Showing posts with label Shelach. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Shelach. Show all posts

Friday, June 20, 2025

The Challah And Tzitzit Message

Why are the mitzvot of challah and tzitzis given after the sin of the meraglim?  The Sfas Emes (5661) explains the idea of the mitzvah of challah is to recognize that even in the most basic gashmi needs of a person, in the staple of his life, there is a G-dly spark that illuminates one's actions.  In other seforim it says (see Igra D''Kallah, Megalleh Amukot) that the parsha of challah, ראשית עריסותיכם, כי תבואו אל הארץ,  hints to the idea that at the beginning of the day, when you get out of bed (עריסה also means a bed,) when the neshama returns to the gashmi, at the beginning of the gashmi needs a person needs to take care of, one should acknowledge how it ties into their spiritual accomplishments.  

The Sefer HaChinuch says that the lavan strings of the tzitzit represent the body of a person and the techeles strings represent the nefesh.  The strings are intertwined since the nefesh and gashmi must be united.  

The sin of the meraglim was that they viewed the gashmi as separate from the ruchni and hence they did not want to enter Eretz Yisrael.  The mitzvot that come after are to demonstrate the mistake of the meraglim.    

Wednesday, June 29, 2022

Different Level

Why does Parshat Korach follow the episode of the meraglim?  Rashi says the meraglim should have learned from the episode of the tzarat of Miriam not to speak loshan harah about Eretz Yisroel?  How could such great people speak negatively against Moshe and Eretz Yisroel?  My wife's uncle explained that what Miriam and the meraglim did not understand what that there was a level of kedusha that was beyond their grasp.  Miriam thought that I'm a navi and Moshe is as well, maybe a greater navi, but we are in the same catagory and should have the same rules.  She couldn't understand that Moshe Rabbenu was in a category by himself and had his own rules.  Similarly, the meraglim thought we are living a holy existence here in the Midbar, there is nothing to be gained by entering Eretz Yisroel, so they were critical of it.  They failed to see the great kedusha present in the Land.  That may be the continuation to the parsha of Korach.  Korach recognized the kedusha in everyone and thought we are all holy, there is a hierarchy.  He did not understand there are levels to kedusha and just because one individual is kadosh does not put him in the same category as one whose kedusha brings them to a different plane. 

Friday, June 24, 2022

It Is Yours Already

 Why does the Torah use the term ארץ מושבתיכם regarding the commandment of nesachim?  The mistake of the meraglim was that Eretz Yisroel was something that they did not yet have and would need to work to get it, they would need to conquer it.  In their minds this was an impossible task, whether on a phycological, spiritual or physical level.  What Hashem was telling Klal Yisroel in the very next parsha, is that Eretz Yisroel is already in your hands, it is your מושב, you just have to remove the obstacles to be there in actuality.  When the object is already in hand, it is much easier to accomplish than to try to obtain something in the first place.  For a halachik derush based upon this difference see here

Tuesday, June 21, 2022

Night Time Offering

The Gemarah in Temurah (14) cites a beratah (במדבר כט, לט) ולנסכיכם ולשלמיכם מה שלמים ביום אף נסכים ביום- "just as peace offerings may be sacrificed only during the day, so too libations may be sacrificed only during the day."  The Gemarah qualifies that the rule that the minchat nesachim has to be offered in the day is only when it is sanctified at the time of the shechita of the korban but if it is not sanctified yet, then it can be brought at night.  The Gemarah in Menachot (104a) says that one can give as a nedavah a minchat nesachim by itself.  What is the din in that situation, can it be offered at night or only during the day?  This should depend on what the nature of this split between if the minchat nesachim come together with the korban or not.  Is the din of the mincha like any other mincha, and should be offered in the day but there is a special dispensation when the korban was already offered, since it is just finishing the job, it adapts the status of הקטר אימורים and can be offered at night or is this mincha distinct from all minachot and should be valid at night but when it is sanctified together with the korban, it adapts the status like the korban and can only be offered in the day?    The Shittah in Zevachim (8a #8) says it can only be offered during the day like other minachot.  However, the Meiri Yoma (29a) seems to hold in that scenario it can be offered at night.  See also Chazon Eish Orach Chayim (126:19.)  This question would seem to hinge on one's understanding of the Gemarah in Temurah.  

Monday, June 7, 2021

Thursday, June 3, 2021

Selective Vision

 From משלחן רבי אליהו ברוך.










A person has selective vision.  One paints a picture in their mind of what they saw to fit their paradigm of life.  He extends this same principle to explain the sin of the meraglim.  The possuk (14:34) says that the sin of the meraglim would be held for 40 years a year corresponding to each day of their journey.  Why are they punished for their journey, the sin was the report, not the journey itself?  Rav Chayim Shmulevetz explains because as they were traveling they were thinking badly about Eretz Yisroel and one gets punished for the thoughts of loshan harah as well.  Through their travels their opinions were formed because they had already concluded that it was a bad idea to enter Eretz Yisroel.  All of the events that they saw were meant for their benefit (Rashi 13:32) but they were not able to see that because they were painting the picture of what they saw to fit with what they wanted to see.

Think Big

What was wrong with the report of the meraglim, they did their job to give an assessment of the situation?  And what led these great men to stray from the correct path? 

The meraglim were not sent to give an evaluation if to attack or not to attack.  Their mission was just to find the least point of resistance to enter Eretz Yisroel.  While their report of the strength of the people they were trying to conquer may have been accurate, their error was in adding the words לא נוכל לעלות אל העם כי חזק הוא ממנו.  They gave an opinion that it would be impossible to conquer the land (Likutay Sichos volume 13.)  Why did people that saw such great miracles and a destruction of the entire Egyptian nation not feel that they could not be successful?  

The Shmiras Halashon (volume 2 on Shelach) says because the meraglim had something lacking in their emunah.  As it says in Devarim (1:32) וּבַדָּבָ֖ר הַזֶּ֑ה אֵֽינְכֶם֙ מַאֲמִינִ֔ם בַּי״י֖ אֱלֹקיכם.  Despite all that they saw they still did not believe that they would be given the ability to conquer Eretz Yisroel.  The Sfas Emes (5631) echoes the same idea  ובאמת גם חטא מרגלים הי' חסרון אמונה כמ"ש אא"ז מוז"ל ע"ש.  He adds that when one has this perspective of a lack of ability, a lack of believe in one's abilities, it becomes a self fulfilling prophesy.  כי ודאי הי' נראה לעיני שכלם שאין בכחם לכנוס שהרי באמת לא נכנסו. אבל אם היו מאמינים ומבטלים הסתכלותם לרצון השי"ת הי' זה עצמו מסייע להם לצאת מהטבע כמ"ש הקב"ה לאברהם צא מאיצטגנינות שלך כו' דכתיב בי' והאמין כו'.  When one thinks small, one will remain small.  It is only by thinking big that one can create new possibilities, new channels and worlds.  As the Sfas Emes (5640) says בפסוק כי לחמנו הם דאיתא ברש"י וכן היינו בעיניהם שהיו אומרים נמלים יש בכרמים כו'. ובמד' איתא החטא שלהם כי מי הגיד להם שמא היו אצלם כמלאכים ע"ש. אבל הכל אמת כי ע"י שהיו שפלים בעצמם כחגבים לכן כן היו בעיניהם כי הכל תלוי בעבודת האדם כמ"ש במ"א בפסוק ולאום מלאום יאמץ.  The meraglim viewed themselves as small and hence everything around them appeared too large to conquer.  Had they fully internalized the strength that was within them because of the commandment of Hashem, things would have become within reach. 

Tuesday, June 1, 2021

Be An Akshan

 From the sefer Noam Hamussar from the vaadim of Rav Nosson Wachtfogel.



Monday, June 22, 2020

Moving To A New Existence

The Zohar explains the meraglim sinned because they knew that they would lose their position of נשאים when they entered Eretz Yisroel and they didn't want to be replaced.  How did they know they would lose their position upon entering Eretz Yisroel?
Life in the midbar was a miraculous existence.  There was no need to worry about food, water, lodging etc.all of one's needs were taken care of and one was free to engage in matters of holiness the entire day.  It was paradise on earth.  Moving into Eretz Yisroel wasn't a change in location but a change in life style.  In the holy land there would be no manna, be'ar miriam, annanay hakavod etc.  One would have to work the land to provide for themselves.  Moving into Eretz Yisroel is moving back into olam hazeh.  The נשאים are leaders because they are leaders, those that perfected the avodah of the times.  That avodah of the midbar that they perfected wouldn't be applicable in E.Y. and hence they knew they that would be replaced.  That is what they meant by ארץ אוכלת יושביה, the ארציות, being involved in the daily conduct of earthly affairs will eat us up.
The possuk (14:24) says ועבדי כלב עקב היתה רוח אחרת עמו וימלא אחרי והביאתיו אל הארץ אשר בא שמה וזרעו יורשנה.  Why is Yehoshua omitted, he also shunned the report of the meraglim?  Moshe prayed for Yehoshua קה יושיעך מעצת מרגלים.  Why the name קה?  The Gemorah in Menachos (29b) says עולם הזה was created with a ה and עולם הבא with a י.  Moshe taught Yehoushua the secret of the combo of the י and the ה, that עולם הזה and עולם הבא go hand in hand.  G-d wants for us not to step straight into עולם הבא, but to work for it.  We must have E.Y. as עולם הזה before paradise.  Yehoshua was taught this principle by Moshe; Calev was not.  He didn't have this understanding and still he disagreed with the Meraglim.  He didn't have the answer to the meraglim's complaint of how can we leave the tranquil life of the midbar, yet he knew it wasn't what they were supposed to do.  עבדי כלב, it was his dedication to Hashem that caused him to receive the special yerusha.
In the following parsha of the libations it says כִּ֣י תָבֹ֗אוּ אֶל־אֶ֙רֶץ֙ מוֹשְׁבֹ֣תֵיכֶ֔ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֲנִ֖י נֹתֵ֥ן לָכֶֽם.  Why is it called אֶ֙רֶץ֙ מוֹשְׁבֹ֣תֵיכֶ֔ם, an unusual term?  אֶ֙רֶץ֙ מוֹשְׁבֹ֣תֵיכֶ֔ם means the place of dwelling, where the main living is.  Hashem is highlighting immoderately after the meraglim the source of their error.  The way to find G-d is through the hardships of this world.
[Based upon shmuz of R' Elefant and additions from Likutay Torah.]

Thursday, June 18, 2020

The Message Of Challah

The midrash Metzorah (15:6) says אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לָמָּה נִסְמְכָה פָּרָשַׁת חַלָּה לְפָרָשַׁת עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, לוֹמַר לָךְ, שֶׁכָּל הַמְקַיֵם מִצְוַת חַלָּה כְּאִלּוּ בִּטֵּל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְכָל הַמְבַטֵּל מִצְוַת חַלָּה כְּאִלּוּ קִיֵּם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה.  What is the connection between challah and avodah zarah?
The essence of avodah zarah is to think that there is some power to a being other than Hashem.  The mitzvah of challah is to recognize that even what appears to be the handiwork of mankind is really in G-d's control.  One who gives challah is מבטל ע"ז, he nullifies that feeling that there is some other capability separate from Hashem.  One who doesn't give challah is מקיים ע"ז, he acknowledges the feeling that there is some feeling other than Hashem. 
That is why the obligation of challah started immediately upon entering Eretz Yisroel because the foundation of living in Eretz Yisroel must be preceded with the message of challah; it isn't our working of the land that builds it up, it is G-d's gift to us.
(Based on Likutay Sichos volume 18, intro. to Chidushay Basra on Challah and see Sfas Emes 5661.)

The Basket

The Mishna Challah (3:1) says that the obligation of challah kicks in when the dough is needed with water.  The Mishna in Challah (2:4) brings the opinion of R' Eliezer that when doughs are combined together in a basket they combine to the shiur to obligate the dough in challlah.  The halacha follows this view as concluded in Pesachim 48b.  The Rishonim (stems from Rav Achai Gaon Shiltos Tzav #73) explain that the possuk says באכלתם מלחם הארץ it tells us that there is an obligation that comes about even after it is already bread.  The Achronim ask why is it different from other scenarios where the dough is exempt at the time of placing water in the dough then it is exempt forever such as a dough of a gentile or hekdesh (Mishna 3:3 and 3:6)? 

According to the Rashba (Teshuva 461) it is not difficult for he explains that that it in the other scenarios as well if the dough is put in a basket afterward it will become obligated in challah.  He explains the lomdus of the obligation of the basket is that putting the dough the is like doing a new act of kneading the dough.  I don't know why he needs that lomdus.

The Toras Zeraim brings from Rav Chayim that the shiur for challah of a kav and a quarter isn't a regular shiur of a minimal amount to cause the obligation to kick in rather less than that amount isn't called dough - doesn't have a שם עיסה.  Based upon this he explain a dough that has the shiur of challah, it had a שם עיסה at the time of the chiuv, during the kneading, it is permanently exempt. But a dough that didn't have the shiur at the time of the kneading, the time of the chiuv never knicked in since it isn't considered a שם עיסה and its obligation is only when it obtains a שם עיסה which is when its combined in the basket with other dough.

The Toras Zeraim brings a few proofs to this principal of Rav Chayim.  One of them is the Gemorah (4:2) compares separating challah before the time of the obligation to separating terumah before the time of the obligation.  What's the comparison, its not challah taken off too early, its lacking in the shiur?  Because lacking in the shiur defines it as before the time of the obligation for the שם עיסה was never chal.  Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurerbach (Minchas Shlomo volume 1 #68) disagrees with this Rav Chayim.  He understands the Yerushalmi there is just saying that less than the shiur isn't considered akin to terumah before the final stage of מירוח where one can separate terumah, rather since it is lacking in the shiur the challah can't be chal. Additional proofs are disussed there but it is beyond the scope of this elucidation.       

Tuesday, June 16, 2020

Don't Fix Yourself

From the sefer חמדת דוד of Rosh Hashana in the footnote brings from the grandson of the קוזמיר in the name of his grandfather to explain why were Klal Yisroel forgiven for the sin of the חטא העגל but not for the meraglim?

















One must of course attempt to fix their errors but it is not in one's hands to fix their themselves, it is only because of the mitzvah of Hashem that it can be fixed.

Wednesday, May 13, 2020

Conquer Through Torah

From Sefer Emrei Pinchas about Torah #10.














                                                                            for further elucidation from Sefer ערבי נחל שלח דרוש ב.


Saturday, December 7, 2019

טוב ויפה

In honor of 9 and 10 Kislav.  We say every day in davening after shema, ויציב וכו' טוב ויפה הדבר הזה.  What is the difference between the words טוב ויפה? A few English translations I looked at translate as good and beautiful.  What it means that the words of shema are beautiful?  I believe that the difference is similar to what this blog write here as to the difference between hod and hadar.  Hod is the external reflection of an inner purity and pristine character.  Hadar is an external beauty but under the nice exterior may lie a malfunctioned engine.  The same kind of idea may be the difference between tov and yaffe.  The word tov indicates that there is a potential inside to the matter.  There is a goodness inside that can be brought out if handled properly.  Yaffe is an external, appealing look to the matter but it may be rotten inside.  [Yaffe is the same word as יפת, they had an emphasis on external beauty.]  Based upon this we can understand what Yehosua and Caleb said טובה הארץ מאד מאד (Shelach 14:7.)  How was this a response to what the meraglim said that its ארץ אוכלת יושביה?  They were saying that yes, externally it may appear difficult to conquer Eretz Yisroel but you have to be able to see the inner goodness inside the land and that goodness is not something to be passed up.  The words of shema are indeed טוב, there is an inner light to them but it is also יפה, one who keeps Torah properly has an external 'beauty', a חן that radiates upon their face.

[There are five times in Tanach that woman are described as טובת מראה, Rivka, Batsheva, Vashti, Ester and Achasvarosh gathered all the woman that where טובת מראה.  The one that bothers me a little according to the above explanation of טובה is Vashti.  I believe the only man described as טוב is דוד, it says he was טוב ראי (Shmuel 2 16:12.) ]
 
This meaning of טוב is hinted to us in the first letter of it, ט where the edge of the ט sticks into the letter to hint to the fact that the food is inside.  As the Zohar (into. 3a) says: עָאלַת אָת ט (תרומה קנ''ב ע''א) אָמְרָה קַמֵּיהּ רִבּוֹן עָלְמָא נִיחָא קַמָּךְ לְמִבְרֵי בִּי עָלְמָא דְּאַנְתְּ בִּי אִתְקְרִיאַת טוֹב וְיָשָׁר. אָמַר לָהּ לָא אִבְרֵי בָּךְ עָלְמָא דְּהָא טוּבָךְ סָתִים בְּגַוָּוךְ, וְצָפוּן בְּגַוָּוךְ, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב, (תהלים לא) מָה רַב טוּבְךָ אֲשֶׁר צָפַנְתָּ לִירֵאֶיךָ הוֹאִיל וְגָנִיז בְּגַוָּוךְ לֵית בֵּיהּ חוּלָקָא לְעָלְמָא דָא דְּאֲנָא בָּעֵי לְמִבְרֵי, אֶלָּא בְּעָלְמָא (שמות קנ''ב א) דְּאֲתֵי.  In English: The letter Tet entered and said: “Maker of the world, it would be good to create the world with me, for it is by me that You are called Tov.” The Creator replied: “I will not create the world by you, for your goodness is concealed within you and is invisible. Therefore, it cannot take any part in the world that I wish to create, and will only be revealed in the world to come (from Sefaria.)  This is why a pregnancy is 9 months for the potential of the fetus takes 9 months to develop as a  whole, complete baby.

[The Ketones Pasim in Behaloscha brings from the Baal Shem Tov says the ט inside the word חטא is the hidden good that exists in the חטא.  What teshuva does is that it removes the outer klipah of the sin and the hidden good is revealed.  Its also noteworthy that the word טוב and the word חטא have the same numerical value if you add the כולל.]

That is why the Sefer Yitzirah says that the letter of the month of Av is ט.  The month of Av currently is seen as a month of great destruction but that is only the outer appearance.  Underneath that cover there is a tremendous spiritual light and potential.  That is alluded to in the letter ט, hence it is the letter of the month.  And of course the day that will be the greatest holiday, the day that contains the greatest light, is the 9 th day of the month.

Based upon this Zohar the Bnei Yissaschar (Kislav maamer 2 #22) answers the question of the Rishonim (Abudraham Chanukah,) why is there no ספיקא דיומא for Chanukah?  He cites from numerous sources that Chanukah is the holiday where there is a revelation of the hidden light that was stored away in creation.  [As Rav Eliyahu Ovadyeh explains, that doesn't mean that one will see all the mysteries of creation; its not about fixing others, the light is for a person to be in tune with their inner self, to see the depths of their own soul.]  Based upon this the Bnei Yissaschar explains if there would be 9 days of Chanukah for ספיקא דיומא, then the holiday would be 9 days representing a hidden good.  However, since the essence of the holiday is about the revelation of the hidden light, not its concealment, then it would be inappropriate for the holiday to be 9 days.

9 has the potential for good but it itself is incomplete.  The good isn't realized yet. The first 9 sefirot contain all the power to create the world but it can't come into actualize without the 10 th sefira of malchus to flow into.  That is the power of the 10 th sefirah.  It is the conduit for the hidden good of the first 9 sefirot to be actualized.  That is the שלימות of 10 for the power of 9 to come to fruition.
(Many of the ideas advanced here are inspired by the writings of Rav Yitzchak Ginzburg. The links for the articles are here, and here.)

Friday, June 28, 2019

Just Yell

What caused the immediate change in Klal Yisroel to decide that they could go into Eretz Yisroel after they originally accepted the report of the meraglim?

From Tanya Ch. 29 [with elucidation from Shiurim B'sefer HaTanya (taken from here.)]

וכמו שמצינו דבר זה מפורש בתורה גבי מרגלים, שמתחלה אמרו: כי חזק הוא ממנו, אל תקרי ממנו כו׳, שלא האמינו ביכולת ה׳, ואחר כך חזרו ואמרו: הננו ועלינו וגו׳

Indeed, we find this explicitly stated in the Torah in connection with the Spies sent by Moses to scout out the Holy Land. At the outset they declared:  “For he (the enemy) is stronger than we,” and, interpreting the word ממנו , the Sages say:

“Read not 'than we,' but 'than He,'” meaning that they had no faith in G‑d’s ability to lead them into the Holy Land. But afterwards they reversed themselves and announced:  “We will readily go up [to conquer the Land].”

ומאין חזרה ובאה אליהם האמונה ביכולת ה׳, הרי לא הראה להם משה רבנו עליו השלום שום אות ומופת על זה בנתיים, רק שאמר להם איך שקצף ה׳ עליהם ונשבע שלא להביאם אל הארץ

Whence did their faith in G‑d’s ability return to them? Our teacher Moses, peace unto him, had not shown them in the interim any sign or miracle concerning this, which would restore their faith. He had merely told them that G‑d was angry with them and had sworn not to allow them to enter the Land.

ומה הועיל זה להם אם לא היו מאמינים ביכולת ה׳, חס ושלום, לכבוש ל״א מלכים, ומפני זה לא רצו כלל ליכנס לארץ

What value did this Divine anger and oath have to them, if in any case they did not believe in G‑d’s ability to subdue the thirty-one kings who reigned in the Land at that time, for which reason they had had no desire whatever to enter the Land?

אלא ודאי מפני שישראל עצמן הם מאמינים בני מאמינים, רק שהסטרא אחרא המלובשת בגופם הגביה עצמה על אור קדושת נפשם האלקית, בגסות רוחה וגבהותה בחוצפה בלי טעם ודעת

Surely, then, the explanation is as follows: Israelites themselves are “believers, [being] the descendants of believers.” Even while they stated, “The enemy is stronger than He,” their divine soul still believed in G‑d. They professed a lack of faith in His ability only because the sitra achra clothed in their body in the person of their animal soul had risen against the light of the holiness of the divine soul, with its characteristic impudent arrogance and haughtiness, without sense or reason.

ולכן מיד שקצף ה׳ עליהם והרעים בקול רעש ורוגז: עד מתי לעדה הרעה הזאת וגו׳ במדבר הזה יפלו פגריכם וגו׳ אני ה׳ דברתי אם לא זאת אעשה לכל העדה הרעה הזאת וגו׳, וכששמעו דברים קשים אלו, נכנע ונשבר לבם בקרבם, כדכתיב: ויתאבלו העם מאד, וממילא נפלה הסטרא אחרא מממשלתה וגבהותה וגסות רוחה

Therefore as soon as G‑d became angry with them, and thundered angrily:  “How long shall I bear with this evil congregation…,Your carcasses shall fall in this wilderness…I, G‑d, have spoken: I will surely do it unto all this evil congregation...,” — their heart was humbled and broken within them when they heard these stern words, as it is written,  “And the people mourned greatly.” Consequently, the sitra achra toppled from its dominion, from its haughtiness and arrogance.

וישראל עצמן הם מאמינים

But the Israelites themselves i.e., as far as their divine soul was concerned had believed in G‑d all along.

Therefore, as soon as they were released from the dominion of the sitra achra, they proclaimed, “We will readily go up...” There was no need of a miracle to convince them of G‑d’s ability. All that was necessary was to divest the sitra achra of its arrogance, and this was accomplished by G‑d’s “raging” at them.

Similarly with every Jew: When the light of his soul does not penetrate his heart, it is merely due to the arrogance of the sitra achra, which will vanish as soon as he rages at it.

ומזה יכול ללמוד כל אדם שנופלים לו במחשבתו ספיקות על אמונה כי הם דברי רוח הסטרא אחרא לבדה, המגביה עצמה על נפשו, אבל ישראל עצמן הם מאמינים כו׳

Every person in whose mind there occur doubts concerning faith in G‑d can deduce from this episode of the Spies that these doubts are nothing but the empty words of the sitra achra which raises itself against his divine soul. But Israelites themselves are believers...

וגם הסטרא אחרא עצמה אין לה ספיקות כלל באמונה, רק שניתן לה רשות לבלבל האדם בדברי שקר ומרמה להרבות שכרו

Furthermore, the sitra achra itself entertains no doubts at all concerning faith. As explained in ch. 22, the kelipah in its spiritual state (i.e., when not clothed in the human body) does not deny G‑d’s sovereignty. It has merely been granted permission to confuse man with false and deceitful words, in order that he may be more richly rewarded for mastering it.

כפיתויי הזונה לבן המלך בשקר ומרמה ברשות המלך, כמו שכתוב בזהר הקדוש

In this it is similar to the harlot who attempts to seduce the king’s son through falsehood and deceit, with the king’s approval, as in the parable narrated in the holy Zohar.

The parable: A king hires a harlot to seduce his son, so that the prince will reveal his wisdom in resisting her wiles. The harlot herself, knowing the king’s intention, does not want the prince to submit to temptation. Similarly with the sitra achra: it is merely fulfilling its G‑d-given task in attempting to lure man away from G‑d, but actually desires that man resist it, thereby earning a greater reward.

However, this is true only of the spiritual kelipah which is the source of the animal soul. The animal soul and evil impulse as clothed within man, on the other hand, are truly evil, and their unequivocal aim is to entice man to do evil.

In the context of the parable, this may be described as follows: The harlot originally commissioned by the king subcontracts a second harlot, and the second a third, and so on. As the actual executor of the mission becomes successively further removed from the king, the original intention is lost, and finally the prince is approached by a harlot who has her own intentions in mind, not those of the king, as she attempts to seduce the prince.

In any event, we see that any doubts one may have concerning faith in G‑d, are merely the empty words of the sitra achra. The soul within every Jew, however, believes in G‑d with a perfect faith.

Thursday, June 27, 2019

Tzitzis: Stamp Of Slavery

The Rambam Krias Shema 1:2 says  : שמע והיה אם שמוע ויאמר ומה הוא קורא שלשה פרשיות אלו הן.  It sounds from this Rambam that the mitzvah of krias shema is to read all 3 parshiot.  We understand the first two parshiot it says בשכבך ובקומך, but how do we know that the third parsha of ויאמר is included in the mitzvah? 

The Rambam doesn’t count the mitzvah of remembering יציאת מצרים as a mitzvah.  The question is why not?  Rav Chayim suggested that the Rambam holds its part of the mitzvah of the קבלת עול מלכות שמים in krias shema.  The Gemorah in Rosh Hashana 32: understands that the words אני ה' אלוקיכם refer to the malchut of Hashem.  We see that this parsha includes accepting the מלכות שמים.  Therefore, the Rambam holds remembering יציאת מצרים isn’t an independent mitzvah; its part of the mitzvah of krias shema.  Therefore, the Rambam understands that the parsha of ויאמר is also part of the mitzvah of krias shema (Reshimot Shiurim Berachos 12b.)  We still need to understand that we see the קבלת עול at the end of the parsha, but how does the main theme of ציצית reflect this idea?

The Or Hachaim says: והיה לכם לציצית – אין ידוע מכוון מאמר זה שיהיה לציצית, ולדברי התוספות שכתבו במסכת מנחות דף מ״ג בדברי רבי מאיר שאמר שם וזה לשונו גדול עונשו של לבן מעונשו של תכלת, משל למלך שאמר לב׳ עבדיו לאחד אמר הביא לי חותם של טיט ולאחד אמר הביא לי חותם של זהב ופשעו שניהם ולא הביאו איזה מהם עונשו מרובה וכו׳, כתבו התוספות מה שמדמה חותם של טיט לציצית שכך עושים לעבדים והציצית מעיד על ישראל שהם עבדי ה׳ כדאיתא במסכת שבת (נז:) כבלא דעבדא תנן עד כאן, ירצה במאמר והיה לכם לציצית לצד שהם עבדים לה׳ והעבד עושה כבלא יהיה לכם סימן זה לכבלא דעבדא.
ואמר וראיתם אותו וזכרתם את כל מצות ה׳ פירוש כשיביטו בסימן עבדותם יתנו לב שאינם בני חורין לעשות כחפצם במאכלם במלבושם בדיבורם ובכל מעשיהם כעבד שאימת רבו עליו ולעמוד בשעה שהאדון מצוה לעמוד ולעשות כל מלאכות אשר צוה ה׳ לעשות. 

The Ketav V'kabbalah adds: ומזה יתבאר לנו לשון. להתעטף בציצית. שתקנו לנו מתקני הברכות אף שאין צריכה עטיפה באמת, כמו שהעיר ב״י באו״ח סי׳ ח׳, ואפילו בטלית קטן שאין בו עטוף, עיקר נוסח הברכה להתעטף בציצית, וכל מה שאמרו בזה אין הדעת מתישבת בו, למה שנו מתקני הברכות ממה שכתוב בתורה בפרשת ציצית לשון כסוי אל לשון עטיפה, אמנם לפי המבואר לכוונה הפנימית תקנו לשון מתעטף, לבאר בו התכלית האמתי המכוון במצות ציצית, כי מצינו לשון עטיפה על ההכנעה, כי אחר שאמר (ישעיהו נ״ז) שהוא ית׳ שוכן את דכה ושפל רוח להחיות רוח שפלים ולב נדכאים אמר, כי רוח מלפני יעטוף, שפירושו כשרוח האדם נעטפת ונכנע לפני כמ״ש רש״י שם, ולכן ישמשו הכתובים לשון עטוף גם על השרוי בצער, כמו בהתעטף עלי רוחי (תהלים קמ״ב), כי האדם בצערו הוא נכנע ודעתו כפופה בו כאלו מעוטף קצת הגוף בקצתו, ורוחו בקרבו גם הוא כאלו מתעטף וכפוף עד שאין לו מקום להתרחב, ולזה בחרו מתקני הברכות לשון להתעטף, שכולל שתי ענינים, כסוי הגוף, כמו ועמקים יעטפו בר (תהלים ס״ה), שמכוסים בתבואה שתרגומו ומישריא יתחפון עבורא, וכלל ג״כ הכנעת האדם בקרבו כעבד לפני אדון כל הארץ.

The tzitzis themselves are the greatest reflection of one's עבדות to Hashem.

(Wo)men Spies

In the second possukשְׁלַח־לְךָ֣ אֲנָשִׁ֗ים, the word אֲנָשִׁ֗ים seems extra, what is it qualifying?  The Kli Yakar gives a few interpretations.  In one interpretation he says: ומטעם זה פרט כאן אנשים לפי שנאמר (במדבר י״ב:א׳) ותדבר מרים ואהרן במשה. והיה לו לומר וידברו כי ותדבר חוזר אל מרים, ועוד שלא מצינו עונש לאהרן, אלא שהגיד לך הכתוב שלה״ר מצוי בנשים יותר מבאנשים כי עשרה קבין שיחה ירדו לעולם ט׳ נטלו נשים כו׳, (קידושין מט:) ולפי שסתם נשים פטפטניות דברניות ע״כ תלה הדבור במרים כי היא התחילה בקלקלה זו ואהרן היה טפל לה, לכך אמר שלח לך אנשים שאין להם דרך נשים ולא יהיו כמרים שספרה לה״ר אלא אנשים ממש שאין מדרכן לספר לה״ר.  This peshat gives a negative view on women.  However he follows this with a positive view of women: ד״א לכך פרט אנשים, לפי שארז״ל (ילקוט שמעוני פנחס תשעג) האנשים היו שונאים את הארץ ואמרו נתנה ראש ונשובה מצרימה (במדבר י״ד:ד׳) והנשים היו מחבבות הארץ ואמרו תנה לנו אחזה (שם כ״ז:ד׳) וע״כ אמר הקב״ה לפי דעתי שאני רואה בעתיד היה יותר טוב לשלוח נשים המחבבות את הארץ כי לא יספרו בגנותה, אבל לך לדעתך שאתה סבור שכשרים המה ואתה סבור שהארץ חביבה עליהם תשלח אנשים וזהו שלח לך לדעתך אנשים, אבל לדעתי היה יותר טוב לשלוח נשים כאמור .  (See more on this view here.)
We can also glean from here that everyone has pluses and minuses.It is our job to attempt to focus on the positive.

Shlach And Korach: Thought And Deed

The midrash cited in Tosfos Babba Bathra (119a) says that the mikkoshas had noble intentions. After the nation was told they wouldn’t enter Eretz Yisroel they thought they were exempt from mitzvot.  Therefore, the mikkoshas desecrated Shabbos in order to show if one violates the mitzvot s/he will be punished.  The Maharsha asks that if the mikkoshas had such intent he shouldn’t have been killed for his action would be a melacha sh’ain korech le’guvah for he didn’t do the melacha for it’s own sake, just to prove a point?  We also need to understand why the people would have thought that they were exempt from the mitzvot? Why is the parsha of the mikkoshas preceded by the parsha of making a mistake and serving avodah zarah, what is the connection?

Why did the meraglim not want to enter Eretz Yisroel?  There are many explanations.  In the Torah of Chabad, it explains that the meraglim wanted to remain in the angelic, miraculous state of existence that they enjoyed in the midbar.  They didn’t want to go into Eretz Yisroel and have to live bederech hateva plowing the fields, building houses etc.  Why go through the everyday hardships of live when one can stay in a frame of a miraculous life and such serve Hashem 24/7.  Chazal call the generation of the midbar the dor da’ah.  They understood how to serve Hashem through the intellect serving Hashem through study and meditation.  They didn’t appreciate how to serve Hashem in the world of action.  They failed to comprehend how can someone serve Hashem having to go through all the actions of everyday life. They failed to appreciate the value in serving hashem through difficulties and serving Hashem through fulfilling physical maaseh mitvot, not just via learning Torah.

After the meraglim the people thought if were not entering Eretz Yisroel then our mission is merely to serve Hashem via our brains and not through actions. They figured we aren’t entering a state where our actions matter and therefore what matters is to serve Hashem through learning and thought, not through actions.  The mikkoshas came to prove that this was wrong and therefore he desecrated Shabbos.  In answer to the Maharsha’s question see the Maharsha and Gelyonai Hashas (Rav Yosef Engel) who explain that Beis Din judge based upon the action that they see.  They don’t judge based upon a person’s intent.  Therefore, even though the mikkoshas had noble intentions this didn’t exempt him for his intent couldn’t be seen.   That’s why the Torah precedes this episode of the mikkoshas with the parsha of avodah zarah for when it comes to avodah zarah as well e person is obligated if he worships the avodah zarah even if he has no intent of accepting it as a deity.  (Based upon Likutay Sichos volume 28.)

Based upon this theme we can understand why the next parsha, Korach follows the meraglim.  Once it became apparent that Hashem desires actions therefore Korach had a claim that in regard to maaseh mitzvot we are all equal.  One person’s fulfillment of a mitzvah isn’t greater that another’s, it’s only in regard to the intent and kavanah that there are different levels.  So, if we see that what Hashem wants is the fulfillment of physical acts of mitzvot why should Moshe and Aharon be greater, we are all equal? That was Korach’s complaint.  However, he was wrong because there has to be a balance of physical fulfillment of mitzvot and kaavanah of a person.  The kaavanah enhances the act and therefore Moshe and Aharon are greater.

Wednesday, June 26, 2019

Who's And What's נסכים

We learn in this weeks parsha when one offers a korban, besides being obligated to bring the animal, there is an obligation to bring libations together with it.  There are two ways to understand this obligation.  One way is that it is included in the obligation of the גברא, it is as if the person took an obligation to bring both a korban and libations.  Or it can be viewed as an obligation of the korban, it is a din in the korban that libations must accompany it just as there are other dinim of the korban.  The Rambam in מעשה קרבנות (16:17) says שאין הנסכים באין לעולם אלא מן החולין כמו שביארנו לפי שנאמר בהן והקריב המקריב קרבנו עד שיהיו משלו ולא יהיה בהן צד לגבוה כלל.  Why does the Rambam need a possuk, this should fit under the general rule that דבר שבחובה אינו בא אלא מו החולין?  We see from the Rambam that the obligation of the נסכים isn’t part of the נדר, it is part of the dinim of the korban and therefore there is a need to learn from an additional possuk that they can only be brought from חולין.  (Toras Hakodesh volume 2 #35, see further discussion there and in Maseh Yad volume 1 on this weeks parsha.)

The Gemorah in Temurah 2b and Menachos 73b has a derasha from the words in possuk 13  כׇּל־הָאֶזְרָ֥ח יַעֲשֶׂה־כָּ֖כָה אֶת־אֵ֑לֶּה, אזרח comes to  exclude a gentile.  Rashi understands the derasha to mean that a gentile can’t volunteer to bring נסכים but they can bring נסכים together with their korban if they want.  This is supported by the Mishna in Shekalim (7:6) that if a gentile sends נסכים we accept it.  The Rambam however, understands that a gentile is completely exempt from bringing נסכים as he says in מעשב קרבנות (3:5) עולות העכו"ם אין מביאין עמהן נסכים שנאמר כל האזרח יעשה ככה אבל נסכיהם קריבין משל צבור שנאמר ככה תעשו לאחד כמספרם.  So how does the Rambam understand the Mishna in Shekalim, furthermore, the Rambam himself cites it in the Laws of Shekalim (4:3,) seemingly a contradiction in the Rambam himself (see Lechem Mishne)? 

The Briskor Rav explains that the derasha excludes the gentile as the owner of the korban for bringing the libations but there still remains an obligation in the cheftza of the korban.  The Rambam in מעשה קרבנות is addressing the obligation on the owner of the korban and explains a gentile is exempt from his obligation as the owner of the korban.  The Rambam in the Laws of Shekalim is discussing a separate issue, the obligation of the cheftzh of the korban and he rules that the gentile may send in the נסכים to be offered for the obligation that exists on the korban.  These two dinim of the Briskor Rav seem to reflect the previous chakirah.  The obligation on the individual is part of the vow of the person, the obligation on the cheftzah of the korban is the obligation of the korban to have נסכים because its part of the dinim of the korban.   

The Sforno explains that the din and need for נסכים only came about after the meraglim.  In his words:הנה עד העגל היה הקרבן ״ריח ניחח״ בזולת מנחה ונסכים, כענין בהבל ובנח ובאברהם, וכענין ״וישלח את נערי בני ישראל, ויעלו עלת ויזבחו זבחים שלמים לה׳ פרים״ (שמות כ״ד:ה׳), לא זולת זה. ובחטאם בעגל הצריך מנחה ונסכים לעולת התמיד שהיא קרבן צבור. ומאז שחטאו במרגלים הצריך מנחה ונסכים להכשיר גם קרבן יחיד.  After the sins of Klal Yisroel, a person has to do more work in order to achieve the connection to Hashem.

Is Wine A Mincha?

In this week’s parsha we learn about the obligation to bring libations together with a korban.  The libation offering consists of bringing a mincha of oil and flour combined plus wine which was poured through the holes on the mizbaoch.  One has the ability to offer a nedavah of the מנחת נסכים as well.  Rashi in Menachos 104b explains in such a situation the one offering the korban brings the oil, flour and wine of a מנחת נסכים.  The Rambam in מעשה קרבנות beginning of ch. 2 says היין והסולת שמביאין עם הקרבן הם הנקראין נסכים והסולת לבדה נקראת מנחת נסכים.  The Rambam in Ch. 14 Law 1 says ומתנדב או נודר מנחה ממנחת נסכים לבדה מאי זה מין משלשה מיני מנחות נסכים כמו שביארנו (meaning one can bring the libation mincha of either the sheep, goat or cow that have different amounts.)  If one does the math and adds 1+1 together, it comes out that according to the Rambam when one volunteers a מנחת נסכים  they bring the flour and oil (the meforshim say סולת  includes the oil as well,) not the wine for the wine is called נסכים but not מנחת נסכים.  It comes out according to Rashi we view the obligation of the wine that accompanies the mincha as part of the mincha, but according to the Rambam its viewed as an independent obligation. (See more about this in the Briskor Rav Menachos 44b, Nitziv in footnote to Sifri, Mikdash Dovid siman 10.)