Author: Rabbi Milder

Posted on

Yisro – Individual Attention

For Food for Thought in Spanish: Haga clic aquí para leer en español. Please share this with your Jewish Spanish speaking family, friends, and associates.

This week’s dvar Torah is built upon a shmuz Rav Moshe Chait zt”l, the venerable Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim Yerushalayim, gave over 20 years ago.

Parshas Yisro is one of the most important Torah portions because it discusses kabbalas haTorah, the acceptance of the Torah by the Jewish people. The reason why it is so important is because it is one of the foundations of the Jewish people and one of the bases for the future of the Jews.

Chaza”l refer to this event as ma’amad Har Sinai, literally, standing at Mount Sinai. Just standing there was inspirational as we say in Dayeinu in the Haggada on Pesach, “If He had brought us to Mount Sinai and had not given us the Torah it would have been for us sufficient (dayeinu).” Just the fire and the voices heard and seen at Mount Sinai could inspire a person to come close to Hashem.

Everyone was at ma’amad Har Sinai! Everyone heard even future generations!

Why did Hashem begin the Ten Commandments in singular form, I am Hashem your (singular) G-D? In fact the Pesiksa DiRabasi of Rav Kahana (21:14) says there might be a possible defense or excuse for why part of the Jewish people succumbed to the sin of the golden calf, for Hashem said in singular form “I am Hashem your G-D” and perhaps He was only speaking to Moshe, therefore from then after Hashem said “I am Hashem your (plural) G-D,” (as He said in the last pasuk of the paragraph about tzitzis that we say in our shema every day); to be sure everyone felt they were warned. Since Hashem was speaking to the entire Jewish people at Har Sinai, why then was the Torah given in singular form?

To teach us that every single Jew must say Hashem gave the Ten Commandments to me, and I must preserve them. One should not say the Torah was given for everyone else. Hashem had to speak to the Jewish people who were at a level of prophesy to convey the message that Hashem expects me to observe the Torah, and if it is not observed by me then there is no Torah.
One could say, I believe there is a Jewish Nation and a Torah but who needs it. Man’s inclination says he wants someone else to observe the Torah; he doesn’t want responsibility. That attitude will cause destruction to himself and the Torah. It will cause a negative effect to all of creation.

The Pesiksa Rabasi of Rav Kahana (21:6) describes kabbalas haTorah with a parable to a realistic painting of a face; the eyes seem to be looking at you whichever corner of the room you are at. The eyes are looking at every single individual in that room at one time. So too, kaviyachol, Hashem had to speak to every single person at Har Sinai personally “looking at them straight in the eye” to impress upon them the need to observe the Torah. The point is that you must obligate yourself; don’t think it is not for me. The acceptance of the Torah at Mount Sinai is virtually meaningless if not thought of in these terms. A person could understand, review, and even do mussar bihispa’alus, getting an emotional charge or inspiration, connecting the brain with the heart on this subject, but still not think it is for me.

Gadlus Ha’adam, the greatness of man is inherent in every person. Hashem placed His Righteousness in man but gave man free choice to make calculations of how to feel and act. If a person does not make the right calculations, then only he will cause his own demise.

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim chapter 10 halacha 11 conclusion of footnote 31

Without going into too many details of each of the gemara’s the Chofetz Chofetz Chaim brought in his Be’er Mayim Chaim, there are a number of lessons that can be derived from these cases where at first glance it seems Rabbanim complained to others that they were personally insulted

  1.  It is very important for the listener to ask “how did this all start” to get a picture of what’s going on and it’s possible that the entire story could change. This is even if the gadol hador, the leader of the generation who is for sure honest is the one complaining, aw we saw with the stories of Rav Anan, in Keubos, who was a rabbi from the time of the gemara who Eliyahu Hanavi even spoke to.
  2. Various reasons why these cases from various gemaras were not considered lashon hara ranged from the fact that in one case (Kesubos 69a) Rav Anan was just asking advice, from Mar Ukva what could he have done wrong to be insulted in that way by Rav Huna.

Another time (Kesubos 79a) Rav Anan intent was for the sake of the truth to go to Mar Ukva the head of the court to stop Rav Nachman from mistakenly ripping up documents that Rav Anan thought were in fact valid and the point was for Mar Ukva to investigate deeper into the matter. If it’s possible to potentially make peace and judge favorably then it’s a mitzvah to listen to complaints in order to potentially resolve an issue.

Another reason to complain is if you know he won’t listen to your rebuke but he will listen to someone else’s rebuke as we saw (Kiddushin33a) Rebbe Shimon bar Rebbe complain to his father Rebbe how Rebbe Chiya didn’t treat him with proper respect as kavod haTorah would dictate and he knew Rebbe Chiya wouldn’t listen to him, so he asked his father, Rebbe Yehuda HaNasi, the leader of the generation to rebuke Rebbe Chiya.

It’s also possible in certain circumstances to believe honest rabbis since they are like witnesses and then rebuke the perpetrator as we saw in Bechoros 30a.

 3. Bottom line we have no proof that you are allowed to tell others of someone who accosted you personally in whatever way if it won’t amount to anything productive, but we have proofs that it is forbidden. The clearest example in conclusion was from Gitten 7a where Mar Ukva, the head if the court approached Rebbe Eliezer for advice of what to do about certain people who were threatening him and he had the power to turn them over to the non-Jewish authorities but he didn’t tell Rebbe Eliezer their names because he didn’t need to know them because Mar Ukva knew he could take care of the problem himself once he got the advice what to do. So, in this circumstance where re his life might have been in danger, he still didn’t spill any names then one must be very careful to not say anything wrong in these types of circumstances.

Posted on

Beshalach – It’s Not About What You Say but How You Say It

For Food for Thought in Spanish: Haga clic aquí para leer en español. Please share this with your Jewish Spanish speaking family, friends, and associates.
This week’s dvar Torah is SPONSORED BY RABBI DOVID VINITSKY AND CHILDREN IN LOVING MEMORY OF HIS UNCLE JOSEPH KATZ  Yosef ben Moshe Hakohen O”H. He was an intellectual who enjoyed learning mussar and was a reader of this weekly thought. May this dvar Torah bring merit to his soul, AND ALSO BRING COMFORT TO HIS WIFE OF 72 YEARS  AUNT ESTEL KATZ AND HIS CHILDREN.


In the beginning of this week’s Torah portion of Beshalach, Pharaoh sent the Jewish people out of Egypt.

It came to pass when Pharaoh let the people go… יזוַיְהִ֗י בְּשַׁלַּ֣ח פַּרְעֹה֘

The medrish Pesiksa Rabasi of Rav Kahana learns a very interesting halacha from this pasuk. “Our Rabbis taught that one who uses (literally send his hand שולח יד) an item deposited to him to watch by his friend, how could it be collected by the owner? This is what our Rabbis have taught us (in Bava Metzia daf 43): If one has used a deposit, Beis Shammai says he has to pay what is missing or extra. (For example, if a sheep was deposited to him full of wool and he sheared the wool, after he used the sheep he has to pay for the sheep and wool and if it grew more wool he has to pay the value of what was grown also.) Beis Hillel says he has to pay the value of what it was worth when stolen (whether it was full of wool or empty.) Rebbe Akiva says, he has to pay the value of its worth at the time of the claim against him, (meaning the value of the deposit when he was summoned to court.) And our Rabbis have taught us, that definitely anyone who has used the deposit of his friend is deserving of breaking his arm. Where do we learn this from? From Pharaoh, who the Jews were given to him as a deposit, and he wanted to use them, and Hashem ‘broke his arm’ as it says ‘Son of man, I have broken the arm of Pharaoh, the king of Egypt’ (Yechezkel 30:21). How do we know that the Jews were a deposit in his hand? For it had said ‘פָּקֹ֤ד פָּקַ֨דְתִּי֙ אֶתְכֶ֔ם ‘ (Shemos 3:16), (which literally means I have made you into a deposit) [and Hashem promised] and I will take them out (Brieshis 50:25). And because the Jews gave up on being redeemed, Hashem said, go tell them that just as the owner of a deposit when he wants to, he takes his item, so to you, when your time has come, I will immediately take you out of his hands. The Jews said to Hashem, ‘Master Of The Universe, see how he [Pharoah] denies your existence, and prevents us from leaving,’ as it says ‘I do not know Hashem, neither will I let Israel out’ (Shemos 5:2). Hashem said to them, I swear by your life that you will see the mouth who said who is Hashem will say Hashem The Righteous. The mouth that said ‘I don’t know Hashem’ will say pray to Hashem, and the mouth that said ‘neither will I let Israel out’ will in the end take everyone by their hand and send them away. How do we know this? As it says, ‘It came to pass when Pharaoh let the people go…’” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
It is interesting to note that Hashem refers to the Jewish people as a “deposited item.” One might think that is very belittling to refer to one’s precious children, a nation of human beings with such potential, as a thing or an object. As they say nowadays, this does not sound politically correct! Why did Hashem refer to the Jewish people in this manner? Yet on the contrary, Hashem was sending a very positive and reassuring message to the Jewish people, to inspire them to not give up hope. Just as they were brought to Egypt, as orchestrated by Hashem, they can very easily be taken out of Egypt, even if they were enslaved and mistreated, just like a person who deposited a precious item into the hands of someone to watch and is now picking it up. These are supposed to be words of encouragement, not insult; it is not what is said but how it is said.

In a similar vein, at the beginning of this medrish a person who uses an item deposited by him to just watch is equated to Pharoah, deserving of his arm being broken just as Pharaoh and his country were crushed by the ten plagues for misusing and abusing the Jews. The Rada”l comments that this person deserving of his arm being broken for using the object is like a thief with a high arm and the pasuk in Iyov suggests, “and the high arm shall be broken” (Iyov 38:15). The Rada”l concludes that one should look further into the matter in Sanhedrin 58b.

There, it discusses a person who raise his hand to strike his fellow. Reish Lakish says: One who raises his hand to strike another, even if he ultimately does not strike him, is called wicked…Rav Huna says: His hand should be cut off, as it is stated: “And the high arm shall be broken” (Job 38:15). If one habitually lifts his arm to strike others, it is better that it be broken. (as per Rashi there.) The Gemara relates that Rav Huna cut off the hand of a person who would habitually hit others. Rashi on the gemara there says that the Jewish court has a right to fine a person by beating or punishing him even if there isn’t precedence of the sort in the Torah in order to create a fence and deterrent in the matter. (Clcik here for Hebrew text.)
This person who used someone’s item that does not belong to him, granted he went against the owner’s trust and did something equivalent to stealing – but is he really as bad as Pharaoh, who brutally enslaved the Jews, tortured and killed many of them? Why are they equated?

Granted Pharaoh deserved and received a much, much more severe punishment for what he did; but it would seem from the reference the Rada”l makes to Sanhedrin that the reason why this guardian of the deposit is equated to Pharaoh, who was the guardian of Hashem’s deposit, is not because of what he did, but how he did it.

It would seem that this person had a habit to use other people’s things, which he was entrusted to watch, and that is why he was deserving to have his hand broken just as the person who is in the habit of even just threatening to strike others. Forming such a nasty habit, albeit that it is not punishable the same way as what Pharaoh, did but it is equated in severity to the acts that he did. This is because when a person forms a negative habit, he has convinced himself that he is doing nothing wrong, just as Pharaoh who resolved to believe he himself was a god and denied the Almighty King Of All Kings, had no intention of letting  the Jews go and needed to be severely punished in order to learn his lesson.

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim Chapter 10, Halacha 11, Footnote continued

The theme of this part of the footnote is that there is no excuse to speak lashon hara even if you are trying to save your name by blaming someone else even if it is true unless there is no other way to prove your innocence. But if you can prove you are not guilty without saying any names of who is wrong then it would be lashon hara to be name dropping.

There are a bunch of cases in the gemara that seems to be going against the halacha that you can’t speak out if you were personally involved. The first case brought was from gemara Brachos 5b Rav Huna complained to Rav Yehudah that his sharecropper snatched most of his wine. Rav Yehudah asked, why are you telling me this? It seems that Rav Huna wasn’t worried that anything more would be stolen, and he had no intention of the rabbis rebuking the sharecropper. The only thing was he wanted to clear his name because Rav Huna withheld part of what he was supposed to give to the sharecropper since the sharecropper stole his stuff. How was he able to do that?

We see from the gemara in Bava Basra 164b that Rebbe reprimanded his son Rebbe Shimon bar Rebbe when he brought him a get mikushar, special kind of divorce bill that was folded and sown together without a time by the date. Rebbe asked where is the time, his son responded maybe it’s inside the bill we should open it up. Rebbe opened it up and it wasn’t there. He looked at his son angrily and his son said I didn’t write it; Reb Yehuda Chaita wrote it. Rebbe responded, why are you speaking lashon hara? If that’s the case, why is Rav Huna any different, in both cases blaim is just being moved to someone else and the speaker is just proving, truthfully, his innocence.

However, there are two reason why Rav Huna was permitted to say what he said. First off Rashi alludes to the fact that this sharecropper was a known thief so it’s not lashon hara to blame him for what he did and second, Rebbe Shimon bar Rebbe did not have to tell his father who wrote, he could have just said I did not write it, but Rav Huna had no choice but to reveal what happened which obviously showed who was in the wrong.

In another episode in Gemara Erechin 16b, Chiya bar Rav complained to Shmuel in yeshiva that Rav Huna was bothering him. Rav Huna said he would stop. After Chiya bar Rav Rav Huna told Shmuel that he was doing something wrong to me. Shmuel asked why didn’t you let me know that beforehand? Rav Huna said I didn’t want the son of Rav to be embarrassed on my part. Rav Huna’a intent was to push off blame from himself without embarrassing Chiya bar Rav for the sake of the truth, but he had no choice for it to be known that Rav Chiya bar Rav had done something wrong.

However, to be allowed to prove your innocence at the expense of the revealing the guilty party when permissible one has to be very careful to meet the prerequisites that will be discussed in halacha 14, for if not, it is guaranteed he will stumble into speaking lashon hara. If you aren’t trying to take the blame off yourself but you aren’t trying to degrade anyone else, it is still lashon hara because someone is degraded whether it was your intention or not, even if it is true, as we saw in chapter 3 halacha 3.

Posted on

Bo – Like the Commitment of a Servant to His Master

This week’s Torah portion of Bo takes us through the final 3 plagues and what led up to the exodus from Egypt. This includes the first Pesach and the laws that relate to Pesach and the seder.

The medrish Pesiksa Rabasi of Rav Kahana expounds on one of his interpretations of a pasuk found in Tehillim (119:62), “At midnight I arise to thank You for Your righteous ordinances.” “In another interpretation “Your righteous ordinances” refers to the ordinances (judgements) that You brought on the Egyptians in Egypt and the righteousness You did with our forefathers in Egypt. For they only had two mitzvos, the blood of the Pesach and the blood of bris milah, therefore it says in Yechezkel (16:7) – ‘And I passed over you and saw you wallowing in your blood and I said to you, through your blood you shall gain life, through your blood you shall gain life.’ This refers to the blood of the Pesach offering and the blood of bris milah.”

The Maharz”u on this medrish, quoting a Medrish Rabba in Rus, explains that they didn’t have any mitzvos in hand to be involved with so that they could be redeemed. Therefore, in order to be redeemed, Hashem gave them 2 mitzvos, which were the blood of the Pascal lamb and the blood of circumcision… (click here for Hebrew text.)

This pasuk in Yechezkel is mentioned every year in the Haggadah, “’And numerous,’ as it is said: ‘I caused you to thrive like the plants of the field, and you increased and grew… I passed over you and saw you wallowing in your bloods, and I said to you `By your blood you shall live,’ and I said to you `By your blood you shall live!’ (Yechezkel 16:6,7). The Ritva commenting on the Haggadah references a Mechilta which says in the name of Rebbe Masia ben Cheresh that Hashem was saying “And I passed over you and saw you” and behold the beloved time had come when Hashem had sworn to Avraham Avinu that He would redeem his children, but they did not have any mitzvos to be involved in so that they can be redeemed… so Hashem gave them two, the mitzvah of Pesach and the mitzvah of milah so that they can be involved in them in order to be redeemed… So to the Rambam wrote that circumcision took place in Egypt, as it says “Any uncircumcised cannot eat from it.” Moshe Rabbeinu circumcised every one of them except for the tribe of Levi for they kept bris milah as it says “And your bris they observed.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)

It would seem from the Maharz”u on the Pesiksa Rabasi and the Ritva on the Haggadah that a prerequisite to being redeemed was that the Jews had to be actively involved in performing mitzvos, which is why  Hashem gave them circumcision and the Pascal Lamb as commandments to fulfill. However, the Ritva himself mentioned that they were already performing mitzvos, earlier in the Haggada, on the line, “’And he became there a nation’ this teaches that Israel was distinctive there.” The Ritva says this was them dressing in a distinct way, differently than the Egyptians, by wearing tzitzis. In fact, the Yalkut Shimone (172) mentions other mitzvos they were careful to fulfill, such as distancing from promiscuity, not speaking lashon hara, and not changing their Hebrew names. Indeed, the gemara in Yoma 28b says that during their entire stay in Egypt there was always a yeshiva open, learning the teachings their forefathers had taught going back generation to generation from Avraham Avinu.  Furthermore, the Pirkei diRebbe Eliezer, end of chapter 48, said that for 3 things the Jewish people deserved to be redeemed from Egypt: for not changing their language from Biblical Hebrew, not speaking lashon hara, and for believing in the uniqueness of Hashem (Yichud Hashem). If this is the case, then what does it mean that Hashem had to give them 2 mitzvos in order to redeem them? Is there a contradiction here in the Ritva and are the midrashim arguing with each other?

Of course, there is no contradiction in the Ritva and it would seem that the midrashim don’t have to be arguing. It is one thing to be performing mitzvos because it is a nice thing to do, or even the proper thing to do, things that might even have been a tradition from one’s ancestors. This steady performance might be even the ultimate cause of redemption. However, they were not commanded to perform those mitzvos. Bris milah and the Korban Pesach were the first mitzvos that Hashem had commanded the Jewish people to perform. It would seem that only because they observed what they were commanded to do were they able to go through with the redemption. It would not have been possible to redeem them without their observance of what was commanded of them. In fact, it would seem from the Pesiksa Rabasi that ideally, they should have first received the Torah so that they could observe all of the mitzvos, but out of Hashem’s righteousness He took them out after observing only two commandments.

Observing something that you feel obligated to do is a whole different level than performing a mitzvah because you just feel like it, or because you are in the mood, or it makes sense to you, or you just like it. The reason being is because it shows commitment and true respect to Hashem that you are observing it because He commanded you to do it, whereas a person who fulfills mitzvos just because, and when he feels like it, shows that he is committed to himself and his desires, not to Hashem. Therefore it makes sense, as a cause and effect, that the only way the Jews could have been redeemed by Hashem out of Egypt and taken under His wing, is if they showed they were willing to commit themselves to Him and follow whatever He commanded them to do.

This seems to be a rule by redemption in general, not specific to the redemption from Egypt. In order for us to be able to be redeemed from our current exile we have to have a strong commitment towards not only believing in Hashem but towards observing his mitzvos, His commandments, that will be the means of actually being redeemed once we deserve it. This should bring a whole new meaning for ourselves when we recite the first paragraph of Shema and accept the Yoke of Heaven and then the second paragraph of Shema when we accept the Yoke of Mitzvos observance.

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim chapter 10 halacha 11


The victim of a crime, like if someone stole from him, cheated him, or even just cursed him out, embarrassed him etc. cannot tell others of what happened to him even If he tries meeting the 7 prerequisites discussed at the beginning of the chapter because there is no way he can tell anyone what happened purely for the sake of the truth to teach people the severity of the crime or to apply pressure to convince the perpetrator repent, he can’t honestly do this because he has personal interests. If people accept what he says he’ll feel justified to tell others and blaspheme the perpetrator and feel good about it since he did a crime against him. There is an exception to this rule that will be discussed in halacha 13.

The Chofetz Chaim feels a need to go into much detail to explain why personal interests are a reason not to speak out since many people make the excuse that they have the right to speak up against criminals who have wronged them personally. Quoting Rabbeinu Yonah he points out that a single witness is only allowed to testify in court if it will be productive, for example it will force the litigant to swear so that the truth will hopefully come out. But one who testifies about what happened to himself in court cannot force and oath because he is invalidated to be a witness for himself, if he testifies in court it is lashon hara and there is a separate sin for the judges to accept what he said, called “lo sisa shema shav” this prohibition will apply if he spoke to the judge before the court case about what happened, even what he says is true, and certainly if he just tells anyone else what happened to him it is lashon hara and anyone who accepts it even if it is true is accepting lashon hara which is forbidden. The only exception would be if a messenger of the court was sent to bring someone to court and he was cursed out and got a refusal to come to court, for example when Nadav and Avihu refused to show up before Moshe then the messenger of the court is allowed to tell them he was cursed out, as mentioned in Moed Katan 16a. The Ram”a in Shulchan Aruch in Choshen Mishpat 228:1 poskins that if someone insults you, you can insult him back halachically (though it is good character to stay silent) but that is only in private, that does not mean you can go reveal to others that someone insulted you.

Posted on

Vaera – It’s Hard to Overcome a Handicap


In the very beginning of this week’s Torah portion of Vaera, Moshe was instructed by Hashem to give encouragement to the Jewish people upon the upcoming redemption out of servitude and bondage and inheritance of the Land of Canaan. “God spoke to Moshe, and He said to him, ‘I am the Lord. I appeared to Avraham, to Yitzchak, and to Yaakov with [the name] Almighty God, but [with] My name YHWH, I did not become known to them. And also, I established My covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their sojournings in which they sojourned. And also, I heard the moans of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians are holding in bondage, and I remembered My covenant.’ Therefore, say to the children of Israel, ‘I am the Lord, and I will take you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will save you from their labor, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments. And I will take you to Me as a people, and I will be a God to you, and you will know that I am the Lord your God, Who has brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. I will bring you to the land, concerning which I raised My hand to give to Avraham, to Yitzchak, and to Yaakov, and I will give it to you as a heritage; I am the Lord’ ” (Shemos 6:2-8).

The next pasuk says that Moshe related what Hashem told him to the Jewish people, but they did not accept what he said. “Moshe spoke thus to the children of Israel, but they did not hearken to Moshe because of shortness of breath and because of [their] hard labor” (Shemos 6:9).
Why didn’t the Jewish people accept such encouraging words? The pasuk states two reasons: because of shortness of breath, which the Ralbag attributes to Moshe, as will be explained shortly, and because of their hard labor, which the Mesillas Yesharim in chapter 2 explains, “In truth, this is one of the cunning strategies of the evil inclination, to relentlessly burden people’s hearts with his service so as to leave them no room to reflect and consider which road they are taking. For he knows that if they were to put their ways to heart even the slightest bit, certainly they would immediately begin to feel regret for their deeds. The remorse would go and intensify within them until they would abandon the sin completely. This is similar to the wicked Pharaoh’s advice saying, “intensify the men’s labor…” (Ex. 5:9). His intention was to leave them no time whatsoever to oppose him or plot against him. He strove to confound their hearts of all reflection by means of the constant, incessant labor.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)

The Jewish people were working so hard that they did not have the time or brainpower to think about and digest what Moshe was telling them. However, the Ralbag adds that if not for Moshe’s “shortness of breath” then they would have accepted what Moshe had told them. What does this mean? The lesson the Ralbag learns from pasuk 9 is that when a person wants to express something to other people, he should formulate his words with the purpose of convincing the person of what he desires of them, using fine and flowery speech so that he will be pleasing to listen to. Without this, it is possible one will not get what he requests, even if it is something which would benefit them (the listeners). We see this from the fact that Hashem commanded Moshe to tell the Jews all that He told him, and most of it was for their own good. Indeed, it was convincing enough that they should have trusted his words, but still the Jews did not listen to Moshe because of the “shortness of breath” of Moshe that he didn’t put in the effort to place his words in an orderly and complete fashion so that they would sound pleasing and believable. (Click here for Hebrew text.)

The Ralbag, in his verse-by-verse commentary, adds that Moshe had spoken directly to the Jews without Aharon as intermediary as indicated in pasuk 6, “Therefore, say to the children of Israel.” Then Hashem told Moshe to speak to Pharaoh without Aharon as intermediary, “But Moshe spoke before the Lord, saying, ‘Behold, the children of Israel did not hearken to me. How then will Pharaoh hearken to me, seeing that I am of impeded lips?’” What Moshe meant by “impeded lips” was that his speech was closed, meaning that the gates of speech were closed in front of him like a person sentenced to be speechless. Therefore, in the next pasuk it writes, “So the Lord spoke to Moshe and to Aharon,” all that He commanded to say to the Jews and Pharaoh. The point being that Hashem spoke to Moshe to in turn speak to Aharon, and Aharon would be the intermediary for the messenger of Hashem to speak on his behalf. (Click here for Hebrew text.)
We must put into perspective what transpired. It is well known that Moshe had some form of verbal handicap, received when he burned his lips on hot coals at the age of 3 when Pharaoh tested him to see if he could be trusted in the palace (Shemos Rabba 1:26). From that day Moshe had a speech impediment. Moshe originally objected to accepting leadership over the Jewish people when he spoke to Hashem at the burning bush, with one of his excuses being that he had a speech impediment and Hashem told Moshe that Aharon would speak for him. Hashem evidently still insisted in the beginning that Moshe would speak to both the Jews and Pharaoh. Moshe tried with the Jews, it didn’t work, and before going to Pharaoh he told Hashem ‘I can’t do this,’ and Hashem acquiesced and brought Aharon in as an intermediary.

Obviously, Moshe had the potential to speak eloquently and get the message clearly across; if not, Hashem would not have wasted His time. So what went wrong? It is actually a bit shocking, if one thinks about it! Moshe had the playbook right in front of him. Hashem told him exactly what to tell the Jewish people. He was like a teleprompter of sorts for Moshe. Moshe of course had the care and desire to tell the Jewish people that they would be seeing salvation soon, don’t worry this terrible exile, servitude will end very soon, and you will be redeemed in exemplary fashion. He cared so much for his people and only wanted the best for them, so why couldn’t he muster up the ability to give over the message with all its flowery detail, excitement, and luster that would energize them to believe in and accept their exciting fate?

It would seem, on some level, though he believed completely in Hashem, accepted his leadership role, and was completely faithful and caring for the Jewish people, but because of the handicap he had, on some miniscule level it effected his confidence in formulating what he was supposed to say in an eloquent and orderly fashion to the degree that he felt hindered and speechless. That is why he told Hashem that he had “impeded lips” and in fact Moshe was “short of breath” when speaking to the Jews. Hashem gave Moshe the chance to overcome his handicap on his own, but Moshe felt he was not ready to, and without any qualms Hashem gave Aharon the job of being Moshe’s mouthpiece.

Still in all, Moshe Rabbeinu was the greatest leader of all time and the first Medrish Rabba at the beginning of Devarim says that through learning and teaching Torah his speech impediment was eventually healed. This is the power of Torah!

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim chapter 10 footnotes on halacha 10

When the Chofetz Chaim said that if a person consistently is transgressing a prohibition between man and G-d which is known to everyone to be against Jewish law and he is doing it on purpose this means it has become part of his way of life, not a sin that he’s done once or twice. If you only saw him do it once or twice then you have to assume maybe he repented but if this is something which is known as part of his lifestyle and he is purposely doing it and it6a sin which everyone knows is a problem, for example every Jew, even those non-observant know that shellfish, pig, and milk and meat together are against Jewish Law so if a person is known to go out to eat at McDonalds and order a bacon cheeseburger all the time you are allowed to speak out against him as long as you meet the 7 prerequisites and speak out in public in front of at least 3 people so that word will spread and no one will suspect him of flattery. One way a sin perpetrated against his fellow man like stealing or hurting someone is different than a sin between man and Hashem is that for the most part besides maybe stealing, if a person is bullying someone physically, emotionally, or monetarily he usually does it because he thinks the victim deserves it. Many times, he has excuses and justifications why he is doing what he is doing he is not outright sinning maliciously just to spite Hashem therefore the reason why you are allowed to speak out against him is for the sake of justice to protect the innocent and the victims and resolve the problems the perpetrator caused if he hasn’t already fixed the issues himself. The perpetrator is still considered “part of your nation” and all the mitzvos that apply to a fellow Jew still apply to him like “Love your neighbor as yourself ” or “Don’t hate your brother in your heart”. However, a person who is habitually transgressing a sin between man and Hashem on purpose which everyone knows is wrong like eating bacon cheeseburgers then he has left the fold and is not considered part of “your nation”. For this reason, one is allowed to speak lashon hara about home, insult him and does not even have a mitzvah to rebuke him since the Torah says by these three mitzvos that who you speak to must be considered part of “your nation”. If a person decides to purposefully leave the fold and not adhere to what everyone knows is wrong, then he does not have to be treated the same way as everyone else. By speaking out against and speaking down at him that might pressure him to repent. According to Jewish law you don’t even have to rebuke him directly because at this stage of the game he has the same status as a scoffed who you can assume does not listen to rebuke but it is still a mitzvah and a nice thing to do to try to engage him personally and convince him to change his ways and maybe you wouldn’t have to speak out against him to apply pressure, but there is no obligation to rebuke such a person.

Posted on

Shemos – Do You Really Care?

For Food for Thought in Spanish: Haga clic aquí para leer en español. Please share this with your Jewish Spanish speaking family, friends, and associates.

This Dvar Torah was gleaned from a shmuz I heard many years ago, at the turn of this century, from Rav Moshe Chait zt”l.
This week’s torah portion of Shemos, begins the second book of the Torah, describing the growth of Moshe Rabbeinu. “The child grew up, and she brought him to Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became like her son. She named him Moshe, and she said, ‘For I drew him from the water.’ Now it came to pass in those days that Moshe grew up and went out to his brothers and looked into their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian man striking a Hebrew man of his brothers” (Shemos 2:10, 11).

The Yalkut Shimone (167) observes that it says about Moshe in the pesukim that he “grew up,” twice. The first one referring to physical growth and the second is gadlus, spiritual growth, when he went out amongst his brothers.
The Ramban on pasuk 11 says on the words “and went out to his brothers” that they told him he is Jewish, so he had a yearning to see what was going on with his brothers.

What was the gadlus, greatness, in the second “growing up? He went out to his brothers, meaning he was concerned about others; that is true greatness!
What does caring about others imply? The Medrish Rabba wonders when the Torah says “he grew up” doesn’t everyone grow up? The medrish answers that Moshe Rabbeinu grew supernaturally. When he was 5 years old, he had the physical body of a 15-year-old. With his maturity he “looked into their burdens,” as the pasuk literally says. Shouldn’t it have said “he saw their burdens?” Rather what the Torah is teaching us is that Moshe Rabbeinu investigated into the matter to see what is going on and he cried. He wished he could do something for them because of all the hard work with the cement; he would therefore lend his shoulder to actually help every one of them.

Moshe Rabbeinu didn’t just stand by and say it’s a nebuch, it’s a shame, he actually got involved. The idea of caring isn’t just to feel for them or even to shed a tear, but to do something. The medrish continues and remarks that Hashem said, ‘You looked out for the Jewish People, I then will look upon you and will assign you as leader over them.’

The Alter miSlobodka, Rav Nosson Tzvi Finkel zt”l, said that a sigh after hearing bad news is worse because instead of that reaction, one could have reacted in another way, maybe to do something about it. If one has a personal problem and he doesn’t just sigh but does something about it, but when it comes to others, he just sighs, that shows the level or lack of maturity in a person.

Rav Mordechai Gifter zt”l, Rosh Yeshiva of Telz Cleveland, when learning with someone, if he heard a crum svara,  logic that did not sound right, he would get on his case and “start pelting him.” He said he did this in order to help the yeshiva guy because he couldn’t handle just standing by when the student would be making such a mistake. This shows how much he cared!

Rav Dovid Leibowitz zt”l, (one of the prime students of the Alter miSlobodka, founder of Yeshiva Chofetz Chaim, and rebbe to Rav Moshe Chait zt”l), when he heard that one of his student’s father was bleeding ulcers he ran to the bima and started saying Tehillim. He was flowing with tears and put his whole being, and all his kishkes into his prayers. These are examples of greatness in caring for others!

Posted on

Sefer Chofetz Chaim Chapter 10 halachos 9, 10

Last week we had said that if a person is speaking out against someone who hurt someone else, assuming he meets the 7 prerequisites he still can only speak out in a group of at least 3 so word will go out and he does not look like he’s trying to flatter the sinner, unless he is afraid of repercussions. Today the Chofetz Chaim said that if a person is known to be someone who doesn’t care what anyone else says and is known to be always honest then he can speak out against the perpetrator even in private, once the perpetrator is willing to listen to rebuke because everyone knows he’s telling the truth and not flattering the sinner.

There is a difference between a person who you should not rebuke beforehand if you know he will go on the defensive and not even give into pressure from others in the future, and if a person is known to always be stubborn and will never listen to anyone then it is still worth it to rebuke him first before spreading the word of his evil ways because maybe he’ll have a change of heart this time.

We’ll see in more detail next week that the same applies to one who transgressed a sin between man and Hashem, but besides meeting the 7 prerequisites there is 3 other criteria needed to speak out against him. 1. He is constantly committing this sin. 2. He is doing it on purpose. 3. It’s the type of sin everyone knows is forbidden.