Review And Know

This blog mentioned in the past the contradiction between the Ramban and Mishna in Avos if the verse in Vaeschanan (4:9) is a lav to forget one's learning or מעמד הר סיני?

The Gemorah in Kiddushin has a derash שיהו דברי תורה מחודדים בפיך. שאם ישאל לך אדם דבר אל תגמגם ותאמר לו, אלא אמור לו מיד.  Why is the this derash about the bar of knowledge of Torah said in the context of giving Torah over to one's children?  Why must know Torah so clearly so that one can respond if asked any question?  The Gur Aryeh Devarim (6:7) says  והטעם, כי צריך שתהיה נקרא ״תורתו״, דכתיב (תהלים א, ב) ״ובתורתו יהגה יומם ולילה״, וגם נקראת קנינו, [דכתיב] (משלי ד, ב) ״כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם״, ואם מגמגם בהן אין זה ״תורתו״. ולא נקרא קנינו, שלא נקרא ׳קנינו׳ אלא אם שלו הוא, ואם מגמגם בתורה ומסופק בה - אינו שלו לגמרי: In order to be called תורתו, one must know it clearly.  Why is that the criteria for being called תורתו, does remembering more information make it more תורתו?  Its not that the person doesn't at all know the facts, but the fact of being מגמגם seems to detract from being called תורתו, why?

In Nisiv Hatorah Ch. 4 the Maharal says "ולא נחשב שהוא בעל תורה בפעל השלימות רק אם תכף שישאל אותו האדם משיב על זה ובזה נראה שהוא בעל תורה בפעל השלימות".  As mentioned in the previous weeks the point of שבועות is to bring out the abilities an individual מן הכח אל הפועל.  That is reflected by having a clarity in learning. What does this mean?

Yerushalmi Berachos (5:1) says א״ר תנחום, הסובר תלמודו לא במהרה הוא משכח, מה טעם, דכתיב פן תשכח את הדברים אשר ראו עיניך.  What does understand one's learning have to do with remembering learning?  Rashi Avodah Zarah (8a) says in explanation of adding to a blessing of shemone esrei מעין הברכה an example of one who forgets their learning should add to חונן הדעת.  In his words: אם היה משכח תלמודו מאריך בחונן הדעת.  Why add to אתה חונן, what does remembering have to do with knowledge, one should add to השיבנו אבינו לתורתך?  What we see is that knowledge means having a clarity in the subject.  The point of review isn't just to retain information; its to get a better clarity in the topic.  Rashi Kiddushin (30a) explains מחודדים בפיך, to review and understand the depth,  חזור עליהם ובדוק בעומקם; again we see the point of review isn't just to amass more information, its to gain a greater understanding in Torah. The obligation of מחודדים בפיך isn't an obligation of how many times to review, its a bar of clarity says review is ודוק בעומקם means the point of review is to get a further clarity. 

The possuk in Tehillim (119:34) says הֲ֭בִינֵנִי וְאֶצְּרָ֥ה תוֹרָתֶ֗ךָ וְאֶשְׁמְרֶ֥נָּה בְכׇל־לֵֽב.  The Even Ezra says הבינני – בכל לב – שלא אשכחנה.  Again we see it is the understanding of Torah that counteracts forgetting.  That is the peshat in the Maharal.  Its not amassing more information that makes it תורתו, its the level of clarity that gives a person a greater connection to Torah.  דעת means connection.  To have a true connection to Torah, to be called תורתו, there must understanding of Torah.  גמגום means there is a lack of דעת and then it isn't called תורתו.  Its not the information that makes the shlamus of a person, its the clarity in Torah.  Now we can understand why this derash is said in the context of transmitting Torah to the next generation.  You can give over to your children that which is clear to you.  It is that level of clarity necessary to transmit the Torah to the future generation.

The Gra on Avos (5:22) comments on הפוך בה הפוך בה דכולה בה- כמ"ש סלסלה ותרוממך.  And in Mishlay (4:8) he adds התבונה שבבינה שתחזור ותהפוך תמיד להבין על בוריו.  Review is to get a clarity.  That is what uplifts the person, the clarity, not just knowing more facts.

The aforementioned Yerushalmi cites the possuk of remembering Sinai to explain מסביר פנים בהלכה will save one from forgetting.  What's the connection? Because if one remembers Sinai then it is impossible to forget one's learning.  Something you see, you don't forget.  If one truly pictures Sinai then it will be impossible to forget one's learning.  The lav of forgetting Sinai (Ramban) and learning (Mishna) is the same; its a commandment to have such a clarity in one's learning that they will not forget (based upon a shmuzz by Rabbi Elefant.)

Traveling To The Rebbi

The Mishna in Sukkah (25a) says שלוחי מצוה פטורין מן המצוה.  One of the examples Rashi gives for this din is if a person is on his way to be מקבל פני רבו בחג.  This obligation is derived (27a) from a verse in the navi and presumably is only Rabbinic.  From here some Achronim want to prove that even if one is doing a Rabbinic mitzavh it also exempts only from fulfilling even a Torah commandment (see Aruch L'nar, Kovetz Shiurim.)

The question that can be raised is this obligation of seeing one's Rebbe a Talmud Torah halacha or is it a Yom Tov halacha.  The Magan Avrohom (301:7) assumes that woman are included in this obligation and the proof is that the source of the obligation is learnt out from the אשה שונמית that went to Elisha.  However, the Pnei Yehoshua Rosh Hashana (16b) assumes that women must be exempt for as a separate obligation it is a mitzvat aseh s'hazman grama and talmud torah she is exempt from.  And he explains that the אשה שונמית would go to Elisha despite the fact that she was exempt because she went to appreciate the greatness of Elisha. How can the Magen Avrohom hold that woman are obligated?  I think the simple peshat would be that we see in the possuk that woman are obligated so we see over here woman are obligated in this mitzvah despite it being time bound.  However why that would be, is unclear.  In the Moaday HaGrach (Kanievsky,) ( #252,) he was asked what is the explanation of the Magen Avrohom and he said it is part of simchas Yom Tov.  I guess Rav Chayim assumes one is happy to see there Rebbe on Yom Tov and it hence would be a fulfillment of simchas Yom Tov.

If we assume like this, then we can address the previous Rashi.  The reason why going לקבל פני רבו בחג exempts one from other mitzvot is because it is a kiyum mitzvah of simchas yom tov.  [I assume the geder of this would be that the Rabbis enacted that one must fulfill simcha in this manner of greeting one's Rebbe and not through other means.]

The next two questions in the sefer reflected this opinion of R' Chayim that it is an obligation of the Yom Tov, not an obligation of learning Torah. In the next question they asked R' Chayim if מקבל פני רבו בחג is part of the mitzvah of talmud torah or part of מורא וכבוד רבו.  He responded that its part of the כבוד הרגל.  [I'm not sure what that means its כבוד הרגל and he didn't respond its from the mitzvah of simcha.] The question after that is why the Rambam cites the law in Talmud Torah (5:7) and not in the laws of Yom Tov?  His response: לפני שכחו מענין רבו.  I don't know what that means either.  He goes לשיטתו in דרך שיחה עמ' תקסח where he assumes saying Gut Yom Tov to one's Rebbe is a fulfillment of the din.  If the yesod hadin is a law in talmud torah, then one would only be able to fulfill it by hearing דברי תורה from his Rebbe.

The Bikkuray Yaakov (603:22) suggests that even though the obligation may be derived from the navi, it is a fulfillment of את ה' אלקיך תירא לרבות ת"ח.  With this idea, he explains the Rashi in Sukkah.  One is exempt from other mitzvot for they are fulfilling the mitzvoh of honoring a talmud chacham. This is a third dimension.  The yesod of the laws isn't for the Yom Tov or talmud torah, rather to show honor to one's Rebbe.  The terminology of Rashi Chagigah (3a) ד"ה להקבל פניו וכו' לכבד את רבו also slightly indicates like this.  And this is the simple read of the Rambam that cites this law in the context of honoring one's Rebbe.  On the other hand ,the Ramban Yisro (20:8) says the mitzvah is 'לשמוע דבר ה indicating the yesod hadin is a way of fulfilling talmud torah.  The Ritvah Sukkah (27a) understands the obligatiobn to come on the holiday is only for someone that is far away but one who lives close to their Rebbe must come every day.  That obligation may be understood as כבוד רבו or because of talmud torah, to able to learn better.  [See Magan Avrohom 554:12 and Pri Migadim there.]

The Nodeh B'yehuda volume 2 (#94) asks why is this law of לקבל פני רבו not cited in the Rosh and Shulchan Aruch?  He says that the mitzvah doesn't apply after the destruction of the Temple based upon the Gemorah Kiddushin (33b) that one should only stand up for their Rebbe once in the morning and once in the evening so that one isn't honoring their Rebbe more than Hashem that we accept his kingship in Shema twice a day.  So too now since we can't go be עולה לרגל, we shouldn't go visit our Rebbe and show more honor to them.  Rav Avrohom Gorvitz asks its not showing more honor to the Rebbe for that we don't do עלייה לרגל is because we are אנוס, not because we are diminishing כבוד שמים?  Furthermore, would one that is exempt from עלייה לרגל be exempt from קבלת פני רבו, it doesn't say that anywhere?  Therefore, he says based upon the understanding that the yesod hadin is to show honor to one's Rebbe, it shouldn't be compared to עלייה לרגל which is to come to Yerushaliam to bring the korbanot of the holiday, rather to krias shema for both of them are  expressions of honoring; shema is honoring Hashem by accepting His sovereignty and לקבל פני רבו is to honor one's Rebbe by going to them. Hence, a lack of being עולה לרגל has nothing to do with going לקבל פני רבו, rather just as one recites krias shema, so too one should also be מקבל פני רבו ברגל.
To conclude with two additional points. The Rema M'pano (Teshuvot #6 at the end,) says the reason to לקבל פני רבו ברגל is because it is the chachamim that cause the kedusha of the yomim tovim by sanctifying the month.
A very important lesson that is cited in the Divrei Siach from the Steipler.

Last Minute

The Kozhnitzer Maggid says (second day Pesach) that even if one hasn't spent the days of Sefirah perfecting themselves, they can still make it up in the last day:

The last words of the mizmor of למנצח בנגינות that there is a minhag to say after counting the omer are אפסי ארץ.  This can be a remez to the idea of the Kozhnitzer; even one who is nothing, אפס, as low as the earth, ארץ , can still in the last minute become prepared for Shavuot.  The end of the אנא בכח that is also customary to say after counting is יודע תעלומות.  Hashem sees that in the depths of our hearts we want to be ready (R' Avrohom Schorr.)

Receiving Team

The Mictav M'Eliyahu (volume 1) says that Shavuot is the time when Hashem gives the Torah but you must be willing/ want to take it.  The Torah is given, but if you don't learn it, עמל בתורה, then aren't doing your job of receiving it.
He cites from Likutay Torah in V'zos Haberecasha that we say in אהבה רבה\ אהבת עולם, בַּעֲבוּר שִׁמְךָ הַגָּדוֹל וּבַעֲבוּר אֲבוֹתֵֽינוּ שֶׁבָּטְ֒חוּ בְךָ וַתְּ֒לַמְּ֒דֵם חֻקֵּי חַיִּים לַעֲשׂוֹת רְצוֹנְ֒ךָ בְּלֵבָב שָׁלֵם כֵּן תְּחָנֵּֽנוּ וּתְלַמְּ֒דֵֽנוּ: אָבִֽינוּ אָב הָרַחֲמָן הַמְרַחֵם רַחֵם עָלֵֽינוּ וְתֵן בְּלִבֵּֽנוּ בִּינָה לְהָבִין וּלְהַשְׂכִּיל לִשְׁמֹֽעַ לִלְמוֹד וּלְ֒לַמֵּד לִשְׁמֹר וְלַעֲשׂוֹת וּלְקַיֵּם אֶת־כָּל דִּבְרֵי־תַלְמוּד תּוֹרָתֶֽךָ בְּאַהֲבָה:  Up to תלמדנו we can ask for the זכות אות to help, up to the giving of the Torah.  But for our acceptance, it has to be done by ourselves.
The חוות דעת says in his intro. to his commentary on Yorah Deah that talmiday chachamim are called by that title because the ultimate חכם is Hashem.  He is the only one that can true חכמה and it is our job to be the talmud.  We have to be willing to receive that חכמה.

Dairy On Shavuot

A few points on the custom of eating dairy on Shavuot.
The Rama says the reason for the custom to eat dairy on Shavuot is a זכר לשתי הלחם.  In his words: ונוהגין בכל מקום לאכול מאכלי חלב ביום ראשון של שבועות ונראה לי הטעם שהוא כמו השני תבשילין שלוקחין בליל פסח זכר לפסח וזכר לחגיגה כן אוכלים מאכל חלב ואח"כ מאכל בשר וצריכין להביא עמהם ב' לחם על השלחן שהוא במקום המזבח ויש בזה זכרון לשני הלחם שהיו מקריבין ביום הבכורים:
The Rema says the custom is on the first day, does that exclude the night and the second day?
According to the Rema the custom wouldn't be to just eat ice cream or have some milk, there has to be bread with it.  I guess that can be fulfilled with mezonos, such as cheese cake.  Based upon this Rav Chayim Shalom Deutsh raised a question in hilchos berachos.  Often many in cheesecakes the mezonos is there only as a support to hold the cheese, in which case no beracha is recited on it and one only recites a shehakol on the cheese.  On Shavuot though, one might want the mezonos to fulfill the custom of the Rema and in which case it wouldn't be טפל and one would recite mezonos, a lot of variables that can be thrown in the question, וצ"ע.

For the spelt lovers out there, the Magen Avrohom (494:8,) cited in Mishna Berurah (#17,) says based upon the Rema that we eat dairy as a זכר לשתי הלחם, that the bread must be wheat as well just like the לשתי הלחם.  By extension we may add one should eat fine wheat, not whole wheat.

The Mishna Berurah (#12) brings an additional reason (I will cite his words in English.) "I also heard in the name of a Gadol who said a correct reason for this: that when Bnei Yisrael stood at Har Sinai and accepted the Torah(When the 10 commandments were revealed, and through this all the parts of the Torah were also revealed to them, like that Rav Sadya Gaon writes, that the 10 commandments sustain the whole Torah) and they went down from the mountain to their homes they found nothing to eat immediately except for dairy foods because for meat they would need much preparation to slaughter with a checked knife like Hashem commanded... And to clean out the strings of forbidden fats and blood, and to rinse and salt(the meat). Also to cook in new vessels because their previous vessels had been used to cook meat (that they now discovered was actually trief) had been used in the last 24 hrs (which is what is forbidden Biblically) so their old vessels were forbidden to them, therefore they choose on account of the time to eat dairy foods and we do this as a commemoration of this."  Rav Zeven in footnote 41 of מועדים להלכה on Shavuot points out that since the Torah was given on Shabbos they couldn't slaughter animals etc. anyway, nothing to do with the new laws.  In some versions of Mishna Berurah they say that the explanation based upon the new laws is only necessary according to the Pirkey D'Rebbe Eliezer that holds the Torah was given on Erev Shabbos.

Another one of the reasons given for the minhag to eat dairy is based upon the midrash tehillim (8) that the angels complained how could the Torah be given to mankind a second time if they just messed up with the agel?  Hashem said well you aint so perfect either for in the few minutes you came down in a bodily form you ate בשר וחלב at Avrohom's house.  Since, the whole reason we received the Torah is in merit of the dairy with the meat, we eat dairy as well.  This whole midrash needs an explanation, what is Hashem's answer, you yourselves ate בשר וחלב; how is that an answer to the argument of the angels that you see man is incapable of keeping the Torah?  Furthermore, where does it say the angels ate בשר וחלב, the possuk in Vayera says they ate the dairy first and the meat second, that is permitted and if it was real בשר וחלב how could Avrohom feed it to them?  In the sefer Pardes Haaretz by Rav Yeshiya Horowitz he cites a teaching from the Alter Rebbe to explain this midrash.  The Alter Rebbe explains that the reason בשר וחלב is prohibited is because בשר  is גבורה and חלב is חסד and they can't be mixed.  Why can one eat meat after dairy but not vice versa?  He explains because the halacha is תתאה גבר, it is what is eaten first, that which is in the bottom of one's stomach that has the dominant force.  Hence, if one eats dairy first, the חסד wins over the גבורה of the meat that follows so its permitted.  In reverse, meat first, then its גבורה will overpower the חסד of the dairy and that is prohibited.  Based upon this he says, that is all true if תתאה גבר, if עלאה גבר then eating meat after dairy would be prohibited.  That was Hashem's answer.  Since you ate meat after dairy, you proved you hold תתאה גבר, if that's the case, the Torah should be given to the תתאה, to mankind. [The basic kabbalistic approach to explain the midrash is also in Pardes Yosef Vayerah (#21) in the name of the Yid Hakadosh.]  The point of mattan torah was to enable תתאה גבר ,that man should be able to effect kedusha into the world.

Wave Your Flag

A third in a series of shmuzzen by R' Elephant. The midrash says דָּבָר אַחֵר, הֱבִיאַנִי אֶל בֵּית הַיָּיִן, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁנִּגְלָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עַל הַר סִינַי יָרְדוּ עִמּוֹ כ"ב רְבָבוֹת שֶׁל מַלְאָכִים, וכו וְהָיוּ כֻלָּם עֲשׂוּיִם דְּגָלִים דְּגָלִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שיר השירים ה, י): דָּגוּל מֵרְבָבָה, כֵּיוָן שֶׁרָאוּ אוֹתָן יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהֵם עֲשׂוּיִם דְּגָלִים דְּגָלִים, הִתְחִילוּ מִתְאַוִּים לִדְגָלִים, אָמְרוּ אַלְוַאי כָּךְ אָנוּ נַעֲשִׂים דְּגָלִים כְּמוֹתָן.  What is the degel of  the malachim and what is the greatness of it?  A degel represents an identity, it is rallying point to gather around.  A malach is a שליח, its whole being exists to do the desire of G-d.  That's why they are named after their תפקיד like מיכאל, רפאל וכו for their essence is their job.  The degel of the malach is its job, its purpose.  That is their identity.  What Klal Yisroel saw was that the malachim had a clear purpose.  That is what Klal Yisroel wanted, to be able to identify their own שורש הנשמה and know what their own job is.  In the words of the Sfas Emes (5636) וזהו הפקידה במספר שמות שהוכן כל אחד מישראל על משמרתו להתדבק בשורש השייך לו. ולכן אח"ז הדגלים כמ"ש במדרש שנתאוו לדגלים כמלאכי השרת. פי' המלאך אין בו שום דבר נפרד וכולו מורה על שליחותו וכבוד קונו. כמו כן בנ"י כיון שהכירו כ"א מעמדו נתאוו לדגלים שיהיו מצוינים לשמו ית':
The Gemorah Shabbos (88) says אמר רבי אלעזר: בשעה שהקדימו ישראל נעשה לנשמע יצתה בת קול ואמרה מי גילה רז זה לבני, רז שמלאכי השרת משתמשים בו.  This means that נעשה ונשמע is the level of a malach.  Why is that?  As explained last time, נעשה ונשמע means that one accepts to do the job placed upon them even if they don't know they have the capabilities to fulfill it.  Since malachim are infused with the drive of avodas Hashem, they have no limitations.   When Klal Yisroel reached this level at Mattan Torah, to be infused with this sense of purpose, they touched the level of a malach. Since they accepted the responsibility to get the job done, they were ready for the degel, to find what there mission is.  Because of their willingness to accept their mission, Hashem revealed to them what was their degel, what their mission was. By undertaking to do the job ,they get the job.
The possuk (2:2) says איש על דגלו באתת לבית אבתם יחנו בני ישראל מנגד סביב לאהל מועד יחנו.  We see from here that the source of all of this.  The source of the degel, the sense of mission and purpose, must come from בית אבתם.  It all starts with the proper חינוך of the parents giving their children this sense of self, identity, mission.  It is up to the parents to hand over the banner to their children.

Return Of The Jedi

[Most of this post is youtube embeds which I believe don't come up in the email, for those that receive it, so if you want to see them, you will have to go the blog.]  President Yoda urges the Jedi to return  to the בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות.  He said the Jedi must return to prepare for Shavuot !  We will fight for our holy rights!

One religious leader said in response the "this is too hasty of an action to follow as of yet , the evil empire is too strong and we can't come out of our hiding places as of yet.  Shavuot will take place but without any cool special effects, just plainly in your own hiding places. Remain strong and may the force be with you!"

Be Humble

וְאִתְּכֶ֣ם יִֽהְי֔וּ אִ֥ישׁ אִ֖ישׁ לַמַּטֶּ֑ה אִ֛ישׁ רֹ֥אשׁ לְבֵית־אֲבֹתָ֖יו הֽוּא: וְאֵ֨לֶּה֙ שְׁמ֣וֹת הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים
אֵ֚לֶּה קְרוּאֵ֣י (כתיב קריאי) הָֽעֵדָ֔ה נְשִׂיאֵ֖י מַטּ֣וֹת אֲבוֹתָ֑ם רָאשֵׁ֛י אַלְפֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל הֵֽם:
וַיִּקַּ֥ח משֶׁ֖ה וְאַֽהֲרֹ֑ן אֵ֚ת הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֣ים הָאֵ֔לֶּה אֲשֶׁ֥ר נִקְּב֖וּ בְּשֵׁמֽוֹת

Why are Klal Yisrel introduced to the נשיאים like its a first time meeting, they already were the נשיאים when they offered the korbanos for the chanukas hamikdash?  Why are they called אנשים, without a title if they were already appointed as נשיאים?  Rav Shwab says Klal Yisroel already accepted them as נשיאים before hand but to be considered a נשיא, to represent their tribe before Hashem they had to view themselves as אנשים, as simple people without any ego.  Only them can they be a proper נשיא.
With this idea he explains the midrash (1:7) דָּבָר אַחֵר, וַיְדַבֵּר ה' אֶל משֶׁה בְּמִדְבַּר סִינַי, אֶלָּא כָּל מִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה עַצְמוֹ כַּמִּדְבָּר, הֶפְקֵר, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִקְנוֹת אֶת הַחָכְמָה וְהַתּוֹרָה, לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר: בְּמִדְבַּר סִינָי.  In order to acquire Torah, one must remove the I that separates between himself and Hashem.

מחמר

The Meshech Chachma points out that regarding the בני קהת it says זֹ֛את עֲבֹדַ֥ת בְּנֵֽי־קְהָ֖ת בְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֑ד קֹ֖דֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִֽׁים, but not for בני גרשון ומררי.  Why?  He explains that only the בני קהת actually carried things on their shoulders, they did a real מלאכה but the other families just drove the animals that carried the loads which is only מחמר, not a מלאכה on Shabbos [It is not worthy that they also did מלאכה of carrying the beams from one wagon to another, see Shabbos (96a,) but that wasn't their main job.]
What the M.C. writes that מחמר isn't a מלאכה would seem to be the source of the debate in the opinions cited in Beis Yosef (495:7) if מחמר is prohibited on Yom Tov or not.  If it is a מלאכה, then its prohibited on Yom Tov as well but if its a seperate prohibition, the only source for that is on Shabbos (see also  Gemorah Yevomos 6 and Rashba there.)

Why Are You Left Out

After the tochacha, the possuk sums up אֵ֠לֶּה הַֽחֻקִּ֣ים וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִים֮ וְהַתּוֹרֹת֒ אֲשֶׁר֙ נָתַ֣ן י״י֔ בֵּינ֕וֹ וּבֵ֖ין בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל בְּהַ֥ר סִינַ֖י בְּיַד־מֹשֶֽׁה׃.  Most Rishonim explain that its going back on all of the mitzvot given until them.  Why does it say בינו ובין בני ישראל, it should say אשר נתן ה' לבני ישראל?  The Sforo explains that it means the bris Hashem made with us at Sinai  אלה החקים – כל המצות שנאמרו קודם שהתחיל פרשת ״אם בחקתי״ הם ״החקים והמשפטים והתורות״ שעליהם נכרת הברית בברכות וקללות. וזה הוא הברית שהזכיר באמרו ״מלבד הברית אשר כרת אתם בחורב״ (דברים כ״ח:ס״ט). בינו ובין בני ישראל – שנדר הוא יתעלה הברכות לכשיזכו, וקבלו הם האלות אם לא יזכו.  The parsha ends אֵ֣לֶּה הַמִּצְוֺ֗ת אֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֧ה י״י֛ אֶת־מֹשֶׁ֖ה אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל בְּהַ֖ר סִינָֽי.  Here it just says מצות and doesn't say בינו ובין, why?  The Sforn understands this possuk is only referring back to all of the laws given after the the tochacha.  All of these laws are mitzvot not included in the bris of Sinai.  Here it doesn't say בינו ובין because there is no bris on these laws, there were merely given as commandments.  In his words, אבל ערכי אדם ודיני הקדש בית ושדה ובכור וחרמים ומעשר בהמה כולם נאמרו אחר זה הברית, אף על פי שנאמרו גם הם בהר סיני, כאמרו (ויקרא כ״ז:ל״ג) אלה המצות אשר צוה ה׳ את משה אל בני ישראל בהר סיני. אבל לא נתנו ״בינו ובין בני ישראל״ בברית.
The Sforno reads this into the pessukim but doesn't explain why these mitzvot are not included in the bris.  Why are these mitzvot singled out from being in the bris?

Read The Words

In this weeks דברי שיח they printed some questions posed to Rav Chayim about Talmud Torah and his short (כדרכו בקודש) answers.
These were some of the questions which I'm noting for he contradicts a Briskor Rav.  I don't know if this is a מחלוקת יסודי how to view תורה שבעל פה after its been written down or a local debate.

In עובדות והנהגות לבית בריסק pg. 147 it recounts:

                                        And in volume 3 of the same sefer it adds more detail:

As an aside, in the same email that I get the דברי שיח from they had this picture. 

HaRav Eliezer Silver (R) with HaRav Avraham Duber Kahana Shapiro (Rav of Kovno/author of Dvar Avrohom) Zichronam L'Vracha taken in 1922

Return To Yourself

ושבתם איש אל אחזתו ואיש אל משפחתו תשבו

- The possuk should have said ושבתם אחוזתו אל איש, it the property that returns to the owner (see Sifsay Chachamim)?  Says the Sfas Emes (5643) רק הפי' שישוב כל איש ישראל לשורשו.  What does this mean?

Many seforim note, the count of sefirah is parallel to the count of Yoval.  Sefiras Haomer is a person level what the count of yovel is on a national level. Every sefirah we are perfecting ourselves until we remove the impurities within us from the משכא דחויא and our pure inside, our source is revealed.  What is our שורש, where do we find it?  In Torah! In his words, וזכה כ"א בחלק שיש בו בהתורה שע"ז מבקשין ותן חלקנו בתורתך.  Everything has a שורש higher up and that can be seen in the Torah.  ותן חלקנו בתורתך is to be able to discover our שורש in Torah.  After sefirah, we receive the Torah, we are able to find our חלק in Torah.  [The next words in the S.E., וזה התשובה עלמא דחירות are a kabbalistic reference beyond the scope of this elucidation.]  Freedom is to have no strings attached to anything or anyone else, to be self dependent entirely.  A deeper freedom is to be in touch with the real you.  To be able to talk to your שורש.  That is only possible by learning Torah; that is the only language your שורש understands.  As the Mishna says, אין לך בן חורין אלא מי שעוסק בתורה (see Sfas Emes Ki Sesa 5654.)

The yovel year is Shavuot in effect on the world.  It is through the people returning to their שורש that the ripple effect happens on the world.  It must start with a ושבתם איש אל אחוזתו, for a person to return to where they are really holding.  When all of Klal Yisroel is united in this avodah, בזמן שכל יושביה עליה, then everything else will go back to its source as a reflection of the avodah of Klal Yisroel.

The Torah says תעבירו שופר, why use this terminology of תעבירו, it should have have תקעו שופר?  The word תעביר means to bring back, to bring back the shofar of Sinai.  In his words, ולא לחנם כ' תעבירו שופר. רק שהיה מתעורר שופר של מתן תורה. ובהר סיני נתן לנו הקב"ה שנזכה מצד עצמינו לעורר תמיד הארת היום של מתן תורה בכל יובל.  The shofar of yoval is a reflection of the shofar of mattan torah and during sefirah we can tap into that kol shofar.

He ends off, ואפשר ע"י מצות ספירת העומר בכוונה מתקנין החטא של ביטול שמיטין ויובלות. לכן מבקשין הרחמן יחזיר לנו עבודת בהמ"ק כשיהיה ניתקן החטא של שמיטין ויובלות.  The Rishonim ask why is it only be this mitzvah we say 'הרחמן הוא יחזיר וכו?  The S. E. suggests because it is through sefirah done properly that we correct our sins of not keeping shemitah and yovel which led to the golus and we pray to be able to fulfill those mitzvot properly.

Say Thank You

A quick though at the conclusion of the week of הוד, the root of הודאה.
The end of the beracha before kriash shema in the morning, either אהבה רבה or אהבת עולם varies upon nusach (it is interesting that every one of the major nuschaot has a different version,) as to the exact wording of the last line right before the end of the beracha, however there are two words that exist in all of them and are first and foremost and those are the words לְהוֹדוֹת לָךְ.  For example, the text of Adut Hamizrach is וְקֵרַבְתָּנוּ מַלְכֵּנוּ לְשִׁמְךָ הַגָּדוֹל בְּאַהֲבָה, לְהוֹדוֹת לָךְ וּלְיַחֶדְךָ לְיִרְאָה וּלְאַהֲבָה אֶת־שִׁמְךָ.  We are saying that Hashem brugh us close (means at Sinai,) first and foremost to thank Him!  Many people like myself like to complain and in these times people have plent to complain about, but we must not forget to give thanks for that that is great and tremendous in our lives, which i'm sure everyone can find in their own life.       
                              From the sefer עיון תפילה by Rav Yechiel Michal Stern.

Is Chalipin A Sale

 וכי תמכרו ממכר לעמיתך או קנה מיד עמיתך אל תונו איש את אחיו

The Rif (teshuva cited in Shittah Mikubetzes Bava Metzia 47b) says since it says מקח, therefore חליפין, which is not a מקח is excluded from the parsha of אונאה.  Tosfos Kiddushin (3a) brings the opinion of Rabbenu Tam that the kinyan of chalipin applies to a gentile as well.  Tosfos asks that the Gemorah Bechoros (13a) says או קנה מיד עמיתך מיד עמיתך הוא דבמשיכה הא מיד עובד כוכבים בכסף, a Jew acquires movable goods through physically moving the object, but a gentile's kinyan is with money.  The Gemorah asks maybe they need both money and a משיכה?  The Gemorah answers, דומיא דעמיתך מה עמיתך בחדא אף עובד כוכבים נמי בחדא.  Asks Tosfos, according to Rabbenu Tam there isn't just one method for a gentile to be koneh, there's two, money and chalipin (see there what he answers)?  [I believe Rabbenu Tam would tell you chalipin is in the category of kesef; it isn't counted as its own kinyan, see Sefer Hayashar # 142, however Tosfos understands Rabbenu Tam that at the end of the day chalipin isn't מטעם כסף.]   Says the Ketzos (195:1) according to the Rif it's not difficult for chalipin isn't referenced to in the possuk for its not a מקח.

There are two types of chalipin.  There is the chalipin mentioned in the Book of Ruth, שלף איש נעלו, known as קנין סודר where the kinyan is symbolic of their arrangement, where one exchanges a handkerchief for the object being acquired.  A second type of chalipin is that of שוה בשוה, where two parties exchange objects.  The Ketzos seems to have understand the Rif's opinion is that neither of them is considered a מקח and is exempt from אונאה.  Many Roshei Yeshiva assume that the Rif only said his din regarding the second type of chalipin, קנין שוה בשוה, when there is no object be bought more than the other, its an exchange, a barter, that is not a מקח!  But in the case of קנין סודר, that is a קנין to uphold the sale of an object.  That is a sale, a מקח and would be subject to אונאה.  According to this, the חליפין of קנין סודר would have אונאה and would be included in the possuk.  The basis for this distinction comes from Rabbenu Tam in Bava Metzia (46b and 47a.)  Rabbenu Tam (with added explanation,) understands that the chiddush of chalipin is that the transfer of a סודר constitutes a קנין.  The exchange of שוה בשוה doesn't need to be learnt from chalipin, its understood you can do a barter.  Although Rabbenu Tam takes it to an extreme to assume the two types of chalipin are completely distinct and שוה בשוה doesn't have the general rules of chalipin and other Rishonim don't take it as far, the yesod is the same.  The שוה בשוה קנין is an exchange, not a sale for payment; that is not a מקח.  The chalipin of סודר is a way of making the קנין, but the sale is for the money that will be received; that is a sale and will be subject to אונאה.

Rabbenu Tam follows his means of distinction is Kiddushin (3a) differentiating between חליפין that is worth a פרוטה vs. what's worth less (see Sefer Hayashar #142.)  However, Rabbenu Tam learns that when it is a perutah then its מטעם כסף, when less, its not מטעם כסף (and in Sefer Hayashar that stands למסקנה not like Tosfos in Kiddushin cites him,) which seems to be the opposite of  how the Roshei Yeshiva learn in the Rif that when it is שוה בשוה it is not a מקח, but when its קנין סודר then it is?  ויש לפלפל, I leave to those learning B.M. or Kiddushin.

Conquer Through Torah

From Sefer Emrei Pinchas about Torah #10.

                                                                            for further elucidation from Sefer ערבי נחל שלח דרוש ב.

Become A Human

Second shmuz from R' Elephant continuing from the first one.  Last week, we explained that the avodah of sefirah is to be transformed from animal to man, to bring out the great potential inside of us.   Why is that the avodah of sefirah?  Generally we assume the chiddush of נעשה ונשמע was that Klal Yisroel accepted to do the Torah even though they didn't know what they were accepting.  In Rashi Shabbos 88a we see more than that.  Rashi says דקדמיתו פומייכו לאודנייכו - קודם ששמעתם אותה היאך היא קשה ואם תוכלו לעמוד בה קבלתם עליכם לקיימה.  The chiddush is that Klal Yisroel accepted something that they didn't even know we would be able to do.  How could they accept if they might be lacking the capability to fulfill the Torah?
Where else do we find such a concept of accepting something beyond your capabilities?  The Ramban in Vayakhal Ramban 35:21 says: וטעם אשר נשאו לבו לקרבה אל המלאכה (שמות ל״ו:ב׳) – כי לא היה בהם שלמד את המלאכות האלה ממלמד, או מי שאימן בהן ידיו כלל, אבל מצא בטבעו שידע לעשות כן, ויגבה לבו בדרכי י״י (דברי הימים ב י״ז:ו׳) לבא לפני משה לאמר לו: אני אעשה כל אשר אדני דובר.  What does the Ramban mean, if there was no one to teach them how did they know how to do the work?  The Ramban himself answers this, מצא בטבעו שידע לעשות כן, it was within their capability, they had the talents to do the work, it needed a impetus of building the mishkan to bring it out.  That's what the Ramban means in the end of his words, ויגבה לבו בדרכי י״י, it requires a sense of גאוה to say I can do it.

Everyone knows the chazal that Hashem offered the Torah to the gentiles but they refused.  The simple peshat is that they refused because they didn't like it.  However, the Shem M'Shmuel  says a different peshat.  He explains the nations wanted to accept the Torah but they said we can't, it runs against our nature.  Edom said we naturally kill, we can't stop doing it and the same for the other nations as well.  Klal Yisroel was able to say we are willing to go against our nature.  That's why on Shauot the offering, the shtei halechem is chametz, which represents גאוה because accepting the Torah requires a sense of גאוה, that ויגבה לבו בדרכי י״י to be able to take on whatever is thrown at you and go against your natural instincts. [I think he means the Shem M'Shmuel in year 5672.]

The Rambam Laws of Tamud Torah (3:6) says מִי שֶׁנְּשָׂאוֹ לִבּוֹ לְקַיֵּם מִצְוָה זוֹ כָּרָאוּי וְלִהְיוֹת מֻכְתָּר בְּכֶתֶר תּוֹרָה. וכו.  Why does the Rambam use this expression of נשא לבו specifically here regarding כתר תורה?  The Gemorah (ibid) says as reward for saying נעשה ונשמע , Klal Yisroel were given crowns.  Why did they get crowns as a reward?  Explains the Sfas Emes Shavuot 5639, פי' שהבורא ית' שילם להם כמדתם כמו שקבלו עליהם יותר מכחם כמו כן נתן להם שיוכלו לקבל הארות גבוהים ורמים שלמעלה מהשגתם. והוא אור שורה ומקיף על בנ"י מה שאין הכלי יכול לקבל וזה ענין קשירת כתרים.  We accepted something that might have been over our head, beyond our capabilities, so we were rewarded by a crown that is placed above the head.  Based upon this, the Rambam is מאד מדיוק.  To merit the keser Torah, one must have the גאוה, ויגבה לבו בדרכי י״י to to be picked up above natural boundaries and limitations.

That's why on sefirah we must go from animal to man, to go beyond our natural animalistic instincts for that is the whole yesod of kabbalas hatorah. An animal is stagnated, it has no growth, as we said last week from the Maharal, בה מה.  If one acts like that then there is no Torah.  To accept Torah, one must be able to grow and go above their capabilities.
To download the audio, click here.

Lavan And Lag B'omer

This post is part two of the previous post. Many of the Chassidic books say that there is a hint to Lag B'omer in the possuk at the end of  Vayetzeh (31:52,) עֵד הַגַּל הַזֶּה וְעֵדָה הַמַּצֵּבָה אִם אָנִי לֹא אֶעֱבֹר אֵלֶיךָ אֶת הַגַּל הַזֶּה וְאִם אַתָּה לֹא תַעֲבֹר אֵלַי אֶת הַגַּל הַזֶּה וְאֶת הַמַּצֵּבָה הַזֹּאת לְרָעָה, the word גל is the same as לג.  What does this possuk have to do with Lag B'omer?

What makes different nations and cultures unique is that each nation has a dominant middah that they personify.  Each one of the 70 nations personifies one of the middot in tumah (7 (middot)*10 (fullest capability) =70.  In Chassidic books it says the language of a nation contains within it the middah of the nation that it is spoken by.  The Likutay Moharan Torah 19:4 says the bridge between the language of tumah and the language of kodesh is Aramit.  It is akin to the עץ הדעת טוב ורע, it has in it bot positive and negative qualities.  It is the person's usage that determines if it becomes elevated to kedusha or lowered to tumah.  He explains that is what's going on in this story of the different names Yaakov and Lavan gave to their place of treaty.  It was a spiritual battle which each one using their language to inculcate their own power into their opposing side.  Lavan ran after Yaakov to harm him.  Hashem told Lavan he can't harm physical harm Yaakov so Lavan attempted to harm him spiritually.  Hence he called their place of treaty גר שהדותא, he used the language of Aramis to try to take the spirituality of Yaakov and infuse him with tumah.  However, Yaakov countered by calling it  גלעד, he raised the Aramis to his level of kedusha.

The Maharal in Netzach Yisroel Ch. 1 points out the root of the words גלה and גאל are the same; גל.  A גל, a pile or wave; a gathering of different forces or things together.  גאולה is when Klal Yisroel is united with א; they are united together with a single purpose of serving Hashem.  In גלות says the Maharal, internally, בפנימיות, Klal Yisroel remain united, however externally, they are scattered to all parts (the ה of גלה he says represents scattered to 4 sides and the inner point,) of the globe.  It is the פנימיות of גל that remains even in the state of גלה that allows for the גאל; to be able to be completely united around the א', אלופו של עולם.  The גל of stones made by Yaakov and Lavan represented each one wanting to gather in the other one's powers.

The Gemorah Sanhedrin (38b) says ואמר רב יהודה אמר רב אדם הראשון בלשון ארמי ספר שנאמר (תהלים קלט, יז) ולי מה יקרו רעיך אל.  והיינו דאמר ריש לקיש מאי דכתיב (בראשית ה, א) זה ספר תולדות אדם מלמד שהראהו הקב"ה דור דור ודורשיו דור דור וחכמיו כיון שהגיע לדורו של רבי עקיבא שמח בתורתו ונתעצב במיתתו אמר ולי מה יקרו רעיך אל.  The Maharshal explains: ונ"ב תרגום של כבד יקיר. ערוך.  The words כבד and יקר mean precious.  Why is ר"ע called יקר and why was Adam prompted to speak in Aramis specifically about R.A.?  The answer lies in a midrash.  The midrash in Chukas (19:6) says וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא לֹא יִהְיֶה אוֹר יְקָרוֹת וְקִפָּאוֹן, יקפאון כְּתִיב, דְּבָרִים הַמְכֻסִּין מִכֶּם בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה עֲתִידִין לִהְיוֹת צוֹפִים לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, כְּהָדֵין סַמְיָא דְּצָפֵי, דִּכְתִיב (ישעיה מב, טז): וְהוֹלַכְתִּי עִוְרִים בְּדֶרֶךְ לֹא יָדָעוּ. וּכְתִיב (ישעיה מב, טז): אֵלֶּה הַדְּבָרִים עֲשִׂיתִם וְלֹא עֲזַבְתִּים, אֶעֱשֶׂה אֵין כְּתִיב כָּאן אֶלָּא עֲשִׂיתִם, שֶׁכְּבָר עָשִׂיתִי לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וַחֲבֵרָיו דְּבָרִים שֶׁלֹא נִגְלוּ לְמשֶׁה נִגְלוּ לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וַחֲבֵרָיו. (איוב כח, י): וְכָל יְקָר רָאֲתָה עֵינוֹ, זֶה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וַחֲבֵרָיו. 

To understand this better I will copy the English translation of the possuk and Rashi in Zecharyeh that the midrash starts with from Chabad.org.  The possuk: And it shall come to pass on that day that there shall be no light, only disappearing light and thick darkness.  Rashi: there shall be no light, only disappearing light and thick darkness: Jonathan renders. There shall not be light, only light that passes away, and thickness, i.e., there shall not be splendorous light, only יְקָרוֹת and קִפָּאוֹן shall [there] be. יְקָרוֹת An expression similar to (Ps. 37: 20), “like the disappearing light over the plains.” Like a sort of light that appears in the morning over the mountains and disappears little by little. וְקִפָּאוֹן Congealed and dark and thick, like ice that is congealed and frozen, as in (Job 10:10), “And like cheese You curdled me.”  The word יקרות, from the root יקר is used in the context of a light emerging from darkness.  That is what the midrash compares to R.A.  R.A. had this ability to reveal parts of Torah that were shrouded in darkness.  That is why the word יקר is used by Adam to describe R.A.  However we still need to understand why express this in Aramis?

In light of Rebbe Nachman's Torah, we now understand why Adam used Aramis to describe R.A. Because as mentioned in the previous post, R.A.'s method of learning was a reflection of his own persona.  The reason why R.A. was able to unearth secrets of the Torah is because that was his life.  He unearthed hidden goodness in that which seems devoid of any.  That is represented by Aramis, the language mixed up  with דעת טוב ורע and one must discover and use the טוב in it.  (See Likutay Moharan there #9, Likutay Halachos Tefillin halacha 6 and Bassar Bechalav halacha 1.)  [וכ"ז קשור לענין יסוד מוציא יקר מזולל, קרי אותיות יקר, שזה יסוד הכונה באכילה, ברית המעור וברית הלשון, ויש דגש בזה בזמן ספירת העומר, שעומר גימטריא קרי, שבמצריים היה גלדול קל שנה של אדם ואכ"מ להאריך.]

The revelation of the deepest secrets of Torah, which occurred on Lag B'omer is comes through purifying the good entangled in the ארמית, in the rah. That is why the Zohar, the sefer of Rashbi, that reveals the deep secrets of the Torah is written in Aramis for it is the specifically the deepest parts of the Torah that can be used to find to elevate the hidden good in Aramis.  That is why עד הגל הזה, where Yaakov elevated Lavan's Aramis is a remez too.
[Many of the ideas here are based upon the Breslov seforim cited explained in this article, and the writings of Rav Tzvi Einfeld.]

Rebbe Akiva And The קוצים

This post is the first half of a two part piece of Lag B'omer.  The Gemorah in Menachos (29b) says that Rebbe Akiva was דורש על כל קוץ וקוץ תילי תילים של הלכות.  Why do Chazal use the term קוץ וקוץ?  The Gemorah in Menachos indicates that this is something greater about Rebbe Akiva over Moshe Rabbenu.  As the Maharal says how could it possibly be that Rebbe Akiva is greater than Moshe Rabbenu חס ושלום?  And why is it specifically Rebbe Akiva that had this methodology of derush?
There is a major difference between the upbringing of Moshe Rabbenu and that of Rebbe Akiva.  Moshe Rabbenu was born to Amrom, whom Chazal call the gadol hador.  He was born into a family where even the kids were prophets and additionally in his own right  Chazal say when he was born  נתמלא הבית אורה etc.  He was destined to greatness from the very beginning. (Not like the Teferes Yisroel end of Kiddushin.)  Moshe Rabbenu is the epitome of the tzaddik gamor that has no connection to evil at all.  Rebbe Akiva's יחוס was far from perfect.  According to various texts in Sanhedrin (96b,) Rebbe Akiva was a descendant of Sisra, a goy that fought against Klal Yisroel.  Not only were his roots shaky, but in his own life he was a complete ignoramus until age 40.  He is the epitome of the baal teshuva, one who turned evil into great.
A few weeks ago this blog explained how קוץ, the numerical value of 196, is the difference between ד and ר, where ד is a good letter (ה' אחד)and ר a bad one (אל אחר.)  The letters of the Torah facilitate a simple read; they represent the straight path of the tzaddik.  The קוצים are the parts of the Torah where the message is unclear.  They show the path of the baal teshuva where the Divine light is greatly covered over and must be dug out of great darkness.  This path is not a straight path but is jagged like the shapes of the קוצים.  The קןץ contain the secret for how to find holyniss in that which seems so bereft of it.  R.A. was דורש the קוצין not because he was greater than Moshe but because they contained the message for his life, not Moshe's.  Moshe's path was contained in the words, R.A.'s in the קןצים.  [I am assuming that the קוץ is the כתרים on the letters like the ערוך seems to say, not like the essay of Shlomo Naeh in לשוננו אדר תש"ע  that it means many parshios, that I will leave for the scholars.]  That is reflected in the end of the Gemorah where Moshe Rabbenu asks  אמר לפניו רבונו של עולם הראיתני תורתו הראני שכרו אמר לו חזור [לאחורך] חזר לאחוריו ראה ששוקלין בשרו במקולין אמר לפניו רבש"ע זו תורה וזו שכרה א"ל שתוק כך עלה במחשבה לפני.  In the prism of complete goodness, Moshe Rabbenu couldn't fathom how such a cruel punishment could befall R.A.  It is only in the world of R.A.,גם זו לטובה that even that which appears to be evil is transformed into a positive.  [See Maharal Tiferes Yisroel Ch. 63.]

From Plowing to Harvest

From Plowing to Harvest Lag Ba'omer Harav Hagaon Yehuda Wagshal Shlita The Rema, in Hilchos Sefiras Ha'omer, states that on Lag Ba'omer we are marbeh b'simchah a little. But the reason for the simchah of Lag Ba'omer seems questionable. On one hand, the Shulchan Aruch and the Rema say that the reason we rejoice on Lag Ba'omer is because it's the day when the talmidim of R' Akiva stopped dying. On the other hand, we all know from other sources that the reason for the simchah of Lag Ba'omer is that it's the yahrtzeit of R' Shimon bar Yochai, which was the day when the secrets of R' Shimon bar Yochai's Torah were revealed. The Shulchan Aruch does not mention that, but the Magen Avraham on the Shulchan Aruch alludes to it. In connection to the Rema's statement that we're marbeh b'simchah on Lag Ba'omer, the Magen Avraham records the following story, from the Kavanos of the Arizal. A certain gadol used to say the Nacheim prayer of Tisha b'Av every day, as a sign of his mourning for the Churban Beis Hamikdash, and he was punished. The Magen Avraham cites this story in brief, but it's brought down elsewhere at length. On Lag Ba'omer, the Arizal and his talmidim went to the kever of R' Shimon bar Yochai, and they celebrated and davened there. One of the talmidim recited Nacheim in his quiet Shemoneh Esrei, and the Arizal approached him and told him that R' Shimon bar Yochai himself had come to him and complained that his talmid was saying Nacheim on his day of simchah. Because of that, this talmid was punished severely: his child passed away and everyone came to comfort him, which was middah k'neged middah - he said Nacheim, so he needed a nechamah. Clearly the Magen Avraham is alluding to the other reason for simchah on Lag Ba'omer: the yahrtzeit of R' Shimon bar Yochai. I would assume that it's no mere coincidence that these two events - the end of the deaths of R' Akiva's students and the revelation of R' Shimon bar Yochai's Torah - happened on the same day. There must be some connection between the two events. In truth, it's hard to understand why we rejoice over the fact that R' Akiva's talmidim stopped dying on Lag Ba'omer. The Pri Chadash points out that on this day, there was no one left! All 24,000 talmidim had been wiped out, and the world was in a state of utter churban, as the Gemara says:והיה העולם שמם . That's a reason to rejoice? Are we b'simchah on Lag Ba'omer to commemorate the total destruction of all of R' Akiva's talmidim? Regarding the story that the Magen Avraham mentions, we can ask another question. What was so terrible about saying Nacheim on Lag Ba'omer that caused the Arizal's talmid to be punished? We know that we are obligated to remember the churban at all times, even during times of simchah. Even at a wedding, at the height of a personal simchah, we are required to remember the churban of Yerushalayim:אִם אֶשְׁכָּחֵךְ יְרוּשָׁלִָם תִּשְׁכַּח יְמִינִי. Why, then, is the simchah of Lag Ba'omer different, to the extent that a person who said Nacheim on that day was punished severely? Plowing vs. Destruction The churban Beis Hamikdash is described by the navi as "plowing" - צִיּוֹן שָׂדֶה תֵחָרֵשׁ- and this description really applies to any churban. In what way was the churban similar to an act of plowing? When viewed as an isolated act, plowing seems like an act of destruction: you take a beautiful field and rips it to pieces. In context, however, plowing is not destructive at all. True, if you plow the field and don't follow up by planting seeds, covering them with earth, watering them, and cultivating them, then the plowing remains an act of destruction. But if you follow the act of plowing with the constructive activities that result in the growth of a useful crop, and you harvest and utilize the fruits of your labors, then the plowing turns out to be the beginning of a process of tremendous growth. This is why the navi states, regarding the fast days for the churban:צוֹם הָרְבִיעִי וְצוֹם הַחֲמִישִׁי וְצוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי וְצוֹם הָעֲשִׂירִי יִהְיֶה לְבֵית יְהוּדָה לְשָׂשׂוֹן וּלְשִׂמְחָה וּלְמֹעֲדִים טוֹבִים. Even Tisha b'Av itself, which is the day of the churban Beis Hamikdash, will eventually be a day of Yom Tov. What happened on Tisha b'Av that is cause for eventual celebration? The answer is that Hakadosh Baruch Hu does not perform acts of destruction. Churban implies that everything is over, and that's not what Hashem does. Hakadosh Baruch Hu performs acts of plowing. The end result of the plowing is up to us. If we leave the initial destruction as a churban, and we don't plant new seeds and cultivate them to ensure future growth, the act of plowing is indeed an act of destruction. But if we plant the seeds and help them grow, then the churban marks the beginning of tremendous new growth. Churban Bayis Rishon and Churban Bayis Sheini were terrible calamities, but if Klal Yisrael followed those acts of plowing by planting seeds and helping them grow, then the end result will be the building of the third Beis Hamikdash, which will be on a higher madreigah than the first and second, and will never be destroyed. That high madregiah can come about only because of the churban of the first two Batei Mikdash. In essence, then, the churban - the plowing - if used properly, will eventually turn into the beginning of new growth, the higher madreigah of the third Beis Hamikdash. And that's why it's going to be a Yom Tov. Tisha b'Av will be the Yom Tov of the geulah, because the process of that ultimate geulah really began on Tisha b'Av, when the field was plowed, so to speak, and its growth began. Similarly, every churban in and of itself is a destruction, but it can potentially become a Yom Tov if it is utilized as an act of plowing. Planting Toras Rashbi The Gemara in Yevamos says that between Pesach and Shavuos, twelve thousand pairs of R' Akiva's talmidim died, and the world was desolate due to this loss: עד שבא ר' עקיבא אצל רבותינו שבדרום ושנאה להם - until R' Akiva found five talmidim in the south and taught them, at which time the world was refilled with Torah. The Gemara seems to emphasize that the new talmidim of R' Akiva were in the south of Eretz Yisrael. Why is that relevant to the story? What's the difference if where they were located? Perhaps the Gemara is alluding to the following idea. R' Akiva and his original talmidim lived in the north. Presumably, had these talmidim remained alive, R' Akiva would have had no reason to travel to the south, and he would never have found his five new talmidim. After losing his original 24,000 talmidim, there was no one left in the north to teach, so he had to search for new talmidim until he found רבותינו שבדרום and began teaching them. He found these new talmidim in the south only because of the death of the original talmidim. Among these new talmidim was R' Shimon bar Yochai - and that means that the Torah greatness of R' Shimon bar Yochai came about only because of the death of the original talmidim of R' Akiva! R' Shimon bar Yochai himself testified, as the Gemara in Gittin teaches, that his primary greatness came from R' Akiva. The Zohar teaches that on Lag Ba'omer, right before R' Shimon bar Yochai's passing, profound secrets of the Torah were revealed to world. It turns out, then, that on the very day when R' Akiva's talmidim were completely wiped out, R' Shimon bar Yochai's Torah reached its zenith. And this revelation really began with the death of R' Akiva's students. Although their death was a tremendous churban, in retrospect it was an act of plowing - and the fact that it was an act of plowing became evident many years later on Lag Ba'omer, when the fruits of that churban were revealed, in the form of R' Shimon bar Yochai's Torah. This explains the connection between the two events we commemorate on Lag Ba'omer, and this answers the question of the Pri Chadash. No, we are not making a party on Lag Ba'omer because the last of R' Akiva's talmidim died and there was no one left. Rather, we are celebrating the idea that because of the end of the deaths of R' Akiva's talmidim, he traveled to the south, found new talmidim, and set in motion the process that caused something greater and bigger than before: R' Shimon bar Yochai's Torah! We can now understand why the recitation of Nacheim on Lag Ba'omer was so incongruous. Nacheim is a tefillah that we say in the midst of galus, when we don't yet have the perspective of viewing the churban as an act of plowing, and we see it purely as a churban. But le'asid lavo, when צוֹם הָרְבִיעִי וְצוֹם הַחֲמִישִׁי וְצוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי וְצוֹם הָעֲשִׂירִי יִהְיֶה לְבֵית יְהוּדָה לְשָׂשׂוֹן וּלְשִׂמְחָה וּלְמֹעֲדִים טוֹבִים, the churban will be revealed as an act of plowing. In galus we don't yet see it that way, but on Lag Ba'omer we got a glimpse of that perspective, because the very desolation of the death of R' Akiva's talmidim was shown to have lain the groundwork for R' Shimon bar Yochai's Torah. Therefore, Lag Ba'omer is not a day to say Nacheim, and that is why R' Shimon bar Yochai protested its recitation by the Arizal's talmid. This is the significance of the simchah of Lag Ba'omer in general. Lag Ba'omer is the day to realize that there's really no such thing as churban, and that any difficult situation we find ourselves in is, in truth, an act of plowing. Klal Yisrael now is experiencing a difficult situation that is a churban on many levels, but on the day of Lag Ba'omer we have the ability to view it as an act of plowing. May the fruits of all the tzaros and churbanos be revealed speedily, and may Hashem bring about the time when they will be לְשָׂשׂוֹן וּלְשִׂמְחָה וּלְמֹעֲדִים.

Sanctify Thy Self

Why does the Torah place the law of kiddush Hashem, ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל right before the parsha of the moadim?  After the moadim the parsha continues to the subject of the menorah, lechem hapanim, the mekallal and then laws about hitting another individual.  Is there any order or reason for the juxtaposition of all of these various laws and why are they all here, in parshas Emor?

What does it mean kiddush Hashem and chillul Hashem, a person's actions don't add or subtract anything from G-d? In the view of the Sfas Emes these ideas take on new meaning.  It is about a person's own connection with their true self.  The Sfas Emes translates ונקדתי בתוך בני ישראל that the תוך, the פמיניות of every Jew is kodesh and kiddush Hashem means to bring out that kedusha.

The Gemorah (Berachos 21b) has a gezerah shaveh תוך תוך from הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאַכַלֶּה אֹתָם כְּרָגַע.that a דבר שבקדושה may only be recited in the presence of 10 Jews.  Why must we learn out from  reshaim?  The Rebbe Reyatz in a sicha, (sichos 5704 pg. 29, 26-27 in the hebrew edition,) explains that we are learning out that the תוך that remains uncorrupted is what makes even kedusha present to warrant saying a דבר שבקדושה (see also Tanya Letter 23 and Likutay Sichos volume 33 Shelach sicha 2.)  How does more people standing together bring a greater level of kedusha; what joins them?  The The Sfas Emes explains that people are different in terms of body, but the source of our souls stems from the same source as it says in Tanya Ch. 32 'לכן נקראו כל ישראל אחים ממש מצד שורש נפשם בה' אחד רק שהגופים מחולקי.  So when 10 Jews get together, their souls combine together for a קומה שלמה of 10 levels of kedusha.  That is why the parsha of Kiddush Hashem precedes the parsha of the moadim because it is the kedusha of the פנימיות of Klal Yisroel, where the Klal is together, that brings about the kedusha of the moadim.  In his words (5655,) ונראה דזה סמיכות פרשת מועדות למצות ונקדשתי. דהנה מקראי קודש הם בכח התאחדות בנ"י.

That is why the Torah doesn't write the law of מסירת נפש as a command, for to bring out one's תוך, קדושה פנימית,it  must come from within a person and is not something that can be done to merely fulfill a command (see Sifsay Chayim.)

That is the basis of the continuation of the parshios after the moadim.  As the שפ"א said, it is the kedusha of Klal Yisroel that brings the kedusha of the moadim.  Following it that comes the parsha of the menorah for the menorah represents the kedusha of Klal Yisroel that brings about the kedusha in the mikdash as the Sfas Emes says (5660) וכמו כן במקדש קיבלו בנ"י נשמה יתירה ולכן בשניהם נאמר עדות כמ"ש בגמ' עדות הוא שהשכינה שורה בישראל. שע"י בנ"י ירדה הקדושה בבהמ"ק.  Following that comes the לחם הפנים, the 12 loaves representing every tribe, to be our representatives in the Mikdash on Shabbos.  Although we ourselves aren't present  in the Mikdash on Shabbos that is because our תוך isn't able to be revealed on such a constant basis.  To represent our תוך is worthy of being present, we are represented by לחם הפנים, the bread which reflects our פנימיות.  That is why in the days of the future every Shabbos will be a time for pilgrimage to the Mikdash (as mentioned in the Psektah based upon the verse in Yeshayehu 66:23,) for then our פנימיות will be able to be revealed every week.

After establishing kedusha, the next two parshios, the mekallel and striking another Jew depict polar opposite, chillul Hashem.  The mekallel is the dimetric opposite of kiddush Hashem.  And following that comes the parsha of striking another Jew which is akin to cursing Hashem as the Sfas Emes (5661-2,) says בפסוק ולא תחללו את שם קדשי. כי הקב"ה חתם שמו ית' באיש ישראל וצריכין לשמור זו הנקודה שלא לעשות זה הכח חולין.  The פנימיות, the תוך בני ישראל is what gets affected when violating the mitzvah of Kiddush Hashem.  A person becomes distant from the kedusha that is present within himself.  Continues the Sfas Emes, ולכן נסמך בכתוב בנקבו שם יומת וסמיך לי' ואיש כי יכה כו' נפש אדם כו' שבנפש ישראל שורה השם.  That's why the laws of hitting another Jew follows after the mekallel, for hitting another Jew is tainting the 'שם ה inside of him in the same vain the blasphemer sought to taint Hashem. 

Hot Bread

Rashi brings an opinion that the מקלל was inspired to his actions from the showbread לגלג ואמר ביום השבת יערכנו, דרך המלך לאכול פת חמה בכל יום, או שמא פת צוננת של תשעה ימים, בתמיה.  It isn't clear why a man should be inspired to curse G-d merely because he thinks the priests din't get fresh bread.  Maybe he would find that upsetting but to go ahead and curse G-d seems to be taking it way too far.  Why did he feel the need to curse because of this?  I will this this question hanging.

The Gemorah Chagigah (26b) says that indeed the bread didn't become cold - מלמד שמגביהין אותו ומראין בו לעולי רגלים לחם הפנים ואומרים להם ראו חיבתכם לפני המקום סילוקו כסידורו דא"ר יהושע בן לוי נס גדול נעשה בלחם הפנים כסידורו כך סילוקו שנאמר (שמואל א כא, ז) לשום לחם חום ביום הלקחו.  Why did the bread remain hot; was a miracle warranted just for the kohanim to enjoy hot bread?

Rav Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak Pesach maamer 58 explains this point.  I will write my understanding of his words which may be way off.  The Bechai in Berashis points out that decay, death, rotting aren't natural.  If man had not sinned, indeed the body would have lasted forever.  It is only because of the sin of man that spoilage was introduced into the world.  בפנימיות everything should maintain the same freshness and strength as  it had at the time of existence.  In the Mikdash, especially in the לחם הפנים, the bread that reflect פנימיות, the bread remains with the same freshness as it had at the time of the baking.

The simple interpretation I believe is that the nes isn't necessary, the language of the Gemorah indicates that indeed the miracle isn't necessary, it is to reflect the great love Hashem has for us that he wanted the Kohanim to enjoy hot bread.

Why Do You Eat Terumah

 וְכֹהֵ֗ן כִּֽי־יִקְנֶ֥ה נֶ֙פֶשׁ֙ קִנְיַ֣ן כַּסְפּ֔וֹ ה֖וּא יֹ֣אכַל בּ֑וֹ.  Rashi cites ואשת כהן אוכלת בתרומה מן המקרא הזה שאף היא קניין כספו.  Rashi Ketubot (58a) adds וכי היכי דקידושי ביאה מאכילין בארוסה דאיתקיש הוויות להדדי.  [I'm not sure if Rashi here on Chumash that omits this point disagrees or is just citing the basic din mentioned in the Gemorah.]  From the fact that Rashi needs the hekesh to know how if the kinyan kiddushin not done through money the kohan can still feed his wife teruma, it seems he understands קנין כספו is literally a kinyan done through money.  If so, how do we know that a slave acquired through chazakah or shtar can eat terumah?  Rav Elchonon (Kovetz Haoros) says when it comes to the slave the words קנין כספו are referring to the type of kinyan one has in the slave; that is the monetary kinyan.  However, one doesn't have a monetary kinyan through kiddushin, so קנין כספו can't refer to the type of kinyan, it must refer to actually acquiring through money and hence Rashi needs the hekesh for the other kinyanim.  It comes out according to Rav Elchonon, that the slave eats terumah because of the קנין ממון his master has in him but a wife eats because of the קנין איסור acquired through money.  The difficulty is if we assume that קנין כספו regarding the slave refers to the type of kinyan, then how does the Gemorah know that it also refers to the literal קנין כספו of kiddushin?

Even though one doesn't acquire any monetary gain through kiddushin, the Achronim bring many proofs [and it is the simple read of the Gemorah in the beginning of Kiddushin,] that the act of kiddushin, of acquiring the women so to speak, is a monetary kinayan just like any other kinyan when one acquires ownership the ownership rights is a קנין ממון in the object.  The Maseas Moshe on Kiddushin suggests that is all true when the kiddushin is done through money but it its done through shtar or beah then the kinyan will be defined as a eishus type of kinyan.  He says, if we follow this approach, then we can understand the Rashi.  No matter how a slave is acquired, one is acquiring a קנין ממון is the slave and can feed it terumah and the same is true when doing kiddushin though money.  When doing kiddushin with another method, then the kinyan isn't defined as a קנין ממון and Rashi needs to invoke a hekesh in which we learn out that when does the other kinyaninm he ends up with a קנין ממון in his ארוסה as well.  If we take this approach it comes out the reason a slave and ארוסה eat terumah is because of the קניו ממון that one has in them.  However, the chiddush of the Maseas Moshe it tremendous and one can definitely debate its truth.     

The אבני מלואים in Teshuva 17 learns up in Tosfos Yebamot (66a) that its the קנין איסור one has in his slaves that allows him to feed them terumah.  In his view קנין כספו means literally acquired with money.  According to his approach, how do we answer the question of Rav Elchonon, why do we need a hekesh for the other kinyanim of kiddushin, but not for the other kinyanim of the slave?   I was going to suggest an answer but I would rather leave it as a question and maybe someone can suggest an answer.

Quarantined Kohan Gadol

The Rambam Kli MIkdash (5:7) says וּבַיִת יִהְיֶה לוֹ מוּכָן בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ וְהוּא הַנִּקְרָא לִשְׁכַּת כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל. וְתִפְאַרְתּוֹ וּכְבוֹדוֹ שֶׁיִּהְיֶה יוֹשֵׁב בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ כָּל הַיּוֹם. וְלֹא יֵצֵא אֶלָּא לְבֵיתוֹ בִּלְבַד בַּלַּיְלָה אוֹ שָׁעָה אוֹ שְׁתַּיִם בַּיּוֹם. וְיִהְיֶה בֵּיתוֹ בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם וְאֵינוֹ זָז מִשָּׁם:  Why is this the תפארת of the Kohan Gadol; what is the great glory of being confined to the mikdash? 

I think the simple peshat in the תפארת is that the Kohan Gadol's life is entirely devoted to the mikdash; he was always in holy mode, no breaks.  However, Rav Shimshom Pinkus says a deeper peshat. 

At the end of Dovid's life he commands Shlomo to find a way to kill Shimi ben Garah.  So Shlomo tells him he must be confined to Yerushalayim and if he leaves he will be killed.  Eventually he leaves and is killed.  Asks Rav Chayim Shmulevetz, how was this a way for Shlomo to fulfill Dovid's command; how did he know Shimi was going to leave and why did Shimi leave if he knew that he would be killed or it?  He explains that a person can be confined to his/her place without a problem if they choose to do so.  The minute it is a command, then the person feels shackled; they feel locked up.  It is possible without any command Shimi might have never left Yerushalim, but Shlomo knew if he commands him to satay, then every second the itch in Shimi to throw off the yoke of confinement placed upon him will grow stronger.  

Why can't a person stand to be contained?  Rav Shimshon Pinkus suggests that it is built into the nature of mankind to want to be connected to the entire world.  This desire, urge and impulse stems from the first man, Adam, that stretched from one end of the world to another (Chagigah 12a.)  Even after he shrunk after the sin, the innate desire to be able to extend through the entire world is still present in mankind and if that capability is denied then a person feels a tremendous lacking and suffers. 

There are two opinions in Chagigah if Adam stretched from one end of the world to the another or from the ground to the heavens.  Says Rav Pinkus, these two opinions are reflected in a person's nature.  Man can either desire to know what's going on in the entire world or remain rooted in his place but yen to know what's going on in the heavens.  These are two different opinions in the Gemorah; the two are exclusive, either one wants to know what's going on in the entire world or  know what's transpiring above us.  That is the תפארת of the Kohn Gadol; his confinement wasn't a jail sentence, it signified that his desire wasn't to know what was going on in all the corners of the world, rather his entire focus was to stick his head in the heavens.  Concludes Rav Pinkus with words of mussar:

Becoming A Person

This post is based upon a shmuz from R' Elephant (of the Mir,) which he said this past Thursday night.  The midrash (Vayikra Rabbah 28:3) says תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא (ויקרא כג, טו): שֶׁבַע שַׁבָּתוֹת תְּמִימֹת תִּהְיֶינָה, אֵימָתַי הֵן תְּמִימוֹת בִּזְמַן שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל עוֹשִׂין רְצוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מָקוֹם.  (As an aside in Likutay Sichos voume 38 sicha Shavout footnote 15 brings other texts in the midrash - בויק"ר הוצאת מרגליות שם, שברוב כת"י במקום "בזמן שישראל עושין רצונו של מקום" איתא "בזמן שאין ישוע ושכני' באות בהן". — אבל מחז"ל ד"בזמן שישראל עושין רצונו של מקום" הובא גם בילקוט המכירי לתהלים מזמור סח (ומסיים "וכן במדרש קהלת"). וראה ביאור מדרש זה ע"ד החסידות באוה"ת להצ"צ אמור (ע' קסז­ח). ועוד.)  We see Chazal already understand the obligation of sefirah to be תמימות isn't just a definition of the count, but is a din in the person counting as well; s/he must be striving to תמימות.  The Midrash in Chayeh Sarah (58:1) says a derush on the possuk in Tehillim (37:18) יוֹדֵ֣עַ י֭״י יְמֵ֣י תְמִימִ֑ם וְ֝נַחֲלָתָ֗ם לְעוֹלָ֥ם תִּהְיֶֽה.  The midrash is bothered the person is a תמים, not the days, what does it mean ימי תמימם?  The midrash  says יודע ד' ימי תמימים ונחלתם לעולם תהיה' כשם שהן תמימים כך שנותם תמימים.  Again Chazal compare תמימים of days to the middah in a person.  What is this middah of תמימים, being תמיד in the avodah of a person?

Hashem tells Avrohom before the bris milah, התהלך לפני והיה תמים, through bris milah he will become תמים.  The word תמים means שְׁלִים (Onklus.)  How is milah a way to achieve שלימות, it doesn't add anything to a person, it removes the ערלה?  The Sfas Emes explains (many maamarim in Lech Lecha in different words,) that inside an individual there lies tremendous potential but there are things that hold a person back from bringing it to fruition.  The act of milah is to remove those shackles (represented by the ערלה,) holding a person back from realizing their potential.  By removing the ערלה one brings out the powers contained within themselves and is therefore called a תמיד.  A similar idea is expressed in the Sfas Emes in likkutim on milah.  The Gemorah Shabbos (130a) connects milah with the possuk שָׂ֣שׂ אָ֭נֹכִי עַל־אִמְרָתֶ֑ךָ כְּ֝מוֹצֵ֗א שָׁלָ֥ל רָֽב.  What's the connection to that possuk (we cited a peshat in the past here.)?  Says the Sfas Emes, milah is how a person brings out the שלל inside himself.  That the middah of תמים, to bring out a person's capability to its fullest.

Sefiras Haomer is the time of advancing from a animal to being human; בהמה לאדם, we go from the korban omer, animal food, to shtei halechem, human food.  What does this mean and why is this the avodah of sefirah and Shavuot?

The Maharal in Tiferes Ch. 3 asks why is a person called אדם because he was made from the ground, everything was made from the ground?  He explains that the essence of a human is to grow.  The entity most similar to that is the ground which brings forth grass, trees, plants etc,; everything grows from earth.  That is the job of a person; to bring forth their potential from under the soil of his/her innards.  An animal on the other hand has no potential; it is born complete; it has no potential for growth.  That is why they are called בהמה, a compound of בה מה, what it is, is right in front of you.  There is nothing under the surface.  [עשו was born עשוי, he wasn't a mentch; he didn't grow.]  The definition of a person is to be a תמים, to constantly grow.

We learn from the Gra that its not a one-time-event that a person is an אדם for they are grow but it is a constant avodah.  In Shir Hashirim 2:1 the Gra says:         

Being human, a אדם, is a פעולה נמשכת, its a constant avodah, a definition that must remain true.  That is why a תלמוד חכם is a talmud chacham, he is always a talmud, always growing, always trying to reach his potential.  אתם קרויים אדם, at mattan torah we are defined as האדם, we reached our defining point.   We went from a nation that was stunted, a bunch of slaves that were not using their capabilities to mattan torah; we received a mission and the capability to become a תלמוד חכם, to constantly shteig.  That is why the avodah of sefirah is תמימות, to work on harvesting the powers which lay within ourselves.