No Pain No Gain

From the bishvilay hamoad of the Mir.  

Harav Hagaon Yosef Elefant Shlita

We find in the Haggadah the idea of מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח, and there’s a machlokes in the Gemara what the גנות is — מתחילה עובדי עבודה זרה היו אבותינו, or עבדים היינו?

The Maharal, in his peirush on the Haggadah, explains that the concept of מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח is rooted in the idea that nothing in Olam Hazeh starts off perfect. In Olam Hazeh, every process of growth, or any process at all, begins with something lacking, with a challenge. And a person grows and shteigs from it. In Olam Hazeh there’s no such thing as something that starts off complete; the whole purpose of our existence in this world is to meet up with challenges and grow from them. The concept of מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח, then, is really a description and a characteristic of anything good that happens in this world.

The Maharal goes on to explain that there are two types of challenges: ruchniyus challenges and gashmiyus challenges. Ruchniyus challenges can cause a person to be shaky spiritually, while gashmiyus challenges involve physical difficulties. The challenge of מתחילה עובדי עבודה זרה is a ruchniyus challenge, while the challenge of עבדים היינו is a gashmiyus challenge.

There was no machlokes in the Gemara whether either of the examples is considered גנות; everyone agrees that עבדים היינו and מתחילה עובדי עבודה זרה are גנות. The question is only, which one do we start with? These are different types of challenges that people have in life, and the fact that there’s a challenge is not a b’dieved — it’s lechatchilah. There is no other way to grow than to start with challenges. That’s the concept of מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח.

Perhaps we can suggest that these two types of challenges are reflected in the two damim of Yetzias Mitzrayim: dam Pesach and dam milah.  The blood of the Korban Pesach corresponded to emunah. Regarding the words משכו וקחו לכם, Rashi comments: משכו ידיכם מעבודה זרה.  Dam milah, on the other hand, lifts a person above the enslavement and lowliness of his body. The Maharal (Gur Aryeh) says that milah is a stamp on a person’s body that he’s an eved Hashem and not an eved to other forces.

So perhaps the two damim of Korban Pesach and milah symbolize the different challenges that a person has: dam Pesach corresponds to מתחילה עובדי עבודה זרה, while dam milah corresponds to עבדים היינו, in which a person is an eved to his middos. This is not a hashkafah challenge, like מתחילה עובדי עבודה זרה, but rather the challenge of being stuck in avdus — in whichever form that takes. Dam milah frees a person from being enslaved to all outside forces and allows him to channel his kochos into being an oved Hashem. That’s the idea of מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח.

This outlook at the process of Yetzias Mitzrayim provides an additional dimension in understanding and appreciating the concept of seeing ourselves as though we left Mitzrayim. The Seder is not just a description of the nissim or hashgachah pratis, but is also reenactment of the process of the growth in which Klal Yisrael went from being avdei Pharaoh to being avdei Hashem.

The Chasam Sofer, in his derashos, explains that the idea of seeing ourselves as though we left Mitzrayim involves reliving the entire process — not just the יצא part of כאילו יצא ממצרים, but also the מתחילה of מתחיל בגנות. There are many aspects to the Seder, but besides the aspect of sippur Yetzias Mitzrayim and recounting the nissim, it’s also a process of growth. The Gaon notes that the Torah mentions Yetzias Mitzrayim 50 times, with each mention corresponding to another step out of the 49 shaarei tumah. Each year, we relive this process of growth, beginning with the challenges and culminating in וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל יֹצְאִים בְּיָד רָמָה, when Klal Yisrael goes out uplifted, ready to be a מַמְלֶכֶת כֹּהֲנִים וְגוֹי קָדוֹשׁ, despite the challenges and because of the challenges.

The Maharal (Gevuras Hashem ch. 4, and elsewhere) discusses the idea of וְכַאֲשֶׁר יְעַנּוּ אֹתוֹ כֵּן יִרְבֶּה וְכֵן יִפְרֹץ, meaning that the more Klal Yisrael is oppressed, the more they shteig and grow, both physically and spiritually. In the context of this discussion, the Maharal cites Chazal’s teaching that Mitzrayim was the worst place in civilization: it was the site of the worst tumah and decadence. Chazal describe the Egyptians as chamorim, which come from the lashon of chomer, meaning materialism and gashmiyus, as the Egyptians were completely mired in physicality. In fact, regarding the passuk of כְּמַעֲשֵׂה אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם אֲשֶׁר יְשַׁבְתֶּם בָּהּ, Chazal teach that what caused Mitzrayim to be so steeped in tumah is the fact that Klal Yisrael needed to be there: אֲשֶׁר יְשַׁבְתֶּם בָּהּ.

Why did Klal Yisrael’s residing in Mitzrayim require that Mitzrayim drop to such a low level?  The Maharal gives an answer that is very relevant to our current situation. He explains that any time an opposing force attacks someone or something, that opposing force forces its target to fight back and bring out its kochos in order to offset the attack and vanquish the attacker. And the stronger the attack, the more “antibodies” — to borrow a contemporary term — the organism produces.

A person can’t shteig mei’atzmo, says the Maharal; a person can shteig only from confrontation, when there’s a force that acts as a counterforce. Hakadosh Baruch Hu created the world in such a way that when a person is under attack he produces antibodies, which provide the kochos that he needs to fight off that attack of the opposing, confrontational force.

The Ran (Nedarim 49) says that a person who was sick and became healed will come out much stronger than before, since his body had to react to the sickness and fight it off. This is the idea behind vaccines, which mimic the immune system’s response to an attack. The concept of antibodies enabling a body to stem the attack of an opposing force exists beyond the biological realm, as the Maharal teaches that when a person is attacked he has the ability to climb to higher levels as a reaction to that attack, producing spiritual “antibodies.”

This, says the Maharal, is the meaning of וְכַאֲשֶׁר יְעַנּוּ אֹתוֹ כֵּן יִרְבֶּה וְכֵן יִפְרֹץ — the more Mitzrayim persecuted the Yidden and opposed them with their koach hatumah, with their koach of being mired in decadence and materialism, the more Klal Yisrael shteiged and produced “antibodies.” Consequently, Klal Yisrael emerged from Mitzrayim stronger and better, with an enhanced antibody system as a reaction to the tumah and chomer of Mitzrayim.

We can now understand why Chazal say that Mitzrayim had to be on such a low level because אֲשֶׁר יְשַׁבְתֶּם בָּהּ — Klal Yisrael needed to be there, to fulfill Hashem’s promise to Avraham Avinu of גֵר יִהְיֶה זַרְעֲךָ. The purpose of Klal Yisrael’s stay in the jungle that was Mitzrayim was for them to develop these antibodies to fight off any level of ruchniyus’dike attack. Klal Yisrael had to be in a place where there was the maximum attack — the maximum “virus” called Mitzrayim — in order to bring out the most powerful antibodies in Klal Yisrael, says the Maharal.

The passuk says: וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל יֹצְאִים בְּיָד רָמָה, and Rashi explains that they emerged with great strength. Rav Wolbe writes that Klal Yisrael came out of Mitzrayim strong, healthy, and powerful, precisely because of כַאֲשֶׁר יְעַנּוּ אֹתוֹ כֵּן יִרְבֶּה וְכֵן יִפְרֹץ. We appreciate the opposition and the challenge!

This idea sheds new light on the concept of מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח. The גנות itself is what gives birth to the שבח, spurring the production of the antibodies that lead to our shteiging. So we’re never afraid of a challenge, and we have dam milah and dam Pesach through which we draw kochos and emunah and cheirus.

The Golus Lie

From the Kovetz Maamarim of Rav Elchonon pg. 253 about why עלילות דם went on for centuries.

 

Why is the lie of the garment of Yosef connected to the Pesach story? The golut of Mitzraim was all brought about by this lie, by the sale of Yosef and the cover up story that was given to Yaakov afterward.  The prophesy given to Avrohom that his descendants would be in golut was very ambiguous and open ended.  It was the actions of the shevatim that determined how it played out.  This is hinted to in the pessukin of Yehoshua (24:2-4) that we read in the Haggadah. "וָאֶקַּח אֶת־אֲבִיכֶם אֶת־אַבְרָהָם מֵעֵבֶר הַנָּהָר וָאוֹלֵךְ אוֹתוֹ בְּכָל־אֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן, וָאַרְבֶּה אֶת־זַרְעוֹ וָאֶתֵּן לוֹ אֶת־יִצְחָק, וָאֶתֵּן לְיִצְחָק אֶת־יַעֲקֹב וְאֶת־עֵשָׂו. וָאֶתֵּן לְעֵשָׂו אֶת־הַר שֵּׂעִיר לָרֶשֶׁת אתוֹ, וְיַעֲקֹב וּבָנָיו יָרְדוּ מִצְרָיִם."  The actions are described as being done by G-d, I took, I led him, I made him have children etc. until the end of the possuk, Yaakov and his children went into Egypt, here it does not say I led thim into golut.  G-d did not cause this to happen, the prophesy of Avrohom could have been fulfilled in another manner, it was the actions of the shevatim that caused ti to play out in this manner (based upon lecture by Rabbi Y.Y. Jacobson.) 

Rav Shmuel Eliyahu in this shiur develops that that an integral part of the mitzvah of sippur yitziat mitzraim is not to just recant what happened in the past but to talk about one's own personal geulah from their own forms of golut.  The constant עלילות דם serve as a reminder that the שיר חדש of the final geulah has not yet happened because עדיין זה מרקד בינינו. 

What Are You Seeing

 From the back of הררי קדם volume 2.  When being olah l'regel what are you coming to see.  Two approaches. 

Biur Chametz When Ever Pesach Is Shabbos

The Rambam (Chometz U’matzah 1:9) says וְאָסְרוּ חֲכָמִים לֶאֱכל חָמֵץ מִתְּחִלַּת שָׁעָה שִׁשִּׁית כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִגַּע בְּאִסּוּר תּוֹרָה. וּמִתְּחִלַּת שָׁעָה שִׁשִּׁית יִהְיֶה הֶחָמֵץ אָסוּר בַּאֲכִילָה וּבַהֲנָיָה כָּל שָׁעָה שִׁשִּׁית מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים וּשְׁאָר הַיּוֹם מִשְּׁבִיעִית וּלְמַעְלָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה. שָׁעָה חֲמִישִׁית אֵין אוֹכְלִין בָּהּ חָמֵץ גְּזֵרָה מִשּׁוּם יוֹם הַמְעֻנָּן שֶׁמָּא יִטְעֶה בֵּין חֲמִישִׁית לְשִׁשִּׁית. וְאֵינוֹ אָסוּר בַּהֲנָיָה בְּשָׁעָה חֲמִישִׁית. לְפִיכָךְ תּוֹלִין בָּהּ תְּרוּמָה וְלֶחֶם תּוֹדָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן מֵחָמֵץ שֶׁהוּא קֹדֶשׁ לֹא אוֹכְלִין וְלֹא שׂוֹרְפִין עַד שֶׁתַּגִּיעַ שָׁעָה שִׁשִּׁית וְשׂוֹרְפִין הַכּל.  The Briskor Rav asks why does the Rambam hold it is prohibited to burn the todah loaves in the 5th hour of the day if the one is not permitted to benefit from them except via eating and they can’t be eaten? The Rav answers that the prohibition in the 6th hour is an extension of the Torah prohibition of chametz and is an issur cheftzah like the Torah prohibition.  The issur in the 5th hour is only an issur gavra not to eat the chametz.  Therefore, it is only when the cheftzah is assur, in the 6th hour of the day that the issur to cause a loss to kodshim is lifted.  

The difficulty with this Rav is that it seems to fly in the face of the Gemorah on 13a, codified in the Rambam (3:4) הָיוּ לוֹ כִּכָּרוֹת רַבּוֹת שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה וְצָרִיךְ לְשָׂרְפָהּ עֶרֶב שַׁבָּת לֹא יְעָרֵב הַטְּהוֹרָה עִם הַטְּמֵאָה וְיִשְׂרֹף אֶלָּא שׂוֹרֵף טְמֵאָה לְעַצְמָהּ וּטְהוֹרָה לְעַצְמָהּ וּתְלוּיָה לְעַצְמָהּ. וּמַנִּיחַ מִן הַטְּהוֹרָה כְּדֵי לֶאֱכל עַד אַרְבַּע שָׁעוֹת בְּיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת בִּלְבַד.  Here we see that one can burn terumah even before it is prohibited for the time of the issur is not until the next day, on Shabbos?  It may be that the din to rid chametz on Friday when erev Pesach is Shabbos is not a practical din to rid most of the chametz before Shabbos, but it is a takkanah to view Friday as the time of biur.  The Shulchan Aruch (444:2) says one should rid oneself of the chometz when erev Pesach is Shabbos at the same time one does when it is erev Pesach so as not to get confused with other years.  However, we may give another reason.  Since the takkanah is to pattern Friday after the regular din of erev Pesach one must burn the chametz at the same time (however the Rishonim give the reason of the S.A.)  (עיין תוס' פסחים יג. ויש לבאר קושיתם דוקא בע"פ שחל להיות בשבת משום דהבינו בקושיתם כהגרי"ז ובתירוצם מסיק שאינו כן וצ"ע וע"ע הררי קדם סימן כג.)

A Nation Apart

Why was the final blow to the Egyptians מכת בכורות?  What was about the killing of the first born that was so dramatic more than any other of the plagues?  

The Maharsha in Pesachim (116b) asks if the reason for matzah is because when leaving Egypt the bread didn't have time to rise if so why did Klal Yisroel eat matzah the year they left and why is the mitzvah before chatzos, it should be only after chatzos when they left?  He explains that the reason given because the bread didn't have time to rise is only to explain why there is an issur of chametz for seven days but the reason for easting matzah the first night is because Klal Yisreol became a holy nation totally separated from the evil forces represented by chametz.  "כמפורש סודו בקרבן מנחה שאמר מצות תאכל במקום קדוש וגו' לא תאפה חמן וגו' כי החמץ רמז אסטרא דשמאלא וכמ"ש גבי מנחה כי כל שאור גו' וכמ"ש ומי מעכב שאור שבעיסה כו' וז"ש מצות תאכל במקום קדוש דהיינו מתוך הקדושה וסטרא דימינא מסיים כי קדש קדשים היא ואין ראוי להיות בה חמץ מסטרא דשמאלא וזהו טעם אכילת מצה בליל פסח כדמיון המנחה לגבי כהן כי אז נתקדשו כל ישראל להבדיל בין ישראל למצרים וליל שמורים הוא מן המזיקים וסטרא דשמאלא להדבק בקדושה."   The makkah of bechorot came to demonstrate that בני בכורי ישראל  (Shemos 4:22-23.)  It is Klal Yisroel that is the elevated nation.  The Rambam describes the מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח in Laws of Chametz (8:4) שֶׁבַּתְּחִלָּה הָיוּ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ בִּימֵי תֶּרַח וּמִלְּפָנָיו כּוֹפְרִים וְטוֹעִין אַחַר הַהֶבֶל וְרוֹדְפִין אַחַר עֲבוֹדַת אֱלִילִים. וּמְסַיֵּם בְּדַת הָאֱמֶת שֶׁקֵּרְבָנוּ הַמָּקוֹם לוֹ וְהִבְדִּילָנוּ מֵהָאֻמּוֹת וְקֵרְבָנוּ לְיִחוּדוֹ.  We celebrate this night not merely leaving Egypt but being recognized as the nation that is close to G-d.  That is the message of makkat bechorot.

Asking About Leaning

 This post is piggybacking off of this one of my father shlita. 

In the perush on the Haggadah attributed to the Rokeach and in the perush of the Gra they say that in the times of the mikdash there was no question about הסבה because that was the normal way of eating ,there was nothing strange and unique instead they asked about why they were eating only roasted meat.  It is only after there was no more pesach and it became not the norm to recline while eating that the question about the roast was replaced by the question about reclining.  They assume the question about הסבה is specifically because we normally do not recline. 

What is very interesting is back to back paragraphs in the perush attributed to the Raavan on the Haggadah which I shall paste here.

The Raavan says that since it is not the norm any more to recline we not do הסבה but in the very next paragraph he understands the answer of עבדים היינו only answers the question of the הסבה (the Shibulay Haleket also learns this way and adds that the other questions are answered by the רבן גמליאל היה אומר at the end of Maggid.)  It is clear that the Raavan must have הסבה as one of the questions of the מה נשתנה.  How could he understand that there is a question about הסבה if he himself says in the previous paragraph that we do not recline not that it not customary to eat that way?  

There are two ways to understand this view of the Raavan that nowadays we do not recline during the Seder.  Either the din of reclining is suspended or that regular eating in a chair is considered a fulfillment of הסבה.  The Raavan on Pesachim says:

Rav Eliyahu Baruch points out the Raavan does not say the din of הסבה no longer applies but rather that our eating while sitting is הסיבתינו, it is our הסבה.  In other words, the takanah is not to specifically eat in a reclining manner but rather to eat in a way that expresses חירות.  When that was done by reclining the obligation was to recline.  Nowadays that is fulfilled by sitting at a table with a chair.  If so, it makes a נפקא מינה if one ate while standing they will not fulfill their obligation because it is not a regular way to eat, it would not be fulfilling הסיבתנו.  He reports that he told this to Rav Elyashiv who agreed with him.  Based upon this we can explain that we still can ask about הסבה because we are forgoing it, we are just fulfilling it in another manner but it is still difficult for it is no different from the rest of the year, so what is the question of מה נשתנה?  

Since the Raavan holds the עבדים היינו comes to answer the question of הסבה it would seem he would also have to hold that this question was asked in the times of the mikdash.  This is the opinion of the Rambam (8:2) as well that lists five questions for the מה נשתנה including both הסבה and why only roast  (see however Tzafnas Paneach.)  But the Gra and Rokeach are logical why ask about reclining when it is the normal way to eat hoe can one disagree with this?  You could learn like the Shibulay Haleket that says the question is specifically כלנו מסובין, why everyone, including those that normally wouldn't recline like the waiter, woman and a child at their father's table are leaning.  However, the Raavan doesn't say that so it is hard to say he learnt that way. 

Burning Kodshim And Chametz

The Mishna at the end of Temurah says about things that are burnt such as kelayim that if the דרך is to burn them they should be burnt, if not, they should be buried.  Rashi comments that things that are not normally burnt means liquids.  The Briskor Rav asks that the Gemorah in Zevachim (92a) says that libations that became tamah are burnt on a special fire, so we see even liquids get burnt?  The Briskor Rav differentiates between the law of burning kodshim vs. other burnings of items that are assur to derive benefit from them.  It is not normal to burn liquids and by איסו"ה that would not be the way to despose of them.  However, koshim that become tamah there is no halacha to get rid of them, it is a special halacha to burn them just as one burns up regular kodshim.  The Minchas Avrohom (Zevachim 85a) and on Torat Kohanim pg. 94) brings further proof to this principle from the Raavad (diburah d’chovah parsha 3 (5) that holds koshim that became passul need to be burnt with wood that is kasher for the mizbaoch.  Why is there such a requirement is the point is to merely to get rid of that which became disqualified?  It must be that it is a din of hakatarah as well.  In light of this we can understand why the Torat Kohanim (5:6) according to the Rash thinks that there would be a din of הפשט וניתוח on kodshim that became tameh if not for a limud.  Why would you have such a הוא אמינא?  In light of the Rav its quite understandable because it is burnt like a korban there is ample reason to assume that it may require הפשט וניתוח as well.  

One of the items on the list in the Mishna in Temurah in chametz on pesach according to Rebbe Yehuda that holds it must be burnt.  It also has the din of being removed like other איסו"ה.  The Gemorah in Pesachim (27b) explains that Rebbe Yehuda learns that chametz must be burnt from a מה מצינו from nosar.  According to this idea how could he equate the two dinim if they are quite distinct, chametz on pesach the point is to remove it but nosar has a kodshim din of being burnt? 

The above mentioned Raavad that holds you need wood that is kasher for the mizbaoch to burn kodshim that became possul says that only applies to kodshei kodashim not to kodshim kalim.   Based upon this we can say that there are two distinct halachot that apply to burning nosar.  When it is kodshei kodashim then it is a special din of haktarah like a korban but when it is kodshim kalim it is just the regular din of burning to remove the kodshim pessulim.  If that is the case we can learn out chametz from the burning of nosar from kodshim kalim.  (From R' Brown's Shabbas Hagadol drasha.)

The Shabbos Holiday

Why is Pesach called Shabbos in the Torah, ממחרת השבת?  Why is the Shabbos before Pesach called Shabbos Hagadol?

The Tur (430) says that Shabbos Hagadol is to commemorate the miracle that they prepared the lambs for the korban Pesach and the Egyptians could do nothing to stop them.  The commentators on the Shulchan Aruch ask why do we commemorate this on Shabbos and not on the date of the occurrence, the 10th of Nissan?  And why is this miracle specifically worthy of merit more than any other miracle that occurred?                    

The Kabbilists say that all ברכה that occurs from the week stems from the Shabbos that precedes the week.  It is the oasis of kedusha that starts off the week on the right foot and imbues the entire week with kedusha.  The beracha that comes during the week is merely a reflection, a fraction of the beracha that was present on the preceding Shabbos. Pesach is the Shabbos of the year.  The great experience of yitzias mitraim that we relive every year gives us the ability to experience the kedusha that is present throughout the rest of the year.  All of the moadim are zecher l’yitzias mitzraim, the kedusha is a ray of that which occurs on Pesach.  That is why Pesach is referred to as Shabbos.  It has that Shabbistic quality of having a kedusha that leaves its mark through the days and year that follows.  

The essence of the act of taking the sheep was in essence an act of preparation to secure the korban pesach.  What was unique about this miracle was that it was a miracle that set forth a building of the future, to offer the korban pesach.  We commemorate this miracle because it reflects the entirety of what the holiday of Pesach is.  This holiday sets the tone and inspires kedusha for the entire year.  It is not just an end in itself but is a cornerstone to build toward the future.  What Shabbos is to the week Pesach is to the year and we therefore choose specifically to convey this message on the Shabbos before Pesach (based upon Binyan Av, Or Gedaylahu and R’ Brown.)    

Rule Over Time

This post is from a shmuz of Rabbi Elefant of the Mir.  The First Mishna in Rosh Hashana says rosh chodesh Nissan is the Rosh Hashana for kings and the Gemorah explains for Jewish kings (for when you count it as the next year of the king when writing a document.)  The Sfas Emes on Parshat Hachodesh 5637 says this is a lesson and a revelation for every one of us.  "בפסוק החדש הזה לכם כו'. דאיתא באחד בניסן ר"ה למלכים כי תשרי ר"ה לשנים הוא התחדשות השנה עפ"י דרך הטבע ובניסן ר"ה למלכים למלכי ישראל כדאיתא בגמ' והיינו בני ישראל שנקראו בני מלכים שהם בני חורין משיעבוד הסט"א שאינם תחת הטבע ולכן אחר שהתחילה הגאולה במצרים אז נאמר להם החודש הזה לכם כו' [נשכח ממני הסיום]."  The miracles that occurred in Nissan are not just external revelations that came into the world but have a personal message for all of us.  Just as in Nissan the regular order of teva was broken and there was a new order of nissim so too every Jew gets a special ability to rule over the yetzer hara and the teva.  To rule over one's teva is the middah of malchut that is revealed in Nissan.  How does one tap inot this middah of malchut?

The first mitzvah given to Klal Yisroel is the mitzvah of kiddush hachodesh.  Why is this mitzvah so central that it was given first and as Rashi at the beginning of Chumash says should have been the opening of the Torah?  And why was it given while Klal Yisroel were still stuck in Egypt?  It must be it was given before the Exodus because it is a necessary intro. to leaving Egypt.  It is a mitzvah one must internalize once one starts learning Torah.  What it the message of kiddush hachodesh?

Many seforim say how we learn from kiddush hachodesh to wax and wane.  Even as the moon reaches its smallest point, when it swallowed up by darkness, it has the ability to come back with renewed and greater vigor.  Klal Yisroel is compared to the moon and the lesson is that we can also renew ourselves and illuminate the darkness in our souls and around us.  But how does own tap into this ability of renewal? 

There is a dichotomy in the mitzvah of kiddush hachodesh.  On the one hand, Rosh Chodesh must be declared by a beis din; it must be initiated by man.  Man must renew himself.  On the other hand, as Rav Gedaylah Schorr point out in his maamer on Nissan, the moon merely lines up to reflect the light of the sun, it does nothing on its own, representing that own must merely turn toward Hashem but there is nothing new that a person must do.  How are we to make sense of this dichotomy, what is the role of the person?  And why is this message specifically represented by kiddush hachodesh?

The Messiat Yesharim in the very beginning of the book describes the arch rival of avodat Hashem is to remove one's ability to think.  This approach was initiated by Pharaoh in his insistence on constant work.  "ואולם הנה זאת באמת אחת מתחבולות היצר הרע וערמתו להכביד עבודתו בתמידות על לבות בני האדם עד שלא ישאר להם ריוח להתבונן ולהסתכל באיזה דרך הם הולכים. כי יודע הוא שאלולי היו שמים לבם כמעט קט על דרכיהם, ודאי שמיד היו מתחילים להנחם ממעשיהם, והיתה החרטה הולכת ומתגברת בהם עד שהיו עוזבים החטא לגמרי. והרי זו מעין עצת פרעה הרשע שאמר (שמות ה): תכבד העבודה על האנשים וגו', שהיה מתכוין שלא להניח להם ריוח כלל לבלתי יתנו לב או ישימו עצה נגדו, אלא היה משתדל להפריע לבם מכל התבוננות בכח התמדת העבודה הבלתי מפסקת."  This was the klipah, the טמטום of Egypt, to occupy a person's time so that one does not have a second to stop and think.  This is hinted to in the parsha setumah at the beginning of Vayechi.  Rashi says at the beginning of Vayikra that the spaces exist to give one time to absorb and think about the information he just received.  The descent into the golus of Egypt removed one's time to be able to pause and remember what they should be doing.  To be enslaved is not merely to do back breaking labor but to be enslaved to one's middot because there is no time to maintain control over one's self. It is no coincidence that the culmination of the geulah, the shiras ham has a lot of empty space.  The geulah from Egypt, the geulat hadaat means there was an explosion of ownership over one's time!  

In the ברית בין הבתרים Hashem tells Avrohom (15:13) ויאמר לאברם ידע תדע כי גר יהיה זרעך בארץ לא להם ועבדום וענו אתם ארבע מאות שנה, his descendants will be enslaved for 400 years.  Three pessukim later it says ודור רביעי ישובו הנה כי לא שלם עון האמרי עד הנה, the geulah is measured by number of generations.  Why is the golus measured in terms of years but the geulah is given in the number of generations?      The Pachad Yitzchak Yom Kippur maamer 21 brings the Gaon that explains golus is dependent on קלקולים בזמן but geulah depends on the tikkkun in a person's nefesh.  What does this mean?  Based upon what we have explained we understand that golus is to be ruled by one's calendar, one does not have time for themselves, it is measured by time.  Geulah is when one takes control of himself, it is expressed in terms of the persons.   He says golus is measured in time and geulah is measured by people, by generations.  This is why kiddush hachodesh is the intro. to yetzias mitzraim.  In order to be free one must first take control of their own time.  Because we are taking control of time.  That is the job of man represented by the need for beis din to proclaim the Rosh Chodesh to merely stop and take control of one's time.  The change in the person will come automatically like the moon that automatically reflects the light of the sun. 

How is this related to malchut?  The Ramban on Behaloscha (12:4) says the nature of the word פתאום is from the word פתי, a fool, כי פתאום על דעת המפרשים – דבר שלא עלה על לב, מגזרת פתי.  A fool is one who is never thinking, always doing things fast without fully contemplating the topic.  The Ramban in Mishpatim (22:15) says the word יפתה, to seduce, is also related to the word פתי.  The yetzer harah turns one into a fool by stopping one from thinking.  The word מלך is related to the word נמלך, to rethink, because the true melech is one who's מוח is שליט על הלב, one who takes the time to reconsider and analyze a question form all angles.  Nissan, the Rosh Hashana of kings is an auspicious time to be able to rule over the yetzer harah, the teva of the world, to be ממליך one's sechal over the natural middot.   

The Messilat Yesharim cites a maamer Chazal that because of the great skill of the yetzer harah one must have wisdom and vision to win over the yetzer harah. "וחכמינו ז"ל אמרו (מועד קטן ה): כל השם ארחותיו בעולם הזה, זוכה ורואה בישועתו של הקדוש ברוך הוא."  On this Gemorah in Sotah (5b) the Maharal says this very yesod that is not natural, not the teva for one to be able to rule over the yetzer harah, and therefore one merits to get a reward that is not in the realm of teva as well. 

Double Call

וַיִּקְרָ֖א אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר י״י֙ אֵלָ֔יו מֵאֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵ֖ד לֵאמֹֽר.  Why the double terminology of ויקרא and וידבר and why repeat that Hashem spoke to Moshe twice and why does it not say the first time Hashem is calling Moshe?  The early Hassidic works (Toldot, Degel) bring on this possuk the teaching of the Baal Shem Tov and each one explains it in their own way. I will cite the English translation of the Toldot "The explanation of that which my teacher asked about that which the Sages, may their memory be blessed, said (Avot 6:2), "Each and every day a heavenly echo goes out from Mount Horeb, and announces, etc.": Either way, it is difficult. If it is impossible for anyone to hear this announcement – if so, why does the echo go out at all? And if it is possible to hear, what is the reason that it is not heard? For if a person were to say that he heard it, he would be condemned as a false prophet! And he explained that 'there is no speech and no words' above; it is only in the realm of thought. If so, the thoughts of repentance that come to a man are from the announcement, etc. And (with relation to this teaching,) the words of the mouth of a sage are a charm."  Based upon this we can understand the possuk.  The first ויקרא it does not say who is calling.  It is not a voice one hears from the outside but rather his own thoughts.  It is the thoughts of teshuva that enter a persons' mind, heart and soul.  After a person starts to heed to the thoughts that have entered his head, then וידבר ה אליו, will a person merit to have Hashem connect to the individual.  מאהל מועד, Rashi says that no one else heard what Moshe heard.  Each indivduial connects to Hashem according to their own level and no one else can hear, no one else is on the same radio station. 

Adam's Korban

The possuk says אדם כי יקריב מכם.  The mefarshim ask why does it use the term אדם?  The Or Hachaim brings from the Tanchuma ובמדרש תנחומא אמרו למה אמר אדם ולא אמר איש, ירצה לומר כי יחטא האדם כאדם הראשון שהתחיל לחטוא יביא קרבן עד כאן.  He expounds that the midrash means that Adam brought a korban but that did not atone his sin but we are given the ability to bring a korban like Adam but we obtain atonement through it.  Why did Adam not obtain atonement?  The Or Hachaim explains because Adam had no evil around him leading him to sin but we living post sin, have to deal with a poisoned environment.  "ואומרו שהתחיל לחטוא, נתן הטעם למה לא נהג ה׳ כמו כן עם אדם הראשון, כי אדם התחיל לחטוא ולא קדם לו בחינת הרע להכריחו לחטוא, מה שאין כן הבאים אחריו כבר קדם להם בחינת החטא בנפשם, וזה לך אות הברית אשר ערל בשרו וצוה ה׳ למול מה שלא היה כן לאדם הראשון."  

Rav Pinkus suggests another interpretation.  The Yerushalmi (7a) says שאלו לחכמה חוטא מהו עונשו אמרו להם חטאים תרדף רעה שאלו לנבואה חוטא מהו עונשו אמרה להן הנפש החוטאת היא תמות שאלו לקודשא בריך הוא חוטא מהו עונשו אמר להן יעשו תשובה ויתכפר לו. היינו דכתיב על כן יורה חטאים בדרך יורה לחטאים דרך לעשות תשובה.  Before the Torah was given there was no ability to bring a korban, that is a chiddush of the Torah.  What is the difference post Torah?  In truth chachma is correct.  There is no room for repair for a rebellion against G-d.  The sin can not be repaired.  The other levels of nevuah, Torah and Hashem Himself do not disagree with this but give other ways to be able be become reborn and divorced from the sin.  Nevuah gives the option of being actually reborn.  Torah gives the option of bringing a korban and sacrificing one's self before Hashem like the Ramban describes and Hashem gives a person the ability to become reborn through teshuva alone.  It is not that the bar is lowered but that there are new forms given to be able to divorce one's self from sin.

Semicha And Vidduy

 The Sifra Dibbura d'nedavah (5:4) says אין לי אלא של אנשים; של נשים מנין? אין לי אלא של ישראל; של עבדים מנין? עד שאתה מרבה להביא את של עובד אלילים מנין? תלמוד לומר "העולה" – כל שהוא עולה טעונה הפשטה. מה ראית להביאן להפשט ונתוח ולהוציאם מן הסמיכה? אחר שריבה הכתוב מיעט! מפני מה אני מביאם להפשט ונתוח? שהפשט ונתוח כשרים בכל אדם, ומוציא אני הסמיכה שאין הסמיכה אלא בבעלים.  What does the Sifra mean that since smicha has to be done by the owner gentiles are excluded as opposed to flaying an olah?  I think the simple peshat is that smicha is a more narrow din than flaying an olah and therefore does not include gentiles.  The Rabbenu Hillel learns it means since the owner must do semicha he must enter the azarah and a gentile can't enter.  The Rash m'shantz learns that when one does semicha they do vidduy and a gentile does not get atonement from a korban and hence does not do semicha.  [I do not understand how his reason fits in the words of the Sifra.]  The Rash says that in all korbanot including a shelamin there is an element of atonement.  The Ralbag also understands that the semicha is attached to the atonement in his commentary in this week's parsha Ch. 1.  The Keren Orah in Menachot (92a) says that is the reason that  a bechor, maaser and pesach do not require semicha because there is no atonement from them.  The Ralbag already says this idea in Ch. 3.  However, the Rambam Maaseh Korbanot (3:6) says the reason they don't have semicha is מפי השמועה.  The Rambam would seem to disagree with the above yesod.  The Rambam would be forced to disagree l'shitaso in Maaseh Korbanot (3:15) that there is no vidduy recited on a shelamim, yet there is still semicha.  He holds the semicha is independent of the vidduy.  The question on the Ralbag, Rash and Keren Orah is how do they understand why there is semicha on a korban metzorah, nazir etc. that merely serve as a mattir ot eat kodshim? 

Nedivot Lev

From the Mir parsha sheet by Rav Shmuel Wolman.

Why was Moshe Rabbeinu not given the opportunity to be involved in the donations to the Mishkan? The sefer Maalos HaTorah, written by the brother of the Gaon, offers a mind-boggling insight. The Torah tells us the entire creation of the Mishkan needed to be an active nedivus lev. The men and women that ran to give all their precious possessions towards this cause were acting out of nedivus lev, parting with their most prized assets. Yet Moshe Rabbeinu was such an ish Elokim, says the Maalos HaTorah, that despite his vast wealth, he was totally detached from his worldly possessions, and they were completely meaningless to him. Therefore, although technically Moshe Rabbeinu had plenty to offer towards the cause, his donation could not possibly be an act of nedivus lev, and he therefore could not contribute to the cause.

Besides providing a powerful insight into Moshe Rabbeinu’s ability to totally negate the finer things in life, the Maalos HaTorah is conveying an entirely new understanding of the concept of nedivus lev. It was not an added element in the building of the Mishkan, but rather the entire essence of the drive to donate to the Mishkan, to the extent that Moshe Rabbeinu’s contribution was worthless, since it could not come with nedivus lev.

In fact, throughout these five parashiyos that discuss the Mishkan, the Torah repeatedly emphasizes the component of nedivus lev, which seems to confirm how essential it was. But why, indeed, was it such a vital element in the donations to the Mishkan?

I think the Torah is conveying a fundamental lesson that could revamp our entire attitude towards avodas Hashem. Hakadosh Baruch Hu asks us to, build Him a home, kaveyachol, and this request necessitates a huge fundraising campaign to provide the resources for this home. We could get the feeling that this is all a very practical project: Get the resources to make this building campaign a success, so we can provide a home for the Shechinah Hakedoshah.  But this is obviously absurd.

Does the Eibishter — who proclaims, though the navi Chaggai: לִי הַכֶּסֶף וְלִי הַזָּהָב — really need our donations of gold and silver? Does the Creator of all the worlds, who is מחדש בטובו בכל יום תמיד really require our craftsmen to provide Him with a home? Obviously not. So what is this all about? The answer is that רחמנא לבא בעי — all the Eibishter wants is the relationship that is created through Klal Yisrael’s nedivus lev and the heartfelt sacrifice and devotion of giving up all their dearest belongings. The Eibishter was not focused on the creation of the Mishkan itself, but rather on the תּוֹכוֹ רָצוּף אַהֲבָה, the tremendous love that permeated every bit of the Mishkan.

We can now understand the Torah’s unusual focus on Klal Yisrael’s nedivus lev, as it describes in detail how zealous the men and women were to give the shirts off their back at the first opportunity. Because that’s what it’s all about! What was important wasn’t what they gave, but how they gave it. The nedivus lev is all the Eibishter is focused on.

This idea sheds light on Chazal’s criticism of the nesi’im, who waited to see what would be brought by others so that they could fill in whatever was missing. Chazal say that the reason the word nesi’im is written missing a yud is to indicate that their attitude was lackluster. The meforshim wonder, wasn’t their offer to fill in any missing donations a noble one? Rabbeinu Bechaye says that their intentions were l’sheim Shamayim — to be practical and ensure that nothing would be lacking. So why were they faulted?

The rosh yeshiva, Rav Chaim Shmulevitz zt”l, explains that when it comes to nedivus lev, there’s no room for cheshbonos. If you crave the relationship with Hashem and you’re so desperate to participate in the project of וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם, then there’s no place for waiting until the end. A person involved in a labor of love and a display of devotion is desperate to secure a slot.

This principle — that the Eibishter doesn’t need our help or donations, and is concerned solely with our nedivus lev — yields a whole new approach to avodas Hashem. It’s not merely about the results; it’s not about saving the day and getting the job done. Rather, it’s all about רחמנא לבא בעי, about pushing ourselves to our limits — בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל מְאֹדֶךָ. The rest is not our concern.

The Eibishter does not need our help, and either way, the results are in Hashem’s hands and do not reflect our accomplishments. We need to do our best, and the rest is beyond the scope of what we are expected to accomplish.

Moshe Rabbeinu was not able to be part of the meleches haMishkan, and Hakadosh Baruch Hu wants to give him a chelek in it, so He performed a nes that would compel him to make believe that he was accomplishing. Isn’t that strange? If Hashem was already awarding Moshe a bona fide share in the building of the Mishkan, why make him go through the motions of a charade in which he wasn’t really accomplishing anything?

The answer is that this is precisely what the binyan haMishkan is all about! The Eibishter does not care at all about the accomplishment, but is concerned, rather, about the nedivus lev — giving it your all. That is exactly what the Eibishter told Moshe Rabbeinu: עסוק אתה בידך נראה כמקימו, והוא נזקף וקם מאליו. This was not a charade at all; rather, Hakadosh Baruch Hu was telling Moshe Rabbeinu, “Put your whole heart into it. Imagine that you’re able to lift it, and give it every ounce of your strength. The rest is on Me.”

This is the quintessential message of nedivus lev: Don’t own the result or the accomplishment, but give it your all, with nedivus lev.

Accordingly, we can understand that this is actually the fulfillment of the command ofוַהֲקֵמֹתָ אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן , because all that a person is ever meant to do is to invest the effort towards the result. In this vein, the passuk in Parashas Nasso states: וַיְהִי בְּיוֹם כַּלּוֹת מֹשֶׁה לְהָקִים אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן, clearly indicating that the Torah considers Moshe Rabbeinu to be the one who put up the Mishkan.

The Nefesh Chaim teaches that the binyan haMishkan is a microcosm of the binyan ha’adam. Each Yid contains within him a Mishkan, and we need to build that Mishkan with the same focus on nedivus halev, understanding that רחמנא לבא בעי. At the same time, we can draw comfort and chizuk that we are not being asked to own the result, but rather to give it our all, as the Mishnah teaches: לא עליך המלאכה לגמור. The Eibishter has nachas ruach only from a Yiddishkeit born of nedivus lev, where our hearts are fully invested in avodas Hashem.

Despite the noble intentions of the nesi’im, they were criticized for not approaching Yiddishkeit with nedivus halev and the yearning for a relationship. As the chassidim explain, the letter yud was left out of their name to indicate that although they were engaged in mitzvos and avodas Hashem, they were missing the yud — representing the Yid, the heart, which is the essential ingredient in our Yiddishkeit.

As we try to survive in a world that is so focused on the bottom line, that worships accomplishment and belittles effort, these parashiyos convey a message that can revitalize our Yiddishkeit: עסוק אתה בידך — give it your all, with your whole heart, and that’s what the Eibishter wants from us.

The Daas Zekeinim MiBaalei HaTosafos tells us that Rosh Chodesh Nissan was the day when Klal Yisrael experienced the joy and satisfaction that resulted from the nedivus lev they invested in the hakamas 

Katan And Terumah

The Mishna in Terumot (1:1) says משנה חמשה לא יתרומו ואם תרמו אין תרומתן תרומה החרש והשוטה והקטן והתורם את שאינו שלו.  The Yerushalmi Terumot (1a) says  the reason ר' שמואל בר נחמן שמע לכולהון מן הכא דבר אל בני ישראל ויקחו לי תרומה פרט לגוי מאת כל איש פרט לקטן אשר ידבנו לבו פרט לחרש ולשוטה וזאת התרומה אשר תקחו מאתם פרט לתורם את שאינו שלו.  [The yerushalmi learns terumah on produce from the terumah given to the mishkan.]  Rashi in Shabbat (153b) where this Mishna is quoted says ותורם את שאינו שלו - בלא רשות דכתיב (דברים י״ד:כ״ב) תבואת זרעך וחרש שוטה וקטן דכתיב אשר ידבנו לבו שיש לו לב להתנדב בהש"ס ירושלמי:  He seems to misquote the Yerushlami for he excludes a katan not from איש but from אשר ידבנו לבו?  The Ridvaz on the Rambam Terumot (4:2) asks why does the Yerushalmi not learn it out from the exclusion of אשר ידבנו לבו?  He answers the Yerushalmi holds that even a קטן שהגיע לעונת נדרים that has daas to make a nedavah is also excluded.  The Rambam himself (4:5) rules that a katan שהגיע לעונת נדרים can separate terumah based upon Rebbe Yose in niddah (46b.)  So, as the Emrei Binah (Terumot siman 8) points out the Rambam must not hold of the Yerushalmi that rejects a katan from a scriptural reference of איש.  In light of this, one could say for some reason Rashi wanted to contend for the opinion that a katan שהגיע לעונת נדרים can separate terumah and therefore switched the limmud to exclude him from אשר ידבנו לבו.  However, the Ketzos (188:3) points out that Rashi in Bava Metzia (71b) says a katan is excluded from shlichut because shlichut is learnt from terumah (גם אתם לרבות שלוחכם) and just a katan is excluded from terumah, so he is excluded from shlichut.  If a katan שהגיע לעונת נדרים can separate terumah he should be able to be a shliach?  He therefore concludes the Rambam must disagree and holds he is excluded since he excluded from giving a get as Rashi Kiddushin (42a) says אין שליחות לקטן דגבי ושלח ושלחה איש כתיב (דברים כ״ד:א׳) כי יקח איש ומינה ילפינן (בב"מ דף עא:) דאין הקטן עושה שליח.  So this Rashi would comew out not like the Rashi in Bava Metzia but could fit with Rashi Kiddushin.  [It is difficult why did Rashi Bava Metzia not just say like he says in Kiddushin which would work according to everyone, וצ"ע.]  Also Rashi in Yevamot (113a) explains והתורם את שאינו שלו because of a different reason - התורם את שאינו שלו - ולא צוהו בעל הבית דשליחות נפקא לן (קדושין דף מא:) מאתם גם אתם לרבות שלוחכם הלכך מה אתם לדעתכם אף שלוחכם לדעתכם:  Why did he switch his explanation from Tractate Shabbas to Tractate Yevamot? 

Four Types Of Jewelry

From sichot of Frierdiker Rebbe Adar 5694 translated into English on chabad.org.

The second occasion on which women are mentioned before men is the Torah’s account of how the people contributed valuables and building materials for the Mishkan, the Sanctuary in the wilderness, and its furnishings.

One should keep in mind that the Holy Temple is not a temporary, one-time edifice. Rather, every Jewish home builds a Beis HaMikdash, in fulfillment of the command, “And they shall build Me a Sanctuary and I shall dwell among them.”

In the wilderness, when G‑d desired to bestow upon our people the greatest gift possible, the construction of a Sanctuary for His Name, even though “the silver is Mine and the gold is Mine” He asked them to contribute the necessary materials. And the first to respond were the women, who brought four kinds of gold jewelry. As understood by Ibn Ezra, these comprised rings worn on the ears, nose and fingers, and bracelets.

Only a husband and a wife together can transform the life of their family into a Beis HaMikdash, but it is the woman who must take the first step. She must make a spiritual contribution of four kinds of jewelry towards their children’s education, for it is this that will turn their home into a Sanctuary for Torah and mitzvos, a place in which G‑d’s Name will abide and which He will bless with happiness.

Contributing one’s earrings signifies listening attentively to the directives of the Torah and its sages on how to bring up children and how to conduct a Jewish home. It also signifies listening attentively to how one’s sons and daughters speak among themselves and with their respective friends. Since the tone of their speech normally echoes what they hear from their parents at home, the parents’ speech needs to set an example of respect and refinement.

The second kind of jewelry, noserings, suggests the sense of smell. A mother needs to be sensitive to the question of which boys and girls her children come in contact with and exchange home visits with, and she needs to monitor these contacts.

The third kind, rings worn on the finger, suggests that building a Sanctuary at home needs something more than the two previous kinds of jewelry. One also needs to point the way. One needs to explain the child the consequences of obedience and proper conduct and (G‑d forbid) of disobedience and improper conduct.

The fourth kind of jewelry mentioned is the bracelet. Children should be brought up with a firm hand, not only when they are disobedient, but also when they are obedient, in order to arouse a lively interest in tackling their studies conscientiously.

I am certain that all or almost all of those present would like to see their children growing up with not only physical but also spiritual health, as observers of the Torah and its mitzvos. Mothers and fathers must know, however, that merely wanting is not enough: one must take such action as will turn that desire into a practical reality.

If so, give your children the fine and wholesome upbringing of yesteryear. Enrol your sons in devout chadarim and in yeshivos in which Torah is studied in a G‑d-fearing spirit, and entrust your daughters to the hands of devout educators. Your children will then grow up observing Torah and mitzvos. Dedicate your spiritual jewelry and build a Beis HaMikdash, and then you will be “blessed with a generation of upright offspring,” with children who will bring you material and spiritual nachas, joyful contentment.

As understood by Rashi, the word used for the fourth kind of jewelry does not signify a bracelet. Rather, it may be understood as an allusion to the laws of family purity, a mitzvah which has been entrusted to women. I am certain that there is no need to speak of taharas hamishpachah to those who are present here. However, one’s own proper observance of the mitzvah is not enough. Beyond this, with tact and refinement, one should go to the trouble of explaining its importance to one’s acquaintances; out of goodhearted friendliness, one should encourage them to observe it, and this will no doubt bring happiness into their homes.

Leaving Moses

ויצאו כל עדת בני ישראל מלפני משה.  Obviously they left Moshe, what is the Torah telling us with the words מלפני משה? Rav Elya Lopian says that you could tell on the faces of Bnei Yisroel that they just left Moshe.  Being in the presence of a Moshe Rabbenu changes a person and that change must be present in the viewer's life.  He says this a mussar for the end of the zman.  Those entering bein hazmanim must carry with them the appearance of those that just came out of yeshiva.  

More on how the face of a tzaddik can create a positive change in someone from the sefer Kerem Tzvi on Shemos:

Finishing Shas Fast

 From this week's Divrei Siach.

How is it physically possible to go through all of Shas in half an hour?

Cow And Calf

Rashi at the beginning of Chukas says the parah adumah is a kapparah for the sin of the egel; תבוא האם ותקנח צואת בנה.  How is parah adumah a kapparah for the egel, just because they both involve cows?  The Rishonim already ask how could Klal Yisroel stoop to avodah zarah after everything they saw? 

The Beis Halevi explains that the intent of Klal Yisroel was not ח"ו to replace G-d but rather to find a way to have a relationship with Him.  "והנה לכאורה יעלה בדעת האדם לפי שכל האנושי אשר אם היה נמצא בעולם אדם מיוחד אשר כבר בא בסוד ה' ויודע סודות סדרי בראשית ומרכבה יוכל להבין מעצמו מהם היאך לעשות המשכן בכל הפרטים שבו ועל ידי ידיעתו בהסודות והכוונות יבין מן המוקדם אל המאוחר ויהיה יכול לידע מזה היאך לבנות משכן כבוד לה'. וענין זה הוא דביקשו ישראל אז אחרי שראו דמשה אשר היה עומד בין ה' ובינם לא בא רצו לעשות מקום מיוחד שיהיה מסוגל אשר בו יהיה השראת שכינתו וכמו דבאמת היה אחרי כן במשכן ועל ידי ידיעתן בהנסתרים רצו להבין מזה המעשה אשר יעשון. ועוד לא סמכו על חכמת עצמן ועל כן הלכו אל אהרן הכהן שהיה גדול מהם והוא ידע עומק הדברים בסודותיהם יותר מכולם וביקשו ממנו קום עשה לנו כו' והכוונה שיהיה מקום מיוחד להשראת שכינה, ונמצא מחשבתם של ישראל היה בזה לטובה שיזכו ע"י מלאכתם זו להשראת שכינה אצלם."  Klal Yisroel's intent was for a way to connect with Hashem now that they thought Moshe was deposed.  The Beis Halevi explains that their mistake was that despite a person's holy intents, if it is not what Hashem commanded it is wrong.  [We may add that the same yesod is present when Nadav and Avihu offered their offering אשר לא צוה ה.  They were trying to connect to Hashem and it should have been right if not for the fact that it was not commanded.]  

The mistake of Klal Yisroel was that their religion was based upon a desire to feel and cleave to the presence of Hashem.  Moshe Rabbenu made them feel close to Hashem and they wanted to replace that connection.  Klal Yisroel could not relate to a G-d that more distant from them.  

The parah adumah is the quintessential chok.  A chok is what the human mind cannot fathom.  However, the word chok is also a law or an order like in חוקות שמים וארץ.  Just as there are rules to the setup of the world, the rules of biology, physics etc. so too there are rules and an order to the world of ruchniut.  The rules and forces to the olam ruchnei and why seem things to go the wrong way may not make sense to us but we must accept it the same way we must accept the rules of nature. Parah adumah teaches us that we can't get lost in our own ideas of how to connect to G-d and get lost on on the spiritual path but must follow in the rules that were set up.  Some times the rules do not make us feel close to G-d or warm and fuzzy inside but nonetheless that is the way to come closer to Hashem. 

That is the mother that cleans us the excrement of her son.  The son does not intend to do a destructive act, it is just a natural action that it wants to relive itself. The mother comes and cleans it up.  the way to avoid a destructive act that seems to make a person feel comfortable is to come back to the source, to  follow in the commandments of Hashem even if they are not what the person would naturally think.  (See the Beis Halevi how he explains the connection to the parah and reads it into the midrash.)