Right after the sin of the meraglim we have the parsha of
nesachim and the mitzvah of challah. The
Midrash comments as follows:
In other words, nesachim and challah were a sign that “kvar
ratzah Elokim es ma’asecha” (as the pasuk in Koheles ends), of G-d’s acceptance
of the Jewish people despite their failings.
The Ishbitzer points out that the pasuk in Koheles first
refers to bread and then to wine, yet the order in the Torah is reversed –
first we have the parsha of nesachim, which involves pouring wine on the
mizbeyach, and then afterwards we have the parsha of challah, which is taken
when baking bread. Why does the Torah
reverse the order from the order in Koheles?
Challah represents yiras shamayim, wanting to be extra
careful and go the extra mile for G-d.
The farmer already took out terumah, took our ma’aser, took out ma’aser
sheni or ma’aser ani – he’s shown that he remembers that his crops are
dependent on G-d. Now he comes to bake
his bread and he’s still not satisfied – let’s take off one more portion and
give it to the kohen just to be safe.
Nesachim represent the depths of the heart. The gemara in Sukkah tells us that the wine
poured on the mizbeyach went down a hole straight into the deepest depths of
the earth.
In an ideal world challah comes before nesachim, we would
build up our yiras shamayim until we felt it penetrate down into the depths of the
soul.
Post-cheit hameraglim is what happens when the the ideal has
been shattered. You can’t talk about
building up yiras shamayim until it penetrates down into the heart if you
think, “heimasu es levaveinu,” that the heart is completely corrupt and unredeemable. The Torah therefore reverses the order. First comes the parsha of nesachim – there is
still something down there in the depths that can be reached. The cheit of a Jew is only on the surface and
never fully corrupts the soul. Once Klal
Yisrael absorbed that lesson and believed that they still had a connection,
then the Torah gives the parsha of challah and talks about rebuilding yiras
shamayim.
The gemara (Brachos 14) says that a person who reads kri’as
shema without tefillin is like a person who offers a korban without the
nesachim that go with it. What’s the
comparison? When a person wraps tefillin
around his head and his arm he shows that his mind and heart and the actions he
takes with his hands are all connected – what he is saying is part of how he
thinks, acts, and feels; it’s not just words coming out of his lips. In light of the Ishbitzer perhaps the gemara
means that just as the nesachim drip down to the deepest depths, it’s the
donning of tefillin that shows that the message of shema is part of the essence
of the person. (See Shem m’Shmuel for a
different interpretation.)
Or you can answer tadir vsheino tadir, tadir kodem. Yes nesachem should come first but challah happens more often, so thats why its mentioned first.
ReplyDeleteI love when you post Torah from the Ishbitzer. I once said over an Ishbitzer that I saw on your blog (I looked it up inside also) at a yeshiva shabbos meal at my Rosh Yeshiva's house. It was the one about Yosef revealing himself, and how the brothers' situation was reversed instantly, because there was never really a threat in the first place, and how galus is like this...I'm sure you remember, it's one of my favorite pieces I've ever seen.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, my Rosh Yeshiva was blown away by this Ishbitzer and a year or two later, a chaver told me that he said it over in my name during his Maharal shiur. One of my proudest moments, all due to your blog, so thanks and keep posting Ishbitzer Torah, it's awesome.
Glad you enjoyed it!
DeleteWhos your ry that gives a maharal shiur? (If you dont mind me asking)
ReplyDeleteRY = ? I have never been in anyone's maharal shiur.
DeleteTadir/matzuy is a factor when two mitzvos are in front of you and you need to figure out which one to do first. I have never heard it applied to the order of parshiyos in the Torah. I don't think your rule will stand a test if we go through parshiyos like kedoshim, ki tavo, etc. where there are a lot of mitzvos.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteNot you chaim, shmuel
ReplyDelete