PARASHAT BESHALACH – Rabbi Fishel Todd

PARASHAT BESHALACH

Rabbi Fishel Todd

Shulchan Aruch Project

QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT OF PARASHAT BESHALACH

Who said to whom, and under what circumstances?

(a) The wilderness has locked them in.

(b) Do not fear! Stand fast, and see the salvation of G-d.

(c) For G-d is waging a war for them against Egypt.

(d) G-d shall reign for ever and ever.

(e) Sing to G-d, for he is exalted above the arrogant, having hurled horse with its rider into the sea.

(f) As we sat by the flesh-pots of Egypt, as we ate bread to satisfaction.

(g) This is what G-d has spoken: tomorrow is a rest day, a Holy Sabbath to G-d.

(h) How long will you refuse to observe My commandments and My teachings?

(i) Is G-d amongst us or not?

(j) The war of G-d against Amalek shall be from generation to generation.

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT OF PARASHAT BESHALACH

Rabbi Fishel Todd

(a) G-d to Moses – about His tempting Pharaoh to pursue the Israelites by changing their route, giving him the impression that the Israelites were stranded in the desert. (14:3)

(b) Moses to the Israelites – as they saw the Egyptians in pursuit. (14:13)

(c) The Egyptians to each other – realizing the power of G-d as He gave them a rough ride in their chasing the Israelites though the parted Red Sea. (14:25)

(d) Moses to the Israelites – as a conclusion to the Song of Moses in thanksgiving for the miracles of the Red Sea. (15:18)

(e) Miriam, to the women, in leading them in the Song of Miriam, sung in thanksgiving for the miracles at the Red Sea. (15:21)

(f) The Israelites, to Moses and Aaron. They were complaining about the food in the desert, looking at the past in Egypt with rose-colored spectacles. (16:3)

(g) Moses to the Israelite princes, when they reported the double portion they received on the sixth day of the week. (16:23)

(h) G-d to Moses – following the disobedience of certain Israelites who went out to gather the manna on the seventh day. (See the commentaries section for further explanation of this verse.) (16:28)

(i) Moses – in calling the place of the Israelite protest Masa U-Meriva (strife and quarrel). He records that they were ‘testing’ G-d, as they had contended ‘Is G-d amongst us or not?’ (17:7)

(j) According to the simple context of the verse, it is Moses declaring that war of G-d against Amalek shall be from generation to generation. Amalek is the permanent enemy of His people. (17:16)

Rabbi Fishel Todd

QUESTIONS ON RASHI TO PARASHAT BESHALACH

Rabbi Fishel Todd

From where, within Rashi’s commentary, may the following values / rules be found?

(a) One ought not to demand the impossible from one’s children.

(b) G-d makes Himself known to humanity as He enables good to triumph over evil.

(c) There is a time for prayer, and there is a time for action. The two should not be confused with each other.

(d) G-d punishes the wicked according to their degree of evil.

(e) G-d does not only bring distress to those who actually harass Israel, but to those far away who support the harassment.

(f) When a person complains and protests, he should do it in a decent manner.

(g) A person should ask for what he needs in whatever he is doing, not for luxuries.

(h) It is forbidden for a person to travel a substantial distance from his own settlement into an uninhabited area on Shabbat.

(i) G-d has His ways of supporting those who study Torah.

(j) It is important for a leader to give his people the benefit of the doubt.

(k) One should respect one’s students as one respects oneself.

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON RASHI TO PARASHAT BESHALACH

(a) The text recalls that Joseph adjured his descendants that his final resting place should be in the Holy Land, and that his remains should be transferred there when the Israelites finally leave the country. Unlike his father Jacob, he did not command his children to bury him in the Holy Land immediately after his death. For Jacob had a son – Joseph the Viceroy of Egypt – with enough authority to carry it out: Joseph himself did not. (13:19)

(b) The text states that after Pharaoh pursues the Israelites, G-d ‘will be honored though Pharaoh’ – through the miracles forming His judgement over him. (14:4)

(c) As the Egyptians approached the fleeing Israelites, G-d told Moses not to stand in prayer, but to direct the Israelites to travel forward. (14:15)

(d) The text of the Song of Moses states that some of the Egyptians drowned ‘like stone’ (v.5), others ‘like straw’ (v.7) and yet others ‘like lead’ (v.10). This shows that each Egyptian was treated according to what he deserved. The worst were tossed about like weightless straw – incessantly thrown around – suffering the most. The best of the group sank like lead – a quick death, and those in the middle sank a little slower – like stone. (15:5)

(e) The text states that the ‘princes of Edom will panic, the powers of Moab will tremble’. (15:15) Even though these people did not actually oppress the Israelites, they are made to suffer deep unease and fear. This is because the power they had faith in and supported against the Israelites was hurled into the abyss in such a spectacular manner. (15:15)

(f) We may learn the importance of asking for essentials in a respectful manner in Rashi’s comment to 15:25 – where he states that the Israelites should have asked Moses to pray to G-d to send them water, rather than merely grumble to Moses and Aaron (15:24) about the lack of water.

(g) The Israelites complained about the lack of bread and meat in the desert. Bread is an essential – therefore the ‘bread from heaven’ fell at the convenient hour in the morning. Meat is a relative luxury – and in any case they still had cattle from the spoils of Egypt – therefore G-d showed His displeasure in bringing the quails at inconvenient evening hours. (16:8)

(h) G-d’s telling Moses that on the seventh day ‘everyone should remain in his place: let no person leave his place on the Sabbath day’ (16:29), is used as a source by the Talmud as a basis for the Rabbinical rule that a person may not travel more than two thousand cubits into uninhabited territory, and if he does, he may not travel more than four cubits until Shabbat is over.

(i) The text states that a small amount of Manna was to be set aside in a suitable container as a reminder to future generations that, as in the desert, G-d has His ways and means of looking after His people who serve Him (16:32-33).

(j) When the Israelites suffered thirst at Rephidim and they complained vociferously to Moses, he cried out to G-d with ‘what can I do for these people – they are about to stone me’! (17:4) Although the people did not protest in the most polite way, they did not personally threaten Moses. In G-d telling Moses to ‘pass before the people’ he was demonstrating to him that he should see for himself that the Israelites did not have violent intentions towards him even in the most extreme circumstances, and that he should have given them the benefit of the doubt.

(k) Moses is recorded to have told Joshua to ‘choose men for us’ (17:9) to go into battle against the Amalekites. Joshua was Moses’ student, yet he treated him as an equal…

QUESTIONS ON OTHER COMMENTARIES TO PARASHAT BESHALACH Rabbi Fishel Todd

Rabbi Fishel Todd

(a) Why, according to Ibn Ezra, did Moses tell the Israelites to wait for Divine Intervention against the pursuing Egyptians, rather than urge them to physically go into battle, as he did later with the Amlekites?

(b) Why, according to the Ohr Hachayim, did G-d tell Moses not to stand in prayer as the pursuing Egyptians approached, but to order the Israelites to go forward – into the Red Sea?

(c) What, according to the Ramban, is the relevance of ‘G-d shall reign for ever and ever’ (15:18) to the content of the Song of Moses?

(d) G-d declared that He would give a daily supply of food to the Israelites, so that He ‘would test them – whether they would follow… (the) Torah or not’. (16:4) What was that actual test according to Rashi, the Ramban, and the Ohr Hachayim?

(e) On Shabbat, some people went out to gather Manna and found none. For that, the text states, G-d said to Moses: ‘How long will you refuse to observe My commandments and My teachings?’ (16:28) Why was that rebuke directed at Moses instead of at the errant Israelites? – according to Rashi, and Ibn Ezra.

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON OTHER COMMENTARIES TO PARASHAT BESHALACH

(a) Ibn Ezra suggests that the Israelites were incapable of fighting without miraculous Divine intervention, because generations of being slaves to the Egyptians had destroyed the necessary initiative and fighting acumen. That is why only Moses’ prayers enabled them to later overcome the Amalekites.

(b) The Ohr Hachayim states that this was not the time of prayer for the following reason. The Israelites had to have the merit of showing faith in G-d in order that they might be saved through Divine intervention. That was that they should ‘journey forth’ (14:15) – and demonstrate that faith by entering the Red Sea when it was in full flow… It would be that act of faith – not the prayers of Moses and Aaron – that would make them worthy of G-d’s salvation at the Red Sea.

(c) According to the Ramban, these words link the miracle of the Red Sea to G-d’s salvation in the future. Just as He destroyed the might of Egypt, so may He reign forever, saving His faithful from those who seek their harm.

(d) The test connected with the Manna was, according to Rashi, whether they would keep the intricate laws of Shabbat associated with it or not. The Ramban prefers a simpler interpretation – would the Israelites follow Me even though they do not have food for the next day? The Ohr Hachayim places the emphasis on ‘Torati’ (16:4) – now all their needs are taken care of, would they employ their free time to Torah study and service of G-d?

(e) According to Rashi, the rebuke was directed at Moses as he had failed to impress on the people that they were to receive a double portion on the sixth day for Shabbat. Ibn Ezra, however, argues that although the rebuke was directed at Moses, he was not its object – he was the spokesman to convey that message to those who were actually guilty Rabbi Fishel Todd.

ITEM FOR DISCUSSION ON PARASHAT BESHALACH

We read in the Hagadda shel Pesach that ‘in every generation they rise against us to destroy us, but the Holy One… saves us from their hands’. Of all our enemies why is the nation of Amalek – who was the grandson of Esau – singled out as the worst of all our attackers? as reflected in the Mitzva of ‘you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from beneath the heavens’. (Deut. 25:19).

 

Rabbi Fishel Todd

 

Parsha Bo Rabbi Fishel Todd

PARASHAT BO
Haftarah: Yirmiyahu 46:13-28

http://shulchanaruchproject.com

Rabbi Fishel Todd

RABBIS’ MESSAGES

“Hashem said to Moshe, ‘Come to Pharaoh.’” (Shemot 10:1)

In Egypt, we became a great nation, united to receive the Torah. At the time, it only looked bad. We need to know how to think more deeply and see the wisdom and hesed of Hashem. The following story, told by Rabbi Yitzchok Hisiger, teaches us how to think.

The Skulener Rebbe’s oldest son, Rav Yeshaya Yaakov Portugal, Rav of Khal Meor Hagolah in Montreal, told the following story about an acquaintance of his, R’ Boruch. A large crystal chandelier in R’ Boruch’s home became dislodged and crashed onto the dining room table. Hearing a loud bang, R’ Boruch’s parents, who were in an adjacent room, ran to see what had happened. They were shocked to discover that the chandelier had landed on their infant grandchild, who was lying in an infant seat on the table. With great trepidation, they moved aside the fallen debris in a bid to get to the baby. They discovered that miraculously, despite the force of the fall and the shards of glass strewn all around, the baby was unharmed, without a scratch. The joy of the elated grandparents knew no bounds. They hugged and kissed the baby and ran to inform R’ Boruch of the miracle. The family later made a seudat hoda’ah (a meal of thanks) to express their gratitude to Hashem for what occurred Rabbi Fishel Todd.

In commenting on this incident, Rav Portugal remarked, “Look at the kindness of Hashem. For whatever reason, Heaven had decreed that R’ Boruch’s expensive crystal chandelier had to break, but this monetary loss would have caused great heartache to R’ Borcuh and his family. Thus, it was orchestrated for their infant baby to be on the table underneath the chandelier at that very moment and for the baby to emerge untouched, safe and sound. In this fashion, not only would R’ Boruch and his family not be distressed over their loss, but they would be full of happiness and would actually make a seudah in celebration.” It’s how we interpret the things that happen to us that makes all the difference. Shabbat Shalom. Rabbi Fishel Todd

“And the blood shall serve as a sign on the houses in which you are.” (Shemot 12:13)

This verse refers to the smearing of the blood from the Korban Pesah on the doorway of each Jewish home. Rashi explains that this sign shall be for you and not for others. Hence we may derive that the blood was smeared on the inside of the doorway. An important lesson may be learned here. Often we attempt to help others in the fulfillment of Torah and misvot, even at great sacrifice to ourselves. This may sometimes be at the expense of our own families. We are ready to sacrifice our time and energy for others, but are we finding time for our own personal study and self-development? The Torah enjoins us to establish in our homes Torah sessions for ourselves. We must be aware of our responsibilities to our own children, to guide and encourage them ourselves, not by proxy through tutors. We are obliged to do for ourselves and for our families that which we so readily do for others. Shabbat Shalom. Rabbi Shmuel Choueka

Rabbi Fishel Todd

* * * * *

A quick tip to boost the power of your prayer. Hazal tell us (Masechet Baba Kama Daf 92A) that Hashem loves the tefilot of one Jew for another so much that anyone who prays on behalf of a fellow Jew with similar needs will have his prayer answered first. A special service has now begun to provide people with names of others who find themselves in a similar predicament. You can call with complete anonymity and get the name of someone to pray for and give the name of someone that needs our prayers. The name of the service is Kol Hamitpalel. Categories include: Marriage; Income; Health; To have children etc.

“Hashem granted the people favor in the eyes of Egypt” (Shemot 11:3) In the midst of the Egyptian exile of slavery, we find an unusual phenomenon. The Torah relates that, during the plagues, the Israelites were loved by the Egyptians. One would have expected the Egyptians to hate the Jews, blaming them for the suffering of the plagues. But, the Torah tells us that this was not the case. The population bore no grudge. The Egyptians said that the Jews had been righteous while they, the Egyptians, were the wicked ones.

Even more interesting is the fact that before the plagues began, the Jews tried to get close and friendly with the Egyptians. They picked up the Egyptian customs and gave great honor to the Egyptians. This didn’t help a bit; the Egyptians turned around and degraded the Jews and enslaved them.

The Ramban in Beresheet (37:16) says that the decrees of Hashem are true and will be born out, and man’s effort, at times, is futile. This means that when the Jews follow the decrees of Hashem all will turn out for the best. If, however, man decides instead to use his logic, he will not succeed. The experience of the Israelites confirms this rule. When they followed their own strategy it backfired. However, later on, when the Israelites followed Hashem’s will as told to them by Moshe, suddenly the Egyptians fell in love with the Jews.

This is a great lesson for us today. The more we become Jewish, the more the gentiles will love the Jews. Shabbat Shalom.

Rabbi FIshel Todd

IN CONTROL
– Rabbi Fishel Todd

“All of your servants will come down to me…and he left Pharaoh’s presence in anger” (Shemot 11:8)

When Moshe was telling Pharaoh about the last plague, which was the death of every first born, he said to Pharaoh, “Your servants will come to me to ask me to leave, and that’s when I will leave Egypt.” Moshe didn’t say to Pharaoh, “You will come to me to ask me to leave,” even though that’s what really happened, because he didn’t want to show dishonor to the king of Egypt. This is truly amazing, because right at the end of this verse it says that Moshe stormed out of the palace in anger for the way Pharaoh had spoken to him. If someone is angry, does he still have the presence of mind to show honor and to speak in a certain way? This should reinforce to us the greatness of our leaders, such as Moshe Rabenu. Although he got angry at Pharaoh, he was in complete control of himself, down to the exact words with which he should speak to the king. Everything Moshe did was exactly measured in order to be able to do the will of Hashem.

Indeed, many of our great Sages followed in Moshe’s footsteps in this respect. There was a great Rabbi of the previous generation who once got angry at what his son had done, but waited two weeks, until he was totally in control of his emotions, before rebuking him! On the one hand, we can’t help but be in awe of such self-discipline, but on the other hand, we have to learn from them how to behave in such situations. How often do we fly off the handle just because we’re upset? Even in anger or frustration we must learn to stay in control and use the right words and the right tone of voice. We will be the real beneficiaries of such self-control. Shabbat Shalom.

COME WITH ME Rabbi Fishel Todd

“And also our cattle will go with us; not a hoof will be left behind, for from it we must take to serve G-d” (Shemot 10:26)

Why does it say, “our cattle will go” instead of “we will take”? When the prophet Eliyahu debated the false prophets of Ba’al, he challenged them to a test: He and they would separately bring sacrifices, and the G-d that accepted the offering would be recognized by all as the true G-d. The oxen were willing to be Eliyahu’s sacrifice but refused to be used by the false prophets of Ba’al. Eliyahu whispered to an ox that he should agree to be used by the false prophets, because the failure of their efforts would prove the falsehood of Ba’al worship, and through the ox there would be a great Kiddush Hashem (sanctification of G-d’s name). Moshe told Pharaoh, “Even if we should agree to let our cattle remain in Egypt, it will be to no avail. For even if we do not take them, our cattle will go with us of their own volition, due to their deep desire to be used as sacrifices for Hashem.” (Vedibarta Bam)

PRIVATE

“And the blood shall serve as a sign on the houses in which you are” (Shemot 12:13)

Rashi explains that this sign shall be for you and not for others. Hence we may derive that the blood was smeared on the inside of the house.

The principal reason for smearing the blood on the inside of the threshold was for the Jew to comprehend the importance of self-sacrifice in the privacy of his home. He must concentrate on the inner dimensions of his personality. The essence of the Jewish act is not the one performed on the public stage, but the one performed on the inner stage, when the audience is only Hashem. The only audience to which a Jew should attach significance is the audience of Hashem. Inner heroism and self-sacrifice is the hallmark of a Ben Yisrael.

Another lesson may be learned here. Often we will attempt to help others in the fulfillment of Torah and Misvot, even at great sacrifice to ourselves. This may be at the expense and the neglect of our own families. We will sacrifice our time and energy for others, but will we find time for our personal study and self-development? The Torah enjoins us to establish in our homes Torah sessions for ourselves. We must be aware of our responsibilities to our own children, to guide and encourage them ourselves, not by proxy through tutors. We are obliged to do for ourselves and our families that which we so readily do for others. (Peninim on the Torah)

Rabbi Fishel Todd

THE HAFTARAH CONNECTION

This week’s Haftarah: Yirmiyahu 46:13-28.

In this haftarah, the prophet Yirmiyahu is sent by Hashem to tell Nebuchadnessar, king of Babylon, to attack Egypt. He then describes the complete devastation of Egypt, similar to the theme of this week’s perashah.

The haftarah ends with Hashem’s assurance that he will save Israel from all their enemies, and although he will punish Israel with justice, he will never wipe them out.

Rabbi Fishel Todd

“And each man should borrow from his [Egyptian] neighbor, silver and gold vessels” (Shemot 11:2)

As we read about the final stages of the Exodus from Egypt, Hashem takes care of a promise He made to Abraham Abinu. Hashem promised that when they leave Egypt, they would go with great wealth. In Perashat Shemot (3:22) Hashem predicts to Moshe that the Jewish people will “borrow” from the Egyptians great wealth. In our perashah, Hashem requests of Moshe to actually tell the Jews to borrow from the Egyptians great wealth of gold and silver. This seems a little strange. If Hashem wants to give the Egyptian wealth to the Jews, couldn’t Hashem find a way that would not leave the Jews beholden to the Egyptians? Rabbi M. Shlov explained in a humorous vein that human nature is such that a person who owes something to someone else is careful to avoid his creditor. Therefore to ensure that the Jews will never return to Egypt, he instructed them to borrow valuable items from them.

If one would analyze the verse in Shemot (3:22) that first mentions this concept of borrowing the wealth, we might notice that the wording is a bit difficult. It says, “They would borrow gold and silver and clothing to put onto their sons and daughters.” Why doesn’t it simply state that they should “dress their children” instead of the more awkward phrase “to put onto their sons and daughters?”

The Pardes Yosef explains that, as we know, the Jews in Egypt retained their own style of dress. They could not possibly just take the Egyptian clothing and dress their own children in them. They had to first alter them and adapt them to their own modest style. These alterations would make the clothing much smaller than their original size, just fit to be “put onto their children.”

This is a profound lesson for us. If the Jews, who were subject to intense persecutions, did not give in to the immodest dress styles of the Egyptian society, why should we? May the merit of reclaiming our heritage of modesty bring about the speedy end of our current exile. Shabbat Shalom.

REMINDERS
by Rabbi Fishel Todd

“And the blood shall be a sign for you on [the doorposts of] the houses.” (Shemot 12:13)

The Jewish people were commanded to slaughter the sheep as the Korban Pesah and put its blood on the doorposts of their houses. In that way G-d would see the blood and pass over their houses during the plague of the Destruction of the Firstborn. We would therefore assume that the blood should be put on the outside of their homes. Rashi tells us that in fact they were to put the blood on the inside, where they themselves could see it, and it should be a sign for them.

The message we can derive from here is that putting the blood was not just an arbitrary act which would protect them. By slaughtering the sheep, which was worshipped by the Egyptians, they showed that they were breaking their ties to any idol-worship that they might have had. In order to reinforce this, they put the blood on the inside of the doorposts so that they themselves could see it and be strengthened in their resolve to abandon idol-worship.

Although a person can make a resolution to become better, when he sees a constant reminder of his resolve, this gives him the strength to go even further. Hashem saw this zechut (merit) of the blood and therefore passed over their houses to protect them, since He saw their commitment to serve Hashem exclusively. We would do well to apply this to our own lives and try to reinforce our acceptance of certain positive traits by seeing how the negative traits are not good for us. This will help us serve Hashem better.

Shabbat Shalom.

TEACH YOUR CHILDREN WELL
Rabbi Fishel Todd

“You shall tell you son on that day, saying, ‘Because of this Hashem acted on my behalf when I left Egypt'” (Shemot 13:8)

It is a holy duty for a father to educate his children, to act as a spiritual guide for them. According to the Rambam, the commandment to educate children is fulfilled especially when the father gears his lesson to the child’s understanding. If we approach the issue sensitively, and respond with courtesy and care to questions the child might pose, and address him as an individual, taking into consideration his unique needs and abilities, the child will understand the spirit of what we are trying to teach him. There is hope that he will arrive at full understanding and be convinced of the truth of what we are teaching him.

A father must even use his belongings as collateral for a loan if he needs funds to educate his children properly. The Rav of Lublin sees this from the laws concerning the implements of the Bet Hamikdash. All of the holy implements must be made of gold, but if gold is unavailable, they may be made of silver. There is one exception. That is the cherubim. They must be made of gold, and nothing else. The cherubim represent Jewish children. Their education is the only insurance of Israel’s eternity. We must use our energy and resources to the maximum to ensure that Jewish education be of the highest quality. One must never be satisfied with cheap substitutes for the best. In the end, this is the best investment. What might seem economical in the short run, will cost dearly in the long run, and in the World to Come. Shabbat Shalom.

IT’S YOUR CHOICE

“Come to Pharaoh for I have made his heart stubborn” (Shemot 10:1)

Many commentators ask: How could Hashem have hardened Pharaoh’s heart? Did He really take away Pharaoh’s free will to decide whether to let B’nei Yisrael go?

Yalkut Ma’amarim answers with a story. A Jew once had a financial dispute with a non-Jew, and the non-Jew took him to court. Before the case was scheduled to begin, the Jew sent an expensive gift to the judge who would be presiding over the case. The judge asked him, “How could you send me a bribe? Doesn’t your Torah state that a person who receives a bribe will be unable to judge fairly? Rabbi Fishel Todd”

The Jew answered, “If you had been a Jew, and the two parties standing before you were also Jews, then you would be impartial to each of the two parties. Then if one of them would give you a bribe, you would be swayed to his side. However, in this situation, you are already leaning to the side of the non-Jew, so I sent you the bribe simply to even the scale and get an impartial judgment.”

This can explain why Hashem hardened Pharaoh’s heart. Pharaoh’s true desire was to deny B’nei Yisrael the right to leave Egypt. The suffering from the plagues was so intense that they were forcing him go against his desire, almost against his will. In effect, Pharaoh at this point, had no free will. So Hashem hardened his heart in order to remove some of the fear of the plagues, so that Pharaoh could once again have his free will to make his own decision. (Lekah Tob)

WHO’S TO BLAME?

Rabbi Fishel Todd

“An uncircumcised male may not eat of it” (Shemot 12:48)

One who is uncircumcised may not partake of the Korban Pesah. The sacrifice celebrating our liberation from bondage demands that one be aligned with the Jewish people if he is to share in their freedom. The story is told that Rav Chaim Brisker once came to an inn at St. Petersburg to join in a halachic conference. The question arose regarding the acceptability of children whose parents did not circumcise them. The majority of the Rabbis argued that a child who was not circumcised may not be included in a community’s Jewish register. It was their way of censuring those assimilated Jews who rejected Berit Milah as their way of showing disdain against what they felt was an archaic religion. The consensus was that by excluding these children from the register, their renegade parents may change their minds about circumcision.

Hearing their decision, Rav Chaim emphatically demanded, “Show me where it says that an uncircumcised child is not a Jew! I understand that he is prohibited from eating Kedoshim and Terumah. He may also not eat of the Korban Pesah. But where does it say that he is not Jewish? Why blame the child for the fault of the father?”

One of the speakers at the conference recounted that, in the city of Warsaw, a certain Jew refused to circumcise his son. After a while the child became ill and died. The community leaders did not permit this child to be buried in the Jewish cemetery. Most of the attendees at this conference agreed with the decision of the Warsaw community who took this stand. The only one who protested was Rav Chaim Brisker. “There is no halachah that forbids an uncircumcised child from being buried in a Jewish cemetery. While there are certain areas that exclude an ‘arel,’ burial in a Jewish cemetery is not one of them. If you’re concerned about making a safeguard to serve as a deterrent against assimilation, don’t take it out on the children. Take it out on the parents. Don’t bury the father who refuses to have his child circumcised!” This reaction was applauded by many – even those who were alienated from Torah and misvot. Rav Chaim had the courage to place the blame where it belonged. It would serve us well to attempt to conjure up some of this same courage.

Rabbi Fishel Todd

PARASHAT VA-EIRA Rabbi Fishel Todd

PARASHAT VA-EIRA

Rabbi Fishel Todd
Rabbi Fishel Todd

QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT AND ON RASHI’S COMMENTARY ON PARASHAT VAEIRA Rabbi Fishel Todd

Questions marked with a * refer to Rashi’s commentary.

1. *How may the opening words ‘I am G-d. I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob’, be seen as G-d’s rebuke to Moses?

2. *Why are the genealogies of Reuben, Simeon, and Levi – but no other tribes, listed in this Parasha?

3. Did G-d actually ‘harden Pharaoh’s heart’ as He declared he would before the Plagues commenced?

4. What fraction of his life had Moses spent by the time he stood before Pharaoh on the threshold of the Ten Plagues?

5. Which plagues were initiated by Aaron, *and why?

6. How do the text and *Rashi’s commentary suggest that the third plague – that of lice – was a greater miracle than the first two?

7. In which two places in the text does Pharaoh actually break his word?

8. How did the fates of the frogs in the second plague differ from the wild animals in the fourth plague, *and why?

9. What, according to the text, were the true purposes of the Plagues?

10. *Moses declared that he had to actually leave the city to pray for the hail and fire to stop crashing down. Why?

 

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT AND ON RASHI’S COMMENTARY ON PARASHAT VAEIRA Rabbi Fishel Todd

1. This is for the following reason. The end of the previous Parasha relates Moses’ protest to G-d that his mission had caused the lot of His people to deteriorate instead of to improve. The opening words of this Parasha relate the substance of G-d’s reply to Moses – in the form of a sharp castigation. G-d speaks harshly to Moses, and He compares him unfavorably with the Patriarchs who maintained their faith without complaint, even though they went through much suffering and anguish and did not live to see the fulfillment of G-d’s promises to their descendants. By contrast, Moses’ protest: ‘Why have you done evil to this people? Why did you send me?’ (5:22) implied lack of faith even when told that the Redemption was at hand.

2. The simple explanation (actually expanded by the Ramban) is to illustrate that Reuben and his tribe retained the rights of the firstborn in regards to genealogy – that right not extending to Moses and Aaron however great they were. Rashi, quoting Midrashic sources, states that the Torah confirms the first three tribes’ importance despite Jacob’s sharply reproving them before his death.

3. Although G-d said that He would ‘harden Pharaoh’s heart’ (7:3), he did not actually do so until after the sixth plague (9:12). This issue is discussed by the commentaries and taken up in answer to question 3 in the next section.

4. Moses was already eighty – two thirds of the way to his hundred and twenty years – at the time he stood before Pharaoh (7:7), on the threshold on initiating the events that were to set the Exodus in to motion.

5. The first three plagues: blood, frogs, and lice, were initiated by Aaron and his stick. The reason Rashi gives broadly follows the principle of ‘do not cast stones into the well from which you drank’. Thus Aaron, rather than Moses, used the stick to make the Nile turn to blood and expel the frogs onto dry land, and the dust to turn into lice. Such an action done by Moses would have shown ingratitude to the waters of the Nile which were instrumental in saving his life as a baby, and to the dust of Egypt which concealed the dead Egyptian that he himself struck.

Rabbi Fishel Todd
Rabbi Fishel Todd

6. The text states that although Egyptians sorcerers could replicate the first two plagues, turning dust into lice was beyond them (8:14). Rashi implies that units of dust are too small for sorcerers to work on.

7. Pharaoh declared after the fourth and seventh plagues that he would release the Israelites to serve G-d in the wilderness, but on both occasions he changed his mind after the plagues stopped, thus breaking his word.

8. The frogs did not return to the Nile, but died on land and putrefied it (8:9-10). ‘He (G-d) removed the wild animals… not one remained’. (8:27) Rashi states that dead animals had commercial value for hides; dead frogs were foul-smelling and useless. The plagues were for the enrichment of the Egyptians.

9. The true purpose of the Plagues was not only to put increasing pressure on Pharaoh to release the Israelites, but to establish in Egypt that G-d is the Almighty and above all humans and idolatry. ((7:4-5)

10. The reason is that Pharaoh’s metropolis – rife with idolatry – was an unsuitable location to approach the Divine Presence in prayer. From that, it may be learnt that one should only pray in appropriate surroundings Rabbi Fishel Todd.

QUESTIONS ON OTHER COMMENTARIES TO THE TEXT OF PARASHAT VAEIRA

1. What, according to Rabbeinu Bachya, are the precise events alluded to by the four expressions of redemption (6:6-7) which have since been linked with the four cups of wine at the Seder?

2. The Holy Land promised to the Israelites is not merely a ‘yerusha’ – an inheritance, but a ‘morasha’ (6:8) – a heritage. What is the meaning of that difference according to the Ha-emek Davar?

3. In the first five plagues, ‘Pharaoh’s heart hardened’ and in the final plagues ‘G-d hardened Pharaoh’s heart’. The latter implies that Pharaoh had no free choice – in the later plagues, he could not have released the Israelites even if he wanted to. How does this justify the further plagues and suffering for not releasing the Israelites – according to (a) Rashi, and (b) the Sforno?

4. The Hagada relates that R. Judah groups the Ten Plagues into three: ‘detzach, adash, be-achav’. What, according to Marcus Lehmann (in Lehmann’s Passover Hagada) is the point that Rabbi Judah is making?

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON OTHER COMMENTARIES TO THE TEXT OF PARASHAT VAEIRA Rabbi Fishel Todd

1. According to Rabbeinu Bachya, the four expressions of Redemption refer to four very specific stages of the process, namely:

(a) ‘Vehotzeiti’ – I shall take you out (from the burdens of Egypt) – subsequently linked to the first cup of wine – denotes the end of the actual slavery which, following Rabbinic tradition, stopped some six months before the actual Exodus.

(b) ‘Vehitzalti’ – I shall save you – subsequently linked to the second cup of wine – refers to the actual leaving of Egypt.

(c) ‘Vegaalti’ – I shall rescue you – subsequently linked to the third cup of wine – refers to the splitting of the Red Sea in the face of the pursuing Egyptians.

(d) ‘Velakachti’ – and I shall take you – subsequently linked to the fourth cup of wine – links with the spiritual climax of the Redemption: the Revelation at Mount Sinai.

2. The Ha-mek Davar makes the following distinction between ‘yerusha’ and ‘morasha’. The former is something that belongs to the person when he is in possession of it. The latter is connected with the person even when not in possession. Thus the Holy Land was a ‘morasha’ to the Israelites even when they were slaves in Egypt and throughout all the succeeding exiles.

3. According to Rashi, G-d did actually deprive Pharaoh of free choice after the sixth plague, as the text states that He ‘hardened Pharaoh’s heart’. That is because his level of corruption was of such a degree that G-d’s only purpose in keeping him alive was to use him as a means of demonstrating His Power and His Might (7:5), and the implied folly of relying on sorcery and idolatry. The Sforno understands the words ‘G-d hardened Pharaoh’s heart’ differently to Rashi. They do not mean that he took away his free choice, but that he expected a higher degree of repentance. G-d’s hardening Pharaoh’s heart meant that He gave Pharaoh more strength to absorb the suffering of the plagues. Were he to repent, it would not be because of the pain, but out of sincere and true repentance; in the spirit of acknowledging that ‘G-d is the righteous and that I (Pharaoh) and my people are the wicked’. (9:27)

4. According to Lehmann, the rhythm of ‘detzach, adash, be-achav’ is the rhythn of the plagues. The Nile turned to blood – outside people’s homes. The frogs actually entered the houses, and the lice went one better – got into people’s actual flesh. Logically the next plague should have killed the people off entirely – instead, the wild animals terrorized those outside near the wild, the pestilence went a little closer affecting property (cattle), and then the boils, like the lice, actually got to the people themselves. With the seventh plague the cycle repeats itself… the hail destroyed crops outside, the locusts were a little more intimate, but it was the darkness which, like the lice and the boils, actually bought normal existence to a stop. (Thus the three cycles of ‘far, closer, and closer’ were a ‘three time warning’ to Pharaoh.) But after the Plague of Darkness, Pharaoh did not see it that way. Instead, he assumed that the next plague would be the start of the fourth cycle. He was wrong – as he ignored the first three sets of warnings, the tenth plague was the logical extension of the third cycle: further away / closer / still closer / and then (at the Killing of the Firstborn) closest: namely death.

Rabbi Fishel Todd
Rabbi Fishel Todd

ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION ON PARASHAT VAYEIRA

1. Moses spoke before G-d: “Behold the Israelites have not listened to me – how will Pharaoh listen to me? I have sealed lips” (6:12). Bereishit Rabba (92:7) states that this is one of the ten times where the kal va-homer (a fortiori deduction) appears in the Torah. Why was Moses so sure that Pharaoh would not listen to him? And in addition, why didn’t Moses give the more obvious reason – that he had been unsuccessful, as G-d had told him, and it was now time for Him to intervene? G-d had told Moses that the Redemption from Egypt would not take place through Moses directly, but through Divine intervention: For I know the King of Egypt will not let you go… I shall set forth My Hand and smite Egypt… and afterwards he will let you go (3:19-20). Moses and Aaron had already pleaded to Pharaoh once, and he responded by intensifying the sufferings of the enslaved Israelites.

2. The Passover Hagadda links the ‘strong hand’ and the ‘outstretched arm’ to the Plagues that G-d imposed on Pharaoh and the Egyptians, to persuade them to release the Israelites. As the Hagadda relates:’With a strong hand’ – that is the plague of pestilence (fatal animal disease), as Moses warned Pharaoh, ‘Behold the Hand of G-d is on your animals – horses, donkeys, camels, cattle, sheep, and goats, to bring them a very heavy pestilence’ (9:3). Why was the ‘strong hand’ of the Exodus related specifically to the plague of pestilence – the fifth out of the ten plagues? What special qualities did the death of the Egyptians’ domestic animals possess over and above the other plagues, so that it was the crucial one that helped the Israelite Exodus to take place?

 

Rabbi Fishel Todd

Parsha Vayigash Rabbi Fishel Todd

 

Rabbi Fishel Todd
Rabbi Fishel Todd

 

http://shulchanaruchproject.com

A discussion by Rabbi Fishel Todd

THE TEXT ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – QUESTIONS Rabbi Fishel Todd

Who said to whom, and in what circumstances?

(a) His soul is bound up with his soul.

(b) Is my father still alive?

(c) You will eat the fat of the land.

(d) Do not quarrel on the way.

(e) I will go and see him before I die.

(f) Do not be frightened to go down to Egypt.

(g) You shall say: ‘Your servants have been cattlemen’.

(h) We have come to live in the land

(i) The days… of my life have been few and bad.

(j) You have saved out lives.

THE TEXT ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – ANSWERS

(a) Judah to Joseph incognito, as the Viceroy of Egypt, in pleading for the release of Benjamin in his stead. (44:30)

(b) Joseph, on revealing his true identity to his brothers, exclaimed: ‘I am Joseph – is my father (Jacob) still alive?’ (45:3)

(c) Pharaoh to Joseph, in inviting Jacob and his sons to come to Egypt. (45:18)

(d) Joseph to his brothers, on seeing them off to Canaan (45:24).

(e) Jacob to his sons, on learning that Joseph was still alive.(45:28)

(f) G-d to Jacob, at the beginning of his journey from Canaan to Egypt. (46:3)

(g) Joseph to his brothers, in preparing them to successfully persuade Pharaoh to allow them to live close to him in Goshen, in Egypt (46:34).

(h) Joseph’s brothers to Pharaoh (47:4), in the circumstances in #(g) above.

(i) Jacob to Pharaoh, on their first meeting. (47:9)

(j) The Egyptians to Joseph, on his supplying them with seeds to keep alive during the famine, in return for a fifth of their produce being passed to Pharaoh (47:25).

Rabbi Fishel Todd
Rabbi Fishel Toddd

RASHI ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – QUESTIONS

Where in the Parasha may the following Torah values be learnt?

1. One may tell untruths if in real danger.

2. When traveling, keep eyes on the road first – even if discussing matters of Torah importance!

3. Honoring parents comes before honoring grandparents.

4. Honoring parents comes before one’s own routine.

5. Pharaoh’s offer of hospitality to Jacob turned out to be to his own great advantage (two sources).

RASHI ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – ANSWERS Rabbi Fishel Todd

1. In pleading for Benjamin to be spared, Judah states that ‘his brother is dead’. (44:20) He had no proof at the time that Joseph – the ‘brother’ was dead. He said so out of fear that if he said otherwise, he might be forced to bring him down to Egypt, as previously with Bemjamin. That, from Judah’s point of view, was impossible. From there it can be illustrated that one may tell untruths when in personal danger.

2. Joseph warned his brothers when they set towards Canaan to bring their father Jacob: ‘al tirgezu baderech’ – do not become agitated on the way (45:25). That expression, according to Rashi, can mean not to get involved in a Halachic argument less ‘the road becomes angry at you’ – a figurative expression telling them not to become so engrossed that they lose their way.

3. Rashi comments on ‘He slaughtered offerings to the G-d of his father Isaac’ that Jacob associated his offerings with Isaac and not Abraham, his grandfather. This teaches us that a son owes more honor to his father than to his grandfather.

4. The text states that Joseph himself harnessed his chariot when he went to meet his father Jacob, on his arrival to Egypt. He did not delay by the usual procedure of waiting for one of his servants to make the necessary preparations. (46:29)

5. Firstly, Rashi quotes the tradition that when ‘Jacob blessed Pharaoh’ (47:10), the blessing was that the Nile would rise whenever he would approach that river and water the thirsty land and its crops. Secondly, Rashi point out from the text stating the Egyptians begged Joseph for seeds in the second year of the famine (47:19), the implication that the famine did indeed come to an end on Jacob’s arrival in Egypt.

Rabbi FIshel Todd
Rabbi Fishel Todd

Rabbi Fishel Todd OTHER COMMENTATORS ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – QUESTIONS

1. The Torah records that Joseph died at the age 110 (50:26). The Talmud (Sotah 13b) has the tradition that he should have lived to 120, but that he forfeited ten years of his life. For what reason, as derived from the opening section of this Parasha?

2. The arrival of Joseph’s brothers, after their true identity was revealed, was ‘good in the eyes of Pharaoh’ (45:16). Why was this so, according to (a) the Ramban and (b) the Sforno?

3. The Rabbis have a tradition that Aravit, the evening prayer, was instituted by Jacob. How, according to the Meshech Chochma, does that connect with this Parasha?

4. Why, according to the Sforno, did G-d tell Jacob not to be afraid of ‘going down to Egypt?’ (46:3)

5. Why, according to Hisrch, were ‘all shepherds (Joseph’s brothers’ occupation) abominations to the Egyptians’? (46:34)

OTHER COMMENTATORS ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – ANSWERS Rabbi Fishel Todd

1. The Talmud (Sotah 13b) has the tradition that Joseph was punished for remaining silent when his own father was described by Judah as ‘avdecha’ – your servant. He lost ten years of his life as a punishment for doing so. Judah himself had done nothing wrong because he thought that he was addressing Egyptian royalty, and such was the required etiquette of the time and place. However, Joseph – from his own point of view – would not have revealed his identity by saying that a resident of Canaan was not his subject – his servant Rabbi Fishel Todd.

2. According to the Ramban, Pharaoh was delighted that his country would no longer bear the stigma of being ruled by an ex-slave and an ex-convict of unknown origins. Now, he could demonstrate that Joseph – his viceroy – came from a highly distinguished background. The Sforno stresses that as Joseph’s own family were becoming residents of Egypt, he would think of himself as a fully fledged member of that community and become even more devoted to its interests.

3. The text states that G-d appeared to Jacob early on his descent to Egypt ‘in the visions of night’. (46:2) This is the only place where a vision is described in those terms – which imply impending darkness. Indeed, the long period in Egypt leading to years of harsh slavery began at that time. The night of exile, when hope was wrapped in darkness, was about to begin. G-d, therefore came in the ‘visions of night’ to stress to Jacob that though the Israelites would be cut off from their Land, they would never be cut off from G-d – He would always be with them. Therefore, explains the Meshech Chochma, Jacob instituted the ‘Aravit’ – daily evening prayer, to show his descendants likewise: the night might be an epilogue to one day, but it is the prologue to another, better day.

4. According to the S’forno, G-d told Jacob not to fear, because in Egypt his descendants would be in less danger of assimilating with the surrounding nations than in the Land of Canaan. For in Egypt, the foreigner was kept at arm’s length – as the text itself records: ‘for the Egyptians could not eat with the Hebrews – it was an abomination for Egypt’. (43:32)

5. Hirsch finds the traits of the shepherd unacceptable to the Egyptians. Because a shepherd is involved with dependant living creatures, he develops the personal attributes of kindness and generosity. Because his possessions are unstable, he learns not to place too much emphasis on wealth. And the gently rhythm of his work gives him time to contemplate on holier and less mundane matters. The Egyptians, writes Hirsch, has a culture that abhorred the above values. It encouraged slavery and the disregard of human dignity, and the resultant perversions and excesses of the country have been well documented Rabbi Fishel Todd.

A favorite comment from the Chafetz Chayim: When Joseph revealed his true identity to his brothers with the words ‘I am Joseph’ G-d’s master plan became clear to the brothers. They had no more questions. Everything that had happened for the last twenty-two years fell into perspective. So, too, it will be in the time to come when G-d will reveal Himself and announce ‘I am G-d!’ The veil will be lifted from our eyes and we will comprehend the meaning of our very strange and tortuous history…

Rabbi Fishel Todd
Rabbi FIshel Todd

SOME ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION Rabbi Fishel Todd

1. The Midrash explains that the reason Jacob sent Judah in advance of him (46:28) was to establish a house of Torah study. This Midrashic explanation emphasizes the need to prioritize Torah education at every place where there is a Jewish community. What was the reason Jacob wanted a house of Torah study to be established in Egypt before he arrived there? Surely he himself could have performed the task better than his son would have? After all, Jacob was (according to the Midrash) a direct disciple of Shem and Ever.

2. The text states: Israel journeyed with all he had and he came to Be-er Sheva. He made offerings to the G-d of his father Isaac… G-d spoke to Israel in night visions and he said ‘Jacob, Jacob’… ‘Do not fear to descend to Egypt for I shall make you into a great nation there’ (46:1-3). The Torah uses the word zevach rather than olah for an offering. That implies a korban shelamim – a peace offering (Vayikra 3:1). Why did Jacob make that type of korban – something that is usually brought as thanks, when he was leaving the Promised Land? And why, having Himself changed his name to Israel did He subsequently use the name Jacob?

*Please note – My own attempts to deal with the issues related in #1 and #2 may be found in the archives for 5762 and 5761 respectively in Shema Yisrael – on Parashat Vayigash

 

Rabbi Fishel Todd

THE TEXT ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – QUESTIONS

Who said to whom, and in what circumstances?

(a) His soul is bound up with his soul.

(b) Is my father still alive?

(c) You will eat the fat of the land.

(d) Do not quarrel on the way.

(e) I will go and see him before I die.

(f) Do not be frightened to go down to Egypt.

(g) You shall say: ‘Your servants have been cattlemen’.

(h) We have come to live in the land

(i) The days… of my life have been few and bad.

(j) You have saved out lives.

 

THE TEXT ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – ANSWERS

(a) Judah to Joseph incognito, as the Viceroy of Egypt, in pleading for the release of Benjamin in his stead. (44:30)

(b) Joseph, on revealing his true identity to his brothers, exclaimed: ‘I am Joseph – is my father (Jacob) still alive?’ (45:3)

(c) Pharaoh to Joseph, in inviting Jacob and his sons to come to Egypt. (45:18)

(d) Joseph to his brothers, on seeing them off to Canaan (45:24).

(e) Jacob to his sons, on learning that Joseph was still alive.(45:28)

(f) G-d to Jacob, at the beginning of his journey from Canaan to Egypt. (46:3)

(g) Joseph to his brothers, in preparing them to successfully persuade Pharaoh to allow them to live close to him in Goshen, in Egypt (46:34).

(h) Joseph’s brothers to Pharaoh (47:4), in the circumstances in #(g) above.

(i) Jacob to Pharaoh, on their first meeting. (47:9)

(j) The Egyptians to Joseph, on his supplying them with seeds to keep alive during the famine, in return for a fifth of their produce being passed to Pharaoh (47:25).

 

RASHI ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – QUESTIONS

Where in the Parasha may the following Torah values be learnt?

1. One may tell untruths if in real danger.

2. When traveling, keep eyes on the road first – even if discussing matters of Torah importance!

3. Honoring parents comes before honoring grandparents.

4. Honoring parents comes before one’s own routine.

5. Pharaoh’s offer of hospitality to Jacob turned out to be to his own great advantage (two sources).

 

RASHI ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – ANSWERS

1. In pleading for Benjamin to be spared, Judah states that ‘his brother is dead’. (44:20) He had no proof at the time that Joseph – the ‘brother’ was dead. He said so out of fear that if he said otherwise, he might be forced to bring him down to Egypt, as previously with Bemjamin. That, from Judah’s point of view, was impossible. From there it can be illustrated that one may tell untruths when in personal danger.

2. Joseph warned his brothers when they set towards Canaan to bring their father Jacob: ‘al tirgezu baderech’ – do not become agitated on the way (45:25). That expression, according to Rashi, can mean not to get involved in a Halachic argument less ‘the road becomes angry at you’ – a figurative expression telling them not to become so engrossed that they lose their way.

3. Rashi comments on ‘He slaughtered offerings to the G-d of his father Isaac’ that Jacob associated his offerings with Isaac and not Abraham, his grandfather. This teaches us that a son owes more honor to his father than to his grandfather.

4. The text states that Joseph himself harnessed his chariot when he went to meet his father Jacob, on his arrival to Egypt. He did not delay by the usual procedure of waiting for one of his servants to make the necessary preparations. (46:29)

5. Firstly, Rashi quotes the tradition that when ‘Jacob blessed Pharaoh’ (47:10), the blessing was that the Nile would rise whenever he would approach that river and water the thirsty land and its crops. Secondly, Rashi point out from the text stating the Egyptians begged Joseph for seeds in the second year of the famine (47:19), the implication that the famine did indeed come to an end on Jacob’s arrival in Egypt.

 

OTHER COMMENTATORS ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – QUESTIONS

1. The Torah records that Joseph died at the age 110 (50:26). The Talmud (Sotah 13b) has the tradition that he should have lived to 120, but that he forfeited ten years of his life. For what reason, as derived from the opening section of this Parasha?

2. The arrival of Joseph’s brothers, after their true identity was revealed, was ‘good in the eyes of Pharaoh’ (45:16). Why was this so, according to (a) the Ramban and (b) the Sforno?

3. The Rabbis have a tradition that Aravit, the evening prayer, was instituted by Jacob. How, according to the Meshech Chochma, does that connect with this Parasha?

4. Why, according to the Sforno, did G-d tell Jacob not to be afraid of ‘going down to Egypt?’ (46:3)

5. Why, according to Hisrch, were ‘all shepherds (Joseph’s brothers’ occupation) abominations to the Egyptians’? (46:34)

 

OTHER COMMENTATORS ON PARASHAT VAYIGASH – ANSWERS

1. The Talmud (Sotah 13b) has the tradition that Joseph was punished for remaining silent when his own father was described by Judah as ‘avdecha’ – your servant. He lost ten years of his life as a punishment for doing so. Judah himself had done nothing wrong because he thought that he was addressing Egyptian royalty, and such was the required etiquette of the time and place. However, Joseph – from his own point of view – would not have revealed his identity by saying that a resident of Canaan was not his subject – his servant.

2. According to the Ramban, Pharaoh was delighted that his country would no longer bear the stigma of being ruled by an ex-slave and an ex-convict of unknown origins. Now, he could demonstrate that Joseph – his viceroy – came from a highly distinguished background. The Sforno stresses that as Joseph’s own family were becoming residents of Egypt, he would think of himself as a fully fledged member of that community and become even more devoted to its interests.

3. The text states that G-d appeared to Jacob early on his descent to Egypt ‘in the visions of night’. (46:2) This is the only place where a vision is described in those terms – which imply impending darkness. Indeed, the long period in Egypt leading to years of harsh slavery began at that time. The night of exile, when hope was wrapped in darkness, was about to begin. G-d, therefore came in the ‘visions of night’ to stress to Jacob that though the Israelites would be cut off from their Land, they would never be cut off from G-d – He would always be with them. Therefore, explains the Meshech Chochma, Jacob instituted the ‘Aravit’ – daily evening prayer, to show his descendants likewise: the night might be an epilogue to one day, but it is the prologue to another, better day.

4. According to the S’forno, G-d told Jacob not to fear, because in Egypt his descendants would be in less danger of assimilating with the surrounding nations than in the Land of Canaan. For in Egypt, the foreigner was kept at arm’s length – as the text itself records: ‘for the Egyptians could not eat with the Hebrews – it was an abomination for Egypt’. (43:32)

5. Hirsch finds the traits of the shepherd unacceptable to the Egyptians. Because a shepherd is involved with dependant living creatures, he develops the personal attributes of kindness and generosity. Because his possessions are unstable, he learns not to place too much emphasis on wealth. And the gently rhythm of his work gives him time to contemplate on holier and less mundane matters. The Egyptians, writes Hirsch, has a culture that abhorred the above values. It encouraged slavery and the disregard of human dignity, and the resultant perversions and excesses of the country have been well documented.

A favorite comment from the Chafetz Chayim: When Joseph revealed his true identity to his brothers with the words ‘I am Joseph’ G-d’s master plan became clear to the brothers. They had no more questions. Everything that had happened for the last twenty-two years fell into perspective. So, too, it will be in the time to come when G-d will reveal Himself and announce ‘I am G-d!’ The veil will be lifted from our eyes and we will comprehend the meaning of our very strange and tortuous history…

 

SOME ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

1. The Midrash explains that the reason Jacob sent Judah in advance of him (46:28) was to establish a house of Torah study. This Midrashic explanation emphasizes the need to prioritize Torah education at every place where there is a Jewish community. What was the reason Jacob wanted a house of Torah study to be established in Egypt before he arrived there? Surely he himself could have performed the task better than his son would have? After all, Jacob was (according to the Midrash) a direct disciple of Shem and Ever.

2. The text states: Israel journeyed with all he had and he came to Be-er Sheva. He made offerings to the G-d of his father Isaac… G-d spoke to Israel in night visions and he said ‘Jacob, Jacob’… ‘Do not fear to descend to Egypt for I shall make you into a great nation there’ (46:1-3). The Torah uses the word zevach rather than olah for an offering. That implies a korban shelamim – a peace offering (Vayikra 3:1). Why did Jacob make that type of korban – something that is usually brought as thanks, when he was leaving the Promised Land? And why, having Himself changed his name to Israel did He subsequently use the name Jacob

“All the souls of Beis-Ya’akov who came to Egypt of the House of Ya’akov numbered seventy” (46:27).

Plus Ya’akov himself, comments R. Bachye, making a total of seventy-one.

Likewise, G-d told Moshe (in Parshas Beha’aloscha) to gather seventy of the elders of Yisrael, who, together with Moshe, numbered seventy-one.

And so it was with the Sanhedrin, which sat in the Beis-Hamikdash. They too, numbered seventy, but with the Nasi, the number was seventy-one.

The original nations of the world (as listed in Parshas No’ach) also numbered seventy, and when one adds Yisrael, there were seventy-one nations.

All of this, says R. Bachye, follows the pattern in Heaven, where, as Chazal teach us, seventy angels surround G-d’s Throne of Glory, which, together with G-d Himself (Kevayachol) make seventy-one. And that is known as ‘G-d’s Beis-Din’.

And this explains why the Torah concludes (not with the word ‘le’Ya’akov’, like it did in the previous Pasuk, but) “le’Beis Ya’akov”, a hint at the Heavenly Beis-Din, which Ya’akov’s wider family echoes.

This teaches us, the author continues, the greatness of Ya’akov Avinu (whose image is engraved underneath the Heavenly Throne and) from whom seventy Souls emerged, which eventually branched out into six hundred thousand when they left Egypt, as this corresponds to the seventy Names which emerge from the Shechinah, and which branch out into six hundred thousand. This in turn, incorporates the maximum number of ‘opinions’ that exist, and it explains as to why Yisrael were only ready to receive the Torah when they reached a total of six hundred thousand, and not before.

 

*
This number is also connected to the fact that the Shechinah has six sides (which no doubt, is in turn, connected to the four directions plus up and down).

Indeed, the Shechinah only rests in Yisrael when there are six hundred thousand people, and that is why the Shechinah rested in Yisrael from the time the Torah was given at Har Sinai, until the destruction of the first Beis-Hamikdash. It did not rest in Yisrael during the era of the second Beis-Hamikdash, R. Bachye contends, because only forty thousand souls returned from Bavel.

That is not to say that the Shechinah does not rest at all on less than six hundred thousand people. For Chazal have said that the Shechinah rests even on twenty-two thousand people, as the Torah writes in Parshas Beha’aloscha (10:36) “Rest Hashem on the tens of thousands and the thousands of Yisrael” (see Rashi there), and this is reiterated in Tehilim (68:18), where the Pasuk says “G-d’s chariot consists of tens of thousands and thousands of angels … “.Furthermore, the Navi writes in Chagai (1:8 [in connection with the second Beis-Hamikdash]) “And I will be pleased with it and I will be honoured (i.e. I will rest My Honour there)”.

What it therefore means is that the Shechinah only rests permanently when Yisrael attain the number six hundred thousand. And that is what happened in the second Beis-Hamikdash, where the Shechinah rested sporadically, as the Pasuk writes in ve’Zos ha’B’rachah (33:12) “He hovers over it all day” – implying that He does not actually settle there Rabbi Fishel Todd.

 

*
Note, that the Pasuk in Chagai that we just quoted is missing a ‘Hey’ in the word “ve’ikaveidah” (and I will be honoured), and it is from there that Chazal learn that the second Beis-Hamikdash was lacking five things – the Aron, the anointing oil, the fire (that descended from Heaven to consume the Korbanos on the Mizbei’ach), the Shechinah and the Urim ve’Tumim (the Names of Hashem that were placed in the folds of the Choshen Mishpat, which enabled to the Kohen Gadol to attain a certain level of Ru’ach ha’Kodesh). As we explained a little earlier, the Shechinah was not totally absent, but rather tended to appear sporadically.

 

*
But in time to come, when the third Beis-Hamikdash is built, the author concludes, Yisrael will be numerous like the sand by the seashore (like G-d promised Hoshei’a [2:1]). When that happens, the Divine Glory and Majesty will return in full force, just as the Navi Yeshayah prophesied (60:1) “Arise and shine, for your light has arrived, and the Glory of G-d shines upon you!”

 

Rabbi Fishel Todd

CHANUKAH 2020 Rabbi Fishel Todd

CHANUKAH 2020
Rabbi Fishel Todd

Three gifts were created in the world. Anyone who merits  any one of them takes all the delight in the world. They are wisdom, strength and wealth.

Of these three gifts wealth is the most external to a person, since it is not actually a part of him, but rather an appendage and thus most visible to others. Strength is a little less external, since it is not possible to determine a person’s might with a superficial glance.  Indeed, there are small, weak-looking people who are in fact very strong.

Strength does nevertheless reveal itself outside the person.

Of the 3 WISDON is the most personal and concealed.

The intellect resides in the deepest recesses of the person and is completely obscured from others.

The 3 early exiles to which the Jews were subjected correspond to those three gifts. In each case, the oppressing was able to suppress a particular aspect of the Jews identity.

Paras and Madai were known for their wealth. In fact, at the beginning of the Purim story we find that the Persian king Achashverosh, as we read in Megelas Esther where Achashverosh showed them the glorious wealth of his kingdom and the majesty of his royal greatness.

Rabbi Fishel Todd
Rabbi Fishel Todd

The Greeks were known for their outstanding wisdom, their philosophers and their ideas have been tremendously influential.

Thus when they oppressed Israel, they were even able to reach the wisdom of the Torah and enslave it to their own ends. Oil in Torah thought expresses wisdom [The Menorah in the Beis Hamikdash represents the light of TORAH radiating to all corners of existence].

So when Chazal, in our original quote, say that the Greeks defiled the oil, they mean that they were clever enough to subjugate the very heart of the nation, to contaminate their Torah wisdom, the oil of the Jews, and to defile it with Hellenism.

In this sense, the Greeks polluted “all the oil in the Temple”; that is , their twisted form of wisdom seized of all areas of Torah wisdom.

The Torah subtly hints at the Yom-tov of Chanukah, says the Ba’al Rokei’ach, by virtue of the juxtaposition of the Parshah of olive oil for the Menorah immediately following the Yomim-tovim in Parshas Emor.

The Torah actually concludes the Parshah of Mo’adim with the words “And Moshe told the Mo’adim of Hashem to the B’nei Yisrael”, and continues “Command the B’nei Yisrael and they shall bring you pure olive-oil”. And as we know, the ideal Mitzvah of Chanukah lights is with olive oil.

In fact, he goes on to explain, there are a number of points in this paragraph that are connected with Chanukah. To begin with, he points out, the words “Tzav es B’nei Yisrael” has the same numerical value as ‘bi’Yemei Matisyahu ben Yochanan’ (including the ‘kolel’ [the phrase], which is perfectly acceptable in terms of the rules of Gematriyos, and which he then explains at great length).

Rabbi FIshel Todd

*

The reason that the miracle took place with oil, the Rokei’ach explains, is based on the fact that the Greeks attempted to negate the light of Torah and to replace it with their own Chochmah (Greek culture). So the miracle took place with oil, which represents Chochmas ha’Torah, for so Chazal have said in Menachos (85b) ‘Wherever olive-oil is found, there one will find Chochmah. They based this on a Pasuk in Shmuel, where Yo’av sent to Teko’a to fetch a wise woman (to convince David to accept his son Avshalom back into the fold). And ‘Teko’a is the supreme place for oil’ (see ‘Why? Because’ in Parshah Pearls).

Moreover, the miracle ocurred with the Menorah, which represents Chochmas ha’Torah, too. For it is in connection with the Menorah that Chazal declared ‘Who wishes to be wise should turn to the south’ Because it was on the south-side of the Heichal that the Menorah stood. This can be understood by bearing in mind the connection between light and Chochmah (did Chazal not say that the original light of the creation was not for the use of the Resha’im, so Hashem hid it – according to the commentaries, in the Torah? Note also, the juxtaposition of the B’rachah of Torah to that of light, before the Shema at Shachris). And the south represents Chochmah, because, due to the fact that the sun shines there all year round, it is the brightest of all the directions.

Incidentally, the original light shone for thirty-six hours, say Chazal, before it was hidden, and correspondingly, we kindle thirty-six lights on Chanukah.

Rabbi Fishel Todd

*

What’s more, the Rokei’ach adds, the dual expressions “le’ha’alos Ner Tamid” (singular) and “ya’aroch es ha’Neiros” (plural) hint at the Mitzvah of Hadlakas Ner Chanukah, one light on the first night, and a number of lights on the subsequent nights. In addition, says the Rokei’ach, the numerical value of “kosis la’ma’or” is equivalent to that of ‘Zera” (children), a hint to what Chazal say in Shabbos (23b) ‘Someone who observes the Mitzvah of ‘Lights’ meticulously, will merit children who are Talmidei-Chachamim’, and which many commentaries ascribe to Chanukah-lights Rabbi FIshel Todd.

He also extrapolates from the fact that Chanukah comes immediately after Sukos, that it had to be eight days, and helps to answer the Beis Yosef’s Kashya, why Chazal fixed eight days and not seven, seeing as the jar contained sufficient oil for one day, and the miracle therefore, lasted only seven.

Finally the first letters of the words “Zayis Zoch Kosis La’mo’or, Le’ha’alos”, the Rokei’ach points out, are equivalent to that of ‘be’Hallel ve’Hodo’oh’, the very words used by the Gemara in Shabbos, in describing the essence of Chanukah.

*

The very fact that the Torah chooses to hint at Chanukah using the medium of oil with connotations of wisdom, provides us with an insight into the deeper meaning of Chanukah. For the battle with the Greeks may have ended on the battlefield, but it began and, for the major part was fought, as a battle of cultures, of truth against falsehood, and of G-dliness against secularism. And this is indeed hinted in ‘Al ha’Nisim’, where we say – ‘You delivered strong men into the hands of the weak, many into the hands of the few, impure into the hands of the pure, wicked into the hands of righteous and slanderers into the hands of those who study Your Torah’.

*

This idea runs parallel with the inherently spiritual nature of Chanukah at all levels, which contrasts so greatly with the physical nature of Purim. This in itself, is well-known. It is however, worth adding that in this context, the word ‘shemen’ (oil) also contains the main root-letters of Neshamah. For you see, just as the seat of desire is the heart, so too, is the seat of wisdom in the brain, which is also the part of the body that one associates with the Neshamah.

***

Parshah Pearls
Mikeitz

(Adapted from the Ba’al ha’Turim)

The Seven Cows

Paroh dreamt about cows, explains the Ba’al ha’Turim, because Yirmiyah described Egypt as “Eglah Yefefiyah” (a beautiful calf [46:20]).

And why seven?

Well, he says, the Pasuk in No’ach (10:13/14) lists Mitzrayim’s six sons: Ludim, Lehovim, Naftuchim, Pasrusim, Kasluchim and Kaforim – plus Mitzrayim itself, makes seven.

And also because of the seven nations of Cana’an, which were sustained by the Egyptians during the time of the famine.

*

Rabbi Fishel Todd

All on One Stem

” … and behold, seven ears came up on one stem (be’koneh echod)” (41:5).

The words “be’koneh echod” appear three times in the Chumash, twice here (in connection with the good years), and once in Vayakhel (37:19), because the good years are like light to the world. And Par’oh saw the ears of corn on one stalk, only by the good years but not by the bad ones. It hints to the fact that, unlike the bad years, which got progressively worse, the good years were all equal in their goodness.

*

It’s In the Hands of the Interpreter

“Ka’asher posar lonu kein hoyoh (just like he interpreted them, so it was)” 41:13.

Our sages have taught us that dreams follow their interpretation. In that case, the Ba’al ha’Turim’s comment, that the words “ka’asher posar” has the same numerical value as ‘she’chalomos holchim achar ha’peh’ should hardly come as a surprise.

*

The Reward of Nice Words

” … ve’al picho yishak kol ami (and all my people will be sustained by your word)” (41:40).

The word “yishak” appears also in Mishlei (24:26) “Sefosayim yishak meishiv devorim nichochim (lips will kiss the one who responds with correct speech” (even though the meaning of the word is quite different in both cases).

This teaches us, says the Ba’al ha’Turim, that Yosef merited to sustain the entire Egyptian nation because he responded correctly to Paroh.

Bearing in mind that he was exiled for improper speech, we see both from here and from other instances throughout the current Parshiyos, how Yosef had rectified his original mistake.

*

Believe It or Not

“va’Yikro Paroh shem Yosef Tzofnas Pa’nei’ach” (41:45).

“Tzofnas Pa’nei’ach” means ‘the revealer of hidden things’, as Rashi explains, and what’s more, it has the same numerical value as Megaleh Nistorim, which also happens to mean ‘the revealer of hidden things’ (Ba’al ha’Turim).

*

And Tzofnas Pa’nei’ach, he says, also forms the first letters of ‘Tzadik Pitpet Nefesh So’eivah, Potifar Inah Nafsho Chinam’ (a Tzadik fought a desirous soul, Potifar afflicted his soul, for no reason), as well as ‘Tzofeh, Fodeh, Navi, Somech, Poser, Anav, Navon, Chozeh’ (One with foresight, redeemer, prophet, supporter, interpreter, humble, wise and seer).

*

Beyond Recognition

” … ve’heim lo hikiruhu (but they did not recognize him)” 42:8.

And the same word is used in connection with Iyov (2:12) “me’rochok ve’ lo hikiruhu (from afar they could not recognize him)”, only the former is missing a ‘Yud’, whereas the latter is not.

Just as Iyov’s friends could not recognize him because he had changed so drastically on account of his suffering, so too, could Yosef’s brothers not recognize him because of his change from a slave to a great prince.

The difference between them was that, when Iyov’s friends came closer, they recognized him, whereas Yosef’s brothers did not.

Why is that? Because Iyov’s friends knew the identity of the person they were visiting, but Yosef’s brothers did not.

*

Missing One

“We are all sons of one man” (42:11).

The word for ‘We’ ought to have been “Anachnu”. Yet here the Torah misses out an ‘Alef’, and writes “Nachnu”. The brothers were referring to themselves, and indeed, says the Ba’al ha’Turim, bearing in mind that ‘Alef’ is equivalent to one, there was literally one missing – Yosef.

Or perhaps, without realizing what they were saying, they were hinting that all those present (Yosef included) were sons of one father, and the missing one was – Binyamin (absent because his father had not sent him with his brothers).

*

Three for Three

“And he placed them under arrest for three days” (42:17).

The three days, explains the Ba’al ha’Turim, corresponded to the three things that his brothers did to him: 1. They stripped him of his shirt; 2. They cast him into a pit: 3. They sold him into slavery.

*

Kill My Two Sons

” You may kill my two sons (es Sh’nei bonai tomis), if I don’t bring him back to you” (42:37).

This was Reuven’s strange guarantee to his father that if he would entrust Binyamin to him, he would return him safe and sound.

The word tomis appears in one other place (Iyov 5:2) “u’Foseh tomis kin’oh (for jealousy kills the fool)”, which the Medrash connects with the congregation of Korach, who were jealous of Moshe. The Masores here, hints at Dasan and Aviram, who were descendants of Reuven. They were the two sons who would die by the pronouncement of their own grandfather Reuven.

And that will also explain why the numerical value of “es sh’nei” is equivalent to ‘Eilu Dasan va’Aviram” (if one spells ‘Eilu’ with a ‘Yud’).

*

Six for Six

“And bring the man a gift; a little balsam, a little honey, some gum, resin, pistachio nuts and almonds” (43:11).

Six different kinds, explains the Ba’al ha’Turim, for each of the sons of Leah (one of the main wives) to carry one species as a gift for Par’oh. For obvious reasons, Rachel’s children were out of the picture.

***

ALL ABOUT CHANUKAH
(Adapted from the Ta’amei ha’Minhagim)

Rabbi Fishel Todd

Ups and Downs

It is customary to play Dreidel on Chanukah, whereas on Purim, there is a Minhag to wield a gregor.

The fact that the Dreidel is spun from the top and the gregor is rattled from the bottom symbolises one of the most fundamental differences between the two festivals.

Purim, as is well-known, followed a tremendous turnabout on the part of the people. As the Megilah itself informs us, the entire nation fasted for three days and wore sackcloth and ashes. This is known as ‘Ita’arusa di’Letata’ (an awakening from below), and that is why we hold a gregor from below and rattle it.

Chanukah on the other hand, was not the result of any such effort on the part of Yisrael as a whole (although one cannot deny the Chashmona’im’s self-sacrifice, which certainly contained great merit, but they were a minority group). In that case, the miracle of Chanukah was an ‘Ita’arusa di’le’Eila’ (an awakening from Above instigated by G-d in his Mercy), and explains why we spin the Dreidel from the top.

*

And this idea also explains a change in text from Chanukah to Purim. On Chanukah, we say in ‘Al ha’Nisim’, ‘You quarreled on their behalf, You judged their judgements and You avenged them’. Whereas on Purim, we say ‘who quarrels our quarrels, judges our judgements and avenges our vengeance’.

This is because on Purim the miracle was the result of Yisrael’s Tefilah and fasting, so it is appropriate to use the first person plural, since Yisrael were personally involved. On Chanukah on the other hand, where Yisrael did not play a major role in the miracle, they are mentioned only in the third person.

*

Pure Beginnings

Another reason for the eight days of Chanukah (see ‘Why? Because’, down the page) is given by the Beis Yosef. The people, he explains, were all Tamei meis, in which case they required seven days to become tahor, and one more day in order to produce the oil.

*

Lighting in Shul

The reason that Chazal instituted lighting the Menorah in Shul as well as at home, says the Levush, is because of guests from out of town, who do not have their own home (and the Mitzvah of Chanukah-Lights is ‘Ish Ner u’Beiso’). It is similar to the Takanah of reciting Kidush in Shul, which they instituted for the same reason.

Another reason is based on the Kolbo, who explains that Kidush is recited in Shul so that people who are not conversant with Kidush (at least that’s how it was before the advent of the Sidur) should take their cue from the Chazen in Shul. And it is for that very reason that they instituted Hadlakas Ner Chanukah in Shul.

Yet another reason for lighting in Shul is given by the Rosh. After all, he explains, the Mitzvah is to commemorate the kindling of the Menorah in the Beis-Hamikdash, the location where it was originally lit. So we light it in Shul, which Chazal refer to as a Mikdash me’at (a minor Mikdash).

And based on the same principle, the Seifer Orchos Chayim explains why many communities light in Shul in the morning as well (even though the time to light Chanukah lights is at night-time). It is to accommodate the opinion of the Rambam, he says, in whose opinion, the Mitzvah of preparing the Menorah each morning (‘Hatovas Neiros’) incorporated kindling the lights again. Consequently, since our kindling commemorates the kindling of the Menorah in the Beis-Hamikdash, it is appropriate to commemorate the Mitzvah fully and light them twice, like they did there.

And a final reason for lighting in Shul, again by the Levush, is based on the principle of ‘Pirsumei Nisa’ (the Mitzvah of publicizing the miracle). ‘Because’, he says, ‘reciting the B’rachos communally involves a great publicizing of Hashem Yisbarach, and a sanctification of His Name’, which after all, is the essence of the Mitzvah.

Why? … Because!

Setting the more profound reasons aside, the Avudraham quoting the Yerushalmi, explains that Chanukah had to last for eight days, since the oil had to come from the north of Eretz Yisrael, from a location four days’ journey from Yerushalayim. To be precise, that location was Tako’a, in the territory of Asher, which was known to produce the best oil-growing olives in the country (as indeed the Torah specifically writes in ve’Zos-ha’B’rachah 33:24)

Four days there and four days back make a total of – eight.

Rabbi Fishel Todd

Shulchan Aruch Project

Pearls Rabbi Fishel Todd

Rabbi Fishel Todd

Rabbi Avigdor teaches us that if immorality is uncontrollable, how can we blame society for its descent into wickedness? The fact is that up till recently, and even today, most people are controlling it. The fact is that what’s depicted in the newspapers and in the other media is not a picture of life; it’s a perverted and crippled picture of what’s in the minds of the writers. Actually, many people are living normally; as you walk down blocks and blocks of Irish houses and Italian houses, they’re living more or less normally. They’re living married lives, and they are controlling themselves; otherwise there’d be mayhem, there’d be murder on all sides. Human beings are controlling themselves. Does it mean every Irish man is perfectly perfect all his life? This I wouldn’t say. But in general people are controlling themselves because that is the only way for civilized people to live. And therefore, we can’t say that the world has lost its control. Rabbi Fishel Todd says of course the liberals are doing their best to break down everything. But despite them, human nature abhors disorder; human nature likes a certain amount of decency, and therefore it will continue no matter what they do. Of course we have to try to stop the torrent of wickedness; we have to attempt to abolish pornography and so on, but that doesn’t mean that we’re losing the fight. We’ll never lose that fight; it’s inherent in human nature. There’s no society that ever abolished morality entirely; impossible. The Roman society, even the Greek society, even though they had certain perversions, but they had certain principles; you have to know a society that’s going to break down all the restrictions is going to decay and fall apart. And if America won’t stop this headlong flight into perversion, who knows what’s going to happen. Let’s hope the Italians and the Irish will win out against the Jewish liberals. Jewish liberals are doing the best to ruin America. I say the Jewish liberals – the truth is that the Orthodox Jews should help a little more than they’re doing; the Jewish Orthodox should identify with American scene and they should all join in the fight against pornography, against gays, and against women’s rights which really means immorality; women’s rights mean mixed dormitories in the colleges, mixed barracks in the military. The United States military has already yielded long before the ERA was passed – right now military barracks are mixed. Rabbi Fsshel Todd

And so, it’s up to us to speak up and write letters; we must write to congressmen and protest constantly. And not to vote for liberals! Don’t vote for a liberal! Reagan is running now; it’s an opportunity. He’s a decent man. Of course I’m not going to put an OK on him and say a kosher l’mehadrin min hamehadrin, but as far as goyishe candidates go, everybody should work for Reagan [President Donald J. Trump]. Forget about being a Democrat, forget about your party affiliation, forget about the private deals. Some institutions make private deals with the politicians and they sell their vote or the votes of the Jews; don’t listen to them! Make it your business that the Jewish people should vote for Reagan – he’s more conservative and more decent than the others – because we have to fight for decency. It’s our big job today. Adapted from TAPE # 308 (March 1980) by Yeshiva Pirchei Shoshanim.

Rabbi Fishel Todd

Shulchan Aruch Project

Parsha Vayishev Rabbi Fishel Todd

 

Rabbi Fishel Todd

Everything Is Planned Above

These are the generations of Ya’akov Yoseph was seventeen years old. As a lad he would feed the flock with his brothers the sons of Bilhah, and the sons of Zilpah, his father’s wives; and Yoseph brought evil reports [about his brothers] to his father. (BERESHIS 37:2)

A valuable coat was once stolen from the Rebbitzen of the famous author of the Chemdas Shlomo. It was subsequently discovered that the thief was one of the people who received a monthly charitable stipend from the Rabbi. Later, the stolen coat was returned by a merchant who admitted that he had bought it from the thief.

When the matter became known, one of the wealthy people of the town spoke with the Rabbi saying, “You see, you always tell us to contribute to charity, and now we see that one of those people who we give to is none other than a lowly thief.”

The Rabbi sighed deeply, called to his secretary and asked, “Do you know where the thief lives?”

“Of course I do,” answered the secretary.

“Well then,” said the Rabbi, “Do not forget to go out to find him next month so we can give him his monthly stipend from the tzedakah fund, since he will probably be too embarrassed to come on his own.”

Just as the Rabbi suspected, the following month, all the other poor people came to get their stipends, but the thief did not show up. The Rabbi reminded his secretary to go call the thief, and promise him that nothing would happen to him if he appeared before the Rabbi. The secretary gave over the message. The thief came, because the Rabbi was known as a tzaddik who would keep his word.

When the thief arrived, the Rabbi said to him, “How could you have transgressed an explicit prohibition of the Torah? I know that you did it because you were in dire need, but still, how could you have committed such a sin? It would have been much better if you had come to me and told me of your plight, rather than committing this sin. I want you to promise me that you will never again do such a thing.”

Rabbi Fishel Todd

After the poor man promised, the Rabbi gave him his regular monthly stipend, and added a bonus to it. (K’TZESHA-SHEMESHBI-GVURASO, p. 154)

The Rabbi viewed the theft as a test designed to determine whether he would become angry, or would recognize that the poor man was in dire straits. Similarly in marriage, many difficult instances arise that are trials for us, to see if we can control our behavior with our spouses.

“These are the generations of Ya’akov, Yoseph.” These generations were born only in the merit of Yoseph. Because of Yoseph, Ya’akov went to Lavan, to marry Rachel. These events were all in anticipation of Yoseph, as it is written, aAnd it was when Rachel gave birth to Yoseph.”2

Who brought Ya’akov down to Egypt? Yoseph. Who sustained them in Egypt? Yoseph. The sea split only in the merit of Yoseph, as it is written, “The waters saw You and they shuddered; You redeemed with Your powerful arm Your nation, the sons of Ya’akov and Yoseph.” 3 Even the Jordan River was split only because of Yoseph.

(YALKUT 140 par. Kesiv)

The midrash is telling us that when the Torah says, “These are the generations of Ya’akov, Yoseph,” 4 the idea is that Yoseph was the reason behind everything that happened to Ya’akov. How is it possible that the most important things that happened in Ya’akov’s life only came to be because of his son? What does it mean that these events were all in anticipation of Yoseph? What do the splitting of the Red Sea and the Jordan River have to do with Yoseph, who had died a long time before either event occurred?

A Jew must understand that he is a link in a chain of generations that began long before his birth and that will go on long after his death. It is very important for him to do the right things, since otherwise he is not only harming himself, but also causing a break in the chain.

Ya’akov realized that everything in his life was part of a chain that had a clear connection with his son Yoseph. This did not minimize his own tasks in life in any way, since if he had failed to perform his own special tasks there would not have been a continuation through to Yoseph. This was not just an incidental connection; rather it was very clear that everything in Ya’akov’s life was intimately tied to the next link in the chain, which was Yoseph.

Our Sages say that the events were put in place in anticipation of Yoseph. This means that everything in Ya’akov’s life was set up by G-d, but the only person who could make these acts ultimately meaningful was Yoseph. From this we learn, that it is not the events of a single lifetime that are of ultimate importance, but rather a Divine plan controls all events throughout the generations.

A person’s life is not in his own hands, rather it is planned down to the most minute detail by G-d. A person thinks that he, alone, is deciding where to work, or where to travel, but in reality all these thoughts and opportunities are implanted in his mind by G-d. That is what our Sages mean when they say, “Everything is in the hands of Heaven except for fear of Heaven.”5 G-d plans all the things that happen to you in your life, except for the choices you make between doing good and evil. Only these decisions are a product of your own free choice.

Who sustained the whole Jewish nation in Egypt? Yoseph. The splitting of the Red Sea was associated with Yoseph, even though he had died a long time earlier. The remains of Yoseph were with the Jewish people when they needed to cross through the Red Sea, and it was the merit of Yoseph that allowed the miracle of the splitting of the Red Sea to occur. The tremendous piety he exhibited when he was alone with Potiphar’s wife, caused such a stir in Heaven, that this merit had the power, generations later, to split the sea. We can learn from here what great power good deeds can yield. Even though Yoseph had died many years earlier, his merit still brought about the redemption of the Jewish people by enabling them to pass through the sea. We should never underestimate our actions, as they can have effects for generations to come.

In the midrash, our Sages say that even the miracle of crossing the Jordan River when the Jewish nation entered the land of Israel, was in of Yoseph’s merit. This is not very well-known information. When Israel passed through the Red Sea the verse says, “And Moshe took the bones of Yoseph with him.”6 But there is no mention of Yoseph in the account of Israel crossing the Jordan River.7 Our Sages however, understood that his merit was the reason for that miracle.

Our Spouses Bring Us Spiritual Tests

Just as Yoseph was linked to all the things that happened to Ya’akov during his lifetime, so too, many things that happen during our lifetimes come about through our relationship with our spouses. We are constantly brought into all sorts of situations that are designed especially for us, to see if we will respect our spouses and treat them with honor. Many such situations are tremendous tests for us, since it is quite easy to criticize or become angry at one’s spouse. Therefore, the trial is much greater than we can imagine and the reward for controlling ourselves is equally great Rabbi Fishel Todd.

The next time your wife is late or dinner is not ready, reflect upon the idea that the whole reason this happened is because Heaven is waiting to see what your reaction will be. The next time your husband is not paying attention to what you are saying, consider that perhaps it is because G-d wants to see if you can control your temper and not become angry. Everything that occurs in life, especially between spouses, happens because G-d wants to give us an opportunity to prove ourselves in order that He can reward us when we succeed. Of course, He will have to punish us if we choose to behave inappropriately.

The trials that confront us at home are much more subtle than trials that we face outside the home. At home, a person feels that he has the right to act any way he wishes. We feel we have the right to be angry at our spouse, since this is not a stranger to whom we must behave courteously. But this erroneous way of thinking stems from the yetzer hara which is constantly trying to trick us. In reality, being at home with our spouses actually requires that we retain at least the same spiritual standards that we strive for when we are away from home. Behaving properly with our spouses is a tremendous responsibility, and we must take it seriously.

A wife’s tears are taken very seriously in G-d’s eyes, and it is a terrible sin to cause one’s wife aggravation. If we realize that all difficulties which we face in life, whether inside the home or out, are trials that were intentionally placed before us by Divne plan, we will be more able to respond correctly. This decision to act properly is what G-d anticipates from us.

Rabbi Fishel Todd

http://shulchanaruchproject.com

1. Bereshis 37:2
2. Bereshis 30:25
3. Tehillim 77:17,16
4. Bereshis 37:2
5. Bereshis 13:19
6. Shemos 13:19
7. Yehoshua Ch 4

Parsha Vashilach Rabbi Fishel Todd

Shulchan Aruch Project

Rabbi Fishel Todd

Did Rashi rely only on Onkelos’ translation?

 

nis’ah venelechah (Gen. 33:12) This phrase means either ‘we will travel and we will proceed’ or ‘Travel! and we will proceed.’ The problem is that the Nun of nis’ah may be a prefix (as the Nun of venelechah certainly is and means ‘we will’) or it may be part of the root of nis’ah (in which case the verb is an imperative, Travel!). R’ A. ibn Ezra and R’ D. Kimche mention both possibilities. R’ Levi ben Gershon seems to opt for ‘we will.’ Rashi however writes nis’ah like shim’ah tefilati (Psalms 102:2) ‘Listen to my prayer,’ shilchah hanaar (Gen. 43:8) ‘Send the lad’ which is like shema, shelach, so too here nis’ah is like nesa and the Nun of nis’ah is part of the root and the translation (quoting Onkelos) is ‘Travel! and we will proceed’ Esav said to Yaakov: Travel from here! and we will proceed.

At first sight it is attractive to read the two Nuns as parallel, both to be read as future first person plural ‘we will.’ Of the classical commentators who deal with the phrase, one prefers this interpretation, while two others give both meanings equal weight. Why does Rashi give preference to the other possibility?

R’ E. Mizrachi (15th-16th cent.), Mira Dachya (discussion of grammar in Rashi, 18th cent.), Meirat Einayim (quoted by R’ Chavel), and Leshon Chayim (discussion of grammar in Rashi, Jerusalem, 1970), each in his own style, argue that it is because there is no Dagesh in the Samech of nis’ah. They state that if the Nun were a prefix, the Nun of the root would be missing, and there would need to be a Dagesh in the Samech of nis’ah.

However, R’ M. Yaffe (16th-17th cent.) in Levush Ha’Orah, answers R’ E. Mizrachi by pointing out that we never find a Dagesh in the Samech of vayisa when the Samech has a Sheva (i.e. vayis’u). It would seem that the later authors who took the same view as R’ E. Mizrachi overlooked this point in the Levush. Thus the original question stands. Why does Rashi give preference to the possibility that nis’ah means ‘Travel!’? My original answer was that Rashi followed Onkelos. However that only pushes the question back to Onkelos. ‘Why does Onkelos give preference to the possibility that nis’ah means ‘Travel!’?’ The answer in the Levush is based on the text itself. The word ‘travel’ is relevant to Yaakov who was on his way from one place to another. But for Esav who had only come to welcome Yaakov and was returning home, the word ‘travel’ was not appropriate. Therefore Onkelos and Rashi prefer the option by which the word nis’ah is in the singular and refers only to Yaakov – ‘Travel!’

R’ Chanoch Oppenheim wrote ‘It bothered me that the word Raban that was only used for a few generations and only in reference to the Nassi, should be used as the shoresh [of rabbanim]. By the time of Rebbi, the Nassi was no longer given this title. Therefore, why should such a limited word be used for the plural of “Rav?” An ‘adam chashuv’ suggested that the meaning of “Raban” means “our teacher.” If the plural would’ve been “Rabim” it would simply mean Rabbis. Perhaps chazal were stressing the idea that these are not simply a group of learned scholars, rather they are our teachers. It is with this perspective that chazal desired that we view our Rabanim’.

Further to last week’s discussion of vayifga bamakom, R’ M. Eisemann of Kiryat Sefer wrote: Regarding R’ A. ibn Ezra’s comment there that nowhere in the Tenach does makom mean Omnipresent, he refers to ‘Derech Hachaim’ in the verse ki kol shulchanot male’u ki tzoah beli makom (Isaiah 28:8) which states that although all the commentators on the Tenach explain the verse as did R’ A. ibn Ezra, nevertheless elsewhere there are many who explained makom as meaning the Holy One Blessed be He. The verse is quoted in Pirkei Avot (3:4) and there it is explained as Omnipresent by Bartenura, Rashi (in the Gemara), Tiferet Yisrael, Derech Hachaim (Maharal Mi-Prague), and R’ Yona (partly).

R’ Eisemann makes a further point. All editions of Rashi on the Torah refer to the verse al tifga bi (Jer. 7:16). However in Chulin (91b) Rashi refers to a totally different verse al tifge’i bi (Ruth 1:15). The word bi refers to the speaker, Ruth herself, and thus there is no reason to regard the parallel word bamakom to be a reference to God. Thus there is good reason to regard vayifga as meaning ‘prayer’ and leave bamakom with its plain meaning ‘at the place.’

Further to the meaning of Vav HaHipuch R’ Eisemann sent me ‘an excerpt from HaRechasim LeVik’ah by R’ Yehudah Leib Shapira, a very reliable book, first published in Altona 1815.’ This passage criticizes a translator who left out the ‘and’ aspect of Vav HaHipuch and translated them as though they were the beginning of the passage. Thus for Vayomer peloni or for vayelech peloni he wrote ‘So and so said’ or ‘So and so went’ and this damages the meaning and the language. For most of these Vavs connect the current item to the item before it as is well known (Vayera 18).

“Hatzileni Na Miyad Achi Miyad Eisav” “Save me please from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Eisav (Eisau)”

Yaakov (Jacob) stood in mortal danger. His evil brother Eisav, jealous over the blessing Yaakov had received from their father, was preparing to attack him. Yaakov prayed to Hashem that he should be delivered from Eisav’s hands.

In actuality, Yaakov faced a two-fold peril. On one hand, Eisav posed a serious physical threat. On the other hand, peace with Eisav could jeopardize Yaakov and his family in the spiritual sense. Fraternizing with the wicked Eisav would leave them open to be influenced by his morally decadent ways.

Yaakov therefore prayed to be spared from both dangers. “Save me please from the hand of my brother”, alludes to Yaakov’s wish that he be protected from the negative influence of Eisav in the event that he makes overtures of brotherly love. “From the hand of Eisav” refers to his request that he be spared from a man whose name has become synonymous with physical threat – Eisav.

 

PARSHAT VAYEITZEI 5773 Rabbi Fishel Todd

PARSHAT VAYEITZEI 5773: D’VAR TORAH

Rabbi FIshel Todd

Parashat Vayeitzei appears to be the first in the middle of the three parshiot that focus on Yaakov Avinu – the Patriarch Jacob. The first – Toldot – sets the scene and escalates the tension between Jacob and Esau. Firstly over the birthright, and secondly, with the blessing. Jacob has to leave home and the Holy Land in a hurry, to the hospitality of Laban some eight hundred kilometers to the north. The second parasha – this week’s – is the bridging ‘roller coaster’. G-d promises him His protection wherever he goes. But he still has to endure falling in love with Rachel and his uncle holding her back, ‘excusing himself’ with local custom. And his success as a cattle breeder arouses Laban’s family’s jealousy to the degree that he has to leave – again in a hurry – with an enraged Laban in hot pursuit. And the greatest tension of all in the next parasha – Esau coming to meet him with four hundred men, which eventually gives way to Jacob’s homecoming and (finally, albeit temporarily), literally ‘Jacob living in quietude and at ease, with none to make him afraid’ (c.f. Jer. 46:27).

In short, this week’s Parasha is one of temporary – though spectacular – trials and tribulations, towards a greater goal.

The next three parshiot – are in the same rhythm; and this time the focus is on Joseph and his brothers, Jacob’s sons. The first – Vayeishev – sets the scene and escalates the tension: more than once. With the dreams and Joseph’s narrowly escaping death, and being sold into slavery. And his rising from a humble slave to the position of Potiphar’s manager, getting him the ‘attention’ of Potifphar’s wife, and her allegations of Joseph ‘getting too close’ – following which Joseph finds himself at the bottom of the Egyptian dungeons. The second parasha – Miketz – is again the bridging ‘roller coaster’; his rise to the top of Pharaoh’s court, his brothers having to make ‘over-frequent journeys’ between Canaan and Egypt for ‘high-tension-charged’ reasons – finishing on a note where Benjamin is to be taken into permanent Egyptian slavery. And again – with Judah’s impassioned plea rising to the highest point of the tension opening the following parasha, the truth emerges that ‘Joseph is still alive and he is a ruler in the land of Egypt’ (45:26), and the family is finally re-united and reconciled.

In short, Miketz – the parallel parasha to this week’s – is in the same mold. Like Vayeitzei, it goes through temporary – though spectacular – trials and tribulations, towards a greater goal.

Vayeitzei and Miketz have the distinction of not only being amongst the longest parshiot in the Torah, but have the joint uniqueness of being written in the Sefer Torah without a break – in one continuous prose paragraph. No other parasha in the Torah – however long or short – contains that characteristic. They are all broken up – as Rashi elsewhere (to Lev. 1:10) points out – to allow ‘pause for thinking it over’ between section and section.

Not so with Vayeitzei, not so with Miketz. Despite their great length, there are no pauses to catch breath and ‘think things over’.

This arrangement brings an important message. Many honest people who strive to their great and worthy goals in life find themselves on the seemingly interminable lonely ‘path less trodden’, with tensions, trials, tribulations, and a long series of frustrations. The message is – like this week’s parasha – ‘Don’t pause! Don’t look behind’. Press on, with your compass pointing to those great goals and destinies which will become yours in due course – and only then, on arrival, can you sit and contemplate the long journey, whose ‘trials and tribulations’ will finally make sense as the dots join themselves all together.

‘I will make you My bride forever. I will make you My bride [in reward for] your righteousness, justice, kindness, and compassion. I will make you a bride in reward for your faith. Then you will know G-d.’ (Hosea 2:21-22)

Guided Tour…

The prophet Hosea preached to the Ten Tribes in the northern kingdom of Israel during the prosperous reign of Jeroboam II – after whose death came the troubled times leading to their final fall to Assyria in 721 BCE. His Divine revelations focused on their pagan practices, and their infidelity towards G-d and their own traditions. The Talmud (Pesachim 87a) brings a tradition, creating the background to the prophecy. G-d told Hosea that Israel had sinned, to which the prophet replied: “All the world is Yours. If they are untrustworthy, exchange them for another nation.”

G-d replied to him: “Go and marry a prostitute who has conceived children from her prostitution, because the Land strays from G-d.” (1:2). This opening chapter of Hosea relates that he had three children from this marriage, and was instructed by G-d give them names of such a nature that they would reveal G-d’s plans for the wayward northern kingdom. The first was a son – which He ordered to be called ‘Jezreel’, meaning that G-d would gather in the exiled Israelites and ‘plant’ them in their Land. That would, however, be in the distant future only. The second was a daughter called ‘Lo-Ruchamah’ – ‘Object of No Mercy.’ That was near to the present: G-d would no longer show mercy to unrepentant Israelites. And the third – the youngest son – was ordered to be called ‘Lo-Ammi’ – ‘Not My People’. That also concerned the present – a statement that the Israelites had forfeited their right to be the Chosen People.

The Talmud (supra 87b) interjects that at that point G-d commanded Hosea to turn his wife and three children out of his home. Then – only then – did Hosea realize his grave mistake in having made a similar suggestion to the Almighty: “All the world is Yours. If they are untrustworthy, exchange them for another nation.”

This forms the scenery for the Haftara – in which Hosea pleads with G-d to have mercy on the Israelites once more. Understanding the depth of his error in speaking ill of his own people, he gives his own blessing that the Israelites will be as numerous as the grains of sand on the seashore (2:1). Their grave faults will be put right: Israel, like the straying wife, will be loved once again. The children’s names will change to ‘Ammi’ – ‘My People’, and ‘Ruhama’ – ‘Object of Mercy.’

That, however, is for the future. The message for the immediate present was simple: Hosea tells the children: “Rebuke your mother” to live faithfully (2:4) for if she does not, she and the children themselves will be disowned. She consorts with other men because she sees them as supplying ‘my bread and my water, my wool and my linen, my oil and my drink.’ (2:7) She will find that they betray her, leaving her abandoned, vulnerable, and utterly helpless. She will then yearn to return to her first husband, but he will not embrace her. Instead, he ‘will uncover her shame in the sight of her lovers’ (2:11), blighting ‘her vines and fig trees, about which she said “these are my fees which her lovers gave me.”‘ She will lose her joyous festivals, which are G-d’s true festivals, as well as the festivals of the pagan worship of Baal (2:13,15) with which she tried to replace them, leaving her with nothing. For she, and the subject of this object lesson, the Israelites themselves, abused the wealth given to them by their ‘lovers’. Israel abused its G-d given wealth by using silver and gold for Baal-worship (2:10).

This dejection will give way to a new era. The wife in the parable and the Israelites in real life will be ‘charmed’ (2:16) – in the case of the latter, G-d will instill a desire to repent and come close to Him (c.f. Deut. 4:29). They will be taken to the ‘desert’. Most commentaries understand this to mean the long period of exile, but Ibn Ezra suggests that it refers to a period that may well be part of living memory – to the land of Israel, which will have taken on the appearance of a desert. He will give her ‘vineyards and change the Valley of Affliction to the Opening of Hope.’ Significantly, the Targum advocates that these ‘vineyards’ are Israel’s spiritual leaders and the philanthropists: the necessary spiritual and economic elements to restore the people in harmony to the Land.

The Haftara concludes with a promise that Israel will be restored to its innocence. The cruel physical and wicked human forces will cease to trouble her, and she shall be G-d’s chosen in security and at ease. He will restore the His relationship with Israel as in the beginning: ‘I will make you My bride forever. I will make you My bride [in reward for] your righteousness, justice, kindness, and compassion. I will make you a bride in reward for your faith. Then you will know G-d.’ (2:21-22)

D’var Torah

The issue of G-d Who hates promiscuity ordering His prophet Hosea to marry a whore disturbed the commentators. The Rambam (Guide II:46), and Ibn Ezra maintain that he did not actually take a prostitute as a wife, but merely saw himself doing so in a prophetic vision. However, Abarbanel and later the Malbim take the narrative literally – he did form a union with such a woman of low repute, and the opening chapters of Hosea do mean what they say. Indeed, Abarbanel claims that the passages must be read that way in order to understand the true nature of prophecy. He writes:

“Those commentators have no claim in saying that, out of concern for the prophet’s honor, G-d would not have commanded Hosea to marry a harlot… G-d did not select the prophets in order to bestow honor upon them or raise them to the throne! No, he selected them for only one purpose: so that they would serve as His envoys in assisting His chosen people to repent for their sins. He commanded His prophets to do whatever He deemed necessary to reach this goal, regardless of their honor. Sometimes words were not sufficient; sometimes real actions were required to grab the people’s attention. Only in this manner would the prophet’s rebuke penetrate the people’s hearts, since that which a person sees with his eyes affects him for more that which he hears. Therefore, regardless of the fact that the prophet was a holy man, G-d commanded him to marry a harlot in order to illustrate that by worshiping idols, the Israelites had in fact done the same. In truth, it would have been fitting for Hosea to do even stranger things than marry a harlot if this would have helped dissuade the people from idolatry.”

Underlying this explanation is the notion that there are situations where the very mission of great personalities requires them to act in a way not normally associated with their position. Hosea being told to take a whore is one example. The story below – much nearer to our own times, serves to illustrate the same theme: a leader must be prepared to act in an unusual way in order to make the right impact on the community. In this case, the issue was not idolatry, but the importance of never doing good at the expense of others – never being a ‘tzadik’ (righteous person) at someone else’s expense.

Rabbi Israel Salanter (1810-1883) illustrated this above maxim with a personal experience, one of which had to do with Yom Kippur, of which he said:

“It is right and it is good that women go to the synagogue. It is true that the most important day of the year is Yom Kippur and that women should attend the Kol Nidrei (evening) service. But it is wrong that a woman attends that service if she leaves babies and young children at home without proper supervision.”

It once happened that Reb Israel was late for the Kol Nidrei service, so late in fact that members of the synagogue went in search of him. They found him in the home of a poor woman, rocking a baby’s cradle. “What is the matter, Rebbe?” they asked. “I was passing when I heard a baby crying,” Reb Israel replied, “I came in and found the mother had gone to synagogue leaving the tot in the care of the eldest daughter who is six or seven. I quietened the little one, but then the elder one begged me to stay because she was frightened of being all by herself.”

From the pulpit that evening he pointed out that the Mitzvah, the good deed, the mother thought she was doing by attending synagogue was more than negated by the sin she had committed in leaving her young children unattended.

Remember that Rabbi Israel Salanter was one of the greatest and most influential spiritual leaders of his day, indeed, of the entire modern era. He was neither a child minder nor a babysitter – most certainly not on Yom Kippur, when a vast community was waiting for him. He could no doubt have sent for someone to look after the children so that he could hurry along and not keep the congregation waiting.

But Reb Israel had a real message to give: one that was right and fitting for the ‘over-holy’ members of his congregation: never being a ‘tzadik’ at someone else’s expense! And like Hosea, he acted it out to ensure that his message would be remembered and internalized: “Why was the Rabbi late for Kol-Nidrei?” And that was underlined by the people’s having to wait for a long time until the proceedings of the evening began…

Rabbi Fishel Todd