​Near
 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
This week’s parasha contains one of the Torah’s most difficult passages:
And Aaron's sons, Nadav and Avihu, each took his pan, put fire in them, and placed incense upon it, and they brought before the L-rd foreign fire, which He had not commanded them. And fire went forth from before the L-rd and consumed them, and they died before the L-rd. (Sefer Vayikra 10:1-2, this and all Bible translations, The Judaic Press Complete Tanach)
Many Talmudic sages, Midrashim and mefarashim (biblical exegetes) struggle to explain this tragedy by diligently searching for clues regarding the improper behaviors that led to Nadav and Avihu’s untimely deaths. One such suggestion is found in Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 52a:
Moses and Aaron once walked along, with Nadab and Abihu [k'var - already] behind them, and all Israel following in the rear. Then Nadab said to Abihu, “When will these elderly men die, so that you and I will be the leaders of our generation.” But the Holy One, blessed be He, said unto them: “We shall see who will bury whom.” (Translation, The Soncino Talmud, with my emendations, brackets my own)
 
It should be noted that Rashi (1040-1135) understood this narrative in a very direct fashion, and therefore states: “Because they wanted [to acquire] power and authority [upon the demise of Moshe and Aharon,] they [Nadav and Avihu] died.” (Translation and brackets my own)
 
At first blush, the Talmud’s vignette is exceptionally difficult, since we have an explicit Midrashic passage that teaches us that Nadav and Avihu were greater than both their father, Aharon, and their uncle, Moshe:
Rav Yitzchak began: “Your words were found and I ‘embraced’ them, and Your word was to me a joy and a rejoicing of my heart, for Your name was called upon me, O L-rd G-d of Hosts.” (Sefer Yirmiyahu 15:16)  Rav Shmuel bar Nachman said: “This statement was said to Moshe at Mount Sinai, and he did not understand it until events [i.e. the death of Nadav and Avihu] unfolded before him. Moshe said to Aharon: ‘My brother, at Sinai it was told to me that I would one day sanctify this house [the Mishkan], and that I would do this together with a great man. I initially thought that perhaps this house would be made holy either through my efforts or yours. Now [subsequent to the death of Nadav and Avihu,] I realize that your two sons are greater than both you and myself.’” (Midrash Vayikra Rabbah, Vilna edition, Parashat Shemini 12:2, translation and brackets my own)
 
If, as this Midrash states, Moshe declared to Aharon, “I realize that your two sons are greater than both you and myself,” how is it even remotely possible that, according to the Talmud, Nadav could tell Avihu: “Oh that these old men might die, so that you and I should be the leaders of our generation?” In other words, if Nadav and Avihu had reached such spiritual heights, how could they possibly wish and wait for the demise of Moshe and Aharon?
Given the difficulties inherent in a literal interpretation of the Talmud’s statement, the founder of the Daf Yomi movement, HaRav Meir Shapiro of Lublin zatzal (1887-1933), analyzes this passage in a unique and trenchant manner. He begins by stressing the incredible level of kedushah (holiness) that Nadav and Avihu had achieved, as indicated in the verse: “And the L-rd spoke to Moses after the death of Aaron's two sons, when they drew near before the L-rd, and they died.” (Sefer Vayikra 16:1)  In Rav Shapiro’s view, the underlying reason for their deaths was precisely their unmatched “closeness (hitkarvute) to Hashem, which led to their yearning and longing to be with Him.” (This and the following quotations, Itturei Torah, Sefer Vayikra, Parashat Shemini, s.v. v'tatze aish, pg. 52, Rabbi Aharon Ya’akov Greenberg ed., translations and brackets my own)  Next, he notes that their level of kedushah had not been achieved “overnight.” Rather, “Nadav and Avihu were already walking behind them” over a very significant period of time, in order to “try to ascertain the levels of holiness that they [Moshe and Aharon] had achieved.”  As a result, when they would say to one another, “when will these elderly men die,” Rav Shapiro asserts that they really meant:
At some unknown point in time, the moment will arrive when they [Moshe and Aharon] will depart from this world, and then, it will be incumbent upon us to lead the generation. If that is the case, we must unflaggingly prepare ourselves for that time, so that we can continue to lead this generation in the same manner as Moshe and Aharon...yet, they were unable to do so, since no one ever arose that equaled Moshe’s level [of prophecy], and they died [without achieving their goal].
 
In a very real sense, Rav Shapiro provides us with a brilliant analysis of our Gemara that complements, rather than contradicts, our Midrashic passage. Nadav and Avihu were incredibly holy and dedicated to serving Hashem and His people. This is why they were driven to emulate the kedushah of Moshe and Aharon and thereby become the next leaders of the Jewish people. Although they were sincere, and their quest was truly l’shame shamayim (in the service of Heaven), they were unable to comprehend the extent to which Moshe differed in kind and degree from any prophet that had ever lived, or would ever live. They could not fathom the gulf that separated them from Moshe and his level of prophecy. This lack of understanding led them to bring aish zarah — incense that had not been commanded by the Almighty — and eventuated in their tragic deaths.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:rdbe718@gmail.com.
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

​
 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The second verse of our parasha presents the commandment to offer a korban olah (completely burnt offering) in the Mishkan (Portable Desert Sanctuary) and Beit HaMikdash (Holy Temple): “Command (tzav) Aaron and his sons, saying, ‘This is the law of the burnt offering: That is the burnt offering which burns on the altar all night until morning, and the fire of the altar shall burn with it.’” (Sefer Vayikra 6:1, this and all Rashi and Bible translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  Rashi (1040-1105), basing himself upon the Sifra, the halachic Midrash to Sefer Vayikra, explains the word, “tzav,” in this manner: “The expression tzav always denotes urging [to promptly and meticulously fulfill a particular commandment] for the present (miyad), and also for future generations (v’ledorot).” The word, “miyad,” makes perfectly good sense in this context, since our verse is the source of the obligation to bring a korban olah ─ something that was possible for Aharon and his sons, and during the period of time we were blessed with the Mishkan and Beit HaMikdash. The term, “v’ledorot,” however, seems quite problematic, since we have not had a Mishkan or Beit HaMikdash for nearly 2,000 years, and we have, therefore, been prohibited from offering the korban olah.
 
My rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as “the Rav” by his students and followers, expanded upon our question in the following fashion:

What is the meaning of the word ledoros (for future generations) in this context? The mitzvos of mezuzah, tefillin and Shabbos are clearly ledoros. Thousands of years have gone by, and these mitzvos are observed as they had been when they were originally given. But in what way are the mitzvos of the Mishkan practiced today? There has been no korban tamid [daily offering] for almost two thousand years! In what sense does the mitzvah of offering korbanos continue? (Sefer Vayikra Chumash Mesoras HaRav, with commentary based upon the teachings of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, edited by Dr. Arnold Lustiger, page 33)
 
The Rav answered our question based upon a narrative passage in Talmud Bavli, Megillah 31b that presents a fascinating dialogue between Hashem and Avraham Avinu (our father Abraham):

Abraham asked how he was to know that G-d would not forsake Israel if they sinned. G-d answered, “In the merit of the [Temple] sacrifices.” Abraham insisted that this merit is fine when these sacrifices are in existence, but what was to happen after the destruction of the Temple? G-d replied that if the Children of Israel learned the laws surrounding the sacrifices, He would consider their study as a virtual sacrificial offering. When we cannot offer sacrifices, we recite the halachos [laws] pertaining to them as a substitute.
 
In sum, our study of the laws concerning the sacrifices that are found throughout Rabbinic literature enables us to bring “virtual sacrificial offerings,” and thereby fulfill these laws in a substitute manner. At this juncture, the Rav extends the notion of that which is virtual to include the Beit HaMikdash itself:

There is a Mikdash in our days as well ─ not physically, but through halachic study. This is the mesorah [the passing down from each generation to the next] of Torah Sheb’al Peh, the Oral Law. Today, we read Parashas Shekalim as if the Beis Hamikdash was still standing; it is ledoros. Parashas Parah reminds us to be ritually pure so that we may bring the korban pesach [Passover offering]. Although we no longer offer a korban pesach, we read Parashas Parah as if the Beis Hamikdash still exists. (Brackets my own)
 
2,000 years is a long time to wait and hope for the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash. Yet, it is a dream that remains indelibly engraved in our minds, and inspires us to say three times daily:
​
Return in mercy to Jerusalem Your city and dwell therein as You have promised; speedily establish therein the throne of David Your servant, and rebuild it, soon in our days, as an everlasting edifice. Blessed are You L-rd, who rebuilds Jerusalem. (Shemoneh Esrai, translation, https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/867674/jewish/Translation.htm)
 
With Hashem’s help and mercy, may we once again be zocheh (merit) to bring korbanot in the Beit HaMikdash, soon and in our days, v’ledorot ─ and for all generations to come! V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:rdbe718@gmail.com.
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

 
 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Chamishah Chumshei Torah (The Five Books of the Torah) contain two instances of the exact phrase, “vayikra Hashem el Moshe” (“and Hashem called to Moshe”). The first appears in Sefer Shemot 24:16, in the context of Kabbalat HaTorah (the Receiving of the Torah), and the second is found in the opening words of our parasha, as a prologue to the many and varied laws of the korbanot (offerings to Hashem). Rashi (1040-1105), in his Commentary on the Torah on our verse, bases himself upon a statement found in the Midrash Sifra, and notes that each time Hashem communicated with Moshe, it was preceded by the Almighty directly calling upon him (“kadmah kriah”). In addition, he suggests that the word, “vayikra,” is an expression of abiding affection (chibah), since this is precisely the language the Ministering Angels use when they call to one another (“v’karah zeh el zeh,” Sefer Yeshayahu 23:4).
 
In a particularly trenchant analysis, Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888) opines that the words, “vayikra Hashem el Moshe,” carry singular theological significance. In his view, they teach us that the Word of Hashem came to Moshe directly from the Creator, rather than through some kind of internally-generated voice:

A call came, and then G-d spoke to Moses. This is probably meant to establish the speeches of G-d to Moses as the Word of G-d coming to Moses and to prevent that misused misrepresentation which tries to change the Divine revelation to Moses into some kind of revelation in Moses, and either put it on par with all those imaginary visions of a so-called ecstasy, or simply as an inspiration coming from within a human being. (Sefer Vayikra 1:1, The Pentateuch: Translated and Explained, second edition, page 3, translation from the German, Isaac Levy)
 
Rav Hirsch continues his exposition of our verse and notes that the words, “vayikra Hashem el Moshe,” separate Judaism from all other religions that have ever existed:

[It is certainly not the case that Moses’ Divine revelations were merely self-created ecstatic moments.] This [notion,] of course, relegates Judaism, “the Jewish Religion,” to the nature of all other religious phases which have occurred in human history, to a “contemporary phase in the history of the development of the human mind.” But this is not so, [for as the Torah states:] “Then the L-rd would speak to Moses face to face, as a man would speak to his companion…” (Sefer Shemot 33:11, this, and the following Torah translation, The Judaica Press Compete Tanach)  
 
At this juncture, Rav Hirsch recapitulates his first theme, and underscores the exceptional import of Hashem speaking to Moses “face to face, as a man would speak to his companion:”
 
[This means that just like] speech from one man to another emanates purely and completely from the mind of the speaker, and in no wise whatsoever comes from the mind of the hearer, and nothing from the mind of the hearer brings it about, so was G-d’s Word to Moses purely and solely the speech of G-d. Not from within Moses, from without, it came to him, called him out of whatever train of thought he might be in at the moment, to listen to what G-d wished to say to him. This vayikra, this call preceding G-d’s speech, does away with that idea of the words of G-d which He transmitted arising from within Moses himself. (Brackets my own)
 
Rav Hirsch highlights a crucial principle of Jewish theology, namely, that Hashem spoke directly to Moshe. As the Torah states: “And there was no other prophet who arose in Israel like Moses, whom the L-rd knew face to face” (Sefer Devarim 34:10, underlining my own)  Moshe’s encounters with Hashem, and the authentic prophetic experiences they entailed, form the foundation of our entire Torah. The Voice from Sinai continues to shape the nature of our people and Judaism, and echoes until our own historical moment. We are truly blessed for evermore that “Hashem called to Moshe.”
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:rdbe718@gmail.com.
 
*** My audio shiurim for women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.
 
​

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Our parasha contains the final pasuk (verse) of Sefer Shemot: “For the cloud of the L-rd was upon the Mishkan by day, and there was fire within it at night, before the eyes of the entire house of Israel in all their journeys.” (Sefer Shemot 40:38, this and all Bible and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  The beginning of our pasuk highlights “the cloud of the L-rd [that] was upon the Mishkan by day.” This was not the first time we have encountered Hashem’s cloud of glory. Rather, in His overwhelming chesed v’rachamim (kindness and mercy), the Almighty had provided this miraculous wonder for us during the Exodus from Egypt:

And the L-rd went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to cause it to lead them on the way and at night in a pillar of fire to give them light, [they thus could] travel day and night. He did not move away the pillar of cloud by day or the pillar of fire at night [from] before the people. (Sefer Shemot 13:21-22)

In his Commentary on the Torah on our verse, Rashi (1040-1105) notes that this pillar of cloud played a dual role as both Hashem’s messenger, and our fledgling nation’s guide during their travels in the Sinai Desert wasteland:

Now who was that messenger? [It was] the pillar of cloud, and the Holy One, blessed be He, in His glory, led it before them. In any case, it was the pillar of cloud that He prepared so that they could be led by it, for they would travel by the pillar of cloud, and the pillar of cloud was not [meant] to provide light but to direct them [on] the way.
 
At first glance, it would seem quite logical to equate the cloud of Hashem that was upon the Mishkan with the pillar of cloud of the Exodus. After all, they were both nissim (miracles) from Hashem. The Vilna Gaon (“the Gra,” Rabbi Elijah ben Solomon Zalman, 1720-1797), however, carefully contrasts these two instances and urges us to focus upon their significant differences, rather than their apparent similarities:

Even though there was a Cloud of Glory that accompanied and went before them during the Exodus, it was short-lived and remained with them only until the Sea of Reeds (Yam Suf). Moreover, it was invisible to the vast majority of the Jewish people, since it was seen solely by the prophets that were among them. This was not the case in this instance [i.e. our parasha’s verse]: “For the cloud of the L-rd was upon the Mishkan by day…before the eyes of the entire house of Israel in all their journeys.” (Sefer Chumash HaGra, Parashat Ki Tisa 34:10, based upon Sefer Aderet Eliyahu, this and the following translations my own)
 
According to the Vilna Gaon, there were two essential differences between the original pillar of cloud that went before our people on their journey of redemption, and the one that rested upon the Mishkan: The Cloud of Glory of the Exodus was temporary in nature, whereas the cloud resting upon the Mishkan was permanent in nature. Moreover, the Cloud of Glory of the Exodus was invisible to the majority of our nation, while the cloud of Hashem that rested upon the Mishkan was manifestly present before the entire people. What might account for these notable differences? Here, too, we are fortunate, since we can once again rely upon the Vilna Gaon’s trenchant analysis:

These changes came about from the time of Moses’ prayer [following the Sin of the Golden Calf] and onward: “For how then will it be known that I have found favor in Your eyes, I and Your people? Is it not that You will go with us? Then I and Your people will be distinguished (v’niflinu) from every [other] nation on the face of the earth.” (Sefer Shemot 33:16) Then the Holy One answered Moses: “And He said: ‘Behold! I will form a covenant; in the presence of all your people, I will perform wonders such as have not been created upon all the earth and among all the nations…’” (Sefer Shemot 34:10) [What was this?] This is what is meant by the expressions, [in our verse, “before the eyes of the entire house of Israel in all their journeys,”] and “the eyes of the entire Jewish people.” (Sefer Devarim 31:7, 34:12) And it is for this that we wait once again.

Thus, according to the Vilna Gaon, Moses’ tefilah (prayer) for reconciliation with the Almighty following the Sin of the Golden Calf altered the very nature of the ananei hakavode (Clouds of Glory). For the first time, all the men, women and children of the Jewish people could apprehend the vision of the Cloud of Glory resting upon the holy Mishkan. Suddenly, everyone could feel the Divine Presence of the Master of the Universe.
The Vilna Gaon’s words, “And it is for this we wait once again,” resonate through the ages, until our own time. With Hashem’s boundless kindness, may we witness the Cloud of Glory in the soon to be rebuilt Beit Hamikdash. V’chane yihi ratzon.
​
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:rdbe718@gmail.com.
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Parshiot Vayakel and Pekudei are narrative Torah portions that exactingly describe the construction of the Mishkan (Portable Desert Sanctuary) and the creation of the bigdei Kohanim (garments of the Kohanim). The word, “va’ya’os” — “and he made,” is used 40 times throughout these passages, 39 of which are stated anonymously. Consequently, the names of the artisans who created a particular kli (vessel), or even one of the constitutive elements of the Mishkan such as one of the altars, remain unknown. The one exception to this rule is the Aron Luchot HaBrit (Ark of the Covenant): “Bezalel made the ark of acacia wood, two and a half cubits long, a cubit and a half wide, and a cubit and a half high.” (Sefer Shemot 37:1, this and all Bible and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach). 
 
We may well ask at this juncture is, “Why was Bezalel’s name explicitly mentioned solely in regards to the Aron Luchot HaBrit, when he was designated by Hashem to be the designer and architect of every aspect of the Mishkan?” This is particularly of the moment, since the Torah informs us:

“See, I [Hashem] have called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, and I have imbued him with the spirit of G-d, with wisdom, with insight, with knowledge, and with [talent for] all manner of craftsmanship to do master weaving, to work with gold, with silver, and with copper, with the craft of stones for setting and with the craft of wood, to do every [manner of] work.” (Sefer Shemot 31:2-5)
 
In his Commentary on the Torah, Rashi (1040-1105) suggests that, “Since he [Bezalel] devoted himself to the work more than the other wise men, it [the Aron Luchot HaBrit] was called by his name [i.e. the work was attributed to him alone].” A generation later, the Ibn Ezra (1089-1167) notes in his Commentary on the Torah that although Bezalel joined others in creating all of the Miskan’s holy vessels, his name was associated, in particular, with the Aron Luchot HaBrit because of its singular kedushah (holiness). While both Rashi and the Ibn Ezra help us answer our question, I believe the most holistic response has been offered by Rabbi Meir Simcha of Dvinsk (1843-1926) in his Torah commentary entitled, “Meshech Chachma.”
 
Rav Meir Simcha begins his analysis by noting that “other people participated in the construction of the various kalim (vessels) at the time of the first and second Beit HaMikdash, and will do so in the future.” (Commentary on Sefer Shemot 37:1, this and the following translations my own)  This, however, he asserts, is not the case regarding the Aron Luchot HaBrit, whose purpose was to house the Tablets of the Law (Luchot HaBrit), since “from the time it was hidden away [shortly before the destruction of the first Beit HaMikdash], no other one could be built, for another set of  HaLuchot could never be constructed.” Rav Meir Simcha continues by explaining that the Aron Luchot HaBrit is therefore called:

the Aron Bezalel, which will exist throughout all the generations — and there will never be another. This is perhaps the reason for our verse’s specificity [when it states, “and Bezalel made,”] to teach us that throughout the generations another Aron HaBrit, and set of Cherubim, may never be produced — but, rather, only those that Bezalel fashioned.
 
Rav Meir Simcha’s first answer to our question is technical in nature: The underlying rationale as to why Bezalel’s name is associated with the Aron Luchot HaBrit is because there can never be another one, since there will never be another set of HaLuchot. As a result, the Aron Luchot HaBrit is forever known as Aron Bezalel — the one and only Aron Luchot HaBrit that was created by Bezalel.
 
Rav Meir Simcha’s second answer to our query is more conceptually-based and responds, as well, to another question: “Why was Bezalel chosen to build the Aron Luchot HaBrit?” In order to properly understand his response, we need to focus upon his view of the order of historical events surrounding the Chet of the Eigel HaZahav (Sin of the Golden Calf) and the Mishkan, something that is hotly debated among the early and later Torah commentators. In Rav Meir Simcha’s view, Hashem initially designated Bezalel as the architect of the Mishkan. Shortly following his appointment, however, klal Yisrael (the Jewish people) participated in the heinous incident of the Eigel HaZahav. At that point, Bezalel was specifically charged with the construction of the Aron Luchot HaBrit:
The Holy One blessed be He was concerned, following the sin of the Eigel HaZahav, that perhaps when someone would build the Aron HaBrit, they would have forbidden thoughts during its construction that would be infused with various kinds of idol worship. Therefore, Bezalel was chosen to build the Aron HaBrit, since his grandfather, [Chur,] was murdered as a result of his refusal to participate in the creation of the Eigel HaZahav.
 
Our writer concludes his trenchant analysis with a solid explanation as to why Bezalel’s name was explicitly mentioned in regards to the Aron Luchot HaBrit:
​
Therefore, based upon his (Bezalel’s) training and his natural orientation toward hating anything and everything associated with those who follow after the foolishness, forms and images of all manner [of idol worship,] he would never have embraced any of these foreign thoughts. Therefore, the Torah writes, “And Bezalel made,’ since he, and he alone, constructed the Aron HaLuchot without any [potentially questionable] help whatsoever.
 
According to Rav Meir Simcha, Bezalel emerges as a true hero of the spirit who was blessed by Hashem with the requisite unique talents and abilities not only to design and build the Mishkan in general, but to also construct the Aron Luchot HaBrit in particular, b’taharah v’kedushah (in purity and sanctity). With Hashem’s help, may we be zocheh (merit) to follow in his footsteps and dedicate ourselves to attaining such holiness of purpose in our lives. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:rdbe718@gmail.com.
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The Tanach contains a number of instances when Hashem or his malach (angel) calls to individuals and repeats their name within the same verse. For example, immediately prior to the Almighty’s command to Avraham to cease offering Yitzhak upon the altar (Akeidat Yitzhak), we find: “And an angel of G-d called to him from heaven and said, ‘Abraham! Abraham!’ And he said, ‘Here I am.’” (Sefer Bereishit 22:11, this and all Tanach and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)   In his Commentary on the Torah, Rashi (1040-1105), basing himself upon Tosefta Berachot I and Sifra Vayikra I, explains that this and, by extension, other cases wherein a name is reiterated, reflect Hashem’s love for the person that is so called.
 
In contrast, our parasha contains a pasuk (verse) that is outside the general rubric of name repetition: “And it came to pass when Moses descended from Mount Sinai, and the two tablets of the testimony were in Moses’ hand when he descended from the mountain, and Moses did not know that the skin of his face had become radiant while He had spoken with him.” (Sefer Shemot 34:29)  This is by no means your classic case wherein Hashem summons people by repeating their names, since our verse is narrative and not dialogical in nature. In addition, this is the only verse in the five books of the Torah of which I am aware wherein a name is found three times. Taken in tandem, this suggests that Moshe’s name is not repeated because of Hashem’s love for him, but, rather, for some other significant reason.
 
In his Commentary on the Torah, the great Spanish exegete, Rabbi Don Yitzhak Abarbanel (1437-1508), addresses the issue of the three-fold repetition of Moshe’s name within our pasuk, and suggests two complementary reasons for this unusual formulation. Both of these focus upon the spiritual-physical change that Moshe underwent, as depicted in the conclusion of our verse, “and Moses did not know that the skin of his face had become radiant while He had spoken with him.” The Abarbanel notes that under normal conditions, one would have thought that Moshe’s transformation would have rendered him unrecognizable by the Jewish people. This, however, was not what emerged:

One ought not to think that as a result of the emanation of the brilliant Divine light the Jewish people were no longer able to recognize Moshe’s face. [Although] this lack of recognition takes place regarding an individual when their friend’s face changes because of a variety of reasons, this was most assuredly not the case regarding Moshe. Instead, the Jewish people perceived Moshe’s face as they always had done, and recognized that this was, indeed his face ─ even with the brilliant Divine light coming forth from him. (This and the following translation my own)
 
In my estimation, it was crucial for our ancestors to continue to identify Moshe’s face, as this would eliminate the dire possibility of their once again proclaiming, “Come on! Make us gods that will go before us, because this man Moses, who brought us up from the land of Egypt we don't know what has become of him” ─ as they had a mere two chapters earlier at the outset of the incident of the Eigel Hazahav (Golden Calf, Sefer Shemot 32:1).  As such, in the mind of our forebears, Moshe remained the Moshe they had always known, and his, and their, continuity remained intact.
 
As we have seen, the Abarbanel’s first reason for the three times we find Moshe’s name in our pasuk reflects our ancestors ongoing ability to recognize that “Moshe was Moshe.” His second reason, once again focuses upon the brilliant Divine light that emanated from Moshe’s countenance, and teaches us about the singular nature of his prophetic experiences, and his unique manner of receiving Hashem’s Word:

And the second matter that is made known to us regarding Moshe, and the [mystical] activity of the Divine light emanating from his face, is that he neither sequestered nor removed himself from his four senses ─ unlike the actions of all the other prophets at the time of their prophetic experiences. We know this to be the case, since he, himself, after receiving the Word from Hashem, returned his own veil to his face. This demonstrates that he never ceased to be aware of his senses, and that [during his prophetic communications] he was totally awake in the same exact fashion as he had been prior to receiving his prophecy.
 
Given the Abarbanel’s trenchant analysis, we are now in an ideal position to briefly explore the exceptional elements of Moshe’s prophetic engagements. We are fortunate that the Rambam (Maimonides, 1135-1204) addressed precisely this topic in his classic work, Perush HaMishnah:

• Unlike all other prophets, Moshe spoke to Hashem in a direct manner, i.e. without any intermediary.
• In contrast to all other prophets, Moshe communicated with the Almighty during the day and when he was completely conscious.
• All other prophets felt anguish, trembled, shuddered and became weak due to their meeting with Hashem. Moshe, however, remained fully in control of his physical and psychological powers throughout his prophetic engagements with Hashem.
• All prophets, with the exception of Moshe, received their visions whenever the Almighty appeared to them – and without their control. Moshe, however, spoke to Hashem whenever he so chose. (Synopsis based upon, Perush HaMishnah, Sanhedrin, Introduction to Perek Chalek, Rav Kapach edition)

The Rambam describes the spiritual intimacy that obtained between Moshe and Hashem.  The portrait that emerges is that of a unique individual who enjoyed unparalleled access to the Almighty due to his exceptional spiritual gifts.
 
Moshe and his prophetic encounters were unique in the annals of Jewish history. As the Torah teaches us, “And there was no other prophet who arose in Israel like Moses, whom the L-rd knew face to face” (Sefer Devarim 34:10, underlining my own)  While none of us are capable of achieving his exalted level, each of us can do our utmost to reach out to Hashem, and establish a meaningful connection with Him. With the Holy One’s chesed and rachamim (kindness and mercy) may this be so. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:rdbe718@gmail.com.
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

​
 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Our parasha focuses upon the mitzvah of constructing the Mishkan (Portable Desert Sanctuary). The pasuk (verse) that conveys this commandment is found early on in our Torah reading: “And they shall make Me a sanctuary (Mikdash) and I will dwell in their midst.” (Sefer Shemot 25:8, this and all Bible translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  The Rambam (Maimonides, 1135-1204) formulates this mitzvah in the following manner:

The 20th mitzvah that we are commanded is to build a House of Avodah (the Temple Service). In it we offer sacrifices, burn the eternal flame, offer our prayers, and congregate for the festivals each year...The source of this mitzvah is G-d’s statement (exalted be He), “And they shall make Me a sanctuary.” (Sefer HaMitzvot, translation, Rabbi Berel Bell)
 
As the Mechilta d’Rabbi Yishmael on our pasuk notes, however, the very act of constructing a Mikdash for Hashem is quite problematic:

And they shall make Me a sanctuary and I will dwell in their midst;” why was this ever stated? After all, was it not already said, (Sefer Yirmiyahu 23:24) ‘Behold I fill the heavens and the earth?’ [And, therefore, how can any dwelling contain Hashem?] (Translation and brackets my own)
 
This question is echoed, as well, in Yeshayahu’s well-known declaration: “So says the L-rd, ‘the heavens are My throne, and the earth is My footstool; which is the house that you will build for Me, and which is the place of My rest?’” (Sefer Yeshayahu 66:1)  Rashi underscores the intent of the prophet’s proclamation in his Commentary on Sefer Yeshayahu: “The heavens are my throne” ─ [Therefore,] I do not need your Temple; “which is the house that you will build for Me” ─ that is fitting for My Schechinah (Divine Presence)?”

We now have a true conundrum: If there is seemingly no need for a Mikdash, why did the Torah command us to build one, and why do we pray three times a day following the conclusion of the Shemoneh Esrai, “May it be Your will, Hashem, our G-d, and the G-d of our forefathers, that the Holy Temple be rebuilt, speedily in our days?” (Translation, The Complete Artscroll Siddur)  My rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as “the Rav” by his students and followers, addresses our question in his analysis of the underlying rationale for the construction of the Mikdash. He notes that “G-d created the world to reside in it, rather than reside in transcendence.” (This and the following quotations, Chumash Mesoras HaRav, Sefer Shemot, page 226)  According to the Rav, this was precisely the extraordinary environment in which Adam and Chava initially lived:

Man could have continually experienced Him instead of trying to infer His Presence through examining nature. But in the wake of the original sin by Adam and Eve, He retreated. “And they heard the voice of the L-rd G-d going in the garden to the direction of the sun, and the man and his wife hid from before the L-rd G-d in the midst of the trees of the garden.” (Sefer Bereishit 3:8)
 
Tragically, as a result of Adam and Chava having eaten from the Pri Etz HaDa’at (Tree of Knowledge), Hashem withdrew into otherworldliness, and, as the Rav explains, humanity’s ability to continually experience Him abruptly ceased:
​
These “footsteps” were those of G-d leaving the garden and departing into infinity. Had they not sinned, G-d would always have been close. As a result of Adam’s hiding and fear of communicating with G-d in the wake of his sin, G-d removed His Divine Presence.
 
In sum, as a result of Adam’s sin and  abject fear of further direct communication with Hashem, the Almighty removed His immanence (the Schechinah) and left mankind’s deep-rooted need for a dynamic connection to the Almighty unmet. Little wonder, then, that the Rav teaches us that the ultimate “…purpose of the tabernacle was to restore the relationship between man and G-d,” in order that His Schechinah could reside amongst us.
 
With Hashem’s help, may we strive to live lives wherein we continually seek the Almighty and search for his Holy Presence. Moreover, “May it be Your will, Hashem, our G-d, and the G-d of our forefathers, that the Holy Temple be rebuilt, speedily in our days” in order that our relationship will be complete once again. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:rdbe718@gmail.com.
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Our parasha contains the ethically-infused mitzvah, “mi’devar sheker tirchak” (“Distance yourself from a false matter,” Sefer Shemot 23:7, all Bible translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach). In his Torah commentary HaKatav Ve’Kabbalah, Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg (1785-1865) raises a fundamental question regarding the phraseology of this commandment: “Why does the Torah use this indirect terminology, rather than the standard formulation, ‘lo tedabar sheker (do not tell a lie)?’” I believe his answer informs our understanding of this Divine directive until the present moment:

The reason the Torah changes the text of this commandment and does not say, ‘lo tedabar sheker,’ is quite clear. For in truth, there is no more commonly found violation of Torah law than telling a lie. This is illustrated in [Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 97a] chapter Chalek, wherein it states: ‘At first I thought there was no truth in this world.’ Rashi explains that this means, ‘There is no person who always speaks the truth.’ Therefore, the Torah uses the [highly unusual “distance yourself from a false matter”] formulation in order to create an even greater gap between ourselves and this violation. This is similar in kind to the often-cited Rabbinic expression, “Distance yourself from that which is reprehensible and from that which is similar in kind.” (Parashat Mishpatim 23:7, translation and brackets my own)
 
The Maharal of Prague (Rabbi Judah ben Bezalel Loewe, 1520-1609) underscores the importance of the Talmudic phrase cited by Rav Mecklenburg, “At first I thought there was no truth in this world.” He suggests that its primary purpose is to stress the value of emet (truth):
​
One must know that the essence of this expression is to make known the great value of emet, for everything that follows the truth is fitting to be permanent in nature. As our Sages taught us, “The truth remains, whereas a lie will not endure.” (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 104a)  This is the case, since truth is fitting for existence, and falsehood is destined for destruction. (Chidushei Aggadot, Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 104a, translation my own)   
 
In the Maharal’s estimation, emet is one of the constitutive elements of existence itself, for only that which is built upon truth will continue to endure. Little wonder, then, that the prophet Zechariah adjured our nation: “Speak the truth each one with his neighbor; truth, and judgment of peace you shall judge in your cities.” (8:16)  Perhaps most important of all, when we seek to live lives that embody emet, we are emulating the Almighty Himself. As the prophet Yirmiyahu proclaimed: “…the L-rd G-d is emet (true)…” (10:10)  The Talmudic sage, Rabbi Avun interprets Yirmiyahu’s use of the term, “emet,” in the following manner: “For He is the [eternally] living G-d and the King for all time.” (Talmud Yerushalmi, Vilna, Berachot 1:5)  Rabbi Chanina further explicates the relationship that obtains between Hashem and emet when he teaches us, “The seal of the Holy One, blessed be He, is emet.” (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 55a)  In other words, emet is one of the markers of Hashem’s presence in the world, and, therefore, the standard by we should judge our daily actions.
 
May the time come soon and, in our days, when the entire world will live in truth and recognize the one true Master of the Universe. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:rdbe718@gmail.com.
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

​
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The first pasuk of our parasha states, “Now Moses’ father-in-law, Jethro, the chieftain of Midian, heard all that G-d had done for Moses and for Israel His people…” Our Sages’ approach to this pasuk focuses primarily on the content of what Yitro heard, which is left unstated in the verse. Rashi’s (1040-1105) celebrated comment is representative of this school of thought: “What news did he hear that [made such an impression that] he came [to the Sinai Desert to meet with Moses]? The splitting of the Red Sea and the war with Amalek.” (Commentary on the Torah, Sefer Shemot 18:1, this and all Bible and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  This interpretation responds to a major gap in our narrative, namely, what motivated Yitro, the leader of Midian, to uproot his entire family and bring them to meet his son-in-law, Moshe, in the howling wasteland of the Sinai Desert? Little wonder, then, that it was embraced by the vast majority of meforshim (Torah commentators).
 
The near-universal acceptance of Rashi’s explanation, however, tends to obscure a second exegetical challenge found in our pasuk: “Why does the Torah mention Moshe separately from the Jewish people?” In other words, why does the Torah state, “Jethro…heard all that G-d had done for Moses and for Israel His people,” instead of “Jethro…heard all that G-d had done for Israel His people?” Is it not the case that Moshe, by definition, is included in the expression, “the Jewish people?”

One of the meforshim who directly addresses our question is Rabbi Kalonymus Kalman Halevi Epstein (1753-1823), known as the Me’or Va’Shemesh after the name of his commentary on the Torah. He posits the existence of two types of passionately observant Torah personalities: the tzadik m’ikaro ─ one who is righteous from youth, and the ba’al teshuvah ─ one who returns to the path of Torah and mitzvot after having encountered a variety of trials and tribulations:

[The tzaddikim m’ikaro] are individuals who serve the Holy One blessed be He in the early days of their youth, and accept the yoke of the Torah upon themselves from that time onwards. They do this because of their love for the Holy One blessed be He, based upon His greatness and His exalted status, may His Name be blessed. (Sefer Me’or Va’Shemesh, Introduction to Parashat Yitro, all translations and brackets my own)
 
And there are those [who become ba’alei teshuvah] who, in their formative years, follow the freewheeling desires of their heart, yet, when they encounter a variety of situations wherein they suffer ─ then they bestir themselves, search and discover [the folly of their ways,] and repent from their [inappropriate] youthful behaviors. Moreover, they reject their negative deeds and [begin] to follow the ways of the Torah and the service [of the Almighty].
 
According to the Me’or Va’Shemesh, Moshe epitomizes the tzadik m’ikaro, whereas the Jews who were enslaved by Pharaoh exemplify ba’alei teshuvah. In his estimation, Moshe, at the youngest possible age, “rejected physical desires and all yearnings for the temporary goods of this world, and acted as if he was ‘a stranger in a strange land.’” Instead, of following the prevailing immoral behaviors of his time, Moshe dedicated himself to the pursuit of kedushah (holiness) and developing his relationship with the Almighty. In stark contrast, the Jewish people fell to the 49th level of tumah (spiritual impurity) as a result of their “assimilation into the non-Jewish culture and emulation of the [Egyptians’ behavior].”
 
The Me’or Va’Shemesh notes that these dissimilar actions and orientations eventuated in two very different outcomes: “[Moshe] merited Hashem’s, may He be blessed, revelation unto to him, the Almighty’s direct communication with him (peh el peh), and [the ability to act as Hashem’s agent in order to perform] all of the wonders and miracles in Egypt and upon the Sea of Reeds.” Based upon our ancestors’ negative trajectory in Egypt, however, their path took a decidedly different course. As a result of the slavery experience, the Me’or Va’Shemesh explains:
​
…[The Jews] became awakened spiritually and returned in complete teshuvah [to the Creator]. As it is written: “Now it came to pass in those many days that the king of Egypt died, and the children of Israel sighed from the labor, and they cried out, and their cry [of prayer] ascended to G-d from the labor.” (Sefer Shemot 2:23, brackets my own)  Then, [following their teshuvah shlaimah,] the Holy One blessed be He, because of His overwhelming mercy and kindness, took them out from under the burdens of Egypt.
 
Based upon the trenchant analysis of the holy Me’or Va’Shemesh, we can now answer our question, “Why does the Torah state, ‘Jethro…heard all that G-d had done for Moses and for Israel His people,’ instead of, ‘Jethro…heard all that G-d had done for Israel His people?’” Quite simply, while Moshe was a passionately proud member of the Jewish people, he is mentioned separately from his beloved nation in recognition of the unique spiritual heights he achieved, and the unequaled relationship he shared with Hashem. This interpretation is reminiscent of the verse in Yigdal sung in most Ashkenazi synagogues every Shabbat evening: “No one amongst the Jewish people has ever risen [to the ultimate spiritual heights] like Moshe — the sole prophet who had the ability to gaze upon the vision of the Almighty.” This, perhaps, is the rationale for the prophet Malachi’s famous declaration: “Remember the teaching of Moses, My servant, the laws and ordinances which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel.” (Sefer Malachi 3:22)  May Moshe ever serve as our model as we strive for all that is good and holy. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:rdbe718@gmail.com.
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.