baaBtu!isq.zoznt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Volume 15 Number 26 eaaTc!

TM

trcdk trcd ihc

Sponsored by R Yehoshua Pesach Hellman

ITq!as!uc!ist!ioI!-Btwiz!as!Oc!czzm!iewiz!mblzn!as!oaa{m! -sBndsbwwt!Onmr!Twnzowmr!Oc!zcd!NIon!itn!oaa{m -sBndsbwwt!Onmr!Twnzowmr!Oc!Dsbi!zmuqo!-sBndsbwwt!rz{zzb!rIdz!uc!meozzsc!ircs! mB{zs!zcd!szbn!uc!ibm!-!msBc!itn!Oc!OwBnt!QTwz!csi!

For comments, questions and subscriptions, E-mail:MayerMWinter@aol.com. Please place BGLG at the subject

Sponsored by R Kalman Schwarzmer

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46.

Rabbi Binyomin Adler Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein Rabbi Oizer Alport Rabbi Stephen Baars-Aish.Com Rabbi Benjamin Blech -Aish.Com Dr. Avigdor Bonchek-Aish.Com HaRav Eliezer Chrysler Rabbi Zvi Akiva Fleisher Rabbi Zvi Akiva Fleisher Rabbi Zvi Akiva Fleisher Rabbi Zvi Akiva Fleisher Rabbi Yissocher Frand Rabbi Yehonasan Gefen-Aish.Com J. Gewirtz Rabbi Shmuel Goldin Rabbi Simcha Groffman Rabbi Avraham Kahn Rabbi Yosef Kalatsky Rabbi Mordecai Kamenetzky Rabbi Dov Kramer Rabbi Moshe Krieger Rabbi Label Lam Rabbi Eli Mansour NCYI Rabbi Kalman Packouz-Aish.Com Rabbi Eliezer Parkoff Rabbi Ben-Zion Rand Rabbi Naftali Reich Rabbi Mordechai Rhine Lord Jonathan Sacks Rabbi A. Leib Scheinbaum Rabbi Dovid Seigel Rabbi Yaakov Asher Sinclair Rabbi Ben Zion Sobel Rabbi Jacob Solomon Rabbi Berel Wein Rabbi Berel Wein Rabbi Noach Weinberg ZTL-Aish.Com Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb - OU Rabbi Mordechai Willig Rabbi Pinchas Winston Yeshiva Aish HaTorah-Aish.Com Yeshiva Aish HaTorah-Aish.Com Rabbi Yochanan Zweig Rabbi Leibie Sternberg

Shabbos Taam HaChaim The Timeless Rav Hirsch Parsha Potpourri Brainstorming With Baars The Archenemy of Happiness Whats Bothering Rashi? Midei Shabbos Chamishoh Mi Yodei'a Chasidic Insights Oroh V'Simchoh Sedrah Selections RavFrand The Guiding Light Migdal Ohr Unlocking the Torah Text Kinder Torah Torah Attitude Beyond Pshat Parsha Parables Taking A Closer Look Bircas HaTorah Parsha Sheet Dvar Torah Weekly Perasha Insights Weekly Dvar Torah Shabbat Shalom Weekly Chizuk Likutei Peshatim Legacy Rabbi's Message Covenant & Conversation Peninim on the Torah Haftorah Ohr Somayach Torah Weekly Torah MiTzion Between the Fish and the Soup Bein Hazmanim Weekly Parsha 48 Ways to Wisdom Way #25 A Weekly Word Person In The Parsha Torahweb Perceptions Jewish History Crash Course#10 Family Parsha Insights Pleasant Ridge Newsletter

page 2 page 3 page 4 page 5 page 6 page 7 page 7 page 9 page 9 page 10 page 10 page 11 page 11 page 12 page 12 page 13 page 14 page 15 page 17 page 17 page 18 page 19 page 19 page 19 page 21 page 22 page 22 page 23 page 24 page 24 page 25 page 27 page 28 page 29 page 29 page 30 page 30 page 35 page 31 page 31 page 32 page 32 page 35 page 34 page 34 The Back Page

For Sponsorships and Dedications, please call 917-501-3822 See page 37 for columns from last week that were received after publication.

m{!-TIoq!uc!ircs , m{-!btz{!seoTlmb!Oc!zwm!wizmb!csi!oaa{m

2
Rabbi Binyomin Adler

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

their hands and feet before entering. They rendered a Halachic decision in front of Moshe their teacher because they felt that all Jews were on the same level. One must wonder from where Nadav and Avihu obtained these apparently heretical thoughts? The answer is provided by the Medrash that states that their sin stemmed from the sin of the Golden Calf. Subsequent to the Giving of the Torah it is said (Shemos 24:11) , against the great men of the children of Israel He did not stretch out His hand they gazed at G-d, yet they ate and drank. Rashi (Ibid) writes that that Nadav and Avihu gazed at HaShem and they were liable the death penalty. However, HaShem did not wish to mire the joy of Receiving the Torah so He waited until the inauguration of the Mishkan to punish them. It would seem that Nadav and Avihu already entertained their inappropriate thoughts at Sinai, and these thoughts were the catalyst for their actions at the inauguration of the Mishkan. While we cannot judge the intentions of great people like Nadav and Avihu, we can take a strong lesson from what transpired. How often do we think that we can make it in our own, without consulting a rabbi or prominent Torah figure? Do we ever entertain the thought that it is sufficient to have G-d in our heart and we are deficient in mitzvah performance? Questions like these should spur us to greater Torah study and mitzvah observance, with the knowledge that HaShem truly desires what is in our hearts, but He also desires that His Divine Presence rest in places of holiness and upon His chosen leaders. HaShem should bring us the Ultimate Redemption, with the arrival of Moshiach Tzidkeinu, speedily, in our days. Shabbos in Action NEW! We all need practical ways of enhancing our Shabbos observance. One thing I have always tried to do is study Sfas Emes or other Sefarim that discuss the beauty and holiness of Shabbos. I would like to give an opportunity to my dear readers to offer suggestions on what we as a nation can do to enhance our Shabbos. The ideas do not need to be original. Please submit your suggestions to shabbostaamhachaim@gmail.com and I will print them in next weeks issue of Shabbos: Taam HaChaim. I wish you a wonderful Shabbos. Good Shabbos. Shabbos Stories The Morning News This was the delicious part of the morning. The house was still quiet as Morris returned home from shul. The aroma of fresh-brewed coffee filled the air, and Morris' daily newspaper waited, crisply folded inside the delivery bag. He sat down with his coffee and slid the newspaper out of its plastic sleeve. As he opened it, though, he saw that something was wrong. It wasn't tightly compressed, straight off the press, as it was every morning. It was creased in a few stray places, as if someone else had already opened it. Could it be? Morris felt outrage rising inside him at the thought of someone invading his private space in so blatant a way. "But let's not get carried away," he warned himself. "Maybe it's just some fluke." The next morning, however, the idea of a fluke was soundly defeated. The newspaper was not only refolded, but it also bore a coffee stain on the front page. Now Morris was ready to do battle. The next morning, he arose at 5 a.m. and watched as the delivery boy flew by on his bike and tossed the newspaper onto his front porch. Peeking though a slat in the window shade, Morris maintained his vigil to see what would happen next. He watched in disbelief as David, his neighbor across the street, emerged from his house, gently lifted the paper off Morris' porch and returned home, presumably to enjoy the Morris' freshly folded paper with his coffee. Morris imagined himself bursting through the front door and catching David red-handed. But in his visualization of sweet revenge, he could not see what would happen next. Would there be an argument? A fight? Would David be remorseful or defensive? Better to hold off on any action, Morris decided. First, he would discuss the situation with his rabbi and get an objective, informed opinion on how to handle it. Morris went to his rabbi and told his tale of pilfering, creased newspapers, and coffee stains. The rabbi shook his head in amazement at the neighbor's audacity. "Morris, you have every right to confront your neighbor and ask him to stop doing this terrible act each morning," the rabbi told him. "But I want you to know that if you do that, then you will be losing a friend and a neighbor forever. "I would like to suggest another option. Forget about your neighbor's actions. Instead of confronting him, buy him a one-year subscription to the newspaper as a gift from you to him. That way, instead of building up a fight, you will be paving a path way of peace. Choose peace, Morris. You deserve it." Going Places A small army of children clambered out the front door and climbed into the big family car. Rabbi Fischel Schachter prodded the dawdlers along. "Let's go everyone!" he called out enthusiastically. Getting the family out the door and on their way was no small feat... The last child was strapped into his booster seat and Rabbi Schachter set out on the road.

"- Shabbos: Taam HaChaim Shemini-Parah 5771 Holiness without Borders? ' ' . ' , the sons of Aharon, Nadav and Avihu, each took his fire pan, they put fire in them and placed incense upon it; and they brought before HaShem an alien fire that He had not commanded them. A fire came forth from before HaShem and consumed them, and they died before HaShem. (Vayikra 10:1-2) In this weeks parasha we learn about the two sons of Aharon who offered a strange fire that they were not instructed in and this caused their deaths. The puzzling matter regarding this incident is that the Medrash (Yalkut Shimoni 524; See Ibid for other reasons not mentioned by the Kli Yakar) enumerates various sins that they committed which do not seem to be associated with the sin of bringing a strange fire. The Kli Yakar in his classic commentary posits that all the sins mentioned are associated with fire but I would like to suggest an alternative approach. First I will enumerate the sins listed in the Medrash and then I will proceed to explain their association with offering strange fire. One sin was that they entered the Holy of Holies in a state of drunkenness. The second sin was that they were not married. The third sin was that they did not have children. The fourth sin was that they were not wearing all the Priestly Vestments. The fifth sin was that they were arrogant, declaring, When will these two elders (Moshe and Aharon) die and we will lead the generation? The sixth sin was that they entered the Holy of Holies without washing their hands and feet. The seventh sin was that they rendered a Halachic decision in front of their teacher Moshe. The eighth sin listed was that they were victims from the sin of their father Aharon who fashioned the Golden Calf. There are two questions regarding this list of sins that need to be addressed. The first question is, as the Kli Yakar asks, if these were their sins, why does the Torah only state that they entered with a strange fire? Second, and even more profound, one must understand how it is possible that the saintly sons of Aharon committed such grievous sins? In order to understand the actions of such great people and how their mistake resulted in such a calamity, it is worthwhile to examine the function of the Mishkan and what the sons of Aharon were attempting to accomplish with their actions. The Mishkan was constructed with the purpose of allowing the Divine Presence a place to rest amongst the Jewish People. Prior to the sin of the Golden Calf there was no need for a Mishkan, as HaShems Presence was to rest in the heart of every single Jew. Thus, the Mishkan served to atone for the sin of the Golden Calf and simultaneously functioned as a resting place for the Divine Presence. Nadav and Avihu, according to Rav Dessler, were seeking to serve HaShem on a higher plane. Rav Dessler maintains that while the average person who enters the Holy of Holies is gripped with trepidation, Nadav and Avihu felt that they could serve HaShem with love alone. In a similar vein we can suggest that Nadav and Avihu desired that HaShems Presence should rest in the heart of every Jew, as was ordained prior to the sin of the Golden Calf. While the construction of the Mishkan was certainly a noble goal, they felt that the Nation could serve HaShem better without a Mishkan. In order to accomplish this mission, Nadav and Avihu offered a strange fire that he had not commanded them. There are various interpretations for the words , that He had not commanded them. In light of our theory that Nadav and Avihu were seeking to serve HaShem without the Mishkan as an intermediary, we can interpret these words to mean that He had not commanded them to serve Him without a Mishkan. The Torah emphasizes in this parasha and in the beginning of Parashas Acharei Mos (16:1) that Nadav and Avihu offered the fire before HaShem and that they died before HaShem. This teaches us that their motive was to serve HaShem directly without any intermediaries. They obviously were mistaken as HaShem put them to death with fire. Their motive is reflected in the sins enumerated by the Medrash. By entering into the Holy of Holies in a state of drunkenness, Nadav and Avihu were demonstrating that they had reached a level where their intellect did not have to be confined, similar to the Mishkan which was a confinement of the Divine Presence. They did not marry because the Gemara (Sota 17a) states that when a man and a woman are meritorious, the Divine Presence rest between them. Here too Nadav and Avihu felt that they did not need an intermediary to allow the Divine Presence to rest amongst them. Regarding children it is said (Tehillim 127:3) ' , the heritage of HaShem is children. Nadav and Avihu mistakenly thought that by having HaShem repose in their hearts they would not need children. Nadav and Vihu did not wear all the Priestly Vestments, because like the Mishkan, they felt the Divine Presence was not contingent on an edifice and on clothing. Similarly, they felt that HaShems Presence was manifest in every single Jew, and Moshe and Aharon were no different than the other Jews. They did not feel that the Holy of Holies was a more significant location than anywhere else in the world, so they did not wash

Shabbos Taam HaChaim

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

"Where are we going?" asked one child. It was a good question. Rabbi Schachter wasn't exactly sure. All he knew was that for his large brood it had to be economical, interesting enough to hold their attention for awhile, and a proper atmosphere for the fine children he was privileged to raise. He decided to poll the children and see if any of them had a good idea. "Niagara Falls! Please can we go there? I've never been there," one child pleaded. "No, that's too far!" advised an older child. "How about the aquarium? We could see the seals and the sharks." "That's boring," another child protested. Suddenly, Rabbi Schachter was struck with the answer. The airport! New York had a train that traveled on elevated rails all around JFK International Airport. From that vantage point, the children could watch the passengers below as they scurried to their destinations. They could see the planes taking off, headed to exotic locations across the globe, and watch the impossibly large jumbo jets landing softly on solid ground. Maintaining his air of mystery, he headed down the highway toward Queens, where the airport was located. Soon, signs for the airport started appearing along the road. "I know where we're going!" one child exclaimed. "We're going to the airport, right?" "That's right," Rabbi Schachter replied, hoping the revelation would be met with approval. "Where are we flying?" asked another child, barely able to contain her excitement. "We're not flying," Rabbi Schachter informed her. "But we are going to have a lot of fun. You just wait and see..." The train pulled up to the platform and they all quickly filed on and found seats. The train rolled gently forward and then, with a lurch, hit its full speed. The children, noses pressed to the windows, took in the hustle and bustle of the busy world beneath them. Rabbi Schachter pointed out interesting features the control towers, the runways, the insignias on the aircrafts' tails that represented every major country in the world. The Air Train completed its route around the airport in just 10 minutes, but the Schachters were in no hurry to disembark. They went around and around, seeing new sights each time. Finally, after they had been riding the Air Train for about an hour, the door opened and a pilot boarded. The overall impression of the tall, slim man in his uniform and cap was that of a distinguished officer. But his face was worn. His little suitcase hung heavily from his hand as he looked around for a seat. Rabbi Schachter gently touched his son's shoulder. "Give the man your seat," he instructed. "No, no, it's all right," said the pilot. "I've been sitting in the pilot's seat for the past 16 hours straight. I don't mind standing at all." The pilot's gaze moved from one seat to the next to the next. "These are all your children?" he asked Rabbi Schachter. "Well, actually, they're not all here," answered Rabbi Schachter. "Some of the older ones are home, and some are in Israel." "Wow, that's really nice. So where exactly are you flying to? I can give you the quickest way to get to the gate. Believe me, I know this place inside out." "Um... you see... the truth is, we really aren't flying anywhere. Today is a holiday and the kids have off from school. I decided to take them for a trip on the Air Train so that my wife would have a little break..." "Okay, so how many times have you gone around the airport already?" "I think this is about the 10th time around." "Amazing," said the pilot. He spoke in a tone of awed disbelief, Is if he had discovered some lost ancient artifact. The two men fell silent for a few minutes. Then, as the train approached the pilot's destination, he turned once more to Rabbi Schachter. "I have been a pilot for the past twenty years," he said. "My schedule is that I fly for three weeks straight and then I get a week off. But even when I'm off that one week, I don't really get to go home and spend time there because my last flight ends in Australia and I live in Denver. By the time I get home and take care of a few things, it's time to take off again. My wife left me years ago because I was never there for her and the kids, and I can't blame her. "When I fly, I know exactly where my point of departure is and where I am headed. I have the whole globe in my computer. But when I finish, I really have nowhere to go - no family, no children, just an empty hotel room. So in truth, although I'm always going somewhere, in reality I am going nowhere. "I'm watching you and your family go around and around the airport, and you're going nowhere, yet the truth is that you are really going somewhere very important. You are taking care of your children and your family and doing the right thing. I really, really envy you. Take care now, and enjoy your holiday." (www.innernet.org.il) Shabbos: Taam HaChaim Shemini-Parah 5771 Is sponsored in memory of a dear friend, Mr. Paul Kohn, ' ' "from Southfield, Michigan. May we only know good news. Have a wonderful and delightful Shabbos Prepared by Rabbi Binyomin Adler

Shabbos: Taam HaChaim is read by thousands of Jews worldwide every week. If you wish to have a share in this mitzvah of sponsoring Shabbos: Taam HaChaim please send an email to ShabbosTaamHachaim@gmail.com or call 248-506-0363 To subscribe weekly by email, please send email to ShabbosTaamHachaim@gmail.com View Shabbos: Taam HaChaim and other Divrei Torah on http://doreishtov.wordpress.com

Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein Torah Calories(1) What could be the connection between the previous narrative about Nadav and Avihu and the long treatment of permissible and impermissible foods that these pesukim introduce? Perhaps we dont need one. Maybe, so to speak, there is always room for an appealing snack. Perhaps eating is so important a concern that you can always talk about it any place you have an opening. Chances are that the opposite is true. The Torah wants us to take eating more seriously than we do. Moreover, this aim is the natural continuation of the sections that came before. The Torah seized upon Nadav and Avihus transgression to generalize a lesson about our service of G-d. Serving Hashem on the cutting-edge of spiritual growth (which is at the core of all the avodah of the Mikdosh) requires complete clarity of mind. Alcohol dulls the mind. Serving Hashem on the highest level requires that we not yield to momentary excitement (as Nadav and Avihu did, in thinking that they had to introduce a fire on the inner altar), but act with level-headed detachment. Alcohol makes this difficult, or less probable. For these reasons, kohanim are instructed to forego wine when serving in the Mikdosh. The kohanim do not give up intoxicating wine as an exercise in self-denial. They forego it only because of what it does to people. Elsewhere, the Torah makes no similar demands. Nowhere does the Torah urge us to be teetotalers, or to approach permissible pleasures abstemiously. The kohain entering into the Mikdosh gives up his consumption of wine, but not because the holiness of his task requires that he deny himself the earthly pleasures of the common man. To the contrary. The section that follows the ban on drinking describes the atonement of a sinner who brings his korban to the Mikdosh. The kohanim play a key, final role in that procedure, but not through holy incantations and the like. The last step in the atonement process - after all the deep and beautiful symbolic rituals centering on the altar sees the kohanim eating their significant share of the korban. As the gemara puts it, the kohanim eat, and those who brought the korban are atoned for. The ultimate expression of the success of the Mikdosh and its mission is not in denying us anything, but in the elevation of eating and by extension all sensory pleasures. The changes that come over us through living in the presence of the Shechinah and in listening to its messages sanctify the most ordinary things in life. Outside of the Mikdosh, then, it could easily be argued that affairs of the palate are largely irrelevant to our responsibilities as Torah Jews. It is this mistaken notion that our parshah now addresses. The section is addressed to both Moshe and Aharon a rare occurrence in Chumash. The very first mitzvah sections sanctifying the New Moon, and the korban Pesach laws were given to both. So will a few of the sections that follow this one: laws of negaim, zivah and nidah. Only in our case does the Torah add the words saying unto them, specifically addressing their individual capacities in sharing their knowledge with the people as a whole. Moshe was the ultimate teacher, the one who allowed us to understand the law completely. Aharons job, as the head of the kohanim, was to ensure that the people could turn that law into reality, especially by maintaining the inner qualities of feelings, will and determination without which the system would founder. We find here a pattern of sections so crucial that they had to be entrusted to two giants, each overseeing a different role. The first mitzvah sections in Chumash Shemos created the body of the Torah nation, of a people in a close covenant with Hashem, ready to perform His bidding. Parshas Mishpatim established a platform of social cohesion that would allow Bnei Yisrael to function as a nation. With parshas Terumah, we were brought to the next level - building a Mishkan that would embody the ideals of Hashems Torah. This section stretches to the place in the text that we now find ourselves. Building an abode for the Shechinah, and arranging for all its support personnel was important. It could have remained, however, an elegant showcase, a theoretical display of the ideals of the Torah, beckoning from an unreachable distance. The Mishkan was not designed to be an interactive museum, but a reality in the life of every single Jew. Every facet of life should be changed for the better by the Mikdosh. This would require a community longing for, cherishing, savoring the holiness of the Mikdosh. The people would have to be those to whom the Torah could address that all-important demand that will appear a few chapters further on: You shall be holy, because I Hashem your G-d am holy. This holiness would not result simply from the will. Aspects of holiness would need be introduced in sweeping facets of peoples lives, as in their eating, and even in the ways in which they would be conceived, as in the sections that follow. This is the task and challenge now put before Moshe and Aharon to translate into reality.

The Timeless Rav Hirsch

Holiness, Defined(2) For I Hashem are your G-d. You shall sanctify yourselves, so that you shall become holy for I am holy. Do not make your souls impure through any creeping animals that creep on the ground. Holiness will come neither with complete ease, nor with insurmountable difficulty. I ask only that you work at it. Set your minds to it. Apply your energies and talents to keep at bay all things that make you less receptive to My demands, less able to act upon them. You will need to resist forces that pull you in a very different direction. If you sanctify yourselves if you do work at it I will guarantee that you will be successful. With practice, the distractions from holiness, the competitors, will become less and less attractive, and you will expend less effort fending them off. Then, you will absorb without a struggle all the morality and purity that I have in mind for you, and that grows out of My own holiness. You must become holy because I am holy. I am the cause of your holiness in two ways. Firstly, I demand it of you. If you wish to be in close association with me, you must become beings closer to My nature. Your actions must harmonize with Mine. This very holiness of Mine not only demands your holiness, but it enables it as well. Hence, a second dimension to our pesukim. This holiness of Mine is not a distant ideal, but something that lives already within you. This neshamah, this breath of Myself that I breathed into you, acts in your small world as I do in Mine. I am entirely above compulsion. Nothing forces Me to act in any way. I have complete freedom. I have planted that aspect of Myself within you. You, too, can free yourselves of compulsion and limitation. You can master the forces that sweep by you in the world I created for you, and become their small god. This is the ultimate freedom and the essential definition of holiness. 1. Based on the Hirsch Chumash, Vayikra 11:1 2. Based on the Hirsch Chumash, Vayikra 11:44 Rabbi Oizer Alport

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

questions why the Torah gives two requirements to determine a fishs kashrus. Wouldnt it have sufficed to make it solely dependent on scales, which are always accompanied by fins? The Gemora cryptically answers that the Torah did so to make the Torah great and mighty. How is this perplexing statement to be understood? The Zayis Reanan (the commentary of the Magen Avrohom on the Yalkut Shimoni) brilliantly elucidates the Gemoras answer. In his notes on the Roshs commentary in Chullin, the Maadanei Yom Tov (3:67 s.k. 5) relates a fascinating episode. Rav Aharon HaRofeh brought before him a poisonous marine animal, known in Latin as stinkus marinus, which clearly possessed scales. In contradiction to the Mishnahs claim, it had four small legs in lieu of fins. The Zayis Reanan suggests that Chazal were aware of this creatures existence. They also recognized that independent of the laws of kashrus, people would instinctively avoid eating this poisonous animal. They therefore werent concerned that their categorical statement, which seems to permit its consumption, would lead to any practical problems. The Gemora in Makkos (23b) teaches that because Hashem wanted to give us merits, He increased the number of mitzvos, as the verse says ' , the same expression used by the Gemora with which we began. Rashi explains that there are many mitzvos, such as the prohibition against eating bugs, which a person would observe independent of the commandment involved. Because Hashem wanted us to accrue additional merits, He forbade them so that we would receive reward for actions which we would perform regardless, but which now have the status of mitzvos. With this introduction, we can understand the Gemora with which we began. The Gemora questioned why the Torah mentions fins as a requirement for kosher fish when it would have sufficed to mention only scales. However, had the Torah done so, the stinkus marinus would technically be kosher, as it possesses scales. The additional requirement of fins comes to render this animal forbidden. This is difficult to understand, as this creature is poisonous and people would anyway avoid it. Why was it necessary to add the requirement of fins to exclude it? Based on Rashis explanation that Hashem made the Torah great with extra mitzvos to give us reward for what we would have done regardless, we may suggest that this is the intention of the Gemora in Chullin in quoting the same verse. Hashem made the Torah great by adding the requirement of fins to render the stinkus marinus non-kosher and give us reward for following our natural instincts to avoid it.

Parsha Potpourri
" "

Parshas Shemini Vol. 6, Issue 26

The Gemora in Sanhedrin (52a) teaches that while Moshe and Aharon were leading the way at Mount Sinai, Nadav and Avihu followed behind them and wondered aloud to one another when Moshe and Aharon might die so that they could assume the mantle of leadership. Hashem replied, Well see who will bury who. Rashi explains that the Gemora is coming to teach that it was for this act of seeking power that they died prematurely. This is difficult to understand for two reasons. First, the Torah gives an alternative reason for their death (10:1-2): they brought an offering which they werent commanded to bring. Second, nowhere do we find that the pursuit of power is a capital crime. The Steipler beautifully resolves these questions based on a Gemora in Rosh Hashana (17a-b). The Gemora teaches that if a person acts humble and unassuming, Hashem overlooks his sins and gives him time to repent. In light of this, the Steipler explains that the Gemora in Sanhedrin doesnt mean to say that Nadav and Avihu were put to death for seeking honor. Rather, it is bothered that Hashem normally gives a person an opportunity to repent and doesnt punish him on the spot. Why were Nadav and Avihu immediately killed for their erroneous actions? The Gemora answers that almost one year previously they expressed their jealous desire for power. As a result, they didnt receive Divine mercy to give them time to repent. The actual cause of their deaths was the foreign sacrifice, as the Torah explicitly says. The reason that Hashem judged them so strictly was because they invited it upon themselves by coveting the leadership. Based on the Steiplers explanation, we may now resolve an apparent difficulty in , the prayer said at the end of Shemoneh Esrei. Seemingly, the most important requests contained therein are Hashem should open our hearts to His Torah and help us pursue the performance of mitzvos. If so, why dont we begin the paragraph with these petitions? The aforementioned Gemora in Rosh Hashana mentions that there is one other way to merit Divine leniency: to overlook wrongs done to us and not respond to insults. If Hashem grants our request to help us excel in our Torah study and mitzvos but judges them strictly, we dont stand much of a chance. Many times they are performed without full concentration or for ulterior motives. We first ask for help in obtaining the two keys to eliciting Hashems mercy: To those who curse me, let my soul be silent, and let my soul be like dust to everyone. Only after we have the tools to merit Hashems compassionate judgment are we able to continue with our primary request. For a fish to be kosher, the Torah requires that it have fins and scales. The Mishnah (Niddah 6:9) teaches that every fish with scales has fins, but some possess fins without scales. In light of this, the Gemora (Chullin 66b)

' ' (2-10:1) '

( 19:2 )

(11:9)

The Gemora in Sanhedrin (99a) teaches that a person who studies Torah but neglects to teach it to others has disgraced Hashems words and rejected His commandments. He will be harshly punished by being completely cut off from the Jewish nation. Although there is a positive mitzvah to teach Torah to others, why is the failure to do so judged so strictly? Rav Pam explains that the very fact that a person is able to keep his learning to himself reveals that he doesnt grasp the sweetness of the Torah that he studies. If he appreciated and personally experienced its beauty and depth, he would literally be unable to contain it within himself. As proof for his claim, Rav Pam quotes the Chasam Sofer, who writes that Moshe Rabbeinu was the only human who understood the mysteries of the purification of the red heifer. Nevertheless, the fact that he wasnt permitted to share it with a single person caused him so much agony that he would have actually preferred not be privy to the secret. Similarly, Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz was wont to quote what the Kuntres HaSfeikos writes that if angels appeared to a person to reveal to him Divine secrets, he would have no pleasure from the intrinsic knowledge until he was able to share it with others. In light of the above, we now understand that if a person studies Torah and feels no burning need to teach it to others, he obviously doesnt appreciate the value of the Torah that he studied. This is the ultimate fulfillment of scorning the word of Hashem and is deserving of the harshest of punishments. Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them): 1) Rashi writes (Devorim 9:20) that Nadav and Avihu died as a punishment to Aharon for his role in the sin of the golden calf. How can this be reconciled with the verse which says (10:1) that they died as a punishment for their own sin in offering a foreign fire on the Altar? (Taam VDaas 16:1) 2) Rashi writes (10:3) that Moshe told Aharon after the death of his two sons, Nadav and Avihu, that he had known that the Mishkan would be sanctified through the death of somebody close to Hashem, but he had assumed that it would be either himself or Aharon, yet he now recognized that Nadav and Avihu were even greater than them. How is it possible that Nadav and Avihu were greater than Moshe, who was the greatest prophet ever to live, and Aharon, who was equal in greatness to Moshe (Rashi Shemos 6:26)? (Even Yisroel Parshas Acharei Mos) 3) The Gemora in Berachos (53b) derives from 11:44 the requirement to wash ones hands at the end of a meal (mayim acharonim). Is there a minimum amount of water which a person is required to use to perform this mitzvah? (Beis Yosef Orach Chaim 181, Eliyah Rabbah 181:3, Maaseh Rav 84, Aruch HaShulchan 181:8, Mishnah Berurah 181:10 and

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

181:19, Kaf HaChaim 181:17, Orchos Rabbeinu Vol. 1 pg. 83, Piskei Teshuvos 181:9, Bishvilei HaParsha) 4) According to the opinion that the reading of Parshas Parah is a Torah obligation (Orach Chaim 685:7), is a woman required to come to the synagogue to hear it as she does for the reading of Parshas Zachor, and if not, what is the difference? (Moadim UZmanim 2:168) Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them): 1) Rav Moshe Shternbuch explains that when a person commits a sin for which he should be punished with death, he may be spared if the consequences of his death will result in pain for his innocent family and friends, who have done nothing wrong and don't deserve to suffer. In this case, Nadav and Avihu deserved to be killed for their sin of offering a foreign fire on the Altar, but they would have been saved if their deaths would cause unwarranted suffering for their father Aharon. When Rashi writes that they died as a punishment to Aharon for his role in the sin of the golden calf, he isn't giving the reason for their deaths, but is indicating why Aharon wasn't able to spare them from being killed for their sin. 2) The Mishnah Berurah writes that it troubles him to see people who are careful to wash mayim acharonim, yet they don't fulfill their obligations, as they content themselves to place a few drops of water on the tips of their fingers when the law requires that the water must reach at least to the end of the second knuckle of each finger. The Kaf HaChaim writes that according to Kabbalah, the entire length of the fingers must be washed. The Vilna Gaon and Aruch HaShulchan maintain that a minimum amount of a revi'is of water must be used (86-150 cc). However, the Bais Yosef and Eliyah Rabbah quote sources who argue that there is no minimum quantity of water required, and the Chida writes that for mystical reasons one should not use a large amount of water and should minimize it. Additionally, the Chazon Ish questioned whether the Vilna Gaon in fact required a revi'is and conducted himself in this manner. 3) Dayan Yisroel Yaakov Fischer answers that there are two types of righteous individuals: those who perfect themselves, and those who also perfect others. Although spending one's time and energy focusing on others comes at the expense of being able to work on one's own selfgrowth, the Chovos HaLevavos writes that a person who benefits the masses is on a higher overall spiritual level than somebody who singularly focuses on himself. Even though the latter may in fact attain greater personal perfection than the former, the accrued merits of those whom the former inspires to grow place him on a higher composite level. Moshe assumed that Hashem would choose to sanctify the Mishkan through the deaths of either Aharon or himself, as they were the two greatest spiritual influences on the Jewish people in their generation, but Hashem elected to take Nadav and Avihu, who because they weren't as busy dealing with others were actually able to reach higher personal levels of perfection than Moshe and Aharon. 4) Rav Moshe Shternbuch maintains that women are not required to come to the synagogue to hear Parshas Parah. He explains that in contrast to the mitzvah of destroying Amalek, which is incumbent upon every individual Jew and even a bride at her wedding (Sotah 44b), the requirement to prepare the ashes of the red heifer isn't individual in nature but national, so the community is required to read about it in the synagogue, but women aren't required to go out of their way to specifically come to hear it.
2011 by Ozer Alport. To subscribe, send comments, or sponsor an issue, email oalport@optonline.net

Aish.Com - Rabbi Stephen Baars

Brainstorming With Baars

Parshas Shemini: Why Do Bad Things Happen To Good People? As long as man has been trying to figure out how to rub two sticks together to make a BBQ, they have been pondering this question. Yet all the answers, whether you believe in G-d or not, fit into one of these three categories: 1) the pagan answer 2) the atheist answer 3) the Jewish answer In truth, the pagans have the most obvious answer. (Don't worry, I'm not a pagan.) For the pagan, the reason bad things happen to people is simply because they are bad. Just like a human being, one of the gods punishes those he or she disapproves of. And even though you and I might think the poor sufferer is wonderful, the pagan would conclude that their god didn't agree. There must be things we don't know about the person and therefore the poor soul gets visited with retribution because they ticked one of the gods off. Theologically, this idea permeates most of the religions of the world (except Judaism) and the only reason it isn't more widely discussed is because it is not very comforting. It's hard to imagine hearing a eulogy about poor uncle Albert, "You know, we all thought you were a great guy, but I guess when the piano fell on your head at age 35 it was a clear sign..."

Unfortunately, most people think there are only two possible answers, the pagan and the atheist views. As such, they would completely abandon the pagan view if not for the fact that the atheist view is much worse. The atheist says that there is no reason. It's all just random. Uncle Albert happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Just his bad luck! At first this might seem appealing, but you would be sorely mistaken. Imagine a father coming home and tearing up his nine year old's homework that he had been working on for over a week, for no reason at all. People who believe that they are the victim of random violence suffer horrendously. It's just not the same thing if the father rips up the homework because he believes the son could work harder. Even though both are harsh, those two acts, and the psychological impact, are completely different. Assuming the father is correct in his and motive assessment, the son has a very good chance of being emotionally healthy because in this latter case the son is dealing with a father that cares. When you think your parent, boss, G-d, or even life, treats you randomly, feelings of despair soon become overwhelming. What's the point of going on if random acts can cut it all short? That isn't the same as a person who feels that there is a justice to what happens, even if you don't like the justice. At the very least, it is a system by which life makes sense. Under those conditions we can manage. I will grant you, neither answer is satisfying, but at least the pagan is better off. The atheist would have us live in a world devoid of any meaning. Failure and success are random. To believe that G-d does not run this world and that results have nothing to do with our efforts is to believe in a godless world which ultimately leads to despair. What makes people fight against all odds is the underlying belief that good will triumph. Another way of looking at this is to see that all pain can be divided into two categories - meaningful and meaningless. We can survive anything if we feel it is meaningful because there is a reason we are going through this. It is not only worth it, but the pain is related to the reward, the more pain the better end result. The best example is childbirth. How do women go through it? Because there is a very meaningful result. However, if our suffering is meaningless, then we will stop trying. If that is what life really is, people would give up. And when people do believe this, they do give up. We can't go through anything if it is meaningless. That is why, relative to the atheist, the pagan's view of life gives a sense of structure and reason to living. Judaism however, offers something completely different that is not shared with anyone. No other religion, philosophy or world philosopher has ever imagined the answer Moshe tells his brother Aharon upon the death of Aharon's two sons. Bad things happen to good people precisely because they are good people. In fact, it is a sign of how good they were that such a bad thing happened to them. If you have blood flowing through your veins then it's virtually impossible for you to not find that answer distinctly disturbing, and you would not be alone - for Aharon himself found it challenging. Let us delve a little further. In sum, these are the only possible answers: 1) Bad things happen because you are bad. 2) There is no reason for it happening, it's just bad luck. 3) Bad things happen because you are good. There are no other possible answers, and as much as we would all like a fourth door, it doesn't exist. Incredibly, the Torah states that when Moshe told this to Aharon, Aharon did not reply (Leviticus 10:3). If we ponder this, we will realize that the Torah would be a massive document if it told us every time someone didn't say anything. Why does the Torah explicitly mention here that Aharon didn't respond to Moshe? Rashi, the famous commentator from the Middle Ages, explains that Aharon wanted to reply and didn't, and for restraining himself he was rewarded. The question to ask is what would Aharon have said? I should mention here that in Jewish tradition it isn't our place to foist upon mourners what we think are the reasons for their tragedy. Our responsibility is to mourn with them in silence unless they request something deeper. It's of the utmost importance to not impose your philosophy on people who are not capable of hearing anything more. Mourning is often a time of confusion and they need their space to find peace, and we must respect that. However, Moshe and Aharon knew each other very well, Moshe obviously knew what his brother wanted to hear. So again, what could Aharon have said? He surely could not have argued like a pagan, that his sons were not really good people. Similarly, he couldn't have answered like the atheist, that they died for no reason. Neither of these reactions are better than what Moshe offered. Isn't the Jewish answer the best possible answer? Most certainly. Aharon knew that Moshes answer was the best and correct explanation. But the Jewish concept leaves one big begging question that you don't have with the pagan or athiest. If bad things happen to good

people, and it's therefore good for them, then... why is it good for them?????? Why was this good for Aharon's two sons? That is the question Aharon could and didn't ask. Why? To use an analogy, now and again Warren Buffet (the financial seer of Omaha) gives his jacket to be raffled off for charity. It's not that people are clamoring for the latest in clothing style, as that's not what Warren is known for. Rather, he puts in his pocket a stock that he thinks is worth buying. Assuming you bid and won and assuming you got to see his advice and meet Mr. Buffet, would it be appropriate to say to him, "Why that company?" If your knowledge of financial affairs is not on par with Mr. Buffet, and therefore it is worth your while to buy the raffle ticket, the answer is clearly inappropriate. If you didn't want his advice, don't buy the ticket. He's the financial genius, not you. That's why Aharon didn't ask. Moshe told him that what happened to them was because they were good, very good. In fact, Rashi explains that Moshe said, "Now I understand that they (your two sons) are greater than you and I." What happened to them was good for them. And if Moshe says it, that's good enough for Aharon, and for this he was rewarded. Nevertheless, you and I (as opposed to Aharon), are probably asking the question, why was it good for them? A person has two basic capacities: physical and spiritual. Physical capacities include how long someone might live as well as other bodily functions like exercise or diet, all according to the design of your body. The body is a very sophisticated machine and we have certain expectations of what we are physically capable of. The other capacity is the soul, or what you might call our spiritual or natural talent. Everyone has the capacity to shine when they live with their inner soul's capacity. The question is, which one is a greater tragedy when it's not fulfilled? The body or the soul? Which would you rather have, to live half your physical years but achieve twice as much true meaning and happiness in life, or live a longer life in terms of age, but only achieve half as much true meaning and happiness? In other words, is it better to minimize or lose some physical capacity to achieve a fuller spiritual life, or the other way round? Some people give their kidney to live a more spiritual life, alternatively, some people cheat their friends to live a more physical existence. Of course, we all want both. We all want to live a full life in years AND achieve as much true meaning as possible. But sometimes that isn't the choice. Sometimes to achieve as much as we are capable of, our physical years need to be cut short. In a similar and less extreme way, Helen Keller had to suffer physically so she could achieve the greatness within her. Nelson Mandela would not be who he is without being in prison for so long, and countless other stories of people who found their greatness within and became beacons of light, not in spite of their suffering, but because of it. G-d saw these people had deep wells of spiritual character that were yearning to find expression, and that without going through what they did, they would never have become what they could. These souls live to give the people around them a better and more meaningful existence. King David, Samson, The Chofetz Chaim, but also Nelson Mandela, and Mother Theresa, did not pursue a path because they wanted an easier life or a more comfortable chair. They understood in the most meaningful real way, they become greater the more they can push themselves for others. To people like this, even death, if it would bring mankind higher, is worth it. This is not as distant or strange as it sounds. Ask your mother or father what they would be willing to do if you needed it. This is not a sacrifice, it's really an opportunity. A mother doesn't see what she did for her children as her loss, but really it's her absolute gain, it's how she became. In conclusion, the point of life is not to get through it. The winner is not the person who racked up the most years. The real value and quality of life is what we do with our time on this good earth. Alternatively, the tragedy of existence is people who squander the most valuable thing we have, life itself. In the same way, a genius or an outstanding musician who idles away his or her talent is a tremendous waste. The fact they lived long does not in anyway assuage the tragedy that they didn't achieve what they should have. Once we are clear on this, we are left with only one question, did a person shine as brightly as they could? More than that we cannot ask of them, and more than that opportunity, we cannot ask of G-d. Moshe told Aharon they did. After that there is nothing more to ask. Brainstorming Questions To Ponder Question 1: Do you think you would be happier if you suffered less? Question 2: Do you think you would be as successful as you are now, if you had half the anguish, strife and difficulty?
This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/tp/b/bwb/89014927.html Like what you read? As a non-profit organization, Aish.com relies on readers like you to enable us to provide meaningful and relevant articles. Join Aish.com and help us continue to give daily inspiration to people like

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

you around the world. Make a secure donation at: https://secure.aish.com/secure/pledge.php or mail a check to Aish.com, 408 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701 Copyright 1995 - 2011 Aish.com - http://www.aish.com

Aish.Com - Rabbi Benjamin Blech

The Archenemy of Happiness

More is never enough. I used to think that the main goal of American business was to make people happy. Create new products so consumers have a better quality of life. Add new bells and whistles to existing technologies to offer a more satisfying experience to the users. I thought happiness was the objective. But the truth is just the opposite: billions of dollars are spent to figure out how to make us feel unhappy. And unless we understand the secret motivation behind the desire of marketers to make us feel discontented with what we have, we are going to fall victim to a never ending cycle of unhappiness. I realized it recently when I heard a friend bemoaning his fate. Not too long ago, but almost a previous era in terms of technological innovation, he bought the new iPod. He was ecstatic. But it didn't last. What a shock to discover that there is now newer and better model on the market. His formerly beloved iPod is now an ancient relic. How could he possibly be happy with it? Since new is always better, there is a very short window of time for anyone to feel satisfied with what they have. To make sure that the contentment of consumers is very quickly terminated, there is a multibillion dollar industry whose purpose is solely the systematic propagation of unhappiness: advertising. Its goal, as admitted by advertising guru B. Earl Puckett, is summed up in this succinct credo: "It is our job to make men and women unhappy with what they have." The "game" of creating unhappiness is a multifaceted industry. We can perhaps see it best in the world of fashion. Big business brainwashes consumers to believe that they need more. Oscar Wilde once said, "Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months." Why do fashions change so quickly? One week you're an outcast if you're not wearing a certain kind of sneakers. The next week, you're a geek if you haven't switched to another brand. Why must you constantly have something else? Because big business needs consumers, so consumers have to be brainwashed to believe that they need more something newer, something better, something that will finally make us happy when we get it. Of course once we buy it the cycle starts all over again. Why do we go along with this? Why do we buy into a belief that is virtually guaranteed to make us unhappy since there will always be something newer that we don't yet have? Because we've bought into the notion that happiness comes from having more, instead of the brilliant insight of the Talmudic sages that "Who is rich? One who is content with his portion." More is never the answer. More has no limits. More seduces us with the unspoken promise of contentment when its very premise is that you dare not be happy with what you already have. If more is the goal, when can you possibly say you've achieved it? No matter where you're at in life more will still beckon you, using its stock in trade argument that you can't possibly be happy as long as there are still things that you don't possess. What's Your Number? In the old film Key Largo, Edward G. Robinson, in the role that defined him, plays a gangster whose life is filled with violence and deceit. In the film he holds a family hostage. Someone asks him what makes him want to live this kind of life but try as he might Robinson can't answer this question. So one of the hostages, played by Humphrey Bogart, suggests an answer: "I know what you want. You want more." Robinson's face brightens as he says, "Yeah! That's it! That's what I want. I want more." Fast forward more than half a century and hear how the same theme is repeated in Oliver Stones "Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps," capturing what motivates those who are ready to destroy their friends and their families in pursuit of unlimited wealth. In a meeting between the young Jake (Shia LaBeouf) and the megalomaniac, Bretton James (Josh Brolin), Jake puts the question to Bretton, who has already caused the suicide of a competitor and the destruction of another firm with false rumors, "So what is your number? When Bretton doesn't understand, Jake explains that everyone has a really far out number that represents total success, the ability to get out of the race knowing that he is now the victor. So what's your number, Jake repeats. Bretton considers and after a few moments of silence responds with one word: "More. The desire for more is our contemporary idol and we worship it at our own peril. Sadly, we transfer the idea that only something newer and different will bring us joy into our personal lives as well. We can replace our insatiable demand for more with the awareness that we have more than enough. Countless studies have shown that the secret of happy marriages is the ability to feel contentment with their partners in spite of the lack of perfection. True love does not come by finding the perfect person, but by learning to see an imperfect person perfectly. My father would tell people that he had the most beautiful wife, the best cook in the world, the greatest

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

mother to his children. Did he really believe that my mother was truly the most outstanding woman in the world? Yes, he did, because he chose to ignore her faults and overemphasize her qualities. He wasn't interested in more. He knew that the woman he married was a gift from G-d. The divorce rate today is testament to the results of worshipping more. Why should I be satisfied with this person if there might be someone newer or better out there? I could have more than I have now. Believing that more automatically leads to joy condemns us to an endless pursuit as we ignore those parts of life that really give it meaning and joy. But we can stop being the creators of our unhappiness by replacing our insatiable demand for more with the awareness that we have more than enough. Kurt Vonnegut and novelist Joseph Heller were once talking at a party hosted by a billionaire hedge fund manager. Vonnegut pointed out that their wealthy host had made more money in one day than Heller ever made from his celebrated novel Catch-22. Heller responded, "Yes, but I have something he will never have: enough. Aish.Com - Dr. Avigdor Bonchek Parshas Shmini 5771 The parsha begins with a description of the day of the dedication of the newly built Mishkan. The celebration was marred by the sudden and tragic death of two sons of Aaron. We read: Vayikra 10:1-2 "And Nadav and Avihu, the sons of Aaron, took each of them his censor and put fire in them and they put incense thereon and offered before Hashem strange fire which He did not command them. And a fire went out from before Hashem and devoured them and they died before Hashem." Rashi:n A fire went out - Rashi: Rabbi Eliezer says: The sons of Aaron died only because they rendered halachic decisions in the presence of their teacher, Moshe. Rabbi Yishmael says: [They died because] they entered the Sanctuary while intoxicated with wine. You can know that this is so because after their death [G-d] warned the survivors not to enter the Sanctuary while intoxicated by wine (see this chapter, verses 8-11). This may be compared to a [parable of a] king who had a faithful member of his household etc. as it is brought in Leviticus Rabbah. Rashi gives us two possible reasons for the sudden death of Nadav and Avihu. What questions would you ask on this comment? Questioning Rashi One Question: Rashi supplies us with reasons for the death of Aaron's sons, but the Torah itself says "and they brought before Hashem a strange fire which He commanded them not." This would seem to be the reason for their deaths. Why does Rashi see the need to suggest other reasons? You may remember other instances in the Torah where Rashi offers reasons for events when the Torah itself had already given its reason. See the cases of Yitro's coming (Exodus 18:1) and the naming of Reuven (Bereisheet 29:32). In each case, Rashi's need to comment alerts us to closely search the words of the Torah to discover subtleties which are the reason for Rashi's comment. Can you find the reason for Rashi's comment here? What's bothering Rashi? What's Bothering Rashi? An Answer: The Torah verse is awkward. If you read it carefully you will see that it is hard to make sense of. The verse says: "And the sons of Aaron took ... and they offered before Hashem a strange fire which He had not commanded them." What do these latter words mean? Do they mean: 1. Hashem had not commanded them to bring this offering? If so, this would hardly seem to be reason for punishing them. Or: 2. Hashem had not commanded them not to bring the offering? Then certainly this is no reason for punishing them! With this in mind, how does Rashi's comment deal with this difficulty in the verse? Understanding Rashi An Answer: Both of the two options above leave us wondering why Aaron's sons were punished. Rashi's comment comes to answer that question. Rashi gives us two possible explanations, drawn from the Sages' interpretations. Questioning The Midrash On what basis do you think that Rav Eliezer concluded that their sin was deciding the halacha without consulting Moshe? Hint: Look carefully at the verse. Understanding The Midrash An Answer: The Torah says "Hashem had not commanded them to bring." The extra word "them" implies that Hashem had commanded someone else to bring this fire, but not them. The fact that they did bring the fire, nevertheless, shows that they decided on their own to bring it. This, in effect, is to decide a halachic matter without consulting the leading authority of the generation (of all generations, for that matter!), Moshe, their teacher.

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/j/as/The_Archenemy_of_Happiness.html Like what you read? As a non-profit organization, Aish.com relies on readers like you to enable us to provide meaningful and relevant articles. Join Aish.com and help us continue to give daily inspiration to people like you around the world. Make a secure donation at: https://secure.aish.com/secure/pledge.php or mail a check to Aish.com, 408 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701 Copyright 1995 - 2011 Aish.com - http://www.aish.com

Whats Bothering Rashi?

See above 1:7 (Parshat Vayikra) where it says that sons of Aaron are to put fire on the altar. There Rashi notes "Even though fire would come down from heaven, it was nevertheless a mitzvah for 'profane' fire to be brought [by the priests]." So it seems that Nadav and Avihu weren't doing anything wrong. However, since Moshe had not ordered them to be the ones to bring this fire, they had acted out of turn. The reason for Rav Yishmael's interpretation is clear. Rashi himself says that the fact that immediately after this tragedy, G-d commanded Aaron not to enter the Sanctuary intoxicated by wine. This leads one to conclude that intoxication was the reason for Nadav and Avihu's death, as the parable points out. Questioning Rav Yishmael But you should have a question on this interpretation of Rav Yishmael. Your Question: A Question: If G-d only forbade entering the Sanctuary in a state of intoxication after the deaths of Nadav and Avihu, why were they punished? At the time they brought the strange fire there was as yet no prohibition [sic!]. Understanding Rav Yishmael An Answer: Common sense and common decency would dictate - even without a divine edict - that one should not enter such a holy site while under the influence of wine. They should have understood this themselves. They are no less responsible for their irresponsible behavior just because they were not told of this prohibition explicitly. But, once G-d saw that they could ignore this elementary act of decency, He found it necessary to make the law abundantly clear. So afterwards He made a formal declaration to Aaron of the laws of decorum when serving in the Sanctuary. The Lesson When Rashi cites a midrash which seems to duplicate what the Torah itself had said, there's cause for reflection and deeper analysis. Shabbat Shalom, Avigdor Bonchek
This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/tp/i/wbr/48925892.html Like what you read? As a non-profit organization, Aish.com relies on readers like you to enable us to provide meaningful and relevant articles. Join Aish.com and help us continue to give daily inspiration to people like you around the world. Make a secure donation at: https://secure.aish.com/secure/pledge.php or mail a check to Aish.com, 408 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701 Copyright 1995 - 2011 Aish.com - http://www.aish.com

HaRav Eliezer Chrysler

Midei Shabbos

Vol. 18 No. 26 This issue is sponsored jointly in honour of the special birthday of Rabbi Chaim Wilschanski,shlita by all his grandchildren and L'iluy Nishmos Ha'Rav Simchah ben ha'Rav Asher and Gita bas Bentziyon z.l. & Chayim Ze'ev ben Yisrael and B'rachah Miriam bas Moshe Aharon z.l. Parshas Shemini (Parah) Wonders of the Creation (Adapted from Rabeinu Bachye) As is well-known, G-d created the world out of four basic elements, fire, wind, water and earth, starting from the top (the lightest and most spiritual elements) going down (to the heavier and more physical ones). They are known by their acronym 'Arma' [Eish, Ru'ach, Mayim and Afar], and this is the order in which Shlomoh Hamelech listed them in Mishlei (30:4) though it is not the order in which they are listed in the second Pasuk of the Creation. If one examines the Parshiyos of the Kasher and non-Kasher animals, one will see that the Torah presents them according to the elements, but in the reverse order (going upwards - 'Amra' Afar, Mayim, Ru'ach and Eish]), as we shall now explain. Hence the Torah begins with the signs of Kasher animals and beasts ("This is the Chayah that you may eat from all the animals that are on earth, whose basic creation was from earth"). The second Parshah deals with the signs of Kasher and non-Kasher fish ("This you may eat from all that lives in the water"), whereas the third Parshah discusses the Kasher and non-Kasher birds ("And these you shall abhor from the birds", whose major component is air, which explains why they are able to fly). Whilst the fourth Parshah (that of the Sheratzim [the rodents] all of which are forbidden), contains the only one of G-d's creations that is made of fire, the lightest and least physical of the elements, as we will now explain. The Torah writes "And this is what is forbidden to you among the rodents that crawl on the earth: the weasel, the mouse, and the toad according to their species". "According to their species, Rabeinu Bachye explains, comes to include a salamander, a species of lizard that is created in an oven that has been burning constantly, day and night, for seven years. Should the salamander leave the fire for one moment, he explains, it will die (just as a fish will die if it leaves the water for a very short period of time). And it is in connection with these wonders that the Sifra quotes Rebbi Akiva, who, upon learning the latter Pasuk, exclaimed 'How great are Your works, oh G-d; all of them You did with wisdom! You created large creatures in the sea and You created large creatures on dry land. If the former were to go up on to dry land, they would die immediately; and if the latter were to enter the sea, then they would die immediately. You created large creatures in fire and You created large creatures in the air. If the former were to fly into the air they would die immediately; and if the latter were to enter the fire then they would die immediately. One cannot

but exclaim 'How great are Your works, oh G-d; all of them You did with wisdom!' And it is for the same reason that the Torah uses the word "Eileh" in connection with both the creatures that were created with wind (11:13 & 11:24) and those that were created from fire (11:31). This is because "Eileh" denotes spirituality, which also explains why it comprises G-d's Name "Elokim" (the 'Yud' and the 'Mem' which conclude it merely denote the plural). And by the same token we find G-d's Name attached to wind ("and a Divine wind was hovering on the surface of the water") and to fire "and a Divine fire fell" (in connection with Iyov's sons) - whereas this never occurs with regard to the two heavier elements water and earth. Alternatively, the author adds, the use of the word "Eileh" can be attributed to the inherent hint to Avodah-Zarah, since "Eileh Elohecho Yisrael!" are the words the Eirev Rav announced as they began to make the Golden Calf. And so it is that many gentiles worship wind and fire, because they are light and spiritual, and they set out to benefit an abundance of goodness and success in their endeavours on account of it. Parshah Pearls (Adapted mainly from the Riva) Tearing One's Clothes in Mourning "And Moshe said to Aharon (following the death of Nadav and Avihu) 'Do not let your hair grow long and do not rend your garments!' " (10:6). Why do Chazal learn the Din of tearing k'ri'ah from a Pasuk in Sh'muel (1, 1:11)"and he rent his garments"?, Why do they not rather learn it from this Pasuk, which implies that Aharon and his sons should not tear k'ri'ah, but that others should? Indeed, Rashi makes this very inference with regard to the prohibition of an Aveil cutting his hair, from the words in this very Pasuk "Do not let your hair grow long!" Citing Rebbi Elyakim, the Riva answers that although they could have learned it from this Pasuk, they preferred to learn it from the Pasuk in Sh'muel, which also teaches us a. that the k'ri'ah should be performed standing and b. that it must measure at least one Tefach. Precluding the Camel "Whatever has split hooves at the top (Mafreses Parsah) and at the bottom (ve'Shosa'as Shesa) that you may eat" (11:3). Rashi explains that this precludes the camel, whose hooves are split at the top but are joined at the bottom. In that case, asks the Da'as Zekeinim mi'Ba'alei Tosfos, in the next Pasuk, when the Torah declares the camel Tamei because it is not "Mafris Parsah", it ought rather to have written because it is not "Shosa'as Shesa"? In similar fashion, he queries Rashi (in Pasuk 27) who explains that the Pasuk " whatever walks on the soles of its feet is Tamei" is coming to preclude bears, dogs and cats, who walk on the soles of their feet (despite the fact that they are completely split). In that case, he asks, why does the Torah declare a rabbit and a hare Tamei "because it does not have split hooves (she'Ein Mafrisin Parsah)"? It should rather have attributed the fact that they are Tamei because 'they walk on the soles of their feet'? It seems to me that whereas Rashi considers walking on the soles of their feet an independent sign of Tum'ah, and that the term "Mafris Parsah ve'Shosa'as Shesa" can also be applied to split soles as well, the Da'as Zekeinim maintains that a Kasher animal must have hooves and that those hooves must be totally split ("Mafris Parsah ve'Shosa'as Shesa"). And any animal that walks on the soles of its feet, is Tamei because it is not included in "Mafris Parsah ve'Shosa'as Shesa", not because walking on its soles is an intrinsic sign of Tum'ah. Moshe's Humility "And Moshe heard, and it was good in his eyes" (11:20). Rashi explains that he was not ashamed to say 'I did not hear this'. The note in Rashi explains that what Rashi means is that he did not say 'Lo shoma'ti', but rather 'shoma'ti ve'shochachti' (I heard it but I forgot). The Riva explains that for Moshe to have said 'I did not hear it' would not have been anything out of the ordinary, seeing as in the Mishnah in the last Perek of Pirkei Avos, we have learned that one of the seven qualities of a Chacham is to admit that he has not learned something that he has indeed not learned. And if that is something that is expected of every Chacham, then it goes without saying that Moshe Rabeinu adhered to it. But to admit that he had learned, but forgotten it, when he might well have said that he never learned it, must have been terribly embarrassing for the leader of K'lal Yisrael; yet that is what he did! Forbidding a Mixture "And it (eating sheratzim [rodents]) shall be an abomination for you" (11:11). This comes, says Rashi, to forbid Ta'aroves (a mixture that contains Sheratzim). But we already know that an Isur that gives taste forbids the mixture in which it is from the Pasuk in Naso (in connection with Nazir) "ve'chol Mishras", so why do we need the current Pasuk to repeat the Isur? And he suggests that perhaps we need the Pasuk here to fix the Shi'ur (the minimum measurement of rodents that the mixture contains) as a k'Zayis (an olive-volume), since we might otherwise have thought that one is even

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

Chayav if it contains the volume of a lentil (k'adashah [like its Shi'ur Tum'ah]). In that case, asks the Riva quoting his Rebbe, why do we need to establish the case by a mixture? Why can we not simply say that we need the Pasuk "and it shall be an abomination for you" to teach us that one is only Chayav if one eats a k'Zayis of rodents, but not for a k'Adashah? The Ostrich and its Daughter "And the daughter of the ostrich's daughter" (11:16). The Torah lists the ostrich's daughter among the forbidden birds and not the ostrich itself, explains the Riva, because the flesh of the ostrich, which eats metal (and glass), is hard, and inedible, whereas the flesh of a young female ostrich is tender and edible. Earthenware Vessels " any earthenware vessel, into which some of them (Sheratzim) fall, whatever is inside it shall become Tamei and it you shall break." An earthenware vessel, Rashi comments, can only become Tamei via its inside (but not by mere contact with something that is Tamei, like other vessels). The reason for this, says the Rive, is because, unlike metal vessels, it can only be purified by being broken. Consequently, the Torah had pity on the owner, by limiting the incidence of Tum'ah, by restricting its susceptibility to becoming Tamei. Otherwise, everybody would constantly be breaking their earthenware vessels. Highlights From The Ba'al Ha'turim "And a fire went out and it consumed them (vatochal osom)" 10:2. The word "osom", says the Ba'al ha'Turim, has an extra 'Vav', hinting at the six sins of which Nadav and Avihu were guilty: They brought a strange fire; They issued a ruling in the presence of Moshe; They drank wine prior to performing the Avodah; They declined to get married and have children; They had their eye on the leadership ('When will these two old men die, so that we will be able to take over?'); They did not take counsel before acting). "And Moshe called to Misha'el and Eltzafan and he said to them "Approach (kirvu [the dead bodies of Nadav and Avihu]) and carry your brothers from before the Holy place " (10:4). The word "Kirvu", the Ba'al ha'Turim points out, has on it two neginos (notes). This hints he explains, that they were not to actually enter the Heichal (a part of the Mishkan where even Levi'im were forbidden to enter). What they therefore did was to throw iron javelins (attached to ropes) inside, which caught on to their clothes, and drag them out. "Do not drink wine or intoxicating drinks (Yayin ve'sheichar al teisht)" 10:9. The words " ve'sheichar al" is the Notrikun (first letters) of the words 'Ve'im Shosoh K'dei Revi'is (Yayin), Osur Lehoros' (And if one drank a Revi'is (of wine), one is forbidden to issue rulings ) And "teisht@ is the Notrikun of 'Tefilas Shikor To'eivah!' (The prayers of a drunk are an abomination). "These are the beasts that you may eat from all the animals that are on the land" (11:2). To preclude, says the Ba'al ha'Turim, a sea-ox, which is forbidden. "From their flesh you shall not eat they are tamei (i.e. forbidden) to you. This you may eat from all that is in the water " (11:8/9) The juxtaposition of the two statements hints at the Halachah permitting a sea-donkey to be eaten. "And these you shall abhor from among the birds - the eagle (es ha'nesher)" 11:13. The Torah begins the list of the forbidden birds with the eagle, because it is the king of the birds. Why is it called a 'nesher'? Because it 'drops its plumage (and grows it afresh [from the word noshar - to fall off]), as the Pasuk writes in Tehilim (103:5) "And renew your youth like an eagle". "And every species of raven (ve'eis kol oreiv le'miyno)" 11:15. "Species of raven", say Chazal, comes to include the starling (zarzer). Sure enough, the Ba'al ha'Turim points out, the Gematriyah of "oreiv le'miyno" is equivalent to that of 'zarzer'. " and the falcon (ve'es ha'tachmos)" 11:16. Based on the word "chomas" (to rob), the Ba'al ha'Turim explains that the tachmos is so-called because it grabs the food from other birds. Since it is the magpie that is known to steal anything from anybody, perhaps, according to the Ba'al ha'Turim, 'tachmos' is a magpie. " and the sparrow hawk (ve'es ha'neitz)" Ibid. The 'Neitz' earns its name, the Ba'al ha'Turim explains a. because of its thick plumage (notzoh) and b. because it vanquishes (menatzei'ach) other birds and seizes them. "And the desert-owl, the pelican (or cormorant) and the owl (ve'es ha'kos, ve'es ha'sholoch ve'es ha'yanshuf)" 11:18. The "kos" is so-called, the Ba'al ha'Turim explains, because it is hidden from view (nichseh), since its habitat is in the desert, the sholoch (See Rashi) and the "yanshuf", because it flies at nighttime (neshef). "The bat, the pelican and the Egyptian vulture (ve'es ha'tinshemes, ve'es ha'ko'os ve'es ho'rocham)" 11:18. They are so-called, says the Ba'al ha'Turim: the "tinshemes" - because whoever sees it is astounded (yishom, because it is weird-looking and

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

ugly); the "ko'os" - because it vomits ('ko'oh') its food, and the "rocham" because it is particularly kind (rachamim) to its young. The Mitzvos And Their Meaning (Adapted from the Seifer ha'Chinuch) Please bear in mind that the rulings in this article reflect the opinion of the Seifer ha'Chinuch and are not necessarily Halachah. Mitzvah 483: Not to Work with Kodshim (cont.) One is permitted to remove the hair from the vicinity of a wound of a B'chor or of Pesulei ha'Mukdashin in order to show it to an expert for examination. That hair however, is forbidden to benefit from even after the animal has been Shechted (assuming the expert passes the wound and gives the go-ahead). This is due to a decree, in case one comes to retain the animal - since it is not subject to atonement. On the other hand, the wool that falls from a sin-offering and a guilt-offering is permitted, because, since they come to atone, the owner is unlikely to retain them. If however, hair is detached from a burned-offering, it is uncertain as to whether it is permitted or not Animals belonging to Kodshei Bedek ha'Bayis (Kodshim belonging to the Beis-Hamikdash's repair fund) are forbidden mi'de'Rabbanan to shear and to work with, but not min ha'Torah. Consequently, someone who works with them is not subject to Malkos min ha'Torah, though he does receive Makas Mardus (Malkos mi'de'Rabbanan) If someone declares an unborn fetus Kodshei Mizbei'ach, the Rabbanan forbade working with its mother because working with a fetus' mother weakens the fetus. Consequently, they permitted it to be shorn, since shearing the mother does not affect the fetus If one declares Hekdesh one of an animal's limbs, it is not certain as to whether the entire animal is forbidden to work with and to shear or not. Consequently, one should not do so, but if one does, one is not subject to Malkos and all other details of the Mitzvah are discussed in Maseches B'choros. This Mitzvah applies everywhere and at all times, to both men and women. Because, although the author already mentioned a number of times that nowadays, one may not declare an animal Hekdesh to go on the Mizbei'ach, or even to Bedek ha'Bayis, nevertheless, if one does, the Hekdesh takes effect on the animal. Somebody who contravenes it, and works with or shears an animal of Kodshim in the way that we described, is subject to Malkos,
For sponsorships and adverts call 651 9502 This article is provided as part of Shema Yisrael Torah Network Permission is granted to redistribute electronically or on paper, provided that this notice is included intact.Shema Yisrael Torah Network For information on subscriptions, archives, and other Shema Yisrael Classes, send mail to parsha@shemayisrael.co.il http://www.shemayisrael.com Jerusalem, Israel 732-370-3344

Rabbi Zvi Akiva Fleisher

Chamishoh Mi Yodei'a

5 Questions On The Weekly Sedrah - Parshas Shmini 5771 - Bs"D

Please send your answers and comments to: Sholom613@Rogers.Com

1) Ch. 9, v. 17: "Milvad olas haboker" - Besides the morning oloh offering - Rashi says that these words are to be understood as "besides the daily morning 'oloh' offering that was ALREADY sacrificed." Only after the "tomid shel shachar" was sacrificed were Aharon's "chatos" (verse 8), the "oloh" (verse 12), the nation's "chatos" (verse 15), the nation's "oloh" (verse 16), and the meal offering (our verse) brought. In the following verse we have the sacrifice of an ox and a ram as "shlomim" offerings. Since these were also processed after the morning "tomid" why didn't the verse wait until after also mentioning these to say "milvad olas haboker?" 2) Ch. 9, v. 23: "Va'yovo Moshe v'Aharon el ohel mo'eid" - Moshe and Aharon came to ohel mo'eid - Rashi says that he found in an addendum to Toras Kohanim that Moshe entered with Aharon to teach him how to process the incense. Why didn't Moshe teach him this earlier? Hadn't the congregational offerings been processed since the first day of the dedication? 3) Ch. 10, v. 2: "Va'teitzei aish va'yomusu" - The gemara Y'vomos 64a says that Nodov and Avihu never married. The medrash says that they reasoned, "Our paternal uncle (Moshe) is a king, our maternal uncle is a tribal leader, our father is the Kohein Gadol, we are Vice Kohanim G'dolim (s'ganim). Do there exist women who are worthy to become our wives?" Their not marrying is derived from the words "u'vonim lo hoyu lo'hem" (Bmidbar 3:4). These words taken at face value do not clearly state that they did not marry, rather only that they had no children. Staying with the literal sense of these words we might even say that they had daughters, but no sons. Did they, or did they not have daughters? 4) Ch. 10, v. 6: "V'acheiCHEM kol beis Yisroel yivku" - And your brethren all of the house of Yisroel shall cry - Rashi says that we derive from these words that the misfortune of a Torah scholar is placed upon the whole community to mourn. How is this conclusive? Perhaps it is only the responsibility of a Torah scholar, but here "all of the house of Yisroel" was required to bemoan the loss of Nodov and Avihu as it was a loss of Torah scholars, but if they would have suffered the loss of a very young child ch"v, a non-relative would have no involvement in mourning? 5) Ch. 11, v. 21: "Asher *lo* chro'ayim mimaal" - Which has (not) jointed legs above - The word LO is spelled with a letter Alef, meaning NOT, but is read with a letter Vov, meaning IT HAS. On a practical level we accept the "LO with a Vov" translation, as we find in Targums Yonoson ben Uziel and Onkelos, and in the Ibn Ezra. Thus only a grasshopper that has an extra set of springing legs close to its neck may be consumed. (There are numerous other requirements as well.) Nevertheless,

the Torah text has LO spelled with an Alef thus indicating a dual interpretation. What insights do you have? Answers: #1 The Torah has already clearly stated that the "shlomim" offering should be processed after the daily "tomid" in Vayikra 6:5, "V'orach o'lehoh ho'oloh v'hiktir o'lehoh chelvei hashlomim." (Bi'u'rei Mahara"i Baal Trumas Hadeshen) #2 Rabbi Yeshayoh (Baal Tosfos in Moshav Z'keinim) asks this. He answers that there is a requirement to take coals from the outer altar and use them to burn the incense. On a daily basis the "tomid" was offered and its body arranged on the altar. Wood was placed on the altar as fuel, but no one lit it, as it was required to have a "heavenly fire," but no heavenly fire came. This scenario repeated itself for 7 days. Thus there were no coals with which to burn the incense. Only on the eighth day, when a fire descended from heaven, were there coals for the incense. Rabbi Eliyohu Mizrochi explains that although the incense was offered daily, starting from the first day, Moshe was unable to teach Aharon because the service takes place inside the "ohel mo'eid." The verse says "U'fesach ohel mo'eid teishvu yomom volaioh shivas yomim" (8:35), And at the opening of ohel mo'eid shall you sit day and night for seven days." Thus Aharon and his sons were prohibited from entering the "ohel mo'eid," and could not be taught the service earlier. A question on Moshe and Aharon both being present during the processing of the incense: Doesn't the Torah prohibit anyone from being in the "ohel mo'eid" when the incense is offered, "V'chol odom lo yi'h'yeh b'ohel mo'eid" (Vayikroh 16:17)? Any help would be greatly appreciated. #3 Targum on Divrei Hayomim 1:24:1 says that they did. #4 Since the Torah expresses itself with "v'acheiCHEM," and YOUR brothers, this is conclusive. "YOUR brothers" indicates that the mourning is done in place of Aharon, Elozor, and Isomor. Had the responsibility to mourn be by virtue of the loss of the great personages Nodov and Avihu the Torah would have said "v'acheiHEM," and THEIR brothers, Nodov and Avihu's brothers, shall cry. (Bi'u'rei Mahara"i Baal Trumas Hadeshen) #5 This can be explained homiletically. The verse says "Ei'lecho Hashem nafshi esso" (T'hilim 25:1). This can be understood as: When in pursuit of Hashem's honour I will act in a bold proud manner of grandeur, as our Rabbis derive from "Va'yigba libo v'darchei Hashem" (Divrei Ha'yomim 2:17:6), and he elevated his heart in the paths of Hashem. We can similarly interpret "Hi'nei mokome iti" (Shmos 33,21) - behold when there is place with Me, i.e. regarding Hashem's honour, then, "v'nitzavto al hatzur," you shall stand proud and upright on the rock. However, "V'hoyoh baavor (read "baavor" as "baavur") k'vodi" (verse 22) - when it comes to acting for my own honour, then "v'samticho b'nikras hatzur," I will place you into the cleavage of the rock, i.e. you should be hidden. Thus a person must have both these contradicting characteristics and know where to apply each. The knee joints, "kro'ayim," symbolize subordination, as we say thrice in our daily prayers, "ki l'cho SICHRA kol berech." Our verse tells us "asher LO (with an Alef) chro'ayim MIMAAL," when it comes to matters of "MIMAAL," heavenly matters, then one should NOT act with humbleness. When it comes to one's personal earthly matters, "l'na'teir bo'hen al ho'ORETZ," then "asher LO (with a Vov) chro'ayim," one should act with humbleness. (Beis Avrohom of Grossvardain) A Gutten Shabbos Kodesh.

Rabbi Zvi Akiva Fleisher Chasidic Insights Parshas Shmini 5771 (From 5765) Bs"D For sponsorships and advertising opportunities, send e-mail to:Sholom613@Rogers.Com Ch. 9, v. 5: "Va'yik'r'vu kol ho'eidoh va'yaamdu lifnei Hashem" - It was because of the merit of all the congregation coming close together, being unified, that they were able to stand in front of Hashem. (Rabbi Isomor of Konskovalle in Mishmeres Isomor) Ch. 9, v. 5,6: "Va'yik'r'vu kol ho'eidoh va'yaamdu lifnei Hashem, Va'yomer Moshe zeh hadovor asher tzivoh Hashem" - All the congregation came together in a unified manner. Moshe told them that coming together in unity is what Hashem commanded them to always do. (Chidushei Hori"m in Likutei Yehudoh) Ch. 9, v. 6: "Asher tzivoh Hashem taasu v'yeiro a'leichem k'vode Hashem" - It is only if you do the mitzvoh because Hashem has commanded you, and for no other reason, no matter how elevated, that the "glory of Hashem" will appear upon you. (Rabbi Zvi Elimelech of Dinov in Agro D'kalo) Ch. 9, v. 7: "Krav el hamizbei'ach" - Rashi says that Aharon was embarrassed to come to the altar. Moshe said to him, "Why are you embarrassed, 'l'chach nivcharto,' for this position you were chosen." We can say "l'chach nivcharto," for this REASON you were chosen. Specifically because you also sinned were you chosen. The Kohein's job is to offer atonement sacrifices. To give the service its maximum effect it is only appropriate to have a Kohein who sinned and has fully repented. He

Chasidic Insights

10

has a broken spirit and fully understands the heart of the penitent who is standing in front of him. He himself has been there (Nirreh li) Ch. 9, v. 7: "Es chatos'cho v'es olo'secho" - Your sin atonement offering and your elevation. By repenting "teshuvoh mei'ahavoh," you not only cleanse yourself from sin, but you have also turned it into a merit, and are more elevated than before you sinned. (Rabbi Yisroel Dov Ber in R'vid Hazohov) Ch. 9, v. 7: "V'cha'peir baadcho u'v'ad ho'om vaa'sei es korban ho'om v'cha'peir baadom" - When Aharon brings his own offering it also serves as an atonement for the nation, as he is their representative and takes responsibility for their behaviour. However, when he brings their offering, it only serves as an atonement for them. (Shem miShmuel) Ch. 9, v. 22: "Va'y'voracheim va'yei'red mei'asose hachatos" - Even though Aharon had just processed a "chatos" atonement offering, he descended from offering it, i.e. he put it totally out of his mind. This was because he wanted to bless the bnei Yisroel without harbouring any thoughts of their having sinned, and thus his blessings would be more effective. (Rabbi Shlomo of Radomsk in Tiferes Shlomo) Ch. 10, v. 16,17: "Va'yiktzofe al Elozor v'al Isomor, Madua Lo Achaltem Es Hachatos Bimkome Hakodesh" - Even though Moshe spoke to elozor and Isomor with anger, it was tempered with "mollei ahavoh," the first letters of the words beginning with "Madua." (Rabbi Yisroel Yitzchok of Alexander) Ch. 11, v. 43: "V'lo sitamu bo'hem v'nitmei'sem bom" - This seems to be double talk. Note that the word "v'nitmei'sem" is missing the letter Alef after the Mem. This allows the word to be read "v'nitamtem," and you will become plugged up. The verse is telling us that if we eat these abominable items "v'nitmei'sem BOM," we will damage our ability to absorb the holy words of the Torah, called "v'dibarto BOM." (Nirreh li) A Gutten Shabbos Kodesh. Rabbi Zvi Akiva Fleisher

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

In a previous edition the words of MRVRHRH"G R' Yaakov Kamenecki zt"l were brought. He counted the words and found that there were approximately nine hundred more words in the first half than in the second half. In an attempt to answer this, he applied a rule of the cantillations (trup). One particular trup called "makaf" does not create any audible difference. It serves to indicate that two words are conceptually connected. Some say that the "makaf" makes the two words surrounding it as one word, although there must be a letter space left between them for the kashrus of the Sefer Torah. He counted once again using this rule, and it narrowed down the discrepancy greatly, bringing the difference down to less than three hundred words. Although the count is still off by quite a bit, he added that since we do not have a clear knowledge of all the trup signs, possibly there are another almost three hundred more "makafim" in the first half of the Torah. I came across a very innovative answer in the name of Rabbi Silver zt"l, known as the Russians' Rabbi. He was a mathematician as well. He suggests that the intention of the gemara is not that these are the middle words in the count of words in the Torah, but rather, the middle of a set of double expression words, as will be explained. There are numerous times where the Torah stresses something by doubling the word form consecutively, such as "go'o go'oh" of Shiras Ha'yam. If we take all these doublings and count them we will find that there are an odd number of them and the middle expression is our "dorosh dorash." We do not count in this list words that are phonetically the same but have a different meaning one from the other. I unfortunately do not have the list at hand to redact it here. Ch. 11, v. 13: "Ho'oznioh" - The Chizkuni writes that this name is indicative of this bird's characteristic, that it is "Az," tough and sharp. Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Orbach asked, "If so, why doesn't the mishnoh in Pirkei Ovos say that one should be "az ka'oznioh" rather than "ka'nemer?" He answers that for the bird it is an external trait, not truly the essence of the bird, while for the leopard it is an internal trait. To be honest, I don't grasp his answer. Possibly we can offer that there are all sorts of traits, and of course, they should all be used, but in varying amounts, and most importantly, only in the proper situation. Even a small measure of haughtiness is in place, "shminis sheb'shminis." Since the audacity, "azus," of the bird is in its name, it is indicative of an all pervasive trait of "azus" displayed all the time. This sort of "azus" is definitely not recommended by the Tana in Pirkei Ovos. (n.l.) Ch. 11, v. 29: "Basheretz" - Among the crawling creatures - In an early edition of parshas Breishis this question was raised: For what purpose did Hashem create "shrotzim?" a number of answers were offered. The gemara Yerushalmi Brochos chapter Horo'eh says that they serve no intrinsic purpose, but when the bnei Yisroel ch"v sin Hashem says, "I have created useless 'shrotzim' and yet I maintain them. Surely, even if the bnei Yisroel sin I will maintain them." This is an insight into why the ministers of Plishtim fashioned golden forms of rats, indicating that no matter how badly they will sin, they will be left to live. This is also an insight into how it came about that when Naamon came to Elisha to be healed, Elisha was learning chapter "shmonoh shrotzim" (gemara Sanhedrin 107b). (Nishmas Kol Chai) Ch. 11, v. 30: "V'hatinsho'mes" - And the mole - We have here a list of eight creatures that impart impurity on contact when they are dead. Why aren't the snake and the scorpion, two deadly creatures not added to this list? Why is it that they impart no impurity? Rabbeinu Bachyei answers that since they are poisonous and a danger to mankind, had the Torah ruled that when they are dead they impart impurity, many people would refrain from killing them. Hashem did not want people to be discouraged from removing this menace, so they do not make people impure when they are dead. Ch. 11, v. 33: "V'chol kli che'res v'oso sishboru" - And any earthenware vessel and it shall you break - If an earthenware vessel contracts impurity it cannot be purified by immersing it into a mikveh. It must be broken. Earthenware vessels only contract impurity when there is a source of impurity that affects its insides. There is no impurity through contact on its outside. A metal vessel can contract impurity either on its inside or outside. The reason for this difference is that an earthenware vessel is made of sand, which has no intrinsic value. Its only value is its ability to contain. Its outside is rough and aesthetically not pleasing. A metal vessel contracts impurity through its inside or outside because its metallic makeup gives it value. It likewise can be purified in a mikveh. Man is like the earthenware vessel. He is made of sand, "Odom y'sodo mei'ofor." His value is his insides, what he contains. If he ch"v becomes internally defiled his only rectification is through breaking, breaking his heart, as per the verse, "Leiv nishbor v'nidkeh Elokim lo sivzeh" (T'hilim 51:19). (Holy Admor of Kotzk in a manner of drush) A Gutten Shabbos Kodesh.
Feel Free To Distribute By Copy Or Electronically. Feedback Is Appreciated. To Subscribe, Kindly Send Request To: Sholom613@Rogers.Com This article is provided as part of Shema Yisrael Torah Network Permission is granted to redistribute electronically or on paper, provided that this notice is

Oroh V'Simchoh

Oroh V'simchoh - Meshech Chochmoh On Parshas Shmini - Bs"D Ch. 9, v. 3: "S'ir izim l'chatos" - The Toras Kohanim says that this sin offering served to atone for the sale of Yoseif. Why did this sin suddenly now require atonement? The Meshech Chochmoh answers that up until the sin of the golden calf the bnei Yisroel had an excuse for selling Yoseif. They could have claimed that had he rebuked them directly instead of bringing negative reports to their father, they might have accepted his words and repented. However, at the time of serving the golden calf, Chur rebuked them openly and directly. Their response was to kill him. This negated the previously mentioned justification and required atonement at this point in time.
Feedback And Submissions Are Appreciated. Sholom613@Rogers.Com

Rabbi Zvi Akiva Fleisher

Sedrah Selections

Sedrah Selections Parshas Shmini 5771 Bs"D Ch. 10, v. 3: "Va'yidom Aharon" - And Aharon remained mute - Rabbi Amrom Blum was the Rav of a congregation in the American mid-west. He once came to the Holy Admor of Satmar zt"l and poured out his heart to him. He said that there were people in the community who openly embarrassed him and even did this as a group. The Holy Admor cited the statement of Rabbi Meir in Pirkei Ovos chapter six, "Whoever toils in Torah for its sake merits many things. Not only that but and the masses benefit from him wise counsel and he is forgiving for the embarrassment he receives." The Holy Admor says that we see from here that even though the public receives numerous benefits from him he can at the same time be subject to great embarrassment. Yet, the statement ends with, "And he is forgiving for his embarrassment." We see from this that even though the shame is unjustified one should just forgive, forgive, and forgive. (Olomos Shechorvu) Ch. 10, v. 16: "Dorosh dorash" - He surely investigated - The gemara Kidushin 30a tells us that these two words are the centre point of the Torah's words. Meseches Sofrim 9:2 says that the word "dorosh" must appear as the last word on the line in a Sefer Torah, and the following word "dorash" must be placed as the first word on the following line. Commentators have been very perplexed over this statement, as a count of all the words of the Torah yields approximately 900 words more in the first half. Rabbi Yaakov Shur, Raava"d of Kitov, in his sefer Mishnas Rebbi Yaakov says that he counted the words of the Torah and found that they totaled 79,980. Half of this is 39,990. "Dorosh" should be the 39,990th word, but in reality it is the 40,921st word. This presents another problem as well. Since "dorosh" is the 40,921st word it is the middle word of a total of an odd number of words in the Torah. If so, we cannot have "dorosh" as the end of the first half and "dorash" as the beginning of the second half.

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

included intact. For information on subscriptions, archives, and other Shema Yisrael Classes, send mail to parsha@shemayisrael.co.il http://www.shemayisrael.co.il Jerusalem, Israel

11

Rabbi Yissocher Frand

RavFrand
Parshas Sh'mini
These divrei Torah were adapted from the hashkafa portion of Rabbi Yissocher Frand's Weekly Portion Torah Tapes: Tape #588, The Aveil and the Haircut. Good Shabbos!

This write-up is adapted from the hashkafa portion of Rabbi Yissocher Frand's Commuter Chavrusah Torah Tapes on the weekly Torah Portion. Tapes or a complete catalogue can be ordered from the Yad Yechiel Institute, PO Box 511, Owings Mills MD 21117-0511. Call (410) 358-0416 or e-mail tapes@yadyechiel.org or visit http://www.yadyechiel.org/ for further information. Transcribed by David Twersky Seattle, WA; Technical Assistance by Dovid Hoffman, Baltimore, MD RavFrand, Copyright 2007 by Rabbi Yissocher Frand and Torah.org. Join the Jewish Learning Revolution! Torah.org: The Judaism Site brings this and a host of other classes to you every week. Visit http://torah.org or email learn@torah.org to get your own free copy of this mailing. Need to change or stop your subscription? Please visit our subscription center, http://torah.org/subscribe/ -- see the links on that page. Permission is granted to redistribute, but please give proper attribution and copyright to the author and Torah.org. Both the author and Torah.org reserve certain rights. Email copyrights@torah.org for full information. Torah.org: The Judaism Site Project Genesis, Inc. 122 Slade Avenue, Suite 250 Baltimore, MD 21208 http://www.torah.org/ learn@torah.org (410) 602-1350 FAX: (410) 510-1053

Moshe was A Kohen for Seven Days: G-d's Justice is Precise There is an interesting Baal HaTurim at the beginning of Parshas Shmini. The first pasuk of the parsha reads, "Vayehi baYom haShmini" [And it was on the eighth day] "karah Moshe" [Moshe called] "to Aaron and his sons, and to the elders of Israel." [Vayikra 9:1] The Baal HaTurim (as he is known to do) ignores the punctuation (trop) and forms the phrase "haShmini kara Moshe". The Baal HaTurim notes that the Gematria [numerical value of these letters] equals "haya b'yom Rosh Chodesh Nisan" [this was on the first day of the month of Nisan]. This is in fact the case. The 8th day following the "Seven Days of Consecration" (which took place at the end of the month of Adar) was indeed the first of Nisan. The Baal HaTurim then quotes a Medrash that Moshe (who served as the functioning High Priest during t he Seven Days of Consecration) remarked, "Since I refused G-d's charge to me for seven days at the Burning Bush, I merited to be the High Priest for seven days." On the face of, this Medrash begs for an explanation. Moshe's refusal to accept the mission that he was asked to undertake should count against him. Why does he think that he was rewarded for those seven days with seven days of being the Kohen Gadol? If he would have refused for two weeks, would we assume that he would have been the High Priest for two weeks? Obviously not! Rav Simcha Zissel, in his Sefer Sam Derech, gives a very nice interpretation of this Medrash. Moshe Rabbeinu refused to take the Jews out of Egypt. Why did he do that? It was a function of his humility (he did not think he was worthy of the assignment) and his sensitivity (he did not want to offend his older brother). Thus, on the one hand, Moshe's refusal to accept the assignment stemmed from positive character traits. On the other hand, we do read in Parshas Shmos [4:14]: "And Hashem was angry with Moshe and He said 'Is there not Aaron your brother the Levite? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he will come forth to meet your and when he sees you he will be glad in his heart.'" The Talmud [Zevachim 102a] wonders how Hashem's anger was manifest in this situation. Normally every time we find the expression "Vayichar Af Hashem" [the Anger of the L-rd was kindled], it is immediately followed by some type of punishment. However, punishment did not seem to be forthcoming here. Rav Shimon bar Yochai suggests that here too, we find punishment. In speaking to Moshe, G-d mentioned "Aaron your brother the Levite". Why was the description "the Levite" necessary? The Gemara answers that the original plan was that Aaron would remain a Levite the rest of his life and not become a Kohen. According to this original plan, the High Priesthood would have been entrusted to Moshe and his descendants. However, because of this "Divine Anger," the plan was changed such that Aaron and his sons became the Priests and Moshe and his family remained Levites. This, then, is what Moshe meant when he said that because he refused for seven days, he got to be a Kohen for seven days: Moshe is saying that really he should have been a Kohen for all Eternity. However, since I refused for seven days (which was inappropriate, given G-d's insistence), I was penalized and only allowed to be the Kohen for seven days and no more. Given the fact that Moshe's refusal stemmed from noble character traits, he was rewarded by the fact that at least for 7 days he was a Kohen, but since he protested too much, it was for no more than 7 days. Hashem's Justice is very precise!

Aish.Com - Rabbi Yehonasan Gefen Parshas Shemini:Who Comes First Among the list of non-kosher birds in Parshas Shemini is the interestingly named 'Chasida'. Rashi quotes the Talmud in Chullin that explains that this bird is renowned for its trait of chesed (kindness) because it shares its food with its friends.(1) The Rizhiner Rebbe asks that if this bird is endowed with such a favorable character trait, why is it considered non-kosher? (2) He answers that the Chasida only does chesed with its own kind, but does not display any kindness to other species of birds. This form of chesed is not compatible with the Torah outlook, indeed it is a 'non-kosher' form of chesed, and consequently it is listed among the non-kosher birds. The implication of the Rizhiner Rebbe's answer is that the 'kosher' form of chesed is to bestow kindness equally to all people, not just those closest to

The Guiding Light

us. However, this does not seem to actually be the case. The Talmud discusses a case in which two people find themselves stranded in a desert and one of them has a bottle of water that can provide enough water for one of them to survive until they reach civilization. There is a debate as to the correct course of action in this case; Ben Peturah says that the one in possession of the bottle should share it with his friend even though it is very likely that as a result both men will die. Rebbe Akiva argues that a person should look after his own needs before those of his friend. Consequently, the man in possession of the bottle should keep it for himself and thereby assure himself of his own survival despite the sad results this behavior will have for his friend.(3) The law follows Rebbe Akiva and applies to many aspects of our lives. For example, a person must provide for his own needs before those of others. Moreover, there is a list of priorities in the laws of charity, whereby a person must provide for those closer to him before others.(4) The Chofetz Chaim writes that these priorities do not just apply to charity, but to all forms of chesed.(5) It could seem that this concept of chayecha kodmim your life comes first -- does not seem so different from the actions of the chasida bird; both seem to embody the attitude that it is acceptable to give to one's own kind(6) at the expense of others. In truth, there are two crucial differences between "your life comes first" and the chasida. Firstly, the chasida only does chesed with its own kind to the total exclusion of all other creatures. In contrast, "your life comes first" does not preclude giving to all kinds of people, rather it simply makes a list of priorities but does not exempt us from the obligation of helping those less close to us.(7) Moreover, there is a very significant factor that limits the effect of "your life comes first" principle. The authorities write that it applies in a situation where two people have identical needs, for example they both need bread to eat. In such a case, "your life comes first" instructs us to give to the person closer to us. However, if their needs are not the same, and the more distant person is more needy then we are obligated to provide for him first because he is more lacking. For example, if the closer person has bread but lacks meat, and the other does not even have bread, then we are obligated to provide him with bread ahead of giving meat to the person closer to us.(8) There is a second, even more crucial difference between the chesed of the chasida and the Torah outlook of chesed. That is the attitude behind giving priority to those closer to us. The root of the chasida's limited chesed is the fact that it only cares about its own kind but has no concern for other species. The chasida is essentially a selfish bird whose sense of self extends to its own species but stops there. In stark contrast, we are obligated to care equally about all other Jews. Given this fact, what is the reasoning behind "your life comes first"? The answer is that this principle is based on a sense of responsibility, not selfishness. The reason that we must give to ourselves and family before others is that we have more responsibility for their well-being. Thus, a person is required to provide for the financial needs of his family before other families because he is the person most responsible for their wellbeing. The implication of this is that "your life comes first" is not a privilege whereby I am allowed to look after myself before others because I am more important than them. Rather, it is an obligation - I am dutybound to look after myself before others and neglecting this duty is no different from failing to observe any Torah requirement. We have seen that the chesed of the chasida is non-kosher according to Torah because it is based on selfishness. In contrast, "your life comes first" is based on a sense of responsibility for those closest to us. It does not in any way take away from the need to care about every Jew, and it does not preclude doing chesed for all Jews, rather it teaches us a list of priorities. It is no easy task to decide how much time and effort should be allotted towards the various groups of people in one's life, ranging from one's wife and kids, to his other family, friends, community members and strangers. Moreover, each person has a different level of responsibility in each area based on his own personal circumstances. In general one must be careful to strike a right balance: on the one hand providing enough, financial physical and emotional support to his immediate family while also fulfilling his obligations to the wider community. Many people have shown that there need not be any contradiction between providing for one's family and simultaneously helping others. Indeed doing chesed with others can be a tremendous tool in educating one's own children in traits such as generosity and empathy. If the right balance can be struck then a person can fulfill all his various responsibilities to everyone. Notes 1. Rashi, Shemini, 11:19. 2. Quoted in Artscroll Stone Chumash. The ultimate reason that certain animals are kosher and other are non-kosher, is beyond our intellectual reasoning. Nonetheless, like all mitzvos, there are reasons for the laws of kosher from which lessons can be derived. For example, carnivorous

12

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/tp/i/gl/118005589.html Like what you read? As a non-profit organization, Aish.com relies on readers like you to enable us to provide meaningful and relevant articles. Join Aish.com and help us continue to give daily inspiration to people like you around the world. Make a secure donation at: https://secure.aish.com/secure/pledge.php or mail a check to Aish.com, 408 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701 Copyright 1995 - 2011 Aish.com - http://www.aish.com

animals are generally non-kosher. In this vein, the Rizhiner Rebbe's question is valid. 3. Bava Metsia, 62a. 4. See Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah, Simun 251. 5. Ahavas Chesed, 1st Chelek, Ch.6, Sif 14. 6. Which in this context refers to family members. 7. Heard from Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita. 8. Pischei Teshuva Yoreh Deah, simun 251, sk,4. Igros Moshe - Even Haezer, Chelek 4, Simun 26, Os 4 See also the Gemara in Nedarim,80b,81a with the commentaries of Ran, Rosh and Tosefos, where the extent of chayecha kodmim is subject to a machlokes among the tannaim. J. Gewirtz

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

earth which would give HaShem the satisfaction He desired, so that He might rest His countenance among us. A young boy went to a wedding and, as boys will, stood near the bandstand. He listened to the keyboardist and followed the tune. Then he concentrated on the horn player and realized that he was playing a different song! The drummer played a different rhythm as well. What a cacophony, it sounded terrible! During a break he told the bandleader his conclusions. "You listened from up close, said the leader. Go to the back of the hall and listen." The boy did as he was told and was shocked. Now the band's music sounded heavenly. He rushed back for an explanation. "Did you have them change their tunes? he asked. "Not at all," said the maestro. "They play different tunes on purpose, and the differences create a result more beautiful than if they all played alike. But, you have to hear them as a group to grasp its beauty. A Bit of Bitachon A weekly infusion of security from Chovos HaLevavos by R Bachya ibn Pakuda, An End to the Means The one who trusts in HaShem as he works looks at his efforts as merely one way HaShem might give him success. He realizes full well that that may not be G-ds intention and that HaShem has myriad ways of sending one his parnasa. His working is merely a fulfillment of HaShems directive to toil and be productive in the world. The one who does not trust in HaShem, however, works in a particular field because he trusts in the particular avenue of parnasa that he pursues and believes that it brings him success or protects him from harm. If these mediums bring him success, he praises them and his keen insight in choosing to be involved in them. (For example: I have a knack for picking stocks, Diamonds have been very good to me, or I knew there was a market for monogrammed belt buckles.) He will not abandon these ways because he believes that his success is tied only to them. If these enterprises fail, he blames them and will refuse to work in them any longer because he thinks that they are worthless and cannot bring him success. This is unlike the Baal HaBitachon who will continue pursuing an honest living through appropriate means even if he doesnt see success from this specific effort. He can continue because he knows his success will come only from HaShem, when He decrees it. - To be continued Thought of the week: Why are trying so hard to fit in when you were born to stand out?
2011 J. Gewirtz Whats taking you so long? Subscribe to the Migdal Ohr today by E-mailing Subscribe to info@jewishspeechwriter.com.

Volume 13 Issue 26 Parshas Shmini-Parah 5771 AEwT B RDA K HRP - YNYMw P A publication dedicated to Harbotzas Torah This weeks issue sponsored in honor of HaRav Abba Zalka Gewirtz Shlita on the occasion of his birthday and on being recognized by the Telshe Yeshiva for over Forty-Two years of dedicated service. HE ISYN LARsY R TB ABYL NEL LXR TB OYRML HMYLw HAWPR TWKZL UXLDBY W ABYL RTSA TB HNX HRs HZYLE HMXWRW OEH TA WKRBYW WACYW DEWM LHA LA IRHAW HwM ABYW ...OKRBYW WDY TA IRHA AsYW (GK-BK:U ARQYW) And Aharon lifted his hands to the people and blessed them and Moshe and Aharon came into the Ohel Moed, exited, and they blessed the people. The Torah tells us that Aharon blessed the people, which the Toras Kohanim says was the three-fold Birchas Kohanim we are familiar with, which begins with Yevarechecha, wishing that G-d shower us with blessing and shine His countenance upon us. In the very next posuk, it tells us that Moshe and Aharon went into the Ohel Moed, then came out and blessed the people. We may wonder why Aharon felt the need to bless them again. What was different this time around? Rashi tells us that this time the bracha Moshe and Aharon gave the Jewish People was that HaShem should rest His presence on the work of their hands, the Mishkan and other endeavors. So what prompted Aharon to bless them a second time? The main difference between the two blessings is that the first, the typical Priestly Blessing of Birchas Kohanim, is rather passive. It asks HaShem to be gracious to us and protect us, and to show us favor. It doesnt really ask anything of us. The bracha Moshe and Aharon gave was that the work the Jews would do should be pleasing to HaShem and that He should show favor to our enterprises. Its not enough for us to sit back and be the receivers of HaShems magnanimity; instead we must actively do that which He finds pleasing and worthy of blessing. The question remains, what moved Aharon to do this? Rashi quotes a further Midrash from Toras Kohanim that Moshe and Aharon entered the Ohel Moed so that Moshe might show Aharon how to offer the ketores, the incense. The Ketores was a fabulously fragrant mixture of a number of ingredients, some which smelled quite good on their own, and others which were less pleasant. Chazal tell us that the Ketores represents Klal Yisrael, which is made up of a multitude of different personalities and abilities, and is only desirable when all are included. When Aharon saw that, he wished to convey to the Jewish People that each of them would only find true blessing by finding the gifts and value that they brought to the nation, which no one else did. They each had to use their G-d-given abilities to bring glory to HaShem, and in that way they would be deserving of having His Divine favor and presence visited upon them. This is alluded to by the fact that Moshe and Aharon together gave this blessing. Aharon as the Kohain and Moshe as the Levi, one symbolizing kindness, the other symbolizing might, together blessed the people with one bracha, showing that true blessing comes when each person contributes their own personal strengths to the whole. This week is also Parshas Parah. Chazal tell us that the Red Heifer atoned for the sin of the Golden Calf saying, Let the mother come and clean up the mess of the child. The same animal can create chaos or peace. So too, even a negative trait can be used in a positive manner, just as the foulsmelling naptha completed the sweet aroma of the Ketores. While the first time Aharon demanded nothing of the Jews, the second time, he blessed them that they find their own way of performing deeds on

Migdal Ohr

Rabbi Shmuel Goldin Shmini Adapted from one of the multiple essays on this parsha in the Unlocking the Torah Text by Rabbi Shmuel Goldin. Sanctuary Sobriety Context In the shadow of Nadav and Avihus tragic death, G-d turns to their father, Aharon, and commands: Do not drink wine or intoxicating beverage, you and your sons with you, when you come into the Tent of Meeting, and you will not die; this is an eternal decree for your generations. In order to distinguish between the sacred and the profane and between the impure and the pure, and to teach the children of Israel all of the statutes that G-d has spoken to them through Moshe. While the text seems to clearly prohibit the consumption of any alcoholic beverage during the Kohens fulfillment of his functions as priest and educator, the Talmud, after extensive debate, limits the full biblical prohibition to the ingestion of intoxicating amounts of wine. In further discussion, many halachists delineate additional, less severe penalties both for the consumption of other intoxicating beverages and for smaller amounts of wine. Finally, most scholars extend the requirement of sobriety during the teaching and application of the law to all teachers and not only to the Kohanim. Moving beyond the technical aspects of the law, numerous commentaries focus on its potential motivation. The Torahs concern, they say, centers on the debilitating effects of alcohol. An individual who is inebriated to any degree will neither be able to properly execute the Sanctuary service nor appropriately engage in halachic discussion and decision making. The Torah therefore prohibits the consumption of wine as a safeguard against possible intoxication. Questions Why are these commandments necessary? Given the intricate detail of the Sanctuary service; given the clear repeated divine warnings concerning the potential consequences of error in that

Unlocking the Torah Text

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

service; given the overwhelming specter of Nadav and Avihus death as an apparent result of ritual deviation; given the fact that proper halachic decisions clearly require ones full faculties; why would anyone assume that these functions could be performed in a state of intoxication? Why must the Torah state the obvious? To go one step further, if the Torahs fundamental concern is potential error in the Sanctuary service or in halachic deliberation, why frame the prohibition as a ban upon alcoholic beverages? Why not simply reiterate a general warning that these disciplines must be approached with awe, reverence and caution? Finally, if this law is based on the potentially debilitating effects of alcohol, why is a difference drawn in the Talmud between wine and other intoxicating beverages? Shouldnt all substances that could potentially lead to inebriation be equally prohibited? Approaches A. An astute observation made by a museum guide during one of my first trips to Israel can help us frame an answer to these questions. You can deduce, he said, common practice within a society from the legal edicts enacted by its government. Centuries from now, he continued to explain, when the ruins of this museum are excavated, archaeologists will not find signs in the rubble stating No bicycle riding. Since it is not current common practice in our day to ride bicycles through museums, legal postings prohibiting such behavior are not necessary and will not be part of the archaeological record. Excavators will, however, find No smoking signs. This discovery will lead them to correctly surmise that smoking was likely to occur in public buildings during the twentieth to twenty-first centuries and that the administrators of this museum moved to prevent such activity. B. This comment may well shed light on the Torahs concern for the sobriety of the Kohanim. G-d finds it necessary to prohibit the consumption of wine during ritual and intellectual religious activity in response to common practice of the time. The use of alcohol and other psychoactive drugs was an integral component of the religious rites of many ancient cultures. Rather than viewing inebriation and similar escapist behaviors as impediments to spiritual search, these societies considered the use of psychoactive substances an essential prerequisite of that very search. Archaeological evidence, in fact, traces the use of psychoactive drugs in every age and on every continent from prehistoric times to the present. In modern times, the term entheogen (meaning literally generating the divine within) has been coined to refer to vision-producing drugs taken to bring on a spiritual experience. The use of such substances, many have believed across the ages, enables man to loosen the shackles of his earthly existence and truly encounter the Divine. In direct opposition to this approach, normative Judaism preaches an earthly encounter with our Creator. As we have consistently seen, one of the Torahs primary messages is that G-d is to be found and experienced in this world, with our feet firmly planted on the ground. The Sforno maintains that Moshe, our greatest prophet, achieved his greatness specifically because of his ability to relate to G-d without relinquishing his physical senses. The ban on alcoholic consumption in specific settings, therefore, does not emerge solely from apprehension over alcohols potentially debilitating effects. A much more fundamental philosophical issue is reflected in this prohibition. G-ds message to His people is once again clear: I am not to be found in the mists at the summit of Sinai. I am not to be encountered in esoteric visions or out of body experiences. You are to find Me in your world through performance of My mitzvot, through the sober study, application and living of My law. C. We can now also understand, as well, the distinction made in the law between wine and other intoxicating substances. Wine, even more than other psychoactive materials, has long occupied a particular place in religious ritual. This fact is evidenced at both extremes within Jewish law. On the one hand, because of the unique status of wine in pagan culture, the Torah mandates the prohibition of yayin nesech (wine that has been used for idolatrous purposes and is, therefore, prohibited to all Jews at all times). On the other hand, wine, in moderation, finds its positive place within Jewish practice, used to mark special occasions and events. Had the Torahs only concern been for potential error on the part of the Kohanim, all intoxicating beverages would have been treated equally. By singling wine out for special attention, however, the Torah communicates that there is more to this prohibition than meets the eye. Wine used properly and in moderation, the Torah teaches, like all of G-ds physical creations, enhances our appreciation of the Divine. When used to escape reality, however, all psychoactive substances undermine our spiritual search, which is predicated on creating a union in our lives between heaven and earth. Rabbi Simcha Groffman

13

Parashas Shemini Wondrous Blessings Forever "Abba, we have now finished the Tehillim section of Pisukei Di'zimra. What follows next in our morning tefillos (prayers)?" "Avi, the next prayer is a selection of four verses from Tehillim which all begin with the word 'boruch'. They are the final verses of the various Sifrei Tehillim, and form a type of closing blessing upon the Tehillim of Pisukei Di'zimra." (Etz Yosef) "What are they blessing Abba?" "The Siddur Iyun HaTefillah presents an inspiring and fascinating explanation of this short prayer. The foundation of praising Hashem is expressing gratitude for His good and wondrous deeds. He is kind to us at all times, and under all circumstances. We express this when we say, 'Blessed is Hashem forever, Amen and Amen.' Even now, in the midst of this deep and dark golus (exile) we thank Him. 'Blessed is Hashem from Zion, who dwells in Yerushalayim, Halleluka.' The Almighty's praise will continue in the times of the final redemption. 'Blessed is Hashem, G-d, the G-d of Yisrael...' The name Hashem refers to His trait of mercy, whereas the name G-d refers to His trait of strict judgment. He is to be extolled for both of these, as He applies the both for our good. '...Who alone performs wonders.' Only He can carry out he awesome acts of kindness for His chosen nation, and only He knows of them." "What does that mean, Abba?" "I will give you an example from the Gemora (Nidda 31a), Avi. Two men once set out on a business trip. One of them was injured by a thorn, and was not able to continue. He began cursing his bad fortune. After a short time, he received word that the ship he was supposed to board sank in the sea. He raised his voice in thanks and praise. Rebbe Elozer applied the verse, '...Who alone performs wonders.' Even the one who has been miraculously saved, does not realize that it was a miracle. Rashi adds that only Hashem knows of the miracle." "How inspiring!" "Indeed, Avi. The prayer finishes with the verse, 'Blessed is His glorious Name forever, and may all the earth be filled with His glory, Amen and Amen.' This refers to the days of Moshiach, when the Almighty will reveal Himself to all. The entire world will receive the knowledge to understand His wonders. The Radak adds that 'The earth will be filled with the knowledge of Hashem as the waters cover the sea bed' (Yishaya 11:9)." "Speedily in our days, Abba." "Amen!" Kinderlach . . . These four verses of blessing hint to the essence of the Pisukei DiZimra. Proper praise to Hashem is the recognition of His hashgacha (Divine supervision), and His wonderful acts of kindness. He is the source of all blessing now, and in the future; both in good times and in trying situations. Many of His miracles go unrecognized by anyone but Himself. He is faithful and will reveal His Greatness to the entire world. May it come speedily and in our days! Soul Building "It was on the eight day . . ." (Vayikra 9:1). This was the eighth day after the seven days of miluim (inauguration) of the Mishkan (Tabernacle). For each of the first seven days, Moshe Rabbeinu single-handedly erected the Mishkan, offered the korbonos (sacrifices), and took down the Mishkan. Still the Shechina did not come down. Finally, on the eight day, Aharon HaKohen offered the korbonos and the Shechina came to rest upon the Mishkan. Then Moshe and Aharon blessed the people. "May the pleasantness of Hashem our G-d be upon us; and may the work of our hands be fixed upon us; and may He make the work of our hands permanent" (Tehillim 90:17). The Malbim explains that Hashem (so to speak) has pleasure when His creations fulfill their intended purpose. We were created to perform His mitzvos properly. When we do that, He takes pleasure in us. He continues to explain that when a person builds a house, it may be beautiful, strong, and comfortable, but it is not a part of the person. It is outside of him. The blessing states that our handiwork should become a part of us. When a person does a mitzvah, it becomes fixed in his soul. It becomes a part of his character and is with him forever. Lastly, we are blessed that Hashem should make all of our handiwork a permanent part of us. All of our deeds should be good in His eyes; therefore, He will fix them within our souls. Kinderlach . . . People build all sorts of things. Some have hobbies building model cars, boats or planes. Some people build buildings. Some exercise to build up their bodies. The blessing of Moshe and Aharon tells us to build up our souls by doing mitzvos properly. Soul building is important for two reasons. Number one, it lasts forever. Longer than the biggest, tallest, strongest building. More importantly, it gives Hashem pleasure. That is the greatest thing that we can do.
Kinder Torah Copyright 2011 All rights reserved to the author Simcha Groffman NEW!!! NEW!!! NEW!!! NEW!!! "SIMCHA'S TORAH STORIES" A Children's book by Simcha Groffman To order your copy, contact the author SIMCHA_B@NETVISION.NET.IL Kinder Torah is now available in .PDF format write simcha_b@netvision.net.il for details Kinder Torah is now available in Hebrew write simcha_b@netvision.net.il for details 4400 copies of Kinder Torah are distributed each week in Arzei Habira, Ashdod, Avnei Cheifetz, Bayit Vegan, Beit E-l, Beit Shemesh, Beit Yisrael, Betar, Bnei Brak, Detroit, Edmonton, Ezras Torah, Gateshead, Geula, Gilo, Givat Shaul, Givat Zev, Har Nof, Haifa, Hayishuv Einav, Katamon, Kiryat Sefer, the Kosel HaMaaravi, Los Angeles, Maale Adumim, Maalot Dafna, Manchester, Mattersdorf, Mattisyahu, Mea Shearim, Miami Beach, Monsey, Netanya, Neve Yaakov, Passaic, Philadelphia, Pisgat Zev, Queens, Ramat Gan, Ramat Sharet, Ramat Shlomo, Ramot, Rannana, Rechasim, Romema, Rechovot, San Simone, Sanhedria HaMurchevet, Shaare Chesed, Shevi Shomron, Telz Stone, Toronto, Unsdorf , Zichron Yaakov, and on the Internet

Kinder Torah

14
Rabbi Avraham Kahn

at www.shemayisrael.co.il/kindertorah/index.htm. To support Kinder Torah, please contact the author at P. O. Box 5338 Jerusalem, Israel 91052 Tel 972-2-585-2216, Fax 972-2-585-6872 E-mail: simcha_b@netvision.net.il Partial sponsorships are also available. This article is provided as part of Shema Yisrael Torah Network Permission is granted to redistribute electronically or on paper, provided that this notice is included intact. For information on subscriptions, archives, and other Shema Yisrael Classes, send mail to parsha@shemayisrael.co.il Shema Yisrael Torah Network http://www.shemayisrael.com Jerusalem, Israel 732-370-3344

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

the Rambam and in Shulchan Aruch. The Rambam (Laws of Sanhedrin 20:8) writes that if a judge has a case brought in front of him and just compares it to a precedent without consulting other authorities available to him, such a judge belongs to the category mentioned in the above Mishnah, and he is a wicked, arrogant fool (see also Talmud Yevamot 109b). Seek Others Opinions The Talmud (Sanhedrin 7b) relates how the great rabbis of the Talmud would seek the opinion of others even if they were of less stature than themselves. For example, Rav Ashi would gather all the experts in town where he lived when there was a question whether an animal was kosher after it had been slaughtered. Do Not Judge Alone The Talmud (Sanhedrin 5a) permits an outstanding scholar to render judgment by himself even in monetary disputes (see also Rambam Laws of Sanhedrin 2:10-11 and Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 2:2-3). Nevertheless the Mishnah (Pirkei Avos 4:10) advises against it and says, Do not judge alone for none judges alone except One [G-d]. Even the most experienced and knowledgeable judge may overlook something when a case is brought in front of him. The Mishnah continues, And do not say, Accept my opinion, for they [the majority], and not you, have the authority. Rabbeinu Yonah explains that although this outstanding scholar could have rendered a judgment on his own, now that he sits with others, the opinion of the majority prevails. For although the other judges have less experience, nevertheless they may have an idea or point that the outstanding scholar did not consider. G-d Himself taught this lesson at the time of Creation. It says (Bereishis 1:26): And G-d said, Let us make man. Rashi quotes the Midrash that asks who was G-d talking to? The Midrash answers that G-d was talking to the angels who had already been created on the second day of Creation. Although the angels were not participating in the creation of man, G-d wanted to teach mankind this lesson, how the greater one should always consult with the ones of lesser stature even if he does not really need their assistance. How much more so when they may have what to contribute. Sanhedrin Students In the time when the Jewish people had the institution of Sanhedrin, every major town would have a small Sanhedrin of 23 members. In the Temple there were three courts, each one with a higher authority than the other. The first two with 23 members each and the Great Sanhedrin above them with 71 members (see Sanhedrin 88b and Rambam Laws of Sanhedrin 1:3). The set up of the Sanhedrin with 23 members would include three rows of students who would listen in on the cases sitting opposite the judges. In this way, the students had a hands-on experience of how to judge, and eventually if one of the judges passed away a new judge would be picked amongst the students. When a single rabbi ruled on other halachic issues his students would often sit with him as well. The Talmud (Avodah Zorah 31a) teaches that if one of the students thinks that the rabbi made a mistake he is obligated to respectfully make him aware of his opinion. However, a student may not hand down a ruling on his own if he has not yet been ordained. Mentor The Talmud (Avodah Zorah 19b) further teaches that just like it is prohibited for a student to render a halachic ruling so may an ordained rabbi not refrain from taking responsibility and rule unless there is someone else available to take on the case. Even when the student is ordained, the Talmud teaches that he may not render halachic rulings in the vicinity of the residence of his mentor unless his mentor has given him the authority to do so. Nadav and Avihu In this weeks Parasha (Vayikra 10:1-2) the Torah relates how Nadav and Avihu were killed by Heavenly fire when they brought unauthorized offerings into the Sanctuary. Our sages discuss how Nadav and Avihu made several mistakes. Rashi quotes from the Talmud (Eruvin 63a) that they ruled on their own instead of asking Moshe. This teaches us the severity of a scholar who renders a halachic ruling when his mentor is in the vicinity. The Torah here teaches us the importance of honouring our elders and respecting their authority. Remove Uncertainty Even the layman has a lesson to learn from this Mishnah. For the teaching of this Mishnah includes that no one may render his own rulings on halachic issues unless he is well versed in the subject. Earlier in Pirkei Avos (1:16) it says: Accept a rabbi upon yourself and remove yourself from uncertainty. Our sages here teach us how laymen with only mediocre knowledge of Halacha may not take the law into their own hands and make their own rulings. Everyone must have a halachic competent rabbi to consult. Often people do things because everyone else does the same. The problem is that everyone else does it for the same reason. When one investigates one may realize that there is no basis for the conduct. Many people do not even know that there is a question to be asked. It is the obligation of every individual to at least make themselves familiar with the minimal knowledge so that they know when to ask questions and seek guidance. This primarily applies when there are direct halachic issues, but it is also important in other day to day occurrences. Ensure Continuity

Parashas Shemini: Better A Fool Than An Arrogant Wise Man Summary Do not be happy to make halachic rulings. The Torah scholar who is overly confident and eager to make halachic rulings is a fool, wicked, and arrogant. Judges who have to decide a case brought in front of them have to spend time in their deliberations before rendering a decision. When you see a man who is wise in his own eyes, there is more hope for the fool than for him. The judge must be extra cautious when he is dealing with property rights. There are still many instances where new decisions have to be made based on the earlier sources. The great rabbis of the Talmud would seek the opinion of others even if they were of less stature than themselves. Do not judge alone for none judges alone except One [G-d]. The set up of the Sanhedrin with 23 members would include three rows of students who would listen in on the cases sitting opposite the judges. An ordained student may not render halachic rulings in the vicinity of the residence of his mentor unless his mentor has given him the authority to do so. Nadav and Avihu were killed by Heavenly fire when they brought unauthorized offerings into the Sanctuary. Accept a rabbi upon yourself and remove yourself from uncertainty. Everyone must join classes and study groups to get a basic knowledge of Halacha and find themselves a competent rabbi to consult. Not Happy To Make Rulings In this weeks Torah Attitude we will go back to the order of things needed to acquire Torah. The next thing enumerated in the Mishnah is: Do not be happy to make halachic rulings. This requirement obviously addresses the knowledgeable Torah scholar, but also has a message for the Torah student and the layman. Fool, Wicked And Arrogant Earlier in Pirkei Avos (4:9), the Mishnah has some very harsh words in regards to the Torah scholar who is overly confident and eager to make halachic rulings. As it says: And the one who is eager to rule is a fool, wicked, and arrogant. The Rambam, in his commentary on this Mishnah, states that such a person is obviously acting without fear of G-d. For a G-d fearing person will always be hesitant to hand down halachic rulings in case he makes a mistake. Rabbeinu Yonah, in his commentary, adds that such a person is foolish for since he considers himself a very smart person, he is likely to stick to his own opinion and will not listen to what other scholars have to say. His lack of fear of G-d, says Rabbeinu Yonah, turns him into an overly confident, wicked person. And in his arrogance he wants to show his ability to make rulings, thus hoping that people will appoint him as their judge. Cautious In Judgment Right at the beginning of Pirkei Avos (1:1) the Mishnah teaches us the Torah approach to making halachic rulings, as it says: Be cautious in judgment. The Rambam explains that this means that the judges who have to decide a case brought in front of them have to spend time in their deliberations before rendering a decision. Rabbeinu Yonah adds that it is very common when a judge hears a case that he will have an immediate impression. The Mishnah here warns that the judges should not rely on their first impression but must investigate the case and the appropriate sources to reach the right decision. Fool Better Than Wise Man Rabbeinu Yonah quotes what it says in Mishlei (26:12): When you see a man who is wise in his own eyes, there is more hope for the fool than for him. For the fool, says Rabbeinu Yonah, there is hope that he will make the right decisions in life. For since he knows that he is not so smart, he will listen to others. But there is no such hope for the person who thinks that he is smarter than anyone else. Extra Cautious For Property Rights Rabbeinu Yonah further explains that this Mishnah specifically speaks about judgment in regards to disputes between two litigants rather than regular halachic rulings. For when it comes to handing down a judgment, the judge must be extra cautious since he is dealing with property rights. This also explains why the Talmud (Sanhedrin 2a) teaches that such cases in general should be ruled by a Beth Din (a court of three halachic judges). In questions of kashruth or other halachic rulings that do not include two parties, a single rabbi is sufficient to make the ruling provided that he is knowledgeable with the subject matter. Nevertheless, even in those cases the Mishnahs teaching of being cautious in judgment applies. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 7b) makes a general rule and states: If the case is clear to you then hand down your ruling, and if not then refrain. New Decisions Nowadays we have the Shulchan Aruch and a rich halachic literature including thousands of responsae from the great halachic authorities throughout the generations. However, there are still many instances where new decisions have to be made based on the earlier sources. The Talmud has many rules and pieces of advice how the Torah scholar should conduct himself when he has to make a halachic ruling. These rules are codified by

Torah Attitude

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

Everyone must join classes and study groups to get a basic knowledge of Halacha and find themselves a competent rabbi to consult. This is the proper way to acquire Torah and to follow its pleasant path. And when we transmit this approach to our children we ensure the continuity of Judaism for future generations.
These words were based on a talk given by Rabbi Avraham Kahn, the Rosh Yeshiva and Founder of Yeshivas Keser Torah in Toronto. Shalom. Michael Deverett P.S. If you have any questions or enjoyed reading this e-mail, we would appreciate hearing from you. If you know of others who may be interested in receiving e-mails similar to this please let us know at Michael@deverettlaw.com .

Rabbi Yosef Kalatzky

Beyond Pshat

1. The Qualifying Factor The Torah states, It was on the eighth day, Moshe summoned Aaron and his sons It was on the eighth day that Aaron and his sons began to officiate in the Mishkan. The Midrash states, During the seven day period that Moshe was at the burning bush G-d had said to him, I want you to go (to Egypt) and fulfill My agency (to redeem My children). Moshe responded, You should send the one who is qualified. You should send Aaron my brother who is more qualified than I am. This dialogue repeated itself on the first day, the second day, etc. G-d said to Moshe, Every day I tell you to go and every day you answer Me that I should send your brother, who is more qualified. I swear on your life that tomorrow you will be repaid for your obstinacy. When the Mishkan will be completed, initially you will believe that you will be the High Priest. However, on the eighth day I will surprise you by informing you that Aaron is the one who will officiate as the High Priest. You will then summon Aaron and his sons. Thus, the verse states, Moshe summoned Aaron and his sons The Midrash continues, There is a calling for greatness. Moshe said to Aaron, G-d said to me that I should install you as the High Priest. Aaron responded, You have toiled for the building of the Mishkan, and I should be made the High Priest? If Moshe had told Aaron in the Name of G-d that he was chosen to be the High Priest, how could Aaron question the appointment? Aaron understood that Moshe had toiled and sacrificed for the building of the Mishkan. Moshe had inculcated into the Mishkan everything that was needed to give it the capacity to accommodate all the spiritual needs of the Jewish people. Chazal refer to the Mishkan as the Mishkan of Moshe because of his degree of involvement and sacrifice for its sake. Certainly, Aaron was not questioning Moshes word as being the word of G-d regarding his appointment as High Priest, but rather, he needed to clarify for himself why did G-d choose him to be the qualified High Priest and not Moshe, who had given the Mishkan its spiritual potential and function. The Midrash continues, Moshe said to Aaron, I swear by your life! That although you have been appointed to be the High Priest I regard it as if it were me. Just as you rejoiced when I was chosen to be the Redeemer (despite the fact that Moshe was the younger brother), so too do I rejoice in your advancement. As the Torah states, G-d said to Moshe, When Aaron will be informed of your elevation, he will come out to greet you in the desert and he will see you and have joy in his heart. Although Aaron was a prophet and G-ds agent to communicate His Will to the Jewish people in Egypt, when Moshe was chosen to be the Redeemer, Aaron did not feel slighted to any degree. To the contrary, he felt joy in his heart that Moshe, his younger brother was chosen. It was only because Aarons heart was pure that he had the ability to rejoice. He understood and internalized to the core of his being that whatever G-d chooses to do is absolute in its essence and there is no other consideration. If He chose Moshe to be the redeemer it was certain to Aaron that the redemption could only come about through Moshes leadership. Aaron was only able to internalize the communication of Moshe being the Redeemer because of his exceptional level of humility. Therefore, when Moshe was informed that Aaron will be the High Priest and not himself, Moshe rejoiced in a similar manner. The purity of Aaron his brother was confirmed through his own rejoicing. Moshe therefore felt that Aarons position as High Priest was no less than he himself being the officiant. One cannot have had a more qualified agent that Aaron, his brother. The humility and purity of Aaron was also demonstrated through the mitzvah of the lighting of the Menorah. When Aaron was told by G-d that the lighting of the Menorah was unique to him, the Torah tells us Aaron did as he was told. Rashi cites the Midrash that explains that Aaron did exactly as he was told without any change. Despite the fact that Aarons participation in the lighting of the Menorah established him as unique and special, he was not affected to any degree because of his level of humility. It was because he fully appreciated his responsibility to G-d to actualize his potential as High Priest. The Torah tells us that after Yehoshua Bin Nun was chosen to be Moshes successor as leader of the Jewish people, they both addressed the people as joint leaders. Within this context of leadership, the Torah refers to Yehoshua as Hoshea, which was his original name prior to the incident of the spies. Rashi in his commentary sites Sifri which states, Although he

(Yehoshua) was given a position of esteem and greatness he humbled himself to the point of his original unknown status when he was referred to as Hoshea. 2. Atonement, Transcending the Animal The Torah tells us that after Aaron was installed as the High Priest, he needed to bring a calf as a sin offering to atone for his participation in the Golden Calf. Aaron in addition, brought a goat as a sin offering on behalf of the Jewish people to atone for their participation in idolatry. The Torah states, Aaron came near to the Altar, and slaughtered the sin offering Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh writes, The Jerusalem Talmud states that they had consulted with Prophecy (Nevuah), What should be the fate of the sinner? Prophecy responded, The life of the sinner should be taken. However the Torah tells us, If one were to sin, He should repent and bring a sacrifice to be atoned. This is based on the Attribute of Mercy. The process of atonement of the sacrifice is based upon the mindset of the one who brings the sacrifice. Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh continues, In truth, the individual who sins deserves to be slaughtered and burned upon the Altar as the animal. When one understands and appreciates the severity of transgression and that the only reason he is spared is due to the Mercy of G-d, then the sacrifice can atone on his behalf. When the Torah states, Aaron came near to the Altar it means that he fully internalized that he had relevance to the Altar within the context of himself deserving to be slaughtered and sacrificed. However, he slaughtered the calf in his place because of the Mercy of G-d. Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh continues, The Midrash states, G-d had taken an oath that the world should function within the context of Justice. The Gemara in Tractate Bava Kama tells us that if one were to say that G-d overlooks and does not evaluate and judge every aspect of ones behavior, he deserves that his life should be compromised. If this is so, then how is the bringing of a sacrifice in stead of the sinner in conformance with this principle? Based on the Attribute of Justice, the individual who had sinned should be put to death. Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh explains, In fact, if ones life were to be taken after he had repented, it would be considered a miscarriage of justice. When one sins, it is not within the context of rational behavior for a Jew. The sinner assumes the persona of an (intellectual) animal. As the Zohar states, A person does not sin unless he is overtaken by a spirit of irrationality (ruach shtus). Therefore, when one sins, he is not sinning as a person whose classified as a human being (Adam) but rather as an animal who is not endowed with discretion. After one introspects and appreciates the wrong that he had done, and begins the process of repentance, he regains the status of a human being (Adam). Therefore, it would be unconscionable to take the life of a human being for an act that was perpetrated by an animal. Therefore, justice dictates that the animal must be sacrificed in the stead of the sinner in conjunction with the sinner recognizing the wrong that he had done. This is the understanding of the verse in Psalms, Man together with the animal, G-d will assist Meaning, if one employs his intellect to repent and appreciates the degree of travesty that in fact he deserves to be slaughtered and sacrificed together with the offering, he will achieve full atonement. The Gemara in Tractate Zevachim tells us that a sacrifice that is brought for atonement must be predicated by repentance. As it states, The sacrifice of the evil is an abomination (to G-d). The reason for this is that if the person does not repent prior to bringing the sacrifice, the transition from animal to rational being has not yet taken place. Therefore, the animal is not qualified to atone. According to Jewish Law, the animal that qualifies for a sin offering is the animal that is consecrated for that specific purpose. If the animal should give birth after it was consecrated to a calf, the offspring does not qualify to be brought as a sin offering although its status is a derivative of the initial consecration. Why should the offspring not be qualified for the offering if in fact it has the sanctity of a sin offering? The power of speech emanates from the spirit that is contained within the human being (Ruach). The power of speech quantifies the human being as being above the classification of animal. It is only when that characteristic is employed for the sake of consecration, can the animal be the equivalent of the sin offering to be slaughtered and sacrificed. Adam, the first human being was classified as the human species when he was endowed with the power of speech that emanated from his spirit Ruach. Similarly, Rambam explains in the Laws of Repentance, For one to be atoned one must verbalize his confession. Only through the articulation of the sin does one assume the classification of Adam which transcends the animal and thus can be atoned. 3. Sensing the Pain of the Torah Sage The Torah states after Nadav and Avihu, the sons of Aaron were struck down by G-d, Moshe said to Aaronyour brethren the entire House of Israel shall bewail the conflagration that Hashem ignited. Rashi cites Chazal, From here we learn that the pain of the Torah Sage is incumbent upon all to experience. Sifsei Chochomim explains Rashi to mean that it is not that everyone must mourn the loss of the one who passed away, but rather, one must feel the pain of the Torah Sage who is grieving. Why is this something that the Torah demands?

15

16

The Gemara in Tractate Berachos tells us that when Moshe was told that G-d had decreed that the Jewish people should be destroyed because of the sin of the Golden Calf, He supplicated G-d to annul the decree to the point that he became ill from the intensity of his prayer. This is alluded to in the verse, Moshe pleaded (vayichal) before Hashem. The word vayichal alludes to the fact that Moshe became choleh (ill). The Gemara tells us that if a Torah Sage is ill one has the obligation to pray for his recovery. Just as Moshe prayed to G-d for the annulment of the decree to the point of becoming ill, so too must one pray for the recovery of the Torah Sage. One is obligated to internalize the tragic state of the Torah Sage who is not well. It is only in the merit of the Torah Sages that the Jewish people continue to exist. Jeremiah the Prophet states, If not for My Covenant being in affect day and night, the extent of heaven and earth would not exist. This is referring to the continuous obligation of Torah study. If Torah were not to be studied, even for a moment, existence would cease to be. When the Torah Sage is compromised with an illness, his recovery is crucial to existence because the world stands in his merit. Therefore, one must internalize the pain and grief of the Torah Sage as his own to understand and appreciate the gravity of the moment. The Jewish people needed to grieve with Aaron and his sons to feel their pain in order to appreciate their value as it pertains to existence. Chofetz Chaim explains the infinite value of Torah Scholars with an allegory. There was a king who had a steamboat built for himself that was the equivalent of a palace. He prided himself in the beauty and elegance of the steamboat that moved so easily over the water. One day the king asked the captain if he could show him how it was powered. The captain brought the king to the lower part of the boat where he saw how coal was being shoveled into the furnaces that caused the steam that powered the turbines. The walls of the lower deck were completely covered in the black soot of the coal and the men who worked to fuel the furnaces were similarly encrusted in grime. When the king saw the degree of filth that was in his palace, he became outraged. How could he allow such squalor to exist within his palace? He thus ordered the captain to break down the walls of the engine room to remove the filth from the walls. Although the captain understood that by doing so the ship would sink, he had no choice but to follow the command of his master. The ship immediately sunk because the king did not understand the value of that aspect and function of the ship. Similarly, if one walks into a study hall or synagogue and notices people engaged in Torah study who may appear to be undernourished or impoverished and are not attractive physical beings because of their needy state, one should not look upon them in a condescending manner. It is these people who are the most vital to existence because their Torah study maintains existence. One must appreciate their true value and look beyond superficial appearances. If the Torah Sage is pained or is in need, one must sense that pain to either alleviate or to indicate that this individual is of great value and importance. 4. Dietary Laws, a Confirmation of the Eternity of the Jewish People The Torah states, "Hashem spoke to Moshe and Aaron, saying to them: Speak to the Children of Israel saying: These are the creatures that you may eat from among the animals that are upon the earth." The Midrash cites a verse from Chavakuk, G-d had stood and measured/evaluated the Earth. He saw and released the nations. What is the meaning of G-d measured the Earth? When G-d wanted to give the Torah to the Jewish people, He evaluated the Earth (existence) and decided to give it in the desert in a public setting. Initially, when the nations of the world rejected the Torah, G-d was going to cause the world to revert back to a state of water (pre-existence). However, when the Jewish people accepted the Torah unequivocally with their declaration of Naaseh Vnishma we will do and we will listen existence continued. It was only when the Jewish people accepted the Torah that the world became tranquil. As it states in Psalms, The Earth was fearful and tranquil. When the Jewish people accepted the Torah, the nations of the world received their release. They were permitted to eat the forbidden contaminated species such as rodents. To what is this analogous? To a doctor who evaluated two patients. One was deathly ill with no chance of recovery. The doctor told his relatives that he should not be denied anything that he wants to eat. Afterwards, the doctor evaluated the second patient and believed that he would recover. He then instructed the family that he was only permitted to eat certain foods; however, other foods must be withheld from him so that he should be able to recover. After hearing the doctors prescription to each of the patients, the doctor was asked, Why do you differentiate between the two patients regarding what they are permitted to eat? The doctor responded, Regarding the patient who is deathly ill, since he will die in any case, there is no reason to deny him anything that he desires. However, the patient, who has relevance to life, must adhere to a strict dietary regiment if he is to live. Similarly, G-d permitted to the nations of the world to eat anything that they desired. However, since the Jewish people have relevance to eternality, they need to maintain their spiritual purity and sanctity. Therefore, G-d forbade them from eating the species that would contaminate them. As it states, You who cling to Hashem, your G-d, you are all alive today. Initially G-d had offered the Torah to the nations of the world. Each nation rejected it for their own reason. However, when the Jewish people chose to

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

accept the Torah they did so unequivocally with their declaration of Naaseh Vnishma. Had the Jewish people not done so, the world would have reverted back to a state of pre-existence. Because of their acceptance of the Torah, the world assumed a state of permanency. G-d chose to give the Torah to the Jewish people in a public setting which was Mt. Sinai. Why did G-d choose to give the Torah in the desert, which is a location that is the ultimate setting of desolation? The Gemara in Tractate Nedarim explains that the reason G-d chose to give the Torah to the Jewish people in the desert was because it is a location that is ownerless and barren. Just as the desert has no innate value, so too must the one who wants to acquire Torah render himself ownerless like the desert (humble). It is only through ones self-negation does one become a proper receptacle for the processing and retention of Torah. It seems from the Midrash that G-d chose to give the Torah in the desert because He wanted to give It in a public setting that had no distractions. Because if there were any distractions at the moment of the giving of the Torah, one would not be able to appreciate the profundity of the event. G-d wanted the Torah to be given in the most pubic setting because He wanted the nations of the world to understand that the world only exists in the merit of the Jewish people. It was only because the Jewish people embraced the Torah, unequivocally, that existence has any value. The nations of the world needed to appreciate and understand that they owe their very existence to the Jewish people, who dedicated themselves to Gd. Chazal tell us that there was a negative aspect to receiving the Torah in a public setting. The Midrash tells us that the reason the Jewish people were vulnerable to the Sin of the Golden Calf was because the nations of the world had given them an evil eye, which was rooted in envy. Had they received the Torah in a more private setting, they would not been minimized by the envy of the nations. Although the Jewish people were put in a compromised position, as a result of the public setting, G-d chose to give the Torah before the eyes of the world, so that they could understand that their existence is only due to the Jewish people receiving the Torah at Sinai. 5. The Invaluable Gift of Mitzvos The Torah states, "These are the creatures that you may eat from among the animals that are upon the earth." The Midrash cites a verse in Psalms, To fulfill Your Will My G-d I do desire and Your Torah is in my innards What is the meaning of this? The Torah permeates every aspect of our existence. How fortunate are the Jewish people because each one of their limbs has relevance to a mitzvah. There are 248 limbs in the human body and G-d has given the Jewish people 248 Positive Commandments (to correspond to them). And therefore we say every day (asher yatzar) Blessed are You, Hashem, our G-d King of the Universe, Who fashioned man with wisdom and created within him many openings and cavities (chalulim chalulim) The numerical equivalent of chalulim chalulim is 248, which corresponds to the number of limbs in the human body. This is the meaning of the words of King David in Psalms, Your Torah is in my innards Reb Chaim Vital explains that just as the human body is comprised of 248 limbs, the Jewish soul is comprised of 248 parts. There is a correlation between the soul and the body. When one fulfills any of the 248 Positive Commandments it perfects the corresponding aspect of the soul. In addition, the physical limb that corresponds to that mitzvah is also spiritualized and elevated. Just as the mitzvos nurture the soul, so too is the body spiritualized. As the Gemara in Tractate Berachos states, Just as G-d permeates all existence, so too does the soul permeate ever aspect of the body. The soul was created to give life and meaning to every aspect of the human being. Chazal tell us that contained within the three paragraphs of the Shema, which is the acceptance of the yoke of heaven/dominion of G-d, are 245 words. If one prays within the context of a quorum, the one leading the service concludes the Shema with three words which complete the number 248 (Hashem Elokechem Emes). If one prays privately, one introduces the Shema with three words (Kail Melech Neeman) in order to bring the number of words in the Shema to 248. When one declares his belief in Gd, he is accepting the yoke of heaven upon every aspect of his physical being. The human being, regarding his make up and inclination, is the equivalent of an animal, apart from his intellect. All of Mans tendencies and drives are rooted within the animal. Man was endowed with intellect in order for him to take control of his physicality and spiritualize it through the performance of the mitzvos. It is only through the study of Torah and performance of mitzvos that man can subordinate his physical inclinations and invest them in spiritual endeavors. The Gemara in Tractate Shabbos states, If the earlier ones are classified as angels, then we can be classified as human beings. However, if the earlier ones are classified as human beings then our classification will be donkeys and not even the equivalent of the donkey of Reb Pinchas Ben Yair. The Gemara tells us that the donkey of Reb Pinchas had been stolen and the thieves who had stolen it had attempted to feed it untithed grain. The donkey refused to eat it because it was a forbidden entity. Although the donkey is an unintelligible creature, because it was the possession of Reb Pinchas Ben Yair, who was a uniquely devout and holy person, the donkey assumed a

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

spiritualized state. Thus, instinctively it would not partake of anything that was contrary to the Torah. Man, in terms of his physical make up, is no different from the donkey. Maharal explains that the Hebrew word chamor donkey is derived from the word chomer material. Just as the essence of the donkey is material, and thus epitomizes the animal, man in his physical make up is no different. The only way one can dominate and dictate the physical is to assume a spiritual persona. In order to facilitate this, G-d endowed the Jewish people with Torah and mitzvos that correspond to every aspect of their physicality to bring about this spiritual metamorphosis. When one transgresses with a certain part of his body, it becomes compromised. Conversely, when one performs a mitzvah with that part of the body, it becomes spiritualized and thus elevated. Therefore, if one were to steal with his hand, besides the need to correct the sin that had been perpetrated, one should perform acts of kindness in order to spiritualize the limb that had been diminished. If one were to gaze upon something that is inappropriate, he should gaze upon the words of the Torah in order to spiritualize his eyes. This concept is mentioned in The Gates of Repentance, authored by Rebbeinu Yonah. The Gemara in Tractate Sukkah states, I (G-d) created the evil inclination. I created Torah as its antidote. When one engages in Torah study and actualizes it through the performance of mitzvos, one incapacitates and subordinates the evil inclination and brings about a spiritualization of himself. Rabbi Mordechai Kamenetzky

conveyed that I shouldn't have. I waited to be dismissed. I couldn't leave without being dismissed. I stood there waiting to be told, "Gei gezunteheit." Finally my father asked, "Did you beat him?" "Twice," I answered. And then my father said, "Gei gezunteheit." A la Twerski story, my own mother, Rebbitzen Tzirel Kamenetzky (nee Spiegel) is also fond of telling the story of her own brothers, each now a Chassidic Rebbe in their own right, who as kids were listening to a Yankee game on a hidden transistor, probably during time that they should have been learning. My grandfather Rav Pinchus Eliyahu Spiegel, the Ostrover Kalushiner rebbe, chided them as well. But as they turned to leave, he called them back with a twinkle, "Nu? Huben zai khotch gevunen? (Nu, did they at least win?) The Message The Talmud tells us an amazing axiom about giving mussar. There must be a combination of firm admonition on the left hand, but caring and compassion on the other hand, or, as the Talmud puts it, "One must push away with the left hand while drawing closer with the right hand" (Sanhedrin 107b). Perhaps the Torah divides the words, (darosh darash) into two parts, one one the right side of the Torah, and the other on the left to hint to us that there is a right side dorosh and a left side darash. Indeed, the Torah tells us on the left side of the Torah, that Moshe dorash and became upset. Maybe it is a veiled allusion to the left handed mussar that must be a bit firmer. While the right dorash is detached from it as a separate entity to draw the children close.

17

Parsha Parables
Shmini 5770: Split Decision I have always been fascinated by a Gemara in Tractate Kidushin 30a. that mentions two words in this week's portion. The two words are next to each other, but in a way, they are worlds apart. "The early [scholars] were called sofrim (counters) because they used to count all the letters of the Torah. Thus, they said, the vav in (the word) gachon in this week's Parshas Shemini marks half the letters of the Torah; (indeed the word contains a large Vav, perhaps as a demarcation symbol of its significance). But I'd like to focus on the next line: "The words darosh darash, represent the halfway mark of the words of the Torah." According to the Gemara, this week we reach the halfway mark of the entire Torah in this week's parsha, (Can you imagine already a half of a year has gone by since Parshas Breishis?), and the divide are two words, spelled exactly the same way with three letters, Dalet Reish Shin. One Dorosh is on the right side of the Torah and the other Dorash though right next to it on the page, is on the left side of the Torah. What fascinates me is that the Divine architecture of the Torah has two words, spelled exactly the same way each on different sides of the Torah. One is on the left; one is on the right. I pondered this fact for a while and analyzed it in the context of the Dorosh, Dorash story as I wondered why Hashem would have wanted to split the Torah right there on that spot. It must be teaching us something. What is the message? What can be the meaning? The basic context of the story is that in this week's portion, the Mishkan is dedicated. It was festive day, with sacrifices being brought and praise for the Almighty, that is, until tragedy struck. Two of Aharon's children, Nadav and Avihu, brought a strange offering which He had not commanded them. "And there came forth fire from before the Lord, and devoured them, and they died before Hashem." The tragedy rendered Aharon the Kohen Gadol and his sons mourners which invalidated some of them from certain service in the newly dedicated Mishkan. The Torah tells us that Moshe diligently enquired (darosh darash) after the goat of the sin-offering, and behold, it had been burnt and not eaten as he felt the case should have been. Thus he became upset with Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron's surviving sons. I won't go into the intricacies of Moshe's objection, to which his brother actually rejoined leading to Moshe's admission of error. But what I'd like to analyze is the reason why the words for this particular inquiry and ultimate chastisement (darosh darash) represent two sides of the Torah. The Story noted psychiatrist and author, Rabbi Dr. Abraham Joshua Twerski telling a story, which I have heard personally, but found transcribed and thus present in that form: "I can't let this talk go by without sharing my favorite memory, which goes back to the thirties when I grew up living over a Beis Medrash. People at that time were mainly horse drivers collecting scraps of metal and rags. Before minchah every day, the men would sit drinking hot tea and playing chess. At five years old, I watched, learned, and played chess with the men. By nine I could beat all the local old folks. Once a visiting rabbi from Chicago challenged me to a game on Rosh HaShanah. He told me it was OK. Later the shamash told me that the (Milwaukee) Rebbe, (Rav JacobTwerski) my father, wanted to see me. He looked up from his sefer and asked me if I'd played chess and with a slight look,
Dedicated in memory of George Fisch and Rebbeca Stein by Ruth and Lionel Fisch, in memory of Rebbeca Stein ob"m -- Rivka bas Avraham Tzvi - Adar 21 George Fisch ob"m -- Yehuda ben Yosef ob"m Adar 22

In honor of Ronald and Sonya Krigsman shetichyu Saadia and Sorala Krigsman and family Chaim and Ann Krigsman and family Tzvi and Hudi Krigsman and family Meyer and Sharon Weissman and family

Rabbi Dov Kramer

Taking A Closer Look

And it was on the eighth day, Moshe called to Aharon, and to his sons, and to the Elders of Israel (Vayikra 9:1). It is obvious why Moshe called Aharon and his sons, as they were instructed to bring special offerings on this special day, the inauguration of the Mishkan, its first full day of operation. The Elders were called because the nation also brought special offerings (see Chizkuni), and they were the nations representatives. However, it was Aharon who told the nation about their offerings (9:3, with speak being in the singular form, i.e. only one person told them), so there would seem to be no need for the Elders to be called to hear about these offerings from Moshe. Even if there was an advantage to hearing it directly from Moshe (despite Aharon being the one to tell the rest of the nation), or if, as Ramban suggests, each individual Elder was told to speak to the people they represented (easier to understand if it were the 12 Nesiim, Heads of Tribe, called rather than the 70 Zekainim, Elders), there would seem to be no reason to have them sit through Moshes instructions to Aharon and his sons about their offerings before hearing about the nations offerings. Why did Moshe call the Elders, together with Aharon and his sons, so that they could hear Moshes instructions to Aharon? Rashi, based on Midrash Tanchuma, says the Elders were called so that they would know it was G-ds idea that Aharon enter and serve as the Kohain Gadol (High Priest), and wouldnt accuse Aharon of entering on his own. The commentaries are puzzled by this, as Rashi had told us (8:5) that Moshe had already told the nation that everything he did was commanded to him by G-d, so they shouldnt suspect anything was done for his (Moshes) honor or for his brothers honor. If Moshe had already told them that G-d chose Aharon to be the Kohain Gadol, why would anyone think Aharon had taken the position for himself, on his own? There are numerous suggestions made by the commentators to answer this question, but most of them leave us with additional questions. (Because he apparently found no satisfactory answer, Kli Yakar has a completely different approach to explain why the Elders were called.) Nevertheless, by taking a closer look at the possible shortcomings of these suggestions, perhaps we can build upon them and find an approach that does not share their deficiencies. Taz says that even though there was no longer any doubt that G-d had chosen Aharon and his sons to be the kohanim (priests) who would perform the services in the Temple (and Mishkan), the nation might have thought that there was no specific requirement that certain services (such as the offerings brought that day and those brought on Yom Kippur) be done only by Aharon (or whomever would succeed him as Kohain Gadol), and that Aharon had decided on his own to be the one to do them (rather than any of his sons). Therefore, Moshe called the Elders so that they should know G-d specifically wanted Aharon to perform these services. However, the term entering implies taking the status of, or doing something, he was authorized for; there is no reason why Aharon would be less authorized to do things than his sons were. Additionally, when Moshe addressed the entire nation (9:6), he could have mentioned that these things had to be done by Aharon; why would he say it only to the Elders? The whole idea that it was so important for everyone to know that what was done on that day had to be done by Aharon (and not that they could have also been done by his sons, despite Aharon being praised for always

18

lighting the Menorah even though any of his sons could have done it, see Ramban, Bamidbar 8:3), seems a bit peculiar. Sifsay Chachamim suggests that the first time Moshe was making sure everyone knew that Aharon and his sons were chosen by G-d to be kohanim, and this time he was making sure they knew Aharon was chosen to be the Kohain Gadol. However, it was clear from the clothing Aharon was supposed to wear (as opposed to what his sons wore) that Aharon had been chosen to be the Kohain Gadol. Maharal says that even though it was clear that Aharon would be the Kohain Gadol, Moshe wanted to make sure everyone knew that Aharon didnt jump the gun and start to fulfill the role before G-d had told him to start (see also Ber Basadeh). However, this being the first day of the Mishkans operation, why would anyone think it was too early? When else should he start? Nachalas Yaakov is among the commentators that differentiates between the seven days of training (the seven days of Miluim) and the eighth day, with Moshe earlier statement referring to Aharon (and his sons) being chosen to train for the role, and calling the Elders intended to inform them that this choice applied to the eighth day as well. We would still need to figure out why there should be a difference between the seven days and the eighth say, thus requiring Moshe to reiterate that Aharon was still chosen by G-d. Maskil LDovid suggests that people might have otherwise thought that Moshe would be the Kohain Gadol, with Aharon being under him, and Aharons sons under their father. However, it should have already been known that Moshe, whose sons were not kohanim, was not going to be the Kohain Gadol, especially since it was made abundantly clear that the priestly garments were for Aharon and his sons (not for Moshe). Im also unsure why this would have to be told to the Elders right away, rather than waiting to tell the entire nation before the offerings were brought. [It should be noted that according to some (see Vayikra Rabbah 11:6), Moshe did serve as Kohain Gadol (albeit wearing the same garb Aharons sons wore) for the 40 years in the desert (it would actually have to be 39). If so, we can understand why people might think that despite both Moshe and Aharon being able to bring the offerings on the Mishkans first full day-and causing G-d presence to fill it--Aharon pulled rank on his younger brother and insisted he be the one to do it. Therefore, Moshe wanted to make it clear that Aharon took over because G-d wanted him to, not because Aharon insisted upon it. Nevertheless, most assume that after the seven days of Miluim, Aharon was the only Kohain Gadol, leaving us wondering why anyone would think Aharon wouldnt assume that role right away.] At the burning bush, G-d spent seven days trying to convince Moshe to take the nation out of Egypt, and He wouldnt take no for an answer. Vayikra Rabbah (11:6) tells us that when the Mishkan was constructed, Gd paid Moshe back, as for the seven days of Miluim Moshe was the Kohain Gadol, and he thought that this role would continue to be his on the eighth day as well, when the Divine Presence would descend. Finally, on the last of the seven days of Miluim, G-d informed Moshe that for the eighth day Aharon would take over (see http://RabbiDMK.posterous.com/Parashas-Shemini-5770). (This could explain why there is no earlier commandment for the offerings of the eighth day even though there was one for the Miluim; G-d didnt want to tip His hand by telling Moshe ahead of time what would happen on the eighth day.) This Midrash also appears in Tanchuma (Shmini 3), followed by the explanation Rashi quotes as to why the Elders were also called when Moshe gave Aharon his instructions. If Moshe thought he was still going to be the Kohain Gadol on the eighth day, he couldnt have informed Aharon that he would take over. Its very likely that the 70 Elders were aware of what Moshe thought was going to happen, so they too would be surprised when it was Aharon who was the Kohain Gadol on the eighth day. In order that they wouldnt think, even for a short time, that Moshe was going to be the Kohain Gadol (that day) until Aharon insisted that he take over, Moshe called the Elders. This way, they knew Aharon didnt enter on his own, but that this is what G-d had commanded. Rabbi Moshe Krieger

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

R Chazkal Levenstein, the famous Mashgiach, is quite puzzled by this Rashi. Usually, admitting when one made a simple error is a trait attributed to simple folk, maybe slightly above average. But Moshe Rabenu was crowned by Hashem Himself with the title, The most humble man on the face of the earth. Would we have expected anything less from him? Would we have expected him to defend his incorrect position, and continue scolding his brother Aharon for doing absolutely nothing wrong just to preserve his own honor like a hoodlum? R Chazkal explains that the Yetzer Hara doesnt work exactly the way we think. We picture good and evil in very extreme roles. Many of us tend to visualize the righteous man as one who can stand up to any test, and the wicked man as a diabolical degenerate human being incapable of goodness, but in reality, the evil inclination is far more subtle than that. He first attempts to convince a person to neglect the minutia, and only afterward does he go for the jugular. Similarly, the tendency toward good does not happen all at once, rather we must attempt to do the right thing day in and day out when it comes to all the little details. Moshe Rabenu had his daily struggles and didnt become righteous overnight, and this was one of them. The Torah records this event in his life to show that it was events like these that made him the man he became. The Mashgiach pointed out that the Midrash goes on to say that Moshe announced in front of the entire camp how he had erred and now his brother Aharon had corrected him in order to emphasize and to teach us how important it is to break ones character traits. It isnt easy to admit when were wrong, but each time we do so, we come a little closer to becoming the G-d-like human beings we are supposed to evolve into. R Chaim Shmuelevitz understood these events slightly differently. R Chaim writes that Moshe Rabenu took a big risk by revealing his error to the entire Jewish people. As we know, Jews are constantly suspicious of the Rabbis that they may have ulterior motives or are capable of making mistakes. Moshe could have had a very realistic concern that the Jews would question the veracity of his transmission from Sinai, and whether or not his memory was intact. Such a situation could have generated a huge desecration of Hashems name, and Moshe could have thusly rationalized covering up his mistake slightly in order to prevent that disaster. Yet he did not. We learn from his actions that in Judaism the ends never justify the means, and that even a very slight transgression cannot be used to justify an enormously positive outcome. Often people get confused with this point and it behooves us to constantly keep it in mind. R Chaim contrasts this with what happened to Moshe at Mei Meriva. There, Moshe was meant to speak to a certain rock to produce water, but he heard the people murmuring to each other that perhaps this was a parlor trick and Moshe had already planned this in advance. However, if he could produce water from a rock they had chosen, that would be truly amazing. So he listened to them, and hit a different rock, reasoning that although Hashem had commanded him to speak with the first rock, when Moshe saw that this wouldnt have been effective in glorifying Hashems name, he reasoned that it was his responsibility to sanctify Hashems name by hitting the second rock. Ironically, this was the biggest and the only time Moshe ever managed to desecrate Hashems name. In any event, it is clear that Judaism does not subscribe to the idea that the end justify the means. What is the litmus test to determine whether or not a persons calculations are genuinely for the sake of Heaven? R Chaim asserts that the primary component one needs to factor out is pleasure. If there is any pleasure or personal benefit involved with the decision at hand, then one is automatically disqualified from being able to be objective. For this reason, Moshe felt that he absolutely had to announce his error in front of the entire Jewish encampment, because he feared that his desire to protect his honor may have swayed his decision in how to act. Similarly, Yehuda admitted to the fact that he was responsible for Tamars pregnancy, although it meant tremendous embarrassment, because he feared that his decision may have been influenced by his fear of shame. On the other hand, when Moshe hit the rock, there was absolutely no personal benefit involved, so Moshe thought he would be okay, and he would have been correct, if not for the aforementioned factor that this was not what Hashem had commanded. R Chaim uses this principle to explain a few cryptic points in the Megillah which we read this past week. Mordechai told Esther to beseech the king on the Jews behalf, and that perhaps through her, the Jews would be saved. Esther responded by saying that she had not been called to the kings inner chambers these past thirty days, and everybody knows that if one approaches the king uninvited, his sentence is unequivocally death. In other words, she was saying, I am not responsible to put myself in danger for the sake of the community. Mordechai responded by telling her not to be concerned with her own safety, meaning that she could not be objective because her own safety was at risk, and any time a person has personal bias involved, it is impossible for them to be objective, and he was telling her that her hesitation was only stemming from her instinct for self-preservation. Esther responded by saying, " , "meaning, although I dont understand what you are saying Mordechai, I accept your ruling as my Rebbi, and your ability to be objective where I cannot.

In this weeks Parsha, the Torah continues to discuss the various offerings relevant to the Mishkan. During this discussion, the Chumash depicts an interesting event that happened involving Moshe, Aharon, and Aharons two sons. Apparently, there was a certain offering which was meant to be eaten, and Aharon had his two sons burn the leftovers instead of consuming the entire offering. When Moshe heard about this, he was a little bit shocked that Aharon had ignored his instructions, but at the same time, he did not want to embarrass Aharon by reproaching him, so instead, he came to reprimand Aharons two sons. Aharon got the hint that Moshe was really speaking to him, and explained to Moshe his Halachic rationale in wishing to burn the leftovers. When Moshe heard this he realized that he had made a mistake and apologized for his error. Rashi comments that this declaration which Moshe made was extremely commendable in that he wasnt too proud to admit that he had been mistaken.

Bircas HaTorah Parsha Sheet

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

One of the most compelling arguments to keep Judaism is the fact that much of it appeals to our intellect. But we must realize that this too is another method of pleasure and can detract from our true service, which must be motivated solely by the fact that the creator of the Universe commanded it. We are obligated to get drunk on Purim to the point that we no longer know the difference between cursed is Haman and blessed is Mordechai. This commandment seems counterintuitive to everything Jewish, yet based on what we have said, it makes perfect sense. We are meant to show Hashem that our service of Him is not based on our intellect, and even when our IQ has gone down to somewhere near the single digits, and we are not much sharper then a retardate, we are still performing Hashems will with the same gusto and enthusiasm as a smart person. This is perhaps the most poignant demonstration that our motives in serving Hashem are not based on our intellect, but rather on what we believe to be true. May we all merit to serve Hashem with purity of heart and with no ulterior motives! Rabbi Label Lam

19

author and Torah.org reserve certain rights. Email copyrights@torah.org for full information. Torah.org: The Judaism Site Project Genesis, Inc. 122 Slade Avenue, Suite 250 Baltimore, MD 21208 http://www.torah.org/ learn@torah.org (410) 602-1350 FAX: (410) 510-1053

Rabbi Eli Mansour

Weekly Perasha Insights

Dvar Torah

Parshas Shemini: Up and Up For I am Hashem your G-d- you are to sanctify yourselves and you shall become holy, for I am holy; and you shall not make your souls impure through any creeping thing that creeps on the earth. For I am Hashem Who brings you up from the Land of Egypt to be a G-d unto you: you shall be holy, for I am holy. (Vayikra 11:44-45) For I am Hashem Who brings you up: In all other verses (that refer to Hashem taking Israel out of Egypt) its written I brought you out, but here it is written, Who brings you up. The House of Rabbi Yishmael explains the verse to mean, Had I only brought Israel out of Egypt for no other reason other than that they do not make themselves impure through creeping things as other nations do, this would be sufficient justification (for bringing them up). This is the explanation for the word, brings up (To gain spiritual elevation). (Rashi) Whats the difference between the expressions of going out and bringing up from Egypt? They both sound awfully similar. Rashi, though, understood that a special, albeit subtle meaning is implied by this change of language. Cut off from the world, in an isolated camp in the Sudetenland, Jewish slave laborers kept the Yom Kippur fast and even celebrated Pesach as much as possible. We were three hundred and fifty young women in the camp. Hadassah Pesserman was the one we looked to for leadership. Even the Germans recognized her position and granted her special privileges. Unlike the other prisoners they did not call her by her first name, Hadassah; instead they called her, die Fraulein Pesserman a token of respect for her personality, her excellent leadership, and her devotion to religion Hadassah had been a member of Agudas Yisrael girls organization back in the Zbirce, Poland. She kept all the Mitzvos carefully even in the camp, including praying every day and observing Shabbos. She was extremely particular about Kashrus, which meant that she never ate any cooked food in the camp. Eventually a close friend of hers got permission to cook potatoes for her in a special pot set aside for that purpose. All the same, Hadassah agreed only to a potato that had been cooked whole in its skin. She was concerned that some well-meaning person might add some oil to the pot, wishing to give her some added nutrition (The cooking oil was usually not Kosher). The prisoners worked in a cotton thread factory. It was true die Fraulein Pesserman no longer produced her daily quota of thread, since was slowly withering away from starvation. But the factory manager, a Nazi by the name of Theodore Rommler, respected her as a person even though she was not worth much anymore to his factory. By the time the infamous Dr. Mengele arrived at the camp to conduct a selection among the prisoners, Hadassah was nothing but skin and bones so and ended up among those marked for Auschwitz and the crematoria But Herr Rommler saved her, claiming, I need this woman for the factory. Die Fraulein Pesslerman, whose whole life was a sanctification of G-ds name, died of exhaustion in 5704, without ever having defiled herself with non-Kosher food. (Testimony of Mrs. Miriam Schneider from Czanow in Shema Yisrael) The Zohar asks a question wondering why Jews shake- swaying back and forth when they pray. The explanation is that just as the flame on a candle strives to go up, back to its source, the sun, so the soul of the Jew, which is compared by King Solomon to the candle of G-d, longs to return to his Creator, even though he knows that in that greater light his tiny light will become so overwhelmed that it will be virtually nullified. It might be that the difference between taking out and bringing up is that it is possible to go out from Egypt, without going up. Its also possible that without having even been taken out one can still go up and up.
DvarTorah, Copyright 2007 by Rabbi Label Lam and Torah.org. Questions or comments? Email feedback@torah.org. Join the Jewish Learning Revolution! Torah.org: The Judaism Site brings this and a host of other classes to you every week. Visit http://torah.org or email learn@torah.org to get your own free copy of this mailing. Need to change or stop your subscription? Please visit our subscription center, http://torah.org/subscribe/ -- see the links on that page. Permission is granted to redistribute, but please give proper attribution and copyright to the author and Torah.org. Both the

Parashat Shemini- Having Trust in the System Parashat Shemini tells of the events that took place on the eighth and final day of the Mishkans inauguration. It was on this day when Aharon, for the first time, functioned as the Kohen Gadol, offering special sacrifices in honor of the occasion. The Sages teach that Aharon was initially hesitant to go forth and perform the sacred rituals in the Mishkan. He still had lingering doubts about whether he had truly been forgiven for his role in the sin of the golden calf. True, his intentions in that unfortunate incident were noble. Seeing that the people wanted a graven image, he instructed them to bring their gold jewelry, incorrectly assuming that they would be hesitant to do so, and that in the meantime, Moshe would return and the crisis would end. Nevertheless, Aharon still felt some guilt over having fashioned the golden calf, and still considered himself unworthy of entering the Mishkan and serving G-d. Moshe therefore had to encourage Aharon and give him a slight push to proceed with the days rituals. What might we learn from Aharons hesitation, and the extra push that he needed? One Rabbi commented that Aharons ambivalence on this occasion is characteristic of a problem that many of us experience regarding the process of Teshuba (repentance). Very often, even after sincere repentance, we are plagued by guilt and find it difficult to move on. Even for a righteous Sadik like Aharon, the natural feelings of regret can cause lingering doubts in the system of repentance. Lingering questions such as Can G-d really forgive me for what I have done? and Am I really worthy of forgiveness? remain. Moshes encouragement and insistence that Aharon proceed with the sacrificial rituals should serve as an example to all of us to have faith and confidence in our own repentance. If we are truly sincere in our remorse, prayers and desire to improve, then we have nothing to fear. We must tell ourselves that yes, G-d very much wants us to enter the Mishkan, to serve Him with sincerity, despite our past mistakes. If our repentance is sincere, then we must move forward with confidence. One might, however, question this conclusion in light of a verse in Tehillim (51:5), Vehatati Negdi Tamid My sin is in front of me, always. Does this not imply that we should always be fearful of the consequences of our wrongdoing? Isnt this proof that we must remain concerned and hesitant about the efficacy of our repentance? In truth, this verse refers not to lingering doubts about the effectiveness of Teshuba, but rather to a commitment to remain constantly vigilant to avoid repeating the sin. Every sin results from a certain weakness or flaw. And part of the process of repentance is identifying that flaw and devising strategies to ensure that it will not cause us to stumble again. Vehatati Negdi Tamid means that we will always remember what led us to sin so we can avoid it going forward. It might mean, for example, that we will avoid the crowd that exerted pressure on us to transgress the Torah, or avoid inappropriate places that cause us to sin. But it does not mean that we will have lingering doubts about the effectiveness of our repentance. We, like Aharon, must feel confident in the system and believe that G-d lovingly and mercifully accepts our Teshuba. Why is it so hard for us to trust the system, and to confidently believe that our Teshuva is accepted? One answer is that these doubts stem from our reluctance to forgive those who offend us. When somebody wrongs us, even if we outwardly forgive, we still harbor negative feelings; we are not prepared to allow the relationship to be fully restored. And this could make it difficult for us to believe that G-d has fully accepted our Teshuba. If we cannot completely forgive our peers, then we will doubt whether G-d can fully forgive us. Thus, one way to gain confidence in the system of repentance is to respond more favorably to those who sin against us. The more wholehearted we are in forgiving others, the more trust we will have in G-ds willingness to forgive us, and thus the less burdened we will be by lingering feelings of guilt and anxiety. National Council of Young Israel

Weekly Dvar Torah

Guest Rabbi: Rabbi Perry Schafler, Associate Member, Young Israel Council of Rabbis Parshat Shmini / Parah The Plain Message of the Enigmatic Decree: Humility and Emunah Both Shabbos Parah and Parshas Shemini present us with Chukim, unexplained Divine decrees, whose enigma and perplexity engaged the thoughts of scholars, teachers and leaders throughout the centuries. The decree enacted in Shemini Bikrovai Akadesh I will be sanctified through those close to Me[Vayikra 10:3] seems difficult to understand. The proximate reason for the death of the sons of Aharon, on the surface, appears clear: Vayakrivu aish zarah [Vayikra 10:1] They offered fire not commanded of them. Nonetheless, various sources present seemingly

20

conflicting responses: Depictions of positive motives, characterizations of elevated status, are elucidated against a diverse list of sins for which punishment may have been incurred. Yet through all this a coherent message can be discerned. Those who are at the highest level are held to the highest standard. A kal vachomer (a fortiori logic) can be applied: If such elevated figures were punished, how much more careful should we be with the enumerated offenses. Rashi cites Moshes remarkable consolation: Aharon my brother; you knew The House would be sanctified by those close to Him. I was convinced it would be through me or you. Now I see that they are greater than me and you. [Rashi 10:3] [Zevachim 115b] Moshe knew the sanctity of the Mishkan would be consecrated and elevated through a great personage of the generation. Yet even though Moshe knew that he alone was chosen to redeem the Jewish people, to receive the Torah, to speak to Hashem face to face; despite the fact, that by all accounts, Nadav and Avihu did something that was improper (for persons of their stature) and died on account of their sins; because of Moshes overriding humility and consequent respect and deference for the Divine decree, he did not question that they could be greater than he! In Parah too, we find this powerful coincidence of an enigmatic Divine decree juxtaposed with the humility of Moshe. Parah is indeed puzzling: Through what mechanism do waters of a burnt red heifer remove spiritual uncleanness? How can the same substance which purifies the defiled also defile the pure? Parah is the exemplar and paradigm of Chok the unexplained, humanly inscrutable Divine Decree. So difficult to understand that even Shlomo HaMelech, given wisdom beyond compare (Melachim I 5:11), was unable to fathom its meaning, and declared it beyond him: Amarti achakmah, vehi rechokah mimeni I said, I will grow in knowledge, (until I understand this), but it remains (so) distant from me (I will not attain it). [Kohelet 7:23] [Niddah 9:a] [Yalkut Shimoni 759] Yet though Shlomo despairs of unlocking the secret of Parah, the solution was granted to Moshe Rabbeinu. There is clearly a special connection between Moshe and Parah, as alluded to in Hashems command: Veyikchu EilechaAnd they shall take it unto you (Moshe). [Bamidbar 19:2] Features of this special association are highlighted by our our sages: Parah will always be called by Moshes name (Rashi, IBID), All other heifers may be annulled, but yours (Moshes) will endure [Tanchuma Chukat 8] Moshes Parah never ends, its ashes contained within each future Parah [Rashi Yoma 4a], Moshe alone understands Parah [Bamidbar Rabbah 19:6]. And remarkably, the rashei tevos (initials): LaTamei MeAfar Sereifat HaChatat, actually spell LeMoshe! What is the reason for this special connection? Why is it that of all the 613 mitzvot, Parah is uniquely, essentially and eternally associated with Moshe, and bears his name? Shlomo HaMelech, the man who had everything but desired most the wisdom to understand all things, also had a special connection to Parah, since the initials which spell lMoshe, if inverted, spell Shlomo! He too sought to understand Parah: Bikesh Kohelet limtzo divrei chefetz, vechatuv yosher divrei emet [Kohelet 12:10], but a heavenly voice told him it was only Moshe, not he, who would be given this knowledge yosher divrei emet. Straight (not inverted) is the name of the one who understands the words of truth. Why is this one mitzvah, whose paradox and mystery baffled even Shlomo HaMelech, understood by Moshe? When Moshe ascended on High he heard the voice of the Kaddosh Baruch Hu dealing with Parah Adumah, saying Halacha in the name of its expounder, Rabbi Eliezer. Moshe said:Master of the World, may it be Your Will, that this person (who expounds the law of Parah) should be from among my descendants. The KBH said to him: By your life, he will be from your descendants. As it says: And the name of the (specified) one is Eliezer. [Shemot 18:4] [Pesikta Rabbati 14:6] [Tanchuma Chukat :8] Why was Parah so important to Moshe, that he chose it above all other mitzvot, and personally requested that its elucidator be his descendant? Why is Moshe granted discernment into Parah which is not granted to others? What is it, beyond wisdom, by force of which Moshe gains this insight? And the man Moshe was very humble, more than any other man upon the face of the earth. [Bamidbar 12:3] The purpose of Chok is to inculcate humility and subservience to the will of Hashem. Because Moshe attained the highest possible degree of humility and subservience that mortal man can attain; because he had already learned the lesson that Chok is meant to teach, Parah could be explained and thereby transformed into Mishpat: Said Rabbi Yose b. R. Chaninah: What is the meaning of the words Veyikchu Eilecha? G-d told Moshe, To you, I reveal the secret but to all others, it is a chok. [Bamidbar Rabbah 19:6] From the Divine point of view, all commandments are Mishpatim: every mitzvah is rational, reasonable, meaningful and necessary. From Mans point of view, even Mishpatim should be seen as Chukim, since we can never really fathom the meaning, import and impact of a mitzvah in all its fullness, even if a reason is provided or discerned.

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

This is the decree of the Torah. [Bamidbar 19:2] The plain message of Parah is to treat all mitzvot with the deference and humility accorded to chukim. The key to the relationship between Moshe and Parah is the connection between humility and faith in Hashem. The sin of the Golden Calf was essentially a failure of Emunah in Hashem. Because humility and emunah are inextricably intertwined, the remedy and atonement for the sin of the Golden Calf is Parah Adumah the Divine Decree par excellence. Humility is a necessary pre condition and key ingredient of true Emunah and proper Service. Humility reduces the distortion and interference of our ego, our desires, and our self interest. It allows us to see our own stature in proper perspective. Humility makes space for Hashems commands, His closeness and His message in our hearts; and frees us to direct our lives to His Service. Moshe, by virtue of his being a paragon of humility, is also known as Eved Hashem, the singular Servant of Hashem. Other human beings can hardly approach Moshes humility and level of Divine service. Yet because Parah Adumah bears his name, we can say to Hashem, please accept this mitzvah as if we had the intentions of the one whose name it carries. Moshe prayed that his descendants remain imbued with the message of Parah: Humility, Emunah and Service of Hashem. May we too merit to embody these qualities and inculcate them in our children. Shabbat shalom The Weekly Sidra- Shmini By Rabbi Moshe Greebel There is a most fascinating concept in the Torah of Ain Kataigar Naaseh Sanaigar, or, an accuser cannot transform into an advocate. In simpler terms, that, which was used for an Avaira (sin), may in no way, serve as an atonement for that same Avaira. Our very first encounter with this principle, in seen in the Gemarah Brachos 59a: For at the time when HaKadosh Baruch Hu wanted to bring a flood upon the world, He took two stars from Kimah (a star grouping), and brought a flood upon the world. And when He wanted to stop it, He took two stars from Ayish (another star grouping) and stopped it. But, why did He not put the other two back? A pit cannot be filled with its own clods; or another reason is, the accuser cannot become advocate.. That is, just as the dug pit cannot be completely refilled with its own displaced earth, so too, can the flood not be stopped with simply replacing the stars in Kimah. Additionally, since the removal of the two stars in Kimah, in the role of accusers, brought on the flood, re-instating them in Kimah as advocates, is not to be done. A second encounter of Ain Kataigar Naaseh Sanaigar is essential in two different aspects of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur: 1. A bovine Shofar may not be utilized on Rosh Hashanah. 2. The Kohain Gadol (high Kohain) may not enter the Kodesh HaKadashim (holy of holies) on Yom Kippur, wearing the Bigdei Zahav (four garments of gold). Concerning both these aspects, the Gemarah in Rosh HaShanah 26a, instructs the following: Ulla said that the reason of the Rabbanim (that a bovine Shofar may not be used for Rosh Hashanah) is to be found in the saying of Rav Chisda. For Rav Chisda said, Why does the Kohain Gadol not enter the inner precincts (Kodesh HaKadashim) in garments of gold (on Yom Kippur) to perform the service there? Because the accuser may not act as advocate. Since the sin of the Aigel HaZahav (golden calf) plays the role of the accuser, a bovine Shofar of a calf, cow, heifer, etc. may not act as advocate. And, since the material of the Aigel HaZahav was gold (the accuser), the Kohain Gadol may not enter the Kodesh HaKadashim on Yom Kippur, wearing the Bigdei Zahav (as the advocate). This principle of Ain Kataigar Naaseh Sanaigar is seen as well, when it comes to acquiring a woman for marriage. Two of the three ways in which she is acquired are with a Shtar (written document), and with money, or the value thereof. From where in the Torah, do we know that acquiring a woman for marriage is accomplished through a Shtar? We know it from the subject of Get (divorce), where it is written: When a man has taken a wife, and married her, and it comes to pass that she finds no favor in his eyes, because he has found some uncleanness in her; then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she has departed out of his house, she may go and become another mans wife. (Dvarim 24:-1-2) Unquestionably then, a Get can only be accomplished with a written document, a bill of divorcement by the husband, which comes straight from the Torah itself. Examining the Gemarah in Kiddushin 5a, which speaks of why a Shtar is necessary as well, for the acquisition of a woman in marriage, we find: And from where do we know that (a woman may be acquired) by a Shtar too?..... Therefore Scripture states, And when she is departed and becomes (another man's wife). Thus, becoming (being acquired) is assimilated to departure (divorce). Just as the departure is by a Shtar, so is becoming (acquisition in marriage) too.. Momentarily interrupting the Gemarah, since departing from a marriage and becoming acquired in a marriage are so strongly compared in the Torah, our Rabbanim of blessed memory, taught that both processes

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

require a Shtar. But, this comparison leads to a new difficulty. If departing and becoming are so strenuously compared, why would this not apply to money as well? Since money was one of the acquisitions of marriage, why should it not be a requirement of Get as well? The Gemarah answers with another example of Ain Kataigar Naaseh Sanaigar: ..Then let departure be assimilated to becoming! Just as the becoming may be by money, so the departure too may be effected by money? Abayai replied, Then it will be said that money unites (in marriage) and money sunders (in divorce). Shall the advocate become the accuser..? Shall the money which was utilized for marriage (advocate) be utilized as well to dissolve a marriage (accuser)? But, at this stage, would the same not apply to the Shtar? ..If so, of Shtar too it will be said that Shtar sunders and Shtar unites. Shall the prosecutor become the defender..? The Gemarah responds: ..The contents of each Shtar are distinct.. That is, concerning Shtar, the principle of Ain Kataigar Naaseh Sanaigar does not apply. For, the wording of each Shtar (Ksubah and Get) is certainly unalike, making the accuser and advocate two completely different entities. However, when it comes to Get requiring money from the comparison of departing and becoming, the Gemarah is for the moment, less successful: ..Then here too, (the purpose of) this money is distinct, and that of the other is distinct. Nevertheless, the impress (of the coin) is the same.. That is, while the argument can be made that the wording of each Shtar is different, money, regardless of its use, is money, with nothing physically different about it. Having deliberated over the background of the principle of Ain Kataigar Naaseh Sanaigar, we will leave the Gemarah at this point, prior to its resolving the question of why Get does not require money, even though it is strongly compared in the Torah to marital acquisition, which does require money. What is the relationship between Ain Kataigar Naaseh Sanaigar and this weeks Sidra? Consider the following. On Rosh Chodesh Nisan, the eighth day after the commencement of the Miluim (seven day initiation period for Aharon and his sons to be Kohanim), the Mishkan (Tabernacle) was assembled and dedicated. Part of this extremely important day was a series of special Korbanos (livestock offerings), which Moshe ordered Aharon to offer, as we find in this weeks Sidra. Here is the beginning of that series: And he (Moshe) said to Aharon, Take a young calf for a sin offering, and a ram for a burnt offering, without blemish, and offer them before HaShem. (Vayikra 9:2) After the entire series of these Korbanos is enumerated in the Torah, they were offered as prescribed: And they brought that which Moshe commanded before the Tent of Meeting; and all the congregation drew near and stood before HaShem. (ibid 9:5) Yet, one Passuk (verse) later, we find: And Moshe said, This is the thing which HaShem commanded that you should do; and the glory of HaShem shall appear to you. (ibid. 9:6) What is this thing that HaShem commanded to be done? Did they not already offer the required Korbanos for this very special day? The commentary of the Bnai Yisachar resolves this question, utilizing our Gemarah from Kiddushin. Initially, the series of Korbanos began with a young calf for a sin offering. Rashi on this, learns: Take a young calf for a sin offering..To let it be known that HaKadosh Baruch Hu has forgiven him (Aharon for building the Aigel HaZahav) through this (young) calf (which he offers on this special day). It is for the (original) calf which he made. Now then, poses the Bnai Yisachar, is this not a flagrant violation of Ain Kataigar Naaseh Sanaigar? How can a calf play simultaneous roles of accuser and advocate for Aharon? To answer this query, we return to the Gemarah in Kiddushin, which made a strong distinction between the Ksubah and the Get: ..The contents of each Shtar are distinct.. So is the case here too, explained the Bnai Yisachar. At the Aigel HaZahav, the Bnia Yisroel cried out: ..This is your g-d, Yisroel, which brought you up out of the land of Egypt! (Shmos 32:4) But, at this Aigel which was brought on so special a day, Moshe described it as: ..This is the thing which HaShem commanded that you should do.. (Bamidbar 9:6) As each Shtar in marriage and Get is different, each historical Aigel was certainly different in its purpose. Moshe, in essence, was informing the Bnai Yisroel that this thing which HaShem commanded, this Aigel on this very special day, unlike its predecessor, was by direct command of HaShem to be considered a Mitzvah. And, no violation of Ain Kataigar Naaseh Sanaigar existed. May we soon see the Gulah Shlaimah in its complete resplendency- and in our times. Good Shabbos.
NCYI's Weekly Divrei Torah Bulletin is sponsored by the Henry, Bertha and Edward Rothman Foundation - Rochester, New York; Cleveland, Ohio; Circleville, Ohio

21

Aish.Com - Rabbi Kalman Packouz Parshas Shmini 5771 GOOD MORNING! A few years ago I received a very interesting email from Micha Males. He asked for my help - and the help of thousands of others as the email spread - to return a diamond ring his wife found in a restroom at a rest stop on the highway from Cleveland to Baltimore. Right before his wife went to use the facilities, they noticed a woman returning from the Ladies Room to the car next to them with a man wearing a yarmulke (kipa, Jewish head covering). After discovering the ring, she ran to catch the woman, but they had driven off. Mr. Males figures that the woman took off her ring to wash for Hamotzie(before eating bread, one washes his hands by pouring from a cup at least twice on the right hand and twice on the left hand). Realizing that this is a great story about the power of the internet to connect people and to help them, I wrote Mr. Males to find out the rest of the story. Unfortunately, not even the power of the internet has reunited the woman with her diamond ring! No one wrote with any clue as to the owner of the ring. What motivates Micha and Penina Males to work so hard to return a diamond ring? Why not just keep it? They could be hundreds if not thousands of dollars richer! Micha and Penina know something that generations of Jews have known - that one of the 613 commandments that the Almighty gave the Jewish people is Hashavas Aveida, returning a lost object. In the book of Exodus, chapter 23, verse 4, it is written, "If you meet your enemy's ox or his donkey going astray, you shall repeatedly bring it back to him." They also know that real riches come from fulfilling the Almighty's commandments. The verse is puzzling. We can understand returning a friend's ox, but why an enemy's? I think the Torah is teaching a very important lesson -the goal of life is to perfect yourself and be G-d-like. Even if you have feelings of dislike, you must overcome them and return the item. Perfecting your character is at least as important as the owner retrieving his property. As it says in Pirkei Avot 4:1, "Who is mighty? He who conquers his passions and desires." Note that the verse says, "you shall repeatedly bring it back to him." The Talmud, Bava Metzia 31a, instructs us that even if someone's animal gets lost 100 times, we are obligated to bring it back each and every time. Talk about conquering frustration! What are some of the laws in the Code of Jewish Law, the Shulchan Aruch (which is a compilation of rulings from the Talmud) governing lost items? The laws are from Choshen Mishpat (CM), the section of the Code of Jewish Laws concerning property matters. This list is from Love Your Neighbor by Z. Pliskin: 1. We are obligated to return lost items to their owners (CM 259:1). 2. It is forbidden to pass by a lost object without picking it up (CM 259). 3. If you take a lost object for yourself with the intention of stealing it, you violate one positive commandment ("You shall surely bring it back to him" Ex. 23:4) and two prohibitions ("You shall not steal" Lev. 19:13 and "You may not hide yourself" Deut. 22:3). 4. Not only does this commandment obligate us to return an object that is already lost, but whenever someone's property or possessions are in danger of being destroyed or lost, we are obligated to try to save them (CM 359:17). 5. The finder of a lost article must guard it and take care of it so that it will not become ruined (CM 267:16-18). 6. If you do not know the identity of the owner, you must make an announcement (or post notices) about it in public places (CM 267:4,7). These are just a few of the laws. There are many. Life is complex. A competent Halachic authority, a rabbi knowledgeable in Jewish law, should be consulted for details and decisions. And then you can polish the diamond that is your soul through the mitzvot, the commandments - and riches far beyond lost diamond rings! Torah Portion of the Week: Shmini Concluding the 7 days of inauguration for the Mishkan (Portable Sanctuary), Aaron, the High Priest, brings sacrifices for himself and the entire nation. Nadav and Avihu, sons of Aaron, bring an incense offering on their own initiative, and are consumed by a heavenly fire (perhaps the only time when someone did something wrong and was immediately hit by "lightning"). The Cohanim are commanded not to serve while intoxicated. The inaugural service is completed. G-d then specifies the species which are kosher to eat: mammals (those that have cloven hoofs and chew their cud), fish (those with fins and scales), birds (certain non-predators), and certain species of locusts. The portion concludes with the laws of spiritual defilement from contact with the carcasses of certain animals. Dvar Torah based on Growth Through Torah by Rabbi Zelig Pliskin When Aharon's two sons died, the Torah reports his reaction: "And Aharon was silent" (Leviticus 10:3). How is it possible that Aharon was silent? What was going through his mind?

Shabbat Shalom

22

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/tp/ss/ssw/118068059.html Like what you read? As a non-profit organization, Aish.com relies on readers like you to enable us to provide meaningful and relevant articles. Join Aish.com and help us continue to give daily inspiration to people like you around the world. Make a secure donation at: https://secure.aish.com/secure/pledge.php or mail a check to Aish.com, 408 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701 Copyright 1995 - 2011 Aish.com - http://www.aish.com

Rabbi Moshe HaCohen Rice writes in Ohr HaMussar: Aharon was greatly praised for remaining silent - for not complaining against the Almighty and for accepting the will of the Almighty. Why? Before something happens one might be able to take action to prevent it. However, afterwards, what can one do? He can fight it or he can accept it as the will of the Almighty. Was his acceptance of the Almighty's will exceptional or unique? The Sages constantly worked on accepting the will of the Almighty. Rabbi Akiva always used to say when something apparently negative happened, "All that the Almighty does is for the good." Nochum, Ish Gam Zu, used to say, "This, too, is for the good" ("ish gam zu" means "the man who has integrated into his being the idea regarding whatever happens to that 'this, too, is for the good.' ") However, when a person says, "All that the Almighty does is for the good" about something that originally disturbed or frustrated him, it implies that at first he was bothered by what happened. As soon as he realizes that the matter bothers him, he uses his intellect to overcome his negative reaction. Intellectually, he knows that all that the Almighty causes to occur is ultimately for the good and this knowledge enables him to accept the situation. An even higher level is to internalize the concept that whatever the Almighty does is positive and good. When this is a person's automatic evaluation of every occurrence, he does not have to keep convincing himself that a specific event is good. Such a person accepts with joy everything that occurs in his life. This was the greatness of Aharon. He remained silent because he knew clearly that everything the Almighty does is purposeful. When things consistently go well for a person, he feels an inner-joy. Acceptance of the Almighty's will is the most crucial attitude to make part of oneself for living a happy life. The more you learn to accept the will of the Almighty, the greater joy you will experience in your life! Quote Of The Week: The self is not something ready-made, but something in continuous formation through choice of action. -- John Dewey In Loving Memory of Udi, Ruth, Yoav, Elad and Hadas Fogel hy"d Rabbi Eliezer Parkoff

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

However to be among secular Jews is worse. They are also Jewish and it is impossible to explain to a child not to mingle with them. They will have a very strong influence on your son. Gut Shabbos!
Rabbi Eliezer Parkoff Rabbi Eliezer Parkoff Rosh Yeshiva Yeshiva Gedolah Medrash Chaim Rabbi Parkoff is author of "Chizuk!" and "Trust Me!" (Feldheim Publishers), and "Mission Possible!" (Israel Book Shop ? Lakewood). You can access Rav Parkoff's Chizuk Sheets online: http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/parkoff/ If you would like to correspond with Rabbi Parkoff, or change your subscription, please contact: rabbi.e.parkoff@gmail Yeshiva Gedolah Medrash Chaim Jerusalem, Israel Rabbi Eliezer Parkoff: 732-325-1257 Rabbi Dovid Moshe Stern: 718-3604674 Shema Yisrael Torah Network info@shemayisrael.co.il http://www.shemayisrael.co.il Jerusalem, Israel 732-370-3344

Rabbi Ben-Zion Rand

Likutei Peshatim

Weekly Chizuk

Shemini: Beware of The Faker "Any animal that has a cloven hoof that is completely split into double hooves, and which brings up its cud, that one you may eat. But these you shall not eat among those that bring up the cud and those that have a cloven hoof: the camel, because it brings up its cud, but does not have a [completely] cloven hoof; it is unclean for you."[Vayikra 11:3-4] "And the pig, because it has a cloven hoof that is completely split, but will not regurgitate its cud; it is unclean for you." [Vayikra 11:7] (From Ha'aros, by Moreinu v'Rabbeinu Rav Zeidel Epstein, zt"l.) Why did the Torah have to accent the feature of the pig that it has a cloven hoof, which is completely split? A cloven hoof is not indicative of prohibition, but rather of kashrus. It should have been mentioned incidentally. The sign of tumah, that it does not chew its cud, should have been accented instead. This is the sign of tumah by all the animals. Chazal explain (Vayikra Rabba 13:5) that the Torah is telling us a fundamental trait of the pig. It sticks out its hoofs as if to proclaim to the world, "Look at me. See! I'm kosher!" The pig uses its kosher feature to publicize its kashrus. Rav Shlomo Harkavi, zt"l (Mashgiach of the Grodno Yeshiva) used to say that this is worse than an animal that has absolutely no kosher characteristics. At least, then, it is obvious to everyone that he is tamai and thus they know to keep away from him. But when he has some kosher sign which he can show off to everyone, sometimes he can influence others to believe that really he is kosher. Therefore the Torah equated his kosher characteristics to his treif characteristics. This possuk is teaching us beware from such combination: half kosher, half treif. Chazal relate (Sota 22b) that King Yannai warned his wife, "Don't be afraid of the Rabbis; nor of those who aren't Rabbis. Rather be aware of the hypocrites. They look like the Rabbis, but they act like Zimri and want reward like Pinchas. When a person's real self is apparent to all, then people can protect themselves and realize the person is not so kosher. Such a person is not so dangerous. The hypocrites are the real menace. They look kosher and yosher and so are very dangerous. A ben Torah once went to one of the American Gedolim (at a time when there were no yeshivos in his city) and asked, should he send his son to public school where he will mix with the goyim. Or should he register him in the Jewish private secular school where at least he will be among Jews. The Gadol told him that it is preferable to learn in public school. At least there it is obvious that the other children are goyim and you can warn the child not to mingle and learn from their bad ways. You are Jewish and they are goyim. The distinction is clear.

Parashas Shemini Internet Edition Vol. 25 No. 26 They Prayed To Merit G-ds Presence And Moshe and Aharon went into the Tent of Meeting and came out and blessed the people; and the glory of G-d appeared to all the people. Vayikra 9:23 Because for all the seven days of the inauguration, during which Moshe put up the Mishkan and officiated in it and dismantled it each day, the Shechina did not rest in it, and Israel was ashamed. And they said to Moshe: Moshe, our master! We went to all this trouble so that the Shechina should rest among us, and thus we would know that the sin of the Golden Calf was forgiven on our behalf! Now we see that it was all for nothing. Therefore, Moshe said to them, This is the thing that G-d has commanded you to do, then the glory of G-d will appear to you. -- Rashi At this point, on Rosh Chodesh Nisan of the year following the departure from Egypt, over eight months had elapsed from the time the sin of the Golden Calf had transpired. In the interim, several direct signs and indications had been given to the Jews to show that G-d had, in fact, forgiven them for their terrible error. The very commandment to build a Mishkan was itself a gesture of acceptance of their repentance. The nation continued to be encircled by the Clouds of Glory, and the heavenly manna bread and the water from the traveling well were all strong testimonies that G-ds presence was to dwell among the Jews. Why did the people again petition for yet another proof that they were forgiven for the sin of the Golden Calf? Sefer Meilitz Yosher explains that there are many levels of spiritual heights. There is a category where one simply merits to have a portion in the world-to-come. There is another level, as we find in the grace after meals, known as earning eternal life in the world-to-come. There is still a more advanced portion where one is referred to as being a member of the world-to-come. Even when one finds himself at a high level, we see that it is necessary to strive to achieve even greater and loftier plateaus. Although the Jews had been assured that the sin of the Golden Calf had been forgiven, initially this simply meant that they were not going to be destroyed. Yet, this was not sufficient to appease their concerns. They craved to establish once again a close and intimate bond with G-d, and to earn His benevolence. They strove to develop a level of atonement which would enable them to encounter the presence of G-d and to be worthy carriers and representatives of His word in this world. Moshe and Aharon, in their words of blessing, distinctly emphasized that they wished for the actions of the people to be acceptable, and deserving for the presence of G-d to reside among them. In this manner, they prayed that the honor and glory of G-d be before them in all their endeavors. The Tragic Flaw Of Nadav And Avihu And the sons of Aharon, Nadav and Avihu, each took his censor, and they put fire in it and laid incense on it, and offered strange fire before G-d, which He had not commanded them. Vayikra 10:1 There are various reasons given as to why Nadav and Avihu died. One reason is that they chose not to get married. Another reason is that they said: When will Moshe and Aharon die so that we can lead Bnei Yisrael! The Gemara relates that once Moshe and Aharon were walking along, with Nadav and Avihu behind them, and all Israel following in the rear. Then Nadav said to Avihu, Oh that these old men might die, so that you and I should be the leaders of our generation. But the Holy One, blessed be He, said to them, We shall see who will bury whom. Ksav Sofer explains that these two reasons are actually one and the same. Nadav and Avihu contemplated that eventually they would be the next leaders of Klal Yisrael. By observing Moshe and Aharon, they came to the conclusion that Moshe, who had dedicated an excessive part of his time for communal needs, unfortunately had little time for his own family. Aharon had spent less time in communal affairs, and his family thrived, with each of his sons being quite successful. Nadav and Avihu therefore felt that, as leaders of the nation, they would not be able to raise children properly, so they did not get married. This is why the verse says: And they died before G-d, for all their intentions were for the sake of Heaven. However, this was the eish zara - the strange fire - that they were not supposed to bring before G-d - which He had not commanded them. They had never been commanded to lead the people, but they had been commanded to marry and have children. Submissive Silence And Aharon held his peace. Vayikra 10:3 Aharon was rewarded by G-d for his silence. His reward was that the following section, which discusses the drinking of wine by Aharon and his sons, was addressed to Aharon personally. -- Rashi

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

What was so great about Aharons silence that he received such an immense reward? Furthermore, why did the Torah use an expression of "vayidom" - a dead silence - as opposed to the word "vayecherash" - and he was silent? The Chafetz Chaim explains that even when a person controls himself and remains silent, the emotions within him still surge, and these feelings are still discernible by means of facial expressions. Feelings of happiness or sadness can still be detected. However, when a person is domem - dead silent, there are no emotional signs whatsoever. Aharons sons had just died at a young age. This was a situation where the average person would break down in tears, and some, chas vshalom, might even be angry at G-d for having let such a tragedy happen. Aharon, on the other hand, understood wholeheartedly that any decree from G-d must ultimately be good. We may not understand why certain decrees are good. Yet, nevertheless, they are good. Aharon had internalized this concept as a part of himself to the extent that his initial reaction at a point of great intensity was opposite that of the average person. He accepted the decree of his children's death with love, without any element of antagonism. For this silence, Aharon was granted a great reward. The Nation Shares In Aharons Loss And Moshe said to Aharon and to his sons Elazar and Itamar: Do not leave your heads unshorn and do not rend your garments that you do not die and He become wrathful with the entire assembly; and your brothers, the entire house of Israel, shall bewail the fire that G-d had ignited. Vayikra 10:6 From this verse we see an important principle concerning how one should feel for others, particularly at the time of a tragedy. The sages have said (Berachos 54a) that a person is obligated to bless G-d for events that appear to be bad in the same way that he is obligated to bless G-d for the good things. This refers not only to reciting a blessing but to an attitude also. One should accept the bad with the same simcha that one accepts the good. Rav Shlomo Kluger notes, however, that this only applies to the person who himself was the recipient of something bad. Others are obligated to react in a way that will give support and encouragement to the person who suffered a tragedy. It is not correct to take the attitude that since that person who suffered a tragedy should accept it with equanimity, so too should those around him merely tell him that its all for the best. Their obligation is to help ease the pain of the sufferer. Therefore, even though Aharon and his sons were not allowed to show any natural manifestations of mourning for the deaths of Nadav and Avihu, it was the responsibility of all of the House of Israel to cry for them and to outwardly express the inner feelings of Aharon and his sons, to show the extent of the loss and bring a measure of comfort to Aharon and his sons. Extenuating Circumstances You may eat these from among them: the arbeh according to its kind, the sal'am according to its kind, the chargol according to its kind, and the chagav according to its kind. Vayikra 11:22 A group of Rabbanim in Morocco had determined that a certain breed of locust was precisely that which the Torah permitted the Jews to eat. Based upon this ruling, many people actually began to eat this creature. Rabbi Chaim ibn Eter, the author of the Or HaChaim, was once visiting the Moroccan city of Meknes, and after having researched the issue thoroughly, he discovered that the ruling to allow the consumption of this particular locust was originally based upon an emergency famine situation where locusts had at one time infested the area and had destroyed the crops. Due to the extreme hunger which ensued, the rabbis had temporarily been willing to rule that the people could rely upon those minority opinions that held that this creature could be consumed. Now, however, when the emergency had passed, Rabbi Chaim felt that one could no longer rely upon this leniency. Most people had forgotten the emergency nature of the original ruling and they considered this locust as being outright kosher. As people became informed of his opinion, they began to accept his ruling, and a heavenly sign appeared to support his view. Although that specific species of locust used to appear regularly in that area, from the moment he issued his statement, that breed of locust ceased to appear, for without its being welcome by the sainted rabbi, it was never again available in that area. Halachic Corner Parashas Parah It is important to give the highest degree of kavod - honor - to the Sefer Torah. It is forbidden to touch the Torah parchment with ones bare hands. It is only permitted in order to repair the Torah (O.C. 147:1). Therefore, when performing Hagbaha and Glila, if it is necessary to straighten out the parchment, one should use a talis or some other material (M.B. ibid. 2). The prevalent minhag is to permit holding the Atzei Chayim without the need for a talis. (Shaar HaTziyun ibid. 4) The Acharonim say that our Chumashim and Tanachim, since they are not written on parchment in Ksav Ashuris, may be handled without washing ones hands. If, however, a person knows that his hands have come in contact with something that would require washing, then the hands must be washed before touching sefarim (M.B. 147:3). However, even washing does not permit one to touch the Torah scroll. However, washing would permit a person to touch a Megilla or a Navi scroll with his bare hands. Questions for Thought and Study

1. What is the significance of the number 8 in the Mishkan? See Rabbeinu Bachya 9:1 2. What tefilla did Aharon and Moshe say when they left the Ohel Moed, in Verse 9:23? See Rashi 9:23 3. Why does the Torah tell us that Uzziel was the uncle of Aharon? Couldnt it have just said that he was Amrams brother? See Rabbeinu Bachya 10:4 4. How did Moshe describe to Bnei Yisrael each kosher and non-kosher animal? See Rashi 11:3 5. Who is the king of all birds? See Rabbeinu Bachya 11:13 Answers: 1. The eighth day of preparation for the Kohanim (which was the first day of Nisan) was the first full day of service. There also were eight garments of the Kohen Gadol, eight staves, eight [listed] spices, and no animal may be sacrificed before its eighth day of life. 2. Aharon and Moshe said: Let the graciousness of G-d be upon us. May it be G-ds will that the Shechina should rest on our work. 3. The Torah wanted to tell us that Uzziel was a "rodeph shalom" - a pursuer of peace - similar to his nephew Aharon. 4. Moshe held up each animal and showed it to Bnei Yisrael. 5. The nesher is the king of birds. That is why it is listed first.

23

The Internet edition is sponsored by Rabbi and Mrs. Avraham Isenberg in memory of Mr. Sam Mermelstein o"h and Mrs. Sara Mermelstein, o"h. Prepared by the faculty, Kollel, and student body of: Hebrew Theological College 7135 N. Carpenter Road, Skokie, IL 60077 Under the direction of Rabbi Ben-Zion Rand, Editor. To sponsor Likutei Peshatim for an upcoming Shabbat, please contact Mrs. Naomi Samber at HTC (847) 982-2500. To subscribe or to remove your address from this list, or if you have any questions, please send a message to: Naomi Samber <samber@htc.edu> The URL for the Hebrew Theological College web page is: <http://www.htc.edu>. The URL for Likutei Peshatim: <http://htc.edu/lpnow.html>. For access to archives of all previous issues, go to: <http://shamash.org/listarchives/likpeshat/> All times listed are for Chicago only. Please consult a local guide for times that apply to your location. Please forward this document freely to all those who may be interested. Please tell your friends to subscribe. Copyright 2008, Hebrew Theological College. Likutei Peshatim is endowed by Les & Ethel Sutker in loving memory of Max and Mary Sutker and Louis and Lillian Klein, a"h. May their memory be a blessing. Prepared by the faculty, Kollel, and student body of Hebrew Theological College under the direction of Rabbi Ben-Zion Rand, Editor To sponsor Likutei Peshatim for a future Shabbos, call Naomi Samber, managing editor, 847-982-2500, Fax 847-982-2507, email samber@htc.edu Details listed in the Sponsorship Section are the responsibility of the sponsors and not of Hebrew Theological College Please do not read Likutei Peshatim during the Torah reading or during the repetition of the Shmoneh Esrei Likutei Peshatim Has Torah Content - Please Treat It Respectfully

Rabbi Naftali Reich

Legacy

Parshas Shemini: Forbidden Waters Certain practices are just too vile and despicable for civilized people to endure, especially when it comes to food. The thought of chewing and swallowing the repulsive little vermin that live under rocks or in stagnant pools of water would make anyone gag. And yet, when the Torah in this weeks portion delineates the organisms we are forbidden to eat there is a detailed mention of all sorts of reptiles, vermin and other loathsome creatures. Why does the Torah find it necessary to forbid something we would find repulsive in any case? The Talmud addresses this problem and explains that Hashem wanted the Jewish people to accumulate additional reward. Therefore, He forbade them to eat vermin, so that they would be rewarded for their abstention. But the questions still remain: Why would we deserve to be rewarded for refraining to do something we find despicable and revolting and would never do anyway? Arent we rewarded for overcoming our natural inclinations in order to comply with Hashems will? In the case the prohibition against vermin, however, can we in all honesty claim that our compliance shows our high regard for Hashems commandments or does it rather show our concern for our own fastidious nature? The answer to these questions reveals one of the fundamental paradoxes of human nature. Forbidden waters are sweet, proclaims the wise and ever insightful King Solomon in Proverbs. We seem to have a peculiar fascination with anything that is forbidden to us. And the more stringent the prohibition the greater the attraction. Are we ever more inclined to run our forefinger along a wall than when we see a sign declaring Wet Paint? Why does the forbidden exert such a strong attraction to us? Because it triggers our inherent egotistical conviction that we are in control of our own lives, that we are the masters of our destiny. Therefore, we automatically view every prohibition as a challenge, an assault on our supposed independence and self-sufficiency, and we are drawn to violate the prohibition simply to prove to ourselves that we can do whatever we please, that no one else can tell us what to do. In this light, we can well understand why we deserve to be rewarded for refraining from eating vermin. Certainly, we are not naturally predisposed to eating the slime of the earth. But when the Torah imposes a legal prohibition on these selfsame vermin they suddenly become strangely appealing. And when we resist this temptation generated by the commandment itself we are rewarded for our compliance. In this way, the Talmud tells us, Hashem rewarded us with additional merit simply by imposing a prohibition on the most loathsome foods imaginable. Two mothers brought their young sons to the seaside on a warm summer day. They placed the children in a sandbox and gave them pails and shovels. Then they walked a short distance away to sit and enjoy the balmy weather. Before walking off, one of the mothers bent down to her child and said, Remember, my precious little one, dont go near the waves. Theyre very dangerous. You might get hurt. No sooner had she sat down, however, than her little boy was off to stick his toes into the surf. The mother ran to retrieve him. She brought him back to the sandbox and repeated her admonition, more sternly this time. Minutes later, the little boy was off to the water once again. During all of

24

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

comfortable and sometimes challenging means that you are living life productively. I am reminded of a man who is told by his wife that the blinker on their car is not working. He takes the car to the mechanic, and after a bit of tinkering the mechanic tells the man to go to the back of the car and see if the blinker is now working. The man stares at the back of the car as the mechanic turns the blinker on. The man calls out, "Now it is working...now it's not... Now it's working... now it's not." The message of the Torah is that sometimes mitzvos will come naturally, but that is not always the case. That doesn't mean anything is wrong. Sometimes there will be a very real craving to do the wrong thing. The Jew might be heard saying, "I'd really like to, but my Father in heaven has told me not to." And if you listen closely you will hear G-d's Voice as well as He says, "I know that it is tempting. I know about the parades, I know about your challenges, I know where you are coming from. As I assign this new exercise to you, I am with you, and I have confidence that you will succeed." With best wishes for a wonderful Shabbos
Rabbi Mordechai Rhine, originally of Monsey, New York, is the Director of TEACH613, an organization which promotes Jewish ethics and education in the Cherry Hill/ Philadelphia area. He is also the Rav of Young Israel of Cherry Hill. Rabbi Rhine is the author of a popular book, "The Magic of Shabbos: A Journey Through the Shabbos Experience," (Judaica Press, 1998) and the presenter of an audio series entitled The Perek Shira Collection by TEACH613, both available in stores or at www.teach613.org. To invite Rabbi Rhine to speak in your community, please contact him at RMRhine@teach613.org or 908-770-9072. 2011, Rabbi Mordechai Rhine and TEACH613

this commotion, the other child remained in the sandbox, completely focused on the castle he was building. I dont understand, the frustrated mother said to her friend. You didnt say a word to your son, and yet he hasnt even looked at the water. But my son keeps running to the water even though I explained to him how dangerous it is. Her friend smiled. Thats it exactly. You forbid your son from going to the water, so he has to prove himself by going. I didnt say anything to my son, so he couldnt care less. He is far more interested in the sand. In our own lives, we can all recognize this tendency in ourselves, whether in issues as momentous as the challenges of Torah observance or as relatively minor as exceeding the speed limit. Somehow, we feel diminished when we subject ourselves to restrictions imposed upon us by others. But if we were truly honest with ourselves, we would realize that accepting the authority of the Torah does not diminish us in any way. On the contrary, it allows us to be directed by the Divine Wisdom rather than our own limited vision and rewards us with serenity and fulfillment that would otherwise be far beyond our reach.
Legacy, Copyright &copy 2011 by Rabbi Naftali Reich and Torah.org. Rabbi Reich is on the faculty of the Ohr Somayach Tanenbaum Education Center. Questions or comments? Email feedback@torah.org. Join the Jewish Learning Revolution! Torah.org: The Judaism Site brings this and a host of other classes to you every week. Visit http://torah.org or email learn@torah.org to get your own free copy of this mailing. Need to change or stop your subscription? Please visit our subscription center, http://torah.org/subscribe/ -- see the links on that page. Permission is granted to redistribute, but please give proper attribution and copyright to the author and Torah.org. Both the author and Torah.org reserve certain rights. Email copyrights@torah.org for full information. Torah.org: The Judaism Site Project Genesis, Inc. 122 Slade Avenue, Suite 250 Baltimore, MD 21208 http://www.torah.org/ learn@torah.org (410) 602-1350 FAX: (410) 510-1053

Rabbi Mordechai Rhine Is Your Blinker Working? Much of this week's Parsha is devoted to the topic of keeping kosher. The Jewish attitude to kosher observance is quite unique. It is not that Kosher food is cleaner, healthier, and tastier. Rather, we are willing to acknowledge that non-kosher food is very tempting. But eating non-kosher food is against Torah law. In fact our Rabbis clarify our attitude when they tell us, "Do not say, 'I couldn't possibly eat pork.' I most definitely could, but my Father in heaven has told me not to." Why is this attitude which recognizes temptation so important? Because there will be times that you will be truly tempted to do the wrong thing. Sometimes you will encounter bad which is really appealing. If you observe merely because it is attractive to do so then temptation might be too great for you. But if you recognize observance as a decision, then when challenged you can say, "It sounds tempting. But my Father in heaven has instructed me..." One of the most important stories about the Chofetz Chayim is when as a young boy he took an apple from a vendor without paying for it. A few days later, when his Rebbe discussed the laws of theft, young Yisroel Meir realized that he had done wrong. He asked his mother for a coin to buy something, and then proceeded to buy an apple from the same vendor. When she gave him an apple he promptly placed it back in her cart. Some people think that the Chofetz Chayim was simply born saintly and righteous, and lived his life without challenge. They think the Chofetz Chayim was born without temptation to steal, to waste time, or to speak Lashon Horah. Such an attitude makes for good folk tale material. But it isn't accurate. Little Yisroel Meir became the legendary Chofetz Chayim because when he was challenged he said, "It sounds tempting. But my Father in heaven told me not to." Understanding challenge is key to success in our own lives and the lives of our children and students whom we mentor. When Rabbi Elchonon Wasserman was in the United States raising money for his Yeshiva in Europe he was once driven through the streets of Manhattan. It was Thanksgiving Day, and Rabbi Wasserman sensed that there was something big happening on the next street. Although the driver was trying to avoid the congested streets near the parade, Rabbi Wasserman insisted that they park the car and walk over to witness the festivities. After watching the festivities for a few minutes Rabbi Wasserman told the driver that he was now ready to return to the car. When the driver expressed confusion over the great Rabbi's behavior, Rabbi Wasserman explained simply, "Now I understand." "I have many American students in my Yeshiva," the Rabbi continued, "students who traveled from America to Europe to study Torah. It is my responsibility as their mentor to understand their challenges, to appreciate the magnitude of their decisions. I need to understand the culture in which they grew up- the pomp and glitz which they gave up in order to study Torah. It was worth the few minutes to watch the parade. Now I can better understand them." Appreciating challenge is a very powerful way to reach success. We may encounter a craving to say, to eat, or to do something that is not correct. It is much more comfortable when the "kosher" way is tastier, cleaner, and clearly more healthy. But sometimes we have this craving. The conflict between the desire to do the right thing and the desire to fulfill the craving can sometimes make it feel like our body is not working properly. One eye-opening attitude is to think of G-d as your exercise coach. As a person becomes stronger greater challenges are placed before him. After all, an exercise bike would not be much of an exercise bike if not for the tension control that can be adjusted. The fact that life is sometimes

Rabbi's Message

Lord Jonathan Sacks Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth

Covenant & Conversation

Shmini 5771 Shmini tells the tragic story of how the great inauguration of the tabernacle, a day about which the sages said that G-d rejoiced as much as he had at the creation of the universe, was overshadowed by the death of two of Aarons sons, Nadav and Avihu: Aarons sons Nadav and Avihu took their censers, put fire in them and added incense; and they offered unauthorized fire before the Lord, which [G-d] had not instructed them [to offer]. Fire came out from the presence of the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord. (Lev. 10: 1-2) Many explanations were given by the sages and later commentators as to what Nadav and avihus sin actually was. But the simplest answer, given by the torah itself here and elsewhere (Num. 3: 4, 26: 61), is that they acted on their own initiative. They did what they had not been commanded. They acted spontaneously, perhaps out of sheer enthusiasm in the mood of the moment, offering unauthorized fire. Evidently it is dangerous to act spontaneously in matters of the spirit. But is it? Moshe acted spontaneously in far more fraught circumstances when he shattered the tablets of stone on seeing the Israelites cavorting around the Golden Calf. The tablets hewn and engraved by G-d himself were perhaps the holiest objects there have ever been. Yet Moshe was not punished for his act. The sages said that though he acted of his own accord without first consulting G-d, G-d assented to his act. Rashi refers to this moment in his very last comment on the Torah, whose last verse (Deut. 34: 12) speaks about all the strong hand, and all the great awe, which Moshe performed before the eyes of all Israel: This refers to when Moshe] took the liberty of shattering the tablets before their eyes, as it is said, "I shattered thembefore your eyes."The Holy One, Blessed be He, consented to his opinion, as it is said, "which you shattered"--- 'More power to you for shattering them!' Why then was spontaneity wrong for Nadav and Avihu yet right for Moshe Rabbenu? The answer is that Nadav and Avihu were cohanim, priests. Moshe was a navi, a prophet. These are two different forms of religious leadership. They involve different tasks, different sensibilities, indeed different approaches to time itself. The Cohen serves G-d in as way that never changes over time (except, of course, when the Temple was destroyed and its service, presided over by the cohanim, came to an end). The prophet serves G-d in a way that is constantly changing over time. When people are at ease the prophet warns of forthcoming catastrophe. When they suffer catastrophe and are in the depths of despair, the prophet brings consolation and hope. The words said by the cohen are always the same. The priestly blessing uses the same words today as it did in the days of Moshe and Aaron. But the words used by a prophet are never the same. No two prophets use the same style (Sanhedrin 89a). So for a prophet spontaneity is of the essence. But for the cohen engaged in Divine service it is completely out of place. Why the difference? After all, the priest and the prophet were serving the same G-d. The Torah uses a kind of device we have only recently reinvented in a somewhat different form. Stereophonic sound sound coming from two different speakers was developed in the 1930s to give the impression of audible perspective. In the 1950s 3D film was developed to do for sight what stereo had done for sound. From the work of Pierre Broca in the 1860s to today, using MRI and PET scans, neuroscientists have striven to understand how our bicameral brain allows us to respond more intelligently to our environment than would otherwise have been possible. Twin perspectives are needed fully to experience reality.

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

The twin perspectives of the priest and prophet correspond to the twin perspectives on creation represented, respectively, by Genesis 1:1 2:3 (spoken in the priestly voice, with an emphasis on order, structure, divisions and boundaries), and Genesis 2: 4 3: 24 (spoken in the prophetic voice, with an emphasis on the nuances and dynamics of interpersonal relationships). Now let us consider one other area in which there was an ongoing argument between structure and spontaneity, namely tefillah, prayer, specifically the Amidah. We know that after the destruction of the Temple, Rabban Gamliel and his court at Yavneh established a standard text for the weekday Amidah, comprising eighteen or later nineteen blessings in a precise order (Mishnah Berakhot 4: 3). Not everyone, however, agreed. Rabbi Joshua held that individuals could say an abridged form of the Amidah. According to some interpretations, Rabbi Eliezer was opposed to a fixed text altogether and held that one should, each day, say something new (Yerushalmi Berakhot 4). It seems that this disagreement is precisely parallel to another one about ?the source of the daily prayers: It has been stated: R. Jose son of R. Hanina said: The prayers were instituted by the Patriarchs. R. Joshua b. Levi says: The prayers were instituted to replace the daily sacrifices. (Berakhot 26b) According to R. Jose son of R. Hanina, Shacharit was established by Abraham, Mincha by Isaac, and Maariv by Jacob. According to R. Joshua b. Levi, Shacharit corresponds to the daily morning sacrifice, Mincha to the afternoon sacrifice. On the face of it, the disagreement has no practical consequences, but in fact it does. If the prayers were instituted by the patriarchs, then their origin is prophetic. If they were established to replace the sacrifices, then their provenance is priestly. Priests were forbidden to act spontaneously, but prophets did so as a matter of course. Someone who saw prayer as priestly would, like Rabban Gamliel, emphasise the importance of a precise text. One who saw it as prophetic would, like Rabbi Eliezer as understood by the Talmud Yerushalmi, value spontaneity and each day try to say something new. Tradition eventually resolved the matter in a most remarkable way. We say each Amidah twice, once privately and silently in the tradition of the prophets, then a second time publicly and collectively by the sheliach tzibbur, the readers repetition, in the tradition of a priest offering a sacrifice at the Temple. (It is easy to understand why there is no readers repetition in the Maariv service: there was no sacrifice at night time). During the silent Amidah we are permitted to add extra words of our own. During the repetition we are not. That is because prophets acted spontaneously, but priests did not. The tragedy of Nadav and Avihu is that they made the mistake of acting like prophets when they were, in fact, priests. But we have inherited both traditions. For without structure, Judaism would have no continuity, but without spontaneity it would have no fresh life. The challenge is to maintain the balance without ever confusing the place of each. In The Struggle For Democracy The World Should Not Forget The Voice Of Prophets Credo - The Times - March 2011 As political turmoil continues in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere, it is worth reflecting on the nature of politics and the fundamental values it aspires to. The West was shaped by two profoundly different civilizations, brought together in creative tension by Christianity. One was ancient Greece, the other ancient Israel: Hebraism and Hellenism as Matthew Arnold called them. Each gave us a political value but they were not the same. The Hebrew Bible gave us the idea we call rights. A classic example occurred during the reign of King David. David, gifted warrior and religious poet, is guilty of a serious sin. He commits adultery with a woman called Bathsheba. To avoid detection he sends her husband Uriah to the front line of battle, where he dies.The prophet Nathan is faced with the challenge of how to get the king to understand the wrongs he has done. He comes to David asking his advice. There is a town, he says, where there is a rich man and a poor man. The rich man has large flocks. The poor man has only one lamb, which he cares for as if it were one of his children. He shares his food with it and lets it sleep in his lap. A visitor came to stay with the rich man, who was too mean to slaughter one of his own animals and instead seized the poor mans lamb, from which he prepared a meal for his guest. What does David think of his conduct? Is it excusable? David is righteously indignant. The man deserves to die, he says. You, says Nathan, are the man. David, to his credit, instantly understands and says, I have sinned. Note what is happening here, politically rather than morally. Nathan is saying that the king has offended Uriahs rights. He has taken his wife. One wrong leading to another, he is also responsible for Uriahs death. The idea, common in the ancient world, that a king can seize what he likes, that might makes right, has no place in this story. Uriah had rights, to his life and to the integrity of his marriage. Uriah was not an Israelite. He was a Hittite, what today we would call an ethnic minority, but that too does not affect the story. Its principle is that human rights set limits to the legitimate use of power. To the Greeks we owe a different value, that of democracy, instituted in Athens twenty-six centuries ago by Solon. Like rights, democracy is a

massive gain for human dignity, giving the people a share in power and turning rule into collective self-rule. But it did not last long. By the time we reach Plato, in the fourth pre-Christian century, he is already expressing his doubts, calling democracy a prelude to tyranny. Democracy is rule by the majority, but it can lead, as John Stuart Mill put it, to the tyranny of the majority. Lord Acton, the great nineteenth century historian, explained what went wrong. It is bad, he said, to be oppressed by a minority, but it is worse to be oppressed by a majority. When a minority becomes corrupt it can be resisted by the majority. But from the absolute will of an entire people there is no appeal, no redemption, no refuge. The Athenians, he said, were brave, patriotic, pious, tolerant and humane. They were the only people of antiquity to grow great through democratic institutions. Then he adds: But the possession of unlimited power, which corrodes the conscience, hardens the heart, and confounds the understanding of monarchs, exercised its demoralizing influence. The emancipated people of Athens became a tyrant. We tend to associate democracy with human rights and vice versa as if the one inevitably led to the other. But there is no necessary connection between them. The fact that for us they grew together has to do with the specific history of the West and the way it combined two different traditions. Lord Acton drew an important conclusion. The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities. Minorities have rights, inalienable rights as Thomas Jefferson put it, but in a democracy they do not necessarily have power. The question then is: which prevails, rights or power? I pray that in pursuit of democracy the world does not forget the voice of the prophets and the rights of minorities.. Rabbi A. Leib Scheinbaum

25

Peninim on the Torah

Parshas Shemini Moshe said, "This it the thing that Hashem has commanded you to do; then the glory of Hashem will appear to you." (9:6) What was the davar, "thing," that Moshe Rabbeinu commanded them to do? The Toras Kohanim writes: "Moshe told Klal Yisrael 'that' yetzer hora, evil-inclination, you shall remove from your hearts; then all of you will be (bound) together with one fear (of Hashem) and one counsel: to serve the Almighty, and that His service should be exclusive to you. If you will achieve this, then the glory of Hashem will appear to you." We still do not have clarity concerning the identity of "that" yetzer hora. From which of the yetzer hora's advocacies were they cautioned to distance themselves? Exactly what were they to remove from their hearts? The Brisker Rav, zl, explains that when Moshe revealed to Aharon and his sons that they were to be privileged to perceive the Revelation of Hashem during the Inauguration of the Mishkan, the possibility existed that this experience could be self-deceiving. They might end up executing the service just for the purpose of perceiving the Shechinah, not in a manner l'shem Shomayim, for the sake of Heaven. Yes - one can delude himself even with the proper intentions. We serve Hashem for one purpose: to carry out His will. To serve Hashem for the spiritual ecstasy associated with experiencing the Divine detracts from the proper motive inherent in carrying out His command. This is the yetzer hora to which Moshe is alluding. One must be totally sincere when serving Hashem. His intentions should be for one purpose only: to carry out Hashem's will - nothing else. Horav Chaim Kamil, zl, applies the Brisker Rav's exposition to explain the necessity for such perfection during the Inauguration of the Mishkan. Specifically because this was the initial offering, the dawn of the holy service in the Mishkan, it was absolutely essential that everything be perfectly aligned, that the intentions and motives be only oriented towards carrying out the will of the Almighty. The Chanukas HaMishkan, Inauguration of the Mishkan, was a seminal event in the formation of Klal Yisrael as a Torah nation under Hashem. The term chinuch, which is the root of chanukas, means an individual's commencement on the journey/road which he will be traveling for quite some time. Chinuch is a reference to a beginning. As Klal Yisrael stood at the threshold of a new service to Hashem, it was important that this chinuch be accomplished in a manner free of any vestiges of personal consideration, regardless of how sublime they may be. The influence of this beginning would be far-reaching. This idea applies equally to chinuch ha'banim, educating our children. If we hope to see Torah nachas, satisfaction and pleasure, from our offspring, we must see to it that from "day one" the goals and objectives of the child's education are focused l'shem Shomayim, for no objective other than sanctifying Hashem's Name. We can then aspire to see true greatness from our children. The idea of acting solely because this is the tzivui, commandment, of Hashem is underscored by the Chidushei HaRim as he addresses the sin of Nadav and Avihu. Chazal offer a number of infractions associated with the behavior of Nadav and Avihu. One important note must be emphasized: Nadav and Avihu were tzaddikim, righteous men, of the highest order. Any allusion to sin on their part is relative to their exalted level of sanctity. When a garment is bright white, any taint, the slightest speck, stands out.

26

The Torah does state a "sin" in connection with their service on that fateful day: "And they brought before Hashem an alien fire that He had not commanded them," asher lo tzivah osome - "that He (Hashem) had not commanded them" (Vayikra 10:1). According to the Ramban, this is a reference to their offering of the daily incense upon the Mizbayach HaPenimi, Inner Altar, even though Hashem had not commanded them to do so. Was their sin that egregious? We derive from here that everything depends on the command. In every area of Torah and mitzvos, our behavior has to be in accordance with Hashem's command. Initiative is a wonderful thing as long as it is consistent with Hashem's command. They acted on their own, setting a dangerous precedent. The Chidushei HaRim notes that, if this is the punishment for acting without first being commanded by Hashem, can we begin to imagine the incredible reward in store for one who acts solely because Hashem has commanded him to do so? The individual who does not question, who acts unequivocally, with total equanimity, because Hashem has commanded him to do so is truly worthy of boundless reward. This is what is meant by the term asher kideshanu b'mitzvosav, "Who has sanctified us with His commandments. By executing our duties purely because they are Hashem's command, we become consecrated to Him. And Aharon was silent. (10:3) In order to understand completely the spiritual level of Aharon HaKohen to have reached a response of "non-response," as he demonstrated to the tragic deaths of his sons, one must acknowledge the depth of devotion to Hashem that is personified by his middah, attribute of bitachon, trust. A true adam ha'shaleim, spiritually complete/refined individual, senses no other factors controlling his life other than Hashem and the Torah. Such an individual fears nothing and no one, other than Hashem. If the Torah instructs him to act - he acts, regardless of the personal consequences. If the Torah instructs him to desist - he desists, without considering the ramifications. His trust is total and unequivocal. He understands that no creature - man or animal - can do him harm, unless it has been mandated by Hashem. In Tehillim 4:9, David Hamelech says, "In peace, in harmony, I lie down and sleep; for You, Hashem, will make me dwell safe and secure." The commentators explain that David Hamelech's sleep is unlike that of other men. When a warrior goes to battle, he sleeps out of exhaustion and always with fear - with one eye open. His sleep is often restless, as he is constantly waking up to the slightest sound. He is always vigilant. David Hamelech acted in the battlefield in a manner not unlike the way he acted at home, in his palace. He does not sense any unusual fear, other than his constant fear of Heaven. There was only one controlling entity in his life: Hashem. Thus, he slept in harmony and peace, because his trust allowed him to feel secure and safe. Moshe Rabbeinu and Aharon HaKohen certainly had reason to fear for their lives when they were commanded to approach Pharaoh with a demand that he release the Jews. Imagine, going to the most powerful despot in the world, a man responsible for the brutal persecution of an entire nation, a tyrant who feared no one: Should they not have feared for their lives? Pharaoh was playing for "keeps." He was not taking any prisoners. Yet, Moshe and Aharon confronted him with total equanimity, without any fear whatsoever. Their trust in Hashem was consummate and irrevocable. They feared no man - only Hashem. Horav Moshe Reis, zl, a distinguished disciple of Novardok, derives from here that, given the right opportunity and the proper commitment, an individual is capable of transforming his natural tendencies. The individual who is prone to fear and who, under normal circumstances, has reason to be afraid can overcome that sense of fear as if it were non-existent. One who truly fears Hashem fears no man. One who fears man is lacking in his fear of Hashem. To fear Hashem means to fear only Hashem. Rav Reis continues by applying this thought to Aharon HaKohen's reaction to the deaths of Nadav and Avihu. The Torah tells us, Vayidom Aharon, "And Aharon was silent." Aharon is lauded for his silence. Why? What else could he have done? All of the screaming and chest-beating was not going to bring them back. If anything, Aharon was challenged to declare, "All that Hashem does is for good." He could also have said, Gam zu l'tovah, "This is also for the (good)." Chazal teach us that just as one blesses over the good, so, too, must he bless over what is (or seems to be) bad. These are guidelines that are considered to be the appropriate Jewish response to tragedy and adversity. If these rules concerning attitude apply to the common Jew, how much more so are they incumbent upon Aharon! Rav Reis explains that Va'yidom Aharon, complete silence, no reaction whatsoever, is the optimum level of response. It indicates total acceptance - complete silence. One who declares: Kol man d'avid Rachmana l'tav avid, demonstrates by his words that - yes - he has every reason to complain, to weep, to react, but he does not, because Hashem's decisions are for good. The desire to cry out exists, but he controls himself, due to his belief in Hashem. After all is said and done, he is definitely bothered, but, as a sign of respect, he is accepting. Va'yidom Aharon is even greater, because essentially he has no response. Total silence; complete acceptance. He seeks no justification for Hashem's actions. He seeks no response, because he has no questions.

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

One who accepts the Din, Judgment, is truly a laudable person. One who is completely silent is even greater. He has no reason to attest to Hashem's goodness, because, as far as he is concerned, he has not experienced anything problematic. Aharon accepted the decree of the Almighty with joy. He had no questions; he needed no answers. He did not have to justify Hashem's actions precisely because he had no questions. How does one achieve such distinction? How does one reach such a spiritual plateau? Anivus, humility/modesty. One who thinks highly of himself does not allow Hashem to be part a of his life. His arrogance takes up too much space within him . Aharon always viewed himself as being unworthy of his noble position. He always felt a searing sense of blame for the sin of the Golden Calf. Could he have prevented it? Could he have somehow lessened its effect? These are questions with which he lived throughout his life. He did not run to the mizrach vant, eastern wall, set aside for distinguished leadership. The rear of the shul was fine with him. He was the eastern wall. Wherever he sat, whatever position he assumed, became the eastern wall. When Aharon was instructed to approach the Mizbayach, Altar, to initiate the services in the Sanctuary, he was reluctant. He was ashamed. After all, did he not play a role in catalyzing the Golden Calf? Moshe told him, "Do not be ashamed, for this is why you were chosen for the position of Kohen Gadol." Aharon taught us a lesson: Do not cop out. Do not be reluctant to confront your errors. Do not gloss over your indiscretions by justifying your actions, seeking excuses, or blaming someone else. That might be human nature, but it was not Aharon HaKohen. We possess an almost uncanny ability to produce a number of plausible reasons to justify our actions. We can transform the most heinous sin into a positive command, an act of kindness. The commentators present a number of possible justifications of Aharon's actions concerning the Golden Calf. He could have used these excuses, but, he did not. He took full responsibility, understanding that for an individual of his spiritual standing, the bar is raised, a higher level of moral and spiritual rectitude is expected. Aharon was willing to accept the consequences. This was the greatness of Aharon, and this is why he was able to react as he did to the tragic deaths of his sons. We now understand why Hashem chose him to be the Kohen Gadol. Taking responsibility and acting with total commitment to Hashem are tall orders for the average individual, but- to the Kohen Gadol, this is what defines him; this is the only way he is able to live. This may you eat from everything that is in the water. (11:9) The Torah details two physical signs that distinguish a kosher fish. The fish must have fins and scales. Once a fish possesses these two signs, it needs no further preparation to render it kosher. When Yaakov Avinu blessed Yosef's two sons, Menashe and Ephraim, he said, "And may they proliferate abundantly like fish within the land" (Bereishis 48:16). Simply explained, fish are not subject to the evil eye, since they live calmly beneath the surface of the water, unseen by man. Horav Yitzchak Zilberstein, Shlita, quotes a fascinating explanation. The various "challenges" that a kosher animal, wild beast, or fowl must undergo until it is prepared appropriately for the table of an observant Jew are well-known. Many prohibitions prevent these kosher creatures from entering the mouth of a Jew. First, the animal must undergo a kosher shechitah, ritual slaughtering. There is no room for error. The knife must be inspected; the animal must be whole-- with no parts missing. The slightest puncture in a vital organ disqualifies the animal. Once an animal has been slaughtered and its vital organs checked, its fat and organs that are not permitted to be eaten must be removed. We now have before us a ritually-slaughtered kosher carcass. It is not yet ready for the table. One must remove the blood by washing and then salting the flesh. Once that process has been completed, the next step is preparation. We must be careful not to mix it with milk or any milk derivative. We take this all for granted, but it is a demanding process. Unlike the animal, beast or fowl, a fish does not have to fulfill such demanding criteria before it can be eaten. A fish needs scales and fins in order to be accepted on a Jew's table. That is all. A fish that is born with simanei taharah, kosher signs, remains in its state of kashrus forever. No more demands; no shechitah; no issues concerning milk; its blood is acceptable. A fish is taken from the water and can immediately be placed on the kosher table. It has fulfilled its requirements by virtue of its birth. This is why our Patriarch Yaakov chose to bless Yosef's children to be like fish. Just as they were born into holiness, to a righteous father and mother, so should they remain on this exalted spiritual level throughout their entire lives - just like fish, who at birth have already fulfilled the requirements of kashrus. Yaakov prayed that his grandsons and all future progeny should remain pure and holy throughout their lives. Challenges to their spiritual integrity should simply disappear as if they were non-existent. The yetzer hora, with his many deceptions, should not succeed in turning them away from Hashem. That you shall not make yourself impure through them. (11:43) The laws of tumah v'taharah, ritual contamination and purity, impress upon us that the basic pre-requisite for our ability to execute Hashem's mitzvos-- and to fulfill our moral and spiritual obligations-- is that we maintain our physical bodies on an elevated level of ritual purity. Only then can we hope to remain receptive, obedient and efficient instruments,

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

imbued with our Heavenly mission to carry out the will of Hashem. Ritual impurity taints the body, as well as the soul. It is something which is not observed by the naked eye, but rather, perceived by the knowing soul. In a thesis on the laws of tumah v'taharah, Horav S.R. Hirsch, zl, underscores this idea time and again. The present chapter of the Torah addresses the tumos which fall under the category of tumas maga, impurity resulting from coming into physical contact with an unclean thing. We specifically address the laws of tumas neveilah and sheretz, impurity resulting from contact with the carcasses of all large mammals and eight small animal species. First, what is tumah? The dead body of a human being creates a scenario which fosters the pernicious state known as tumah. When we see the body of a recently deceased person, we see what appears to be a human being who has succumbed completely to the power of physical forces. The dead person seems to illustrate the power of the physical and its domination of the human being. This cannot be further from the truth. It would be true, if this body that lays before was indeed the human being that until recently was vibrant and alive. This is, however, not true. We know that the corpse which we see before us is not the real human being, because man's true being cannot be affected by physical forces. Hashem nosan; Hashem lokach, "The Almighty gives; the Almighty takes." The soul of life that breathes vibrancy into the earthly shell that lays before us departed before the physical body became subject to the laws of earth's natural forces. Once the soul of life has been removed from the body, "nature" takes over. Otherwise, nature cannot reign over the handiwork of the Divine. Furthermore, during the soul's "tenure" in the body, while the life-giving force of what is the essence of the human being was a part of the body/shell, the person was a vibrant, free-willed, self-determining, G-dly individual. Now that the body has succumbed to the forces of "nature" that body/person has been liberated from subservience to mere physical forces. The body has been elevated -- with all of its capacities for action and also for pleasure-- into the realm of true freedom, where it can perform the moral task of its life of its own free will. In other words, the essential person is now granted the opportunity to serve Hashem, unencumbered by the demands of physicality. Life allows man to dominate and reign over the physical aspects of his body. He is endowed with emotions, intelligence, and the ability to execute his plans of action and to employ the physical aspects of his body, with all of its inherent powers, drives and faculties, to the free-willed discharge of Hashem's commandments and duties. This is the meaning of life. While we live, we use the physical components of our body to carry out Hashem's mitzvos. One might think, and regrettably this is what the secular world would have us believe, that, in the face of the phenomenon of death, all of this comes to an abrupt end. The individual who has until now lived - dies. He no longer is capable of anything. With death comes an end to all of his functioning. If so, why bother? It is almost like the old clich?, "Life is tough, and then you die." One has nothing to which to look forward. In the face of the phenomenon of death, the secular world preaches the frailty of man, his submission to the physical forces that exert their control over him. It cannot be further from the truth. One must always be aware of his constant freedom to choose life and service to Hashem, in complete dominance over the physical. With this proud awareness of his physical freedom, he remains forearmed against the materialistic notions that prey on the unknowing, the timid, the weak, the ones who believe, "Let us live it up, for tomorrow we will die." They are "dead" wrong. True, death brings with it an end to the physical, but only to the extent that the source of life, the neshamah, soul, is transferred, elevated to a new sphere of activity, a world where materialism and physicality play no role whatsoever. Tumah sets in with the advent of death, because it is at this time that the delusion concerning the meaning of life and death is fostered in one's mind. At the moment of death, the living allow themselves to think that the human being that lays before them has succumbed to the power of physical forces. We, therefore, reiterate that the corpse before us is not that human being. What lies before us is an empty shell. The human being has been uplifted to live on in a higher world, the eternal World of Truth. Having said this, Rav Hirsch elaborates on the fact that susceptibility to tumah is limited to articles actually used by people for specific purposes, and, even then, only to certain type of articles. Tumah is not a physical condition which attaches itself to the physical properties of the articles involved. Rather, tumah is an abstract concept which is negated from all phases of human life, represented by utensils. Keilim, utensils, have specific uses; thus, they represent human life and endeavor. For instance, a chest is an object in which one stores his possessions; a tool is used for creative work; a pot is used for preparing food to nourish and satiate a person. Thus, vessels appear as symbols of specific aspects of human endeavor. Inasmuch as Judaism encompasses much symbolism, tumah is no different. Therefore, the concept of tumah does not apply to all vessels indiscriminately, but only to those that represent the most significant phases of human life, which the laws relating to tumah seek to convey in symbolic terms. When symbolizing an abstract concept, it is essential that one be specific in his definition of the symbol and its connotation. By doing this, the symbolic and conceptual significance of the concept is preserved. Rav

Hirsch shares a number of examples with us. Tzitzis serve as a reminder of the moral sanctity inherent in human clothing. Therefore, the garments specified as requiring Tzitzis are those made of wool or linen, since these materials are most commonly used for clothing. The Mezuzah denotes the sanctity of the Jewish home. Consistent with this idea, the Mezuzah is placed only in specific rooms, which by their spaciousness and arrangement symbolize the concept of a home. In the case of prohibited creative labor on Shabbos, the activities which are singled out are those which best reflect man's constructive power over matter. In the same spirit, the laws prohibiting the mixture of milk and meat, eating, cooking and partaking pleasure are stated only concerning those mixtures consisting of the meat and milk of kosher/clean animals, as they are man's principal source of nourishment. Undomesticated animals and fowl are excluded. All of the above choices ensure us that the symbolic character which conveys the abstract idea is concise, clean and clearly defined. Likewise, in the laws of tumah, we are deliberate in the choice of articles. Tumah susceptibility is limited to those articles which best characterize the human personality. Accordingly, these laws specify three distinct categories of utensils. First, are those utensils made of wood, or any animal or vegetable material. Typically, this is a reference to articles used to store man's possessions or to make his clothing. This category of utensils identifies man as part of society and as an active user of his possessions. The second category is comprised of metal utensils, whose outstanding feature is that they are used as tools. Earthenware utensils comprise the third category. These are, for the most part, vessels intended for the preservation and preparation of foods. These represent man in his foodprocuring activities. In summation: the ideas conveyed by the laws relating to unclean vessels and utensils admonish us to create boudaries to define our relationship with the society that surrounds us. The manner in which we handle our possessions and our activities, both at work and during pleasure activities, must always be on a pristine level of moral and ethical rectitude. Moral purity should highlight our determination to carry out the objectives set for us by the Mishkan and its holy appurtenances. Va'ani Tefillah Mi kamocha ba'eilim Hashem. Who is like You among the Heavenly powers, Hashem! In the Talmud Gittin 56b, Chazal interpret this pasuk in a somewhat unusual manner. They see in the word eilim which is spelled missing a yud, an allusion to the word eeleim, mute. Thus, they explain the pasuk to mean: Who is like You among the mutes? You hear the cries of suffering from Your people, yet You remain silent as if You were mute. This interpretation begs elucidation. Are we lauding Hashem for ignoring our suffering? Surely, there is a reason for His non-response to our pleas, but is this what we want to emphasize? Horav Shimon Schwab, zl, quotes Horav S.R. Hirsch, zl, who interprets eilim as a reference to the powerful forces of nature. The forces of nature are powerless to respond to the suffering of man. They are mute to his cries. Indeed, while the Jews suffered in Auschwitz, the birds continued their usual chirping, the sun still shone, and the flowers still blossomed. Nature took no notice of the indescribable suffering to which we were subjected. In Egypt, we suffered greatly. Yet, Hashem seemed to ignore our plight. We cried, and we begged; but He did not seem to hear us. The forces of nature are mute, but what about Hashem? Does He not hear our cries? This went through the minds of the Jewish slaves in Egypt. As they stood at the banks of the Red Sea, when their redemption from Egypt was finally realized, they perceived with greater clarity. Then they saw things through the spectacles of emunah. Their level of faith had risen, and they could now interpret "silence" in a different light. What they had not been able to understand previously, they now were able to exalt. One day, we will also achieve "closure" to our tzaros, and we will then "see" how it has all been truly beneficial. our husband, father, grandfather Horav Doniel Schur Z"L ..... " " " " ' , ,
Peninim on the Torah is in its 20th year of publication. The first fifteen years have been published in book form. The Fifteenth volume is available at your local book seller or directly from Rabbi Scheinbaum. He can be contacted at 216-321-5838 ext. 165 or by fax at 216-321-0588 Discounts are available for bulk orders or Chinuch/Kiruv organizations. This article is provided as part of Shema Yisrael Torah Network Permission is granted to redistribute electronically or on paper, provided that this notice is included intact. For information on subscriptions, archives, and other Shema Yisrael Classes, send mail to parsha@shemayisrael.co.il http://www.shemayisrael.co.il Jerusalem, Israel 732-370-3344

27

Rabbi Dovid Seigel Parshas Parah - Yechezkel 36:16 This week's Haftorah, read in conjunction with Parshas Parah, describes the Jewish people's state of purity in the time of Mashiach. Hashem reminds them of their sinful behavior that kindled His wrath and sent them into exile. After endless years of darkness Hashem will purify His children and return them home. The prophet Yechezkel says in Hashem's name, "And I will sprinkle pure waters upon you that will be purify you from all your impurities and repulsive actions..." (36:25) Yechezkel is referring to the Jewish people's ultimate state of purity wherein Hashem will totally cleanse them from sin. Yechezkel compares this spiritual cleansing to

Haftorah

28

purification from ritual impurity. It is worthwhile to understand this particular analogy. Instead of comparing this purification to the traditional immersion process Yechezkel compares it to the sprinkling of the red heifer waters. This detailed and mysterious procedure purified one fro m direct contact with a corpse. Such contact produced the most severe state of ritual impurity and required a unique purification process. Yechezkel's analogy suggests a direct corollary between sin and death. Apparently, the ultimate removal of sin is similar to the removal of the impurity of death. Let us examine the nature of the red heifer process and understand its relationship to sin. We read in the maftir portion of Parshas Parah that the kohain was commanded to slaughter the heifer and sprinkle its sacrificial blood outside the Bais Hamikdash's walls. The kohanim then burned the heifer's body and mixed her ashes with spring water producing a ritual mixture. The mixture was then sprinkled on anyone who was associated with a corpse. The Sages comment on the unique nature of this sacrifice and explain that it atoned for the Jewish nations sin of the golden calf. They show how every detail of this sacrifice ran parallel lines with the details of the sinful golden calf experience. (see Rashi to Bamidbar 19:2 II) This indicates a direct relationship between the spiritual impurity of death and the golden calf. For this reason the purification process began with atonement from the golden calf sin. In fact, the purifying mixture was a product of the atonement of that sin. Whenever the Jewish nation required purification ashes they would atone for the golden calf sin and produced their necessary mixtures. Apparently, this sin's impact was so far reaching that it left an indelible impression on the Jewish people's ritual purity. Yet, this atonement was specifically related to association with a corpse and only required when producing purifying ashes. We can appreciate this intriguing phenomenon through the Sages' profound insight in Mesichta Avoda Zara (5a). They teach us that when the Jewish people received the Torah they transcended the curse of mortality. They cleaved to Hashem's will with such intensity that their bodies were transformed into semi-spiritual entities. After two thousand years of world existence the body finally cooperated with the soul and created a harmonious unit of Hashem's perfect service. Regretfully, this lofty experience was short lived and, after forty days of elevation the Jewish people succumbed to fear and anxiety. They doubted if their revered leader Moshe Rabbeinu would ever return and desperately sought a qualified spiritual replacement. This set the stage for their insincere Egyptian converts who seduced the Jewish people into idolatry. This infamous plunge returned them to mortality. Their bodies returned to their physical state replete with all earthly urges and cravings. We can further develop this through Sefer Hachinuch's understanding of the red heifer and its ritual mixture. He explains death's ritual impurity in the following manner. When one passes away, his soul departs from his body leaving behind a total physical entity. The body, barren of any trace of spirituality, projects a penetrating image of vanity and reflects a lifetime of earthly urges and sinful practices. Direct contact with a barren body damages one's spirituality and renders him ritually impure. This impure status has a positive effect and forces one to view his body and its effects in a different manner. His impure predicament reminds him that his body was meant to unite with his soul and he helps one senses the repulse of total earthly cravings. (Sefer Hachinuch Mitzva 263) In truth, this vanity and sinful association traces back to the Jewish people's shameful sin of the golden calf. That single act returned the Jewish body to its physical state and created its ritual impurity. During that infamous scene the Jewish people traded their closest relationship with Hashem for shameful bodily cravings. Although this became reality their brief Har Sinai experience proved that one can free himself from earthly drives and direct his total being towards Hashem. We now understand the red heifer's crucial role in the purification process. We realize that atonement from the golden calf was a prerequisite for ritual purity. Hashem introduced this impurity to assist one in detaching himself from his physical drives. One's impure state sent him a clear message about the body's shameful role in sin. However, one was reminded that his physical cravings were not necessarily part of his Jewish psyche. There was a time in the Jewish people's history where body and soul craved for something of true content and substance namely, association with Hashem. The first step of purification was to contemplate the damaging effect of physical drives. After detaching oneself from his deep rooted urges the red heifer mixture completed the process. Its goal was to remind one of his true potential, to unify body and soul thereby achieving spiritual perfection. We can now begin to understand Yechezkels comparison between ultimate purity from sin and the the red heifer mixture. The prophet Yechezkel describes this ultimate purity in the following words, "And I shall give you a new heart and place a new spirit in your midst and remove the stone heart from your flesh..." (36:26) Ramban teaches us that this refers to the Jewish people's pure desire to fulfill Hashem's will. The time will ultimately arrive for the body and all its drives to take a back seat. The Jewish people in the Messianic era will return to Adam's perfect state before his involvement in sin. Their single minded desire will be similar to that of the Jewish people during their first forty days at Har Sinai. They will totally detach themselves from physical passions and crave for the

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

closest relationship with Hashem. (Ramban D'vorim 30:6) This process will ultimately return them to their semi-spiritual state of Har Sinai. This time, however, it will be everlasting a nd Hashem will permanently remove the curse of mortality from His people. (see Daas T'vunos 3:40) The analogy of the purifying waters is now complete. Throughout the years, the red heifer's sacrificial waters purified one from association with earthly cravings. The ritual mix removed ritual impurity and reduced one's sinful urges. In addition, the atonement process brought one in contact with his soul's innermost cravings, to cleave to Hashem. It linked one to his glorious past at Har Sinai and inspired him to his glorious future in Meshiach's times. And it will ultimately complete its role and detach the Jewish people from all physical drives and passions and direct body and soul's total focus towards Hashem. How timely is this lesson immediately following Purim with our sights set on Pesach. The mitzvos of Purim allows us to contact our innermost feelings and ascertain our true essence. After this uplifting experience we begin preparing for our total redemption. Indeed, the Sages teach us that as the Jewish people were redeemed from Egypt in the month of Nissan they will be ultimately redeemed in that same month. May we merit that this refer to our upcoming Nissan.

Haftorah, Copyright &copy 2011 by Rabbi Dovid Siegel and Torah.org. The author is Rosh Kollel of Kollel Toras Chaim of Kiryat Sefer, Israel. Kollel Toras Chesed 3732 West Dempster Skokie, Illinois 600 76 Phone: 847-674-7959Fax: 847-674-4023 kollel@arlin.net Questions or comments? Email feedback@torah.org. Join the Jewish Learning Revolution! Torah.org: The Judaism Site brings this and a host of other classes to you every week. Visit http://torah.org or email learn@torah.org to get your own free copy of this mailing. Need to change or stop your subscription? Please visit our subscription center, http://torah.org/subscribe/ -- see the links on that page. Permission is granted to redistribute, but please give proper attribution and copyright to the author and Torah.org. Both the author and Torah.org reserve certain rights. Email copyrights@torah.org for full information. Torah.org: The Judaism Site Project Genesis, Inc. 122 Slade Avenue, Suite 250 Baltimore, MD 21208 http://www.torah.org/ learn@torah.org (410) 602-1350 FAX: (410) 510-1053

Rabbi Yaakov Asher Sinclair

Ohr Somayach Torah Weekly

Overview On the eighth day of the dedication of the Mishkan, Aharon, his sons, and the entire nation bring various korbanot (offerings) as commanded by Moshe. Aharon and Moshe bless the nation. G-d allows the Jewish People to sense His Presence after they complete the Mishkan. Aharon's sons, Nadav and Avihu, innovate an offering not commanded by G-d. A fire comes from before G-d and consumes them, stressing the need to perform the commandments only as Moshe directs. Moshe consoles Aharon, who grieves in silence. Moshe directs the kohanim as to their behavior during the mourning period, and warns them that they must not drink intoxicating beverages before serving in the Mishkan. The Torah lists the two characteristics of a kosher animal: It has split hooves, and it chews, regurgitates, and re-chews its food. The Torah specifies by name those non-kosher animals which have only one of these two signs. A kosher fish has fins and easily removable scales. All birds not included in the list of forbidden families are permitted. The Torah forbids all types of insects except for four species of locusts. Details are given of the purification process after coming in contact with ritually-impure species. Bnei Yisrael are commanded to be separate and holy like G-d. Insights One Small Step For A Man Lest you become contaminated (11:43) The road to holiness does not start with lofty ideals or sublime thoughts. It does not begin with a mind-expanding revelation or a Close Encounter. It cannot be produced by psychotropic drugs, nor can it be experienced by climbing the Alpsor the Andes. True, gazing down from Mont Blancor Everest may fill us with awe at the Creators handiwork. Nature can truly inspire closeness to G-d. But all this inspiration will vanish like a cloud of smoke if we lack the fundamental ingredients to concretize inspiration into actuality. The road to holiness starts with a few small boring steps. Like being a decent moral person, controlling our emotions and our appetites. As Jews, we may not eat what we like when we like. On Pesach we may eat no bread. On Yom Tov we should eat meat. On Yom Kippur we may eat nothing. At all times we may not eat the forbidden foods that are the subject of this weeks Torah portion. Lest you become contaminated. In Hebrew this sentence is expressed as one word, Vnitmaytem. The spelling of this word is unusual. It lacks an aleph, and thus it can also read as Vnitumtem, which means Lest you become dulled. In our search for holiness and meaning in this world, one of our greatest assets and aids are the laws of kashrut. Kosher food is soul food. Food for the soul. Food that feeds our spirituality and sharpens our ability to receive holiness. Food that is not kosher does the reverse. It dulls our senses. It makes us less sensitive, less receptive to holiness. A Jew who tries to seek holiness sitting on top of some mountain in the Far Eastliving on a diet of salted pork will find it impossible to achieve his goal. The view of Ganges, or the Himalayas(or his navel) may titillate his spiritual senses, but he will find no growth or nourishment reaching his core. The spiritual masters teach that if a person contaminates himself a little, he becomes contaminated a great deal. Spirituality is a delicate thing. It doesnt take much to jam the broadcast from Upstairs. On the other hand, a little bit of holiness goes a long way. As the Torah teaches You shall sanctify yourselves and you shall become holy.(11:44) A little bit of sanctity generates a lot of holiness. If we sanctify ourselves down here in

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

this lowly world with all its barriers to holiness, if we guard our mouths, our eyes and our ears, then the Torah promises us that we will be given help to lift us to lofty peaks of holiness. It all starts with one small step.
1995-2011 Ohr Somayach International - All rights reserved. Articles may be distributed to another person intact without prior permission. We also encourage you to include this material in other publications, such as synagogue newsletters. However, we ask that you contact us beforehand for permission, and then send us a sample issue.

29

Rabbi Ben Zion Sobel

Torah MiTzion

Shemini "I will be sanctified through those who are nearest Me" (Vayikra 10:3). Non-religious Jews in Israel are so amenable to Teshuvah (Repentance) that often it is not even necessary to suggest to them to return to their roots. When they are impressed with a religious person acting the way the Torah stipulate, they frequently decide on their own that they want to be a part of such a prominent community. In his new book, Borechi Nafshi on Vayikra, Rabbi Zilberstein shlita relates a story about Rabbi Yosef Leizerson zt"l who lived in Bnei Brak and took bus number 318 every morning to Rechovot where he headed a kolel. The bus driver was accustomed to seeing this modest passenger wait for him at the bus stop every morning for years. One morning, for some reason, Rabbi Leizerson was a bit late and as he approached the road, he saw the bus already loading passengers. The bus driver saw the Rabbi across the street and signaled to him not to rush; he would wait for him. However, the elderly Rabbi did his best to get to the bus stop as fast as he could. When he ascended the stairs, a bit out of breath, the bus driver asked him why he had exerted himself in spite of the fact that he had indicated that he would be waiting for him until he arrived. To the driver's shock, the Rabbi responded with his typical smile, "It was very nice of you to agree to wait for me. However, the bus is full of people who are in a hurry to reach their destinations. What right do I have to hold them up because I was late?" The driver was amazed at the consideration of the Rabbi and began to interest himself in religion. First he began putting on tefillin; then he began to pray every morning before work, until he became a full fledged ba'al teshuvah.
Shema Yisrael Torah Network info@shemayisrael.co.il http://www.shemayisrael.co.il Jerusalem, Israel 732-370-3344

Rabbi Yaakov Solomon

Between the Fish and the Soup

Parshat Shemini 5771: D'var Torah The sons of Aaron, Nadav and Avihu brought before G-d a strange fire that He did not command them [to bring]. Fire came forth from G-d and it consumed them, and they died before G-d. Moshe said to Aaron, "That is what G-d was speaking about when He said: 'I will be sanctified by those close to Me".' (10:1-3) The Rashbam writes that the words bikrovai ekadesh: 'I will be sanctified by those who are close to me' apply to Elazar and Ithamar, the younger brothers of Nadav and Avihu. Not to Nadav and Avihu themselves. The reason is that Elazar and Ithamar were so devoted to the service of G-d that they continued the holy proceedings at the dedication of the Tabernacle even though their older brothers Nadav and Avihu had just died. True dedication is serving under the greatest hardship. And those who are 'close to' G-d are those who serve Him with extreme dedication. Rashi, however, follows the well-known Midrashic interpretation that the words bikrovai ekadesh: 'I will be sanctified by those who are close to me' do apply to Nadav and Avihu. The deaths were indeed a fulfillment of Gd's previous words to Moshe. In reference to the Tabernacle, G-d had said: "It will be sanctified through My glory" - bichvodi (Ex. 29:43) which is similar to the Hebrew word meaning 'those who honor me'. Rashi elaborates with the words: 'Moshe told Aaron: "I knew that the Tabernacle would be sanctified by someone in whom G-d's glory rests, but I thought it would be one of us. Now I know that they were greater than either of us".' The following alternative explanation may be suggested. Nadav and Avihu wished to get close to G-d, but they took an unauthorized short cut. As the text states: 'Nadav and Aivhu brought before G-d a strange fire that He did not command them [to bring]'. And G-d was effectively making an example of them to teach the Israelites the following lesson. Closeness to G-d comes though using His Commandments as a guide to approach Him, stage by stage. Not doing what you think He wants. But doing what He tells you He wants. And if He doesn't tell, hold back. Getting close to G-d goes stage by stage, not instantaneous, though He may well give a 'helping hand' on the way That is the meaning of the words bikrovai ekadesh: 'I will be sanctified by those who have the patience rather that the impetuosity to get close to me'. Those who have that great dedication, of the quality exemplified by the Rashbam (above). This concept also applies to human relationships. Most satisfying friendships and contacts are the products of sustained effort to get to know

the other, and working together in sometimes trying conditions, rather than on the basis of just a quick meeting where there is 'chemistry'. Parashat Shemini (Haftara Parah) 5771 (G-d says to Ezekiel) "I shall give you a new heart, and I shall put a new spirit within you. I shall remove the heart of stone from within you flesh, and give you a heart of flesh." (Ezekiel 36:26) Guided Tour... The prophet Ezekiel was a kohen - a priest who spent his earlier life in the Holy Land. His period of recorded prophecy, however, took place after his enforced exile to Babylon - during the period before and after the Destruction of the First Temple in 586 BCE. His Divine communications were addressed to both those Jews already exiled in Babylonia, and to the people of Jerusalem. The Book of Ezekiel begins in drama, and climaxes to crescendo. It is a long message with powerful, vivid, and ultra-brilliant images. It starts with the excitement of storms, lightening and fire - the heavens open, and Ezekiel dramatically experiences G-d's words and power. The Almighty calls on him to be a prophet to carry His message to the people through communications emanating from the celestial mobile angelic composition of His throne. The prophecy continues to warn the Jews in the darkest terms of His judgment on them, as a consequence of their having abandoned Torah teachings and basic morality, preferring false prophets, and an idolatrous and grossly self-indulgent lifestyle. It then leaves the Israelites, removing its focus to the doom of the various nations that misled them. By the time the prophecies of Ezekiel return to the Jews, they become warmer and more kindly. Words of threat are replaced with words of comfort and hope: promising a brighter future for the Israelites (the subject of the Haftara), and their revival and unification within the Holy Land, with, after the defeat of the nation of Gog, a fully restored Temple and nation. The Haftara itself anticipates the scene of Ezekiel's famous vision of the resurrection of the Israelites in the Promised Land - the vision of the valley where the dry bones gain flesh and come to life. The prophet states in Gd's name that the people of Israel were scattered among the nations because they had defiled the land through idolatry. They had thus spiritually contaminated their own Land. And even in exile, the House of Israel continued to conduct themselves in such ways at to bring G-d's name into disrepute. However, the time would come where G-d would clear His own name, as it were, in the eyes of the nations - even though His people had been poor ambassadors for Him. In pursuit of that aim, he would cleanse His people Israel - however unworthy they were. Ezekiel compares G-d's rejection of Israel with a husband distancing himself from intimacy with his wife during her period. The comparison is significant. Such separation is only temporary, the relationship being restored after her ritual bathing (Lev. 15:28). Similarly, G-d will separate Himself from Israel for a limited period, after which He would return them to their Land, and metaphorically purify them by 'sprinkling' on them 'pure water'. Moreover, He would make the Israelites more receptive to His teachings - replacing their 'hearts of stone' with 'hearts of flesh'. That would lead to the final covenant between G-d and Israel. Israel, in its own land and well-populated rebuilt cities, would be a people to G-d, and He would be G-d to that people. Ezekiel did not give a date for when this prophecy would come to pass. However the Talmud, in writing on the Prophets in general, records the following tradition: Many prophets arose in Israel, twice as many as the Israelites who left Egypt. [Why then are so few prophecies recorded in the Bible?] Only those prophecies necessary for future generations were written down; those unnecessary for future generations were not written down (Megilla 14a). Although there was a partial return to the Promised Land less than a century after Ezekiel's prophecy, it would appear that much of the content of the Haftara refers to the final Messianic redemption of the Israelites may that become the living reality of our own time. D'var Torah In the physical and spiritual redemption described above, G-d would make the Israelites more receptive to His teachings - replacing their 'hearts of stone' with 'hearts of flesh'. That would lead to the final covenant between G-d and Israel. These metaphors create problems. Had Ezekiel spoken about giving new heart to the Israelites, his message would be easy to understand. But what does he wish to convey by changing the hearts' composition from stone to flesh? Stone represents strength; flesh is weak. Stone denotes resilience and resistance; flesh is like clay in the hands of the potter. Furthermore, flesh can easily become corrupted. When the Torah describes the generation of the Flood, it states: 'for all flesh on Earth had perverted its ways' (Gen. 6:12). Ezekiel's vision of the final redemption seems to be a weakened rather than a strengthened Israel. The following may serve as an illumination to Ezekiel's message. A teenager of a mixed religious background told me today that he was an agnostic. 'Can you prove that G-d exists?' he asked. ' Have you met Him? Have you ever seen any miracles?' I understood that his real complaint was that he was spiritually tone deaf. I suggested that he should work towards developing spiritual sensitivity.

30

No, I told him, I had not seen G-d in person - although I have seen the tracks He leaves behind. And so could he, if he cared to take a look. I cannot pick up radio waves, but I can listen to the radio, and accept that the radio can sense and pick up things that I cannot. However, spiritual sensitivity is not something that always comes naturally: Saadia Gaon, the Rambam, and many other leading sages throughout the generations write extensively on the means to achieve this quality. Said the mathematician: 'I could prove G-d statistically. Take the human body alone - the chance that all the functions of the individual would happen by chance would be a computational monstrosity.' On the other side of the fence, a scientist declared, 'I have swept the universe with my telescope and I did not find G-d.' The spiritually sensitive person replied, 'That would be as unreasonable as for me to say that I have taken a violin apart, examined every piece with a microscope, and found no music.' Indeed, the world of biochemistry agrees that the workings of the simplest cell - even today not fully understood - are far more complex than the most sophisticated computer. Saying that the cell came by chance is like leaving monkeys on a typewriter and finding that they keyed in Shakespeare's Hamlet. My kindly and helpful non-religious Ulpan (Hebrew Language school) teacher made the following comment after the Gulf War: I know that thirty-nine lethal scud missiles fell on densely populated areas within Israel's coastal cities, and yet virtually nobody was killed. Those religious Jews - you know - perhaps that are right. But I can't say that The above could illustrate the difference between the heart of stone and the heart of flesh. Stone is strong, but unbending and relatively insensitive. Flesh is live and responsive. G-d is in effect saying that in giving people hearts of flesh, He will make it easier for people to sense Him, relate to Him, and thus serve Him. G-d then is purifying the Israelites by heightening their spiritual sensitivities. The maxim of Talmud: 'He that comes to purify himself is assured of help from Heaven' (Shabbat 104a), will become all the more important in the return of the Israelites to the Promised Land.
For those looking for more comprehensive material, questions and answers on the Parasha may be found at http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/solomon/questions/ and on the material on the Haftara at http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/solomon/haftara/ . Written by Jacob Solomon. Tel 02 673 7998. E-mail: jacobsol@netvision.net.il for any points you wish to raise and/or to join those that receive this Parasha sheet every week. Parashiot from the First, Second, and Third Series may be viewed on the Shema Yisrael web-site: http://www.shemayisrael.com/parsha/solomon/archives/archives.htm This article is provided as part of Shema Yisrael Torah Network Permission is granted to redistribute electronically or on paper, provided that this notice is included intact. For information on subscriptions, archives, and other Shema Yisrael Classes, send mail to parsha@shemayisrael.co.il http://www.shemayisrael.co.il Jerusalem, Israel 732-370-3344

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

that Rabbi Akiva never announced that it was time to leave the study hall except on the eve of Yom Kippur and of Pesach. To Rabbi Akiva bein hazmanim was always the zman itself and that is what helped make him the paradigm hero of the Jewish people for all times and circumstances. Naturally life and its necessary mundane and ordinary chores persist. In the yeshiva world, the buying of new hats, suits and other accessories; helping prepare for Pesach at home and elsewhere; and serious matchmaking efforts take place then. In our world of year-round constant bein hazmanim work, family and all of the ordinary tasks of living occupy us. Yet we can realize that even while performing these tasks we can do so with a higher intent and a deeper understanding of the value and purpose of time. The commonly used phrase to kill time indicates a hidden appreciation within our subconscious that this is somehow akin to the heinous crime of taking human life. The great blessing of shehecheyanu that You have given us life and preserved us is called in the Talmud the blessing of zman of time. That is how life is measured and also how it should be appreciated. That is why we mark birthdays and anniversaries and treasure special days and celebrate the holidays of the year. Our father Avraham was eulogized as having arrived with his days. That is meant to indicate that all of his days were filled with constructive activities, holy endeavors and great kindness and attention to the needs of others. He arrived at the end of his life with full days. He never differentiated between bein hazmanim and the zman itself. As such, he continues to set an example for all of his descendants, the people of Israel. Shabat shalom, Berel Wein
U.S. Office 386 Route 59 Monsey, NY 10952 845-368-1425 | 800-499-WEIN (9346) Fax: 845-368-1528 Questions? info@jewishdestiny.com Israel Office P.O. Box 23671 Jerusalem, Israel 91236 052-833-9560 Fax: 02-586-8536 Questions? scubac@netvision.net.il RabbiWein.com 2009 The Destiny Foundation

Rabbi Berel Wein

Weekly Parsha

Rabbi Berel Wein

Bein Hazmanim

Now that Purim is safely past us and the month of Nissan fast approaches with the glorious holiday of Pesach in its wings, the yeshiva world enters a period of time called bein hazmanim - between the times (the semesters of Torah study.) There are three semesters in the yeshiva world and they run from Succot to Nissan, Iyar to the Ninth of Av and then the month of Elul to Yom Kippur. The periods of time between these semesters is therefore called bein hazmanim the time between semesters. I find a great deal of symbolism lurking in this apparently somewhat prosaic title of bein hazmanim. I have always felt that all of us in life constantly find ourselves bein hazmanim. We are always between our changing stages of life, moving our location, changing jobs or professions, traveling, adjusting to new family situations and hoping to make some sense of the bewildering world events that always seem to blindside us. I feel that bein hazmanim is therefore in its broadest sense not an intermission time in our lives but it is really the constant state of life and being in our lives. We are always between things life cycle events, plans, trips and projects. Many times therefore we somehow sacrifice the certain present for the uncertain future. By looking forward to the zman the coming semester itself, so to speak, we oftentimes ignore the bein hazmanim, frittering away opportunity and time that are currently present before us for our use and positive exploitation. In the yeshiva world there is almost always a lecture given by the heads of the yeshiva at the end of the zman to the student body imploring the students not to waste the bein hazmanim and to never allow it to be a time of backsliding in Torah studies and correct behavior. Many times the bein hazmanim can cancel out the hard won accomplishments of the recent zman itself. Thus the goal is to make the student realize that in truth bein hazmanim is a zman in itself and that it should be treated accordingly. How true that is in everyday life as well. Rabbi Akiva said that one should not postpone study and good deeds for a later time when he or she thinks it will be available for those projects, for that time or opportunity may never arrive. Living in a lackadaisical bein hazmanim mode is dangerous and counterproductive to human accomplishment. The rabbis of Israel, over all of the generations of our history, stressed that time is the only commodity in life that is irreplaceable. By this they meant that bein hazmanim is always the zman itself. The Talmud itself tells us

Weekly Parsha : Shmini The events described in this week parsha occur on the eighth day after the seven day dedication period of the Mishkan and the installation of the kohanim/priests that would serve in that sanctuary. And this eighth day turns into a day of challenge and eventually sad tragedy. By emphasizing that all of this occurred on the eighth day, the Torah teaches us a vital lesson in life. The seven days of dedication are days of exhilaration and accomplishment. But such feelings and emotions cannot usually be maintained indefinitely. In life there always is the day after, the eighth day, which is one of challenge, struggle and even of pain. This day, though, can define and determine ones life and future. I have often thought that this is perhaps one of the more subtle messages implied by the Torah when fixing the day of circumcision of a Jewish infant boy to be on the eighth day of his life. It is the day that imprints on him his Jewishness forever. It is a day of joy and commemoration for parents and the family, but also one of pain with the drawing of blood from the infant. It is therefore a day of solemnity and dedication and it teaches that sacrifice, consistency and determination all are part of ones lot in life. One of my revered teachers in the yeshiva put it to us starry eyed teenagers quite succinctly, if not somewhat ironically, many decades ago. He said: Life is like chewing gum a little flavor and the rest is simply chew, chew, chew. And so it is. My beloved grandson, Binyamin Gewirtz, the youngest of all of my beloved grandsons, is celebrating his Bar Mitzva this Shabat. Happily, parshat Shmini was also my bar mitzvah parsha. I remember that my father of blessed memory said to me in his synagogue sermon that Shabat, that what I would make out of my life on the eighth day after all of the bar mitzvah celebrations had receded - was the important challenge in life. It is certainly correct that the challenge of the eighth day is the true test in life. I pray that the Lord grant my Binyamin all of the blessings of life but my main prayer is that he, like all of us, realizes that the challenges of life lie in the everyday mundane behavior which we can, if we so desire, transform with purpose and holiness. That is the message that is transmitted here in the parsha to Aharon and his sons. Steadfastness, belief, obedience to Torah law and Jewish values is what is asked of them. The seven days of celebration and dedication have ended and now the task of caring for the holy Mishkan is entrusted to them. And perhaps that is what the rabbis meant when they indicated that the two sons of Aharon who were killed in the Mishkan died because they were inebriated from wine. They were still in the seven days of celebration mode which had ended and not in the eighth day mode which now descended upon them. Such errors in life can be fatal and often disastrous. Shabat shalom, Rabbi Berel Wein
U.S. Office 386 Route 59 Monsey, NY 10952 845-368-1425 | 800-499-WEIN (9346) Fax: 845-368-1528 Questions? info@jewishdestiny.com Israel Office P.O. Box 23671 Jerusalem, Israel 91236 052-833-9560 Fax: 02-586-8536 Questions? scubac@netvision.net.il RabbiWein.com 2009 The Destiny Foundation

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb-OU

Person in the Parsha

Parshat Shemini (Shabbat Parah) - The Stork and the Heron I don't think that parents tell this one to their children anymore, but they used to when I was a boy. When children once inquired about where babies come from, they were told that the stork brought them. The stork is a migratory bird that was very familiar to people living in central Europe. The stork would suddenly, almost mysteriously, appear in the spring after a long absence during the cold winter. The stork would nest on rooftops, adjacent to, and often right on top of, the chimneys of the house. Since every child was witness to the absence and ultimate return of these large white birds with long beaks, it was only natural that parents would avoid telling their children the "facts of life" for as long as they could get away with, attributing the appearance of new babies to the stork. Interestingly, the stork makes its appearance in this week's Torah portion, Shemini. The Bible, however, does not stoop to the once common myth that the stork was responsible for the delivery, if not production, of new babies. Indeed in next week's Torah portion, Tazriah, the opening verses contain a fairly explicit account of the biology of conception and childbirth. But the Bible does enumerate the stork as one of the numerous "unclean" birds; that is, as one of the species of birds that a Jew is forbidden to eat. The Hebrew term for the stork is chasidah, upon which Rashi has a fascinating commentary. He begins by identifying the chasidah as "a large white fowl" and applies the old French name tzikonia to it. A quick consultation with a children's book on zoology informed me that the European white stork, which nests on rooftops and in trees and is a symbol of childbirth, is technically classified in Latin as ciconia ciconia. Rashi was apparently very familiar with this bird. He continues to suggest the reason why the ciconia ciconia, or stork, is called chasidah in Hebrew. After all, that Hebrew term means "the kindly one", the one who does acts of chesed (loving-kindness). The reason, already offered in the Talmud, is that the stork "is kind to her friends"; that is, generous and protective of other members of its own species. Keen students of the parsha long ago began to wonder why a bird that was so kind and passionate should be listed among the unclean fowl. After all, it is commonly assumed that those animals which are prohibited to be eaten are each representative of some undesirable character trait. Here is a bird which deserves to be called chasidah, pious one. Why should it be considered unclean? One such keen student, and it is difficult to ascertain his identity, long ago suggested that the problem with the chasidah is that, although she is kind, she is kind only to her friends. She shows compassion only for other members of her own species. To those who are not her friends but belong to a different species, she is indifferent and, often, even cruel. Being kind in a discriminatory fashion is a negative character trait. Hence, the stork is treif, forbidden. What a powerful and relevant lesson for each of us! Barely two weeks ago, we witnessed the effects of a devastating earthquake and tsunami wreaked upon the islands of Japan. We also observed all the graphic and horrible images of human misery and suffering. We all were summoned to contribute in any way we could to assist the Japanese victims. But who among us can deny not having at least had a fleeting temptation to look away from that human suffering because it occurred so far away from us, to people who are unrelated to us? It is only natural that our response would be, "Charity begins at home," and that we would turn to the needs of our own friends and close ones, blotting out the cries and tears of those of an "alien species". The message that Rashi gives us is clear. Such a reaction is treif. It is utterly wrong to ignore the suffering of human beings just because they are different or distant from us. The chasidah is sympathetic and charitable, but only to its own kind. We are not allowed to emulate the chasidah. Just after the chasidah is listed in this week's parsha, in Leviticus 11:19, we find mentioned another bird, the anafah. Rashi describes the anafah as an ill-tempered large fowl, an angry bird, and hazards a guess that it is the heron, with which he was personally familiar, living in north central Europe. If the stork symbolizes the evil of discriminatory generosity, the heron symbolizes the evils of anger. Anger is judged very negatively by the Jewish tradition. Our Sages tell us that it is by the manner in which a person controls his anger that his true character can be assessed. The Talmud tells us that a person who becomes angry is susceptible to grievous errors, so that even the wisest of men can make mistakes if he permits himself to become angry. Our Sages offer an example of a wise man who fell prey to anger and then erred. That wise man was none other than Moshe himself, and the incident happened in our very Torah portion, Shemini. "And Moshe diligently inquired for the goat of the sin offering, and, behold, it was burnt; and he was angry with Elazar and Itamar..." (Leviticus 10:16) In the immediate subsequent verses, it became clear, as Aaron, Moshes brother, pointed out, that Moshe "rushed to judgment" and was mistaken. To his credit, Moshe was not too embarrassed to admit his mistake.

Malbim, a brilliant and often creatively insightful 19th century commentator, suggests with regard to these verses that there is a reciprocal relationship between anger and error. Yes, when one is in a state of anger, his judgment is clouded, and he is prone to error. But it is also true, he argues, that when one is blinded by error, he is prone to anger. Often, seeing the facts clearly precludes the angry response. Once again, we have seen the great wisdom that can be accessed by merely "scratching the surface" of the biblical text. On the surface, this week's biblical portion offers us the names of two species of fowl which are ritually excluded from the Jewish menu. But beneath the surface, these two birds, the stork and the heron, open up two vast chapters in the comprehensive book of Jewish ethics. From the stork, we learn how important it is that our charity be inclusive and extend even to populations far-removed, geographically, ethnically or religiously, from us. And from the heron, we learn about the dangers of anger and about the dynamic relationship between our intellectual powers and our emotional passions. Sometimes, intellectual faults lead to sinful emotions. More frequently, unbridled emotions compromise our intellect in ways which can be disastrous. Two lessons from two birds: Be sensitive to the needs of all human beings whether they resemble you or not, and control your anger, lest you fall into the snares of errors and mistakes. Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss

31

Power Bentching Shelley Zeitlin: Rav Weiss, I hear you just came out with a new sefer. Rabbi Weiss: Yes, with the help of Hashem, it is called Power Bentching. Shelley Zeitlin: What a modern sounding name! Rabbi Weiss: Yes, it has a catchy tune to it but more importantly the idea is how powerful bentching can be in elevating us spiritually and upgrading us financially. Shelley Zeitlin: Rabbi, I happen to know that you give two Daf Yomis a day, teach seminary, make a weekly tape and CD and are a busy pulpit rabbi of the Agudas Yisroel of Staten Island. How do you find time to write a sefer on bentching? Rabbi Weiss: The answer is over a long period of time. Rav Avigdor Miller, Ztl, Zya, once said to succeed at writing a sefer you have to work on it a little bit every day. The ideas in this sefer were started with a series of articles that I wrote over twenty years ago. I then put out a series of six tapes on bentching. After that, I spent a solid summer culling from over a hundred seforim for thoughts on bentching. So, Power Bentching is a sweet labor spanning two decades. Shelley Zeitlin: So when did you have the time to write it? Rabbi Weiss: You should know, Shelley! I dictated almost the entire sefer to you over the phone during my drive time (using a speaker phone of course). Shelley Zeitlin: After those dictations, what happened next? Rabbi Weiss: Then the many edits started. Shelley Zeitlin: What do you mean by edits? Rabbi Weiss: My brother, Yosef Asher Weiss, gave it a look over. Then my sister in-law, Mrs. Breindy Reiss, a veteran mechaneches, took it apart piece by piece with a special eye that it should be suitable even for delicate elementary school-age children. Yet another special sister in-law Mrs. Hindie Rosenfeld inserted the Hebrew text. After that, my sister inlaw, Mrs. Ahuva Weiss, a real professional proofreader, handed it back to me with hundreds of more corrections. Then, my talented typesetter, Shaya Sonnenschein, added many important suggestions of his own. Shelley Zeitlin: That must have been a painful process Rabbi Weiss: Most of it just made me more aware that Ill never be an English Major. But, we did have some battles when it came to taking out some delicate content. Shelley Zeitlin: Who won the battles? Rabbi Weiss: Most of the time I lost erring on the side of caution. Furthermore, when Torah Umesorah reviewed the sefer to recommend it to all yeshivas, Beis Yaakovs, and day schools, I gave them the final say on taking out yet some more questionable content. Shelley Zeitlin: Did Torah Umesorah write a letter or recommendation? Rabbi Weiss: I am very proud to say that they certainly did and the letter is included in the haskomah section of Power Bentching. Shelley Zeitlin: For what type of reader did you write this sefer? Rabbi Weiss: For anyone who wants to improve their understanding and concentration of bentching. Shelley Zeitlin: Let me be more specific. Adults or children? Yeshivish or novice? Rabbi Weiss: Well, Shelley, I hope that both adults and school-age children will equally benefit from Power Bentching. I wish I had a sefer like this to study when I was in school. Then, thousands of my bentchings would have been more meaningful. But, it is certainly a study text written for the adult reader as well. As to your second question, there are many significant novelties in this sefer for the yeshiva community. I have quoted from the full gamut of our ancient greats ranging from the Sefardic,

A Weekly Word

32

Chassidic, and Yeshivish worlds alike. There are many chidushim which will delight the reader who is a Talmid Chocham. On the other hand, I was very careful to translate everything so as to make the sefer palatable, helpful, and enjoyable for the novice as well. Shelley Zeitlin: Where are your sources from? Rabbi Weiss: Believe it or not, the main source for commentaries on bentching is the Hagadah shel Pesach. One of the fourteen steps of the seder is boreich, to bentch. Thus, many of the great Hagadahs contain great commentaries on bentching too. I literally went through over one hundred Hagadahs, studying their thoughts on bentching. There are also scholarly works written on bentching by our great sages, such as Rav Chaim Kanievskys commentary to name but one. Shelley Zeitlin: Why did you choose to write on bentching instead of the Shemoneh Esrei, for example? Rabbi Weiss: First of all, bentching is Biblical in nature. Secondly, it is an activity that is done together with the whole family. Thus, it is a wonderful springboard for parents to speak about before bentching at the Shabbos and Yom Tov table. Finally, because of the many Hagadahs, the research material to answer all of my questions was more readily accessible. Shelley Zeitlin: Lets go back to the name Power Bentching. To what kind of power are you referring? Rabbi Weiss: The Chofetz Chaim, Ztl, Zya, assures us that if we bench with kavannah, proper concentration, we can be assured of a livelihood that is plentiful and dignified all our days. Especially in our financially troubled times, I think this is something very powerful indeed. Shelley Zeitlin: It certainly is. Anything else? Rabbi Weiss: Ill give you a scoop from the sefer. The only Hebrew letter that is missing from the bentching is the fei sofis. This, says the Knesses HaGedolah, is because the name of the angels of destruction, such as ketef and ketzef, all end with the fei sofis. One who bentches with kavannah will miss out from these angels of destruction. This is certainly a very powerful protection. Shelley Zeitlin: Is the material presented as essays? Rabbi Weiss: No! It is a sentence by sentence elucidation of every part of bentching. Shelley Zeitlin: That can be very dry Rabbi Weiss: In order to avoid any tedious reading, I peppered the sefer with stories, practical lessons, and halachic insights. Furthermore, I included scores of questions on the text which I assume troubled many of the readers throughout the years and therefore I am certain that their curiosity will be piqued to read about the answers. Shelley Zeitlin: What can the reader hope to gain from Power Bentching? Rabbi Weiss: Firstly, he or she will be greatly encouraged to spend more time on their bentching. They will read about Rav Shach, Ztl, Zya, attributing his amazing longevity to always bentching from a bentcher. They will learn the subtle difference between similar phrases such as, Reeinu, Zuneinu, Parnaseinu, etc. They will find a reservoir of new thoughts to have in mind when saying the nine vital harachamon petitions. Shelley Zeitlin: This sounds quite exciting. Where can I get my hands on a copy of Power Bentching? Rabbi Weiss: Shelley, its not available in stores yet. Eventually it will be distributed by Judaica Press as were my other four seforim, Passionate Judaism, Meaningful Living, Challenging Times, and Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss on the Yamim Noraim. Shelley Zeitlin: So how can one get a copy now? Rabbi Weiss: By calling me directly at 718-916 3100 or by emailing me at RMMWSI@aol.com. Shelley Zeitlin: Is it available for weddings, bar mitzvahs and dinners? Rabbi Weiss: Yes. There will be a special 5 x 7 edition for simchas. If anyone is interested, they can call me. Shelley Zeitlin: What about for schools? Rabbi Weiss: It is a special dream of mine that some smart people will step up and sponsor the sefer as a textbook for their childrens Yeshiva, Beis Yaakov, or day school. I will give a special rate should anyone be interested in doing so. Shelley Zeitlin: Whats next on your writing agenda? Rabbi Weiss: Well, this Power Bentching is really Part One for it is only a commentary on the bentching for weekdays. Part Two will be dedicated to commentaries on retzeih, al hanisim, yaaleh vyavo, sheva brachos, and the harachamons on the milah. Shelley Zeitlin: Anything else? Rabbi Weiss: Yes. We are also presently researching translating Power Bentching into Hebrew, French, Russian, and Persian. We are looking for both writers and sponsors to enable this to happen. Shelley Zeitlin: Rabbi, I know Ive enjoyed the sefer immensely and I hope that there will be thousands of people who feel the same way. Rabbi Weiss: Thank you, Shelley. It is my prayer to Hashem that I should be able to continue to be marbetz Torah to benefit the masses, for many, many years to come.
To receive a weekly cassette tape or CD directly from Rabbi Weiss, please send a check to Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss, P.O. Box 140726, Staten Island, NY 10314 or contact him at RMMWSI@aol.com. Attend Rabbi Weisss weekly shiur at the Landau Shul, Avenue L and East 9th in Flatbush, Tuesday nights at 9:30 p.m. Rabbi Weisss Daf Yomi and Mishnah Yomis shiurim can be heard LIVE on Kol Haloshon at (718) 906-6400. Write to KolHaloshon@gmail.com for details. (Sheldon Zeitlin transcribes Rabbi Weiss articles. If you wish to receive Rabbi Weiss articles by email, please send a note to ZeitlinShelley@aol.com.

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

Rabbi Mordechai Willig The Joy of Purim, Pesach, and Family I "Vayehi bayom ha'shemini" refers to the eighth day of the dedication of the Mishkan, Rosh Chodesh Nissan, when the Mishkan was established (Rashi, Vayikra 9:1). This day was the day on which Hashem's heart was joyful (Rashi Shir haShirim3:11). When Adar enters, we increase joy (Ta'anis 29a) commemorating the miracles of Purim and Pesach (Rashi). In a leap year, we read Shemini between Purim and Pesach, as we approach the midpoint between these two yomim tovim, - Rosh Chodesh Nissan - which is the day on which Hashem and Am Yisrael rejoiced. How do we increase joy on Purim and Pesach? On Purim, we should increase gifts to the poor, "as there is no joy as great and splendid as gladdening the hearts of the poor, orphans, and strangers. One who gladdens the heart of these unfortunates resembles Hashem, "'Who revives the spirit of the lowly and the heart of the crushed'" (Rambam, Hilchos Megilla 2:17. Also see "Purim: The Holiday of Giving," TorahWeb 1999). On Pesach, experiencing the authentic joy demanded by the mitzvah of "v'samachta b'chagecha" requires assisting the poor as well (Rambam, Hilchos Yom Tov 6:18). Rashi (Kiddushin 34b) goes further and reads v'samachta b'chagecha (Devarim 16:14) as v'seemachta, indicating that you must make others happy. Alternatively, only by making others happy can one himself be happy. Despite the emphasis on achieving joy by helping the less fortunate, the primary obligation of joy on holidays is that a family be joyful together (Rambam, Hilchos Yom Tov 6:17, Ra'avad Chagiga 1:1). Furthermore, the requirement to be joyful as a family, "rejoice - you and your household" (Devarim 14:25), which is quoted in the context of the yomim tovim, applies year round as well (Tosafos Pesachim 109a). Indeed, one who dwells without a wife dwells without joy, as it says "Rejoice, you and your household" (Yevamot 62b). II "Vayehi bayom ha'shemini" - the word vayehi teaches that the joy was incomplete (Yalkut Shimoni 520) because on that very day, Nadav and Avihu died (Vayikra 10:2) as a punishment for bringing before Hashem a fire (aish zara) that He had not commanded them to bring (Vayikra 10:1). Nadav and Avihu were great people, perhaps greater than Moshe and Aharon (Rashi 10:3). They were passionate in their love of Hashem and went so far as to pursue it without the limitation of the law by offering the ketores, which brings one extraordinarily close to Hashem. This, however, was against Hashem's will and led to their death (Ha'emek Davar 9:6, Harchev Davar 10:1). Nadav and Avihu were unsatisfied with their exalted status and attempted to raise it in an unauthorized manner. Perhaps their unhappiness was connected to their not having established families of their own (as noted earlier from Yevamot 62b), as we are taught that they were punished for not having fulfilled this mitzvah (Yalkut Shimoni 524). This unhappiness led them to seek both spiritual heights which Hashem did not authorize them to experience as well as greater authority to rule over the people in place of Moshe and Aharon (ibid). As the Rambam taught, gladdening others is a wonderful way to emulate Hashem and to achieve heights of joy which obviate the need for prohibited or inappropriate manifestations of religious fervor. This mandate is not limited to gladdening the poor on Purim and Pesach; as noted above, it applies within a family all year. Raising children is the most important religious undertaking one can engage in (Igros Moshe 4:49). The satisfaction of serving Hashem in this critical manner, in a home which is imbued with the mandated simcha shel mitzvah discussed above, should protect against repeating the mistake of Nadav and Avihu who pursued a relationship with Hashem via an aish zara (halachically unauthorized religious activity) rather than through the authentic simcha shel mitzvah accessible through having and raising a family. In these days of increased joy, may we all serve and cleave to Hashem appropriately, and by resembling and emulating Him, reach the greatest levels of simchah. Copyright 2011 by The TorahWeb Foundation. All rights reserved. Rabbi Pinchas Winston

TorahWeb

Perceptions

Parshas Shemini: Power to Transition And Nadav and Avihu, the sons of Aharon, each took his censer, and put fire in it, and placed incense on it, and offered an unauthorized fire before G-d, which He had not commanded them. (Vayikra 10:1) MOOO. Okay, that isnt the most intelligent way to start off a parshah sheet, but it does get things going in the right direction. This week is Parashas Parah, the third of four special Maftirs read before and after Purim, to focus us on the opportunities of the moment. This one is about the mitzvah of Parah Adumahthe Red Heiferused to spiritually purify a Jew who has come in contact with a dead body and the like.

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

Holy cow! Is it that time of year again?! Apparently, yes. And being so, it affords me an opportunity to talk about what I will call Chok and Chistory, or rather, History. And, as you will see towards the end, bH, even though this weeks special Maftir is from another part of the Torah, all the way from Parashas Chukas past the middle of Sefer Bamidbar, and this weeks parshah is Parashas Shemini, one theme connects both sections, and this time of year. Last night I had trouble falling asleep, something that for me, thank G-d, is not usually an issue. It was Motzei Shabbos, and I had had a significant nap Shabbos afternoon, so I thought that maybe I just wasnt tired yet. But I was, since it was relatively late already. Was it the cup of coffee I had several hours earlier? Not likely, since it was already four hours later, and that much coffee that early doesnt usually affect me like that. And, part of me really wanted to sleep, seemingly unaffected by the coffee, so I just turned over and tried again to fall asleep. Then I realized what was keeping me up. It was like an annoying sound in the background that you dont become conscious of until you focus on it, but which you hear anyhow and irritates you nonetheless. Something, indeed a number of things, had gotten under my skin, and they bothered me more than I had thought. Just before going to bed, I was shown a picture of the baby that had been murdered with his parents and two siblings by the Arab terrorist who had broken into the community of Itamar that Shabbos. All of a sudden, what had happened became more real as my imagination played out what must have taken place Shabbos night. Without knowing it, I had gone to bed confused and angry. What had happened in Japan since that Friday was also overwhelming, but it had been a natural disaster. This murder was a brutally cowardly act of seemingly such innocent people, and though we are expected to accept Gds judgment as to why such things can happen, that is not always so easy to do emotionally, and it kept me up for a while. I eventually fell asleep, but had nightmares. I woke early the next morning, as usual, but I woke up sad and disturbed. It is still gnawing away at me hours later, as it should. You dont just move on from tragedies such as this one, or what is happening in Japan, or what is happening in so many places around the world where tragedy is occurring. Life must go on, but not as if everything is fine and dandy. Like in this weeks parshah, for example. Aharon HaKohen was the Kohen Gadol, the spiritual representative of the entire Jewish people, and for that matter, the entire universe. On the other hand, he just lost his two oldest sons, his primary heirs, and in a most tragic way. And yet, he was expected to move on, to continue with his duties as if everything was as it should be. Then Moshe said unto Aharon, This is what G-d said, saying, Through those close to Me I will be sanctified, and before all the people I will be glorified. Vayidom AharonAnd Aharon remained silent. (Vayikra 10:3) Moshe Rabbeinu obviously said this to console his mourning brother. But, it could have had the reverse effect. You mean there was a warning? G-d told you that someone was going to die sanctifying His Name, implying that, perhaps, it might have been avoidable? Does that not make my pain even worse? Not in the case of Aharon ben Amram. Indeed, what does it mean that Aharon remained silent? What else was he going to do? Scream out? Rebel against G-d? Quit his job? Not likely. Mourn the loss of his sons? For sure. But beyond that, what else was there for him to do? The answer is a discussion in the Talmud between the great and righteous king Chizkiah, and the prophet Yeshayahu: What did The Holy One, Blessed is He, do? He brought suffering to Chizkiah, and then told Yeshayahu, Go and visit the sick, as it says, In those days Chizkiah became ill to the point of death; and Yeshayahu son of Amotz, the prophet came and said to him, So says G-d, Lord of Hosts: Command your house for you shall die and not live. (Yeshayahu 38:1) What is meant by you shall die and not live? You will die in this world, and you will not live in the World-to-Come. Why do I deserve such a severe punishment? asked Chizkiah. Because, answered Yeshayahu, you have not had children. But I saw through Ruach HakodeshHoly Spiritthat I would have evil children. What business have you with kavshei RachmanahG-ds hidden plans? (Brochos 10a) Since Chizkiah, with the help of prophecy, was able to see the evilness of his potential progeny, he took the safe route and avoided marriage and having children. However, as the Talmud points out elsewhere: The world is made for procreation. (Arachin 2b) and Chizkiah was taken to task for second-guessing the Almighty. G-ds response to Chizkah: Your job is to have the children and to raise them the best you can. What they end up being, however, will be a function of Divine Providence. Aharon HaKohen, on the other hand, unlike his two sons, did not secondguess G-d, not in action and not in thought. Remaining silent did not only

33

Perceptions, Copyright &copy 2011 by Rabbi Pinchas Winston and Torah.org. Questions or comments? Email feedback@torah.org. Join the Jewish Learning Revolution! Torah.org: The Judaism Site brings this and a host of other classes to you every week. Visit http://torah.org or email learn@torah.org to get your own free copy of this mailing. Need to change or stop your subscription? Please visit our subscription center, http://torah.org/subscribe/ -- see the links on that page. Permission is granted to redistribute, but please give proper attribution and copyright to the author and Torah.org. Both the author and Torah.org reserve certain rights. Email copyrights@torah.org for full information. Torah.org: The Judaism Site Project Genesis, Inc. 122 Slade Avenue, Suite 250 Baltimore, MD 21208 http://www.torah.org/ learn@torah.org (410) 602-1350 FAX: (410) 510-1053

mean keeping his feelings and doubts to himself, it meant not having them at all. He obviously mourned the loss of his two beloved sons, and but accepted it as if they had died from natural causes, and in their time. It is not an easy level to reach. You have to feel the loss, and especially that of others. You have to perceive the injustice, and be driven to avenge it and set matters right as the Torah prescribes. But, underneath it all has to be an intellectual and emotional acceptance of what has happened, knowing that even the darkest moments of history belong to G-ds master plan. It is an extremely delicate balance to create and maintain. For you will find that most people get either too emotional or remain too detached when it comes to historical moments that do not fit our paradigm of what is just and fair. There are people who, in the face of tragedy, become so emotional that they just cant stay with G-d, and some who stay with G-d because they are too stoic to the tragedy. Thats not balance. Then there are the people who allow themselves to feel the full emotional brunt of a difficult situation, but act towards G-d as if everything makes sense and fits nicely into the master plan for Creation. For, even though their heart screams out Foul! their mind whispers, Fair. They have the wherewithal to stand there, like Aharon HaKohen before them, and present a face of calm though a whirlpool of emotion may churn inside of them. Some time ago I received a manuscript from someone I had never met. He had been in the camps as a young child, and wrote about his memories as an old man, about how he had miraculously survived and what he saw around him during those torturous years. Seeing that I published books, he wanted my opinion about what he had written. There was much to read and absorb. However, one particular story has stayed with until this day as if I read it yesterday, though I had about 10 years ago. One day in a death camp, a Nazi commandant came out to see the prisoners that had lined up for roll call. Clearly the man enjoyed himself, seeing Jews being treated so lowly, and he strutted over to an elderly rabbi who was standing in line. Addressing the rabbi, the Nazi said, obviously in German, sarcastically and with a big smile on his face: Well Heir Rabbi, where is your G-d now?! It was clear to all who could hear that the commandant was making fun of the Jewish people and their belief in the G-d of the Torah. After all, if He truly was G-d, how could He allow His people to be so mistreated and His Torah so disgraced? Surely even the rabbi, the commandant must have reasoned, must submit to the idea that the Aryan race was indeed the chosen one, not the descendants of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov. But not this Jew. As the author described, without fear or intimidation, the rabbi simply and calmly pointed Heavenward, as if to say, Where He has always been, and will always remain. The Nazi, ysvz, like so many others before and after him who tried the same tactic to break Jews but met with the same psychological resistance instead, was taken aback. As he processed that he had become the loser in the battle of psychological warfare he did what Nazis did best: he became extremely incensed and began to kick and beat the rabbi to death in front horrified onlookers. Now, I never saw a picture of the rabbi nor do I know much about the camp in which he was brutally murdered. But, I imagine that the rabbi, well aware of the consequences for besting a Nazi officer, calmly, bravely, and heroically stood up for G-d, Torah, and His people, in the true tradition of vayidom Aharon, at a time that most others would have capitulated. To quote the words of Rebi Yossi ben Kisma to his student, the destinedto-be-martyred Rebi Chanina ben Teradyon, My portion should be like your portion! (Avodah Zarah 18a). Who knows how much reward the rabbi, and all those like him throughout Jewish history, received for sticking with G-d at times that it looked as if G-d did not stick with the Jewish people? When history functions in a mishpat-mode, that is, in ways that the events of history make sense to us as well, then we are obligated to speak out and use them to emphasize the involvement of G-d in history. When it functions in a chok-mode, and the events not only do not make sense to us, put they push the envelope as far as trust and faith in G-d go, then we are obligated to hold our peace and wait until they transition from chok to mishpat. The reward for doing so in the World-to-Come is beyond grasp. But even in this world, there is compensation, as Dovid HaMelech foretold: Then was our mouth filled with laughter, and our tongue with singing; then the nations said, G-d has done great things with these. G-d has done great things with us; we are rejoiced (Tehillim 126:2-3) May we have the intellectual and emotional strength to transition through these final birth pangs of Moshiachs arrival, and live to have the above words apply to our generation.

34
Rabbi Yochanan Zweig

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

vision of the prophet Zecharia in which two winged women transport a measuring utensil to Babylonia. The Talmud interprets this to be an allusion to their bringing the trait of flattery to Babylonia(1). Rashi explains the inference to flattery in this verse in the following manner: The Torah describes the women as having the wings of a "chasida" - stork. The Talmud explains that a chasida is so named because the stork performs acts of "chesed" - kindness for its friends(2). How does performing acts of kindness for its friends transform the stork into the symbol of flattery? The Ramban teaches that since the birds which we are prohibited to eat exhibit negative character traits, consumption of them would infuse a person with these traits(3). In light of this, it is difficult to reconcile the Ramban's teaching with the Talmud's explanation of the name "chasida"(4). Why would the Torah name an unclean bird with a positive trait(5)? The Talmud is teaching us that what person does for his friends should be done out of commitment and obligation to the relationship. Viewing all that we do for friends as acts of kindness is a negative trait. Therefore, the chasida is being defined by a negative trait, not a positive one. What motivates a person to view that which he does for his friends as acts of kindness? The Hebrew word for "friend" is "chaver", which is a derivation of the word "chibur" - "to be joined with". The closer a relationship is, the greater the loss of independence; commitment to a relationship is accompanied by obligations. A person must make himself available to accommodate his friend's needs. When a person views that which he does for his friend as a kindness, he maintains a distance within the relationship, not allowing for a commitment that would require obligation. He seeks to maintain his independence, for this allows him to have a relationship on his terms. What he is doing in essence is retaining his control over the relationship. The act of flattery is essentially the same as the behavior exhibited by the chasida. When a person resorts to flattery within a relationship, he is giving his friend a false sense of reality. This is a manipulative act, giving the flatterer control over the relationship. Again, the relationship is being dictated on his terms. This explains a statement made by the Talmud: The punishment of the flatterer is that he will fall into the hands of the one who he flattered(6). Since he attempted to control, the quid-pro-quo is that he will eventually be controlled. 1. Kiddushin 48b 2. Ibid 3. See 11:13, these are birds that exhibit cruelty 4. Chullin 63a 5. See Chidushei Harim, Torah Temimah who address this issue 6. Sotah 42b

Insights into the Weekly Parsha

Parshas Shemini: Reality of Consequence "...and they died before Hashem" (10:2) The Zohar relates that both Nadav and Avihu were under the age of twenty when they died(1). Since their deaths were a punishment by heavenly means, a difficulty arises; their deaths violate the accepted rule that the heavenly court does not mete out punishment to anyone under twenty years of age(2).. Some of the later commentaries respond to this difficulty based upon the opinion of the Tzelach that if a child exhibits superior intellect, he can be held responsible for his actions, even at a young age(3). Perhaps we can offer a different answer. In the beginning of Parshas Acharei Mos, Rashi explains the juxtaposition between the deaths of Aharon's sons and the prohibition of entering the Holy of Holies. Rashi says that just as a doctor's warning is more effective when he points out to his patient the fate of someone who failed to heed his directives, Hashem warns Aharon that if he enters the Holy of Holies indiscriminately, he will die in the same manner as his sons(4). Why does Rashi use a doctorpatient scenario as a parable? Would it not have been more appropriate to compare Hashem and Aharon to a king and his subject? If Rashi would have used a king-subject scenario, the message would be that if the subject does not follow the king's directions, he will die as a punishment. However, if a person fails to follow the instructions of a doctor and dies as a result, we consider this to be a logical consequence, not a punishment; the patient brought upon himself his own demise. Entering the Holy of Holies without permission is the same concept; the result is the death of the individual as a logical consequence of being in a place so holy that his soul cannot tolerate it.. His death is not a punishment. Therefore, Rashi compares Hashem and Aharon to a doctor and his patient, for if Aharon would die as a result of not adhering to Hashem's warning, this would be an inevitable consequence. There is no questions as to how the heavenly court could have punished Aharon's sons; their deaths were not a punishment, rather a consequence of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, to which even minors are not impervious. 1. Begining of Parshas Achrei Mos see Sefer Drash V'iyun 2. Bamidbar Rabbah 18:4 See Pardeis Yoseif Parshas Chayei Sarah 3. Tzelach Berachos 31b 4. 16:1 Good Enough To Eat "For distinguishing between the impure and the pure and between the creatures that may be eaten and the creatures that may not be eaten"(11:47) At the end of the parsha we are commanded to distinguish between the animals that may be eaten and those that may not. Careful analysis of the Hebrew text reveals that the verse lacks parallel structure. The expression used to refer to the animals which may be eaten is "hachaya hane'echeles", for which the expression with parallel structure would be "hachaya asher ainena ne'echeles" - "the animals which may not be eaten". However, the Torah uses the expression "hachaya asher lo sayachel" to refer to the animals which may not be eaten. Why does the Torah not use the expression with parallel structure? The Rambam in his introduction to Pirkei Avos poses the following question: Which is a higher service of Hashem, one who by nature does not have the desire to violate the precepts, or one who struggles with the desire, finally conquering his evil inclination, and does the will of Hashem? The Rambam comes to the following conclusion: In the Torah we find two categories of precepts. There are those which, by nature, we sense the obligation to uphold them. We understand that violating them would mean doing something intrinsically wrong, i.e. murder, theft, and adultery. The second category of precepts includes those which we would have no inkling of their prohibitive nature, were it not for Hashem having restricted us from doing them, i.e. the dietary laws, and shaatnez. Concerning those that we identify as being intrinsically wrong, the Torah obligates us not to desire to do them. The soul that adheres to these precepts, but desires to violate them is defective. Concerning those with which we do not associate an intrinsic wrong, the higher level of adherence is desiring to violate them, but restraining ourselves only because Hashem commands us to do so(1). The verb "ne'echeles" - "may be eaten" is a passive participle which in the context of the verse functions as an adjective. This adjective defines the nature of the animal, i.e. it is edible. "Lo sayachel" is a verb which attaches an action to the object, but does not define the object itself, i.e. it may not be eaten, not that it is inedible. If the expression "ainena ne'echeles" would have been used, it would have defined non-kosher as inedible. The Torah is careful in its choice of words to relay the message that non-kosher does not mean abhorrent and inedible, rather, as the Rambam explains, something desirable but nonetheless prohibited. 1. Shemoneh Perakim Ch..6 Controlling Kindness "And the chasida..."(11:19) The Talmud teaches that each locale has a proclivity toward certain character traits or behaviors. Babylonia is noted for its high incidence of flattery, and as a source for this, the Talmud cites a verse found in the

Questions or comments? Email feedback@torah.org. Join the Jewish Learning Revolution! Torah.org: The Judaism Site brings this and a host of other classes to you every week. Visit http://torah.org or email learn@torah.org to get your own free copy of this mailing. Need to change or stop your subscription? Please visit our subscription center, http://torah.org/subscribe/ -- see the links on that page. Permission is granted to redistribute, but please give proper attribution and copyright to the author and Torah.org. Both the author and Torah.org reserve certain rights. Email copyrights@torah.org for full information. Torah.org: The Judaism Site Project Genesis, Inc. 122 Slade Avenue, Suite 250 Baltimore, MD 21208 http://www.torah.org/ learn@torah.org (410) 602-1350 FAX: (410) 510-1053

Aish.Com - Yeshiva Aish HaTorah

Family Parsha

Parshas Shemini: Speak Up! by Nesanel Yoel Safran From This Weeks Torah Portion When is it right to get involved in other people's business? When we can help them. In this week's Torah portion, (Lev. 10:16-20) although Moshe is criticizing the actions of Elazar and Itamar - and not his own - Aaron steps in and speaks up in their defense. So too, we should be willing to speak up and defend others. Story In our story, a kid has to choose whether to speak out or sneak out. In Focus Jeff looked out over the white, snowy horizon. The unexpected snowfall had turned his usually 'blah' looking neighborhood into something right out of a greeting card, with sledding kids, hanging icicles and jolly snowmen. Deciding it was a scene he'd like to see again - especially on a hot, summer afternoon, Jeff took his camera out of his carry bag and started to take a short video of the serene surroundings. Suddenly, he was almost knocked over by the commotion as a large dog blustered by, kicking up snow with all four legs as he went along, until ... boom! -the dog ran smack into a snowman, knocking it over onto its back. Jeff chuckled at the comical scene, put his camera away and went on, when he heard some yelling from behind him. "I should bury you in the snow for doing that!" "But I didn't t-touch your snowman, I p-p-promise," Jeff heard a young voice quiver. Jeff turned to see Larry, one of the neighborhood big kids, standing over a smaller boy and waving the snow shovel he had in his hand like a club. "I'm going to teach you a lesson for busting my snowman you're never gonna forget!..." Picking up the pace, Jeff began to hightail away from the scene that could be turning quite nasty any moment. Jeff felt sorry for that younger kid and knew he was innocent, but 'not getting involved' was something Jeff always figured was the best policy and there was no reason to change that policy now... Or was there?

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

"Um, excuse me," Jeff said, hardly believing he was saying the words. "Huh? Yeah?" the menacing-looking Larry turned his way. "Uh, I was watching and I saw that the kid," he pointed to the trembling younger boy, "really didn't bust your snowman." "Yeah, right. You're just trying to get him off the hook," the big kid bellowed. "Now get outta here before I teach you a lesson, too!" Jeff, seeing he wasn't going to change the kid's mind, was about to take his advice and turn on his heels, when he remembered... He pulled out his camera and pushed a couple of buttons. "I've got it all on video. See, look, it was that big, black dog who wrecked your snowman," he said. "Wow, I can't believe it. Betrayed by my own dog!" the big kid looked up from the display screen and shook his head. "Hey, sorry kid," he said to the younger boy, who gratefully went on his way. As Jeff put his camera away, he was glad that he'd gotten the picture in focus -and that he had the right focus about not being afraid to speak up to help someone in trouble. Discussion Questions Ages 3-5 Q. How did Jeff feel at first about going to help the younger kid? A. Although he felt bad for him, he didn't want to speak up to help him. Q. How did he feel in the end? A. He was glad he had been able to help him. Ages 6-9 Q. What life-lesson do you think Jeff learned that day? A. He had shied away from getting involved and helping people when he could, but he rightly decided to speak up and saved an innocent kid from getting hurt. Q. How can we encourage ourselves to speak up for others? A. One way is to put ourselves in the 'shoes' of the one who needs help and think about how much we would appreciate someone who cared enough to speak up. Ages 10 and Up Q. Our sages teach that each of us is 'a guarantor' for one another. What do you think that means? A. We have to look at the next person not as a detached stranger whose problems don't concern us, but rather as someone we care about and are willing to help if and when we can. Q. Should one get involved to speak up for someone if by doing so we put ourselves in danger? A. Certainly we shouldn't foolishly endanger ourselves. However we should be willing to face a certain amount of stress or discomfort in order to help someone else in need.
This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/tp/pak/fp/118068484.html Like what you read? As a non-profit organization, Aish.com relies on readers like you to enable us to provide meaningful and relevant articles. Join Aish.com and help us continue to give daily inspiration to people like you around the world. Make a secure donation at: https://secure.aish.com/secure/pledge.php or mail a check to Aish.com, 408 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701 Copyright 1995 - 2011 Aish.com - http://www.aish.com

35

Aish.Com - Yeshiva Aish HaTorah

Jewish History Crash Course

Crash Course in Jewish History Part 10: Ten Plagues by Rabbi Ken Spiro Once the plagues hit Egypt -- blood, lice, frogs, etc. -- the devastation continues for over a year. Each plague is an open miracle, because each one represents a fantastic manipulation of nature. The laws of nature are turned upside down to help the Jews. Open miracles are a very important part of early Jewish history. After the destruction of the First Temple they're going to cease, although arguably the Jews couldn't have survived this long without continual hidden miracles. The obvious question we must ask when we examine The Plagues is why? Why did HaShem choose to set the Jewish people free through this very long, drawn-out process? If He wanted, HaShem, an all-powerful being that He is, could have made all the Egyptians drop dead on the first encounter with Moshe, or He could have frozen them in place, then all the Jews could have packed up and left in five minutes. To explain why the Ten Plagues had to be, we need to first explain the Jewish view of miracles in general. Judaism holds that nature does not act independently of HaShem, but, at the same time, HaShem created the laws of nature and does not interfere with them. HaShem is certainly capable of doing whatever He likes, but He doesn't play around with the physical world and its workings. Therefore, most miracles are natural phenomena with awesomely good timing. But to this rule, the Ten Plagues are a notable exception. A Total Exception Unlike the Ten Plagues, the splitting of the Red Sea or Reed Sea -- Yam Suf -- could be explained as a natural event with great timing. Several years ago two oceanographers documented that every 2,500 years or so the right combination of winds and tide will cause the ocean to split over the area of the Red Sea today. Unlike the movie version, where the Red Sea splits in a matter of minutes, the Bible story relates a lengthy

Author Biography: Rabbi Ken Spiro is originally from New Rochelle,NY. He graduated from Vasser College with a BA in Russian Language and Literature and did graduate studies at the Pushkin Institute in Moscow. He has Rabbinical ordination from Yeshiva Aish HaTorah in Jerusalem and a Masters Degree in History from The Vermont College of Norwich University. Rabbi Spiro is also a licensed tour guide by the Israel Ministry of Tourism. He lives in Jerusalem with his wife and five children where he works as a senior lecturer and researcher on Aish HaTorah outreach programs. This article can also be read at: http://aish.com/literacy/jewishhistory/Crash_Course_in_Jewish_History_Part_10_Ten_Plagues.asp Copyright 2001 Aish.com - http://aish.com

process -- just as documented -- of the wind blowing all night and by the morning there's a dry place to walk through. Napoleon, 200 years ago, witnessed a similar phenomenon. Can you imagine if that happened to you? Right at the time you needed to cross a body of water it splits for you overnight. If an event that occurs statistically once every 2,500 years happened for you, just when you needed it, you wouldn't say, "Ah, that's a good, interesting combination of winds and tides." You'd say, "Oh my G-d, a miracle!" That's what's happening in most cases of miracles in the Bible. However, there is no natural explanation for the Ten Plagues. The Ten Plagues are a clear example of HaShem flipping the laws of nature on its end. We have hail -- which should be frozen -- that is on fire; we have darkness so dense that no one can see or move; things that happened to Egyptians not happening to Jews. All supernatural stuff. Why? Here is the reason: The whole essence of idolatry is the belief that every force in nature has a god that controls it. In Egypt they worshipped the Nile god, the sun god, the cat god, the sheep god, etc. The Ten Plagues were designed by HaShem to flip all the laws of nature on end to demonstrate -- not just for the Jewish people but for all of humanity, for all of history -- that He alone controls all of nature, all of the physical world, and that there is nothing outside of His control. If we examine the plagues carefully we can readily see that each one was designed to show HaShem's control of all forces in nature: water and earth, fire and ice, insects, reptiles and mammals, light and darkness, and finally, life and death. Archeological Evidence Do we have evidence for the Ten Plagues in archeological records? As noted in the last installment in this series there is recorded a ten-year period in Egyptian history (right around this time) when chaos reigned. There are other oblique references, the most famous being the Ipuwer Papyrus. This is actually a series of papyri, which describe various cataclysmic events in Egypt -- blood everywhere, people dying etc. Immanuel Velikovsky uses the Ipuwer Papyrus as the basis for his book, Worlds in Collision, in which he argues that the whole Exodus story is true, but that the plagues happened because a comet came close to the earth. He says the dust from the comet turned the water red, and the pull of the comet's gravitational field split the sea, etc. However, if you read the Torah, you see that with the plague of blood, it's not just water turning a "dusty red." The Midrash also tells us that Egyptians perish from this bloody water but not the Jews. Despite that, there is an amazing amount of resistance on the part of the Egyptians -- not just the Pharaoh, but the whole of Egypt -- to let the Jews leave. It is classic anti-Semitism, "I don't care if I take my whole country down as long as I can take the Jews with me." This actually is a very common historical pattern. You'll see this certainly when we get to Hitler -- they needed the trains to supply the Eastern Front, but they diverted them to ship Jews to Auschwitz. They were losing the war, but their main energy still went, not to win, not to even save themselves, but to kill the Jews. Finally, finally, after the death of the first-born, the Pharaoh says, "Go!" The Jews leave, the sea splits, the Egyptians follow and they drown. That's the final great event until ... Mount Sinai. Next: Mount Sinai

Aish.Com - Rabbi Noach Weinberg ZTL

48 Ways to Wisdom
Way #25 No Pain No Gain What is the opposite of pain? Nine out of ten people will say, "Pleasure." Incorrect. The actual opposite of pain is "no pain" - i.e. comfort. And while comfort may be very nice, it is not the ultimate pleasure. A person who goes through life chasing comfort will be very disappointed at the end - because if you spend your life avoiding pain, you will also avoid the deepest pleasures. As much as everyone tries to minimize pain in life, the fact remains that pain is unavoidable. Everything has its ups and downs. Therefore, if we want to succeed in life, the key is not to eliminate pain entirely (for that is an impossibility), but rather to learn how to understand and accept the pain. The 48 Ways says: Pain is the price we pay for pleasure. All of life's lasting pleasures - good relationships, successful careers, the pursuit of meaning - require a lot of pain and effort to achieve. What we call "pain" is frequently a matter of "effort." The effort of physical fitness is painful. The effort of thinking through a difficult idea is painful. The effort of building a long-term relationship is painful. From

36

here we see that although effort may be "painful," the goal of life should not be to escape it. Anyone looking for a smooth ride will miss out on life's immeasurable pleasures. A Pain-Pleasure Example Real pleasure is inseparable from pain. Here's an example: What would you say is your parents' greatest "pleasure?" That's right: You. What would you say is your parents' greatest "pain?" The same answer: You. It's not an accident that your parents' greatest pleasure is also the source of their greatest pain. Because the greater the pleasure, the greater the effort required. To pursue comfort is defined as "decadent." When an entire society makes comfort its primary goal, that's dangerous. The Roman Empire collapsed because of decadence; they got too comfortable. The low birth rate in the Western world is an indication of contemporary decadence. I often ask young people how many children they want, and they tell me "two." "Why so few? "Because I love children, and I want to give them every advantage. It'll be difficult enough sending two children to university, let alone five. And what about clothes? And summer camp? With two children it's feasible, but with five?" That sounds logical. So I say: "OK, I'll give you one million dollars for one of your sisters. You've got five of them, so you won't miss one. She'll be given every advantage. No harm will come to her. You just won't see her again." "Are you crazy? That's my sister you're talking about. I wouldn't take TEN million dollars for her!" Do you see? If you run from pain or effort, you're really running away from pleasure. Fear Of Pain Often, the fear of pain is worse than the pain itself. An inoculation takes all of one second, but anticipation of the pain can last for hours beforehand. Fear of pain is the greatest restriction there is. If you're afraid of traveling, you'll never go anywhere. If you're afraid of physical or emotional exertion, you won't achieve, you won't grow, you won't find truth. We all have a choice: Either pay in the pain of trying, or in the emotional pain of knowing you're too weak to try. For example: If you don't ask for the job, you avoid the pain of refusal - but you have the pain of being a quitter the rest of your life. And that always comes back to haunt a person. What is at the core of someone's choice of suicide? What is really driving the person when he picks up a gun to put an end to it all? He wants to avoid pain. He wants to escape. In the words of Shakespeare, "To be or not to be, that is the question. Whether to withstand the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or by taking arms against fate ... to end it all." That's what he's looking for. He wants to sleep. To help you confront tough situations, remember: "Pain is passing, results are lasting." In fact, pain is often just a threshold to cross to get to another world of pleasure. A good example is the dentist. The drill and filling will take an hour, and the pain will subside in two. But the filling will prevent further decay, and give you eating enjoyment for years to come. Fear Of Reality The biggest fear people have of all fears, and the one most important to overcome, is the fear of facing up to reality. People would rather live an illusion than wake up to reality. Why? Because if reality turns out to be something different than what we're used to, it means having to change our course in life. And that hurts! We all choose to escape, now and then, from the effort that's involved in accomplishing the goals and ambitions we have in life. We all want to be great; we all want to change the world. It's just that we don't always feel like putting forth the effort. So we distract ourselves and escape from who we really are and what we want to achieve. The 48 Ways says: It hurts a lot more when reality confronts us, especially when it may be too late to do anything about it. Always ask yourself: "What pain am I avoiding?" Identify exactly what you're afraid of. Reason it out: What's the worst that could happen? As an exercise, make a list of the goals you'd love to achieve if no pain was involved. Then next to each goal, write down the amount of pain you anticipate in trying to reach those goals. Then, write down what makes the goal so worthwhile. Now compare the two columns. If a particular goal is truly worthwhile, then you'll see instantly how your fear of pain is holding you back from achieving that goal. And it will clarify how you'd even be willing to pay the price of pain to achieve it! Keep Your Eye On The Ball

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

One of the best ways of getting rid of pain is to forget about it and focus instead on the pleasure. It may seem as if pain and pleasure can't occur simultaneously, and that if you're feeling pain there is no pleasure. Wrong! There is pleasure to be felt, it's just that in focusing on the pain, you make yourself numb to the pleasure. Switch the focus and you switch the feeling. Imagine a team of basketball players, running around the court, pushing themselves to the limit, just to score a basket. Do they notice the pain they're feeling? Barely. The pleasure of playing and scoring overwhelms their feeling of pain. Now what would happen if you asked them to conduct the following experiment: Play basketball as you would normally - run, jump, shoot, and defend. But this time do all of that without the ball! How long do you think they could play for? Maybe five minutes! Because without the ball, there is no pleasure to distract them from the pain. Every step now seems like a major effort! Give them back the ball, and they'll play for another two hours! Judaism says: Keep your eye on the ball. If you want the ultimate in living - then you'll want to learn all you can about life. This will enable you to focus and make any effort a pleasure. Focus On The Up-Side Imagine a little boy playing ball with his friends. He falls down, scrapes his knee and begins to cry. But when his friends call out, "Cry baby!" he quickly pulls himself together and goes back in the game. An hour later, the child comes home, walks through the door, shows his mother his knee - and immediately bursts into tears! Our enjoyment of life has a lot to do with how we deal with pain. Many people have learned to say, "So what!" and take pain in stride. Others focus on their suffering and get stuck in a mode of "complain ... be sad ... you owe to yourself." Many people make the error of focusing on their failures, rather than on their strong points. This causes pointless anguish and pain. Every human being has been created with marvelous talents and potential. Therefore, to obsess over your shortcomings is as foolish as going to a spectacular concert, then fretting the entire time about being overcharged fifty cents for your ticket! Those who have achieved the most are those who've endured the greatest pain. Would you stop the revolution because you have a splinter in your finger? Would you hold up wisdom because you have a headache? Imagine yourself at a wonderful restaurant - beautiful view, exquisite furnishings ... but there's no salt. "NO SALT! How can that be?! This is an outrage!" And so, what could have been an enjoyable experience turns into a nightmare for you and those around you. In fact many relationships sour for the same reason. Rather than focus on the positive, people focus on the negative. It causes unnecessary suffering. Learn to focus on the goodness amidst the pain, and you'll discover the maximum goodness that life can possibly offer. According To The Pain Is The Reward In one sense there is a positive side to pain: The greater pain we experience on the way toward a goal, the greater we enjoy the success of reaching it. In other words: The more we pay, the more we treasure. Human beings can actually derive pleasure from overcoming pain. People will swim in ice-water or walk over hot coals just to conquer the pain of doing so. Overcoming pain gives us a sense of our own free will, and how much we can shape our lives. Learning wisdom is a good example of the value of struggling. Wisdom is the most valuable tool for living a meaningful life. If you want to be happy - really happy - you need wisdom. Learning wisdom means taking the time to research an idea, working to understand it, integrating it, and practicing it over and over again. That means taking the pain now to learn some eternal ideas. Because when you finally do figure it out, you'll value it all the more. You know you have what it takes. Now go and get it. Pain Of Others The rules are different when it comes to the pain of other people. Don't ignore their pain. When you go to visit a friend in the hospital, don't start preaching about how he should "look at the positive side." Compassion and understanding will help alleviate his pain. That's being a good friend, spouse, parent, etc. Similarly, don't look away from the suffering of humanity. If there's a problem in your community (or even in some faraway land), ask yourself: "What can I do to alleviate it?" A person would need to be blind to be unaware of the plight of humanity today: despair, persecution, broken homes ... (Blind, or too involved with one's own personal concerns.) Those who have some sense of vision do something about the problem. They write a check when there's a knock on the door. But even they are "too busy" to get personally involved. It is the rare few who go out of their way to seek solutions to the problems.

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

Greatness is not found in "upping your donation" from last year. Greatness is found in being involved, in making it as much your problem as the one who is suffering. That is where a leader will be found, and that's where your own greatness will ultimately be expressed. Why Did HaShem Make It This Way? HaShem could have created us as automated robots. But instead He gave each of us a set of challenges - and the potential to overcome them. This is how we grow and "repair our souls." Utilizing our Free Will is the essence of what it means to be a human being. Every moment we're alive, we're using our free will to choose between life and death, reality or escapism. It's a constant choice. We are either making the choice to take the pain in order to grow, or we're quitting. Which is not to suggest that we should go out of our way to seek difficulties. But if there is a process that we must undergo, then it is foolish to avoid it. Too often we busy ourselves with petty distractions, in order to escape the confrontation with reality. But it always catches up with us eventually. Because it is part and parcel of our reason for being.

37

Effort is a process that each of us has to go through. We have crucial life lessons to learn, and it is precisely for that reason our souls have come to earth in the first place. Our greatness is found in using our free will to resolve conflict, fight and accomplish. To bite the bullet and not run away. Why Is "Accepting Pain" An Ingredient In Wisdom? "According to the effort is the reward." The more effort you expend, the more pleasure you'll get. If you jump ship when the waters get choppy, you'll never make it to shore. Accept the pain of confronting reality and finding the truth. Deal with the difficulties of life by focusing on your pleasures; learn to find the pleasure within the pain. Don't fear the pain; learn to welcome it as a necessary byproduct of growth. Don't escape the suffering of others. It's all part of the Grand Eternal Plan.
Author Biography: Rabbi Noach Weinberg was the dean and founder of Aish HaTorah International. Over the last 40 years, his visionary educational programs have brought hundreds of thousands of Jews closer to their heritage. Copyright 2002 Aish.com - "The 48 Ways to Wisdom" is culled from the Talmud (Pirkei Avos 6:6), which states that "the crown of Torah is acquired by 48 Ways." Each of these is a special tool to help us sharpen our personal skills and get the most out of life. His popular cassette series on the "48 Ways" has sold thousands worldwide.

. . . . . Community Kollel

The following columns from last week were received after publication Chicago Kollel Parsha Encounters Chicago Kollel Halacha Encounters Rabbi Yaacov Haber TorahLab Rabbi Mayer Twersky Torahweb Rabbi Pinchas Winston Perceptions

page 37 page 37 page 38 page 38 page 39

Parsha Encounters

Parshas Tzav: Destroying the Amaleik Within By Rabbi Doni Deutsch A Project Of Chicago Community Kollel Rabbi Shimons students asked him, Why did the Jews of that generation deserve destruction? He said to them, You say. They said, because they enjoyed Achashveroshs party. He asked, if so .They said to him, you say. He said, because they bowed to a graven image (Megilah 12a) Rabbi Shimons students asked him a question - as talmidim do throughout shas. But instead of answering them as we would expect, he asks them for their answer to the question. Why? After all, hes the Rebbe and they are coming to him for an answer. (While it possible he is testing them, it would seem there is more to it.) The second puzzling part of the story is when they tell him, You say. This is a problem because the Gemara in Brachos 27b implies that halachically, students are not allowed to address their Rebbe in the less respectful second person. (The Gemara there in fact proves that Rav Yirmiyah bar Abba was more than just a simple disciple of Rav, from the fact that he said you when addressing Rav.) In our Gemara they were clearly Rabbi Shimons talmidim, so how could they address him as you? The answer to this second question may very well be that adarabah, because Rabbi Shimon made a point of asking them the question, thereby treating them almost like his Rabbeim, perhaps that allowed them to take the liberty of addressing him with less than the usual honor. But we still need to understand why Rabbi Shimon acted as he did. The key to understanding this Gemara is found in the Torah reading for Purim (Shmos,17:9), where Moshe tells Yehoshua, choose for us men and go fight against Amalaik. Rashi comments, that Moshes saying for us, instead of for me, teaches us that a Rebbe is obligated to show honor to a talmid. HaGaon Rav Yitzchak Hutner (Pachad Yitzchak, Purim #18) says that the fact that this halacha is taught specifically here, indicates that kvod hatalmid is somehow connected to the eternal battle against Amaliak. While Rav Hutner explains one way of understanding this, perhaps we can suggest another approach. The Medrash at the beginning of Pashas Yisro, compares Amalaik to a letz a scoffer. Rav Hutner (in Pachad Yitzchak, Purim #1) explains that a letz is someone to whom nothing is chashuv (significant). Even when faced with something significant, the letz finds a way to laugh it off and is not impressed. And that is Amalaik. As it says in Az Yashir, Shamu amim yirgazun, chil achaz yoshvai plashes When Hashem split the Yam Suf, all the nations were terrified of Klal Yisrael. Everyone that is, except Amalaik. Amalaik attacks Klal Yisrael. As Rashi says (Devarim, 25:18) this can be compared to a boiling hot bath into which nobody could enter. But then one irresponsible person came and jumped in. Even though he got burned, he cooled it off for others. So too Amalaik. Klal Yisrael was untouchable everyone was afraid of them. But Amalaik is the scoffer. Theyre not impressed by anything , no matter how chashuv.

And so they attack. Yes, Yehoshua defeats them. But they cooled us off, and now other nations can - and do - attack Klal Yisrael. Laitzonus is a midah that is very destructive to avodas Hashem. As the Ramchal writes (Mesilas Yesharim, Chapter 5), when one is a letz, words of mussar will not change him. His laitzanus simply does not allow any words of inspiration and mussar to penetrate his heart. And if the middah raah of Amalaik is laitzanus then the only way to fight against Amalaik is by doing all that we can to give chashivus to things. Not only where it is obvious that it is deserved, but by finding the chashivus in people and things even where it is not so obvious. And that, perhaps, is why we are taught the lesson of kvod talmidim specifically at the battle with Amalaik. The fact that a talmid must honor his rebbe is obvious. The chiddush is that even though the rebbe is certainly greater, still, he must see the chashivus of his talmid and show him respect as well. Kvod talmidim is an essential part of the battle with Amalaik. And that is why Rabbi Shimon went out of his way to bestow honor upon his talmidim specifically when discussing the Purim story, which is the story of milchemes Amalaik. May we be zocheh to always find chashivus in people and things even when it is not so obvious, and thereby successfully destroy the koach of Amalaik within ourselves. Rabbi Deutsch, an alumnus of the Kollel, is co-founder of CTN, and learns daily at the Kollel. Chicago Community Kollel

Halacha Encounters

Krias HaMegillah By Rabbi Pesach Gottesman The Gemara in Megillah (14A) poses the following question. Why dont we recite Hallel, the expression of praise and thanks to Hashem which is said on other holidays, on the festive day of Purim, when we celebrate the Jewish peoples deliverance from Hamans threat of annihilation? R Nachman answers that the recitation of the megillah itself takes the place of Hallel. Retelling the story of our salvation is the greatest praise we can give Hashem. However, amidst all the joy and excitement one must bear in mind to perform the mitzvos of the day in the manner which Chazal instructed. Otherwise, we may fulfill the spirit of Purim but not its mitzvos. One must recite or hear someone else recite the megillah once during the night of Purim and once during Purim day. Krias HaMegillah is unique in that it was instituted to publicize the miracle of Purim. This aspect of pirsumei nissa gives rise to some special halachos. For example, one should not eat or drink even a small amount before Krias HaMegillah (which is usually allowed before the carrying out of other mitzvos), unless one feels ill or (on years when Purim is not on Sunday) fasting on Taanis Esther is difficult for him (M.B. 692, 14). Although one can fulfill his obligation even by reading the megillah to himself, it is a mitzvah to hear the megillah in shul where there are many people to accomplish pirsumei nissa. Even if one is able to gather a minyan in his home, one should nonetheless go to shul in order to listen to the megillah.

38

Everyone is obligated in the mitzvah of megillah. Even though women are usually exempt from time-related mitzvos, they are obligated in listening to the megillah because they too were part of the miracle (they were also saved from the threat, and Esther played a key role in the events). Children are obligated to hear the megillah once they reach the age of chinuch, which is when they are capable of listening to the entire megillah in the same fashion as an adult. The Mishnah Berurah admonishes those who bring underage children (who will cause a disturbance) to shul. The entire shul must stand while the baal koreh recites the berochos. When the baal koreh recites the berachah of shehecheyanu at the daytime reading, he and the entire shul should keep in mind the mitzvos of Mishloach Manos and the Purim Seudah. One should have intention that he is listening to the megillah in order to fulfill his obligation. It is assumed that even without explicit intention everyone in shul has the mitzvah in mind (M.B. 690, 49). During the recital of the megillah one may sit, except for the baal koreh who is reading for the tzibbur. One must hear every single word of the megillah. If one misses even one word, he has not fulfilled the mitzvah. If one is listening to a baal koreh and misses a word, it is not enough to merely say that one word; rather, he must continue from the point he missed until he catches up to the keriah. Otherwise, the keriah will be out of order, which Chazal do not allow. If one is dozing off or unfocused (Levushei Serad, 690, 16, and contemporary Poskim) to the point that if someone were to ask him a question about what he is listening to, he wouldnt be able to answer, it is considered as if he did not hear the megillah. One who usually uses a hearing aid should remove it in order to listen naturally to the keriah (Minchas Shlomo Vol. I, 9). If one is unable to hear without a hearing aid and cant read the megillah to himself, he may rely on the Poskim who allow the megillah to be read even through an instrument (see Piskei Teshuvos 689, 3). Lechatchilah, the entire megillah should be read from a kosher klaf; bedieved, one may read up to half the megillah from a regular printed Chumash. For this reason, many people follow along with the keriah in shul from a kosher megillah in order to be able to catch up lest they miss any words (see Pri Megadim 690, A.A 19). One who has his own kosher megillah may read along, provided that he does not disturb anyone (M.B. 25). One who has a printed Chumash should not read along (except to catch up on any missed words). It should be mentioned that one who is following along in his own megillah should be comfortable reading from a klaf in which the letters are written in Kesav Ashuris. As noted before, it does not suffice to make up the single word one missed; therefore, a situation may arise where many lines must be read, which is challenging for someone who is inexperienced in Krias HaMegillah. There are many customs regarding the actual keriah, some mentioned in the Gemara and others which have been accepted over the generations. Although their observance is not imperative to the fulfillment of the mitzvah, one should never ignore or belittle any minhag (Rema 690, 17). The custom is that the entire shul says four pesukim out loud as an expression of happiness. The baal koreh must repeat them afterwards in order that everyone should hear the entire megillah being read from a klaf. The names of the ten sons of Haman (starting from the word Chameish) should be read in one breath in order to demonstrate that they were hanged together. The custom in many shuls is that the tzibbur also reads the names in one breath before the baal koreh does, although the Chayei Adam quoted by the Mishnah Berurah states that this is unnecessary. Because the megillah is called an Iggeres, a letter, it is the custom that as the baal koreh reads the megillah, he folds it as if it is a long letter. The Mishnah Berurah writes that there is no reason for someone following along to fold his megillah like an Iggeres but notes that many people do so nonetheless. In addition, one should not pause for more than a breath between each pasuk as one would if reading a letter from the king. The Rema writes that the custom is for children to write the name Haman on sticks or stones and to bang whenever his name is mentioned to fulfill the mitzvah of wiping out Amaleks name. The custom to bang and make noise during Krias HaMegillah derives from that practice. One should not say any words while banging; if one does so, however, the keriah is not disqualified. One must be very careful that he does not miss any words because of the banging; due to this concern, some have the minhag to repeat a couple of words once it is quiet. It is the minhag in some shuls to repeat certain pesukim because there is uncertainty regarding the manner in which they should be read. One should familiarize ones self with his shuls customs in order to avoid confusion. One should wear his tefillin during the daytime reading and touch them when the word vayekar is read, because it refers to tefillin. The sefer Yesod VShoresh Ha'avodah (shaar 12, ch. 4) writes that one should prepare himself for the reading of the megillah by understanding its meaning, and should feel a tremendous simchah during the keriah. We should be zocheh to experience nissim vniflaos in our times, just as our nation experienced great miracles in the days of Mordechai and Esther. Rabbi Gottesman is a full-time member of the Kollel.

baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc!

Rabbi Yaacov Haber

TorahLab

Zachor There was a boiling hot bath. Everyone wanted to go in but they were afraid. One brazen fellow plunged in. Once he leaped in everyone jumped in after him. When the Jews left Egypt they were hot, very hot. The surrounding nations heard about all the miracles that occurred to the Jews. The world was in awe of the Jewish people. They were also jealous of our chosenness and wanted to attack. They were all afraid to jump in. One brazen nation Amalek came and plunged in against the Jews and cooled us down. We have since suffered for generations in the hands of ruthless governments and anti-Semitic populaces. None of them were afraid of us. reishis goyim Amalek - Amalek was the first, they started. Once they started we became easy prey for the entire world. Something even worse happened. Asher Korcho Baderech. We were hot and Amalek made us cold. With the attack of Amalek we turned stony, frigid and dispassionate about Hashem. Not only were we cooled down in the eyes of the nations for all of history, but even more tragic, our own attitude, in our own minds and hearts became cold. Id like to discuss the nu-nu factor. Once in Buffalo it came to my attention that two of my congregants were involved in an illicit affair. I was beside myself. I didnt know whether to shoot, excommunicate, scream, or threaten. The standards of my community were being compromised. Chilul Hashem was pending. Olam Haba was being thrown out the window. I called a seasoned Rabbi and described the situation to him. Ill never forget his response! Nu-nu. One of the great luminaries of the last generation was Rav Yechezkel Levenstien. He was the spiritual leader of Mir Yeshiva in Poland, Shanghai and eventually he came to the Mir Yeshiva in Brooklyn. After a very short time in this country he announced that he could no longer stay in the US and that he will be making Aliya. In his departing talk he spoke about a man who entered a perfumery. As he entered he was overwhelmed with the fragrance. After a few minutes the fragrance became subtle and after an hour he could detect no smell. Rav Yechezkel said that at the beginning he wasnt used to American society. The things he saw hit him like a ton of bricks. They kept him up at night. After a few weeks the very same society became tolerable until he found himself saying, nu-nu. It was time to leave. Can you remember how you felt the first time you heard that a Yeshiva student was abusing drugs? Can you remember how you felt when the first SCUD missile fell on Tel Aviv? Can you remember how you felt the first time you heard that there was a child on the street because no Yeshiva or Jewish school would take him in? We were hot. We cant cool down! The Torah lists the crimes of Amalek. He stabbed us in the back. He attacked our weakest. He came upon us when we were faint and exhausted. He didnt fear G-d. But the first and the worst thing Amalek did was that he made us cold. Timche - erase the memory of Amalek. Turn up the heat. Rabbi Mayer Twersky The Faith of Shmuel Hanavi The connection between the haftorah of parshas Zachor and parshas Zachor itself is readily apparent. We read about Shaul's battle against Amalek, and his sin in sparing Agag, progenitor of Haman. Upon reflection, however, there is a second connection as well. When Hashem informs Shmuel that Shaul is to forfeit his kingdom on account of his sin, Shmuel is deeply aggrieved. In fact, as the navi records, "vayizak el Hashem kol halayla" - Shmuel, in aguish, cries out to Hashem throughout the night. He is deeply pained at Shaul's plight, and thus he pours his heart out in an effort to intercede on Shaul's behalf. Shmuel, of course, does not succeed. Hashem does not accept his tefilos. One would have expected Shmuel, in delivering the news to Shaul, to be somewhat reticent. And yet with the force of complete conviction, Shmuel rebukes Shaul and, without a trace of his own prior aggrievement, informs Shaul of his punishment. Shmuel is a paragon of faith. He himself thought there was cause to be forgiving of Shaul. He thus implored Hashem to do so. And yet when Hakadosh Baruch Hu overruled him, with the conviction of pure faith, Shmuel accepted Hashem's decree as true and just. People are perplexed by the mitzvah of eradicating Amalek, men, women, and children. Shmuel serves as a model for all generations. Not only are we to comply with ratzon Hashem, we must feel the conviction that His ratzon is true and just and be able to project that conviction. This attitude clearly needs to be cultivated in relation to all manifestations of ratzon Hashem, whether in Torah or history. Copyright 2011 by The TorahWeb Foundation. All rights reserved.

TorahWeb

!baaBtu!isq.zoznt trcdk trcd ihc

Rabbi Pinchas Winston

Perceptions

Parshas Tzav: We Drink to Step Out G-d spoke unto Moshe, saying, Command Aaron and his sons, saying: This is the law of the burnt-offering (Vayikra 6:1-2) This Shabbos is Parshas Zachor and tonight is Purim for everyone except those who live in cities whose walls date back to the time of Yehoshua bin Nun. And, though at first glance the parshah seems to have little to do with the mitzvah to eradicate Amalek, and the holiday of Purim, in truth, they are all speaking about one and the same matter. Purim is about appearances. As the Talmud explains, because we acted disloyal to G-d on the outside, while remaining true to Him on the inside, He gave the appearance of abandoning us to Haman, when in fact He was working behind the scenes to protect us from him. In the end, when the truth about us was revealed, the truth about Him was revealed too. Hence, we drink until we dont know the difference between cursed Haman and cursed Mordechai, because by that point we are supposed to have come to realize that everything is a function of Hashgochah Pratis Divine Providenceand all power belongs to G-d. There are really no Hamans, or Hitlers, ysvz for that matter, at least as they actually appear to us, just the will of G-d. Of course, it is easier to believe just the opposite. Many people would rather believe that evil people are able to somehow work around the will G-d for a time, rather than believe that G-d can allow, if not actually perpetrate Himself, the worst evils known to mankind. To think that Hitler ysvz and his Nazi followers were just emissaries of G-d is more than most people can emotionally handle, especially if they choose to believe in a benevolent G-d. Granted there is a concept called tough love. Which parent or teacher hasnt had to be tough on a child for his or her own good? Sometimes, were even tough on ourselves when we realize that todays sacrifice is tomorrows growth and gain. We even get pleasure sometimes from actually making the sacrifice, feeling nobler because of it. But tough love has its limits. It is only meant to benefit a person in the long run, during his or her present lifetime. Near genocide by Haman was tough love. But, what about the cruel extermination of 6,000,000 Jews? It says that after Adam HaRishon was forced from the Garden of Eden because of his sin that he fasted for 130 years in order to rectify the damage he had caused (Eiruvin 18b). And yet, after he was finished, he still did little to change the world that he brought into being, so severe was the impact of his sin. Anyone looking on might have wondered what the big deal was. True, the world was no longer paradise, but it had lots of promise. The new world had plenty of potential, and it wasnt long before man adapted and learned to manipulate Creation to his liking. It wasnt long before mankind created its own version of the Garden of Eden. Its like people visiting an old house that clearly had been something in its day. Walking around the home, which had not been perfectly kept over the years, they are still impressed with what they see, until they wander it a room that has pictures of what the house looked like when it was still in use. Wow, that is really something, they say looking at the pictures in awe. Even their imaginations could not have pictured such grandeur from what remained. Likewise, people born outside of the Garden of Eden, though they could still see it from the outside at first, could not have possibly imagined what being in the Garden had been like. They could not appreciate how much the world had been transformed because of mankinds initial sin. They could not visualize the tremendous gap between the world that once was and the world that had since emerged. And that is the way it has been throughout history. We know that a sin is a bad thing, and many people try to avoid them. However, we are almost totally unaware of the impact that it has on Creation; we dont see the full extent of the damage that is done. If we could, not only would we probably not sin, but if we did, we probably would be unable to live with ourselves, like a person who slowed down too quickly on a icy highway, causing a 100-car pile up with many people injured. That is Amaleks work. Amalek is antimatter, that is, he is anti all that matters to G-d. In one form or another, he exists to desensitize mankind from the impact of sinning, so that people will be less careful about what they do and constantly damage the world and themselves. How this benefits him is another story, especially since Amalek seems bent on destroying the world even if it means that he will ultimately go down with the ship as well. The point of sacrifices, which take the life of an animal, is to reverse the impact of Amalek. It is to re-sensitize the Jew to the impact of sin by working on rectifying the four layers of existence that are affected by sin. They are: the mineral world, represented by the salt of the sacrifice, the plant world, represented by the firewood, the sacrifice itself represents the animal world, and the person performing it is on behalf of the human level. And even then, a sacrifice could only rectify a portion of the damage done to the world. But, it was all that G-d expected from us, and by doing our

Perceptions, Copyright &copy 2011 by Rabbi Pinchas Winston and Torah.org. Questions or comments? Email feedback@torah.org. Join the Jewish Learning Revolution! Torah.org: The Judaism Site brings this and a host of other classes to you every week. Visit http://torah.org or email learn@torah.org to get your own free copy of this mailing. Need to change or stop your subscription? Please visit our subscription center, http://torah.org/subscribe/ -- see the links on that page. Permission is granted to redistribute, but please give proper attribution and copyright to the author and Torah.org. Both the author and Torah.org reserve certain rights. Email copyrights@torah.org for full information. Torah.org: The Judaism Site Project Genesis, Inc. 122 Slade Avenue, Suite 250 Baltimore, MD 21208 http://www.torah.org/ learn@torah.org (410) 602-1350 FAX: (410) 510-1053

share G-d corrected the rest, as much as He was willing to do so. However, the fact that the Temples were destroyed and history has seen man descend spiritually over the millennia indicates that rectification was lacking, and so the world has degenerated. As we know, the physical world reflects the spirit world. And, just as anything good in Creation, if left in a state of disrepair will eventually rot and become destroyed, likewise if the spiritual world is not maintained, a spiritual rotting eventually occurs, resulting in the growth and flourishing of evil, until eventually it springs forth into history and the physical plain. If you want to know the state of the Creation, just take a look at the evil in the world, and what it is able to do. If it is being kept at bay, the spiritual weather is good. If it is increasing in power, doing more damage, and brandishing its sword, no matter how righteous we may think that we are, the bottom line is that the world is in rapid decline, as it is today, much to Amaleks joy. Purim means that G-d maintains the right of veto. It is G-ds way of telling us, Look, if you are not going to re-sensitize yourself to what matters most in life and take the initiative to teach others as well, then I will do it Myself. I will raise up Hamans who will force you to re-examine lives that you should have been re-examining all the time on your own. At the end of the day, there will be redemptions, but the cost at which they come will be based upon how much you rectify your situations yourselves. Clearly Jewish history is a testimony to this sobering reality. Indeed, both the Ramchal and the Vilna Gaon stated that whether or not Moshiach Ben Yosef dies in battle is dependent upon where the Jewish people are holding at the time that he comes. The more we prepare the way for his arrival, the less danger he will be in as he arrives. And since Moshiach Ben Yosef represents so much more than simply a single individual, his death would be a very troubling event for the entire Jewish people, clearly something to be avoided at all cost. However, Purim is supposed to deliver another message, this time through the drinking of wine. For, as the rabbis teach, though one can become intoxicated on Purim using any kind of kosher spirit, the essential mitzvah is to use wine, because many miracles happened through wine. For example, had Achashveros not been drunk, he wouldnt have requested Vashti to appear before his guests, especially without clothing. And, had he not been drunk, he certainly wouldnt have had her executed for not doing so, leaving Esther and the miraculous redemption of Purim in the backstage of history. Had Achashveros acted reasonably? For a sober person, no. For a drunk person, yes. In other words, that Vashti received her comeuppance (the Talmud says that she made Jewish women undress and break Shabbos) and was moved out of the way for Esther in such a weird way because the king was drunk did not appear like a miracle. Achashveros drinking gave Heaven room to do its thing without attracting any additional attention. In other words, wine was a device that pushed Achashveros out of the way so that G-d could work His wonders. It neutralized his daas, that is, his perception of reality and his personality. It distracted him, pulled the proverbial wool over his eyes, which is why the next morning, once he sobered up and realized what he had done, he had such regret. It is an important message for all of us. Where was G-d when I needed Him most? people have often ask. Why did He allow this to happen to me, people have moaned after experiencing some kind of personal catastrophe. Many agnostics have been made based upon such questions which they believe have gone unanswered. However, the truth is that G-d was there when we needed Him, and always is. And, with few exceptions, He wants to help us and perform the miracle we need, but not in a way, necessarily, that it will appear as a miracle. Such clarity can unnecessarily reduce the free-will of those involved. Only a few times in history has G-d worked so overtly that even those undeserving to see such Divine Providence were party to it. The problem is that we tend to get in the way. Either because we get too involved in our crises, or not involved enough, we limit the avenues that G-d can and will use to save us. There may be trillions of ways that G-d can solve our problems, but only a few of them serve the purpose of Creation while serving us at the same time. Righteous people know how to balance out the situation, how to do their part to solve crises, while leaving G-d enough room to do His part without revealing too much about His involvement. They know what it means to live with such a level of daas, of G-dly knowledge, and how to implement it in everyday life. They know when to step in, and how to step out. For the rest of us, it may not be so easy. Between worrying about the worst scenarios and doing everything we can, and more, to avert them, we tend to push G-d out of the picture, an Amalekian approach to life and Divine Providence. Therefore, at least once a year on Purim we drink to feel what it is like to not care so much, to be willing to give over some of our personal providence back to G-d; to step out of His way so that He can move history as He deems fit for all of Creation.

39

Vol 21 # 49 tga,

PLEASANT RIDGE NEWSLETTER

A Kehilas Prozdor Publication
(c) 1990-2011 R. Leibie Sternberg (Monsey/Spring Valley Zmanim)

sxc vrp-hbhna :,arp

Shiur Shachris aezx

http://www.prozdor.com

Candles Mincha

DafYomi

Friday 6:55 Shabbos Sunday

7:05 6:55 7:05

6:00 7:25

9:00 8:00

9:57 9:56 9:55

IMPORTANCE OF ....
The Gemara (Berachos 34a) states that one who is asked to be the Shliach Tzibur should at first refuse, as if to say that he is not worthy. Upon the second request he should reconsider, and when asked a third time he should consent and go. The Gemara notes that ,ubcrx (refusal) is one of three things that are done best in small amounts. The Shulchan Aruch (jut 53:15-16) rules accordingly, adding that this procedure only applies to one who is not the permanent Shliach Tzibur for this congregation. The permanent Shliach Tzibur should immediately go, even without being asked. The Gemara (Bava Metzia 87a) also distinguishes between how the Malochim quickly agreed to Avrohoms offer of hospitality, while Lot had to plead with them (stn oc rmphu), saying that from here we see that iyek ihcrxn - one may refuse [the request of] a small man, but not a great man. The MaHarsha comments that to a smaller man, one may refuse many times (stn), but to a great man, not at all. The small amount recommended by the Gemara may refer to a request from a hbubhc one who is neither greater nor smaller. The Toras Kohanim (7) darshans: jcznv kt cre irvt kt van rnthu, connecting it to the Posuk: una htrec ktunau uhbvfc irvtu van to teach us that all 3 (Moshe, Aharon and Shmuel) were equivalent. The Binyan Ariel asks why Moshe concluded the instructions to Aharon with the words: s vum ratf. Was not Moshes authority sufficient ? He suggests that Moshe was concerned that Aharon might refuse to initially undertake the Avodah, and to avoid such a refusal, Moshe added that it was really Hashems instruction to make Aharon permanent, allowing for no refusals. One might ask, how could Aharon consider refusing Moshe, if kusdk ihcrxn iht - one may not refuse a great man, at all ? It is because the Toras Kohanim equates Aharon with Moshe, and as Moshe was not greater, Aharon was permitted to be crxn a few (2-3) times. To avoid even those few refusals, Moshe added: s vum ratf.

DID YOU KNOW THAT ....

The Gemara (Berachos 34b) records a Machlokes between R Yochanan, who says that the reward set aside for a Tzadik is greater than that awaiting a Baal Teshuvah, and R Avahu who says the opposite. Both derive their opinions from the Posuk: cureku eujrk ouka ouka. R Avahu notes that the eujr which is stated first and given precedence refers to those who were far from observance, while R Yochanan says it refers to those who are far from sin. A possible proof to the opinion of R Yochanan may be implied from the Gemara (ibid 22b) which relates that R Papa, R Huna and Rava were dining together. R Papa asked to lead Birchas HaMazon, as he had recently immersed in 9 Kabin of water required by Ezra. Rava argued that he was more suitable, as he had immersed in a full Mikveh of 40 Saah. R Huna then claimed that he had not immersed in either amount, as he had no need to. Thus, it appears that one who was Tahor all along may be superior to one who had become Tahor. However, the Gemara (Yoma 2a) describes how the Kohen who was designated to burn the Parah Adumah was purposely made Tomay. This was done so that after his Taharah process completed Tevilah, he would be instructed to go ahead with the Parah Adumah without waiting for nightfall, to show the Tzadokim that their view (which required nightfall) was incorrect. R Yosef Engel (Ben Poras 2:2) asks, in light of the importance of Parah Adumah to provide Taharah, even to those who were Tomay for having come into contact with a dead body the most serious of Tumah sources, it seems strange that the process of the Parah would involve such a leniency, allowing a Kohen with less-than-total Taharah to serve. Teaching Tzadokim would seem to be less than adequate as a justification. He answers that the real reason for making the Kohen Tomay is to comply with the Rambams explanation of the Mishna (Parah 3:5) where he says that one who has become Tomay and then was purified in a Mikveh is on a higher level of Taharah, because the Posuk calls him Tahor. One who was never Tomay may be in reality Tahor, but he does not have the benefit of the Torah specifically declaring him to be Tahor. Thus, the Taharah process does more than just remove Tumah. It enhances and improves, which may be the case with doing Teshuva as well.

QUESTION OF THE WEEK:

Who should, as a general rule, not daven a lot ?

ANSWER TO LAST WEEK:

(When should someone wear weekday clothing on Shabbos ? )

The someone is a Kohen, who, during the time the Beis HaMikdash stood, was only allowed to wear the same 4 forms of Bigdei Kehuna, everyday, including Shabbos, which he was not permitted to add onto. The Meil Tzedaka (p.7) suggests that since the Posuk says: rug ,ub,f ovk aghu the Kohanim may have had 2 shirts each one for Shabbos and one for weekdays.

A wife announced to her husband that she refused to light Shabbos candles on the candlesticks that he had bought her (they were having Shalom Bayis problems) and planned to light without them. The husband then went and lit on those candlesticks himself, reciting the brocho, after hiding all other candles and matches. The wife took him to a Din Torah, demanding 10 Zehuvim for his having stolen her mitzvah. The The axiom: vjnac ohcrn rst xbfban is a mitzvah which can be Rav cited the Sdei Chemed (vb:n) who says that there is no mandate of r,uh uc vumn for Shabbos Licht, which is why the Chasan fulfilled during the entire month of Adar with anything that ujukacn provides the candlesticks, to participate in the mitzvah. Since she tried brings joy to ones heart, particularly where the vjna is to be to deprive him of the mitzvah, she has no claim that he did the same. found in the performance of other mitzvos. When there are two Mazel Tov to the Steinman and Sternberg families upon the birth of a months of Adar, it only applies to the second Adar, and some son to Akiva and Rivkie Steinman. May they be Zoche to a Bris BZmano and hold that it extends into Nisan as well. (Sheeilos Yaavetz 2:88) much Nachas from him. Sholosh Seudos sponsored by the Chaimowitz family.

A Lesson Can Be Learned From:

DIN'S CORNER:

P.S.

This issue is dedicated: ohhj cegh rc ovrct bzku hukv ejmh rc krgp bzk Dedications ($18) and appreciations may be sent to: Kehilas Prozdor, 8 GreenHill Lane, Spring Valley, N.Y. 10977 (845) 354-7240 As this contains Divrei Torah and partial Pesukim, it should be treated with proper respect, both during and after use