looking inside

The Midrash at the beginning of our parsha tells us that even a neveilah is better than a talmid chacham without da’as.  Why do Chazal draw an analogy davka to neveilah?  Sefas Emes explains that a neveilah has bones, has flesh, has skin – it looks just like a live animal.  What’s missing is the neshoma and pnimiyus on the inside.  So too, a talmid chacham without da’as has a frock, a nice hat, etc. but what’s missing is the pnimiyus, the da’as on the inside. 

Problem is in our world, all people look at is the outside.

 On the flip side, the Torah says regarding the korban olah that it is offered “…lirtzono lifnei Hashem.” (1:3)  Why does the Torah need to add the words “lifnei Hashem?”  We all know where and to whom the korban is being offered.  Ksav Sofer answers: Chazal say that beis din has a right to coerce a person until he says “rotzeh ani” and consents to bring the korban.  Were you or I to see this person getting hit by beis din until he cries “Uncle!” we would say to ourselves that there’s no way he really means it.  However, the Rambam (Hil Geirushin ch 2) explains that in a person’s heart of hearts he really does want to do the right thing.  The coercion is not to force him to do something against his will; it’s to force his brain and body to respond to his deeper inner will.  We see it as coercion, but ”…lifnei Hashem,” in G-d’s eyes, where the truth of what’s in a person’s heart is known, it is “lirtzono.”

see no evil, hear no evil

The Netziv brings an amazing Tosefta on the pasuk, “V’nefesh ki techetah v’sham’ah kol alah… im lo yagid v’nasa avono.” (5:1)  Lichorah the first phrases should be reversed.  A person needs to first hear a shevu’ah and decide to ignore it and then he becomes a choteih.  Why does the Torah put the “v’nefesh ki tachetah” first and only then say what the person did wrong?

 רבי אלעזר בן מתיא אומר אין אדם מתחייב אא"כ חטא שנא' (שם) נפש כי תחטא ושמעה

Before the person actually decided not to testify, he had to witness something worth coming to court to testify about.  The circumstance of “v’sham’ah ko alah” had to arise and present itself.  That, says the Netziv, did not happen by chance.  The Tosefta (Shavuos 3:3, see the Netziv’s girsa changes) explains that what a person hears and sees is dictated by Hashem.   It’s only because the person already was guilty of wrongdoing that Hashem put him in the difficult situation of “v’sham’ah kol alah,” of seeing something that would force him to have to serve as a witness. 

Chazal say that someone who sees the sotah disgraced should take a vow of nezirus.  Everybody asks: Isn’t it the guy who *doesn’t* see what happens to the sotah and is not shocked who needs nezirus?  The guy who sees the sotah already got the message?!  In light of the Netziv the answer perhaps is that the very fact that the person witnessed such a terrible thing proves that he has work to do on himself. 

The Netziv doesn’t say it, but maybe with his pshat we can answer another question the meforshim ask.  Why does the pasuk end, “v’nasa avono?”  The word “avon” means deliberate crime.  The pasuk, however, is talking about someone who is a shogeg?  Perhaps “avon” is not referring to the mistake of the shevuas ha’eidus mentioned in the pasuk, but rather to the wrongdoing that precipitated the person being put in the shevu’ah situation to begin with. 

When you turn on the internet, radio, TV, newspapers, etc. and see or hear all the tragedies out there, yes, you can say, “Baruch Hashem – it’s not me!” but the truth is that it is us.  The very fact that we are seeing or hearing such things is a wakeup call.   

Maybe it’s the approach of Purim that made me think of the connection to what we say on Yom Ki-Purim.  In musaf, when we describe the avodah of the Kohen gadol, we say the piyut of “emes mah nehedar” and we say “ashrei ayin…,” how fortunate were the eyes able to see such a beautiful sight.  The Tosefta quoted by the Netziv ends on a positive note:

 

וכן היה ר' אלעזר בן מתיא אומר מתחייב לראות הרואה עושי מצוה זכה לראות.

Maybe we are not speaking about seeing the avodah itself when we say “ashrei ayin,” but rather seeing the the avodah is a siman that, “ashrei ayin,” the person who was zocheh to witness that sight must indeed have kadosh and tahor eyes, and is so very fortunate.

you can't make this stuff up

From the Jeffrey Goldberg interview with Obama published earlier in the week:

OBAMA: I believe that President Abbas is sincere about his willingness to recognize Israel and its right to exist, to recognize Israel’s legitimate security needs, to shun violence, to resolve these issues in a diplomatic fashion that meets the concerns of the people of Israel.

Headline news this morning, from the AP:

Israeli naval forces raided a ship in the Red Sea early Wednesday and seized dozens of advanced rockets from Iran destined for Palestinian militants in Gaza that would have significantly boosted their ability to strike Israeli citizens, the military said.

More from Obama:

“We’ve now seen 15 to 20 percent of those chemical weapons on their way out of Syria with a very concrete schedule to get rid of the rest,” Obama told me. “That would not have happened had the Iranians said, ‘Obama’s bluffing, he’s not actually really willing to take a strike.’ If the Russians had said, ‘Ehh, don’t worry about it, all those submarines that are floating around your coastline, that’s all just for show.’ Of course they took it seriously! That’s why they engaged in the policy they did.”

Headline  article in the Fiscal Times - "Assad Thumbs His Nose at Deal to Remove Chemical Weapons"

"In other words, 18 months of negotiations between Assad and the opposition have yielded next to nothing....Under a deal struck with the Russians and Americans, Assad is supposed to give these weapons up. But reports Wednesday indicate that he’s gotten rid of less than 4 percent of them."

And from the Iranian FARS news agency:

TEHRAN (FNA)- Deputy Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces for Cultural Affairs and Defense Publicity Brigadier General Massoud Jazzayeri called the recent statements of US President Barack Obama on Iran as "the joke of the year"...

Too bad the American people still haven't realized it.

chinuch for mikra megillah

When I told my wife the GR”A mentioned in yesterday’s post, that “zichram lo yasuf m’zar’am” refers specifically to mikra megillah, she remarked that practically this makes sense because we all bring our children to shul to hear megillah.  This minhag is actually brought by the Tur and S.A. (end of siman 689).  It seems the S.A. is not talking about the normal din of chinuch, as why would that deserve special mention more than by any other mitzvah?  Also, the Achronim warn not to bring too young children, as they disturb everyone, which implies that the age children we are talking about is not the same as the normal chinuch age. 

The gemara (Meg 4) tells us that even women are obligated in mikra megillah because “af hein hayu b’oso ha’nes.”  The Yerushalmi (quoted in the Hagahos Maimoni, Hil Megillah perek 1) goes a step further and applies the same sevara to ketanim as well.  (Parenthetically, you see from this Yerushalmi that “af hein” applies to those who were in danger and saved, not only to women because Esther caused the miracle, as some Rishonim learn.)  R’ Baruch Mordechai Ezrachi asks: why do we need to come on to the din of “af hein” to obligate children in mikra megillah?  We have a din of chinuch in kol hatorah kulah!?

You can read Rav Ezrachi’s answer here.  Maybe the Yerushalmi is not talking about a din of chinuch at all.  This is the same Yerushalmi that is the source for the din in S.A. above which deals with little kids.  Perhaps there is some kind of unique din here that obligates all to hear megillah. 

Whatever the lomdus and however you explain it, there is undeniably some kind of special connection between Purim and children.  The L. Rebbe discusses how so many of the minhagim of the day – banging for Haman, dressing up, etc. – are an attraction for children in particular.  Chazal tell us that Mordechai countered Haman’s decree by gathering thousands of children and learning with them and it was in that zechus that the nes happened.  Limud haTorah by Jewish children is a powerful, powerful force. 

chinuch on mitzvos where the kiyum is b'lev

 וְהַיָּמִים הָאֵלֶּה נִזְכָּרִים וְנַעֲשִׂים בְּכָל-דּוֹר וָדוֹר, מִשְׁפָּחָה וּמִשְׁפָּחָה, מְדִינָה וּמְדִינָה, וְעִיר וָעִיר; וִימֵי הַפּוּרִים הָאֵלֶּה, לֹא יַעַבְרוּ מִתּוֹךְ הַיְּהוּדִים, וְזִכְרָם, לֹא-יָסוּף מִזַּרְעָם.

Why the difference between the use of “ymei haPurim”/”yehudim” in the first half of the pasuk and “zichram”/”zar’am” in the second half?   The GR”A explains that “V’Ymei haPurim ha’eilu lo ya’avru m’toch hayehudim” (9:28) refers to the chiyuv of partying; “V’zichram lo yasuf m’zar’am” refers to the chiyuv of mikra megillah.  …”  (Compare with Malbim’s explanation of the double language of “nizkarim v’na’asim” earlier in the same pasuk: "nizkarim" refers to mikra megillah; "na'asim" refers to mishteh, simcha, and mishloach manos.)   R’ Moshe Shternbruch in Moadim u’Zmanim (vol 2 footnote to p 184) deduces a chiddush l’halacha from here: there is only a din of chinuch, a mitzvah on “zar’am,” for mikra megillah, but not for mishteh and simcha. 

 

Why should this be the case?  R’ Shternbruch suggests that the mitzvah of chinuch only applies to mitzvos where the ma’aseh mitzvah is everything, but not to mitzvos where the act done is just a means to a kiyum b’lev, an emotional or intellectual reaction.  A child can be trained to perform a rote act; he/she cannot be trained or expected to have an emotional response.  When it comes to eating and drinking on Purim, the meal is just a means to an end of creating a state of simcha – the kiyum b’lev is what is key.  

  

I don’t understand.  The Rambam in Hil Yom Tov ch 6 writes that included in the mitzvah of simchas Yom Tov is buying clothes for one’s wife and buying toys or candy for one’s children.  Doesn’t that imply that the mitzvah of simcha applies to children as well?  And if you tell me that the Rambam does not mean the child has his own mitzvah of simcha, but rather you fulfill your mitzvah of simcha by entertaining the child and your family, then why not apply the same standard to Purim as well?  Why would the pasuk not tell us that mishteh and simcha applies to “zar’am” as well because we have to make them happy on the day of Purim in order to fulfill our mitzah of simcha? 

 

If anything, it seems that simchas Yom Tov is more of a kiyum b’lev than simchas Purim.  Rav Soloveitchik (Shiurim l’Zecher Aba Mari) contrasts the Rambam’s view, which allows for a subjective kiyum of simcha through food, new clothes, toys, etc. with that of Tos (M.K. 14), who holds that m’dorasya simcha is fulfilled only by eating a korban shelamim.  According to Tos., it’s the act of eating korban meat which is key; according to the Rambam there is no specific act mandated to fulfill simcha because the kiyum is the emotional state, not what you do.  However, when it comes to simchas Purim, the Eimek Bracha writes that it’s the act of drinking in and of itself which is the mitzvah, not the state of simcha it brings you to.  "Ad d'lo yada" is a ptur; it's the point beyond which one is exempt from mitzvah performance -- it's not a state of mind that one is required to ellicit for the kiyum mitzvah.

 

Secondly, does R’ Shternbruch mean to suggest that there is no din of chinuch on mitzvos like tefilah?  Reciting kri’as shema?  Aren't these kiyumim sheb'lev?  Even haggadah, where children are the centerpiece of the mitzvah, is some degree is not about reciting words, but is about eliciting the reaction of “ro’eh es atzmo k’ilu hu yatzah m’Mitzrayim,” experiencing the Exodus as a reality.  These are a few examples that came to my mind, but you probably can think of others.

 

It’s a little bit of a kvetch, but I want to suggest that we can understand the GR”A in light of the Rambam we learned last week (Meg 2:18):

 

  כל ספרי הנביאים וכל הכתובים, עתידין ליבטל לימות המשיח, חוץ ממגילת אסתר--הרי היא קיימת כחמישה חומשי תורה, וכהלכות של תורה שבעל פה, שאינן בטילין, לעולם.

 

The Rambam paskens based on the Yerushalmi that the megillah and chumash are the only seforim in Tanach that will still be with us after Moshiach comes.  The Rambam doesn’t say anything about the celebration of Purim as a holiday.  (The Yalkut Shimoni in Mishlei does imply that Purim as a mo’ed will not be bateil.  I don’t see this in the Rambam’s words or in the Yerushalmi, which only talks about megillah as a text.  Still, I admit you can easily argue that I am splitting hairs.) 

 

Coming back to the pasuk, read according to GR”A, what it is telling us is that mishteh and simcha, the drinking and partying, has been with us since the days of Mordechai and Esther.  However, what will remain with our children, "zara'am,"who IY”H will be living in the days of Moshiach, will be not be the partying, but “zichram” alone, the text of megillah and the lessons it teaches. 

 

Is this torah about Purim or Purim torah? 

Rosh Devarcha Emes = ADaR

Kiddushin 31a:

 דרש עולא רבה אפיתחא דבי נשיאה מאי דכתיב יודוך ה'כל מלכי ארץ כי שמעו אמרי פיך מאמר פיך לא נאמר אלא אמרי פיך בשעה שאמר הקב"ה אנכי ולא יהיה לך אמרו אומות העולם לכבוד עצמו הוא דורש כיון שאמר כבד את אביך ואת אמך חזרו והודו למאמרות הראשונות רבא אמר מהכא ראש דברך אמת ראש דברך ולא סוף דברך אלא מסוף דברך ניכר שראש דברך אמת

The gemara says that Ulla darshened that the nations of the world thought that G-d was giving commandments for his own aggrandizement until they heard the commandment of “Honor your Mother and Father.”  Rava continued and darshened the pasuk of “Rosh devarcha emes” (Tehillim 119:160) – from “sof devarcha,” the truth of the end words, we know that the first words are true as well.

The simple pshat in the gemara is that Rava was just building on Ulla, using a pasuk in Tehillim as a springboard for the same idea.  However, this opens the door to a few questions:

1)      Maharasha asks: The pasuk only refers to “Rosh devarcha.”  Where did Rava get the idea that we learn anything from “sof devaracha?”

2)      Maharasha’s second question: Why is the commandment of kibud va called “sof devarcha?”  It is not the last commandment of the aseres hadibbros?

3)      Lastly, Rashi writes that “l’achar zman” the nochrim admitted that “rosh devarcha” is also true.  This implies some passage of time, yet it should have only taken seconds to get from the first dibros to “kabeid…?”

The Imrei Baruch of Vizhnitz explains that Rava is teaching us a new idea.

Rosh Devarcha Emes is roshei teivos ADaR.

 רֹאשׁ-דְּבָרְךָ אֱמֶת; וּלְעוֹלָם, כָּל-מִשְׁפַּט צִדְקֶךָ.

The nochrim for hundreds of years complained (see A”Z 2b) that “kafah aleihem har k’gigis,” that Hashem forced us into taking the Torah, but it was not something we earned or deserved.  “L’achar zman,” later in time, as Rashi explains, i.e. when we got to the Adar of Mordechai and Esther, the kabbalas haTorah of that Purim, which done with love, validated in retrospect the original kabbalas haTorah.  “Rosh devarcha emes”  = Adar spelled backwards, because thanks to Purim we could look back in history, back in time, and prove that we alone deserve a special relationship with Hashem and deserved the Torah.

v’halachti imachem b’chamas Kerry

I’m not a navi, I don’t have ruach hakodesh, this is not da’as Torah.  I think it’s common sense.  If we, Klal Yisrael, threaten boycotts of Yehudah and Shomron, threaten to leave Eretz Yisrael, midah k’negged midah our enemies will be spiritually empowered to attack us with boycotts and with threats against our sovereignty over the land, etc. 

Here’s a Bloomberg article; a similar one ran yesterday in the Times of Israel.  Read about Obama and Kerry y’mach shemam’s threats and ultimatums.  Read about their illusions -- the "success" they think they have had with Iran, even as Iran continues its efforts to build a nuclear weapon; the "success" they think they have had in Syria, which still has not dismantled its chemical weapons and where over 100,000 have been killed; the "success" they have had in Russia, which just invaded the Ukraine.  (Update: Another excellent piece in Commentary here.)  Melech tipeish or simply a rasha?  Who knows.  V’halachti imachem b’chamas Kerry.

 

What is most upsetting about the situation is how little it seems we can do.  It is a tremendous challenge when all avenues of hishtadlus are basically moot and all we have is Torah and tefillah.  We as a people need a lot of chizuk...

getting rich off the Mishkan

The Midrash writes that Moshe had to go through the accounting made in our parsha because there were scoffers who charged that Moshe had grown rich off the making of the Mishkan.

Why would anyone give credence to such a rumor?  Moshe Rabeinuwas willing to sacrifice himself for Klal Yisrael; he was the one who pleaded on their behalf after cheit ha’eigel.  Does it make sense to think that he was out for the money?

“Ain ani eleh b’da’as.”  A person can suffer a poverty of brains.  A person can also have a richness of intelligence.  Sefas Emes (Likutim) explains that there were those who charged that Moshe Rabeinu was rich in ruchniyus, in da’as, because he had worked on the Mishkan.  It was not the money they were complaining about, but rather the spiritual weath, which they charged he had "hoarded” for himself.  Therefore, Moshe gave an accounting.  As we explained yesterday from the Kotzker, this was not a fiscal report, but a spiritual inventory, e.g. Ploni’s kavanos and l’shem shamayim created the kedusha of the aron; Ploni’s nedivus lev and retzinus went into the Menorah, etc.  Moshe Rabeinu proved to every person that he/she was connected directly in some way to the spiritual riches of the Mishkan.  The "wealth" was theirs alone to benefit from.

why should the dati-leumi/hesder world join the protest?

I posted links to a few depressing articles yesterday.  Today I want to give you a positive one. 

R' Shmuel Eliyahu asks: We differ with the chareidi world in our attitude toward army service, toward the state, and in other areas as well.  Why should we, Roshei Yeshiva of hesder, join with the chareidi world in their million man protest?  (I have read elsewhere that Rav Aviner, Rav Tau, and Rav Shapira are all participating as well).  Why should our talmidim, most of whom serve in the army, participate?  

For me, the important part of the answer was this:

הסיבה השנייה היא הכבוד לעולם התורה של הציבור החרדי. אנשים שמקיימים את המשנה באבות כפשוטה, "פַּת בַּמֶּלַח תֹּאכֵל וּמַיִם בַּמְּשׂוּרָה תִּשְׁתֶּה וְעַל הָאָרֶץ תִּישָׁן וְחַיֵּי צַעַר תִּחְיֶה וּבַתּוֹרָה אַתָּה עָמֵל". גם אם אני חלוק עליהם בכמה דברים אינני יכול להתעלם מהמסירות נפש שלהם לתורה. על זה אמר דוד המלך בתהילים: "חָבֵר אָנִי לְכָל אֲשֶׁר יְרֵאוּךָ".

הסיבה השלישית היא הכאב. אי אפשר להתעלם מכאב של מאות אלפי אנשים שנשבר מטה לחמם בעקבות הקיצוץ החריף שיאיר לפיד כפה על תקציב הישיבות. אי אפשר להתעלם מכאב משפחות שלמות שנשארו בלי פת לחם וטיטולים. גם אם אנחנו לא מסכימים עם אחינו בכל, אנחנו לא יכולים להתעלם מהכאב. "עימו אנכי בצרה".

We do not have to agree with the chareidi world, but we can still respect their committment to Torah and their self-sacrifice.  We can still empathize with the pain of their community as families struggle to make ends meet in the face of government cutbacks in funding.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think the dati-leumi Rabbonim who participate will get any more kavod from the chareidi world for their stance.  They have nothing to gain other than doing what they think is right simply l'shem shamayim.  And to me, that's what makes their position admirable.

the situation is sad

1) If you want to appreciate the contribution of hesder, read this article by R’ Eliezer Melamed.

2) If you want to be sick, read this article about a letter sent by talmidei hesder to their Roshei Yeshivos asking them not to participate in the million man asifa out of fear for their safety.  Quotes such as this, from a chareidi newspaper, turn your stomach:

 "תמיד ידענו, שהעקימות השכלית, העיוות הדבילי, העיוורון התלמודי - כל מה שיוצר את הטפיל התורני המורה בתורה שלא כהלכה - הם המחלה הממארת של רבים מקרב ראשי ותלמידי ה'הסדר' ודומיהם במגזר הדתל"י..."

Why does the chareidi world think it needs to delegitimize the dati-leumi community, including important talmidei chachamim and Rabbanim, in order to advance their own agenda? 

And don’t ask me why the talmidim think they need to send a letter like this in the first place instead of just letting their Roshei Yeshiva make their own decisions.

3) Lastly, if you’re not sick enough, read this article.  In my opinion the hypocritical leftists who boycott Yehudah and Shomron are either A) plain vanilla anti-semites or B) fools serving as the tools of anti-semites.  How silly would it be if chareidi Jews joined in that boycott as a means of hurting the dati-leumi community? 

 

It’s a sad, sad situation all around.  No matter who you think is right or wrong, can't we all at least agree on that?

 

Haman uses a double lashon of "mefuzar u'meforad" - Why?  Maybe the pshat us that "pizur" is physical separation; "pirud" means even if we happen to live in the same place, we are a splintered people, with different factions and camps always fighting with each other.  Maybe that's why the tikun is to drink "ad d'lo yada."  "Im ain da'as, havdalah mi'nayin?"  If you put aside your own deyos to at least hear out the other side, then the havdalah between factions gets erased.

the 1775 missing shekalim

The Midrash writes that when Moshe was making his accounting of where the money collected for the Mishkan was spent, he could not recall what he had done with 1775 shekel.  He was sitting and pondering until Hashem opened his eyes and he saw that he had used them for the hooks on the poles (vavim l’amudim) that held up the walls. 

It sounds a little strange – was Moshe feeling his pockets, searching his drawers, looking in case he had misplaced the money?  Moshe Rabeinu, the person who epitomized “da’as,” could not recall what he had done?

The Kotzker (quoted in the She’eiris Menachem here) explained that Moshe’s accounting was not like something done by the IRS or like a corporate annual report – it was a spiritual accounting.  After the Mishkan was completed, Moshe was able to look back and see how the madreiga of ruchniyus of each item in the Mishkan corresponded exactly to the level of kavanah invested by the person who donated for it.  The donations of Ploni who had tremendous kavanos l’shem shamayim may have been used for the aron or in the kodesh kodashim; the donations of a different Ploni, whose kavanos were a little less intense, may have been used in an outer wall.   You got exactly what you spiritually paid for, so to speak.

Moshe was left with was 1775 shekalim that he identified as has having been tossed in without the right kavanos, without the real l’shem shamayim that a Mishkan demanded.  Moshe couldn’t figure out how these monies translated into a davar sheb’kedusha. How did they have a place in the Mishkan?   

G-d revealed the answer: They were the hooks that stood atop the poles.  There are people who are amudim: They are like the poles that keep the building upright, they have all the right kavanos and the l’shem shamayim. But even those who fall short of those ideals still have a place: They just need to “hook-up” with one of those amudim and attach to their presence.  Recognizing one's own shortcomings and making up for them by following someone greater is itself a tremendous accomplishment.

The gemara has a din that something that a mechubar la’tahor is itself tahor, something attached to taharah is itself treated as tahor.  Reading a deeper meaning into this halacha, the Yehudi haKadosh was asked how it makes sense: Someone who is tahor has worked day and night to achieve a certain spiritual level; why should someone who just attaches himself to that individual deserve the same benefit? 

The answer: It’s harder to be a true mechubar than it is to be a tahor.

It’s an age old problem -- everyone wants to be an Indian chief, but no one wants to be an Indian.  Hiskashrus to someone bigger, hisbatlus to someone bigger, pushing one's ego into the back seat, is a very hard thing to do, and what’s worse is that no one sees you doing it and gives you credit.  Even Moshe Rabeinu almost missed it.  We need to celebrate not just the amudim, but the vavim l'amudim as well.