Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. Talmud Bavli, Baba Batra 14b-15b teaches that the Tanach was written by a community of writers: Who wrote the Tanach? Moshe wrote his own book and the portion of Bilam and Iyov. Yehoshua wrote the book, which bears his name, and [the last] eight verses of the Torah. Shmuel wrote the book which bears his name, and Shoftim and Megillat Rut. David wrote Tehillim, including in it the work of the elders, namely, Adam, Melchizedek, Avraham, Moshe, Heman, Yeduthun, Asaph, and the three sons of Korach. Yirmiyahu wrote the book, which bears his name, Sefer Melachim, and Megillat Eicah. Chezkiyahu and his colleagues wrote Yeshayahu, Mishle, Megillat Shir HaShirimand Kohelet. The Men of the Great Assembly wrote Yechezkel, the Twelve Minor Prophets, Daniel and Megillat Esther. Ezra wrote the book that bears his name and the genealogies of Divrei HaYamim up to his own time. (Translation, Soncino Talmud, with my emendations) The phrase, “Moshe wrote his own book,” refers to the Torah. In fact, the Nevi’im and Nehemiah call the Torah, “Torat Moshe,” as we find in Sefer Yehoshua 8:31: As Moshe, the servant of Hashem, commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moshe (b’sefer Torat Moshe) an altar of whole stones, upon which no (man) has lifted up any iron. And they offered upon it burnt-offerings to Hashem and sacrificed peace-offerings. And he wrote there upon the stones a copy of Torat Moshe, which he wrote in the presence of the children of Israel. (This, and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, with my emendations) While the entire Torah is Torat Moshe, Sefer Devarim stands out most prominently as Moshe’s book. The very first pasuk proclaims the personal nature of this final volume of the Torah. Instead of the oft-found phrase, “And Hashem spoke to Moshe saying,” we encounter: “These are the words which Moshe spoke to all Israel on that side of the Jordan in the desert, in the plain opposite the Red Sea, between Paran and Tofel and Lavan and Hazeroth and Di Zahav.” In other words, this sefer, is at one and the same time, divrei Elokim emet and the heartfelt expression of Moshe’s unique love and concern for klal Yisrael. Chazal refer to Sefer Devarim as Mishneh Torah. Tosafot (11th-13th centuries) and the Ramban (1194-1270) explain this term as “repetition of that which was already stated.” In essence, it is primarily a review, or summary, of previously known narrative and halachic passages. In contrast, the Netziv (Rav Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin, 1817-1893), maintains: [The name “Mishneh Torah”] may be properly interpreted and explained as referring to [understanding the Torah] in a holistic fashion—in regard to the specifics and details of its terms and language. Since this is the case, the entire book and its substance is, [in reality,] coming to encourage us to be extensively involved in Torah study so that we will be able to explain the nuances of the text (dikdukei hamikra), as this is [the fundamental nature of] Torah study. Moreover, all of the ethical exhortations (musar), and multiple rebukes of Moshe, were solely for the purpose of [encouraging us] to accept the yoke of Torah study upon ourselves. This idea is based upon the many principles of faith and belief that will be explained within the sefer itself. It is for this reason that it is called by its name “Mishneh Torah,” since it refers to exactitude in Torah study (shinun shel Torah). (HaEmek Davar, Introduction to Sefer Devarim, translation and brackets my own) In sum, according to the Netziv, our Sages coined the name Mishneh Torah to connote Sefer Devarim’s emphasis on meticulous Torah study. Consequently, mishneh, in this instance, means depth-level analysis and knowledge of the Torah, inclusive of its language, laws, and musar. The Netziv cites a fascinating midrash that gives voice to the preeminent position of Sefer Devarim within Rabbinic thought: Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said: “Sefer Mishneh Torah was the standard (signon) of Yehoshua. [We know this because] at the very moment the Holy One Blessed be He revealed himself to Yehoshua, He found him sitting [and learning] with the Mishneh Torah in his hands.” (Midrash Bereishit Rabbah, Parashat Bereishit, section 6, translation my own) Why was Yehoshua deeply engaged in studying Sefer Devarim rather than one of the other books of the Torah? After all, they, too, incorporate crucial halachot (laws) and ethics. The Netziv’s answer helps us understand the unique nature of Mishneh Torah: “We may learn [from this midrash] that this sefer, in particular, incorporates the entire gamut of moral and ethical principles [that are found throughout the Torah].” In a few days, we will commemorate the heartbreaking events that befell our people on Tisha b’Av. Based on the Netziv’s interpretation of Mishneh Torah, Sefer Devarim emerges as the most appropriate sefer of Chamisha Chumshei Torah to read and study on the Shabbat preceding this day. Beyond question, Tisha b’Av teaches us the necessity to treat our fellow Jews with compassion and understanding—whoever and wherever they may be. This lifelong quest is fraught with innumerable trials. As such, we are blessed that Torat Moshe in general, and Mishneh Torah in particular, provide the roadmap we need to guide us on this challenging journey. Like Yehoshua, may Hashem grant us the wisdom to implement its eternal message as our own. V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom and a truly meaningful fast. Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav
0 Comments
Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. The phrase, “aleh hamitzvot (these are the commandments), appears twice in the Torah in the concluding pasukim of Sefer Vayikra and Parashat Masei: These are the commandments (mitzvot) that Hashem commanded Moshe to [tell] the children of Israel on Mount Sinai. (Sefer Vayikra 27:34) These are the commandments (mitzvot) and the ordinances (v’hamishpatim) that Hashem commanded the children of Israel through Moshe in the plains of Moab, by the Jordan at Jericho. (Sefer Bamidbar 36:13, these, and all Bible translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, with my emendations) The pasukim differ in that the location mentioned in the first pasuk is Har Sinai, whereas the second refers to “the plains of Moab, by the Jordan at Jericho.” Additionally, the first verse only mentions mitzvot, while the second adds mishpatim. In both cases, however, Moshe is tasked to teach the mitzvot to the Jewish people. This concept is alluded to, as well, in the well-known verse, “Torah tzivah lanu Moshe morasha kehillat Ya’akov” (“The Torah that Moshe commanded us is a legacy for the congregation of Ya’akov,” Sefer Devarim 33:4) While the meaning of “aleh hamitzvot” is elusive, the Talmud Yerushalmi offers this analysis: “[This means,] that these [and these alone] are the mitzvot that Moshe instructed us to observe. And so, too, did Moshe teach us: ‘In the future, and from this point forward, no other prophet may originate a new mitzvah for you.’” (Megillah I:V, translation my own) In addition, this principle is found in Midrash Sifrei to Sefer Bamidbar, and four separate times in Talmud Bavli. This repetition signifies its particular import in classical halachic thought. Based upon these sources, the Rambam (Maimonides, 1135-1204), codifies the expression, “no prophet is permitted to create a new matter (that is, mitzvah) from this point forward,” in this manner: It is clear and explicit in the Torah that it [the Torah] is [Hashem’s] mitzvah, remaining forever without change, addition, or diminishment, as [Sefer Devarim 13:1] states: “All these matters which I command to you, you shall be careful to perform. You may not add to it or diminish from it,” and [Sefer Devarim 29:28] states: “What is revealed is for us and our children forever, to carry out all the words of this Torah.” This teaches that we are commanded to fulfill all the Torah's directives forever. It is also said: “It is an everlasting statute for all your generations,” and [Sefer Devarim 30:20] states: “It is not in the heavens.” This teaches that a prophet can no longer add a new precept [to the Torah]. (Mishneh Torah, Sefer Hamada, Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 9:1, translation, Rabbi Eliyahu Touger, underlining and brackets my own) The Malbim (Rabbi Meir Leibush ben Yechiel Michel, 1809-1879) further explicates the meaning of our phrase, “no prophet is permitted to create a new matter from this point forward.” He opines that “aleh hamitzvot” connotes “these and no others,” and adds, “our teacher Moshe was the sole prophet of the Torah.” As such, “all subsequent prophets had but one purpose—to encourage loyalty to Moshe’ Torah (Torat Moshe).” Thus, by definition, “they could neither add nor subtract [from the Torah].” (Commentary on Sefer Vayikra, section 120, translation my own) The Malbim’s use of the expression, “Torat Moshe,” is similar in kind to a pasuk in Sefer Malachi wherein the navi proclaims, “Remember the Torah of My servant Moshe (Torat Moshe), [inclusive of] the laws and ordinances which I commanded him in Horeb (that is, at Mount Sinai) for all Israel.” (3:22, translation my own) The promise of reward for fulfilling Torat Moshe is found throughout the Torah. One of the most celebrated of these passages appears in the second paragraph of the Shema: And it will be, if you hearken to My commandments that I command you this day to love Hashem, your G-d, to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul, I will give the rain of your land at its time, the early rain and the latter rain, and you will gather in your grain, your wine, and your oil. And I will give grass in your field for your livestock, and you will eat and be sated. (Sefer Devarim 11:3) This narrative focuses upon the physical rewards that will accrue to our nation if we demonstrate true allegiance to the Almighty. As such the focus is on rain, grain, wine, oil, livestock, and the general satisfaction of our earthly needs. In contrast, Malachi turns our attention to the ultimate spiritual reward, namely, the fulfillment of Judaism’s eschatological vision: “Behold, I will send you Eliyahu HaNavi before the coming of the great and awesome day of Hashem, that he may turn the heart of the fathers back through the children, and the heart of the children back through their fathers…” (23-24) With Hashem’s help, may we ever strive to fulfill His eternal Torat Moshe. Then, may we behold Eliyahu HaNavi, and the coming of Mashiach ben David, soon and in our days. V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. Moshe’s multifold accomplishments are legendary. His leadership was extraordinary, the level of nevuah he achieved was different in kind and degree than that of any other prophet who ever lived, and his ability to commune with Hashem is unequaled in the history of our people: “There never arose another prophet amongst the Jewish people like Moshe, to whom Hashem revealed Himself face to face.” (Sefer Devarim 34:10, my translation, as per Onkelos). In his Torah commentary, Torah Temimah, Rabbi Baruch ha-Levi Epstein zatzal (1860-1942) informs us that there was one area, however, wherein Pinchas superseded even Moshe Rabbeinu: “Therefore, let it be said: ‘Behold, I [Hashem] give to him [Pinchas] my Covenant of Peace (brit shalom).’” (Bamidbar25:12) “It is fitting that this atonement [as seen in the words ‘brit shalom’] will continue to bring about expiation forever more.” (Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin, 82b). At first glance, it is very difficult to understand why Pinchas merited this explicit reward even more than Moshe Rabbeinu, since we find numerous times where, [through Moshe’s efforts,] Hashem “forgot” His anger against the Jewish people, such as in the instances of the Golden Calf and the Spies. (All translations, underlining, brackets and emphasis my own) After raising this fundamental issue, Rav Epstein suggests why Pinchas, and not Moshe, was deserving of the brit shalom: But the matter should, however, be explained in the following manner: We see from this that there was a fundamental difference that obtained between Moshe’s and Pinchas’ ability to remove Hashem’s anger [from upon the Jewish people]. Moshe was able to remove Hashem’s anger for a limited time, yet there remained, so to speak, in Hashem’s heart (mind) a grievance against the Jewish people, just as we find in the instances of the Golden Calf…and the Spies. Peace such as this cannot be called true and absolute peace. In contrast, the removal of Hashem’s anger in Pinchas’ case was a complete and total removal of anger [forevermore]. Therefore, Pinchas merited the just reward [of the brit shalom]. In sum, Pinchas was able to obtain a total and permanent peace between Hashem and His people— devoid of any future recriminations and punishments. This is something that escaped even Moshe Rabbeinu’s grasp. Nonetheless, a crucial question remains: “Why was there such a manifest difference between them?” I believe the following phrase guides us toward an answer: “When he [Pinchas] displayed the anger that I [Hashem] should have displayed.” (Bamidbar 25:11, per Rashi, second gloss on Bamidbar 25:11) In sum, Pinchas acted as Hashem’s messenger in expressing His legitimate anger. He channeled Hashem’s fury in response to the vulgar immorality and idol worship in which many of the men had been engaged. In this sense, Pinchas was a zealot who was completely devoted to Hashem. As such, his total being merged with Hashem’s righteous anger in his desire to execute Hashem’s will. In stark contrast, Moshe Rabbeinu never became angry—neither on a personal level, nor in the service of Hashem, and this is as it should be. Chazal view anger as tantamount to avodah zarah, since in the heat of anger, a person cannot focus upon Hashem, Torah, or mitzvot. Instead, he or she is entirely consumed by the emotion of anger and becomes irrational. Clearly, one of the worst characteristics an authentic leader of klal Yisrael could have is anger. Little wonder, then, that Moshe neither had the personality trait of anger, nor did he become angry—even when it was warranted. Paradoxically, Pinchas was gifted the brit shalom after having brought about total peace between Hashem and klal Yisrael—as a result of the righteous anger he expressed on behalf of the Almighty. In this way, Pinchas served as a protective force and bridged the gaping chasm between Hashem and our people. As spiritually heroic as Pinchas’ actions were, however, it must be stressed that they were permissible solely at that moment in history. Zealotry is simply not, and must never become, an operable concept in the Jewish lexicon of behavior. With Hashem’s help, may we strive to emulate Pinchas’ dedication and devotion to the Holy One blessed be He. V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. Parashat Chukat contains a mysterious passage that focuses upon a well: From there to the well, that is the well of which Hashem said to Moshe, “Gather the people, and I will give them water.” Then Israel sang this song: “Ascend, O well, sing to it! A well dug by princes, carved out by nobles of the people, through the lawgiver with their staffs, and from the desert, a gift.” (Sefer Bamidbar 21:16-18, this and all Bible and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach) At first glance, it seems that this is an actual well, as Hashem said Moshe, “I will give them water,” an interpretation that Rashi (1040-1105) supports: “Then Israel sang this song, was said at the end of forty [years], but the well was given to them at the beginning of the forty [years].” In contrast, Rabbi Chaim ibn Attar (the Ohr HaChaim, 1696-1743), offers a strikingly different interpretation. In so doing, he maintains the well is not a well at all, instead, it is a metaphor for the Torah: It is possible that this shirah [is not to be taken as literally having been sung over a well. Instead, it] was said in regard to the Torah. Nevertheless, one ought not to view that generation’s song [to the Torah] as an indictment regarding those that did not sing such a new song when the Torah was given as a permanent possession [to the Jewish people at Mount Sinai]—when it would have been fitting and proper to sing just such a song of praise. For without a doubt, this song of the Torah wherein it is called “a well of water,” received [this appellation] because … the Torah is compared to water … (Translation and brackets my own) The Ohr HaChaim’s association of Torah with water is based upon the Talmudic expression, “ain mayim elah Torah” (“there is no use of the term ‘water’ that does not symbolize Torah’”): For it was taught: “And they went three days in the wilderness and found no water,” (Sefer Shemot 15:22) regarding which those who expound verses in an allegorical manner said: “water can only mean Torah,” as it says: “Behold! All who thirst, go to water [Rashi, water = Torah], and whoever has no money, go, buy, and eat, and go, buy without money and without a price, wine and milk.” (Sefer Yeshayahu 55:1) Therefore this means that when they went three days without Torah, they immediately became exhausted… (Talmud Bavli, Baba Kama 52a, translation, The Soncino Talmudwith my brackets and emendations) Sefer Bereishit 37:24 focuses upon the nature of the pit into which Yosef was thrown by his brothers, and once again, water plays a significant role: “And they took him and cast him into the pit; now the pit was empty there was no water in it.” Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 22a explains our pasuk in this manner: Rav Natan bar Manyumi taught in the name of Rav Tanḥum: What is the meaning of the verse that is written with regard to Joseph: “And they took him, and cast him into the pit; and the pit was empty, there was no water in it”? By inference from that which is stated: “And the pit was empty,” don’t I know that there was no water in it? Rather, why does the verse say: “There was no water in it?” The verse comes to emphasize and teach that there was no water in it, but there were snakes and scorpions in it. (Koren Talmud, Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz zatzal, editor) Initially, almost all of Yosef’s brothers sought to kill him, they settled, however, on tossing him into a pit, irrespective as to what dangers may have lurked therein. Their behavior toward Yosef ensured that the pit would be filled with snakes and scorpions, code words, in this instance, for blatant insensitivity and callousness. Little wonder, then, that “there was no water in it,” for when cold-heartedness reigns supreme, the Torah is pushed aside. May the time come soon and, in our days, when the prophet Yeshayahu’s words will be realized. For, then, at long last, Hashem will be recognized by the entire world as the Master of the Universe: Here is the G-d of my salvation, I shall trust and not fear; for the strength and praise of the Eternal Hashem was my salvation. And you shall draw water with joy from the fountains of the salvation. And you shall say on that day, “Thank Hashem, call in His Name, publicize His deeds among the peoples; keep it in remembrance, for His Name is exalted.” (12:2-4) V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav 6/18/2023 Parashat Korach 5783, 2023: "The Entire People Are Holy and Hashem is in Our Midst"Read NowRabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. In the context of his analysis of Korach’s rebellion, my rebbi and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as “the Rav” by his students and followers, described Korach as “a demagogue motivated by selfish ambitions.” (Rabbi Abraham R. Besdin, Reflections of the Rav: Lessons in Jewish Thought, p. 140) Therefore, even though he was blessed with a prodigious intellect (Rashi, Commentary on the Torah to Sefer Bamidbar 16:7), tremendous wealth (Talmud Bavli, Pesachim, 119a and Midrash Shemot Rabbah 31:2), and all that was associated with such brilliance and affluence, this was simply not enough for Korach. He wanted everything. As such, when he was denied leadership of the tribe of Levi, having been passed over in favor of his cousin, Elitzafon ben Uziel (Midrash Tanchuma, Korach I), his demagoguery knew no bounds. The Ramban (Nachmanides, 1194-1270), in his Commentary on the Torah on our parasha, maintains that Korach did not immediately foment rebellion when he was denied leadership of the tribe of Levi. Instead, he strategically waited for the most auspicious time to begin his machinations. The Rav follows this interpretation of events, and notes: The opportune moment arrived sooner than Korach anticipated. It was the incident of the spies, perhaps the most tragic incident in Moses’ life. The Almighty’s decree that all the adults would die in the desert was a hard blow to Moses’ prestige. For a short while, he lost his influence over the crowds…Suddenly all their hopes and dreams were dissipated and shattered. No land, no conquest, no rivers of milk and honey, no realizations of the promise were in sight — only many bleak and dreary years before Israel would set foot on the soil of Canaan. (Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Vision and Leadership: Reflections on Joseph and Moses, David Shatz, Joel B. Wolowelsky, and Reuven Ziegler editors, page 192) Many people generally familiar with Rav Soloveitchik’s thought are unaware that in 1924 he spent three semesters studying Political Theory and Science at the Free Polish University in Warsaw, Poland. This training provided him with the perfect background for understanding the nature and development of political movements. Little wonder, then, that he emphasizes the following notions in his analysis of Korach’s insurrection: Any conspiracy or organized rebellion, no matter how egotistically motivated, must develop an ideology to succeed. Korach planned an anti-Moses movement, and such a movement cannot exist or make headway without developing an ideology. Every movement must have a motto, and Korach indeed provided the philosophy of the rebellion. (Vision and Leadership, page 194) What exactly was the philosophical underpinning of Korach’s mutiny against Aharon and Moshe? The Torah underscores his position at the very beginning of our parasha: Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, took [himself to one side] along with Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth, descendants of Reuben. They confronted Moses together with two hundred and fifty men from the children of Israel, chieftains of the congregation, representatives of the assembly, men of repute. They assembled against Moses and Aaron, and said to them, “You take too much upon yourselves, for the entire congregation are all holy, and the L-rd is in their midst. So why do you raise yourselves above the L-rd's assembly?” (Sefer Bamidbar 16:1-3, translation, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach) Korach’s ideological thesis appears to be entirely accurate. Beyond a doubt, the entire congregation of the Jewish people is holy and Hashem is in our midst. This has been the case ever since we stood shoulder to shoulder as one united and chosen nation at Har Sinai and received the Torah. As the Rav writes: The basis of this challenge was very simple and, at first glance quite logical. No one can deny the assertion that the whole community is holy; it is the very essence of our choseness. Every Jew possesses intrinsic sanctity. As far as holiness is concerned, there is no distinction between Moses and a simple woodchopper. Hence, Korach asked, what right did Moses or Aaron have to lead, to guide, to rule? He charged them with seizing power illegitimately. He raised the millennial-old argument based on the equality of all people. (Vision and Leadership, p.194, underlining my own) Yet, while “no one can deny the assertion that the whole community is holy; it is the very essence of our choseness,” it is only part of the story of the kedushah (holiness) of the Jewish people. There exists another, equally vital component of the sanctity of our nation, namely, the kedushah of the individual: …Judaism was not satisfied with the social [i.e. collective] aspect of kedushah. If the community were the only source of sanctity, then the individual would be deprived of his creative role, his individual initiative, his originality and uniqueness. The outstanding person would not be able to develop into a great leader. Hence, the Torah says, there is a second resource of kedushah — the sanctity which the individual detects in the inner recesses of his personality…There is a separate kedushah attached to every individual. (Vision and Leadership, p.195, underlining and brackets my own) Precisely because “there is a separate kedushah attached to every individual,” Am Yisrael is infused with “the countless kedushah experiences of the individual members of the community.” In effect, “the single person sanctifies the community.” (Vision and Leadership, p.195, underlining my own) Korach’s refusal to recognize this fundamental component of kedushat Yisrael (the sanctity of the Jewish people) is precisely why he had the unmitigated gall to ask Moshe and Aharon, “Why do you raise yourselves above the L-rd’s assembly?” Once again, we may turn to the Rav’s penetrating explication: The statement by Korach that “All the community is holy” is correct as long as we are speaking of the community-rooted kedushah inherited from our ancestors. Indeed, “all the community,” the community as a whole is a source of holiness…However, if we shift our attention from the social aspect to the individual aspect of kedushah, the whole idea of equality turns into an absurdity. We must admit that the behirah [chosen nature] of Moses was above and beyond the behirah of the woodchopper or water-drawer. (Vision and Leadership, p.196, underlining my own) May we, as a people, recognize both the “community-rooted kedushah inherited from our ancestors,” and the unique sanctity that each and every one of us has to bring to our nation. Then, with the Almighty’s help, may we fulfill the Torah’s words: “And you shall be to Me a kingdom of princes and a holy nation” (Sefer Shemot 19:6), as we continue our sacred task l’takane ha’olam b’malchut Sha-dai—to perfect the world under the kingship of Hashem. V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshimof Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. At the beginning of our parasha, Hashem tells Moshe: “Send out for yourself men (shelach lecha anashim) who will scout the Land of Canaan, which I am giving to the children of Israel. You shall send one man each for his father’s tribe; each one shall be a chieftain in their midst.’” (Sefer Bamidbar 13:2, this and the following Tanach and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, with my emendations) Rashi (1040-1105), basing himself on Talmud Bavli 34b, notes that Hashem had no interest in sending these men to Eretz Yisrael. Instead, he merely allowed Moshe to do so: shelach lecha: “According to your own understanding. I am not commanding you, but if you wish, you may send. Since the Jews had come [to Moshe] and said, ‘Let us send men ahead of us,’ as it says, ‘All of you approached me…’” (Sefer Devarim 1:22) The concluding word in the phrase, “shelach lecha anashim,” also needs to be carefully analyzed. After all, who else, other than the anashim could Moshe have sent? The answer is deceptively simple: Moshe could have sent nashim(women). The origin of this idea is found in the Kli Yakar, the celebrated 16th century Torah commentary of Rabbi Shlomo Ephraim of Luntchitz (1550-1619): Another explanation as to why the Torah specifies “anashim”: Our Sages of blessed memory [Midrash Yalkut Shimoni,Parashat Pinchas] noted that the men despised the Land and declared: “Let us appoint a leader and return to Egypt.” (Sefer Bamidbar 14:4). [In contrast,] the women loved the Land and said: “Give us a permanent portion.” (27:4) Therefore, the Holy One Blessed Be He said: “According to My opinion, since I see what the future will bring, it is far better to send women that love the land for they will not speak about it in a disparaging and negative manner. But you, [Moshe], believe that these men are in fact fine and upstanding individuals (kesharim), and you believe that the Land is beloved to them—Go ahead and send men!” This is why when the Torah writes: “Send for yourself men,” [Rashi] interprets it as “According to your own understanding,” as for Me however, it would have been far better to send women... (Translation and emphasis my own) This amazing statement of Rav Luntchitz speaks volumes about the unique character of Jewish women. Remember, it was the Jewish women who refused to give up hope amid the misery and backbreaking labor of Egypt and encouraged their husbands, in kedushah and taharah (purity), to bring another generation of Jews into the world. Moreover, it was the Jewish women who steadfastly refused to participate in the Egel HaZahav (the incident of the Golden Calf). Little wonder, then, that it could have been the Jewish women who would have set the stage for our grand entrance into Eretz Yisrael, with Moshe as Mashiach, if they had only been given the opportunity! Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshimof Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. Parshiot Yitro and Beha’alotecha contain two versions of Yitro’s departure from klal Yisrael. The first is quite terse: “Moshe saw his father-in-law off, and he went away to his land (va’yalech lo el artzo).” (Sefer Shemot 18:27) The second, however, is far more expansive: Then Moshe said to Chovav the son of Reuel the Midianite, Moshe’s father-in-law, “We are traveling to the place about which Hashem said, ‘I will give it to you.’ Come with us and we will be good to you, for Hashem has spoken of good fortune for Israel.” He [Chovav=Yitro] said to him, “I won’t go (lo alech), for I will go (alech) to my land and my birthplace.” He [Moshe] said, “Please don’t leave us, as you are familiar with our encampments in the desert, and you will be our guide. And if you go with us, we will bestow on you the good which Hashem grants us.” (Sefer Bamidbar10:29-32, all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach) The Midrash Mechilta on Sefer Shemot provides the backstory regarding what took place when Yitro left Moshe: And he [Moshe] said to him [Yitro]: “You have given us excellent advice [regarding the establishment of courts throughout klal Yisrael], and the Omnipresent one, Himself, has agreed to your plan, please do not abandon us.” And he [Yitro] responded to him [Moshe]: “Is it not the case that a small lamp will only be of value in a place that is dark? For, after all, this same small lamp will do absolutely nothing if it is placed between the [shining] sun and the [reflecting] moon. You, Moshe are the sun, and Aharon, your brother, is the moon. Therefore, what will the small lamp [that is, what can, I, Yitro,] do in your midst? Rather, behold, I will go to my land, and I will convert all the people in my country, bring them to talmud Torah, and bring them under the wings of the Schechinah…” (Mesechta d’Amalek II, translation and brackets my own) In sum, Yitro felt that he had given his personal best toward the advancement of klal Yisrael, and that the time had come for the luminaries of the Jewish people to fully shine their light upon the people. Moreover, he felt he could make an even greater contribution to advancing Hashem’s glory in the world by converting his nation, and thereby bring them tachat kanfei HaShechinah (under the divine protection of the Master of the Universe). In his Commentary on the Torah, the Alshich HaKadosh zatzal (Rav Moshe Alshich, 1508-1593) presents a different backstory than the Mechilta. In so doing, he provides an outstanding analysis of the previously cited verse in ourparasha: “I won’t go (lo alech), for I will go (alech) to my land and my birthplace: Even though Moshe never questioned his [Yitro’s] allegiance to the Torah, Yitro was concerned and said to himself: “Perhaps Moshe questions whether or not this is the end of me and thinks I have loosened my connection to Hashem’s Torah. Or, perhaps he thinks that even though I will remain strong in my emunah (faith), perhaps when I reside once again among the non-Jews, I will return to my [former] gods.” He [Yitro], therefore, set his [Moshe’s] mind at ease (literally, mareh lo hana’ah) and informed him that he would not abandon Hashem. According to the Alshich HaKadosh, Yitro subtly shared his true intentions with Moshe through the use of the words, “lo alech,” and “alech:” He said: “lo alech,” This meant, “I [Yitro] am only refraining and holding back from traveling with the Jewish people, and not, G-d forbid, [rejecting] the Torah, [for I remain a ger tzedek].” And regarding the second [potential concern of his son-in-law, Yitro said:] “But rather, only to my land and my birthplace alech (shall I go)—but not to my gods.” The Alshich HaKadosh brilliantly unpacks the meaning of lo alech and alech and reveals how these seemingly simple words were meant to dispel any conceivable fears Moshe may have had concerning Yitro’s unbreakable connection to the Torah and Hashem. May we, like Yitro, remain ever steadfast in our love of Hashem, and loyal to His holy Torah, wherever we may go. V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshimof Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. The concluding pasukim of a parasha often serve as a summation of one or more of the subjects contained therein. In his Commentary on the Torah, the Alshich Hakadosh (Rav Moshe Alschich,1508-1593) notes that this approach is not followed in our sidrah, as the final verse is disassociated from all preceding pasukim: “When Moshe would come into the Tent of Meeting (Ohel Moade) to speak with Him, he would hear the Voice (va’yishma et HaKol) speaking to him from the two cherubim above the covering which was over the Ark of Testimony (Aron HaEidut), and He spoke to him (va’yidabare aluv).” (Sefer Bamidbar 7:89, this and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach): Behold, this verse does not appear to have any connection to that which comes before or after. Since this is the case, I would like to borrow a phrase from Rashi’s Commentary on the Torah on Sefer Bereishit 1:1: “ain hamikra hazeh omare elah darshani—this text certainly calls for a thoroughgoing analysis.” The expression, “Ohel Moade,” is used numerous times in Shemot, Vayikra, Bamidbar and Devarim—without a precise definition. As such, its identity is often confused with the Mishkan. This leads the Abarbanel (Rabbi Don Yitzchak ben Yehudah Abarbanel 1437–1508), in his Commentary on the Torah on our pasuk, to clarify this term: “The Ohel Moade is the sanctuary, [and a section within the Mishkan,] where we find the Shulchan, Menorah and the Mizbeach HaKetoret (the altar upon which the incense was offered).” The Kodesh Kedoshim (Holy of Holies) was behind the Ohel Moade, and the area from which Moshe would hear “HaKol speaking to him from the two cherubim above the covering which was over the Aron HaEidut” when he was standing in the Ohel Moade. Hakol refers to the Voice of Hashem that Rashi and most commentators explain as “HaKol sh’nidabare imo b’Sinai—the Voice with which He [Hashem] spoke with him at Mount Sinai.” In his Commentary on the Torah on our verse, the Sforno (Rav Ovadiah ben Ya’akov, c. 1470–c. 1550) explains the unique manner of Moshe’s communications with the Almighty: “When Moshe would come into the Ohel Moade to speak with Him, he would hear the Voice (va’yishma et HaKol) …” and this did not take place in the first Beit HaMikdash, and certainly not in the second Beit HaMikdash. For no other navi was ever able to walk into the Mikdash to prophesize and immediately obtain his prophecy… The Sforno’s insight is congruent with one of the Rambam’s (Maimonides, 1135-1204) analyses of the matchless nature of nevuat Moshe Rabbeinu as found in his 13 Principles of Faith: And the fourth difference is that prophetic visions did not come to any of the [other] prophets according to their will, but only according to the will of Hashem … Moshe, our teacher, however, [could receive prophecy] at any time he so desired. [This is clearly illustrated in Sefer Bamidbar 9:8:] “Wait and I will hear what Hashem commands for you…” (Perush HaMishnayot, Sanhedrin 10, Principle Seven, Rabbi David Kapach Hebrew translation of the Arabic, English translation my own) The final words of our pasuk, “and He spoke to him (va’yidabare aluv),” are understood by Rashi as Hashem speaking exclusively to Moshe in such a manner as “to exclude Aharon from the divine statements.” A very different and daring approach, however, is offered by Rabbeinu Bahya ben Asher ibn Halawa (1255–1340) in his Commentary on the Torah on our pasuk: It is possible to explain, “va’yidabare aluv,” as “and Moshe spoke to Him.” This comes to teach us the greatness of Moshe in contrast to all other prophets, for he was neither reluctant nor frightened to respond directly to the Almighty. As we find in the verse: “Then Hashem would speak to Moshe face to face (panim el panim), as a man would speak to his companion…” (Sefer Shemot 33:11), for it is the manner of a person who is speaking to their friend for one to speak and one to answer. So, too, does it state in our verse, HaKol would speak to Moshe from the two cherubim above the covering which was over the Aron HaEidut, and he [Moshe] would then speak to Hashem at any time he so desired. In sum, Moshe emerges as the greatest prophet who has ever and will ever live, for he, alone, spoke to Hashem panim el panim, “as a man would speak to his companion,” at any time he so desired. Little wonder, then, that we find in the Yigdal hymn: “In Israel none like Moses arose again…” (Translation, The Complete ArtScroll Siddur, page 14) Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. Chazal describe Shavuot as zman matan Torateinu, the time when Hashem gave us His holy Torah. The world-shaping significance of our subsequent acceptance of the Torah (kabbalat haTorah) is given powerful voice in Midrash Tanchuma, Parashat Bereishit I: And it is taught in a baraita, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: “Why does it say in [the verses depicting] the Creation of the Universe, day one (yom echad), second day (yom shani), third day (yom shlishi), fourth day (yom revi’i), fifth day (yom chamishi), sixth day (yom hashishi), and what is the reason for the [seemingly superfluous] letter “heh” [in yom hashishi]? [After all,] in all other instances the text only states, yom echad, yom shani and so on. This is coming to teach us that the Holy One blessed be He stated this condition to the entire Universe: ‘If the Jewish people will accept the Torah that is comprised of five books [hinted at by the numerical value of the letter heh =5], then all will be good [that is, all that has been created will continue to exist]. If not, however, I will return everything that exists to its pre-Creation state--tohu vavohu.’” (Translation my own) According to this midrash, the continuation of the Universe was contingent upon the Jewish people accepting the Torah. Little wonder, then, that Chazal consistently emphasize the singular import of Torah study. One of the best-known examples that gives voice to this idea is Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 127a: These are the matters that a person does them and enjoys their profits in this world, and nevertheless the principal exists for him for the World-to-Come, and they are: Honoring one’s father and mother, and acts of loving kindness, and bringing peace between a person and another, and Torah study is equal to all of them--v’talmud Torah k’neged kulam. (All Talmud translations, The Koren Talmud Bavli, translation, Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz zatzal) If talmud Torah is k’neged kulam, what is the nature of the relationship between Torah study and other mitzvot? This crucial question is addressed in Talmud Bavli, Kiddushin 40b: And there already was an incident in which Rabbi Tarfon and the Elders (zekanim) were reclining in the loft of the house of Nit’za, in Lod, when this question was asked of them: Is study greater (talmud gadol) or is action greater (ma’aseh gadol)? Rabbi Tarfon answered and said: Action is greater. Rabbi Akiva answered and said: Study is greater. Everyone answered and said [that is, the consensus was]: Study is greater, but not as an independent value; rather, it is greater, as study leads to action--talmud gadol sh’hatalmud mavi l’yedei ma’aseh. Rashi (1040-1105) interprets the concluding phrase of our passage, “talmud gadol sh’hatalmud mavi l’yedei ma’aseh,” as: “nimtzau shneihem b’yado—both Torah study and action will be within his grasp.” According to this approach, since talmud Torah enables the proper fulfillment of mitzvot actions, it complements ma’aseh. In other words, while Rabbi Tarfon champions the notion ma’aseh gadol, and Rabbi Akiva ostensibly argues and states, “talmud gadol,” they are not actually in disagreement. Instead, both of these Torah giants agree that study is greater, but not as an independent value; rather, it is greater because it leads to action. In his Chidushei Aggadot on Kiddushin 40b, the Maharal of Prague (Rabbi Yehudah Loew ben Bezalel, 1512 ca-1609) advances our understanding of the ultimate value of mitzvot actions: Ma’aseh gadol: [This statement of Rabbi Tarfon] means that action is indispensable, whereas the Torah that one learns in order to perform [a particular act] is not as fundamental as the ma’aseh [itself], as the ideal outcome [of Torah study] is the proper fulfillment of [the mitzvot]. This is the case, since man is not exclusively an intellectual entity, for, [only if he was] completely cerebral would his Torah be his very being… therefore, action is the essence [of humankind] … (Translation and brackets my own) According to the Maharal, while talmud Torah is a central part of Jewish living and a powerful component of our intellectual makeup, it is nonetheless insufficient if it does not lead to mitzvot observance. This is congruent with the well-known axiom in Pirkei Avot: “v’lo hamidrash ikkar elah hama’aseh—Torah study is not the essence, but rather, the deed.” (1:17) With Hashem’s help, may we be zocheh to attain the ideal stated by Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yossi: “V’halomed al manat la’asot—And one who learns in order to do is given the opportunity to learn, teach, observe and do.” (Pirkei Avot 4:5, translation, Rabbi Yosef Marcus). V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom and Chag Sameach, Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav Rabbi David Etengoff Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon HaKohane, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Gittel Malka bat Moshe, Alexander Leib ben Benyamin Yosef, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world. Sefer Vayikra is the only book in the Tanach where we find the expression, “v’yarata m’elokecha,” (“and you shall have awe for your G-d”). It appears three times in Parashat Behar and twice in Parashat Kedoshim: 1) You shall not curse a deaf person. You shall not place a stumbling block before a blind person, and you shall have awe for your G-d. I am Hashem. (19:14) 2) You shall rise before a venerable person and you shall respect the elderly, and you shall have awe for your G-d. I am Hashem. (19:32) 3) And you shall not wrong, one man his fellow Jew, and you shall have awe for your G-d, for I am Hashem, your G-d. (25:17) 4) You shall not take from him interest or increase, and you shall have awe for your G-d, and let your brother live with you. (25:36) 5) You shall not work him with rigor, and you shall have awe for your G-d. (25:33, these and all Tanach and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, underlining my own) Our five verses refer respectively to: the prohibition of purposely misleading someone to your own financial advantage (lifnei ivare), the obligation to rise before and treat the elderly with respect (mipnei saivah takum), the injunction against vexing your fellow Jew through painful words (ona’at devarim), the ban against charging interest to a fellow Jew (rivet) and the sanction against mistreating a Jewish slave by forcing he or she to perform worthless and unpleasant work (avodah b’farech). Although at first glance, these mitzvot seem to be disconnected, Rashi (1040-1105), basing himself upon the Sifra, the halachic Midrash to Sefer Vayikra, teaches us that v’yarata m’elokecha links these pasukim closely together: and you shall fear your G-d: [Why is this mentioned here?] Because this matter [of misadvising someone] is not discernible by people, whether this person had good or evil intentions, and he can avoid [being recriminated by his victim afterwards] by saying, “I meant well!” Therefore, concerning this, it says, “and you shall have awe for your G-d,” Who knows your thoughts! Likewise, concerning anything known to the one who does it, but to which no one else is privy, Scripture says, “and you shall have awe for your G-d.” (Commentary to Sefer Vayikra 19:14, underlining my own) In sum, Rashi maintains that since each of the actions referenced in our pasukim is indiscernible by people, their underlying intentions remain unknown to observers. Therefore, only the active party knows the truth as to whether or not they were performed for the benefit of others or to their detriment. Nothing, however, is hidden from the Almighty, including our very thoughts. As such, one must be continuously in awe of the Master of the Universe and meticulous in his/her mitzvot observance. In his trenchant analysis of our verses, the great Chasidic rebbe, Rabbi Yehudah Aryeh Leib Alter (1847-1905), known as the “Sefat Emet” after the name of his commentary on the Torah, expands upon Rashi’s gloss with a profound insight into the power of mitzvah actions to engender yirat Hashem: It is obvious that through awe [of G-d] one is able to properly fulfill those matters that are indiscernible by others. [What is less evident,] however, is that these mitzvot which are solely contingent upon one’s private intentions, will, through their proper performance, enable one to acquire awe [of the Almighty]. This is the case, since when each mitzvah is fulfilled, it alters a person’s actions in a positive fashion. As such, these mitzvot that are contingent upon a person’s innermost thoughts, [when performed correctly,] will repair [any negativity that lurks] in the mind of the one [who performs such a commandment]. So, too, did I hear from my teacher and rebbe [the “Chidushei HaRim, 1798-1866] zatzal, on the verse, “And you shall not wrong, one man his fellow Jew, and you shall have awe for your G-d, for I am Hashem, your G-d.” (Sefer Vayikra 25:17) As he noted, through punctiliously refraining from vexing one’s fellow Jew, one will merit [the characteristic of] awe before the Almighty… (Translation and brackets my own) May our heartfelt fulfillment of Hashem’s mitzvot lead us to awe before Him, bringing us ever closer to His holy Torah. V’chane yihi ratzon. Shabbat Shalom Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org. Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list. *** My audio shiurim 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: The Rav |
Details
Archives
April 2024
AuthorTalmid of Rabbi Soloveitchik zatzal Categories |