The meaning of absolute freedom.
A word appears in this Parashat: dror. It’s the first time and last we will see it in the Torah with this particular meaning: freedom. As in absolute and pure freedom.
'Uhkrahtem dror baEretz leKol yeshVeyah' - 'And proclaim dror throughout the land to all it’s inhabitants'.
We know the word Chofesh as ‘free’ or ‘setting one free’. For instance in Deuteronomy 15:12 we find “And in the seventh year you shall let him go free”, but here the difference is that even if a slave goes free it is to return to another master somewhere else.
Unquestionably, ‘dror’ is linked to the Yovel year. The year of jubilee - Yovel, is all about freedom. In fact it is Ibn Ezra who looks at the word Yovel as ‘releasing’ - unlike Rashi who defines the word as 'sheep' and by extension ties it to the shofar.
And if you look at Parashat Behar carefully, you'll see that it teaches us what freedom actually is. It teaches us what the exact differences are between free and truly having freedom. It does that by commending us to set slaves free, just as we were set free as slaves. Yet out newly given freedom wasn't called dror during Yetziat Mitzrayim (exodus from Egypt). Weren't we free?
The answer may be found in the writings of Rabbi Bedersi, father of Rabbi Yedaya, at the end of the 13th Century, in where he compares ‘dror’ with the purity of the swallow, it being a ritually pure bird. Or, ‘dror’ as a word combined with oil or myrrh means pure in its finest form.
So, one could say that during the time of the exodus, we were literally given the road to freedom, but weren't free of corruption and doubts and did not achieve enough spiritual belief yet to achieve 'pure' freedom or shall we say ‘dror’.
It's not for nothing that Martin Buber calls ‘dror’ the ‘rare and dear word’.
Other proof that we're being taught here what freedom really is, is the referral to send the slave away. Buber writes in his native tongue: “Aber im Siebenten geht er in die Ledigung aus...”, “But in the seventh he shall go out free”. Followed later with: “Schicke ihn geledigt von dir weg” - “Send him to go free from you”.
It is Abravanel who sums up the obligation of the Yovel year in three parts:
1- setting all servants free as ‘Bnei Israel being set free in Egypt’
2- no harvesting nor sowing as “No harvesting nor sowing just as there was none at Mount Sinai”
3- all land returns to its original state as ‘Am Israel not owing any land in the Sinai’.
But Abravanel does not compare freeing a servant with the setting free of Am Israel. Instead, he considers achieving freedom only through studying Torah. (Bamidbar Rabba 10,21)
Back to Yovel.
It is powerful to realize that HaShem does not consider the gift of the exodus for Am Israel to be a true dror. And it’s even more remarkable to realize that we have been given that honor in the year of Yovel. We are to give dror and enjoy dror by setting our servants free, our land free and ourselves free. In a way, we get the chance to achieve true ‘dror’ every Yovel year. Translate this into today's scenario and then think of starting over. Think of shedding your material things. Think of setting your servants free (if you have any). Think of not chasing income. Think of bringing yourself back to a natural state.
Maybe it's what some call retirement.
The Torah calls it ‘dror’, only once.
Showing newest 20 of 23 posts from October 2009. Show older posts
Showing newest 20 of 23 posts from October 2009. Show older posts
Parashat Shmini
Aharonʼs Disaster.
This parashat is an unsolved mystery for the most part. Countless hours have been spent by our Sages and Rabbis over the ages trying to explain what happened on - what should have been a most joyous day. The eighth day, counting the seven days before as the days in which the Kohanim were to prepare for this big day (miluim), is also the first day of Nissan. A big day. The first and only dedication day for the Mishkan.
After years of yearning for a specific place to honor HaShem, after months and months of preparation, days of nervous last details and instructions, and hours of anticipation, the day starts with the exact delivery of various korbanot. In order for HaShem to appear, these offers are to be followed precisely. Aharon gets the honor to prepare the calf thatʼs to be offered, by many a Rabbi explained as a reminder of the sin of the golden calf. No surprise then that Aharon is the one to deliver it as if to state to Bnei Israel that even the highest of priests is not faultless.
Vayirah kavod HaShem el col Ha-Am, And the glory of Gʼd appeared to all the people. Just to understand this moment, we have to realize that human endeavors following HaShemʼs instructions, from broidery, to gold smiting, to architectural plans, to specific offerings, made it work. Through direct cooperation between Am Israel and HaShem, a structure was built in which Gʼd appeared as promised to all the people and not just Moshe Rabbenu. What a moment this must have been.
And then it happened.
Aharonʼs sons, Nadav and Avihu, young priests, take it upon themselves to offer a strange fire (esh zarah), with a certain incense. And the Torah follows this incident with the words: “which He commanded them not”, followed immediately with: “And there went fire out from before Gʼd and devoured them and they died before Gʼd.”
Just like that.
In an instant, a sin is followed by capital punishment. The Torah needs two sentences to write of this event. It takes Aharonʼs breath away and has puzzled practically all Sages and all Rabbis throughout the ages. From the text it is not clear to what extent Nadav and Avihu were in the wrong. For instance it is written “they came near…”, but we donʼt know if they entered the actual Sanctuary. They may not have, since HaShem had moments before shown Himself to the entire nation and would have had some kind of presence outside the Sanctuary. The second fault made by Nadav and Avihu was the strange fire. Not much is known about what exactly was strange about it and the word “zarah”, strange is strange in itself. It only describes that HaShem did not command it. The third fault was that of using incense, which was also not prescribed.
There was no warning here. Was this a sin so great that immediate death was the only answer HaShem could give? The Torah doesnʼt dwell on this situation but instead turns to Moshe to break the silence of Aharon. Moshe turns to him and explains: “This is it – that Gʼd spoke, saying: Through them that are nigh unto Me I will be sanctified, and before all the people I will be glorified.”
Sages and Rabbis have come to the conclusion, that both Nadav and Avihu served as a symbol that no one, especially those who are learned, and in this case blessed to be so close to HaShem, are above anyone. In fact, they are more closely scrutinized. And so, setting this example serves as a reminder that no one, not even Moshe is above any other member of Clal Israel. This becomes evident again later when Moshe Rabbenu is not allowed to enter Eretz Israel.
The question that stands out here is not what kind of sin Nadav and Avihu committed, but rather why they committed it. In Or HaHayim the judgement is that the men were “overwhelmed by joy…” (Sifra 24). The Biur tells us that “in their superabundant joy, they lost their judgement…”, and that “they acted on their own accord.” With other words, even if their heart was in the right place, they committed a sin by simply not following the commandments or volunteering acts that werenʼt commanded in the first place.
If we accept that they were joyous and did not do this out of malicious reasons, then why was the punishment so quick and fierce? Wasnʼt there time for a warning? Couldnʼt they have been hurt instead of killed? Moshe tries to explain to Aharon the way HaShem speaks through those that are near to him. Rashi explains it by stating that Moshe tells Aharon that “this House would be sanctified by those who are cherished by Gʼd and I thought it would be either through me or through you. Now I see that these (two sons) are greater than I or you.” Did Rashi intent to say here that both sons became korbanot themselves? That they served as an example for punishment and ultimate power of HaShem?
A Birkenau survivor by the name of Louis Bannet z”l, once told me that he could never again understand HaShem. That there was no explanation possible for a Gʼd who allowed that much suffering to His people during the Shoah. This man was my friend and I had no words for him. There is no answer for a Gʼd without rachmanut. Something we should search for on Yom HaShoah, the day after this coming Shabbat.
This parashat is an unsolved mystery for the most part. Countless hours have been spent by our Sages and Rabbis over the ages trying to explain what happened on - what should have been a most joyous day. The eighth day, counting the seven days before as the days in which the Kohanim were to prepare for this big day (miluim), is also the first day of Nissan. A big day. The first and only dedication day for the Mishkan.
After years of yearning for a specific place to honor HaShem, after months and months of preparation, days of nervous last details and instructions, and hours of anticipation, the day starts with the exact delivery of various korbanot. In order for HaShem to appear, these offers are to be followed precisely. Aharon gets the honor to prepare the calf thatʼs to be offered, by many a Rabbi explained as a reminder of the sin of the golden calf. No surprise then that Aharon is the one to deliver it as if to state to Bnei Israel that even the highest of priests is not faultless.
Vayirah kavod HaShem el col Ha-Am, And the glory of Gʼd appeared to all the people. Just to understand this moment, we have to realize that human endeavors following HaShemʼs instructions, from broidery, to gold smiting, to architectural plans, to specific offerings, made it work. Through direct cooperation between Am Israel and HaShem, a structure was built in which Gʼd appeared as promised to all the people and not just Moshe Rabbenu. What a moment this must have been.
And then it happened.
Aharonʼs sons, Nadav and Avihu, young priests, take it upon themselves to offer a strange fire (esh zarah), with a certain incense. And the Torah follows this incident with the words: “which He commanded them not”, followed immediately with: “And there went fire out from before Gʼd and devoured them and they died before Gʼd.”
Just like that.
In an instant, a sin is followed by capital punishment. The Torah needs two sentences to write of this event. It takes Aharonʼs breath away and has puzzled practically all Sages and all Rabbis throughout the ages. From the text it is not clear to what extent Nadav and Avihu were in the wrong. For instance it is written “they came near…”, but we donʼt know if they entered the actual Sanctuary. They may not have, since HaShem had moments before shown Himself to the entire nation and would have had some kind of presence outside the Sanctuary. The second fault made by Nadav and Avihu was the strange fire. Not much is known about what exactly was strange about it and the word “zarah”, strange is strange in itself. It only describes that HaShem did not command it. The third fault was that of using incense, which was also not prescribed.
There was no warning here. Was this a sin so great that immediate death was the only answer HaShem could give? The Torah doesnʼt dwell on this situation but instead turns to Moshe to break the silence of Aharon. Moshe turns to him and explains: “This is it – that Gʼd spoke, saying: Through them that are nigh unto Me I will be sanctified, and before all the people I will be glorified.”
Sages and Rabbis have come to the conclusion, that both Nadav and Avihu served as a symbol that no one, especially those who are learned, and in this case blessed to be so close to HaShem, are above anyone. In fact, they are more closely scrutinized. And so, setting this example serves as a reminder that no one, not even Moshe is above any other member of Clal Israel. This becomes evident again later when Moshe Rabbenu is not allowed to enter Eretz Israel.
The question that stands out here is not what kind of sin Nadav and Avihu committed, but rather why they committed it. In Or HaHayim the judgement is that the men were “overwhelmed by joy…” (Sifra 24). The Biur tells us that “in their superabundant joy, they lost their judgement…”, and that “they acted on their own accord.” With other words, even if their heart was in the right place, they committed a sin by simply not following the commandments or volunteering acts that werenʼt commanded in the first place.
If we accept that they were joyous and did not do this out of malicious reasons, then why was the punishment so quick and fierce? Wasnʼt there time for a warning? Couldnʼt they have been hurt instead of killed? Moshe tries to explain to Aharon the way HaShem speaks through those that are near to him. Rashi explains it by stating that Moshe tells Aharon that “this House would be sanctified by those who are cherished by Gʼd and I thought it would be either through me or through you. Now I see that these (two sons) are greater than I or you.” Did Rashi intent to say here that both sons became korbanot themselves? That they served as an example for punishment and ultimate power of HaShem?
A Birkenau survivor by the name of Louis Bannet z”l, once told me that he could never again understand HaShem. That there was no explanation possible for a Gʼd who allowed that much suffering to His people during the Shoah. This man was my friend and I had no words for him. There is no answer for a Gʼd without rachmanut. Something we should search for on Yom HaShoah, the day after this coming Shabbat.
Shabbat Chol Hamoed Pesach
What is the connection between Yeheskel Chapter 37 and Pesach?
Written in this Haftorah it reads:
“The hand of HaShem came upon me. He took me out by the spirit of the HaShem (ruach HaShem) and set me down in the valley. It was full of bones. He led me all around them; there were very many of them spread over the valley, and they were very dry (Yehezkel 37:1- 2).”
And then before Yehezkel’s eyes this happened:
“The breath entered them, and they came to life and stood up on their feet, a vast multitude (37:10).”
“These bones are the whole House of Israel. They say, 'Our bones are dried up, our hope is gone; we are doomed.' Prophecy, therefore, and say to them: Thus said the Lord God: I am going to open your graves and lift you out of your graves, O My people, and bring you to the land of Israel (37:11-12).”
The obvious observation is: both the Exodus and Yeheskel’s visions are about redemption. Another explanation comes from the Talmud (Sanhedrin 92b), where the belief is that the revived bones are those of the sons of Efraim whom were killed because they left Egypt to prematurely. They miscalculated the right time to leave Egypt.
So then why is Yeheskel to be read on this Shabbat when it is not precisely connected to Pesach?
The answer might come from another set of bones, those belonging to Yosef. Remember, Yosef made his brothers swear that should they leave Egypt, they would bring his bones with them, making the bones a symbol of redemption and hope. (Bereshit 13;19)
What really is the connecting theme here is the redemption in both situations. And the defenition of what successful redemption is.
In Mitzrayim we are carefully taught how the redemption took place, the right timing for it and the matzah as the symbol of haste that came with it. After all, one second past 18 minutes and a matzah turns to chametz. So redemption might need careful planning, but when the time is there, one should not waste time either.
Moshe asks Yosef directly if he’s coming or not, adding that it is up to him. As if Moshe cannot know if it is an individual’s right time for redemption.
He said to him: 'Yosef, Yosef, The time has arrived which the Holy One Blessed be He swore I would redeem you, and the [time of the] oath which you made Israel take has arrived. If you show yourself – good, if not - behold we are clean of your oath.'
(Talmud - Sotah 13a)
Through his prophet Yeheskel, HaShem wanted to deliver a message of hope, of revival to Israel. He wanted it understood that He was in control and only He could give life and sustain it. The power of HaShem is evidenced in his communication with the prophet Yeheskel and the message which was delivered.
That’s something you could also say about the relationship between HaShem and Moshe: both Moshe and Yeheskel are messengers.
Since we’re talking bones, let’s go a few thousand years ahead to the archeological findings of bones in Egypt.
Bones are found in certain area’s of Egypt at a ratio of 3 women to 1 man. And in certain area’s 65% of the bones are children.
Without knowledge of the Torah this is hard to explain. However we know why. We know that boys were to be killed by Pharaoh’s order.
Further proof that the Exodus story factually took place, can be found in the Elephantine Papyri; A collection of ancient Jewish manuscripts dating from the 5th Century BCE mostly written in Aramaic and scattered among various museums including the Brooklyn Museum. These are carefully written documents about daily Jewish life and there’s one part that’s called the “Passover Letter”, a handbook on how to keep Pesach, that’s in the Egyptian Museum of Berlin.
On the back of one of these Papyri called Brooklyn 35.1446 (held in the Brooklyn Museum), you can find a list of Jewish sounding names: Yissachar, Asher, Sjafra, Menachem etc. On the front we find an order from the Pharaoh to move a group of slaves from one place to another. One of the names on the list is Siphrah, one of the two midwives who helped prevent the killing of the children -Shemot 1:15-21.
On wall drawings in caves and in hieroglyphic writings one can see the depiction of slaves having a lighter skin color than the Egyptians themselves.
One other Papyrus scroll called Harris A, column 75, line 1 through 9, we read about the description of a man of Semitic background who becomes Prince of Egypt and who “teaches” the people.
In “El Arish”, a black plaque was found made from pure granite on which the story of 9 black days is written during which no one left their house and one couldn’t see each other nor the gods.
And archeologists are dumbfounded by the amount of chariot parts, human bones found at what they call the underwater bridge at Nuweiba in Egypt, the exact area to be believed the spot where Moshe and Bnei Israel crossed.
Back to the Bones of Ephraim. The Talmud sees them as symbols of a resurrected nation. One could say the re-birth of a nation. Isn’t that what Yitziat Mitzrayim is all about?
Ilana Goldstein Saks, formerly from Bar-Ilan, a teacher at the Women’s Beit Midrash in Efrat writes;
“The midrash suggests that although they erred with their lack of caution, and consequently suffered, their efforts were not disregarded. Redemption, ultimately, will come to those who look at the world with open eyes and are poised for action. The exiles in Babylonia, to whom Yehezkel spoke his comforting words, only needed to recall the exodus from Egypt to be assured that God would remember them, even when they felt so forgotten. All the more so, the image of the revived bones of the first unsuccessful exodus would remind them, and us, that even when hope seems so distant and actions so useless, one should never despair.”
Written in this Haftorah it reads:
“The hand of HaShem came upon me. He took me out by the spirit of the HaShem (ruach HaShem) and set me down in the valley. It was full of bones. He led me all around them; there were very many of them spread over the valley, and they were very dry (Yehezkel 37:1- 2).”
And then before Yehezkel’s eyes this happened:
“The breath entered them, and they came to life and stood up on their feet, a vast multitude (37:10).”
“These bones are the whole House of Israel. They say, 'Our bones are dried up, our hope is gone; we are doomed.' Prophecy, therefore, and say to them: Thus said the Lord God: I am going to open your graves and lift you out of your graves, O My people, and bring you to the land of Israel (37:11-12).”
The obvious observation is: both the Exodus and Yeheskel’s visions are about redemption. Another explanation comes from the Talmud (Sanhedrin 92b), where the belief is that the revived bones are those of the sons of Efraim whom were killed because they left Egypt to prematurely. They miscalculated the right time to leave Egypt.
So then why is Yeheskel to be read on this Shabbat when it is not precisely connected to Pesach?
The answer might come from another set of bones, those belonging to Yosef. Remember, Yosef made his brothers swear that should they leave Egypt, they would bring his bones with them, making the bones a symbol of redemption and hope. (Bereshit 13;19)
What really is the connecting theme here is the redemption in both situations. And the defenition of what successful redemption is.
In Mitzrayim we are carefully taught how the redemption took place, the right timing for it and the matzah as the symbol of haste that came with it. After all, one second past 18 minutes and a matzah turns to chametz. So redemption might need careful planning, but when the time is there, one should not waste time either.
Moshe asks Yosef directly if he’s coming or not, adding that it is up to him. As if Moshe cannot know if it is an individual’s right time for redemption.
He said to him: 'Yosef, Yosef, The time has arrived which the Holy One Blessed be He swore I would redeem you, and the [time of the] oath which you made Israel take has arrived. If you show yourself – good, if not - behold we are clean of your oath.'
(Talmud - Sotah 13a)
Through his prophet Yeheskel, HaShem wanted to deliver a message of hope, of revival to Israel. He wanted it understood that He was in control and only He could give life and sustain it. The power of HaShem is evidenced in his communication with the prophet Yeheskel and the message which was delivered.
That’s something you could also say about the relationship between HaShem and Moshe: both Moshe and Yeheskel are messengers.
Since we’re talking bones, let’s go a few thousand years ahead to the archeological findings of bones in Egypt.
Bones are found in certain area’s of Egypt at a ratio of 3 women to 1 man. And in certain area’s 65% of the bones are children.
Without knowledge of the Torah this is hard to explain. However we know why. We know that boys were to be killed by Pharaoh’s order.
Further proof that the Exodus story factually took place, can be found in the Elephantine Papyri; A collection of ancient Jewish manuscripts dating from the 5th Century BCE mostly written in Aramaic and scattered among various museums including the Brooklyn Museum. These are carefully written documents about daily Jewish life and there’s one part that’s called the “Passover Letter”, a handbook on how to keep Pesach, that’s in the Egyptian Museum of Berlin.
On the back of one of these Papyri called Brooklyn 35.1446 (held in the Brooklyn Museum), you can find a list of Jewish sounding names: Yissachar, Asher, Sjafra, Menachem etc. On the front we find an order from the Pharaoh to move a group of slaves from one place to another. One of the names on the list is Siphrah, one of the two midwives who helped prevent the killing of the children -Shemot 1:15-21.
On wall drawings in caves and in hieroglyphic writings one can see the depiction of slaves having a lighter skin color than the Egyptians themselves.
One other Papyrus scroll called Harris A, column 75, line 1 through 9, we read about the description of a man of Semitic background who becomes Prince of Egypt and who “teaches” the people.
In “El Arish”, a black plaque was found made from pure granite on which the story of 9 black days is written during which no one left their house and one couldn’t see each other nor the gods.
And archeologists are dumbfounded by the amount of chariot parts, human bones found at what they call the underwater bridge at Nuweiba in Egypt, the exact area to be believed the spot where Moshe and Bnei Israel crossed.
Back to the Bones of Ephraim. The Talmud sees them as symbols of a resurrected nation. One could say the re-birth of a nation. Isn’t that what Yitziat Mitzrayim is all about?
Ilana Goldstein Saks, formerly from Bar-Ilan, a teacher at the Women’s Beit Midrash in Efrat writes;
“The midrash suggests that although they erred with their lack of caution, and consequently suffered, their efforts were not disregarded. Redemption, ultimately, will come to those who look at the world with open eyes and are poised for action. The exiles in Babylonia, to whom Yehezkel spoke his comforting words, only needed to recall the exodus from Egypt to be assured that God would remember them, even when they felt so forgotten. All the more so, the image of the revived bones of the first unsuccessful exodus would remind them, and us, that even when hope seems so distant and actions so useless, one should never despair.”
Ki Tissa 2010
The Anger of Moshe.
Upon seeing the Golden Calf, Moshe Rabbenu breaks the Tablets immediately; he smashes them to pieces.
Something is wrong here. Moshe Rabbenu, our greatest ambassador ever; He, who was so convinced that he wasn’t worthy enough to bring us out of Mitzrayim at first, pleaded with HaShem not to pick him; He who then became the sales representative of HaShem and vice versa, the salesman of Am-Israel - He smashes the tablets written by Ha-Shem personally in a moment of anger.
As it is written;
“Ve-Haluchot Ma-aseh Elohim neimah. Ve-Hamichtav michtav Elohim, Hu charut al-Haluchot.” “And the Tablets were the handiwork of Ha-Shem, and the writing was the writing of Ha-Shem, graven upon the Tablets.”
So Moses knows the importance and value of these Tablets to Ha-Shem and Am Israel.
That Moses was angry, all Sages agree, but the question is what was the anger for?
Sforno offers this thought: “ He (Moshe), thought that when he came to Am Israel they would have already have repented. He did not expect to find them rejoicing in the sin. Dancing was not what he expected. This is what made him irate.
HaShem had prepared Moshe for the Golden Calf, yet Moshe wanted to give Am Israel the benefit of the doubt.
Just before, coming down the Mountain, Joshua greeted him. Joshua, who had waited there loyally for Moshe to return and had not been back to the camp. When they approached the camp and heard the noise, Joshua expressed the unknown nature of the noise, while Moshe just explained it as “singing”.
Rambam explains this as Moshe’s humility and his reluctance to speak bad of Am Israel.
And before that, on the top of the mountain, Moshe gives Ha-Shem a masterful pleading argument;
“…for it is a stiff-necked people; pardon therefore our iniquity and our sin.”
As Moshe Rabbenu argues with HaShem that the Egyptians will be able to say that Ha-Shem took his people out of Mitzrayim only to kill them in the mountains, thereby weakening His stature among the Egyptians,
Am Israel is busy deceiving Ha-Shem and their leader Moshe below.
Back to Moshe’s anger.
How is it possible that a man like Moshe allows himself to lose his conduct and smashes that what Ha-Shem himself has written?
How come Moshe doesn’t confront his brother and makes him responsible? You know, have a brother to brother conversation?
Most Sages agree with the thought that Moshe wanted to shock Am Israel. Says Isaac Arama; Moshe saw that the calf was indeed a calf and broke the Tablets under the mount to shame them.”
In the Ha’amek Davar we find: “…He broke a unique treasure before their eyes.”
So we know that Moshe knew that the Torah, the Tablets are most holy. That he, the messenger is to deliver them to Am Israel and yet, he breaks the Tablets and with that, his promise to Ha-Shem as well.
Is this a tit for tat? Is the breaking of the Tablets the sin that balances the sin of the calf? Does Moshe do this to show Am Israel that what they’ve done is exactly the same in terms of degree of crime?
Is Moshe Rabbenu holding up a mirror?
Ramban avoids going here. Ramban concentrates on what caused Moshe to act this way; “He could not control himself…”
But he saw the Calf and he broke the Tablets within the same sentence. There was no moment to think.
Yet, on his way back from the mountain, he could have had plenty of time to think. And when Joshua pointed out the strange noise, Moshe was dismissive.
But Ramban could not see a man so full of love for Ha-Shem, Israel and Torah, to plan something so dreadful.
Interestingly, it’s Meshach Chochmah who offers an in-between explanation that it was Moshe’s frustration that the People saw him as part god. That they couldn’t except the Torah as a whole without Moshe.
That even if Moshe had not returned, the Torah is enough and theirs to have. For this reason God approved of Moses’ action.
Rashba calls the broken pieces that find their place in the Ark, the “accuser” and the second and whole Tablets the “defender” thereby also concluding that the breaking was valued by Ha-Shem.
One thing is very clear, of all the actions of Moshe Rabbenu ordered by Ha-Shem, this one is the most important one. Sages have said that Moshe came down the mountain happy and positive, holding the Tablets proudly. This was to be the physical welcoming of the Torah, more important that the exodus from Mitzrayim and more important than the entering of Eretz Israel. This was the most important moment to Moshe Rabbenu and Am Israel, and they blew it.
It was enough for the most Chassid of all men Am Israel ever had on their side, to blow up.
Which in itself is a lesson for all time; those who defile the Torah, lose Moshe Rabbenu, the best friend they ever had, in an instant. For those, all hope is no more.
Upon seeing the Golden Calf, Moshe Rabbenu breaks the Tablets immediately; he smashes them to pieces.
Something is wrong here. Moshe Rabbenu, our greatest ambassador ever; He, who was so convinced that he wasn’t worthy enough to bring us out of Mitzrayim at first, pleaded with HaShem not to pick him; He who then became the sales representative of HaShem and vice versa, the salesman of Am-Israel - He smashes the tablets written by Ha-Shem personally in a moment of anger.
As it is written;
“Ve-Haluchot Ma-aseh Elohim neimah. Ve-Hamichtav michtav Elohim, Hu charut al-Haluchot.” “And the Tablets were the handiwork of Ha-Shem, and the writing was the writing of Ha-Shem, graven upon the Tablets.”
So Moses knows the importance and value of these Tablets to Ha-Shem and Am Israel.
That Moses was angry, all Sages agree, but the question is what was the anger for?
Sforno offers this thought: “ He (Moshe), thought that when he came to Am Israel they would have already have repented. He did not expect to find them rejoicing in the sin. Dancing was not what he expected. This is what made him irate.
HaShem had prepared Moshe for the Golden Calf, yet Moshe wanted to give Am Israel the benefit of the doubt.
Just before, coming down the Mountain, Joshua greeted him. Joshua, who had waited there loyally for Moshe to return and had not been back to the camp. When they approached the camp and heard the noise, Joshua expressed the unknown nature of the noise, while Moshe just explained it as “singing”.
Rambam explains this as Moshe’s humility and his reluctance to speak bad of Am Israel.
And before that, on the top of the mountain, Moshe gives Ha-Shem a masterful pleading argument;
“…for it is a stiff-necked people; pardon therefore our iniquity and our sin.”
As Moshe Rabbenu argues with HaShem that the Egyptians will be able to say that Ha-Shem took his people out of Mitzrayim only to kill them in the mountains, thereby weakening His stature among the Egyptians,
Am Israel is busy deceiving Ha-Shem and their leader Moshe below.
Back to Moshe’s anger.
How is it possible that a man like Moshe allows himself to lose his conduct and smashes that what Ha-Shem himself has written?
How come Moshe doesn’t confront his brother and makes him responsible? You know, have a brother to brother conversation?
Most Sages agree with the thought that Moshe wanted to shock Am Israel. Says Isaac Arama; Moshe saw that the calf was indeed a calf and broke the Tablets under the mount to shame them.”
In the Ha’amek Davar we find: “…He broke a unique treasure before their eyes.”
So we know that Moshe knew that the Torah, the Tablets are most holy. That he, the messenger is to deliver them to Am Israel and yet, he breaks the Tablets and with that, his promise to Ha-Shem as well.
Is this a tit for tat? Is the breaking of the Tablets the sin that balances the sin of the calf? Does Moshe do this to show Am Israel that what they’ve done is exactly the same in terms of degree of crime?
Is Moshe Rabbenu holding up a mirror?
Ramban avoids going here. Ramban concentrates on what caused Moshe to act this way; “He could not control himself…”
But he saw the Calf and he broke the Tablets within the same sentence. There was no moment to think.
Yet, on his way back from the mountain, he could have had plenty of time to think. And when Joshua pointed out the strange noise, Moshe was dismissive.
But Ramban could not see a man so full of love for Ha-Shem, Israel and Torah, to plan something so dreadful.
Interestingly, it’s Meshach Chochmah who offers an in-between explanation that it was Moshe’s frustration that the People saw him as part god. That they couldn’t except the Torah as a whole without Moshe.
That even if Moshe had not returned, the Torah is enough and theirs to have. For this reason God approved of Moses’ action.
Rashba calls the broken pieces that find their place in the Ark, the “accuser” and the second and whole Tablets the “defender” thereby also concluding that the breaking was valued by Ha-Shem.
One thing is very clear, of all the actions of Moshe Rabbenu ordered by Ha-Shem, this one is the most important one. Sages have said that Moshe came down the mountain happy and positive, holding the Tablets proudly. This was to be the physical welcoming of the Torah, more important that the exodus from Mitzrayim and more important than the entering of Eretz Israel. This was the most important moment to Moshe Rabbenu and Am Israel, and they blew it.
It was enough for the most Chassid of all men Am Israel ever had on their side, to blow up.
Which in itself is a lesson for all time; those who defile the Torah, lose Moshe Rabbenu, the best friend they ever had, in an instant. For those, all hope is no more.
Ki Tissa
I’m watching Law & Order, episode 1000 BCE.
The Scene: an impressive courtroom quite different from most. This one is particularly large and has a group of about three thousand defendants sitting on one side. On the other side, at the table usually reserved for the prosecution, I see an unusually large contingency of prosecutors. I recognize Rashi, Ramban, Arbravanel and many others. Also represented at that table are Midrash and Talmudic writers.
On the other side I find just one lawyer representing the defense: Judah Ha-Levi, who is sitting all by himself.
On the bench there’s no one. However there’s something strange about the impressive chair usually filled by a judge, it’s lit up in a strange way.
The rest of the courtroom is filled by scholars and rabbis; I recognize Nehama Leibowitz, and in awe I recognize Moses sitting by himself.
For the prosecution, Rashi, played by Sam Waterston who normally plays District Attorney Jack McCoy, rises up from his chair and calls Aaron Ha-Cohen to the stand.
Aaron, after affirming the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, seats himself behind a wooden balustrade.
Rashi begins with the simple question: “How could this disaster happen before you?”
Aaron: “They asked me to supply them with a leader like Moses, not an actual g-d.”
Rashi concludes: “Didn’t they acknowledged other g-ds as well?” He then turns to the jury , doesn’t wait for Aaron to answer the question and says: “Acknowledge, can only apply to actual worship of idols.”
I see Ramban and other prosecutors nodding their heads in agreement.
“Objection!” cries out Judah Ha-Levi, as he jumps out of his chair, “Heresay...”
No sign from the bench.
Rashi turns to Aaron and asks: “Did you not give them the idea to use gold?”
Aaron: “They said, rise, make us a g-d.” “And I said whoever has gold, strip it off and give it to me and I threw it into the fire.”
Aaron looks at Moses in the audience and says: “Do not be annoyed with me”.
Avraham b. Ha Ramban hands over a note to Benno Jacob. On it I see the words:
The Almighty Judge said to Moses: “Your people have corrupted themselves”, not My people. Only by exclusively worshipping Him did they qualify to be called “His people...”.
Benno Jacob, approves of this opinion by nodding.
Judah Ha-Levi approaches Aaron for questioning. He paces back and forth between the Jury box and Aaron as if to say; “How am I going to make my case without further prosecuting the defendants?”
The camera zooms in on the witness and we see Aaron sweat profusely. He has the look of a man who knows he’s a conspirator of idolatry.
Judah: “How many souls were involved here?”
Aaron: “Three thousand, give or take.”
Judah: “And how many souls do you count among Am Israel?”
Aaron: “Six hundred thousand, give or take.”
The prosecution feverishly is taking notes.
Judah Ha-Levi: “Isn’t idolatry common among other Nations?”
Without waiting for Aaron to answer he continues:
“Weren’t you privy to idolatry among the Egyptians during your years in Mitzrayim?”
“Isn’t it normal for people to expect to have a physical example of their g-d?”
Rashi, clearly amused shoots Ramban a note: “If that’s all he’s got, he’s losing the case.” Ramban agrees.
I’m interrupted by a commercial break.
As we come back to the program, the prosecution is back asking Aaron questions.
“How was it possible that within forty days after the Sinai Revelation with one of the commandments clearly stating: “I’m the Lord - Thou shall have no other g-ds but me”, still ringing in their ears, they did seek other g-ds?”
Aaron hesitates to answer.
I watch the doors of the court room open and in walks a man named Shadal who makes his way quietly over to Judah Ha-Levi. Without saying a word he shakes Judah’s hand and joins him.
Shadal hands Judah a note stating: “G-d did not say- They have turned away from me - indicating that they have not abandoned the worship of G-d in favor of other g-ds.
The prosecution continues.
Isaac Arama for the prosecution.
To Aaron: “Did you not think that when Moses broke the two tablets, written by Ha-Shem himself, something so dire had happened for him to do this?”
He continues: “Did Moses do this to shock you or to shame you?”
Ramban takes over. He’s not concerned over finding a motivation for the Divine decision to wipe out the transgressors. He disagrees with Tanna debei Eliyahu that G-d never gave the order. It is a Divine decree and that’s sufficient for him.
Ramban calls Moses to the stand.
Ramban examines Moses: “I want to go back to something here, everyone knows that you, Moses, are an outstanding leader but not a g-d. Yet they asked - Since Moses has left us, let us make G-d. They did not ask for a g-d-calf representing the supreme powers of life and death but merely a substitute for Moses’ leadership. - would you agree?”
Moses: “So it was...”
Commercial break, I’m watching a spot about Egyptian cotton claiming to be the best in the world.
Back to the program and the closing statements have begun. Judah Ha-levi paces back and forth again.
He passionately addresses the Jury; “All the people in those times worshipped images....The people were left waiting for Moses to come down without having changed their clothes since the Revelation. They had remained as they were, waiting for Moses who was forty days late, not having taken any food for himself and having left them with the intention of returning the same day.”
As I’m watching this I can’t help but think - this is still no reason to build yourself a golden calf. And I’m wondering, why didn’t they give it a catchy name? All other idols in those days had them. For idolators they did a half-job, plus for a show like Law & Order, it would have made the point that much more.
As the credits roll up, we see the large group of defendants being led away. Aaron catches up with Moses as they slowly leave the room.
The Scene: an impressive courtroom quite different from most. This one is particularly large and has a group of about three thousand defendants sitting on one side. On the other side, at the table usually reserved for the prosecution, I see an unusually large contingency of prosecutors. I recognize Rashi, Ramban, Arbravanel and many others. Also represented at that table are Midrash and Talmudic writers.
On the other side I find just one lawyer representing the defense: Judah Ha-Levi, who is sitting all by himself.
On the bench there’s no one. However there’s something strange about the impressive chair usually filled by a judge, it’s lit up in a strange way.
The rest of the courtroom is filled by scholars and rabbis; I recognize Nehama Leibowitz, and in awe I recognize Moses sitting by himself.
For the prosecution, Rashi, played by Sam Waterston who normally plays District Attorney Jack McCoy, rises up from his chair and calls Aaron Ha-Cohen to the stand.
Aaron, after affirming the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, seats himself behind a wooden balustrade.
Rashi begins with the simple question: “How could this disaster happen before you?”
Aaron: “They asked me to supply them with a leader like Moses, not an actual g-d.”
Rashi concludes: “Didn’t they acknowledged other g-ds as well?” He then turns to the jury , doesn’t wait for Aaron to answer the question and says: “Acknowledge, can only apply to actual worship of idols.”
I see Ramban and other prosecutors nodding their heads in agreement.
“Objection!” cries out Judah Ha-Levi, as he jumps out of his chair, “Heresay...”
No sign from the bench.
Rashi turns to Aaron and asks: “Did you not give them the idea to use gold?”
Aaron: “They said, rise, make us a g-d.” “And I said whoever has gold, strip it off and give it to me and I threw it into the fire.”
Aaron looks at Moses in the audience and says: “Do not be annoyed with me”.
Avraham b. Ha Ramban hands over a note to Benno Jacob. On it I see the words:
The Almighty Judge said to Moses: “Your people have corrupted themselves”, not My people. Only by exclusively worshipping Him did they qualify to be called “His people...”.
Benno Jacob, approves of this opinion by nodding.
Judah Ha-Levi approaches Aaron for questioning. He paces back and forth between the Jury box and Aaron as if to say; “How am I going to make my case without further prosecuting the defendants?”
The camera zooms in on the witness and we see Aaron sweat profusely. He has the look of a man who knows he’s a conspirator of idolatry.
Judah: “How many souls were involved here?”
Aaron: “Three thousand, give or take.”
Judah: “And how many souls do you count among Am Israel?”
Aaron: “Six hundred thousand, give or take.”
The prosecution feverishly is taking notes.
Judah Ha-Levi: “Isn’t idolatry common among other Nations?”
Without waiting for Aaron to answer he continues:
“Weren’t you privy to idolatry among the Egyptians during your years in Mitzrayim?”
“Isn’t it normal for people to expect to have a physical example of their g-d?”
Rashi, clearly amused shoots Ramban a note: “If that’s all he’s got, he’s losing the case.” Ramban agrees.
I’m interrupted by a commercial break.
As we come back to the program, the prosecution is back asking Aaron questions.
“How was it possible that within forty days after the Sinai Revelation with one of the commandments clearly stating: “I’m the Lord - Thou shall have no other g-ds but me”, still ringing in their ears, they did seek other g-ds?”
Aaron hesitates to answer.
I watch the doors of the court room open and in walks a man named Shadal who makes his way quietly over to Judah Ha-Levi. Without saying a word he shakes Judah’s hand and joins him.
Shadal hands Judah a note stating: “G-d did not say- They have turned away from me - indicating that they have not abandoned the worship of G-d in favor of other g-ds.
The prosecution continues.
Isaac Arama for the prosecution.
To Aaron: “Did you not think that when Moses broke the two tablets, written by Ha-Shem himself, something so dire had happened for him to do this?”
He continues: “Did Moses do this to shock you or to shame you?”
Ramban takes over. He’s not concerned over finding a motivation for the Divine decision to wipe out the transgressors. He disagrees with Tanna debei Eliyahu that G-d never gave the order. It is a Divine decree and that’s sufficient for him.
Ramban calls Moses to the stand.
Ramban examines Moses: “I want to go back to something here, everyone knows that you, Moses, are an outstanding leader but not a g-d. Yet they asked - Since Moses has left us, let us make G-d. They did not ask for a g-d-calf representing the supreme powers of life and death but merely a substitute for Moses’ leadership. - would you agree?”
Moses: “So it was...”
Commercial break, I’m watching a spot about Egyptian cotton claiming to be the best in the world.
Back to the program and the closing statements have begun. Judah Ha-levi paces back and forth again.
He passionately addresses the Jury; “All the people in those times worshipped images....The people were left waiting for Moses to come down without having changed their clothes since the Revelation. They had remained as they were, waiting for Moses who was forty days late, not having taken any food for himself and having left them with the intention of returning the same day.”
As I’m watching this I can’t help but think - this is still no reason to build yourself a golden calf. And I’m wondering, why didn’t they give it a catchy name? All other idols in those days had them. For idolators they did a half-job, plus for a show like Law & Order, it would have made the point that much more.
As the credits roll up, we see the large group of defendants being led away. Aaron catches up with Moses as they slowly leave the room.
Mishpatim 2010
The introduction of Rachmanut.
Why here? Why now? All of a sudden, in the middle of Shemot, we find this Parashat thatʼs hidden like a couple of forgotten law books. And, without any announcement, Mishpatim throws at us the most detailed and specific of codes and rules.
One reason can be that Bnei Israel continuous to develop into One People - Am Israel in Shemot, and thus is ready for a detailed set of rules. One could say that without this Parashat there would be no developed or compassionate legal system as we have today.
Why else does the Torah make such an effort as to write in details the difference between stealing an ox versus a sheep? While the Babylonian answer to that is to treat stealing as just stealing, period - we on the other hand, are taught to reason. Akedat Yitzhak puts it this way: “A thief who deliberately sets out to inflict loss on his fellow man deserves to have a taste of his own medicine...”
We are being taught many things in this Parashat and perhaps the most important lesson of all: that of Rachmanut - compassion. Repeatedly does the Torah bring up the most severe crimes first and lesser ones next, only to teach us reasoning.
Steal a cow or sheep and you will be punished by having to pay double back. But if the thievery includes slaughtering or disposing of the loot, the Torah fixes the punishment; a four or five-fold restitution.
Sages point out that the Torah starts out by pointing towards the more severe crime of slaughtering or disposing, because a thief almost never keeps the stolen property on his land. He usually immediately will slaughter it or dispose of it. But we are reminded that if a thief who doesnʼt, deserves a lesser punishment. And why then the difference between stealing an ox and sheep? Why is stealing an ox worse? Philo comments in a practical way; “The sheep has four benefits - milk, cheese, wool and offspring (lambs), while the ox has five - milk, cheese, offspring (calves) and in addition, ploughing the land and pulling the wagon.” Other Sages did not count milk and cheese as two benefits, but Ibn Ezra agrees with the ploughing benefit.
This is fascinating. In Mishpatim we are taught to reason. We are taught to judge situations carefully. We are being taught Rachmanut.
We are taught that when a thief enters a premise, the owner can take his life. “Thereʼs no blood in him...” - Rashi explains the thief as a soulless and bloodless person with no value. That is pretty harsh for Rashi. While Rashbam also observes that the owner is guiltless and no “blood” payment is required. Again, the Torah starts out with the worst case scenario, only to follow with reason; “If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood guiltiness for him.” Rambam explains “...that a thief by day is usually just that; a thief. If it was obvious to the house owner that the thief had no homicidal intentions but merely came to steal, it is forbidden to kill him.”
Very carefully are we taught our behaviour towards the Ger - the stranger. In Bava Metzia 59b, our Sages point out that this mitzvah of respect is repeated thirty six times in the Torah. More than any other mitzvah even the mitzvah to love HaShem! Mishpatim is not just a carefully assembled list of laws and regulations. This Parashat teaches us through careful judgement to “reason.” This Parashat sets the ultimate foundation for Rachmanut, no matter what the circumstances.
Why here? Why now? All of a sudden, in the middle of Shemot, we find this Parashat thatʼs hidden like a couple of forgotten law books. And, without any announcement, Mishpatim throws at us the most detailed and specific of codes and rules.
One reason can be that Bnei Israel continuous to develop into One People - Am Israel in Shemot, and thus is ready for a detailed set of rules. One could say that without this Parashat there would be no developed or compassionate legal system as we have today.
Why else does the Torah make such an effort as to write in details the difference between stealing an ox versus a sheep? While the Babylonian answer to that is to treat stealing as just stealing, period - we on the other hand, are taught to reason. Akedat Yitzhak puts it this way: “A thief who deliberately sets out to inflict loss on his fellow man deserves to have a taste of his own medicine...”
We are being taught many things in this Parashat and perhaps the most important lesson of all: that of Rachmanut - compassion. Repeatedly does the Torah bring up the most severe crimes first and lesser ones next, only to teach us reasoning.
Steal a cow or sheep and you will be punished by having to pay double back. But if the thievery includes slaughtering or disposing of the loot, the Torah fixes the punishment; a four or five-fold restitution.
Sages point out that the Torah starts out by pointing towards the more severe crime of slaughtering or disposing, because a thief almost never keeps the stolen property on his land. He usually immediately will slaughter it or dispose of it. But we are reminded that if a thief who doesnʼt, deserves a lesser punishment. And why then the difference between stealing an ox and sheep? Why is stealing an ox worse? Philo comments in a practical way; “The sheep has four benefits - milk, cheese, wool and offspring (lambs), while the ox has five - milk, cheese, offspring (calves) and in addition, ploughing the land and pulling the wagon.” Other Sages did not count milk and cheese as two benefits, but Ibn Ezra agrees with the ploughing benefit.
This is fascinating. In Mishpatim we are taught to reason. We are taught to judge situations carefully. We are being taught Rachmanut.
We are taught that when a thief enters a premise, the owner can take his life. “Thereʼs no blood in him...” - Rashi explains the thief as a soulless and bloodless person with no value. That is pretty harsh for Rashi. While Rashbam also observes that the owner is guiltless and no “blood” payment is required. Again, the Torah starts out with the worst case scenario, only to follow with reason; “If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood guiltiness for him.” Rambam explains “...that a thief by day is usually just that; a thief. If it was obvious to the house owner that the thief had no homicidal intentions but merely came to steal, it is forbidden to kill him.”
Very carefully are we taught our behaviour towards the Ger - the stranger. In Bava Metzia 59b, our Sages point out that this mitzvah of respect is repeated thirty six times in the Torah. More than any other mitzvah even the mitzvah to love HaShem! Mishpatim is not just a carefully assembled list of laws and regulations. This Parashat teaches us through careful judgement to “reason.” This Parashat sets the ultimate foundation for Rachmanut, no matter what the circumstances.
Shemot
The Making of a People. The Making of a Leader.
If we may consider Bereshit the book of the birth of all life and mankind and the chosing of the families from which the Jewish people will grow, than allow Shemot to be the Book of the establishment of the Jewish people as one united people. After all, all stories in Bereshit are about personalities like Adam, Cain, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph. All Parashot so far center on their actions and significances. Now, scroll on into Shemot and suddenly the Torah refers to the grandchildren of Jacob and his sons as “People.” And, interestingly enough it was Pharaoh himself who calls them “The People of the Children of Israel” first.
“U-vnei (Bnei) Israel paru vyishretzu vayirbu vaya-atzmu bimeod meod.”
“The children of Israel proliferated, swarmed, multiplied and grew more and more.” Rashbam sees the odd style of words: “bi-meod meod” not as quantity but rather as “very powerful.”
Paraoh’s concern grows with the words: “Look, the Israelite people have become too many and too strong for us.” Followed by the chilling words: “Come, let us deal shrewdly with them”, admitting that he’s starting to think of a final solution for them. What follows next, is nothing short of the same slow suppression we will see during the thirties in Germany.
Could Pharaoh have foreseen that by causing fear and slavery he laid the groundwork for a non-people to become a united people?
Much has been said about the reason why Bnei Israel was punished so severely for so many years in a land where their forefathers enjoyed such wealth and freedom. The Midrash writes: “They said, let us be like Egyptians. Because they did so, the Holy One blessed be He turned the love which the Egyptians bore them into hatred…” Meaning that HaShem caused bondage as punishment for the total assimilation the Jewish People sought. They were about to lose their identity. Ha’amek Davar states: “They were punished for violating Jacob’s wish that they should live apart from the Egyptians in Goshen.”
Fascinating is the command to the midwives to kill the male newborns. It is the first sign of rebellion. And it’s women who stand up against Pharaoh first! It is Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Rashban and Ramban who agree with the Talmud in thinking that these midwives were Jewish. They all read: “…LaMeyaldot Ha-ivriyot” as “the Hebrew Midwives,” thereby making this a Jewish heroism. But why would Pharaoh put his trust in Jewish women killing Jewish male newborns? This contrast does not escape others who think that the words should be read as “the midwives OF the Israelites!” The Midrash writes that two of them “feared HaShem” and thus the discussion goes that these two heroines, Shifrah and Puah, could have been converts (according to Shadal and Imrei No’am).
Enters Moses. The Torah doesn’t prepare us much into why Moses notices the wrong doings of his brethern and becomes the champion of his fellow Israelites. In fact there’s only one mentioning of his turn-about: …when Moses was grown, and he went out to his brethern, and saw their burden.” Rashi interprets this seeing, or looking as Moses’ sharing their burden with his eyes and heart. As if Moses opened his heart and felt their suffering. And also feeling one with them.
This is the turning point. Here Moses takes the direction to eventually become the Leader of all Leaders Bnei Israel has ever seen. Next, Moses intervenes three times on behalf of the victim:
1- between Jew and Non-Jew.
2- between Jew and fellow Jew.
3- between Non-Jew and Non-Jew.
Brilliantly does the triple test serve as indubitable proof that it is about justice and not revenge. Moses breaks every law and it is as if he cannot go back. This is it, he is without doubt destined to become leader.
It is unclear how long the time was between Moses’ rebellion, his life as a shepherd and his rise to become Moshe Rabbenu. But we know that Moses didn’t take his calling at the thornbush likely. Five times he refuses his mission. “Who am I to go to Pharaoh and take the children of Israel out of Egypt?” Rashi believes that Moses found himself undeserving to perform such a task and that Moses also thought that Israel was underserving of a miracle.
This may be interpreted as the making of the leader Moses at the hand of HaShem. As if to clearly state that the God fearing Moses didn’t rise up out of anger but as a chosen leader. Or is it that Moses wanted to know how much HaShem would help him?
As Moses with Aaron on his side declares the first “Let my People go”, his heart must have been pure and convinced of HaShem standing there next to him as well. We will see in the rest of the book of Shemot the strengthening of a leader and that of Bnei Israel into one people. It has to be done word for word, foot by foot, miracle after miracle. After all, this is not just about freedom; it is just as much about the birth of Am Israel.
If we may consider Bereshit the book of the birth of all life and mankind and the chosing of the families from which the Jewish people will grow, than allow Shemot to be the Book of the establishment of the Jewish people as one united people. After all, all stories in Bereshit are about personalities like Adam, Cain, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph. All Parashot so far center on their actions and significances. Now, scroll on into Shemot and suddenly the Torah refers to the grandchildren of Jacob and his sons as “People.” And, interestingly enough it was Pharaoh himself who calls them “The People of the Children of Israel” first.
“U-vnei (Bnei) Israel paru vyishretzu vayirbu vaya-atzmu bimeod meod.”
“The children of Israel proliferated, swarmed, multiplied and grew more and more.” Rashbam sees the odd style of words: “bi-meod meod” not as quantity but rather as “very powerful.”
Paraoh’s concern grows with the words: “Look, the Israelite people have become too many and too strong for us.” Followed by the chilling words: “Come, let us deal shrewdly with them”, admitting that he’s starting to think of a final solution for them. What follows next, is nothing short of the same slow suppression we will see during the thirties in Germany.
Could Pharaoh have foreseen that by causing fear and slavery he laid the groundwork for a non-people to become a united people?
Much has been said about the reason why Bnei Israel was punished so severely for so many years in a land where their forefathers enjoyed such wealth and freedom. The Midrash writes: “They said, let us be like Egyptians. Because they did so, the Holy One blessed be He turned the love which the Egyptians bore them into hatred…” Meaning that HaShem caused bondage as punishment for the total assimilation the Jewish People sought. They were about to lose their identity. Ha’amek Davar states: “They were punished for violating Jacob’s wish that they should live apart from the Egyptians in Goshen.”
Fascinating is the command to the midwives to kill the male newborns. It is the first sign of rebellion. And it’s women who stand up against Pharaoh first! It is Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Rashban and Ramban who agree with the Talmud in thinking that these midwives were Jewish. They all read: “…LaMeyaldot Ha-ivriyot” as “the Hebrew Midwives,” thereby making this a Jewish heroism. But why would Pharaoh put his trust in Jewish women killing Jewish male newborns? This contrast does not escape others who think that the words should be read as “the midwives OF the Israelites!” The Midrash writes that two of them “feared HaShem” and thus the discussion goes that these two heroines, Shifrah and Puah, could have been converts (according to Shadal and Imrei No’am).
Enters Moses. The Torah doesn’t prepare us much into why Moses notices the wrong doings of his brethern and becomes the champion of his fellow Israelites. In fact there’s only one mentioning of his turn-about: …when Moses was grown, and he went out to his brethern, and saw their burden.” Rashi interprets this seeing, or looking as Moses’ sharing their burden with his eyes and heart. As if Moses opened his heart and felt their suffering. And also feeling one with them.
This is the turning point. Here Moses takes the direction to eventually become the Leader of all Leaders Bnei Israel has ever seen. Next, Moses intervenes three times on behalf of the victim:
1- between Jew and Non-Jew.
2- between Jew and fellow Jew.
3- between Non-Jew and Non-Jew.
Brilliantly does the triple test serve as indubitable proof that it is about justice and not revenge. Moses breaks every law and it is as if he cannot go back. This is it, he is without doubt destined to become leader.
It is unclear how long the time was between Moses’ rebellion, his life as a shepherd and his rise to become Moshe Rabbenu. But we know that Moses didn’t take his calling at the thornbush likely. Five times he refuses his mission. “Who am I to go to Pharaoh and take the children of Israel out of Egypt?” Rashi believes that Moses found himself undeserving to perform such a task and that Moses also thought that Israel was underserving of a miracle.
This may be interpreted as the making of the leader Moses at the hand of HaShem. As if to clearly state that the God fearing Moses didn’t rise up out of anger but as a chosen leader. Or is it that Moses wanted to know how much HaShem would help him?
As Moses with Aaron on his side declares the first “Let my People go”, his heart must have been pure and convinced of HaShem standing there next to him as well. We will see in the rest of the book of Shemot the strengthening of a leader and that of Bnei Israel into one people. It has to be done word for word, foot by foot, miracle after miracle. After all, this is not just about freedom; it is just as much about the birth of Am Israel.
Toldot
A Twin After All.
Already in the womb of Rivka did Esau and Yaakov have issues. They were difficult enough for Rivka to complain to Shem ben Noach, who explains to her that she will give birth to twins.
Commentaries believe that Rivka didn’t know that she was having twins. She thought that the turmoil inside her was coming from one person. Yaakov gets born after Esau clutching his heel.
Years later, as Yaakov prepares lentil soup for his father Yitzhak (commentaries point out that this traditional mourners dish is so chosen because Avraham died that day), Eisav comes home and asks for some of the food. When Yaakov asks Esau for his birthright in return, Esau gives it to him.
How wicked was Esau really?
How wicked was Yaakov really?
Giving up your birthright for a cup of lentil soup doesn’t fit the portrait of a wicked person. But Esau learned that day that even a man like Avraham eventually dies. Don’t forget, Esau had great respect for Avraham and that day he didn’t sinned but merely gave in to mortality. He believed in Avraham’s immortality. Did Yaakov seized this moment of weakness of his brother by negotiating food for birthright?
How wicked was Esau really?
How wicked was Yaakov really?
Rabbis state that one child would devote his energies to the conquest of the external world. The second child would concentrate his abilities on the conquest of the internal world. This makes Esau a man of the field and Yaakov a man of Torah. Yet, how does one explain the conspiracy between mother and child to deceive on her husband and his father; Yitzchak? Yaakov cheats on his father Yitzchak; dresses up as his brother to steal away his rightful firstborn’s blessing.
It seems that our Sages jump gladly to the defense of Yaakov in some direct or indirect way. Abravanel is no different here, he almost blames Yitzchak for letting it come this far:
Quote: “There is no doubt that Yitzchak should have given thought to Esau’s character”…”He should have prayed to G’d for guidance as to whether he should bless the eldest or the most deserving…”
There are quite some contrasts and variations in opinion among the Rabbi’s as to why Yitzchak insisted in blessing Esau. The author of Hamidrash VaHama-aseh, writes that Yitzchak’s deed was even greater than Avraham’s willingness to offer up his son, because Avraham was given an direct order and Yitzchak obeyed out of pure Da-at – faith. The Torah informs us all too well that Yitzchak did know of Esau’s misbehaviour, like his marrying of the wrong wives.
Or HaChayim, suggests that Yitzchak insisted of blessing Esau versus Yaakov, because he hoped that this meaningful blessing would correct Esau from his ways.
Many Rabbi’s have pointed out that Yaakov paid for this terrible behaviour by being cheated on himself. One example: Lavan tricks his son-in-law Yaakov by giving him Rachel instead of Leah. Pointing out to him that in his house the eldest does take precedence. Years later it is his own sons who lie to him about the fate of Yosef using his garment stained in goat’s blood to prove that he had died. Just like Yaakov used the skin of a goat to trick his father, did his own sons use a cloth to trick him.
Maimonides argues that true repentance is finding one self in the same circumstance where one sinned – and not making the same mistake.
But did that second chance ever arise for Yaakov?
Interestingly the Torah shows us that Yaakov’s son Yehudah is blessed with a twin from Tamar. During birth the firstborn receives a scarlet thread as if Yehudah wants to say that he will not make his father’s mistakes.
Years later, when Yosef brings his children before his father Yaakov, Yaakov reverses his hands and puts his right on the youngest and his left on the eldest. Yosef not wanting to follow his father's mistake, tries to correct his father.
It is as if Yehudah and Yosef make tikkun for what happened to their father and uncle.
It is said that twins can feel each other even when they’re not together. Studies have been done that point out that one twin knows that the other is sick, even when thousands of miles apart. Maybe it’s because Esau and Yaakov were twins, that the Torah tries to tell us that tikkun can be had perhaps not through your own direct deeds, but your indirect deeds like having righteous children.
Both Yehudah and Yosef were the better deeds of Yaakov. Both reject deception. And by that Yaakov has been repaired and can die in peace.
Already in the womb of Rivka did Esau and Yaakov have issues. They were difficult enough for Rivka to complain to Shem ben Noach, who explains to her that she will give birth to twins.
Commentaries believe that Rivka didn’t know that she was having twins. She thought that the turmoil inside her was coming from one person. Yaakov gets born after Esau clutching his heel.
Years later, as Yaakov prepares lentil soup for his father Yitzhak (commentaries point out that this traditional mourners dish is so chosen because Avraham died that day), Eisav comes home and asks for some of the food. When Yaakov asks Esau for his birthright in return, Esau gives it to him.
How wicked was Esau really?
How wicked was Yaakov really?
Giving up your birthright for a cup of lentil soup doesn’t fit the portrait of a wicked person. But Esau learned that day that even a man like Avraham eventually dies. Don’t forget, Esau had great respect for Avraham and that day he didn’t sinned but merely gave in to mortality. He believed in Avraham’s immortality. Did Yaakov seized this moment of weakness of his brother by negotiating food for birthright?
How wicked was Esau really?
How wicked was Yaakov really?
Rabbis state that one child would devote his energies to the conquest of the external world. The second child would concentrate his abilities on the conquest of the internal world. This makes Esau a man of the field and Yaakov a man of Torah. Yet, how does one explain the conspiracy between mother and child to deceive on her husband and his father; Yitzchak? Yaakov cheats on his father Yitzchak; dresses up as his brother to steal away his rightful firstborn’s blessing.
It seems that our Sages jump gladly to the defense of Yaakov in some direct or indirect way. Abravanel is no different here, he almost blames Yitzchak for letting it come this far:
Quote: “There is no doubt that Yitzchak should have given thought to Esau’s character”…”He should have prayed to G’d for guidance as to whether he should bless the eldest or the most deserving…”
There are quite some contrasts and variations in opinion among the Rabbi’s as to why Yitzchak insisted in blessing Esau. The author of Hamidrash VaHama-aseh, writes that Yitzchak’s deed was even greater than Avraham’s willingness to offer up his son, because Avraham was given an direct order and Yitzchak obeyed out of pure Da-at – faith. The Torah informs us all too well that Yitzchak did know of Esau’s misbehaviour, like his marrying of the wrong wives.
Or HaChayim, suggests that Yitzchak insisted of blessing Esau versus Yaakov, because he hoped that this meaningful blessing would correct Esau from his ways.
Many Rabbi’s have pointed out that Yaakov paid for this terrible behaviour by being cheated on himself. One example: Lavan tricks his son-in-law Yaakov by giving him Rachel instead of Leah. Pointing out to him that in his house the eldest does take precedence. Years later it is his own sons who lie to him about the fate of Yosef using his garment stained in goat’s blood to prove that he had died. Just like Yaakov used the skin of a goat to trick his father, did his own sons use a cloth to trick him.
Maimonides argues that true repentance is finding one self in the same circumstance where one sinned – and not making the same mistake.
But did that second chance ever arise for Yaakov?
Interestingly the Torah shows us that Yaakov’s son Yehudah is blessed with a twin from Tamar. During birth the firstborn receives a scarlet thread as if Yehudah wants to say that he will not make his father’s mistakes.
Years later, when Yosef brings his children before his father Yaakov, Yaakov reverses his hands and puts his right on the youngest and his left on the eldest. Yosef not wanting to follow his father's mistake, tries to correct his father.
It is as if Yehudah and Yosef make tikkun for what happened to their father and uncle.
It is said that twins can feel each other even when they’re not together. Studies have been done that point out that one twin knows that the other is sick, even when thousands of miles apart. Maybe it’s because Esau and Yaakov were twins, that the Torah tries to tell us that tikkun can be had perhaps not through your own direct deeds, but your indirect deeds like having righteous children.
Both Yehudah and Yosef were the better deeds of Yaakov. Both reject deception. And by that Yaakov has been repaired and can die in peace.
Miketz
Joseph: the opportunist.
After being sold twice, once on the suggestion of Judah to the Midianites and the second time to Potiphar, Joseph has grown into a man who knows his strengths.
As we know from last week’s Parashat, Joseph rises within the house of Potiphar while getting to know the political do’s and dont’s in Egypt. After all, he’s within the household of the Pharao’s courtier.
It is therefore interesting to see how Joseph “sells” himself to the Pharao when getting the chance to explain Pharao’s dream. And I write dream, because seeing both dreams as one dream, was perhaps the most genius step Joseph took.
But was it Joseph made that assumption? Was it his mistake, or was it HaShem’s divine intervention?
Joseph uses HaShem’s name and words freely in what we can call a foreign country. He refuses his master’s wife with the words: “How can I do this great wrong and sin against God?” - thereby closing the argument forever. And, if anyone is troubled or even angry at his interpretations, Joseph answers with: “Do not interpretations belong to God?”
And so does Joseph again, standing before the Pharaoh: “It is not in me; God shall give Pharaoh an answer of peace.”
Four times does Joseph mention God’s name:
-What (1) God is about to do He has declared to Pharaoh…
-What (2) God is about to do He has shown to Pharaoh…
-It is because the thing is established by (3) God and (4) God will shortly bring
it to pass.
Joseph shows Pharaoh here who’s boss. Who’s the Doer, the Declarer, the Shower and the Bringer to Pass. But, he also immediately uses this moment to promote himself ever so cleverly. Joseph continues with: “Now therefore let Pharaoh look for a man discerning and wise and set him over the land of Egypt.”
Followed by what is to be done as far as overseeing the land, supervising the job, spelled out in careful detail.
Did Joseph make a political and shrewd move here? Did he count on two things: his knowledge and closeness to God and his knowledge of the details as to how to implement the harvesting, the saving and the distribution of the corn?
Ramban writes: “….It was not his own advice. Had they commissioned him to advice the king? It was merely part and parcel of the dream’s interpretation….”
With other words, Joseph spelled out the interpretation to its fullest describing the words as actionable words. In Haketav Vehakabbala it is written that this is also based on the words: “And Pharaoh awoke…”, which Joseph saw as “…awake to action.”
So unlike the interpretations of others before him, Joseph’s interpretation was immediately understood and especially liked by the Pharaoh. I couldn’t find any writings as to why Joseph took both Pharao’s dreams and interpreted as one. Which must also have contributed to Pharao liking Joseph’s explanation.
So did Joseph gamble his interpretation by making it into a speech loaded with actionable points? Ramban doesn’t think so. Ramban insists of thinking that Joseph was no magician and that any wisdom he displayed came from HaShem.
The speech paid off.
Pharaoh: “Fore as much as God has shown thee all this, there is none so discerning and wise as thou. Thou shalt be over my house.”
At this point there must have been a physical expression of relief with wonderment, for the Pharaoh repeats himself in stronger words: “See I have set thee over all the land of Egypt.”
Abravanel closes the question as to why Joseph rolled the dice in front of Paraoh like a man who has nothing to lose, by stating: “This advice was prompted from beginning to end by HaShem. The prophet cannot keep back his prophecy and must unburden himself.”
Personally it does bother me that Joseph’s language of self-promotion stands so near to the use of HaShem’s name. He clearly was desperate enough to grab the opportunity to sell himself.
And speaking of opportunity, why did Joseph later not reveal himself? Why did he denounce his brothers? Was it vengeance that caused him to denounce his brothers at first?
Vengeance? Not. (Ibid) Joseph did comfort his brothers and kept stating to “fear not…”. And, according to Ramban, Joseph was lead by his past dreams. Even though he remembered clearly how his brothers had cast him into a pit and sold him, his dreams take prevalence.
Joseph also has to excuse himself while in a room for the first time with his brothers, in order not to reveal his tears. Still, he’s using the opportunity to put his brothers to the task.
Why?
Ramban thinks that Joseph realized that his past dreams had not been fulfilled. The part: “…where we were binding sheaves…”, meant that all of his brothers had first to bow down to him.
Basically, we see that what got his brothers so angry twenty years ago; that Joseph felt that the elder brothers should “serve” the younger, and later, made them throw Joseph in a pit and sell him literally down the river - had to be fulfilled. So Joseph did what he did to make his dreams come true. Isaac Arama in Akedat Yitzhak, thinks it’s preposterous to even think such a thing. The fulfilling of dreams is only up to HaShem.
In the end, Joseph does right by Pharaoh. And he certainly does right by his brothers after a grueling test. And meanwhile he does “OK” for himself.
Opportunist or not.
After being sold twice, once on the suggestion of Judah to the Midianites and the second time to Potiphar, Joseph has grown into a man who knows his strengths.
As we know from last week’s Parashat, Joseph rises within the house of Potiphar while getting to know the political do’s and dont’s in Egypt. After all, he’s within the household of the Pharao’s courtier.
It is therefore interesting to see how Joseph “sells” himself to the Pharao when getting the chance to explain Pharao’s dream. And I write dream, because seeing both dreams as one dream, was perhaps the most genius step Joseph took.
But was it Joseph made that assumption? Was it his mistake, or was it HaShem’s divine intervention?
Joseph uses HaShem’s name and words freely in what we can call a foreign country. He refuses his master’s wife with the words: “How can I do this great wrong and sin against God?” - thereby closing the argument forever. And, if anyone is troubled or even angry at his interpretations, Joseph answers with: “Do not interpretations belong to God?”
And so does Joseph again, standing before the Pharaoh: “It is not in me; God shall give Pharaoh an answer of peace.”
Four times does Joseph mention God’s name:
-What (1) God is about to do He has declared to Pharaoh…
-What (2) God is about to do He has shown to Pharaoh…
-It is because the thing is established by (3) God and (4) God will shortly bring
it to pass.
Joseph shows Pharaoh here who’s boss. Who’s the Doer, the Declarer, the Shower and the Bringer to Pass. But, he also immediately uses this moment to promote himself ever so cleverly. Joseph continues with: “Now therefore let Pharaoh look for a man discerning and wise and set him over the land of Egypt.”
Followed by what is to be done as far as overseeing the land, supervising the job, spelled out in careful detail.
Did Joseph make a political and shrewd move here? Did he count on two things: his knowledge and closeness to God and his knowledge of the details as to how to implement the harvesting, the saving and the distribution of the corn?
Ramban writes: “….It was not his own advice. Had they commissioned him to advice the king? It was merely part and parcel of the dream’s interpretation….”
With other words, Joseph spelled out the interpretation to its fullest describing the words as actionable words. In Haketav Vehakabbala it is written that this is also based on the words: “And Pharaoh awoke…”, which Joseph saw as “…awake to action.”
So unlike the interpretations of others before him, Joseph’s interpretation was immediately understood and especially liked by the Pharaoh. I couldn’t find any writings as to why Joseph took both Pharao’s dreams and interpreted as one. Which must also have contributed to Pharao liking Joseph’s explanation.
So did Joseph gamble his interpretation by making it into a speech loaded with actionable points? Ramban doesn’t think so. Ramban insists of thinking that Joseph was no magician and that any wisdom he displayed came from HaShem.
The speech paid off.
Pharaoh: “Fore as much as God has shown thee all this, there is none so discerning and wise as thou. Thou shalt be over my house.”
At this point there must have been a physical expression of relief with wonderment, for the Pharaoh repeats himself in stronger words: “See I have set thee over all the land of Egypt.”
Abravanel closes the question as to why Joseph rolled the dice in front of Paraoh like a man who has nothing to lose, by stating: “This advice was prompted from beginning to end by HaShem. The prophet cannot keep back his prophecy and must unburden himself.”
Personally it does bother me that Joseph’s language of self-promotion stands so near to the use of HaShem’s name. He clearly was desperate enough to grab the opportunity to sell himself.
And speaking of opportunity, why did Joseph later not reveal himself? Why did he denounce his brothers? Was it vengeance that caused him to denounce his brothers at first?
Vengeance? Not. (Ibid) Joseph did comfort his brothers and kept stating to “fear not…”. And, according to Ramban, Joseph was lead by his past dreams. Even though he remembered clearly how his brothers had cast him into a pit and sold him, his dreams take prevalence.
Joseph also has to excuse himself while in a room for the first time with his brothers, in order not to reveal his tears. Still, he’s using the opportunity to put his brothers to the task.
Why?
Ramban thinks that Joseph realized that his past dreams had not been fulfilled. The part: “…where we were binding sheaves…”, meant that all of his brothers had first to bow down to him.
Basically, we see that what got his brothers so angry twenty years ago; that Joseph felt that the elder brothers should “serve” the younger, and later, made them throw Joseph in a pit and sell him literally down the river - had to be fulfilled. So Joseph did what he did to make his dreams come true. Isaac Arama in Akedat Yitzhak, thinks it’s preposterous to even think such a thing. The fulfilling of dreams is only up to HaShem.
In the end, Joseph does right by Pharaoh. And he certainly does right by his brothers after a grueling test. And meanwhile he does “OK” for himself.
Opportunist or not.
Noach
Only a few weeks ago we read the book of Dvarim (Deuteronomy) and listened to the words of Moshe Rabbenu as if we were standing there in front of him. It is as if the Torah was written in a slower pace, so that we would learn Moshe’s words carefully.
Last week, in Bereshiet (In the beginning) we read at lightning speed. Biologists might say that every sentence according to science counted for thousand upon thousands of years.
Seven days to create everything. Mankind shaped. Mankind disappoints. 4 sins among Mankind; first Adam’s sin, then Cain’s sin followed by Lemech and if that’s not disappointing enough the collective sin of the Son’s of HaShem. All that in one parashat.
Then turn the page so to speak and enter the story of Noach. This parashat basically starts with what you could call Noach’s resume. As if to say; “People, we found a good one!”
Noach - iesh tzadik - tamim haja bedorotav. Noach – a man righteous and whole-hearted in his generations…
In his generations? What does that mean? Some credit Noach to be righteous enough for the times he was living in. Rashi writes: “He was righteous compared with his generation; but had he lived in Avrahams generation he would have been naught”. A lot has been commented on the difference of Noach’s closeness to HaShem versus Avrahams.
Compare this:
Noach iesh tzadik – tamim haja bedorotav Eht HaElohim hithalech Noach.
Noach walked – with God Versus Avraham: HitHalech Lefanai VeHaja tamim. Avraham walked in front of HaShem… Big difference it is as if there was a greater trust between HaSham and Avraham. Since it takes trust to walk in front – in order to announce HaShem.
Still, Noach was chosen to be saved and to save. Save seven pair of all clean animals and two pair of all the unclean.
Question I have is ….is the Torah telling us that the state of affairs was so bad that this Noach - was the best HaShem could find? And yet, out of this Noach, mankind would continue? Just like the Torah painstakingly describes Noach to be fit for the role lest we doubt HaShem, so does the Torah continue to painstakingly describe the circumstances why HaShem took the drastic steps to destroy what he had given to us one parashat ago.
As if to make clear that HaShem rather would spare mankind. As if to assure us that He had no other choice. The Midrash and also Rabbi Yohanan in Sanhedrin agree that HaShem had no choice after violence was being committed:
Ki-Malah Ha-Aretz Chamas Mi-Pneihem
For the earth was filled with violence…
Yet in the time it took for Noach to build the ark, plenty of time was given for Mankind to repent. Even the first rain, says Rashi, served more as a warning. Had mankind repented, it would have been a blessed rain.
I couldn’t find any references to the following, but you could say that the state of Haolam – the earth - during the flood was that of the first day in Bereshiet. For in the second sentence of the Torah the last word is Mayim (water). Thus describing the darkness, the earth and just the waters.
Because after all, during the flood HaShem made the waters cover the highest mountain, and so the complete earth was back to where it was during the first day.
What does HaShem say after the flood had abated: no more floods. All of mankind is equal. And he blesses Noach almost the same as he did with Adam. A complete new beginning. With a distinct difference. Adam was made directly in the likeness of God. Noach was not. Therefore Noach beginnings came with different warnings.
Mankind is equal. Mankind shall not lift up sword against nation. The latter statement being a direct reaction against the Chamas from before the flood.
But the actual first thing HaShem said was tye new dietary law of eating flesh. Something mankind had not done for 1656 years since creation. But with the new law the Torah also includes a rule to withhold Mankind from becoming bestial by clearly stating; But flesh with its soul – its blood you shall not eat… Rashi explains this as the first forbidding rule that not only states not to eat flesh from an animal that’s alive, but also forbids the eating of blood from an animal.
We’re on our way to becoming kosher…
A covenant between mankind and HaShem is signed by ways of the sign of the rainbow. Whenever the rainbow appears it would serve as reminder of the briet (the covenant).
But many generations later while mankind is multiplying and the first monarch Nimrod rules… mankind divides and starts to become subordinate again. Three reasons are given for building the Tower. One is that the Semites wanted to commemorate the victims of the flood. The second is that the Hamites wanted to use the tower as a way to wage war with HaShem and third is that the offspring of Japheth wanted to erect a gigantic temple to their idols….
Midah ke-neged Midah…
And so these three reasons to build… also became the three reasons for punishment... that - of no longer one common language but instead many languages.
And so again we see punishment… a new beginning and again punishment for mankind’s failing.
A direct comparison with Bereshiet.
Parashat Noach is yet another clean start with a somewhat unhappy ending… but in this case we at least are also somewhat more developed with more laws to adhere to and a somewhat greater morality to follow for the length of an exact ten generations long period of time.
Until next week, when a star player arises, so chosen by HaShem and when HaShem decides to concentrate his efforts of development on a smaller group of people… you know… the chosen ones.
Last week, in Bereshiet (In the beginning) we read at lightning speed. Biologists might say that every sentence according to science counted for thousand upon thousands of years.
Seven days to create everything. Mankind shaped. Mankind disappoints. 4 sins among Mankind; first Adam’s sin, then Cain’s sin followed by Lemech and if that’s not disappointing enough the collective sin of the Son’s of HaShem. All that in one parashat.
Then turn the page so to speak and enter the story of Noach. This parashat basically starts with what you could call Noach’s resume. As if to say; “People, we found a good one!”
Noach - iesh tzadik - tamim haja bedorotav. Noach – a man righteous and whole-hearted in his generations…
In his generations? What does that mean? Some credit Noach to be righteous enough for the times he was living in. Rashi writes: “He was righteous compared with his generation; but had he lived in Avrahams generation he would have been naught”. A lot has been commented on the difference of Noach’s closeness to HaShem versus Avrahams.
Compare this:
Noach iesh tzadik – tamim haja bedorotav Eht HaElohim hithalech Noach.
Noach walked – with God Versus Avraham: HitHalech Lefanai VeHaja tamim. Avraham walked in front of HaShem… Big difference it is as if there was a greater trust between HaSham and Avraham. Since it takes trust to walk in front – in order to announce HaShem.
Still, Noach was chosen to be saved and to save. Save seven pair of all clean animals and two pair of all the unclean.
Question I have is ….is the Torah telling us that the state of affairs was so bad that this Noach - was the best HaShem could find? And yet, out of this Noach, mankind would continue? Just like the Torah painstakingly describes Noach to be fit for the role lest we doubt HaShem, so does the Torah continue to painstakingly describe the circumstances why HaShem took the drastic steps to destroy what he had given to us one parashat ago.
As if to make clear that HaShem rather would spare mankind. As if to assure us that He had no other choice. The Midrash and also Rabbi Yohanan in Sanhedrin agree that HaShem had no choice after violence was being committed:
Ki-Malah Ha-Aretz Chamas Mi-Pneihem
For the earth was filled with violence…
Yet in the time it took for Noach to build the ark, plenty of time was given for Mankind to repent. Even the first rain, says Rashi, served more as a warning. Had mankind repented, it would have been a blessed rain.
I couldn’t find any references to the following, but you could say that the state of Haolam – the earth - during the flood was that of the first day in Bereshiet. For in the second sentence of the Torah the last word is Mayim (water). Thus describing the darkness, the earth and just the waters.
Because after all, during the flood HaShem made the waters cover the highest mountain, and so the complete earth was back to where it was during the first day.
What does HaShem say after the flood had abated: no more floods. All of mankind is equal. And he blesses Noach almost the same as he did with Adam. A complete new beginning. With a distinct difference. Adam was made directly in the likeness of God. Noach was not. Therefore Noach beginnings came with different warnings.
Mankind is equal. Mankind shall not lift up sword against nation. The latter statement being a direct reaction against the Chamas from before the flood.
But the actual first thing HaShem said was tye new dietary law of eating flesh. Something mankind had not done for 1656 years since creation. But with the new law the Torah also includes a rule to withhold Mankind from becoming bestial by clearly stating; But flesh with its soul – its blood you shall not eat… Rashi explains this as the first forbidding rule that not only states not to eat flesh from an animal that’s alive, but also forbids the eating of blood from an animal.
We’re on our way to becoming kosher…
A covenant between mankind and HaShem is signed by ways of the sign of the rainbow. Whenever the rainbow appears it would serve as reminder of the briet (the covenant).
But many generations later while mankind is multiplying and the first monarch Nimrod rules… mankind divides and starts to become subordinate again. Three reasons are given for building the Tower. One is that the Semites wanted to commemorate the victims of the flood. The second is that the Hamites wanted to use the tower as a way to wage war with HaShem and third is that the offspring of Japheth wanted to erect a gigantic temple to their idols….
Midah ke-neged Midah…
And so these three reasons to build… also became the three reasons for punishment... that - of no longer one common language but instead many languages.
And so again we see punishment… a new beginning and again punishment for mankind’s failing.
A direct comparison with Bereshiet.
Parashat Noach is yet another clean start with a somewhat unhappy ending… but in this case we at least are also somewhat more developed with more laws to adhere to and a somewhat greater morality to follow for the length of an exact ten generations long period of time.
Until next week, when a star player arises, so chosen by HaShem and when HaShem decides to concentrate his efforts of development on a smaller group of people… you know… the chosen ones.
Bereshiet
No other Parashat tests our faith more than Bereshiet. And more so now than a thousand years ago. For this Parashat has been the counter weight of Darwin and millions of scientist after him. It is also the excuse of many not to believe in Ha-Shem (The Name). And as time goes on, those who do not believe, think they’re proven right with the uncovering of yet one more fossil.
None of our Sages really dives into the rapid beginnings of this Parashat. It’s only on the sixth day that they come into action after the creation of animals and man. It is as if the creation of earth, wilderness and all other life, that Darwin used as his theory of evolution, is a given to our Rabbis.
The exact order in which Ha-Shem creates Olam (the world), is also Darwin’s order of evolution theories; fishes and birds (on the fifth day) followed by animals and man (on the sixth day). And some modern Rabbis will sometime allow themselves to think that God’s days of creation were perhaps longer days than regular modern days are. Could the first day have been a few millions of years long? With other days being equally that long, thereby making the creation in fact the evolution?
This is the Parashat that tests us in another way. It asks us to believe or not. This is where the Hebrew word ‘Daht’ - ‘Believe’, comes into play and makes us who we are. Almost always do modern writers translate the word ‘Daht’ for the English word ‘Religion’, and measure people by the words; ‘He’s very religious or he’s not very religious’.
That’s a mistake. Hebrew does not have a word for religion. Bereshit tests us by asking us to believe it or not. To be ‘Dahti’ or not. To be a ‘Believer’ or not. The Torah does not measure us whether we are religious, very religious or super religious. It cannot, because it doesn’t have a word for religion.
The Torah asks you only one thing; ‘Are you a believer in all of this, or not? And the answer isn’t, I believe a little, or very, or I’m an orthodox believer. Believing is black and white. Believing is simply a yes, or a no.
We are blessed. We are created in God’s likeness - ‘Be-Tzalmoh’. Which gives us the responsibility, the duties and the glory we can achieve in this newly created world. Prof. Gutman in his book; Dat Umadda, - Religion (wrongly translated) and Science, dwells on the thought; ‘The Image of God’; “The personality of man is placed vis-a-vis the personality of God…” Meaning, every individual is equally significant before God, since every man was created in His image. Darwin will of course disagree, but in the words; “And fill the earth and subdue it: And rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of heaven; and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth”, - Ramban understands that man has been given dominion over the earth to do as his will with the rest of he animal creation, to build, uproot, plant, mine metal from the earth and the like. As if God gave man the right to complete creation.
Upon creating man, God does not speak the phrase: And God saw that it was good” as He did before upon delivering other creations. Many have said that this is because man has his own road to walk and can be good or bad. Ramban, in Tshuva 5 states; Freewill is accorded every man. If he desires to take the evil one and be wicked, he is free to do so…the Creator does not preordain man to be good or bad.
There are a few reasons that have been discussed in the past and present for the creation of the woman:
1- She is the ‘help’ every man needs. (Literally; cook for him - Yevamot)
2- She is the companion every man needs. (Loh-tov hayot ha-adam le-vadoh.)
3- A life without a wife is without joy, blessing and well-being. (Talmud)
4- Without a woman, man would have to devote all of his effort to supply his daily needs. (Sforno)
The Talmud comes closest to establishing the clear partnership that evolves later in the Torah between man and woman upfront. Like a reporter who gets the story first, the Talmud ’sees’ the future benefits of a woman. But is that written in hindsight?
There’s a strange thing going on here. Before the creation of man, there’s clearly the creation of male and female animal, in order to multiply. The Torah announces ‘man’ and ‘female’ creation of ‘man’ before the more explicit way in which He creates first him then her. - “And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created He him, male and female created he them.”
Then why is there any discussion that a woman should be created as a reaction to loneliness? Is that just to point out that man should seek woman for time to come? The Sages see this as evidence that marriage is sacred, and that without this divine institution, man cannot be complete. But it is as if the Torah backtracks in telling us how woman was created later out of man’s rib. We are asked to believe without questioning. As is Adam in Eve. And when Eve believes in the wrong, Adam follows her down the wrong path, turning good into bad. Proving that Ha-Shem’s worry about man’s freewill in doing good or bad, right. The blessing; and it was good - Va-Yareh Elohim Ki-Tov, was indeed good for the sees, the skies, the plants, the trees and the animals, but not man. For he and she, has a mind of their own.
He and she can decide to believe or not to believe. And the answer is either a yes or a no. It’s not something that can be measured in a word called ‘religion’.
None of our Sages really dives into the rapid beginnings of this Parashat. It’s only on the sixth day that they come into action after the creation of animals and man. It is as if the creation of earth, wilderness and all other life, that Darwin used as his theory of evolution, is a given to our Rabbis.
The exact order in which Ha-Shem creates Olam (the world), is also Darwin’s order of evolution theories; fishes and birds (on the fifth day) followed by animals and man (on the sixth day). And some modern Rabbis will sometime allow themselves to think that God’s days of creation were perhaps longer days than regular modern days are. Could the first day have been a few millions of years long? With other days being equally that long, thereby making the creation in fact the evolution?
This is the Parashat that tests us in another way. It asks us to believe or not. This is where the Hebrew word ‘Daht’ - ‘Believe’, comes into play and makes us who we are. Almost always do modern writers translate the word ‘Daht’ for the English word ‘Religion’, and measure people by the words; ‘He’s very religious or he’s not very religious’.
That’s a mistake. Hebrew does not have a word for religion. Bereshit tests us by asking us to believe it or not. To be ‘Dahti’ or not. To be a ‘Believer’ or not. The Torah does not measure us whether we are religious, very religious or super religious. It cannot, because it doesn’t have a word for religion.
The Torah asks you only one thing; ‘Are you a believer in all of this, or not? And the answer isn’t, I believe a little, or very, or I’m an orthodox believer. Believing is black and white. Believing is simply a yes, or a no.
We are blessed. We are created in God’s likeness - ‘Be-Tzalmoh’. Which gives us the responsibility, the duties and the glory we can achieve in this newly created world. Prof. Gutman in his book; Dat Umadda, - Religion (wrongly translated) and Science, dwells on the thought; ‘The Image of God’; “The personality of man is placed vis-a-vis the personality of God…” Meaning, every individual is equally significant before God, since every man was created in His image. Darwin will of course disagree, but in the words; “And fill the earth and subdue it: And rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of heaven; and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth”, - Ramban understands that man has been given dominion over the earth to do as his will with the rest of he animal creation, to build, uproot, plant, mine metal from the earth and the like. As if God gave man the right to complete creation.
Upon creating man, God does not speak the phrase: And God saw that it was good” as He did before upon delivering other creations. Many have said that this is because man has his own road to walk and can be good or bad. Ramban, in Tshuva 5 states; Freewill is accorded every man. If he desires to take the evil one and be wicked, he is free to do so…the Creator does not preordain man to be good or bad.
There are a few reasons that have been discussed in the past and present for the creation of the woman:
1- She is the ‘help’ every man needs. (Literally; cook for him - Yevamot)
2- She is the companion every man needs. (Loh-tov hayot ha-adam le-vadoh.)
3- A life without a wife is without joy, blessing and well-being. (Talmud)
4- Without a woman, man would have to devote all of his effort to supply his daily needs. (Sforno)
The Talmud comes closest to establishing the clear partnership that evolves later in the Torah between man and woman upfront. Like a reporter who gets the story first, the Talmud ’sees’ the future benefits of a woman. But is that written in hindsight?
There’s a strange thing going on here. Before the creation of man, there’s clearly the creation of male and female animal, in order to multiply. The Torah announces ‘man’ and ‘female’ creation of ‘man’ before the more explicit way in which He creates first him then her. - “And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created He him, male and female created he them.”
Then why is there any discussion that a woman should be created as a reaction to loneliness? Is that just to point out that man should seek woman for time to come? The Sages see this as evidence that marriage is sacred, and that without this divine institution, man cannot be complete. But it is as if the Torah backtracks in telling us how woman was created later out of man’s rib. We are asked to believe without questioning. As is Adam in Eve. And when Eve believes in the wrong, Adam follows her down the wrong path, turning good into bad. Proving that Ha-Shem’s worry about man’s freewill in doing good or bad, right. The blessing; and it was good - Va-Yareh Elohim Ki-Tov, was indeed good for the sees, the skies, the plants, the trees and the animals, but not man. For he and she, has a mind of their own.
He and she can decide to believe or not to believe. And the answer is either a yes or a no. It’s not something that can be measured in a word called ‘religion’.
Behar Behukotai
I want to be a farmer.
Nothing is perhaps more defined in the Torah than the Shabbat. It’s compared to a covenant between HaShem and Bnei Israel. It’s discussed to be a sign whereby Israel leads among nations. It’s defined as a blessing towards Am Israel. And it’s also seen, simply, as a day of rest. Because after all HaShem rested on the same day. Let us see the Shemitah, the Shabbat for the Land, in the same light. Only, there are huge differences between our Sages and Rabbinic Commentators as to how far we can go in defining Shemitah. “…then shall the land keep a Shabbath to the Lord.” (25:2)
Here’s a list of various commentators (Sages from various times) as to how to understand the above.
1‐ Alshikh: “Since mankind has a strong feeling of proprietorship, the Shemitah puts him in place. As to remind him that the Land is created by and of HaShem.”
2‐ Maimonides: “…it (the Shemitah) implies sympathy with our fellow men and promotes the well‐being of mankind; for in reference to these precepts it is stated in the Torah: That the poor of thy people may eat.” (Ex‐23:11)
3‐ Maimonides again: “…the land will also increase its produce and improve when it remains fallow for some time.”
4‐ Abravanel: disagreeing with Maimonides: “The truth is that this is not so” – His argument: “If the Torah is concerned about the natural weakening of the land in consequence of working year after year, how then is it going to yield produce for three years?”
5‐ Keli Yakar: also disagreeing with Maimonides: “…If the purpose of the Torah had been to avoid the weakening of the soil, why should violating this law be punished by exile? ...Furthermore, in this case the Shemitah year would not be –Shabbat L’El‐ but for the benefit for the Land.”
6‐ The Akidat Yitzhak: “…that the seven years of work and the suspension of work in every seventh year causes us to realize that our mission on earth is not to be slaves to the soil but a much higher and nobler one.”
7‐ Ibn Ezra sees it as a year in which mankind should raise his spirituality.
8‐ Rav Kook agrees with Ibn Ezra but adds that in the quest for sustenance of commercial activities, even the cancellation of debts, man is given the chance to purify his soul and of uncovering and activating the Divine treasure which dwells in the soul of the nation.
On one hand most commentators aren’t willing to define the Shemitah year as a year to let the Land rest for biological reasons; so that the soil can somehow restore itself. No, most are looking for a much grander meaning. It is also the only time that a specified time is named as Shabbath to the Lord. No other festival or day, not even Yom Kippur has been given that status.
It is only the Shemitah that has been given the same status and therefore gravity and importance as the Shabbat. And it comes with a severe punishment for not abiding by its rules: exile.
For a farmer reading this, and I don’t believe there are any among you, the word exile should send shivers down his or her spine. That’s losing your land, status and occupation. For a farmer giving up the land for one whole year meant also the mandatory sharing of the crops with your servants and with strangers.
Shemitah is a way to literally stop being slaves to materialism. To step back and leave your possessions behind, in order to reflect, to study and to share (tzedakah). Keli Yakar explains the Shemitah of the land against the Shemitah (cancellation) of debts: …”since no sowing or planting is allowed, the poor may eat freely and none may store produce and treat it as his own, this undoubtedly creates favorable conditions towards peace, because all strife originates from the attitude of ‘mine is mine’ and people claiming their rights. But in the seventh year all are equal – this can indeed generate peace.”
Now what to do if you’re not a farmer? What if you’re a hedge fund manager? Leave your fund unattended the seventh year? Open it up to everyone while studying Torah? Share the crop with the poor?
If you’re a banker and you’re wondering how this affects you, the answer is easier: all loans are supposed to be cancelled every seventh year. Good for you. But seriously, besides being interested in vineyards that uphold the Shemitah rules for kashrut (eating laws) reasons, many of us aren’t affected by any of this. What a pity. Unless of course we remind ourselves how lucky the Jewish farmer and landowner actually are to be able to follow the rules of Shemitah and take mandatory time off to study the Torah, reflect on life and do Tzedakah (charity) all at the same time.
Makes you rethink agriculture as a career. Doesn’t it?
Nothing is perhaps more defined in the Torah than the Shabbat. It’s compared to a covenant between HaShem and Bnei Israel. It’s discussed to be a sign whereby Israel leads among nations. It’s defined as a blessing towards Am Israel. And it’s also seen, simply, as a day of rest. Because after all HaShem rested on the same day. Let us see the Shemitah, the Shabbat for the Land, in the same light. Only, there are huge differences between our Sages and Rabbinic Commentators as to how far we can go in defining Shemitah. “…then shall the land keep a Shabbath to the Lord.” (25:2)
Here’s a list of various commentators (Sages from various times) as to how to understand the above.
1‐ Alshikh: “Since mankind has a strong feeling of proprietorship, the Shemitah puts him in place. As to remind him that the Land is created by and of HaShem.”
2‐ Maimonides: “…it (the Shemitah) implies sympathy with our fellow men and promotes the well‐being of mankind; for in reference to these precepts it is stated in the Torah: That the poor of thy people may eat.” (Ex‐23:11)
3‐ Maimonides again: “…the land will also increase its produce and improve when it remains fallow for some time.”
4‐ Abravanel: disagreeing with Maimonides: “The truth is that this is not so” – His argument: “If the Torah is concerned about the natural weakening of the land in consequence of working year after year, how then is it going to yield produce for three years?”
5‐ Keli Yakar: also disagreeing with Maimonides: “…If the purpose of the Torah had been to avoid the weakening of the soil, why should violating this law be punished by exile? ...Furthermore, in this case the Shemitah year would not be –Shabbat L’El‐ but for the benefit for the Land.”
6‐ The Akidat Yitzhak: “…that the seven years of work and the suspension of work in every seventh year causes us to realize that our mission on earth is not to be slaves to the soil but a much higher and nobler one.”
7‐ Ibn Ezra sees it as a year in which mankind should raise his spirituality.
8‐ Rav Kook agrees with Ibn Ezra but adds that in the quest for sustenance of commercial activities, even the cancellation of debts, man is given the chance to purify his soul and of uncovering and activating the Divine treasure which dwells in the soul of the nation.
On one hand most commentators aren’t willing to define the Shemitah year as a year to let the Land rest for biological reasons; so that the soil can somehow restore itself. No, most are looking for a much grander meaning. It is also the only time that a specified time is named as Shabbath to the Lord. No other festival or day, not even Yom Kippur has been given that status.
It is only the Shemitah that has been given the same status and therefore gravity and importance as the Shabbat. And it comes with a severe punishment for not abiding by its rules: exile.
For a farmer reading this, and I don’t believe there are any among you, the word exile should send shivers down his or her spine. That’s losing your land, status and occupation. For a farmer giving up the land for one whole year meant also the mandatory sharing of the crops with your servants and with strangers.
Shemitah is a way to literally stop being slaves to materialism. To step back and leave your possessions behind, in order to reflect, to study and to share (tzedakah). Keli Yakar explains the Shemitah of the land against the Shemitah (cancellation) of debts: …”since no sowing or planting is allowed, the poor may eat freely and none may store produce and treat it as his own, this undoubtedly creates favorable conditions towards peace, because all strife originates from the attitude of ‘mine is mine’ and people claiming their rights. But in the seventh year all are equal – this can indeed generate peace.”
Now what to do if you’re not a farmer? What if you’re a hedge fund manager? Leave your fund unattended the seventh year? Open it up to everyone while studying Torah? Share the crop with the poor?
If you’re a banker and you’re wondering how this affects you, the answer is easier: all loans are supposed to be cancelled every seventh year. Good for you. But seriously, besides being interested in vineyards that uphold the Shemitah rules for kashrut (eating laws) reasons, many of us aren’t affected by any of this. What a pity. Unless of course we remind ourselves how lucky the Jewish farmer and landowner actually are to be able to follow the rules of Shemitah and take mandatory time off to study the Torah, reflect on life and do Tzedakah (charity) all at the same time.
Makes you rethink agriculture as a career. Doesn’t it?
Acherei Mot - Kedoshim
We are approaching the middle of the Torah and one could read both these Parashot as an advanced second beginning of the Torah.
Let’s look at Acharei Mot as the end of part One and Kedoshim as the beginning of part Two. Now we know that the Torah isn’t written with exclamation points, or commas nor any other markings. But we can say from similar observations and commentaries, made by almost all Sages and Rabbi’s, that Kedoshim especially, holds the most important lesson within the Torah.
Starting with the details of the Yom Kippur service in Acharei Mot, the Torah is perfectly arranged keeping the part of the service that is performed in linen - divided from the part written about the service to be performed in golden garments.
The Torah states:
And Aaron shall present the bullocks of the sin-offering, which is for himself and make atonement for himself and his house.
Rashi states: “He confesses over it his sins and the sins of his household.”
Confession, is at the center of the Yom Kippur service and prayers. And if we continue the thought to split the Torah in two, then we consider this a most important ending to the first part, namely that HaShem has given us the power and the chance to judge ourselves. As if to say that we’ve learned part One of the Torah and it should give us the wisdom to judge ourselves. In other words, being able to perform atonement requires us to carefully learn the Torah up to this part. We have graduated to a level that allows us atonement.
Not only in the psychological sense, but in practical sense as well; having to choose between two animals, of which the bullock shall be slaughtered and the goat shall escape. Basically and symbolically giving man the chance to choose over life and death.
Kedoshim, being part One of the second half of the Torah, begins appropriately with Moses calling in all of Bnei Israel at the same time. This time not spreading the Oral Law first to Aaron, then Aaron and his sons, then Aaron, his sons and the elders, followed by Aaron, his sons, the elders and the people. No, this time the Torah states: Speak to the congregations of the children of Israel and say to them…
What Moses was about to say next is in Rabbi Hillel’s opinion the absolute most crucial lesson to be learned in all of the Torah.
The first words being “Kedoshim tiheyu, ki kedosh ani HaShem Eloheichem – You shall be holy, for I the Lord your G’d am holy.
If we hold on to the notion that this is in fact the first part of the second half of the Torah, then let’s look at Bereshit, the first part of the first half of the Torah for a moment and remember that mankind was born out of the likeness of HaShem. Equality to a certain amount at least in physical appearance with HaShem.
Here, in Kedoshim mankind is now said to be equal in stature as well. He’s thought to be as holy as HaShem is.
Provided, we keep to the rules and regulations.
Why call all of Bnei Israel together to teach them this lesson? Says Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrahi: “They had to attend together so that if doubts should arise over a ruling, they could enlighten one another by reference to the primary source. If they had, however, received these laws in separate groups, this would not be possible since each group could deny hearing Moses say such a thing.”
Moses continues:
“You shall not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people…
But you shall love your neighbour as yourself.
It is said that Rabbi Hillel was challenged by a man who said that if Hillel could explain the Torah during the time in which the man would stand on one leg, he’d convert to Judaism. Hillel waited for the man to do as he said and answered: “You shall love your neighbour as you do yourself. Now go practice that.”
Thereby, years later, proving that the 1968 Hippies were right for saying: “All you need is Love.”
The term “holy” refers to a new set of understandings. A “next lesson to be learned.” This is part Two after all, and part One ended with a complex learning of sexual do’s and don’t’s.
Rashi and Nachmonides have spent the most time arguing the meanings of why Acharei Mot ended with the laws of chastity. For, to be pure and holy, one must obstain from certain lusts. Rashi points out that there’s a loophole in the Torah. That man can still lust for his wife or even wives, thereby being less holy. Nachmanides believes that the purity these laws describe so carefully, pertain to many more circumstances and must lead to abstaining from excess in sexual as well as drinking behaviour.
Making the argument that Kedoshim is a new beginning in the Torah even stronger, is the repetition of the phrases “I am the Lord your G’d or I am the Lord”, as if HaShem wanted to reintroduce himself all over again.
Another argument is the repeat of the Laws of Mount Sinai. As if Bnei Israel had never heard these laws before, the Torah repeats them carefully and deliberately.
The most profound promise that Moses makes in Parashat Kedoshim; is that man is holy. The most profound revelation that G’d makes in Parashat Bereshit; is that man is made in the likeness of HaShem himself.
Kedoshim blesses mankind to be holy as a reward for learning the first part of the Torah and holy as a promise for learning the next part of the Torah. As if being a teacher; seeing the potential in his students and promising an A+ at the beginning of the second semester.
Let’s look at Acharei Mot as the end of part One and Kedoshim as the beginning of part Two. Now we know that the Torah isn’t written with exclamation points, or commas nor any other markings. But we can say from similar observations and commentaries, made by almost all Sages and Rabbi’s, that Kedoshim especially, holds the most important lesson within the Torah.
Starting with the details of the Yom Kippur service in Acharei Mot, the Torah is perfectly arranged keeping the part of the service that is performed in linen - divided from the part written about the service to be performed in golden garments.
The Torah states:
And Aaron shall present the bullocks of the sin-offering, which is for himself and make atonement for himself and his house.
Rashi states: “He confesses over it his sins and the sins of his household.”
Confession, is at the center of the Yom Kippur service and prayers. And if we continue the thought to split the Torah in two, then we consider this a most important ending to the first part, namely that HaShem has given us the power and the chance to judge ourselves. As if to say that we’ve learned part One of the Torah and it should give us the wisdom to judge ourselves. In other words, being able to perform atonement requires us to carefully learn the Torah up to this part. We have graduated to a level that allows us atonement.
Not only in the psychological sense, but in practical sense as well; having to choose between two animals, of which the bullock shall be slaughtered and the goat shall escape. Basically and symbolically giving man the chance to choose over life and death.
Kedoshim, being part One of the second half of the Torah, begins appropriately with Moses calling in all of Bnei Israel at the same time. This time not spreading the Oral Law first to Aaron, then Aaron and his sons, then Aaron, his sons and the elders, followed by Aaron, his sons, the elders and the people. No, this time the Torah states: Speak to the congregations of the children of Israel and say to them…
What Moses was about to say next is in Rabbi Hillel’s opinion the absolute most crucial lesson to be learned in all of the Torah.
The first words being “Kedoshim tiheyu, ki kedosh ani HaShem Eloheichem – You shall be holy, for I the Lord your G’d am holy.
If we hold on to the notion that this is in fact the first part of the second half of the Torah, then let’s look at Bereshit, the first part of the first half of the Torah for a moment and remember that mankind was born out of the likeness of HaShem. Equality to a certain amount at least in physical appearance with HaShem.
Here, in Kedoshim mankind is now said to be equal in stature as well. He’s thought to be as holy as HaShem is.
Provided, we keep to the rules and regulations.
Why call all of Bnei Israel together to teach them this lesson? Says Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrahi: “They had to attend together so that if doubts should arise over a ruling, they could enlighten one another by reference to the primary source. If they had, however, received these laws in separate groups, this would not be possible since each group could deny hearing Moses say such a thing.”
Moses continues:
“You shall not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people…
But you shall love your neighbour as yourself.
It is said that Rabbi Hillel was challenged by a man who said that if Hillel could explain the Torah during the time in which the man would stand on one leg, he’d convert to Judaism. Hillel waited for the man to do as he said and answered: “You shall love your neighbour as you do yourself. Now go practice that.”
Thereby, years later, proving that the 1968 Hippies were right for saying: “All you need is Love.”
The term “holy” refers to a new set of understandings. A “next lesson to be learned.” This is part Two after all, and part One ended with a complex learning of sexual do’s and don’t’s.
Rashi and Nachmonides have spent the most time arguing the meanings of why Acharei Mot ended with the laws of chastity. For, to be pure and holy, one must obstain from certain lusts. Rashi points out that there’s a loophole in the Torah. That man can still lust for his wife or even wives, thereby being less holy. Nachmanides believes that the purity these laws describe so carefully, pertain to many more circumstances and must lead to abstaining from excess in sexual as well as drinking behaviour.
Making the argument that Kedoshim is a new beginning in the Torah even stronger, is the repetition of the phrases “I am the Lord your G’d or I am the Lord”, as if HaShem wanted to reintroduce himself all over again.
Another argument is the repeat of the Laws of Mount Sinai. As if Bnei Israel had never heard these laws before, the Torah repeats them carefully and deliberately.
The most profound promise that Moses makes in Parashat Kedoshim; is that man is holy. The most profound revelation that G’d makes in Parashat Bereshit; is that man is made in the likeness of HaShem himself.
Kedoshim blesses mankind to be holy as a reward for learning the first part of the Torah and holy as a promise for learning the next part of the Torah. As if being a teacher; seeing the potential in his students and promising an A+ at the beginning of the second semester.
BeShallach
It is the highest grossing Parashat in Hollywood history.
And maybe the longest discussed Parashat among our sages.
Take the first five words.
"Va-yehi BeShalach Paroh eht-HaAm."
And then when Pharoah let the people go.
Yet Teheliem (psalm) 114 says:
When Israel went out of Egypt….
So why give the credit to Pharaoh?
Abravanel agrees and states that it should have been “When Israel went out of Egypt…”
After all the plagues - the word the Pharoah used came from the root Lish-Loach – to send…. Translated in English all to often wrongly as “let go.”
After the last plague it’s the Egyptians and not just the Pharoah using the word “LeSchalcham” – to send them – often translated as “to get them to go…”
Rashi and others do conclude that it is written as a subordinate clause. Only three words later does Elohim take over… It is as if the people were handed over from Pharoah to HaShem.
And I say The People, because there’s no mentioning of Israel here. Three times the Torah mentions “Ha-Am”, and the forth time it writes “Bnei Israel.”
“Am Israel” has of course been described as “Bnei Israel” before, but never did it have a more precise meaning than in this Parashat. For here they are, being born out of slavery and carefully lead into freedom.
Is that why HaShem leads them the long way - around the land of the Philistines, avoiding a struggle and battle?
Is it not a child who would run back to safety even if that safety it calls home - in really is the house of bondage?
Is it not a child that returns to what it knows?
You cannot discard two hundred and ten years of home even if it is slavery.
More often than not a prisoner after years of prison rather stays inside than being set free into a world he doesn’t know.
Rashbam - Rabbi Schmuel ben Meir, explains that HaShem diverted them from going the short route in order to avoid the Caanites and the possible hostilities because they would have preferred to return.
However Rambam simply believes that HaShem wanted to prepare them for hardship in order to make them tougher in the long fight ahead to conquer the Promised Land.
Can we say that this is similar to bringing up a child?
Should the parent be more lenient? Should it always be yes and never no?
Rambam continues to observe that man cannot be expected to fight after being in slavery by simply washing off the sweat and toil of his previous occupation.
The Torah continues:
“…and when Pharaoh drew nigh,
the children of Israel lifted up their eyes,
and, behold, Egypt was marching after them;
and they were sore afraid…”
“VaYiruh Meod”
Afraid? Why? 600,000 men against 600 elite forces. That’s 1 against 1000. Then again 1 highly trained soldier hand picked by the Pharaoh against 1000 former slaves.
Ibn Ezra observes that they were suffering from a slave mentality that would have to die with the generation that had endured slavery. And, that only a new generation would have the independence and the spirit to fight a war of conquest.
So unsure they were that they said to Moses: were there no graves in Egypt that you had to take us to die in the wilderness.
Not only does Ha-Am complain mentioning Egypt five times…they forget that Moses took the bones of Joseph as he so wished - with him. Wasn’t that symbolic enough to say Egypt isn’t good enough to be buried in?
Children complain when they do not understand what is happening around them. And when pushed between an approaching army and the sea, and nobody knows what is about to happen; not even Moses, your believe is being tested to the max.
But by then, you would think after ten plagues, and after all the miracles, wasn’t the believe in HaShem established? Didn’t Ha-Dat (the believe) set in already among Bnei Israel or should we say Am Israel?
The answer comes from Ramban who divides The Israelites into two groups. One group crying out to HaShem. And another group not accepting the salvation performed for them – still believing that it would have been better not to have been set free.
And here is why he’s thinking this way: Because in the text of the Torah there’s the distinction being made between Bnei Israel and HaAm, between the Children of Israel and The People.
But it was “to The People” to whom Moshe turned to allay their fears:
“VaYomer Mosche el-HaAm el-TirUh…”And Moses said unto the people: fear not…
With other words it was The People and not the Children of Israel who uttered: what have you done to us to bring us out of Egypt…
What a moment of truth. You either believe or not in HaShem… We often forget that in Hebrew there is no word for religion there’s only the word Dat – Believe. And here, at the edge of the water you had to believe or not.
A Jew is not religious or more religious or very religious. Nonsense, a jew is a believer. Period. A believer in HaShem.
And here at the edge of the water HaShem told Moshe to the Children of Israel to march forward. Not following Moshe but rather in front of him. With Dat. With Believe.
According to Shemot Rabbah the Tribe of Judah plunges in first. Stated in Tehilim 114 Judah was the one who sanctified him… Even this amazing miracle didn’t convince all. But then again HaShem doesn’t perform miracles for all, but for those who are special.
Only three days later the complaining was back over lack of food and shortage of water.
As if the historic and great miracle filmed by Cecil B DeMille – by the way, the only oscar they got for the movie was for special effects, – wasn’t enough to make permanent believers out of them.
And how did the Torah mention those whose complained? As Ha-Am. The People, eventually to be replaced by Bnei Israel. A people of newly born believers and ready to grow up worthy to be called The Chosen People.
And maybe the longest discussed Parashat among our sages.
Take the first five words.
"Va-yehi BeShalach Paroh eht-HaAm."
And then when Pharoah let the people go.
Yet Teheliem (psalm) 114 says:
When Israel went out of Egypt….
So why give the credit to Pharaoh?
Abravanel agrees and states that it should have been “When Israel went out of Egypt…”
After all the plagues - the word the Pharoah used came from the root Lish-Loach – to send…. Translated in English all to often wrongly as “let go.”
After the last plague it’s the Egyptians and not just the Pharoah using the word “LeSchalcham” – to send them – often translated as “to get them to go…”
Rashi and others do conclude that it is written as a subordinate clause. Only three words later does Elohim take over… It is as if the people were handed over from Pharoah to HaShem.
And I say The People, because there’s no mentioning of Israel here. Three times the Torah mentions “Ha-Am”, and the forth time it writes “Bnei Israel.”
“Am Israel” has of course been described as “Bnei Israel” before, but never did it have a more precise meaning than in this Parashat. For here they are, being born out of slavery and carefully lead into freedom.
Is that why HaShem leads them the long way - around the land of the Philistines, avoiding a struggle and battle?
Is it not a child who would run back to safety even if that safety it calls home - in really is the house of bondage?
Is it not a child that returns to what it knows?
You cannot discard two hundred and ten years of home even if it is slavery.
More often than not a prisoner after years of prison rather stays inside than being set free into a world he doesn’t know.
Rashbam - Rabbi Schmuel ben Meir, explains that HaShem diverted them from going the short route in order to avoid the Caanites and the possible hostilities because they would have preferred to return.
However Rambam simply believes that HaShem wanted to prepare them for hardship in order to make them tougher in the long fight ahead to conquer the Promised Land.
Can we say that this is similar to bringing up a child?
Should the parent be more lenient? Should it always be yes and never no?
Rambam continues to observe that man cannot be expected to fight after being in slavery by simply washing off the sweat and toil of his previous occupation.
The Torah continues:
“…and when Pharaoh drew nigh,
the children of Israel lifted up their eyes,
and, behold, Egypt was marching after them;
and they were sore afraid…”
“VaYiruh Meod”
Afraid? Why? 600,000 men against 600 elite forces. That’s 1 against 1000. Then again 1 highly trained soldier hand picked by the Pharaoh against 1000 former slaves.
Ibn Ezra observes that they were suffering from a slave mentality that would have to die with the generation that had endured slavery. And, that only a new generation would have the independence and the spirit to fight a war of conquest.
So unsure they were that they said to Moses: were there no graves in Egypt that you had to take us to die in the wilderness.
Not only does Ha-Am complain mentioning Egypt five times…they forget that Moses took the bones of Joseph as he so wished - with him. Wasn’t that symbolic enough to say Egypt isn’t good enough to be buried in?
Children complain when they do not understand what is happening around them. And when pushed between an approaching army and the sea, and nobody knows what is about to happen; not even Moses, your believe is being tested to the max.
But by then, you would think after ten plagues, and after all the miracles, wasn’t the believe in HaShem established? Didn’t Ha-Dat (the believe) set in already among Bnei Israel or should we say Am Israel?
The answer comes from Ramban who divides The Israelites into two groups. One group crying out to HaShem. And another group not accepting the salvation performed for them – still believing that it would have been better not to have been set free.
And here is why he’s thinking this way: Because in the text of the Torah there’s the distinction being made between Bnei Israel and HaAm, between the Children of Israel and The People.
But it was “to The People” to whom Moshe turned to allay their fears:
“VaYomer Mosche el-HaAm el-TirUh…”And Moses said unto the people: fear not…
With other words it was The People and not the Children of Israel who uttered: what have you done to us to bring us out of Egypt…
What a moment of truth. You either believe or not in HaShem… We often forget that in Hebrew there is no word for religion there’s only the word Dat – Believe. And here, at the edge of the water you had to believe or not.
A Jew is not religious or more religious or very religious. Nonsense, a jew is a believer. Period. A believer in HaShem.
And here at the edge of the water HaShem told Moshe to the Children of Israel to march forward. Not following Moshe but rather in front of him. With Dat. With Believe.
According to Shemot Rabbah the Tribe of Judah plunges in first. Stated in Tehilim 114 Judah was the one who sanctified him… Even this amazing miracle didn’t convince all. But then again HaShem doesn’t perform miracles for all, but for those who are special.
Only three days later the complaining was back over lack of food and shortage of water.
As if the historic and great miracle filmed by Cecil B DeMille – by the way, the only oscar they got for the movie was for special effects, – wasn’t enough to make permanent believers out of them.
And how did the Torah mention those whose complained? As Ha-Am. The People, eventually to be replaced by Bnei Israel. A people of newly born believers and ready to grow up worthy to be called The Chosen People.
Ekev
Here, the longest address of Moshe Rabbenu continues. It should not be surprising, since here is the great leader not being allowed himself to go into Eretz Israel (Land of Israel). Yet he knows the great dangers of the plenty that can turn man into complacency.
There, not far away is waiting a good land, a land of wheat and barley. With brooks of water and fountains you can almost hear. A land whose stones are iron and out of its hills copper may be mined… a land of milk and honey.
Here, manna does not have to fall from the heavens. Manna, so chosen for it wasn’t a known substance to this generation and the former generation. Perhaps chosen to be the perfect bland contrast to the plenty of food awaiting them across the Jordan River.
That plenty that’s awaiting them can lead to the faults and ignorance Am Israel has made before. Moshe fears this. And HaShem (The Name) fears it too.
So Moshe could have left it with the ten commandments and call it a day. But no, he spoke into great detail. Small details… how Israel should love HaShem. How HaShem loves Israel. And… how Israel should fear HaShem.
Back and forth. Love… and also the word fear.
Why fear?
Veh-Attah Israel, Ma HaShem Sho-el mimchah….
And now, Israel what does HaShem thy God asks of thee, But to FEAR the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways and to love him, and to serve the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with thy soul; to keep the commandments of the Lord, and his statutes which I command thee this day for THY good.
Ci-Iem Lir-ah et HaShem… but to fear HaShem…
Is not much to ask from Klal Israel. They may have shrugged and thought: ok, I’ll fear God.
But ‘fear’ is mostly understood by Moshe, (the Gemara explains); It is because of his unusual high moral standards that he, Moshe, understands these words perhaps better than anyone. He knows what fear really means.
Ramban says:
The phrase “what does HaShem asks of thee…
Must be understood in relation to the closing phrase…
for THY own good….
Here, Klal Israel is asked to follow instructions carefully so that THEY benefit from it… and not HaShem.
It’s important to realize that never in this address, is HasShem, through Moshe Rabbeinu asking to do good… by or for HaShem….
This is a new beginning… the word “and now” – ve-attah..
Signifies a clean slate for all of Israel.
No matter what the faults were in the past, as carefully repeated by Moshe in his address,
here, close by… is the good land as a gift… now start over and don’t mess it up….
Perhaps here, the greatest fear is that Moshe knows very well that with the gift of good and plenty also comes complacency.
Maybe, the long address to Israel going back and forth between loving God and fearing God is parallel to the Shema.
The first part of the Shema being about Unity and Love.
And the second part, as stated in this sidra, about the acceptance of the yoke of the mitzwot… and fear is certainly central to that.
Moshe Rabbeinu must have been aware of his days coming to an end. And therefore the word Ve-attah… can be read as You… as in ‘And You people’. As if Moshe wanted to distance himself totally from Am Israel, thereby giving them a totally new beginning, without any responsibility to him, but with sole responsibility to HaShem.
Moshe, in his address, carefully balances love and fear.
Good and bad. And with it he gives Klal Israel a post-it note; in the form of tefillin and the order of the mezuzah containing the ever so important Shema.
As if to say, you cannot blame me for anything anymore,
I have told you so.
And now, It’s totally up to you.
There, not far away is waiting a good land, a land of wheat and barley. With brooks of water and fountains you can almost hear. A land whose stones are iron and out of its hills copper may be mined… a land of milk and honey.
Here, manna does not have to fall from the heavens. Manna, so chosen for it wasn’t a known substance to this generation and the former generation. Perhaps chosen to be the perfect bland contrast to the plenty of food awaiting them across the Jordan River.
That plenty that’s awaiting them can lead to the faults and ignorance Am Israel has made before. Moshe fears this. And HaShem (The Name) fears it too.
So Moshe could have left it with the ten commandments and call it a day. But no, he spoke into great detail. Small details… how Israel should love HaShem. How HaShem loves Israel. And… how Israel should fear HaShem.
Back and forth. Love… and also the word fear.
Why fear?
Veh-Attah Israel, Ma HaShem Sho-el mimchah….
And now, Israel what does HaShem thy God asks of thee, But to FEAR the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways and to love him, and to serve the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with thy soul; to keep the commandments of the Lord, and his statutes which I command thee this day for THY good.
Ci-Iem Lir-ah et HaShem… but to fear HaShem…
Is not much to ask from Klal Israel. They may have shrugged and thought: ok, I’ll fear God.
But ‘fear’ is mostly understood by Moshe, (the Gemara explains); It is because of his unusual high moral standards that he, Moshe, understands these words perhaps better than anyone. He knows what fear really means.
Ramban says:
The phrase “what does HaShem asks of thee…
Must be understood in relation to the closing phrase…
for THY own good….
Here, Klal Israel is asked to follow instructions carefully so that THEY benefit from it… and not HaShem.
It’s important to realize that never in this address, is HasShem, through Moshe Rabbeinu asking to do good… by or for HaShem….
This is a new beginning… the word “and now” – ve-attah..
Signifies a clean slate for all of Israel.
No matter what the faults were in the past, as carefully repeated by Moshe in his address,
here, close by… is the good land as a gift… now start over and don’t mess it up….
Perhaps here, the greatest fear is that Moshe knows very well that with the gift of good and plenty also comes complacency.
Maybe, the long address to Israel going back and forth between loving God and fearing God is parallel to the Shema.
The first part of the Shema being about Unity and Love.
And the second part, as stated in this sidra, about the acceptance of the yoke of the mitzwot… and fear is certainly central to that.
Moshe Rabbeinu must have been aware of his days coming to an end. And therefore the word Ve-attah… can be read as You… as in ‘And You people’. As if Moshe wanted to distance himself totally from Am Israel, thereby giving them a totally new beginning, without any responsibility to him, but with sole responsibility to HaShem.
Moshe, in his address, carefully balances love and fear.
Good and bad. And with it he gives Klal Israel a post-it note; in the form of tefillin and the order of the mezuzah containing the ever so important Shema.
As if to say, you cannot blame me for anything anymore,
I have told you so.
And now, It’s totally up to you.
Vayishlach
Jacov’s Fear
After twenty years of hiding from Esau, Jacov returns to Beersheba.
He chooses to prepare himself in three ways;
With gifts, through prayer and should the two not work, by force – milchamah.
Upon hearing that Esau might meet him with a force of 400 men, Jacov appears frightened. He shows it. He starts calling Esau –adoni- my lord. Some of our Sages clearly voiced disapproval of Jacov showing that kind of appeasement towards Esau.
Both Rabbi Huna in Bereshit Rabba and later Rabbi Judah ben Simon are stunned by Jacov positioning himself towards Esau as –quote- “thy servant Jacov”. In the words of HaShem: “Thou didst humble thyself and called Esau ‘my lord’ eight times. By thy life. I shall raise up from his children eight kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel”.
So much for diplomacy first. For Jacov did have the right intentions. After all he didn’t know what to expect of Esau. It’s as if he was punished for trying diplomacy first. Ramban even sees a parallel between Jacov’s behaviour and that of the Hashmoneans seeking the good offices of the Romans. By this they actually hastened the downfall of Israel.
An opposite point is made by Rabbi Judah HaNasi. Close friend of the Roman Emperor Antoninus. Rabbi Judah HaNasi was a master in diplomacy in order to keep good relations with the Romans and to safeguard the interests of the Jewish People.
The Midrash has this quote:
Writing an epistle to his majesty the Emperor Antoninus. He started to write: …from Judah HaNasi (the prince)…and then corrected himself to write: …from thy servant Judah HaNasi….thinking –what am I better than my forefather? Did not Jacov say thus: “thus said thy servant Jacov?”
And it worked judging by Esau’s reaction. Is this parashat the first lesson in diplomacy? Are we taught to humble ourselves towards others beyond HaShem?
Jacov showed fear. Ramban points again at the Hasmoneans:
“For we ourselves initiated our fall at the hands of Edom, since the kings in the Second Temple allied themselves with the Romans…”
I just finished a Dutch book written by a fellow Dutch Jew by the name Leon de Winter, The Right Of Return. In it, he describes Israel in 2024 shrunken to nothing more than Tel Aviv and surroundings. Eilat has fallen, Jerusalem has fallen. And Tel Aviv will undoubtedly also fall. Clearly this fictional story of a future Israel falling and falling more and more because of appeasement and weakness written in 2008, has a direct line to today’s parashat and the reaction of Sages and Rabbi’s alike warning of the consequences.
And yet, there’s another reason Jacov may have chosen to be so humble. Maybe it was because HaShem did promise to look out over him. Maybe Jacov wanted to show HaShem he could forgo his own pride by showing humbleness first.
Moshe Rabbenu knows better than anyone the responsibility of HaShem’s good graces. At the same time Moshe Rabbenu still had to make his own choices that could loose him the right of HaShem’s favour. And he did make a mistake and lost his favour, standing just a few meters away across the Jordan from HaEretz.
The same goes for Jacov. He still had to choose his own way, and approach.
Our sages phrase it this way:
The genuinely upright man understands that the promise granted him by divine grace is only conditional, depending on him not becoming “soiled by sin”…
Not often enough does one hear of a wealthy man bestowing his children of their trust funds upon certain conditions. Just to make sure they develop a character of good standing first.
Back to Jacov’s Fear.
Why should he? He had HaShem’s blessing. He had HaShem’s support.
Abravanel says it this way:
Jacov’s fear was not due to the weakness of his faith. Indeed he genuinely trusted in God. But his fear was like that of the real hero who going to battle is afraid of death and senses the danger but out of noble motives scorns life and choses a brave death…
Since it is forbidden for men to rely on a miracle, Jacov takes precautions.
The gift, the prayer and lastly the battle.
Jacov doesn’t have to go any further than the gift. Esau comes running towards him, embraces him, falls on his neck and kisses him and both weep.
After twenty years of hiding from Esau, Jacov returns to Beersheba.
He chooses to prepare himself in three ways;
With gifts, through prayer and should the two not work, by force – milchamah.
Upon hearing that Esau might meet him with a force of 400 men, Jacov appears frightened. He shows it. He starts calling Esau –adoni- my lord. Some of our Sages clearly voiced disapproval of Jacov showing that kind of appeasement towards Esau.
Both Rabbi Huna in Bereshit Rabba and later Rabbi Judah ben Simon are stunned by Jacov positioning himself towards Esau as –quote- “thy servant Jacov”. In the words of HaShem: “Thou didst humble thyself and called Esau ‘my lord’ eight times. By thy life. I shall raise up from his children eight kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel”.
So much for diplomacy first. For Jacov did have the right intentions. After all he didn’t know what to expect of Esau. It’s as if he was punished for trying diplomacy first. Ramban even sees a parallel between Jacov’s behaviour and that of the Hashmoneans seeking the good offices of the Romans. By this they actually hastened the downfall of Israel.
An opposite point is made by Rabbi Judah HaNasi. Close friend of the Roman Emperor Antoninus. Rabbi Judah HaNasi was a master in diplomacy in order to keep good relations with the Romans and to safeguard the interests of the Jewish People.
The Midrash has this quote:
Writing an epistle to his majesty the Emperor Antoninus. He started to write: …from Judah HaNasi (the prince)…and then corrected himself to write: …from thy servant Judah HaNasi….thinking –what am I better than my forefather? Did not Jacov say thus: “thus said thy servant Jacov?”
And it worked judging by Esau’s reaction. Is this parashat the first lesson in diplomacy? Are we taught to humble ourselves towards others beyond HaShem?
Jacov showed fear. Ramban points again at the Hasmoneans:
“For we ourselves initiated our fall at the hands of Edom, since the kings in the Second Temple allied themselves with the Romans…”
I just finished a Dutch book written by a fellow Dutch Jew by the name Leon de Winter, The Right Of Return. In it, he describes Israel in 2024 shrunken to nothing more than Tel Aviv and surroundings. Eilat has fallen, Jerusalem has fallen. And Tel Aviv will undoubtedly also fall. Clearly this fictional story of a future Israel falling and falling more and more because of appeasement and weakness written in 2008, has a direct line to today’s parashat and the reaction of Sages and Rabbi’s alike warning of the consequences.
And yet, there’s another reason Jacov may have chosen to be so humble. Maybe it was because HaShem did promise to look out over him. Maybe Jacov wanted to show HaShem he could forgo his own pride by showing humbleness first.
Moshe Rabbenu knows better than anyone the responsibility of HaShem’s good graces. At the same time Moshe Rabbenu still had to make his own choices that could loose him the right of HaShem’s favour. And he did make a mistake and lost his favour, standing just a few meters away across the Jordan from HaEretz.
The same goes for Jacov. He still had to choose his own way, and approach.
Our sages phrase it this way:
The genuinely upright man understands that the promise granted him by divine grace is only conditional, depending on him not becoming “soiled by sin”…
Not often enough does one hear of a wealthy man bestowing his children of their trust funds upon certain conditions. Just to make sure they develop a character of good standing first.
Back to Jacov’s Fear.
Why should he? He had HaShem’s blessing. He had HaShem’s support.
Abravanel says it this way:
Jacov’s fear was not due to the weakness of his faith. Indeed he genuinely trusted in God. But his fear was like that of the real hero who going to battle is afraid of death and senses the danger but out of noble motives scorns life and choses a brave death…
Since it is forbidden for men to rely on a miracle, Jacov takes precautions.
The gift, the prayer and lastly the battle.
Jacov doesn’t have to go any further than the gift. Esau comes running towards him, embraces him, falls on his neck and kisses him and both weep.
Vayechi
The last of the twelve parashot of Bereshiet.
One could ask themselves, if having to choose only one of the five books of the Torah, which one would you choose?
The answer could easily be …Bereshiet.
For Bereshiet is a complete book and ends perfectly with the cornerstone being laid for Am Israel in the twelth parashat: Vayechi.
The sages say that you can take Bereshiet and look at it as the complete human story:
The purpose of our creation.
The transformation of the soul from a spiritual entity to a physical human being.
The manner in which we develop our self and environment.
And finally the realization of the purpose of life.
Translated as follows:
Bereshiet – Purpose
Noach – Tranquility
Lech Lecha – Journey
Vayeira – Vision
Chayeh Sarah – Invigoration
Toldot – Production
Vayetzei – Excursion
Vayishlach – Delegation
Vayeishev – Integration
Miketz – End
Vayigash – Union
And finally
Vayechi – life (itself)
Sages translated “vayechi” as “and he lived”
Making thereby a connection to eternal life.
The Lubbavitcher Rebbe describes the Death of Jacob as
“and he Lived” he- being Jacov. For Jacov’s life is immutable… Jacov lives on…
Looking at how the Torah is written, one can see that this parashat is literally closed. It has no indentation in it’s typography. It’s a closed book. Rashi points out that this is not only the closing of a book, but the book is closed, meaning that Jacov cannot speak to the end of days to his sons on his deathbed. He whishes to reveal the “ketz”, the end of days but he can’t.
In Jacov’s words - Pesachim:
“Perhaps there’s an inadequancy in my bed (read: offspring) like Avraham who fathered Ishmael, or my father Yitchak who fathered Esau”….
Now the last of the three patriarchs finds himself fearful again to be given the responsibility - to give out, hand over responsibilities among his own offspring.
We saw Jacov being fearful before in Vayyishlach when, after hiding from Esau for twenty years, he returns to face his brother calling him “adoni” – “Sir…”.
But this time his fear is deeper and more spiritual. For perhaps Jacov knows that not all of his sons are perfect.
“Shimon and Levi are brothers, instruments of violence are their weapons…in their anger they slew a man….cursed be their anger…”
Or in Reuven’s case: ….”hasty as water, you shall not excel; because you went up and violated your father’s bed…”
Jacov’s fear can be understood as the fear of a man who fears HaShem. A man who fears his own responsibility.
He must have known that he was the last of the dynasty.
In Hebrew,
“shalshelet, which is derived from “shalosh” – number three, is the word for dynasty. And according to the Kabbalah, each of the patriarchs created a different spiritual awareness in this world.
Each contributing to the three pillars necessary to complete the establishment of the nation.
Avraham is identified with Chesed.
Yitzchak with the opposite of kindness; gevurah and din (strength and justice)
And Jacov with the merging of the two namely Tiferet – beauty.
Jacov knows he’s becoming Israel. It’s up to his sons to grow into Israel. Jacov is fearful that there maybe a klipat gevurah – a counterfeit, among them and maybe it’s not time for the nation to be formed.
From Pesachim:
His sons responded to Jacov’s fear:
His sons said to him: Shma Israel HaShem Elohenu, HaShem Echad. And Jacov immediately responded: Baruch Shem Kavod Malchuto Leolam Vaed.
His sons trying to assure their father that they truly accept the One God. As if to say: Yes we understand your fear, but herewith we declare our believe, our dat, and now you can be assured.
And as Jacov says this later on his deathbed again, he doesn’t do so sadly but as to uplift himself. As did Rabbi Akiva when the Romans tortured him. According to the Talmud it was time to uplift himself and to infuse the people with a sense of nationhood…
So the Shema becomes the perfect end to a book not because someone is dying but because a Nation Is Born.
This is why Bereshiet is a closed book.
Not necessarily chapter one of the Torah; but rather it’s own beginning, middle and complete end.
With Vayechi being the last chapter giving official birth to Am Yisroel- Bereshiet is complete…
And what kind of end?
A happy one?
That’s depends how Am Israel handles themselves.
It will be tested soon with the tide changing in Egypt.
But that’s another, completely separate book.
One could ask themselves, if having to choose only one of the five books of the Torah, which one would you choose?
The answer could easily be …Bereshiet.
For Bereshiet is a complete book and ends perfectly with the cornerstone being laid for Am Israel in the twelth parashat: Vayechi.
The sages say that you can take Bereshiet and look at it as the complete human story:
The purpose of our creation.
The transformation of the soul from a spiritual entity to a physical human being.
The manner in which we develop our self and environment.
And finally the realization of the purpose of life.
Translated as follows:
Bereshiet – Purpose
Noach – Tranquility
Lech Lecha – Journey
Vayeira – Vision
Chayeh Sarah – Invigoration
Toldot – Production
Vayetzei – Excursion
Vayishlach – Delegation
Vayeishev – Integration
Miketz – End
Vayigash – Union
And finally
Vayechi – life (itself)
Sages translated “vayechi” as “and he lived”
Making thereby a connection to eternal life.
The Lubbavitcher Rebbe describes the Death of Jacob as
“and he Lived” he- being Jacov. For Jacov’s life is immutable… Jacov lives on…
Looking at how the Torah is written, one can see that this parashat is literally closed. It has no indentation in it’s typography. It’s a closed book. Rashi points out that this is not only the closing of a book, but the book is closed, meaning that Jacov cannot speak to the end of days to his sons on his deathbed. He whishes to reveal the “ketz”, the end of days but he can’t.
In Jacov’s words - Pesachim:
“Perhaps there’s an inadequancy in my bed (read: offspring) like Avraham who fathered Ishmael, or my father Yitchak who fathered Esau”….
Now the last of the three patriarchs finds himself fearful again to be given the responsibility - to give out, hand over responsibilities among his own offspring.
We saw Jacov being fearful before in Vayyishlach when, after hiding from Esau for twenty years, he returns to face his brother calling him “adoni” – “Sir…”.
But this time his fear is deeper and more spiritual. For perhaps Jacov knows that not all of his sons are perfect.
“Shimon and Levi are brothers, instruments of violence are their weapons…in their anger they slew a man….cursed be their anger…”
Or in Reuven’s case: ….”hasty as water, you shall not excel; because you went up and violated your father’s bed…”
Jacov’s fear can be understood as the fear of a man who fears HaShem. A man who fears his own responsibility.
He must have known that he was the last of the dynasty.
In Hebrew,
“shalshelet, which is derived from “shalosh” – number three, is the word for dynasty. And according to the Kabbalah, each of the patriarchs created a different spiritual awareness in this world.
Each contributing to the three pillars necessary to complete the establishment of the nation.
Avraham is identified with Chesed.
Yitzchak with the opposite of kindness; gevurah and din (strength and justice)
And Jacov with the merging of the two namely Tiferet – beauty.
Jacov knows he’s becoming Israel. It’s up to his sons to grow into Israel. Jacov is fearful that there maybe a klipat gevurah – a counterfeit, among them and maybe it’s not time for the nation to be formed.
From Pesachim:
His sons responded to Jacov’s fear:
His sons said to him: Shma Israel HaShem Elohenu, HaShem Echad. And Jacov immediately responded: Baruch Shem Kavod Malchuto Leolam Vaed.
His sons trying to assure their father that they truly accept the One God. As if to say: Yes we understand your fear, but herewith we declare our believe, our dat, and now you can be assured.
And as Jacov says this later on his deathbed again, he doesn’t do so sadly but as to uplift himself. As did Rabbi Akiva when the Romans tortured him. According to the Talmud it was time to uplift himself and to infuse the people with a sense of nationhood…
So the Shema becomes the perfect end to a book not because someone is dying but because a Nation Is Born.
This is why Bereshiet is a closed book.
Not necessarily chapter one of the Torah; but rather it’s own beginning, middle and complete end.
With Vayechi being the last chapter giving official birth to Am Yisroel- Bereshiet is complete…
And what kind of end?
A happy one?
That’s depends how Am Israel handles themselves.
It will be tested soon with the tide changing in Egypt.
But that’s another, completely separate book.
Matot Massei
Israel, The Gift.
Read the Torah in Spanish, or German, or Japanese and you will find the words “promised land” translated exactly as “promised land”. The rest of the world has acknowledged our right to Israel by way of the word “promised”.
But in this Parashat another word stands out that actually means much more than just a promise:
“nah-tati” or literally: “I gave…”
As in: Ki La-chem Nah-tati Eht Ha-Aretz La-reshet Oh-tah.
Or: For unto you have I given the land to possess it.
That’s the gift of Israel.
All through the Torah, HaShem alludes to the gesture of Israel belonging to the Israelites in different ways and with different words.
From “granted”, to “shall dwell in”, to “posses it”, to “brought you…” the promise of Israel is clear. And, what’s more, the word “promise” is repeated every time we switch forefathers.
It’s Nachmanides who is convinced that the promise of Israel is more than that. He thinks it’s a command to “go and posses” the Land.
Twice the phrase “Ve-Horashtem” – “and thou shalt posses them” occurs in Massei. Some, including Rashi translate the first mentioning as:
“Thou shalt dispossess the inhabitants of the land”.
And they translate the second mentioning of “Ve-Horashtem” as: “You shall possess the land and dwell therein…”
Rashi therefore sees the second mentioning of the same word, as a pre-condition of the first settlement. With other words, if you first re-possess, that you will possess next.
Even translating the same word twice in a row, and giving it different values can lead to dramatic results. Can you imagine if Nachmanides, Maimonides, Rashi and the like would have translated their discussions and opinions in their own languages? The chance of us having had various other mitzvot would have been great.
Even staying within the Hebrew of the Torah itself, the interpretations of our Sages have been fascinatingly different.
Back to the rest of the world. Why is it that the common acceptance of our status in the non-Jewish world is that we were “promised” the land of Canaan and not “given”?
Is it the oversight of the Sages not to make more of the word: Nah-tati (I gave you)? Nachmanides goes beyond the word “promise”. He thinks that the inhabitance of Israel is a command. Even more than just a mitvah. He sets the stage for the thought that only in Israel can one truly observe all the precepts of the Torah.
When King David was expelled by Saul he complained: …”since whoever resides in Eretz Israel is like to him who has a god, whilst whoever resides outside it, is like him who has no god…
We were “given” the land in Leviticus 25,38 before: “To give you the land of Canaan, to be your God.” Which makes me wonder, what would have happened if the Sages had made much more of the word: “given” or gift? What would have happened if first the Monks in Latin and Greek and later in printed Christian Bible versions the “Promised Land” would instead have been “the Gift of the Land of Israel to the Jews?”
Could it have stopped Richard the Lionheart during the Third Crusade from brutally slaughtering us in every city or town he stopped on the way to free the Promised Land? Would it have made a difference in our history at all? Of course we’ll never know. But in my personal opinion, a gift has a greater value than a promise.
Read the Torah in Spanish, or German, or Japanese and you will find the words “promised land” translated exactly as “promised land”. The rest of the world has acknowledged our right to Israel by way of the word “promised”.
But in this Parashat another word stands out that actually means much more than just a promise:
“nah-tati” or literally: “I gave…”
As in: Ki La-chem Nah-tati Eht Ha-Aretz La-reshet Oh-tah.
Or: For unto you have I given the land to possess it.
That’s the gift of Israel.
All through the Torah, HaShem alludes to the gesture of Israel belonging to the Israelites in different ways and with different words.
From “granted”, to “shall dwell in”, to “posses it”, to “brought you…” the promise of Israel is clear. And, what’s more, the word “promise” is repeated every time we switch forefathers.
It’s Nachmanides who is convinced that the promise of Israel is more than that. He thinks it’s a command to “go and posses” the Land.
Twice the phrase “Ve-Horashtem” – “and thou shalt posses them” occurs in Massei. Some, including Rashi translate the first mentioning as:
“Thou shalt dispossess the inhabitants of the land”.
And they translate the second mentioning of “Ve-Horashtem” as: “You shall possess the land and dwell therein…”
Rashi therefore sees the second mentioning of the same word, as a pre-condition of the first settlement. With other words, if you first re-possess, that you will possess next.
Even translating the same word twice in a row, and giving it different values can lead to dramatic results. Can you imagine if Nachmanides, Maimonides, Rashi and the like would have translated their discussions and opinions in their own languages? The chance of us having had various other mitzvot would have been great.
Even staying within the Hebrew of the Torah itself, the interpretations of our Sages have been fascinatingly different.
Back to the rest of the world. Why is it that the common acceptance of our status in the non-Jewish world is that we were “promised” the land of Canaan and not “given”?
Is it the oversight of the Sages not to make more of the word: Nah-tati (I gave you)? Nachmanides goes beyond the word “promise”. He thinks that the inhabitance of Israel is a command. Even more than just a mitvah. He sets the stage for the thought that only in Israel can one truly observe all the precepts of the Torah.
When King David was expelled by Saul he complained: …”since whoever resides in Eretz Israel is like to him who has a god, whilst whoever resides outside it, is like him who has no god…
We were “given” the land in Leviticus 25,38 before: “To give you the land of Canaan, to be your God.” Which makes me wonder, what would have happened if the Sages had made much more of the word: “given” or gift? What would have happened if first the Monks in Latin and Greek and later in printed Christian Bible versions the “Promised Land” would instead have been “the Gift of the Land of Israel to the Jews?”
Could it have stopped Richard the Lionheart during the Third Crusade from brutally slaughtering us in every city or town he stopped on the way to free the Promised Land? Would it have made a difference in our history at all? Of course we’ll never know. But in my personal opinion, a gift has a greater value than a promise.
Shelah
Never Trust a Spy.
Lack of faith is not an uncommon theme when it comes to Am Israel since leaving Egypt. And the sages have pointed out many times why Am Israel doubt itself, spread rumours, defies Moses or even ignores HaShem. HaShem does not prevent men and women to go their own way, even if it is a bad way. Our Sages point out: “Mankind is led on by the path he wishes to pursue”. Here, we find Am Israel choosing the path of doubt by selecting spies to enter their promised land in order to report back what to expect. HaShem doesn’t prevent this; on the contrary – He helps carrying out this act as good as it can be done.
Moses formulates six clear questions for the spies.
1‐ “See” the land what it is.
2‐ Check out the people whether they’re strong or weak, few or many.
3‐ What the “land” they dwell in is all about.
4‐ …Whether it’s good or bad.
5‐ What kind of cities they dwell in.
6‐ And, whether they live in tents or strongholds.
Pretty simple and straightforward questions. On top of that, you don’t have to be James Bond to figure all that out. But as soon as they returned, their report wasn’t at all straightforward. Their stories grew more opinionated. They reported back three times and the stories grew as follows: The first time their report about the inhibitants was …Nevertheless the people be fierce that dwell in the land, and the cities are very strongly fortified… Repeating this to Caleb it became: “We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we”. Lastly to Moses they offered the opinion that “The land, which we have thoroughly explored, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof, and all the people that we saw in it are men of great stature”. Here, these leaders acting as spies are now defying HaShem’s will. Ramban doubts if they did anything wrong by offering their opinion: “…the people who live there are a fierce lot”, but does detect subtectivity. After all, they reported back the good of the land and at the same time saying that the people there were too strong to overcome.
What’s the crime here?
Isaac Arama in Akedat Yitzhak: They were no longer neutral. They didn’t only deliver the facts but gave their opinion. This is mostly clear in the double meaning of the sentence: Loh Nuchal La‐a lot El Ha‐am, Ki Chazak Hu Mimenu. We are not able to go up against the people for they are stronger than: 1‐ WE or 2‐ HE. The word ‘Mimenu’, after all can mean – ‘than we’‐ or –‘than he’‐, which could mean –‘than He’ – He, as in HaShem. Rashi was convinced they meant ‘Him’ ‐ That they implied that these people were stronger than God. Isaac Arama concludes that we may thank these pessimistic spies for the Diaspora. The trials and tribulations that were to follow Am Israel over the next ages, are to be pointed back to this moment. Nachmanides did not consider the act of sending out spies as a sign of lack of trust. He considers the sin of the people to be in their reaction to the subjective report of the spies.
We’ve heard this many times before:
1‐ The immediate longing to Egypt.
2‐ The doubt in HaShem to “fall by the Sword?’
3‐ The actual intent to organize the return to Egypt: “Let us make a leader, and let us return into Egypt”.
Rashi gives two explanations of the words: Nitnah Rosh…make a leader. One is that we may see this litterally as “making a King” – a leader. And secondly that this also points to idolworship. At this point Moses has to come inbetween a people that repeats their mistakes and insults HaShem in just a similar way as when they invented the golden calf. At the time of the golden calf, Moses acted with three pleas; firstly; Love of HaShem towards his people, secondly; Hillul HaShem – the bringing of the name into disrepute among the nations and thirdly; the covenant made with the Patriarchs.
This time, Moses tries it with just one argument. That of bringing the name of HaShem in disrepute; “What will the Egyptians be thinking? The same argument Joshua uses after Israel’s first defeat; “What wilt Thou do for the sake of Thy great name?” Moses himself is also giving up on Am Israel since he doesn’t refer to them as ‐Thy People‐ but merely as –this people‐. Did Moses realize that be distancing himself so clearly from his people he could save them?Was this perhaps the reason for HaShem to punish the ten spies with death and tocontinue the journey with an ungrateful and underserving people?
Let’s give the last on this to Maimonides who will do the apologizing for all of us; “Man cannot be expected suddenly to leave the state of slavery and toiling in bricks and straw and the like, wash with soiled hands at the spur of the moment and fight
with giants. It was therefore part of the Divine wisdom to make them wander around the wildernes until they had become schooled in courage. For, as we know, a nomadic existence under spartan conditions breeds courage, and the reverse, cravenness. In addition a new generation of people grew up who had known no humiliation and bondage”.
Keep walking Am Israel. Just a little more.
Lack of faith is not an uncommon theme when it comes to Am Israel since leaving Egypt. And the sages have pointed out many times why Am Israel doubt itself, spread rumours, defies Moses or even ignores HaShem. HaShem does not prevent men and women to go their own way, even if it is a bad way. Our Sages point out: “Mankind is led on by the path he wishes to pursue”. Here, we find Am Israel choosing the path of doubt by selecting spies to enter their promised land in order to report back what to expect. HaShem doesn’t prevent this; on the contrary – He helps carrying out this act as good as it can be done.
Moses formulates six clear questions for the spies.
1‐ “See” the land what it is.
2‐ Check out the people whether they’re strong or weak, few or many.
3‐ What the “land” they dwell in is all about.
4‐ …Whether it’s good or bad.
5‐ What kind of cities they dwell in.
6‐ And, whether they live in tents or strongholds.
Pretty simple and straightforward questions. On top of that, you don’t have to be James Bond to figure all that out. But as soon as they returned, their report wasn’t at all straightforward. Their stories grew more opinionated. They reported back three times and the stories grew as follows: The first time their report about the inhibitants was …Nevertheless the people be fierce that dwell in the land, and the cities are very strongly fortified… Repeating this to Caleb it became: “We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we”. Lastly to Moses they offered the opinion that “The land, which we have thoroughly explored, is a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof, and all the people that we saw in it are men of great stature”. Here, these leaders acting as spies are now defying HaShem’s will. Ramban doubts if they did anything wrong by offering their opinion: “…the people who live there are a fierce lot”, but does detect subtectivity. After all, they reported back the good of the land and at the same time saying that the people there were too strong to overcome.
What’s the crime here?
Isaac Arama in Akedat Yitzhak: They were no longer neutral. They didn’t only deliver the facts but gave their opinion. This is mostly clear in the double meaning of the sentence: Loh Nuchal La‐a lot El Ha‐am, Ki Chazak Hu Mimenu. We are not able to go up against the people for they are stronger than: 1‐ WE or 2‐ HE. The word ‘Mimenu’, after all can mean – ‘than we’‐ or –‘than he’‐, which could mean –‘than He’ – He, as in HaShem. Rashi was convinced they meant ‘Him’ ‐ That they implied that these people were stronger than God. Isaac Arama concludes that we may thank these pessimistic spies for the Diaspora. The trials and tribulations that were to follow Am Israel over the next ages, are to be pointed back to this moment. Nachmanides did not consider the act of sending out spies as a sign of lack of trust. He considers the sin of the people to be in their reaction to the subjective report of the spies.
We’ve heard this many times before:
1‐ The immediate longing to Egypt.
2‐ The doubt in HaShem to “fall by the Sword?’
3‐ The actual intent to organize the return to Egypt: “Let us make a leader, and let us return into Egypt”.
Rashi gives two explanations of the words: Nitnah Rosh…make a leader. One is that we may see this litterally as “making a King” – a leader. And secondly that this also points to idolworship. At this point Moses has to come inbetween a people that repeats their mistakes and insults HaShem in just a similar way as when they invented the golden calf. At the time of the golden calf, Moses acted with three pleas; firstly; Love of HaShem towards his people, secondly; Hillul HaShem – the bringing of the name into disrepute among the nations and thirdly; the covenant made with the Patriarchs.
This time, Moses tries it with just one argument. That of bringing the name of HaShem in disrepute; “What will the Egyptians be thinking? The same argument Joshua uses after Israel’s first defeat; “What wilt Thou do for the sake of Thy great name?” Moses himself is also giving up on Am Israel since he doesn’t refer to them as ‐Thy People‐ but merely as –this people‐. Did Moses realize that be distancing himself so clearly from his people he could save them?Was this perhaps the reason for HaShem to punish the ten spies with death and tocontinue the journey with an ungrateful and underserving people?
Let’s give the last on this to Maimonides who will do the apologizing for all of us; “Man cannot be expected suddenly to leave the state of slavery and toiling in bricks and straw and the like, wash with soiled hands at the spur of the moment and fight
with giants. It was therefore part of the Divine wisdom to make them wander around the wildernes until they had become schooled in courage. For, as we know, a nomadic existence under spartan conditions breeds courage, and the reverse, cravenness. In addition a new generation of people grew up who had known no humiliation and bondage”.
Keep walking Am Israel. Just a little more.
Mishpatim 2009
Too often we forget, that the word ‘Torah’ can be translated as a word for ‘Law’. And there’s no better Parasha to make a case for that than Mishpatim. Am Israel, freshly given the Ten Commandments is now handed multiple ordinances, or Mishpatim.
According to Rashi, the Torah makes no difference in the importance of any of these Mishpatim. The parasha starts off matter of factly with the words: “And these…” thereby adding to what was directed to Am Israel before; namely the Ten Commandments.
It’s important to know that these Mishpatim were “…set before them” - not taught by Moses, but rather a written law. Lest they forget them. Rashi argues (Tanchuma Mishpatim 3) that these laws were for Am Israel only - not for gentiles, hence the difference in importance here between oral Torah and written Torah. (From Mechilta, Eruvin 54b)
With the second sentence the Torah dives into various laws in a very direct and clear language, as if it were a law book one finds in a common law office. Is there a meaning as to the order of these new laws? Why start of with slaves and especially Hebrew slaves?
Recently, in a documentary on the life of Abraham Lincoln and his fight against slavery that aired on PBS, several historians made a point of reminding the audience that history should be judged within the time it took place. That Mister Lincoln didn’t wake up one day and took on slavery, but rather that it was a gradual and carefully planned struggle.
Perhaps the Torah features slavery first, as if it wants to immediately set certain things straight. Slaves and slave ownership was common among nations, but it was to be different among Am Israel. The human value of the lowest person within Israel’s society was just as much HaShem’s creation as any other member of our People - Ha-Am.
So why start off with slaves? I couldn’t find the exact reason but I did find this.
Arbarbanel looked for a lesson to be learned from the juxtaposition between the Ten Commandments and the passage on Hebrew slaves at the beginning of the Parasha. Abarbanel felt that the juxtaposition taught - that by taking the Israelites out of bondage, Hashem acquired them as His very own - as indicated by the Midrash by the words, “The children of Israel are My servants,” (Lev. 25:58) “and not servants of servants”.
Not exactly what I had hoped for. Personally, I thought that maybe the Torah wanted to make a direct connection between our slavery in Mitzrayim and keeping slaves of our own as something that is wrong.
In Diyyukim, Rabbi Pinehas Wolf asks - why did the Torah allow slavery at all? He argues that had slavery been abolished, this act would not have achieved its goals among all peoples. Indeed, the Torah would not have had an impact on all people. The other nations would have dismissed it as another crazy idea from the Hebrews just as taking off a day from work. The word for slave used here is ‘Eved’ directly from the root La-Avod - to work. At our seder tables we sing Avad-iem Hayenu - which of course literally translates into ‘workers we were’. Unless the meaning of the root ‘To Work, La-Avod’ - means ‘To Slave’, we could find the answer in the notion that there may be no word in Hebrew for slave, as we understand it in English. Maybe the Torah means simply ‘worker’. In modern and older English, throughout translated books, whether for the Mishna, Midrash or Torah, we find the word ’slave’ more often than not translated as ’servant or maiden’. Then again, Mishpatim continues with very precise laws that make the life of the sold or bought human, whether called slave, servant or maiden, better and more secure than any other slave among any other People.
Let’s say for a moment that Mishpatim did start off with slavery because of Am Israel’s own recent history as slaves. Can we then find other links between the recent past and the recent freedom? Are we not called “Bnei Israel”- Children of Israel, in BeShallach and as such reduced into children that must learn things anew after hundreds of years in captivity?
Is Mishpatim simply the deeper lesson that had to follow the Top Ten Commandments of Good Behaviour? Or is there a reason for putting it in a certain order?
Let’s see.
Mishpatim continues with murder. As slaves, Pharaoh and other forms of criminal behaviour by the Egyptians often exposed us at unlawful murder. Mishpatim even points out that murder by a beast is just as punishable as that by a human. Next, laws about offences against property. In Egypt, there was no property to think off and even if there was, it could be taken by the Egyptians at any time. Followed by Laws of Morality. Laws against witchcraft, sodomy, oppression of the weak and polytheism meant to keep Israel on the straight and narrow path of the One G’d, rather than the common law of multiple Gods in Egypt. Laws of thievery. Didn’t the Egyptians steal our lives, our freedom our wives and children? How to deal rightfully with strangers. Weren’t we treated wrongfully as strangers in Egypt? Rules of lending and mercy towards the poor. Doesn’t that help keep a People together and make a People stronger? Isn’t it so that when one man falls, a People begin to fall? Not for nothing it is stated in the Torah: Iem Kesef Talveh eht-Ami - When you lend My People money - thereby pointing towards one People and not a singular person.
Up next: laws towards honesty and avoidance of falsehoods. Clearly the glue to keep a People at peace and united. Followed by the prohibition to not take bribes, to not take gifts, to stay on the side of the righteous. Rashi points out in Bereshit Rabbah (70,8) - “…there is no transgression more serious and widespread than falsehood.”
And then?
Moses ascends to the mountain. Returns after forty days. Reads the book of the Covenant and the People answer as one. Not individually, but as one People. “Vah-yomeru kol asher diber HaShem na-aseh veh-nishmah.” “And they said, all that The Lord has spoken we will do and obey.”
And so the children of Israel begin to learn through mitzvoth the lesson to become one People. From Bnei Israel to Am Israel. Something they could never have imagined nor achieved in Egypt.
According to Rashi, the Torah makes no difference in the importance of any of these Mishpatim. The parasha starts off matter of factly with the words: “And these…” thereby adding to what was directed to Am Israel before; namely the Ten Commandments.
It’s important to know that these Mishpatim were “…set before them” - not taught by Moses, but rather a written law. Lest they forget them. Rashi argues (Tanchuma Mishpatim 3) that these laws were for Am Israel only - not for gentiles, hence the difference in importance here between oral Torah and written Torah. (From Mechilta, Eruvin 54b)
With the second sentence the Torah dives into various laws in a very direct and clear language, as if it were a law book one finds in a common law office. Is there a meaning as to the order of these new laws? Why start of with slaves and especially Hebrew slaves?
Recently, in a documentary on the life of Abraham Lincoln and his fight against slavery that aired on PBS, several historians made a point of reminding the audience that history should be judged within the time it took place. That Mister Lincoln didn’t wake up one day and took on slavery, but rather that it was a gradual and carefully planned struggle.
Perhaps the Torah features slavery first, as if it wants to immediately set certain things straight. Slaves and slave ownership was common among nations, but it was to be different among Am Israel. The human value of the lowest person within Israel’s society was just as much HaShem’s creation as any other member of our People - Ha-Am.
So why start off with slaves? I couldn’t find the exact reason but I did find this.
Arbarbanel looked for a lesson to be learned from the juxtaposition between the Ten Commandments and the passage on Hebrew slaves at the beginning of the Parasha. Abarbanel felt that the juxtaposition taught - that by taking the Israelites out of bondage, Hashem acquired them as His very own - as indicated by the Midrash by the words, “The children of Israel are My servants,” (Lev. 25:58) “and not servants of servants”.
Not exactly what I had hoped for. Personally, I thought that maybe the Torah wanted to make a direct connection between our slavery in Mitzrayim and keeping slaves of our own as something that is wrong.
In Diyyukim, Rabbi Pinehas Wolf asks - why did the Torah allow slavery at all? He argues that had slavery been abolished, this act would not have achieved its goals among all peoples. Indeed, the Torah would not have had an impact on all people. The other nations would have dismissed it as another crazy idea from the Hebrews just as taking off a day from work. The word for slave used here is ‘Eved’ directly from the root La-Avod - to work. At our seder tables we sing Avad-iem Hayenu - which of course literally translates into ‘workers we were’. Unless the meaning of the root ‘To Work, La-Avod’ - means ‘To Slave’, we could find the answer in the notion that there may be no word in Hebrew for slave, as we understand it in English. Maybe the Torah means simply ‘worker’. In modern and older English, throughout translated books, whether for the Mishna, Midrash or Torah, we find the word ’slave’ more often than not translated as ’servant or maiden’. Then again, Mishpatim continues with very precise laws that make the life of the sold or bought human, whether called slave, servant or maiden, better and more secure than any other slave among any other People.
Let’s say for a moment that Mishpatim did start off with slavery because of Am Israel’s own recent history as slaves. Can we then find other links between the recent past and the recent freedom? Are we not called “Bnei Israel”- Children of Israel, in BeShallach and as such reduced into children that must learn things anew after hundreds of years in captivity?
Is Mishpatim simply the deeper lesson that had to follow the Top Ten Commandments of Good Behaviour? Or is there a reason for putting it in a certain order?
Let’s see.
Mishpatim continues with murder. As slaves, Pharaoh and other forms of criminal behaviour by the Egyptians often exposed us at unlawful murder. Mishpatim even points out that murder by a beast is just as punishable as that by a human. Next, laws about offences against property. In Egypt, there was no property to think off and even if there was, it could be taken by the Egyptians at any time. Followed by Laws of Morality. Laws against witchcraft, sodomy, oppression of the weak and polytheism meant to keep Israel on the straight and narrow path of the One G’d, rather than the common law of multiple Gods in Egypt. Laws of thievery. Didn’t the Egyptians steal our lives, our freedom our wives and children? How to deal rightfully with strangers. Weren’t we treated wrongfully as strangers in Egypt? Rules of lending and mercy towards the poor. Doesn’t that help keep a People together and make a People stronger? Isn’t it so that when one man falls, a People begin to fall? Not for nothing it is stated in the Torah: Iem Kesef Talveh eht-Ami - When you lend My People money - thereby pointing towards one People and not a singular person.
Up next: laws towards honesty and avoidance of falsehoods. Clearly the glue to keep a People at peace and united. Followed by the prohibition to not take bribes, to not take gifts, to stay on the side of the righteous. Rashi points out in Bereshit Rabbah (70,8) - “…there is no transgression more serious and widespread than falsehood.”
And then?
Moses ascends to the mountain. Returns after forty days. Reads the book of the Covenant and the People answer as one. Not individually, but as one People. “Vah-yomeru kol asher diber HaShem na-aseh veh-nishmah.” “And they said, all that The Lord has spoken we will do and obey.”
And so the children of Israel begin to learn through mitzvoth the lesson to become one People. From Bnei Israel to Am Israel. Something they could never have imagined nor achieved in Egypt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
News:
