Category: Food for Thought

זכרון ציפה תרצה – The Food for Thought Archives in blessed memory of Celia Rosenberg a”h

Posted on

Shelach – All Mitzvos Done at Once


 The maftir aliyah of this week’s Torah portion of Shelach is the third paragraph of Krias Shema, the portion that speaks of the mitzva of tzitzis. There are many gemaras that say wearing tzitzis is equivalent to all 613 mitzvos (see Menachos daf 43, Nedarim daf 25 and Shevuos daf 29). Rashi here (Bamidbar 15:39) gives one explanation as to why this is so: since the gematria (numerical value) of the word tzitzis is 600 and there are 8 strings and 5 knots for each corner of the garment, which equals up to 613.

However, only the Sifri says that “‘and you shall see it and you shall remember’ refers to the fact that whoever fulfills the mitzva of tzitzis is attributed as if he fulfilled all the mitzvos. And isn’t it a kal vachomer (fortiori), for if one fulfills the mitzva of tzitzis it’s as if he fulfilled all the mitzvos, all the more so for fulfilling any of the other mitzvos of the Torah.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
Besides the fact that the Sifri is the only place which mentions this kal vachomer, the logic requires an explanation. If you say, like Rashi, that there is some esoteric explanation which makes wearing tzitzis equivalent to fulfilling all the mitzvos because the reminder of the 613 mitzvos are constantly on one’s body, that can be understood. But why would fulfilling any other mitzva like eating kosher, putting on tefillin, blowing shofar, etc. have an even more logical conclusion that it is like performing all of them?
The Raavad asks the flip side of the coin; that if there really isn’t anything special about the mitzva of tzitzis (ignoring the esoteric hint to all the mitzvos) then why is tzitzis any different than any other mitzva? The suggestion of a kal vachomer sounds like tzitzis is an inferior mitzva to the rest of the mitzvos; why aren’t they all equal? The Raavad answers that tzitzis is a cheaper mitzvah to fulfill because you are anyways buying clothing, and only two strings of techeiles (special bluish string) are required. So, if one fulfills the cheaper mitzva of tzitzis, and it’s credited as if he fulfills all the mitzvos, then all the more so if he fulfills more expensive mitzvos he’s accredited to fulfilling all the mitzvos! (We can’t really relate to this because we buy separate garments which have 4 corners and put tzitzis on them, but they used to only wear four-cornered garments that required the tzitzis, and if not, they would not wear tzitzis). However, this might explain why tzitzis is different, and in a way inferior to all other mitzvos to then warrant a kal vachomer; but why would fulfilling one mitzva be equivalent to fulfilling all the mitzvos, besides the esoteric reason which only applies to tzitzis?

The Netziv gives his own explanation of the Sifri, “Whoever fulfills the mitzva of tzitzis by seeing and remembering to take action, which is the main mitzva of tzitzis, for it was only given as a sign (אות וסימן), it’s as if he fulfilled all the mitzvos, for by just acknowledging the requirement to perform [all the mitzvos, Hashem] equates it as he actually fulfilled them. So just as one fulfills the mitzva of tzitzis which is just preparation and a sign to do [all the other] mitzvos, then all the more so (קל וחומר,) by fulfilling any other mitzva in the Torah which are the main parts of Torah and mitzvos then surely if one performs even one of them appropriately it’s equated as if he performed all the mitzvos because one action causes many more mitzvos to be performed as we see earlier on paragraph 6.”
There the Sifri says, “Rebbe said, don’t be happy over just one mitzva, for in the end it will cause many mitzvos to be done. And if one transgresses a sin don’t be worried on just that one for it causes many more sins to be done as the mishna in Pirkei Avos (chapter 4) says ‘one mitzva causes another mitzva and one sin causes another sin.'” The Netziv, expounding on an Avos DiRebbe Nosson which is similar to this Sifri, explains that if one performs one mitzva with joy and a good heart, and doesn’t regret doing that mitzva, then it will inspire him to fulfill more mitzvos in the end. Therefore one shouldn’t just be happy over that first mitzvah, but feel joyous over the fact that he is preparing himself to fulfill many mitzvos. On the other hand, if one transgresses one sin and doesn’t regret it, then he should expect to transgress many more sins because he is setting himself up to be committing more sins with his lack of care. The Netziv takes this one step further based on Rav Chaim Volozhin in his sefer Nefesh Hachaim (perek 1) which says that when one fulfills a mitzva it inspires him to get to the source of the matter, it’s holiness, just like the nature of anything to be attracted towards its roots and source. In this way he will continue to sanctify and purify himself. The same in the opposite direction; by doing one sin the spirit of impurity will wrap around him and drive him towards the source of sin, which will cause him to continue in that path. (If he doesn’t proactively stop himself from that down word spiral; the first step being regret.) (Click here for Hebrew text.)
We see from the Netziv that once one properly fulfills a mitzva with true joy and a good heart, then with this attitude or spirit one can get into the mode of doing more mitzvos. It’s the impetus of the first mitzva done correctly which allows him to do more and that is why that one mitzva is equated as if he performed all the mitzvos in the Torah. So if the mitzva of tzitzis, which is just a sign and a means to mentally prepare one to fulfill the rest of the mitzvos, is equated to already fulfilling all the mitzvos by starting off with this one, then all the more so with any other mitzva. They are not just preparations, but are the main part of the Torah. If  it’s done correctly then it will spark the motivation to continue to perform more mitzvos and is credited as if all the mitzvos were done as soon as the first one is fulfilled in its entirety.

But one has to appreciate the complexity and profundity of starting on the right track. To be done correctly with pure, positive, and happy intentions, one has to be fully motivated and committed. He has to overlook any monetary impediments, as the Raavad points out, because a life of fulfilling Torah and mitzvos takes a lot of self-sacrifice, monetarily, physically, and mentally. To have the unwavering resolve to believe and trust in Hashem that by doing His will in fulfilling the guidebook for mankind, the Torah, it is the best thing for every single individual in the world. This is no simple task. But when one does have the proper attitude and frame of mind, then everything flows in the right direction. Hashem, out of His Great love and compassion, who can see into the depths of our heart, sees this and rewards us for fulfilling His entire Torah, when it all starts, even before the rest of it happens.



Click here to watch another class on Sefer Maalos HaMiddos chapter on humility.
Passcode: YJWh1V6@

Click here to watch a different shmuz on Parshas Shelach
Passcode: C2XzGp=4

Posted on

Bihaaloscha – Law and Order


 One of the hallmark attributes and the heritage of the mussar of Kelm heavily emphasized was the attribute of seder, orderliness. Indeed, every chapter that discusses a character trait in the Sefer Cheshbon HaNefesh begins with a statement that summarized that chapter. By the Trait of Order (section 3) the summary statement is: “All your actions and possessions should be orderly – each and every one in a set place and at a set time. Let your thoughts always be free to deal with that which lies ahead of you.”

The Ralbag in his Toaliyos elaborates on the importance of seder, orderliness, in this week’s Torah portion of Bihaaloscha. Before there were cell phones and the internet, sending out alarms and alerts for everyone’s information, the Jews traveling in the desert would blow trumpets to ensured that everyone would simultaneously receive the proper signals and instructions on what to do.

The Torah states:

“If they blow a teki’ah on one of them, the princes, the leaders of Israel’s thousands, must convene before you. When you blow a teki’ah and a teru’ah, the divisions encamped to the east must set out. When you blow a teki’ah and a teru’ah a second time, the divisions encamped to the south must travel. They must blow a teru’ah for beginning their traveling, but when assembling the assembly, you must blow a teki’ah but not a teru’ah” 

(Bamidbar 10:4-7).

The tekiah and teruah of this passage are the same as the blasts of those names that are sounded on Rosh Hashanah: tekiah was a long clear blast of the trumpet, and teruah was a series of short, staccato blasts. When both trumpets sounded a tekiah, it signaled the entire nation to assemble at the Mishkan. Such a blast from a single trumpet summoned the leaders. A teruah blast would signal to the three tribe formations that they were to begin their journey.
 The lesson the Ralbag learns from these pesukim is that it is appropriate for a leader to organize his matters in a fashion such that when he wants his ministers to come before him, or the whole nation to gather, he makes sure that the message will be understood altogether, at once, so that no jealousy will develop amongst them. This was facilitated through the powerful sounds that were heard far and near through the trumpet blasts. If sometimes they would call only some and then other times call the others, there would be a difference in the type of blasts, so that those being summoned would sense through the type of blast who is being summoned. This is an obvious way to keep things orderly. This is why there was one tekiah blown to summon the leaders, and there wasn’t any teruah, but when the entire nation was called together there would be two tekiahs and [sometimes] teruahs. (Click here for Hebrew text.)
Why would differentiating between trumpet blasts as a signal of who is being summoned and instructions as to what to do calm jealousy among people? It’s logical to suggest that the leaders were summoned more often than the populace, because they were leaders and needed advice in governance from the Supreme Leader, Moshe Rabbeinu. Wouldn’t the people often hearing the summoning of the leaders and everyone knowing about it create more jealousy if they weren’t brought together to see the leader, Moshe Rabbeinu as often? Wouldn’t less publicity, like private messengers sending word of who should come to Moshe Rabbeinu, be more subtle and cause less jealousy? And even if people see some people starting to go and are wondering why they weren’t invited, they could figure out that their invitation might be coming as soon as the messenger gets to him. So why should this process of trumpeting work to avoid jealousy?

It must be that an official sense of orderhas a calming effect on people, and they feel more at ease when they see and understand exactly what’s going on in an official and orderly fashion. That is the effect the attribute of order can have on people.
 We see this further a few pesukim later, when the Torah speaks about the order of the Jews while traveling in the desert. They didn’t travel the same way as the encampment, in a square surrounding the Mishkan, which was in the middle with three tribes at each side. Rather, they got into formation with Yehuda and his two other tribes in the front, the Mishkan was taken apart and its parts were carried by the Levite families of Gershon and Merari after them, then came the tribe of Reuvain and his two tribes in back of them, with the Levite family of Kehas carrying the vessels of the Mishkan. In back of them was the tribe of Ephraim and his two tribes, and finally at the end of the line traveled the tribe of Dan and his two tribes (See pesukim 11-28). The lesson the Ralbag learns from here is that it is befitting for a leader of a nation or army to have his actions orderly, so that no strife will occur amongst his followers. This is why there was an exact order to how the Jewish People traveled and encamped in the desert. Who would travel first, who would travel second, and who would travel third, because with this order, it ensured a scarcity of quarrels.
 The square encampment around the Mishkan and the line-up of tribes while travelling was designed to ensure order and keep the peace. But why make it so official? People don’t always like to live around family; they might want friends from another tribe as neighbors. Also, to reshape into a line from a square when traveling is a whole to-do. How do all these rules ensure less quarreling in the camp?

It must be that the sense of official order has such a calming effect that to have this setup and these rules is helpful. We see from all this how important the trait of seder, having order, is both practically and specifically as designed to combat the negative attribute of jealousy and infighting.

Posted on

Naso – Defining What a Blessing Is



 We just finished the Yom Tov of Shavuos and we merited to have birkas Kohanim, the priestly blessings, showered upon us by the Kohanim. Yet, what actually is a blessing? How does it affect our lives?

The source for Birkas Kohanim is in this week’s Torah portion of Naso; there are 3 stanzas: “May Hashem bless you and keep you. May Hashem shine His countenance upon you and be gracious unto you. May Hashem lift His countenance to you and establish peace for you” (Bamidbar 6:24-26). The Ibn Ezra on pasuk 24 defines a blessing as “an addition.” This means a blessing is wishing for the one receiving the blessing to have more than what is natural or normal to attain, or an addition to what one currently is in possession of. Rav Shimshon Rephael Hirsch defines a bracha as something that “denotes a condition of unhindered progressive development, of progressive prosperity.” (Parenthetically when we make a blessing and say “Baruch Ata Hashem…” Chazal say what we are saying is “You, Hashem, are the source all blessing…” see page 13 in Sefer Avodah Shebilev by Rav Alexander Ziskind Sternbach.)

The Sifri (144) has many interpretations of what these blessings are for. The Malbim, within “the lenses” of the Sifri, places the priestly blessings into three categories, good in what can be (1) seen and felt in this physical world. (2) in the spiritual realm, and (3) the connection between the soul and the body.
 For example, the Sifri says “‘Hashem will bless you’ with the blessing explicitly expressed in the Torah, ‘Blessed will you be in the city, blessed you will be in the field… blessed shall be your fruit basket and kneading bowl… blessed shall you be when you come… all these blessing will come upon you and overtake you when you will listen to the voice of Hashem your G-D’ (Devarim 28:2-6). Hashem will bless you with assets and will guard your assets. Rebbe Nosson says one will be blessed with assets and his body will be guarded. Rebbe Yitzchak says you will be guarded from the evil inclination.” The Raavad, wondering what is the logic behind this three-way argument, says that Rebbe Nosson holds that if one is given assets, and he cannot guard them, it is not actually a blessing. The first opinion holds that even if one can’t physically take care of his assets, if there is a blessing on their safekeeping, that in and of itself is a blessing. Rebbe Yitzchak learns “guarding” from “guarding,” and just as in Mishley 3:23 “And you shall guard your leg,” which means that you will be guarded from being entrapped by being ensnared by the evil inclination. (Click here for Hebrew text.)
If a blessing is continuous prosperity, and is what is best for the person, then Rebbe Nosson and Rebbe Yitzchak have pretty compelling arguments. For according to Rebbe Nosson, if one isn’t healthy and cannot fully appreciate his property then  what is the point of having it? And according to Rebbe Yitzchak, if the property is too much and gets in the way of serving Hashem properly, i.e. the yetzer hara overwhelms the person with physical desires or any other bad character traits which are connected to having lots of assets, then what does the first opinion hold? Why is the blessing of a lot of property, which has self-preservation, have any worth to it? It must be that he holds that in any event it is still a blessing. The very fact that one has an abundance of assets to take care of himself and his family, that can be guarded and preserved for good use, is a blessing. This in of itself, one should appreciate in whatever state of health one is in, and he, on his own terms should go through the struggle to work on himself to ensure that he uses the blessing he receives properly, according to Hashem’s will.
 In the second bracha, “Hashem shall enlighten His countenance upon you,” according to one interpretation in the Sifri means, “that this shine is from the light of Torah.” The Raavad comments on this that one should merit Torah, and his rulings and teachings should be enlightened and not shrouded in darkness. 
If you think about this, it is quite astounding! Why should there be a need for a blessing so that the light of Torah will shine through anyone and be accepted by others? The Torah by itself is so pure and holy, given by Hashem, Himself, to His beloved children. Indeed, it is of natural importance and respect, being that it was created 2000 years before the world was created and is the blueprint of creation and the handbook for mankind. So why would it need any additional blessings to help people spread the light of Torah? The truth of the matter is that although the Torah itself is pure and holy and very compelling when understood in a vacuum, yet  the blessings are geared towards the vessels of those who teach it and spread it. For we are just human beings who are imperfect and might not be good at spreading the light of Torah and penetrating those that should be learning it, and may not be answering questions in the clearest possible way. So, in our frail imperfect state, there could indeed be “darkness,” so that people might not accept what we have to say regarding Torah issues. Therefore a blessing that our rulings and teaching be accepted and enlightening to others is a very reasonable and important blessing.
 Lastly, the third blessing concludes, “and place upon you peace.” The Sifri quotes another argument, Rebbe Chanina Sgan HaKohanim, who says ‘and peace shall be placed upon you in your home.’ Rebbe Nosson says ‘peace of the kingdom.’ The Raavad explains that Rav Chanina Sgan HaKohanim held that shalom bayis, peace in the household, is greater than with every other person, since it’s a constant day and night and it’s a different type of peace than with other people. Whereas Rebbe Nosson held that peace within the house is inclusive with getting along with all people, and therefore having peace within one’s environment, one’s country is most important. (Click here for Hebrew text.)
Rebbe Nosson’s view seems to make a lot of sense. If shalom bayis is included in shalom malchus, then why not have a blessing which is all inclusive. But even if they are different, wouldn’t one think that having peace and serenity in one’s country, not worrying about violence in one’s neighborhood, ceasing antisemitism and terror, is a more important blessing for one’s safety and peace of mind than shalom bayis? Yet Rebbe Chanina Sgan HaKohanim says that shalom bayis, having love, peace and tranquility within one’s immediate family and especially with one’s wife, because it’s a constant and consistent situation day in and day out, is a greater blessing than dealing with everyone else around you in the outside world. But it’s more than that. It’s a whole different dynamic of peace, which is held to be on a different plane than world peace, and is therefore judged differently and can’t be lumped together with everyone and everything else.

As one “counts his blessings,” it’s worthwhile to be sure he has his priorities straights. There is a lot here to contemplate, about what is more of a blessing and what is not.


Good Shabbos,
Rabbi Dovid Shmuel Milder

Posted on

Bamidbar – On Their Own Merits


There is so much to be learned from every corner of the Torah; even from letters that aren’t there but logically should be there. Case in point, found in this week’s Torah portion of Bamidbar, the Baal HaTurim makes an interesting observation regarding when the Torah enumerates each tribe. The tribes were set up into 4 units on each side of the Mishkan, and the leading tribe of each side were mentioned first with its census and then it says “and those with them ‘this tribe etc.'” “and ‘that tribe etc.'” But between the tribe of Yissachar and Zevulun the word “and” was not used to differentiate between those two tribes.

The Baal HaTurim (2:7) says “[The Torah states] ‘tribe of Zevulun’ and did not say ‘and the tribe’ as it said by all the other ones, because Zevulun financially supported Yissachar (See Breishis Rabba 99:9). And I saw in the Medrish Tanchuma (not found in our editions) the reason why it doesn’t say “and the tribe of Zevulun” as it says by all the [other tribes] is because it is coming to teach you that Zevulun was involved in business and would feed Yissachar [who was involved in Torah learning] therefore the pasuk did not make him (Zevulun) look like he is subordinate to him (Yissachar), like saying his (Zevulun) reward is only as great as his (Yissachar). So to it says in Mishley (3:18) ‘It’s a tree of life to those who grasp it, and its supporters are praiseworthy.’ It also writes in Koheles (7:12) ‘For the shade of wisdom is within the shade of money’, therefore they were mentioned within one tribe as if it says, ‘Yissachar the tribe of Zevulun’.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
 The famous Yissachar and Zevulun relationship. The tribe of Zevulun lived by the seaports in the Land of Israel and were successful businessmen. They also supported the tribe of Yissachar, who were known to be sitting and learning Torah all day, delving into the depths and profundities of Hashem’s handbook for mankind, which is the blueprints of creation. On a simple and logical level this seems to mean that there was a “pact” made that Zevulun would get an equal amount of reward for Yissachar’s Torah study, for without Zevulun’s support Yissachar could not have put a full effort into their studies. This is no small thing, as Chaza”l famously say that learning Torah is equated to all the other mitzvos (תלמוד תורה כנגד כולם). Just to paint a picture of how much reward even learning one word of Torah is, the Alter of Kelm said that it is worth it for all the pain and suffering that is experienced in birthing and raising a child and then whatever pain and suffering that child goes through as he grows up and goes through life until the day he dies just so that he can answer “baruch Hu umvaruch Shmo” even just once. And saying “amen,” even just once in one’s lifetime, is one thousand times better than “baruch Hu umvaruch Shmo.” Answering “amen yehei Shmei rabba umivorach…” is a thousand times greater than answering “amen,” and one Torah saying is one thousand times greater than a “amen yehei Shmei Rabba etc.” (See Shma Bni, by Rav Binyamin Luban note 570).

Now imagine hours and hours of learning per day how much reward that must be? Unfathomable!! Yet the Baal HaTurim says that one who supports Torah isn’t getting the reward of the Torah learners he is supporting. Why not? It seems unconceivably vast and worthwhile?

It would seem that Hashem wanted the supporters of Torah to not feel subordinate to the Torah learners, but rather the support of Torah learning is independently rewarded for doing just that, supporting Torah. That mitzvah by itself has its own value, which might even be on par if not in a sense greater than the reward for Torah learning. As the famous pasuk quoted in Mishlei, which we say whenever we put back the Torah, concludes: “and its supporters are praiseworthy.” Whereas by those who learn Torah, the beginning of the pasuk only says “It is a Tree of Life to those who grasp it.” If anything, it’s even possibly inferable from the end of the Baal HaTurim that the Torah learners are subordinate in a sense to their supporters, as he concludes that the Torah should be read as if they are one tribe, “Yissachar the tribe of Zevulun,” under Zevulun’s banner.

Praiseworthy are the supporters of Torah! This is something great to think about after seeing a glimpse how precious Torah learning is!

Posted on

Behar/Bechukosai – Highlighted Addition


It is well known throughout Chaza”l that the way Hashem enforces reward and punishment is measure for measure. An incredible example of this is depicted in the 7th chapter of Tanna D’vei Eliyahu Rabba. Another related factor to take into account is “The measure that a person measures is the way Hashem measures him.” This is elaborated upon in the 11th chapter of Tanna D’vei Eliyahu Rabba.
We find this system of reward and punishment further emphasized and explained in this week’s double portion of Behar and Bechukosai. The Torah portion of Behar begins with discussing the sabbatical and jubilee years (שמיטה ויובל). Then in perek 25, pasuk 17 it discusses the negative commandment of not hurting people with words in personal relationships (לא תונו איש את עמיתו). Then in pasuk 18 it states: “You shall perform My decrees, and observe My laws and perform them; then you shall dwell securely on the land. “
The Chizkuni on pasuk 18 says that “performing My decrees” refers to the mitzvos that have to do with The Land [of Israel] that should be observed during shmittah and yovel. An example of “observing My laws” is this mitzva in pasuk 17 of not aggrieving your fellow Jew. The end of the pasuk is teaching us that the reward for observing Hashem’s mitzvos is that we will not have any fear of being exiled from The Land of Israel. (Click here for Hebrew text.)

In the beginning of the second Torah portion, which is the conclusion of the Book of Vayikra, Bechukosai, it writes: “If you follow My decrees and observe My laws and perform them; then I will provide your rains in their time, and the land will give its produce, and the trees of the field will give its fruit. Your threshing will last until satiety, and you will dwell securely in your land” (Vayikra 26:3-5). The Chizkuni explains, that “if you do what I have put upon you to do, then even the clouds, the land, and the trees that were created for you will do for you what is upon them to do. “Rain will come in its proper time” for if it does not come in their proper, rain can cause the grain to rot. “Your threshing will last until satiety etc.” Just as you will be constantly observing My mitzvos without fail, so too your blessing will come to you without fail and there will not be any delay from one blessing to the next.

Finally, when the pasuk concludes “and you will dwell securely in your land” the Chizkuni observes, “beforehand in parshas Behar (25:18) it had written ‘then you shall dwell securely on the land,’ it now reiterates and highlights its words and adds “in YOUR land” the land that belongs to YOU. But in years of famine people are exiled as it says [by the punishment od Kayin], ‘It (the ground) shall no longer yield its strength to you, you shall be a vagrant and a wanderer on earth’ (Breishis 4:12). It also says in Iyov (15:23), ‘He wanders about for food – where is it?'” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
 In order for the Jews to be deserving of such blessings on a constant and consistent basis, measure for measure, they have to be constantly and consistently fulfilling Hashem’s will with proper intent, love and fear of Hashem. This would take much focus in order to get into the proper habit and rhythm, to be constantly growing in Torah and Mitzvos. If they are so focused, then why does Hashem feel this highlighted addition of “YOUR land” is needed to be emphasized; what would it add to the person who is so focused already in doing good, striving to serve Hashem properly, and live a full and meaningful life? If, on the other hand, the pasuk is specifically talking to those that need to work on themselves to get to the level of deserving constant and consistent blessing, then just highlighting and adding “to dwell in YOUR land” wouldn’t necessarily do anything. Because one has to first work on his proper focus in order to ensure constancy and consistency; it’s not guaranteed that this addition will cause him to focus.

A prerequisite for ensuring consistent and constant blessing for consistent and constant Torah observance is without a doubt a focus on Torah observance and a resolve to make sure one stays on that high level and only tries to grow. However, chizuk, reinforcement of the good that results from the causes that are deserving of the reward, is always healthy to strengthen the commitment. Positive reinforcements highlighted on a personal level, i.e. emphasizing “YOUR land,” is always a positive thing. And it is constructive because just as there are infinite levels one can gain in His relationship with Hashem, there is never enough chizuk to make sure the relationship lasts.

Posted on

Emor – Personalities of Appreciating Wisdom

There is a well know pasuk in Mishlei often quoted in yeshivas, after the rebbe has gone through a long sugya (topic in Gemara or another Torah topic) and was successfully able to answer all the questions clearly and thoroughly. The pasuk in Mishlei (24:26) states, loosely translated:

Lips should kiss him who gives a right answer. כושְׂפָתַ֥יִם יִשָּׁ֑ק מֵ֜שִׁ֗יב דְּבָרִ֥ים נְכֹחִֽים:

 In fact, Rashi in Gitten 9a translates the the pasuk in this fashion. However, Tosfos there has a different interpretation: “When a person says proper words those that are around him will clinch their lips tightly closed, for they are quiet and have nothing to respond.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)

Speaking on the same wave length as  Tosfos, Rabbeinu Bachye in the introduction to this week’s Torah portion of Emor when defining this pasuk on a simple level says: “King Shlomo is teaching here about the quality of a sage that his words are sweet to people and everyone desires to listen to him because he speaks proper speech and answers anyone who asks him a question. The intent of the pasuk is not that he is deserving a kiss on the lips because what kind of lesson can come out of that? Furthermore, if that was the intent the pasuk should have written “שפתים יושק” (that in the passive grammatical form his lips should be kissed). But rather the pasuk is saying that the lips of the listeners, who pay attention to the proper words, will close up tightly. The point being, that the ears of people will follow his words, and their hearts will be correct and complete with him, to listen in a fashion as if he is kissing the lips of those that are listening because he’s desirable to his brethren and his words are heard and accepted by them.” (Click here for Hebrew text.) 
We see three possible interpretations of this pasuk. Rashi asserts that people are so excited to hear words of truth coming out of a wise man’s mouth that they proactively want to kiss him! Tosfos holds that when they hear the words of truth they are speechless, while Rabbeinu Bachye holds that people have a feeling of complete bliss and acceptance when they hear words of truth from a wise man.

Why does Rabbeinu Bachye openly reject Rashi’s interpretation (albeit without quoting Rashi)? According to Rashi, the pasuk is teaching us that a person will get so excited when he hears words of truth that make sense, are clear, and inspiring that he’d want to kiss the person who said it. Why does Rabbeinu Bachye say that there is no lesson from this? Why is it any different than what he said?

It must be that Rabbeinu Bachye holds that it’s possible to get excited about something you hear, and react in a very positive way, but not internalize it. Inspiration is fleeting; not taking it to heart must not be what the pasuk is talking about. Rather, when a person internalized the words that he hears, and it made a deep impact on him, and he feels a feeling of inner bliss, then they make a true impact on the person. Which is a sensible lesson to learn from this pasuk. Along the same lines, Tosfos also holds that the lesson heard must be internalized, and one will then have a feeling of speechlessness, upon hearing something so impactful. Either way, both Rabbeinu Bachye and Tosfos seem to hold that an outer reactions do not mean there is a true understanding and acceptance of what was heard. It’s the inner feeling which is transformative; this is the litmus test of whether something one hears is really impactful or not.

This is a good question on Rashi’s understanding of the pasuk, but Rashi must hold that a person will internalize what he hears, and will then not just have an inner feeling of bliss or be speechless, but will want to react and show his excitement! There are different ways and natures of how one reacts to something positive he or she hears, but whatever type of personality you are, you should be sure it has a transformational effect on you and you don’t fool yourself otherwise.

Happy Lag B’omer & Good Shabbos,
Rabbi Dovid Shmuel Milder

Posted on

Acharei Mos/Kedoshim – A sense of Emuna

This dvar Torah is dedicated in memory of יוסף בן מרי ורחמים
חג’ג’ לילוף

In this week’s double Torah portion of Acharei Mos/Kedoshim we find a very important and fundamental rule about the Torah. In Acharei Mos the Torah states, “Carry out My laws (משפטי) and safeguard My decrees (חקותי) to follow them; I am Hashem, your G-D” (Vayikra 18:4). 
The Sifra (140) comments that carrying out laws refers to the things written in the Torah that even if they would not have been written would have made sense, ethically. For example: stealing, illicit relations, idolatry, cursing G-D, or murder. Even if those would not have been written, it makes sense to have them written down. The decrees, however, are purely moral rules those that the evil inclination can make up excuses against them, and gentiles can make excuses against them as well, for example, eating pig, wearing shaatnez, chalitza to a yevama, purifying a metzora, para aduma, or the goat that was sent off on Yom Kippur. Since the Yetzer Hara and the gentiles make up excuses against them, the Torah states: “I am Hashem;” I decreed them; you are not permitted to make up any excuses against them.

The Malbim explains what the Sifra is highlighting here from this pasuk. “Here they explain the difference between a חק, a decree, and a משפט, a law, even according to the simple explanation. That a decree is dependent on an obligation which is not known by itself through means of nature, mussar (character development), or common sense, rather only the one who made the decree knows the reason behind the matter. A law refers to something which common sense and mussar expects, and for the most part applies to laws between man and his fellow man, which is mainly figured out based on common sense. We also find that the laws of nature that Hashem put together their realistic parameters are called the decrees of the world meaning a חק, a decree. But the way He runs the world, and His intervention according to the ways of His creations are called laws (משפטים). About the decrees of Hashem whose reasonings are unknown, the evil inclination and gentiles make up excuses against them. That is why the pasuk writes ‘I am Hashem,’ the reasons are known to Me and I decreed them. That is why it emphasizes, ‘carry out’ by the laws and ‘safeguard’ by the decrees, because the safeguarding in one’s heart is easy in regard to laws because they are logical, but carrying them out can be hard since though you know their obligations one still lust to steal and take advantage of others because of the desires in their heart. But the decrees are the opposite, that safeguarding them in one’s heart is difficult, since they don’t really sit well in one’s mind and intellect.” (Click here for Hebrew text.) 
The mitzvos of Hashem can be categorized into 2 different types: (1) laws that are logical and basically make sense to any ethical, logically thinking human being, and (2) decrees which are statutes of G-D that aren’t easily understandable, but are moral rules that must be followed because Hashem said so and He has a reasoning behind them. However, it sounds like these decrees, even if the reasoning behind them would be revealed, would still not sit well with the gentiles or the Yetzer Hara, the evil inclination, who both try to come up with excuses or reasonings why they sound silly and makes no sense. So, this is why Hashem emphasized that despite whatever answer or excuse one could make up, to not follow them; still I am Hashem and you must believe in Me and My decrees.

An example of a decree which seems to have thoughtful and reasonable logic expressed by the commentaries is found in the second Torah portion of the week, Kedoshim, there the Torah states, “You shall observe My decrees: You shall not crossbreed your livestock with different species. You shall not sow your field with a mixture of seeds, and a garment which has a mixture of shaatnez shall not come upon you” (Vayikra 19:19).

This pasuk discusses the prohibition of kilayim, forbidden mixtures. Rabbeinu Bachye shares a reason for these prohibitions: “According to the simple understanding the reason for the prohibition of forbidden mixtures is because all the things created in this world whether animal or vegetation has a power source or mazal (fortune) connected on high, and each thing was created in its own species, for this, The Mighty King made a foundation for them in the beginning of creation, so that each one would have their own unique species. So, someone who mixes, or grafts two species together changes and weakens the acts of creation which the Torah writes about them, ‘according to their species’ (Breishis 1:12, 21, 25), and he does the opposite of Hashem who wants to differentiate between each species. It is as if this person makes himself appear that he thinks what The Holy One Blessed Be He has created in this world isn’t enough and he wants to outsmart and add more species, new ones, within what the Eternal One has created. The prohibition of plowing an ox and donkey is for the same reason because it is the custom of farmers after plowing to bring the yoke [with the two animals] into one barn and it would lead into crossbreeding and giving birth to strange breeds resulting in the weakening of creation.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
According to this Sifra, even though Rabbeinu Bachya has compelling reasoning why forbidden mixtures are prohibited, nevertheless gentiles and the yetzer hara would try to convince Jews that these laws are silly, really make no sense, and that there are benefits to cross breeding. So why not use them and enjoy them?
What is the underlying difference between a law and a decree? Why would any commonsense gentile agree that murder, adultery, or stealing are of course forbidden but eating kosher, or not wearing a suit which was made out of a mixture of wool and linen is ridiculous, even if there Divine logic is explained?

It would seem that the difference between a law and a decree is that a law has a sense of logic behind it. It just makes sense, it can’t be questioned, and of course it must be observed; how can there be law and order, a functioning society without it? But a decree doesn’t have the natural sense, that feeling inside oneself, to obligate a person to observe it. Therefore the Torah teaches us, “I am Hashem,” that one must have an incredibly strong sense of emuna, faith and belief in Hashem, in order to fight off all the excuses that may face a person and deter his or her observance.

Ultimately emuna is the key and basis for observing Hashem’s Torah. Either to make sense of His decrees, or to help combat the lust and desires that might stop one from carrying out His laws.

Posted on

Metzora: A Lesson for the Miser


 One of the reasons for contracting the spiritual ailment of tzaraas is tzaras ayin, miserliness, (see Erechin 16a). In the Torah portion of Metzora, when speaking about tzaraas on a house, the Torah states: “The one to whom the house belongs shall come and declare to the kohen saying, ‘Something like an affliction has appeared to me in the house.’ The kohen shall command; and they shall clear the house before the kohen comes to look at the affliction, so that everything in the house should not be contaminated; and afterwards shall the kohen come to look at the house” (Vayikra 14:35, 36).
Rabbeinu Bachya points out from the fact that the Torah uses the term, “’The one to whom the house belongs shall come,’ Chaza”l in Yoma 11b learn out that this house is only his, meaning he doesn’t want to lend out his vessels or host guests in his house, for this affliction can come, for being a miser.”

But Rabbeinu Bachye then points out in the next pasuk that “the Torah is careful with Jewish money, even on earthenware, for these vessels the Torah tells him to get out of the house so that they won’t become contaminated, must be referring to earthenware, for if it was another type of vessel they can just be purified by dipping them in a mikvah, or if it was referring to food and drink he can just eat them while he is contaminated. So rather it must be referring to earthenware which does not become purified in the mikva.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
Tzaras ayin, the word for miser in Hebrew, literally means ‘causing pain with one’s eye.’ A miser is a selfish person who is not willing to share his possessions with anyone. If the miser is so obsessed with his possessions that he is unwilling to let others use them, or even bring guests into his house, then wouldn’t it make sense that he deserves, measure for measure, for everything that he owns to be defiled, even if it means needing to destroy the earthenware? Why isn’t that just one of the consequences of not sharing one’s possessions? We find many times where people can’t make use of their possessions in the Torah. Like shmita, tithes, first born flock, or sacrificial offerings, especially burnt offerings that are completely burnt up. Hashem doesn’t consider that a waste; on the contrary it’s an atonement. Why wouldn’t the earthenware be an atonement as well?

We see from here how much Hashem loves even the lowliest of His children the Jewish People, and cares for their possessions, even if the person is not willing to share it with others. Hashem cares for them not because the items are really His, deposited to the owner to take care of and use wisely, even with others, on His behalf, but rather simply because Hashem has mercy on the possessions of a Jew.

 Feeling and seeing Hashem’s love, even when being punished, I humbly believe, Rabbeinu Bachye is pointing this out as an impetus for the miser to change his attitude and ways.

Posted on

Tazria: A Proof Against Equity


 The spiritual ailment of tzaraas had an effect on one’s house, clothes, and/or body. In regards to tzaraas on clothes the Torah in the portion of Tazria states, “If there shall be a tzaraas affliction in a garment, in a woolen garment or a linen garment, or in the warp or the woof of the linen or the wool: or in leather or in anything fashioned of leather; and the affliction shall be deep green or deep red, in the garment or the leather, or the warp or the woof, or in any leather utensil: it is a tzaraas affliction, and it shall be shown to the kohen” (Vayikra 13:47-49).
  The Sifra (162) discussing why the pasuk had to reiterate in detail about “in the garment…or the warp, or the woof, or in any leather utensil: it is a tzaraas affliction,” says, “It would be possible to think that only a garment that both wealthy and poor people wear can receive tzaraas. But a garment that a wealthy person would have but a poor person wouldn’t, or a poor person would have but a wealthy one wouldn’t, or if neither a wealthy or poor person would own, how do we know it can contract tzaraas? Therefore the Torah states, ‘it’s a tzaraas affliction, and it shall be shown to the kohen.’”

The Malbim, while explaining how the Sifra derives this from the pasuk, says: “that Chaza”l is explaining to us that we don’t care about what type of a person it is who owns the garment, whether rich or poor. Granted if the garment was small or thick it’s not befitting for a wealthy person, or if it was expensive it’s questionable whether it belongs to the poor person, or if the garment is fully worn out then it’s not useful to anyone, however the pasuk is informing us that if the garment turned by itself a deep green [or red] then it has a tzaraas affliction, without looking into who it should belong to.” (Click here for Hebrew text.)
 When a person would bring his or her garment to the kohen to see if it had an affliction, why would we think to question who it belonged to, if he or she claimed it as his or hers? He or she is obviously not trying to steal anything; on the contrary, they were admitting they had done a wrongdoing and were trying to fix the problem. If the Torah would say any garment with a deep green or deep red hue might be tzaraas, and must be taken to a kohen for inspection, then wouldn’t that mean any garment?

It must be that people have automatic, preconceived notions that things should be universal, and if they aren’t universal for everyone, then rules and laws shouldn’t apply. However, the Torah is teaching us, and feels the need to teach us, that nothing is universal. There can be many different variables and different situations that are not easily discernable but must all be considered. Laws don’t have to only apply to clothing, which are worn by both the rich and the poor. It’s possible for clothes that only belong to the rich or the poor get tzaraas or even if somehow the poor got ahold of something expensive, that garment can receive tzaraas. Even if it is useless to anyone, they are all the same; there is no universal standard.

Posted on

Shemini – Pacing Speed

This week’s Torah portion of Shemini begins with the priestly service of the kohanim in the Mishkan, and the subsequent debacle of Nadav and Avihu. After Aharon and his sons brought the initial offerings, the Torah states: “And Aharon lifted up his hands towards the people and blessed them. He then descended from preparing the sin offering, the burnt offering, and the peace offering. And Moshe and Aharon went into the Tent of Meeting. Then they came out and blessed the people, and the glory of Hashem appeared to all the people. And fire went forth from before Hashem and consumed the burnt offering and the fats upon the altar, and all the people saw, sang praises, and fell upon their faces. And Aharon’s sons, Nadav and Avihu, each took his pan, put fire in them, and placed incense upon it, and they brought before Hashem foreign fire, which He had not commanded them. And fire went forth from before Hashem and consumed them, and they died before Hashem” (Vayikra 9:22-24, 10:1,2).

The Sifra (Torah Kohanim 16) depicts the impact and excitement of the first service in the Mishkan: “At that time, for what they did [the kohanim] merited to get all the priestly gifts and have the opportunity to be the only ones to give the priestly blessings for all generations until the resurrection of the dead. When they finished bringing the sin-offering, burnt-offering, and peace-offering they came down the altar with joy.” In paragraph 23 the Sifra says that when the fire came down from before Hashem, “since they saw a new fire that came down from Heaven and licked up (or scorched) the burnt-offering and fats on the altar, they fell on their faces and gave praises to Heaven.” Then in paragraph 24 the Sifra discusses another interpretation (different than what he had said earlier,) of what happened with Nadav and Avihu. “The children of Aharon also took [pans] with joy, since they saw the new fire. They got up to add love onto love, for the word ‘taking’ shows joy. [The fact the Torah emphasized ‘the sons of Aharon’ after it mentioned Nadav and Avihu teaches us that they did not give proper respect to Aharon. Neither did Nadav and Avihu seek advice to do this from Moshe. ‘Each man with their pan’ means they acted on their own and they didn’t even take advice from each other. ‘They brought a strange fire before Hashem that they were not commanded,’ Rebbe Yishmael says, you might think it was really a foreign fire, therefore it says, ‘that He didn’t command them,’ it was just that they entered without seeking advice.”

The Chofetz Chaim in his commentary on the Sifra explains what happened in the incident of Nadav and Avihu according to this medrish. When it says ‘they wanted to add love onto love,’ that means they wanted to bring an additional, new gift out of love for Hashem, the Blessed One. They took the pans with ‘joy,’ meaning with the zrizus, speed, alacrity, and with joy, as with the first set of offerings. The mistake Nadav and Avihu made was that if this was an appropriate thing to do then they should have let their father, Aharon, do it out of respect for him. But they decided to do it themselves, without asking anyone’s advice, even each other’s, which might have ensured that what they were doing was right. The Chofetz Chaim goes on to explain that the problem was not that they brought the incense using normal fire, rather the sin was that they did not wait until they were commanded to bring it; the act in of itself was appropriate. (Click here for Hebrew text  & Here.)

It would seem that the incense in the pans that Nadav and Avihu brought were accepted by Hashem with fire coming down from Heaven “licking it up.” They did it with zrizus, swiftly and with joy, as a mitzva should be done, with the sole purpose of showing their love to Hashem, for Hashem’s sake, lisheim Shamayim; so what went wrong and why were they considered at fault? It is because they acted too hastily and didn’t wait for orders or at least ask permission from Moshe or their father, which showed a lack of honor to Aharon. But why should they have been held accountable? They had such positive emotions, joy and love focused on Hashem. They also used the attribute of zrizus like how all mitzvos should be fulfilled. They thought this was obviously the next move that should be done based on the love and joy produced for Hashem with the initial offerings, and in hindsight it really was the right thing to do. We see this from the fact that Hashem did send down a fire and singe their offering of incense. So why were they so severely punished, that that very fire from Heaven that accepted their offerings took their lives as well for not giving proper respect to Aharon and not seeking advice or waiting for orders from Moshe. But they did it for all the right reasons, just to enhance the relationship between Hashem and His beloved people; so why fault them?

It would seem that even with all the right intentions, and the act even being appropriate, but because they allowed their emotions to take control of them, even if they were positive emotions, it caused them to act too hastily. Even albeit on a dakei dakos, minute, miniature level. For at the lofty levels they were on, they deserved such punishment. If they had kept focused and weighed when and how to do the right thing, then they would not have faltered, and that was what caused their sin according to this Sifra.

We have to always be very careful to be in control of our emotions, even if what’s driving us are positive emotions. We still have to intellectually make sure we are doing the right thing, at the right time, in the best possible way.