugubrious commemoration of the consequences of selfishness and sinas chinam.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">With this, he says, we understand the old minhag of the young women dancing in the vineyards on Yom Kippur and the fifteenth of Av. Bishlema Yom Kippur, we understand that the men will not have improper thoughts, and their interest in a good shidduch will be l'sheim shamayim. But the fifteenth of Av? Isn't this an invitation to improper thoughts and sin? </span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">The answer is that Tu Ba'av will be the seventh day of a holiday that begins on Tisha Ba'av, with intermediate days of Chol Hamoed, just like Pesach and Sukkos. At the finale of this wonderful holiday, young men and women will be inspired to seek a match that will enable a lifetime of Zikui Harabbim and Avodas Hashem. </span><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: x-small;">(Yes, I know that this minhag from the Mishna predates Mashiach by several millenia. So Tzorich Iyun.)</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">This is a wonderful pshat. I just saw something from the Ari zal that while slightly different, is essentially the same and also fits perfectly into Rashi's Sifra in Emor. The Ari zal in LIkutei Torah Ki Sisa, Shemos 32:5, says</span></span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ויאמר חג לה' מחר הנה תימא גדולה בדבר זה וכבר תרצו ז"ל מלת ויבן מזבח לה' שכונתו לש"ש הי' אך החג הזה מה יאמר בו ואיך כתבה תורה פלסתר ואיך יצאו דברים כאלה מפי אהרן אמנם סוד הנמרץ בזה כי העגל נעשה בי"ו בתמוז ובי"ז נשתברו הלוחות ועתיר הקב"ה להפכם ליו"ט נמצא כי חג לה' מחר כי יש מחר לאחר זמן וכ"מ בדרז"ל</span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So the Ari is saying that the yomtov will begin on Shiva Asar and end on Tisha Ba'av, while Rav Schwab is saying that it will begin on Shiva Asar and end on Tisha. Many ask that it is odd that the ikkar yomtov, Tisha Ba'av, would end the holiday, because on the Yamim Tovim that we have, the ikkar simcha is at the beginning. In any case, Rav Schwab was unaware of the this Kisvei HaAri, but his view of the future yomtov is more understandable, that it begins on Tisha Ba'av and ends on Tes Vov Ba'av.</span></span></p><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">When I said this at the table, one of my grandchildren asked me, "If the Torah calls it a moed, then why don't we make havdalah?" Good point, and I imagine that when Zechariah's nevuah is fulfilled, we really will make both havdalah and kiddush. The answer is that unlike tachanun, havdalah is not talui in Moed alone, it also requires that you are going from issur melacha to hetter, or greater issur to lesser issur. Moed it may be, but there is no metziyus of issur melacha.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="background-color: white; font-family: helvetica;"><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Reb Chaim said an interesting hearah. The Mecholos on Yom Kippur and the fifteenth of Av seem to have been davka in the environs of a Mikdash or Mishkan. The Mishna says בנות ירושלים, and the passuk in Shoftim 21:21 also mentions davka the young women of Shiloh, where the Mishkan was at that time.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">וּרְאִיתֶ֗ם וְ֠הִנֵּ֠ה אִם־יֵ֨צְא֥וּ בְנוֹת־שִׁילוֹ֮ לָח֣וּל בַּמְּחֹלוֹת֒ וִֽיצָאתֶם֙ מִן־הַכְּרָמִ֔ים וַחֲטַפְתֶּ֥ם לָכֶ֛ם אִ֥ישׁ אִשְׁתּ֖וֹ מִבְּנ֣וֹת שִׁיל֑וֹ וַהֲלַכְתֶּ֖ם אֶ֥רֶץ בִּנְיָמִֽן׃</span></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">So it is very yitachen that it was only in those places, in the light of the Aron Hakodesh and the avodah, that these dances could take place in purity. </span></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">He also pointed out what Reb Chaim Kanievsky says in his Taamah Dikra here on the relevance of Matnos aniyim in connection with Rus and Naami.</span></div><div dir="rtl" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">ובקצרכם וגו' לעני ולגר תעזב אותם. עי' בתו"כ למה כתובה פרשה זו כאן
שכבר כתובה בפ' קדושים, ואפשר לומר עוד שרמזה כאן התורה למעשה
רות שהיתה גיורת ולקטה הלקט לכן כתיב לעני ולגר והיא באה בתחלת
קציר שעורים (ואמרו במדרש שזה קציר העומר) ולכן סמכו כאן לקציר העומר,
ולגר עם האות שלפניה ושלאחרי' אותיות לגיורת, ויש כאן עוד רמזים לזה
ולגר תעזב, תעזב אותיות בעז והת' עם ראש וסוף תיבת ולגר אותיות רות,
לעני ולגר תעזב אתם בגימטריא זו נעמי ורות המואביה כלתה. </span></div><div dir="rtl" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium; text-align: right;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;">Putting the Taama Dikra togther with the Mayan Beis Hashoeivah tremendously enhances both. Kideamri inshi, </span></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><div dir="rtl" style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: large;">אז מ'גייט אויפן ריכטיגן וועג, טרעפט מען זיך. </span><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div></span></div><div style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: medium; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: helvetica; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div></span></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-61549922076182066402021-07-10T22:11:00.004-05:002021-07-11T22:30:32.747-05:00Two Brachos on Marijuana Brownies<p><span style="font-size: medium;">First, Shehakol. You would not say Mezonos. The flour is absolutely a tafel to the active ingredient. MB beginning of 212-</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> אינו תאב כלל לאכול פת, לכן הוי הפת טפל. משא"כ אם הוא תאב לאכול פת גם כן, אע"פ שאוכלו עם המליח, כהנהוג לאכול דג מלוח שקורין הערינ"ג עם פת, אינה טפלה אליו, אפילו אם תאב להמליח יותר, וצריך לברך עליה המוציא ופוטר את המליח.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Second, Tefillas HaDerech.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Of course, the second is tongue in cheek. But when you think about it, you'll agree that sometimes people react badly to psychodelic drugs and have very frightening experiences. If so, you really ought to daven for a trip that is protected from אויבים ואורבים וכל מיני פורעניות.</span></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-36234380328447502692021-04-19T08:55:00.009-05:002021-04-25T17:56:26.465-05:00The Importance of Mesibas Preida, Tzeischem L'Shalom, Goodbye Party.<p> Three parts.</p><p style="text-align: center;">Part One: Sources in Chazal for the idea of marking a person's departure from his home city with a סעודת או מסיבת פרידה, וצאתכם לשלום</p><p style="text-align: center;">Part Two: The story of the Beilis Trial, and how it relates to the idea of a Seudas Preida.</p><p style="text-align: center;">Part Three: An insight into the interconnectedness of all men, and even more so the people in the Jewish community, and the beauty that is hidden in so many people כפלח הרימון, and how important it is to try to understand, and appreciate, and admire our fellow Jews. </p><p style="text-align: center;"><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b> Part I</b></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">To some extent, you don't need a makor in Chazal for things that are obviously good and true. On the other hand, we do like to cite sources for everything, such as in Gittin 6a, </span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;">והא בבל לצפונה דא"י קיימא דכתיב (ירמיהו א, יד) ויאמר ה' אלי מצפון תפתח הרעה</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">So, is there a source for gathering to wish a friend off when he leaves the community? I have three. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Two are from the stories of Eliahu and Elisha.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>The first </b>is in Malachim I 19:19-21.</span></p><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to I Kings 19:19" class="segment highlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="I Kings 19:19" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">וַיֵּ֣לֶךְ מִ֠שָּׁם וַיִּמְצָ֞א אֶת־אֱלִישָׁ֤ע בֶּן־שָׁפָט֙ וְה֣וּא חֹרֵ֔שׁ שְׁנֵים־עָשָׂ֤ר צְמָדִים֙ לְפָנָ֔יו וְה֖וּא בִּשְׁנֵ֣ים הֶעָשָׂ֑ר וַיַּעֲבֹ֤ר אֵלִיָּ֙הוּ֙ אֵלָ֔יו וַיַּשְׁלֵ֥ךְ אַדַּרְתּ֖וֹ אֵלָֽיו׃</span></p></div><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to I Kings 19:20" class="segment highlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="I Kings 19:20" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">וַיַּעֲזֹ֣ב אֶת־הַבָּקָ֗ר וַיָּ֙רָץ֙ אַחֲרֵ֣י אֵֽלִיָּ֔הוּ וַיֹּ֗אמֶר אֶשְּׁקָה־נָּא֙ לְאָבִ֣י וּלְאִמִּ֔י וְאֵלְכָ֖ה אַחֲרֶ֑יךָ וַיֹּ֤אמֶר לוֹ֙ לֵ֣ךְ שׁ֔וּב כִּ֥י מֶה־עָשִׂ֖יתִי לָֽךְ׃</span></p></div><p></p><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to I Kings 19:21" class="segment highlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="I Kings 19:21" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">וַיָּ֨שָׁב מֵאַחֲרָ֜יו וַיִּקַּ֣ח אֶת־צֶ֧מֶד הַבָּקָ֣ר וַיִּזְבָּחֵ֗הוּ וּבִכְלִ֤י הַבָּקָר֙ בִּשְּׁלָ֣ם הַבָּשָׂ֔ר וַיִּתֵּ֥ן לָעָ֖ם וַיֹּאכֵ֑לוּ וַיָּ֗קָם וַיֵּ֛לֶךְ אַחֲרֵ֥י אֵלִיָּ֖הוּ וַיְשָׁרְתֵֽהוּ׃</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">The Radak in 21 says</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;"><b>וישב מאחריו. </b>לנשק לאביו ולאמו אף על פי שלא ספר הכתוב ואחר כך שחט הבקר<b> ועשה סעודה באותו השדה לחורשים ולעם אשר באו אחריו ללוותו וזהו שאמר ויתן לעם כי מהעם לא היו אתו בשדה כי אם אחד עשר החורשים אלא זהו פירושו כי הלך לקחת רשות מאביו ומאמו ובאו אחריו מאנשי עירו ללוותו כי הוא נפרד מהם:</b></span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>The second</b> is in Melachim II 2:9.</span></p><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to II Kings 2:9" class="segment highlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="II Kings 2:9" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">וַיְהִ֣י כְעָבְרָ֗ם וְאֵ֨לִיָּ֜הוּ אָמַ֤ר אֶל־אֱלִישָׁע֙ שְׁאַל֙ מָ֣ה אֶֽעֱשֶׂה־לָּ֔ךְ בְּטֶ֖רֶם אֶלָּקַ֣ח מֵעִמָּ֑ךְ וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלִישָׁ֔ע וִֽיהִי־נָ֛א פִּֽי־שְׁנַ֥יִם בְּרוּחֲךָ֖ אֵלָֽי׃</span></p></div><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><div aria-controls="panel-1" aria-label="Click to see links to II Kings 2:10" class="segment highlight showNamedEntityLinks" data-ref="II Kings 2:10" tabindex="0"><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">וַיֹּ֖אמֶר הִקְשִׁ֣יתָ לִשְׁא֑וֹל אִם־תִּרְאֶ֨ה אֹתִ֜י לֻקָּ֤ח מֵֽאִתָּךְ֙ יְהִֽי־לְךָ֣ כֵ֔ן וְאִם־אַ֖יִן לֹ֥א יִהְיֶֽה׃</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">It certainly was a hard request to fulfill! What did Eliahu mean, that the only chance it will come true would be if Elisha saw him taken away? </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">I believe the idea was that we don't truly understand and certainly do not fully appreciate what we have until the moment before it is taken away from us. </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">Eliahu told Elisha that to be truly inspired by him, by Eliahu, to the degree that his heart and mind would open up to siyata dishmaya of such great ruach hakodesh and nevuah, he would need to witness Eliahu being taken away from him. </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span class="he" lang="he" style="font-size: medium;">We see that to understand and appreciate our fellows, we need to face the imminent reality of their going away, and that will give each side the opportunity to be inspired by the other's middos tovos.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>The third is</b> ... that you don't need a makor for a seudas preida because it is a kal vachomer from halvoyas orchim. As one small example of <a href="https://beisvaad.blogspot.com/2018/12/eikev-devarim-712-accompanying.html">the importance of levoyas orchim</a>, see Rambam Aveil 14:2</span></p><p class="segmentText" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="background-color: white; font-size: large;">שכר הלויה מרובה מן הכל. (!) והוא החק שחקקו אברהם אבינו ודרך החסד שנהג בה. מאכיל עוברי דרכים ומשקה אותן ומלוה אותן. וגדולה הכנסת אורחים מהקבלת פני שכינה. שנאמר וירא והנה שלשה אנשים. ולוויים יותר מהכנסתן. אמרו חכמים כל שאינו מלוה כאילו שופך דמים:</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">If being melaveh orchim is so vitally important, that its schar is "Merubah min hakol," that one who does it is keeping him alive, and one who fails to do so is like a rotzei'ach, then kal vachomer that applies to an individual that lived in your community and who is now leaving. If you do it for some tumbleweed orei'ach, how much more so must you do it for a member of the community that is moving away!</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>Part II</b></span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">I just had the honor and privilege to make a Kiddush to mark a member of our community leaving Chicago. He was born and raised here, and his parents were born and raised here, and his great grandparents came here in 1912. The Kiddush was on Parshas Tazri'a Metzora. We found a perfect connection of being melaveh our friend with the parsha of Tzaraas, as odd as that may sound.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">The Alshich in Vayikra 12:1 asks, the appellation "Adam" for the Metzora seems inappropriate. Adam is the term used for an elevated human being, and here it is used for a hateful despicable person. </span></p><p class="segmentText" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;">ועל פי דרכנו נשית לב אל מלת אדם. כי הוא לפי האמת התואר המשובח שבתוארי המין האנושי כנודע מספר הזוהר ולמה נתייחד באשר שנא ה'.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">Rav Galinski answered the question with the story of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menahem_Mendel_Beilis">the Beilis trial</a> in 1911. Harav Galinski says the story his way, but I will tell it as my father did, which is much better.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">The prosecutor enlisted an alleged religious expert in Judaic rituals, a notoriously anti Semitic Catholic priest, Justinas Pranaitis. While the defense had emphasized that Judaism famously abhorred the taking of human life, Pranaitis said that this was a lie, and he could prove it from the Talmud. The Talmud says that the Jews consider the Gentiles as not human. True, a Jew would never kill a fellow human being, but the Jews consider Gentiles as animals, and no more care about their lives than they would about a cat, or a chicken. They would kill a Gentile for even the most trivial reason, or for no reason at all. After all, the Talmud says in Yevamos 60b</span></p><p class="segmentText" dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;">ניא, וכן היה רשב"י אומר: קברי גוים אינן מטמאין באהל שנאמר: 'ואתן צאני מרעיתי אדם אתם', אתם קרויין אדם ואין הגוים קרויין אדם</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">Clear. The Jews view the Gentiles as subhuman, and would kill them with absolutely no mercy or pang of conscience.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">This accusation struck fear in the Jewish community. Pogroms were being prepared, priests were preaching against the deicide Jew, and a repeat of the Khmelnytsky massacres was imminent.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">The defense desperately sent a message to Rav Meir Shapiro. What should we do? How can we answer this accusation??</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">Rav Shapiro told him exactly what to say, and this was the defense.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">The Talmud means something entirely different. The Jews have forever been pacifists who never shed blood.. Only the blindly antisemitic would misunderstand the Gemara, because its meaning is very clear.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">When a Gentile looks at the newspaper, and he sees that thousands of people are starving in China, and if he reacts at all he will sigh, and shake his head, and then turn the page. But if a Jew finds out that there is a Jew in China that doesn't have Matza for Pesach, he will be at the Chinese embassy the next morning with a box of Matza. The Gentile may pity the distant stranger, but the Jew feels the pain of a fellow Jew as if it were his own, even though he never met him, and will never meet him. </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">This is what the Gemara means. We, the Jewish People, are Adam, in the singular. We are not separate individuals with a common religion. We are all like one, all parts of one organism. That is what אתם קרויין אדם ואין הגוים קרויין אדם means. We are all like one.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">And if you deny this, I will prove that not only is it true, but that you yourselves know that it to be true. </span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">If you open the newspaper, and there is a story about Ivan, who murdered his neighbor, you will say, "Terrible! Ivan is a murderer." But if you open the paper, and you see a story about Yankel Kohen who murdered his neighbor, you won't say "Yankel Kohen is a murderer." You will say "Terrible! The Jews are murderers!" Why? What's the difference between Ivan the murderer and Yankel the murderer? The answer is that you yourselves know, you yourselves believe in your hearts, that all the Jews are Adam, one person, but the Gentiles, each one is separate from the other.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">This response struck like a bolt of lightning. It hit at both the priest's misinterpretation of the Gemara, and also spoke directly to the tens of thousands of Russians that were sharpening their knives, waiting to kill the Jews because of one Menachem Mendel Beilis.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">This answers the Alshich's question. A Jewish neshama is not separate from other Jews. We are all one, and we mourn each other's pain and celebrate each other's happiness. If a Jew does not act like that, if he is a ganov and a holeich rachil and az ponim, that means that he is like a limb that is cut off of a body. This spiritual disease manifests itself in Tzaraas, where the person loses his own limbs. Davka because we are Adam, because our neshamos are all interconnected, a man who behaves in the opposite manner has a deadly and mortal spiritual affliction.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;">When a person is a member of the community, he is not just one person by himself. He is an integral part of everyone else that lives there. When he has the opportunity to do good for others, he takes advantage of the moment. If he has a snow plow, all the neighbors have clear sidewalks. If he has left over from Shabbos, he makes sure it is delivered to someone that might not have enough to eat. When some people came to Chicago from South Africa, he made sure that they would become part of the community, and he shepherded them along until they found their land legs. These are only small chasadim that I happen to know about, but the point is that this person is a vital part of the entire community, or each and every one of us. The connection is mutual and indivisible. On the one hand, that means that with his leaving, we all are losing an important part of our lives, but on the other hand, wherever he goes, he remains part of what and who we are.</span></p><p class="segmentText"><br /></p><p class="segmentText"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>Part III</b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Robert Fulghum</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The Barber<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Hair grows at the rate of about half an inch a month.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I don't know where he got his facts, but Mr. Washington came up with that one when we were comparing barbers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That means that about eight feet of hair had been cut off my head and face in the last sixteen years by my barber.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span>I hadn't thought much about it until I called to make my usual appointment and found that my barber had left to go into building maintenance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How could he do this?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>My barber.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It felt like a death in the family.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There was so much more to our relationship than sartorial statistics.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span>We started out as categories to each other:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>"barber" and "customer."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Then we became "redneck ignorant barber" and "pinko egghead minister."<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Once a month we reviewed the world and our lives and explored our positions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We sparred over civil rights and Vietnam and lots of elections.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We became mirrors, confidants, confessors, therapists, and companions in an odd sort of way.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We went through being thirty years old and then forty.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We discussed and argued and joked, but always with a certain thoughtful deference.<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">After all, I was his customer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And he was standing there with his razor in his hand.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span>I found out that his dad was a country policeman, that he grew up poor in a tiny town and had prejudices about Indians.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He found out that I had the same small-town roots and grew up with prejudices about Blacks.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Our kids were the same ages, and we suffered through the same stages of parenthood together.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We shared wife stories and children stories and car troubles and lawn problems.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I found out he gave his day off to giving free haircuts to old men in nursing homes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He found out a few good things about me, too, I suppose.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span>I never saw him outside the barber shop, never met his wife or children, never sat in his home or ate a meal with him.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yet he became a terribly important fixture in my life.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Perhaps a lot more important than if we had been next-door neighbors.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The quality of our relationship was partly created by a peculiar distance.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There's a real sense of loss in his leaving.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I feel like not having my hair cut anymore, though eight feet of hair may seem strange.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span>Without realizing it, we fill important places in each other's lives.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It's that way with a minister and congregation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Or with the guy at the corner grocery, the mechanic at the local garage, the family doctor, teachers, neighbors, co-workers.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Good people, who are always "there," who can be relied upon in small, important ways.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>People who teach us, bless us, encourage us, support us, uplift us in the dailiness of life.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We never tell them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I don't know why, but we don't.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span>And, of course, we fill that role ourselves.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There are those who depend on us, watch us, learn from us, take from us.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And we never know.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Don't sell yourself short.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You may never have proof of your importance, but you are more important than you think.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span>It reminds me of an old Sufi story of a good man who was granted one wish by God.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The man said he would like to go about doing good without knowing about it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>God granted his wish.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And then God decided that it was such a good idea, he would grant that wish to all human beings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And so it has been to this day.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> Mr. Fulghum's story strikes me as a very good reminder of the real and true interconnectedness of every member of the Jewish community, of the preciousness of every Jewish soul and its drive to do tzedaka and chesed, and how important it is to remember that it is not the great and feted philanthropists and tzadikim that make us who we are, it is those quiet heroes with shining souls that live next door to us.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span face=""Arial",sans-serif" style="color: black; font-size: medium; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b>Part IV</b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: medium;">It's a great opportunity for the guest of honor to sing <a href="https://youtu.be/Qy9_lfjQopU">So Long Farewell</a> from The Sound of Music.</span></p></div></div>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955681.post-48268712460760064782021-04-18T18:08:00.011-05:002021-04-22T08:55:05.306-05:00Pesach Pizza Pan Parchment Paper Petur.<p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span><span style="font-size: large;">This past Pesach, we had a bright new star in the kitchen - </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimOykHi8mkL3RYkjfZMxDe6Z5TjwYHUuDU43pLhVaCxPFLbCjRA_EUoKkc1osw9ZmNHC3gnX_9S4UwRwSdXMzUSvlEK-b4-iSEMIRA9T6WGrVpt45e40a-wLro5Z0UGhgCyrse/s1500/71PRGJV4jbL._AC_SL1500_.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1260" data-original-width="1500" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimOykHi8mkL3RYkjfZMxDe6Z5TjwYHUuDU43pLhVaCxPFLbCjRA_EUoKkc1osw9ZmNHC3gnX_9S4UwRwSdXMzUSvlEK-b4-iSEMIRA9T6WGrVpt45e40a-wLro5Z0UGhgCyrse/s320/71PRGJV4jbL._AC_SL1500_.jpg" width="320" /></span></a></div><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The Betty Crocker Pizza Maker.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">It is the perfect size for hand shmura or machine matza, you dip the matza into water, put it on the hot pan, cover with tomato sauce and cheese and vegetables, close it for a few minutes, and voila! It really produces very good pizza, even without factoring in a Pesach handicap. We made dozens of them, and not a bit was left. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">The problem is, how to be tovel this thing. As with all electronics, there are those that are mattir without tevilla for various reasons. There are those that avoid the issue either by being mafkir or by being makneh to a Gentile.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">But if you are worried about the issue of tevilas keilim, and you don't want to rely on the mattirim, nor do you want to be mevatel a mitzva deoraysa with a ha'arama, and you're afraid that immersion will cause risk of danger, can you use it with parchment paper interposed between the metal and the food, top and bottom? None of the food will touch the kli. I am told that it works perfectly with parchment paper.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">No. Sorry. First of all, I have a mesora from Reb Moshe that what matters is the sheim kli, and using it with paper doesn't change the reality that it is a kli matteches. Besides my mesora, there is the teshuva from Reb Shlomo Zalman.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">Minchas Shlomo II Yoreh Deiah 66.</span></p><p dir="rtl" style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: medium;">נראה דבלי שדרך תשמישו הוא ע"י שקית שיש בו כמו כד שמחזיקים בו חלב בשקית של ניילון, או אפי' שקיות של נייר אם רגילים להוציא ולהכניס ע"י השקית, נראה דחשיב הפסק אם כך הוא עיקר תשמישו, אבל אם הדרך להשתמש רק ע"י פריסת מפה וכ"ש נייר וניילון, אף שיש דוגמא לספק זה במגילה כ"ו ע"ב דכורסיא תשיב תשמיש דתשמיש בגלל המפה שפרוסה עליה, ולענין מוקצה של בסיס לדבר האסור בנר דולק על השלחן חשיבי תרווייהו כבסיס כמבואר בסי' ש"ט, אפי"ה נראה דנד"ד שאני דחציצת הנייר לאו כלום הוא. ונלענ"ד דטעון טבילה עם ברכה ותמיתני בעניי על הבן איש חי (ש"ב פר' מטות) שכת"ר כתב שמסתפק בכך.</span></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">(I personally was tovel them in snow, not because I was chalila going against rov haposkim, but relying in part on the meikilim by such appliances in general, and doing it where the snow originally fell and in a fashion that the chshashos of tevilla in snow did not pertain. Although Rabbi Abadi of Lakewood also holds like this, please do not rely on me. See https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=54963&st=&pgnum=204</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">A Tevilla alternative, without the guilt of haarama or snow kulos, is to take the appliance apart and put it back together such that you have a פנים חדשות, a keli that was made by a Jew. Rabbi Moish Pollack told me that such a service is available in Lakewood. I am not an expert in hilchos tumas keilim to know what comprises broken and re-created, so I have never taken that option. Obviously, it would called useless, but I don't know if the ease of fixing the cut wire means it's still the old keli, and whether an external problem makes it "broken." It could still hold food, it's just not useful for its original purpose. But just this morning, Rabbi Dr. Nachum Stone, of Maaleh Adumim, told me that Harav Nachum Rabinowitz said that cutting off the plug and putting it back together definitely is called panim chadashos and there would be no chiyuv tevilla! Wonderful. Bli neder, I'm taking out my wire cutter.)</span></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">I find Reb Shlomo Zalman's teshuva a little difficult to understand, but I think that he would say that a candy dish in which you put wrapped candy is not chayav tevilla; it is more like a pitcher for bags of milk than paper on top of a dish.</span></p>Eliezer Eisenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16036989084122930226noreply@blogger.com0