Summer Issue

This issue has been sponsored by the following parents of Torah Academy's Class of 2001:

Mr. Bloom in honor of Joshua
Mr. and Mrs. Eis in honor of Yoel
Dr. and Mrs. Fischer in honor of Dov
Mr. and Mrs. Fox in honor of Yonatan
Mr. and Mrs. Frank in honor of Jonathan
Mr. and Mrs. Friedman in honor of Eliyahu
Mr. and Mrs. Glass in honor of David
Mr. and Mrs. Glassberg in honor of Yisrael
Mr. and Mrs. Glasser in honor of Moshe
Mr. and Mrs. Hus in honor of Moshe
Mr. and Mrs. Katz in honor of Asher
Dr. and Mrs. Kay in honor of Jason
Mr. and Mrs. Neimand in honor of Dov
Mr. and Mrs. Safier in honor of Aaron
Dr. and Mrs. Scharf in honor of Yisroel
Mr. and Mrs. Schechter in honor of Yakir
Rabbi and Mrs. Schwarzburg in honor of Ariel
Dr. and Mrs. Shaffren in honor of Eliezer
Dr. and Mrs. Shinnar in honor of Avraham
Mr. and Mrs. Silverberg in honor of Joshua
Mr. and Mrs. Srulowitz in honor of Avi
Mr. and Mrs. Stein in honor of Gil
Dr. and Dr. Turetzky in honor of Yehuda
Mrs. Wenger in honor of Daniel
Mr. and Mrs. Whitman in honor of Harrison
Dr. and Mrs. Yagoda in honor of Craig
Mr. and Mrs. Zakheim in honor of Yonatan
Mr. and Mrs. Irving Zeidel in honor of David
Mr. Rosenberg and Mrs. Zeidman-Rosenberg in honor of Michael ------------------------

Due to a typographical error Elana Leichman's name was misspelled in last week's sponsor box as Ilana.
-
-----------------------

Special thanks to: Josh Dubin, David Gertler, Shuky Gross, and Simcha Haber.  
------------------------

The staff of Kol Torah would like to thank our outgoing seniors Avi-Gil Chaitovsky, Moshe Glasser, Dani Gross, and Daniel Wenger, as well as David Gertler, for all of their hard work on behalf of Kol Torah.
------------------------

The staff of Kol Torah would like to extend a heartfelt thank you  and Hatzlacha Rabah to Rabbi Zvi Grumet for all of his assistance to this publication during the past nine years.


PARSHAT BEHALOTCHA

 

When to Play "Stump the Rebbe"
by Dr. Joel M. Berman

 "Kach Et Halevim...Vitahar Otam"

"Take the Leviim and purify them."

When I entered graduate school, I often attended seminar given by physics and chemistry professors as well as guest lecturers.  These lecturers would usually use the time to present their latest research results.  I recall after one such seminar, a student very politely asked a Kasha, a question, on the speaker's results.  The professor became visibly agitated and defensive.  Unable to answer the question, he instead insulted the student.  After witnessing similar events over the next few months, it became clear to me that large fragile egos and Emet, truth, cannot comfortably coexist in the same time and space.  I also learned that you do not play "stump the Rebbe" with a college professor.

Contrast these experiences with one of my first experiences in Yeshiva.  A Talmid asked a severe Kasha on the way the Maggid Shiur understood the Gemara.  The Maggid Shiur, in contrast to his university counterpart, was delighted.  His response was "I don't know.  That's a great question!  I'll try to find the answer and get back to you." Our busy, distracted lives cause our ability to differentiate between Emet and Sheker to become muddled, especially when egos and money are involved.  Our leaders and teachers, however, must not suffer from such compromised abilities.  They, like the Leviim in this week's Parsha, are required to go through a purification process - years of learning from and emulating their Rabbeim - until they too can integrate the world from a Torah perspective.  They, like the Leviim in this week's Parsha, are also required be Tahor, pure, free of ego and ulterior motives.  They must be dedicated to finding the truth, even if it causes some discomfort.

 

A Reversal of History 
by Ari Michael

A question everyone who learns Chumash has is what the reversed 'Nun' on either side of the Pasuk, Vayihe Binsoa Haaron, "And when the Ark would travel"(10:25-26), is for.  Rav Soloveitchik zt"l had a unique view of what they meant.  The stories in Parshat Behaalotcha seem to be totally unrelated and without continuity.  At the end of Parshat Naso and the beginning of Parshat Behaalotcha we see the completion of the Mikdash through the Korbanot Hanesiem and the commanding of Aharon to light the Menorah.  Then comes the commandment to bring the Korban Pesach and the Mitzva of Pesach Sheni.  There is a description of how the Machaneh the camp would travel: either through the Annanay Hakavod or the Chatzotzrot.  Then, the Torah shows us the entire parade of the Machaneh in its first movement.  Moshe then has a conversation with his father-in-law, Yitro, and the people who are Michutz Lamachaneh are incorporated into the camp.  This was followed by the story of the Asafsuf and Mitoninim.  Then, the Parsha ends with the complaint of Miriam against her brother, Moshe.  In reality, though, all of these seemingly unrelated stories form one tragic tale.  The reason Bnai Yisrael were in the Midbar was to receive the Torah and build the Bait Hamikdash.  With the sacrificing of the Karbanot Hanisiyim, their responsibility was discharged and they were ready to enter Etretz Yisrael.  However, since they had been delayed in the Midbar because of the Egel, they had to bring the Korban Pesach.  The Torah then shows us the camp as it prepared to move out and Hashem gives Moshe a means by which to communicate with Bnai Yisrael while traveling: the Chatzotzrot.  Tension and excitement filled the air as Bnai Yisrael awaited Hashem's word to set out, which can be readily seen from Moshe's conversation with his father in law in which he sounds like a kid who has been promised candy and knows he will be getting it very soon.  Then, "And when the Ark would travel Moshe would say, Arise, O Lord, let your enemies be scattered and your foes flee before you."  This is the story of what was supposed to happen.  Bnai Yisrael were supposed to march right into Yimot Hamoshiach.  However, the people began to complain and lust for material things and this greatly angered Hashem and Moshe.  What angered Hashem so much was that they started living the lifestyle of idol worshippers.  This complaint was worse than the Egel because idol worshippers will realize the idol is worthless, but the adoption of the pagan way of life is far worse.  That is why even Moshe was unable to defend Bnai Yisrael: there is no excuse for what they did.  Their adoption of the pagan way of life was the reason Moshe asked Hashem to give him helpers or give him death.  He found out now that he was going to take on the role of the Yonayk and give up his private life.  Finally, the Parsha ends with Miriam questioning her brother's reasons for separating from his wife.  Hashem then explained that with Moshe's new responsibilities, he has no time for a private life.

 

PARSHAT SHELACH

 

Paradise Lost, Hope Regained  
by Rabbi Zvi Grumet

 Imagine that you, your parents, your grandparents, and their grandparents before them had been raised with a belief that a promise, some promise, would eventually be fulfilled and that the result would be a profound and permanent change in your lives for all eternity.  Now further imagine that a messenger from Hashem arrived to tell you that the time had come for the fulfillment of that promise, and even delivered the appropriate signs handed down through the generations.  Let's take that one step further-you personally witness the fulfillment of the first stages of that promise accompanied by wondrous miracles.  Finally, just as you were preparing yourself for the ultimate completion of the promise, the messenger turns to tell you that you will not live to see it.  The sense of frustration is compounded by each of the stages witnessed, and accompanying that frustration is a deep despair.

This is the state in which Bnai Yisrael find themselves immediately after the catastrophe of the Miraglim.  They were there in the depths of Egyptian slavery; they struggled with the question of whether to believe that Hashem was indeed redeeming them and that Moshe was his messenger; they witnessed the miracles of the plagues and the splitting of the sea, proclaiming Zeh Ali Vianvehu; they were the recipients of Divine protection of the Ananay Hakavod and the munificence of the bounty of the Man.  As far as they could tell the time for their ultimate redemption had arrived.  Yet one misstep later they find themselves literally on the border of their promised land, the destination of their dreams, only to be informed that they would not enter.  And those who refused to accept that reality were mercilessly defeated in battle.  The sense of despair that engulfed the people was beyond description.

It is precisely at that point that Hashem intervenes.  First, He teaches them that when they enter the Land, emphasizing that the corporate entity of Am Yisrael will indeed enter the land regardless of the fate of particular individuals, that they are to bring from the produce of that land alongside their regular sacrifices.  The assurance of their eventual entry into the land comes none too soon.  Second, He instructs them how to use the sacrificial order to recover from what would appear be the devastating consequence of sin.  Yet this is not yet enough.

At the close of the Parsha Hashem instructs the people in the Mitzva of Tzitzit.  Much has been written about the juxtaposition of this instruction at the close of the devastating incident of the Miraglim, yet let us focus on the concluding verse.  After all that has happened, Hashem lets His people in on a secret- the purpose of redeeming them from Egypt was so that He could establish a relationship with them.  Contrary to (their) popular belief, which was that the redemption was to bring them into their Promised Land, they are informed that the purpose of the exodus was to begin the process of the bonding of the two covenantal partners.  Suddenly the focus has shifted, liberating the nation from its despair and feeling that they were nothing but a failure, and helping them to understand that their primary purpose-building and maintaining a pact with Hashem, in which He would be their God and they His people-could still be accomplished.  In too many generations our hopes that the final redemption was imminent have been ignited, with prognosticators and visionaries pointing to the incontrovertible signs that we are the generation to personally witness the Messianic era, only to have those hopes shattered and with them the spirit of the people who invested so much of themselves in those dreams.  Perhaps we would be well served to review Hashems response to that first frustrated generation: The redemption will come, whenever that will be, yet that experience pales in comparison to establishing a genuine and enduring relationship with the ultimate Redeemer.

   

PARSHAT KORACH

 

Does it Matter if it's Blue or White?
by Rabbi Ezra Wiener

The Midrash in Bemidbar Rabba (18:1) notes the juxtaposition of the Parsha of Tzitzit and the beginning of Parshat Korach by suggesting the following as Korach's challenge to Moshe's position of authority: does a Talit that is completely woven with threads of Techelet require Tzitzit?  What is the significance of the Mitzva of Tzitzit that out of all the Mitzvot, only this Mitzva was chosen by Korach as a challenge to Moshe's authority?

R' Yechiel Reuven Mendlebaum in his work Dodai Reuven explains as follows:  The Rambam in Morah Nivuchin divides Mitzvot into 2 basic categories:  the first category is called Daat, those Mitzvot that increase our awareness of Hashem and our acceptance of His domain over all of creation.  These Mitzvot include Shabbat, Shemittah, avoiding idol worship, etc.  The second category of Mitzvot is Midot, those Mitzvot that establish within the Jewish people values that will allow for society to function properly.  These Mitzvot include Arot, Gezel, Shfichat Damim, etc.

Each of the two colors in the Tzitzit represents one of these categories.  The blue color of the Techelet, which, according to the Gemara in Menachot reminds us of the Kisay Hakavod, represents the first category of Mitzvot those that increase our awareness that there is a God who is Almighty, Daat.  The white color represents the Mitzvot whose directive is to cleanse a person from his evil traits and to inculcate with him desire to do what is moral, Midot.  When we look at the Tzitzit we will "Remember all the Mitzvot of Hashem" (Bemidbar Sinai 15:39), both the Daat and the Midot.

Therefore, Korach therefore approached Moshe with the following challenge:  if Hashem provided the Jewish people with both Daat and Midot then there is no need for a leader.  If each Jew performs the category of Mitzvot that provides him with the proper Emunah and also performs the Midot category, which allows for society to function smoothly then there should be no need for anyone to assume a position of authority.  The fact that Moshe has assumed leadership is an indication that without him society would not follow the Mitzvot of the category if Midot (white) even if we already have a complete set of Daat (Techelet).

 

The Honorable Thing to Do       
by Yair Manas

After Korach, Datan, and Aviram commenced their rebellion, "Moshe sent to call Datan and Aviram" (12:6).  Rashi comments that Moshe himself went to find them and pacify them with words of peace.  This was the same Moshe who is the great leader of Bnai Yisrael.  Even with his high office Moshe did not become detached from the people.  Rather, he himself went to find the rebels instead of waiting for the rebels to come to him.  He did not worry about losing his personal honor.  He was willing to sacrifice his honor for the sake of peace.

It is very unfortunate that some people seem to enjoy arguing and fighting amongst themselves.  These people enjoy a good fight and cannot wait to attack their fellow man.  Even if they are wrong, they are reluctant to apologize.  Their pride would not permit them to apologize.  They would say, "let the other person come to me" and the quarrel would go unresolved.

Moshe's attitude shows how foolish this approach is.  If the great leader of Bnai Yisrael would give up his pride in search of peace, so much more so should the average person.  Moshe's attitude teaches us that we should strive for peace, even at the expense of our valuable pride.  We should sacrifice our pride for peace just like our leader, Moshe, does

 

PARSHAT CHUKAT

 Parshat Chukat:  The Fulcrum of Jewish History      
by Rabbi Steven
Prebor

Although Parshat Chukat is primarily a narrative, there is a section at the beginning that deals with the Mitzva of Parah Aduma.  It is generally assumed that the order of topics in the Torah is based on a thematic scheme.  As we read the narrative section that immediately follows Parah Aduma, it becomes difficult to understand how the two topics are connected.  As we explore this narrative further, however, a link may emerge.

At the beginning of Perek 20 the Torah tells us Vayavo Binei Yisrael Kol Haedah Midbar Tzin.  Rashi claims, based on the word "Eidah," that the Torah has jumped close to forty years into the future here.  Those arriving in Midbar Tzin are only the Jews who will conquer Eretz Canaan.  Everyone from the previous generation has already died.  One striking reality of this "new generation" is that they do not appear to be any different than their parents.  When there is no water, Bnai Yisrael complain that Yetziat Mitzrayim should not have taken place if its result was going to be the death of all Jews in the Midbar.  Sound familiar?  This same theme was articulated by the previous generation several times.  In Perek 21, Bnai Yisrael complain that there is neither food nor water, and they have some negative things to say about the Manna.  Once again, it is a familiar story.  It does not seem like Bnai Yisrael have changed.  Presumably, the forty years in the Midbar was supposed to give Bnai Yisrael an opportunity to get used to the demands of the Torah and political independence.  However, thus far in Parshat Chukat, Bnai Yisrael appear ill equipped for that lifestyle.

Nevertheless, as we go on, something happens which has never happened before.  In Perek 21 when Hashem sends the Nechashim Haserefim, the Jews respond by saying "We have sinned."  This is truly unprecedented.  Even though some Jews (the Mafilim in 14:40) do say, "we have sinned" in the aftermath of the Cheit Hameraglim; they say this as they embark on a military campaign against Hashem's and Moshe's orders.  This time, however, Bnai Yisrael say "we have sinned" in the midst of a pattern of following Hashem's orders of whether or not to fight.  Clearly, change has taken place.  Bnai Yisrael are not perfect.  However, they now have the ability to see their mistake when someone points it out to them.  The forty years in the desert has achieved its goal.

Back in Parshat Behaalotcha, Bnai Yisrael at one point comment about the fish that they ate in Egypt for free."  Rashi, dealing with the fact that Bnai Yisrael had not received anything in Egypt for free, claims that this means free of Mitzvot.  Apparently, Bnai Yisrael were uncomfortable with the moral obligations that their new life entailed.  Now, however, one generation later, they are ready.  They are not perfect, but they are fundamentally committed to the idea.  This may explain why Parshat Chukat starts with the Parah Aduma.  The Parah Aduma is the epitome of Chok, since it includes the inherent contradiction of purifying the defiled while defiling the pure.  It therefore is a symbol of the central issue behind the inability of the previous generation to succeed in Hashem's plan, and what sets them apart from the new generation.

 

Camper vs. Counselor       
by Daniel Wenger

Following the section of the Torah describing the laws of the Parah Aduma, Bnai Yisrael unfortunately had an opportunity to put this Chok into practice.  The first Pasuk of the twentieth Perek of Sefer Bemidbar Sinai states quite succinctly that Miriam died there and she was buried there.  What does the Torah record next?  Surprisingly, it makes no mention of any mourning for Miriam; rather, Bnai Yisrael come complaining to Moshe that they no longer have water to drink because the rock that was serving as a well for the nation had dried up when Miriam passed away.  In doing so, Bnai Yisrael not only missed their chance to mourn for Miriam, they inadvertently caused Moshe and Aharon to be mourned for as well.

Bnai Yisrael's complaints were so fierce that Moshe and Aharon had to escape them to the Ohel Moed (20:6).  There they asked Hashem what to do, and they were told to gather the nation in front of Miriam's rock, at which time Moshe would speak to it and water would once again flow from it and supply Bnai Yisrael.  The Erev Rav, however, did not make it so easy for Moshe to do this.  Several commentators say that the Erev Rav challenged Moshe to bring forth the water from a different rock, if he was indeed a messenger of miracles.  Moshe was unsure of what to do with these rebels since the Shechina had left because of them.  He was not prepared to deal with dissidents at a time when a miracle was about to be performed for them and was unsure if he should follow Hashem's will or the request of the people, so he quickly became enraged.  He berated the non-believers and called out to Bnai Yisrael to watch as Hashem's power was about to bring forth water.

The time had now come for Moshe to speak to the rock, but the rock did not respond.  Ramban blames this on Moshe's anger, that he could not have had the proper intents in mind when speaking to the rock, so it did not do as he told it.  So, as we all know, Moshe resorted to the original method of bringing forth water from rocks and smote it with his staff.  This was the action that, although it brought forth ample water for Bnai Yisrael, was the cause of death for Moshe and Aharon for their not having had pure faith in Hashem's words.  Thus we see that Bnai Yisrael's complaints were a source of death for their leaders.

As summer camp season is coming into full swing this week, there are sure to be plenty of episodes of campers flocking to their counselors to protest an administrative action that has been taken against them.  Although none of these incidents will result in a death, God forbid, they do put counselors in the awkward position of having to uphold the request of the administration while keeping their campers calm and respecting of their leaders.  It should be learned from Moshe's mis-action that the correct response is not to get angry with the children, but to find other ways to solve these issues: first by talking it over, but never by hitting.

   

PARSHAT BALAK

 

Bilam's Personality 
by Yair Manas

When Balak sends messengers to Bilam, he sends them Petorah Asher Al Hanahar...  "To Pethor, which is by the river" (22:5).  Rashi comments that Pethor is Aramaic for a moneychanger, so just as people bring their money to a moneychanger, so too all of the kings sent requests to Bilam for occult services.  Targum Yonatan says that the word Pethor means to interpret.  Bilaam started out interpreting dreams and then went on to becoming a magician and then a prophet.

Another explanation could be that Pethor, located on the shores of the Euphrates, was one of the centers of sorcery in the Mesopotamia.  Black arts were known and practiced there.  Therefore Balak sent messengers to Pethor to find Bilaam.

Rav Hirsch teaches that there are contradictory aspects to Bilaam's personality.  Bilaam was not a friend of Bnai Yisrael.  He belongs in the group of people like Malchitzedek and Yitro, who recognize the truth of monotheism.  Bilam recognized Hashem.  However, despite this recognition, he did not add the qualities of morality and fine character to his personality to this recognition.  Even with the knowledge that there is one true God, Bilaam went and attempted to curse Bnai Yisrael.  Bilam acknowledged Hashem but he did not remove himself from idol worship nor did he follow Hashem's commands.

Rabbi Elie Munk, in his book The Call of the Torah, says that Bilaam serves as an example of the need to express the knowledge of Hashem through the Mitzvot, so that, unlike with Bilaam, the recognition of Hashem can act effectively on one's character.

Bilaam teaches us that it is not enough just to recognize God and know that He is there.  Rather one should strive to perform Mitzvot.  Through these Mitzvot, we can serve Hashem in a better way than the prophet Bilaam. 

 

PARSHAT PINCHAS

 

Water, Water Everywhere       
by Avi-Gil Chaitovsky

In Parshat Pinchas (28:16-29:39), the Torah tells us of the special Korban Musaf brought on each of the holidays.  On each day of Sukkot, the number of cows decreased by one, starting with thirteen on the first day and ending with seven on the last.  The total number of cows brought over the entire holiday is 70, a number associated with the number of nations in the world.  Some explain that these cows were Korbanot for all the nations of the world.  If the process of decreasing by one cow each day could be easily explained, as above, why does the Torah feel it necessary to mention the Korban of each day individually (2:17-34), using the same words over and over?

One answer, found in Masechet Taanit (2b), is based on the slight differences found in the context of some of the days.  On the second day the word "Veniska" is changed to "Veniskeihem."  On day six, the same word is changed to "Unesacheha," and on day seven the word "Kamishpat" is changed to "Kimishpatam."  The three letters that appear to be extra spell the word Mayim, water.

Rabbi Yehuda Ben Betairah says, based on the change made on the second day, that one should begin saying "Mashiv Haruach Umorid Hageshem," the prayer that states God's power over rain, starting on the second day, since the beginning of the hint to water appears here.  Rabbi Akiva says we start on the sixth day, due to its extraneous letter.  The extra Yud of the sixth day changes the word "Veniska," "and its libation" to "Unesacheha," "and its libations."  Rabbi Akiva interprets the plural to refer to the water libation brought on Sukkot together with the regular wine libation.  Since he believes that this is the hint to that additional libation, this day is the first on which we say Mashiv Haruach.

Sukkot, it seems, is really a holiday about water.  The rainy season in Eretz Yisrael begins around this time, the water libation was brought, and the Simchat Bait Hashoeva was celebrated on Sukkot.  One can even say that the Mitzva of Arba Minim requires rain, so that the different plants can grow.

In addition, this author suggests an alternate usage of the water relationship, relating back to the question of why such similar Pesukim are repeated many times.  Water is often equated with Torah.  Just as water is a source of life, Torah is the source of life.  Just as one is unable to go far without water, one will not get anywhere without Torah.  What this analogy teaches us is to guard the Torah carefully, to learn it carefully, and to keep the Mitzvot. 

 

PARSHAT MATOT MASAI

 

Back Talking
      
by Donny Manas

Parshat Matot begins by describing the different kinds of vows a person can make, and how to annul them.  It also says that, one, a person should not go back on his words, and two, a person should perform everything that leaves his mouth.

Why does the Torah have to say both the positive of doing everything that leaves his mouth, and also the negative of not going back on his words?  Commentaries point out that the Torah is elevating a person's words and turning them into a commandment, as if his words were biblical.  They describe how we are above animals because we can speak, and we should use that power wisely.

They also point out that speech really is a power, able to raise and lower people's spirits.  Some commentaries have even pointed out how we have two eyes, two ears, and two nostrils, but only one mouth, proving that one mouth can do damage or cause good like two of any of the other body parts.

But there is something else that can be used to symbolize the power of speech.  Our mouths have sharp teeth, but have soft lips to protect us from exposing those teeth.  We may have bad things to say, but we have to use our lips to prevent ourselves from speaking negatively.  But we have a tongue, which is also soft!  Maybe we should learn to protect our insides from thinking negatively about others, so that we will not have to come to use external measures not to say them!  It all starts from the inside.  The Torah is urging all of us to improve our lives from our insides, and improve someone else's life with our outsides.  The Torah also teaches us that we should watch what comes out of our mouths, and not violate the negative of going back on our words.

 

 PARSHAT DEVARIM


The Innocence of Youth

by Rabbi Joel Grossman

"These are the words that Moshe spoke to all Israel" (Devarim 1:1).  Rashi comments that each place Moshe mentioned an allusion to one of the nation's sins, but he did not want to state them explicitly, so as not to embarrass the people.  Rav Moshe Feinstein, in his Darash Moshe asks an interesting question on this concept.  Soon afterwards Moshe chastises the people at length over the spies and the Golden Calf.  Rav Moshe asks since Moshe was going to speak to them specifically for these incidents anyway, why in this instance was he so concerned to speak in this vague way?

Rav Moshe answers that in the beginning of the Parsha Moshe was not speaking directly to the people who had sinned, since that generation was no longer living.  Rather, he was speaking to their children who were blameless.  Moshe therefore spoke in a vague, milder tone and referred to the sins only by allusion.  Later, Moshe was repeating the reproofs he had given to the previous generation, which had to be forceful in order to show the seriousness of their sin.  In addressing the next generation who had not committed the sins Moshe did not have to speak harshly; merely alluding to the sins of their ancestors was enough to remind them that they were not immune to sin.  Therefore, as the second generation had not yet uprooted the traits that brought about these sins, Moshe chastised them as if they had committed these sins.

Along these lines of teaching our children properly so that they rid themselves of bad character traits and develop proper character traits, which will lead them to doing Mitzvot, I would like to share a story I recently heard from Rabbi Pesach Krohn, Shlita.  He told a story about a young boy in Israel who was waiting for a bus.  When he boarded the bus there was a large crowd that was boarding at the same time.  Since there was such a hustle and bustle the bus driver forgot to punch a hole in his ticket.  He told the driver that he did not punch a hole but the driver insisted that he did.  During the trip the driver noticed the boy sitting in his seat and crying.  He called the boy over and asked, "Why are you crying?"  The boy said in a sobbing voice, "that this ride is stealing, since you didn't punch my ticket and therefore I didn't pay for this ride."  The driver couldn't believe his eyes and ears and he punched a hole in the ticket.  What a great job of education this boy's parents did, to teach him never to take something that does not belong to him, and such a person has the proper character to make sure that he will not sin and only do what is proper.

May all of us learn a lesson from this boy and his parents and hopefully there will be no need for anyone to chastise us about our behavior and we will be able to make the name of Hashem holy by our actions.

 

Toiling in Torah
      
by Yoni Ratzersdorfer

When Moshe Rabbeinu proposed to establish a judicial and educational system to replace the system in which everyone came to him to learn, the people replied Tov Hadaver Asher Dibarta Laasot, "The thing that you have proposed to do is good" (1:14).  Rashi comments that Moshe was upset with the enthusiastic reaction from the nation.  Moshe responded to the people, "From whom is it better to learn, from me or from my students?  Is it not better to learn from me, someone who has toiled and suffered in the study of Torah?"  Rav Moshe Feinstein explains that Rashi should have said that they should have preferred Moshe Rabbeinu as a teacher because he was the original teacher, as opposed to learning from his students.  Why does Rashi choose to say that Moshe was a better teacher because he suffered and toiled in his learning?

This can be answered by saying that some people who are not yet great scholars might find it easier to learn from a student because the student does not have as great an understanding as the original teacher.  Rashi is trying to tell us to seek out the best teacher, someone who has toiled and suffered in learning in order to completely understand every subject.  This type of teacher does not solely rely on his great mind but constantly labors to find the truth.

This can explain Rashi in Parshat Bechukotai, where he says that anyone who does not toil in Torah is viewed as someone who has not learned at all.  Even a person with the greatest of minds who has not labored but depends on his memory and genius cannot be considered a true Talmid Chacham.  The wisdom of the Torah is far greater than the wisdom of any human mind.  Only after a person puts in effort and has suffered in his learning will Hashem assist him in understanding the Torah.

 

PARSHAT VAETCHANAN

 

These are the Mitzvot...  More or Less  
by David Gertler

Parshat Vaetchanan states the most important principle of the Torah.  The Torah (Devarim 4:2) writes, "You shall not add to the words that I have commanded to you, and shall not subtract anything from it."  Why am I calling these the two most important Mitzvot?  Additionally what is the reason behind these Mitzvot?  And lastly, have we been properly keeping these Mitzvot?

These two Mitzvot lay down the absoluteness of the Torah.  These are the most axiomatic Mitzvot of the Torah.  If one has a fervent belief that this one Pasuk is given by Hashem, that person has obligated himself to believing the rest of the Mitzvot.

Rabbi Zvi Grumet made an interesting observation regarding Moshe, which helps us to understand the absoluteness of these principles.  In the story of Miriam's talking about Moshe (Bemidbar Sinai 12), Miriam comments that there is nothing special about Moshe, as both Miriam and Aharon have spoken to Hashem.  This is directly after the story of the Shivim Zekainim, where Hashem gives Nevuah to seventy people.  During the story, Yehoshua and Moshe find out that two more than the original seventy are prophesizing.  Yehoshua becomes very upset but Moshe expresses a wish that the entire nation should become Neviim.  We see that Moshe is not alone in being able to have Nevuah, but the story of Miriam explains to us Moshe's uniqueness.  When Hashem is rebuking Aharon and Miriam he tells them that all other Neviim get their Nevuah in dreams, but it is not so with Moshe.  Moshe is Neeman in the entire house of Hashem.  I am going to translate the word ðàîï as trusted, that Moshe is trusted with all of the knowledge of the works of Hashem, and not with riddles but clear and precise visions.  The reason that these principles are absolute and complete is because they were given by Moshe, the only one able to receive a vision from Hashem clearly.  No other prophet was, or will be, able to do that.  And therefore no other Navi can claim that they were given a new Mitzva or that they were instructed to retract a Mitzva, because we are told that even if they get Nevuah it is not on the level to be able to understand such a concept.  The Mishna states that in judging if one is a Navi all one must do is watch for these two principles, if they violate either one they are a Navi Sheker.

In recent conversation someone asked me if we can think that we are properly observing these Mitzvot.  After all, there is so much of the Torah that is neglected, an example being the laws of Tumah Vetaharah.  I responded that there is a difference between Neglect and stating that a certain Mitzva, which should apply, does not.  We do not have the proper means to be cleansed of Tumat Hamet (i.e. Para Aduma), but we yearn for the day that we do.  Even without our ability to properly keep all of the Mitzvot, we must keep those that are accessible to us and we should strive to make more of the Mitzvot accessible to us if possible.

 

PARSHAT AKEV


That Which Is Not Said  
by Rabbi Mark Smilowitz

Twice a day we say the three passages which comprise the Kriat Shema.  Of all the passages in the Torah, these are the only three that we are obligated to recite daily.  What is unique about these three passages?  Why, of all the possible choices, were these three singled out?

Our Sages say that the first paragraph is important for its acceptance of Hashem as King, the second is important for its acceptance of the commandments, and the third is important for its mention of the exodus from Egypt (see Berachot 13a).  However, while the Rabbis used this categorization to explain the chronological order of the paragraphs-first comes acceptance of Hashem Himself, then His commandments, then gratitude for saving us-there might be another explanation as to why the first two paragraphs were selected for daily recitation.

It should be noted that there is another Jewish ritual that requires the recital of the first two paragraphs of the Shema.  The Mishna (Sotah 41a) says that during the seventh year of the Shemittah cycle, when all the people would gather in Jerusalem for the Hakhel ceremony, the king of Israel would read aloud from the book of Devarim.  He would read a little from the beginning of the book, a little from the end, plus two passages from the middle of the book, which are identified as the first two paragraphs of the Kriat Shema.  What is the significance of these two particular paragraphs for the Hakhel ceremony?

Rav Mordechai Sabato has noted that these two paragraphs, Shema and Vehaya Im Shamoah, serve as bookends for the entire unit between them.  If we examine all the topics in between Shema, from last week's Parsha, and Vehaya Im Shamoah, from this week's Parsha, we discover that they all have something in common.  For certain, they are all Mitzvot Bein Adam Lamakom, commandments between man and Hashem.  However, there is more that links them.  Here is a basic outline of all the topics in this unit:  

1.  Do not forget Hashem to stray after foreign gods.

2.  Do not test Hashem.

3.  Teach your children to keep the commandments and revere Hashem.

4.  Do not be absorbed by the surrounding nations and abandon Hashem.

5.  There is great reward for following Hashem's laws

6.  Do not fear the warring nations; rather, trust that Hashem will help us achieve victory.

7.  Remember to thank Hashem for all the goodness He has provided.

8.  There is severe punishment for abandoning Hashem.

9.  Make no claims of righteousness to Hashem; He owes us nothing except for the promise to the Patriarchs and maintaining Justice.

10.  The only way to please Hashem is by following all of His commandments.

11.  Hashem constantly keeps His watchful eye out for the inhabitants of Israel.

Note that some common themes that pop up in these Parshiot are the land of Israel, the requirement to love Hashem, and the importance of keeping the commandments.  What emerges is that this entire section, beginning from Shema and ending with Vehaya Im Shamoah, is about basic issues of faith in Hashem.  They might be called the a-b-c's of our religion, the foundation, or the creed.  In these passages are the fundamental elements of our relationship with the Almighty.

Perhaps when we read the first two paragraphs of the Shema, both daily and on the seventh year pilgrimage, we are meant to think about not only these two paragraphs, but also all of the ideas between them.  Thus, the Kriat Shema is our way of saying to Hashem, "If we had time, we would read all the pieces in the Torah which state our commitment of faith to You.  Please accept the first and last passages as a symbolic statement of all that is said in between."  If we view Kriat Shema in this manner, then this prayer is not the final word in stating our faith, but rather the first word.  It is up to every Jew who recites the Shema to think beyond what is actually read, and add nuances of commitment and faith that are not stated outright, but are implied.
I would like to give thanks to Rabbi Menachem Leibtag from whom I first heard this idea.

 

Praising Hashem For Every Last Bit
by Effie Richmond

The Pasuk that we say every time we bench is Viachalta Visavata Uberachta, "You will eat and you will be satisfied and you will bless" (8:10).  Everyone is aware of the plain meaning of this statement: that after you eat something you are required to give some sort of praise to Hashem.  It says in Gemara Berachot 20b "How can I not favor the Jewish people?  It says in my Torah 'You will eat and you will be satisfied and bless Hashem' but they bless Hashem on food the size of an olive or a fig."  Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l gives a deeper meaning to this statement.  He explains that what is meant by this Gemara is that even the richest of people should have the feeling of gratitude to Hashem before he eats anything.  The reason for this is because even when the food is on his table and he is ready to eat it there is no guarantee that he will be able to benefit from it, and only after he eats it then he gets benefit from it.  That is why we must bless equally if we were to eat a small meal or a feast.  We should enjoy everything that Hashem gives us and we should not take anything for granted, and that is why we say Viachalta Visavata Uberachta.

 

PARSHAT RE’EH


Good Math, Bad Logic:
The Final Gematria
by David Gertler

In Parshat Re'eh the Torah makes us aware that there will be blessing and cursing on Har Gerizim and Har Eival.  However, it is not until Parshat Ki Tavo that we are told which Shevatim will be standing on which mountain.  Obviously the commentators will try to figure out the reason that each Shevet is on a certain mountain.

The Chida quotes Rabbeinu Ephraim, as he often does, to give insight through using Gematria.  Rabbeinu Ephraim writes that the reason that the Shevet of Asher was on Har Eival, which was the mountain for curse, was because Asher was famous for having a daughter (Serach Bat Asher), and the Gematria of Habat "the daughter" is equal to that of Aror "cursed."

The Chida, having quoted that, gets angry with Rabbeinu Ephraim, and he says: "I, the ordinary person, see praise from what the Gemara says [about women]."  He goes on to say that perhaps one can suggest that Shevet Reuven is on Har Eival due to his sin, to which the Torah alluded to just Pesukim earlier (Devarim 27:20).  However, to say that Asher had a daughter, and "the daughter" is equal, in Gematria, to "cursed," and therefore they were placed on Har Eival, is not logical for a number of reasons.  The Gemara (Baba Batra 103a, 144b) says that blessing is bestowed on the house from a woman's presence.  The Chida says that specifically speaking the daughters of Asher were wed to Kings and High Priests.  Additionally, there is a concept of Hakol Talui Baisha, everything is dependent on the woman. 

The Chida started off his comment by saying that one cannot say that the Gematria of "Arur" being equal to that of "Habat" has meaning.  He ends his comments by saying that if one would like to play number games there is another equation, which makes more sense, which one can play.  He quotes the Pasuk from Eishet Chayil (Mishlei 31:39) Vaet Alit Al Kalnah "You rise up above them all," and says that the Gematria of Vaet is equal to that of Habat. 

The Chida seems to be saying that although Gematrias can help one's purpose, they are not at all perfect and new ideas should not be brought out from them.  Gematrias may be fun and interesting, but truth being told, they can work positively or negatively.  Personally speaking, whenever I find a Gematria I always look to see if that is the only connection between the two ideas.  If there is another connection and the Gematria helps it along, then I use it, but if it is a new idea, only seen through this Gematria, I prefer to leave things as they were.  For example, the Gematria of Tzitzit adding up to 600 plus the five knots and eight strings, to equal 613, to remind us of the Mitzvot is an idea we see in the Pasuk zachartem Kol Mitzvot Hashem (Bemidbar Sinai 15:39)- Tzitzit should remind one of all 613 Mitzvot.  However the Rabbeinu Ephraim's idea above has only ideas to contradict it and "although the math is right, the reasoning is wrong."

 

PARSHAT SHOFTIM

 

Hidden Meanings  
by Rabbi Ezra Wiener

The pre-battle speech of the ëäï îùéç begins with the phrase:  Shema Yisrael Atem Krovim Hayom Lamilchama (20:3).  The Gemara in Sotah (42a) relates, "Even if you only have the merit of fulfilling the commandment of the reading of Shema alone, you are worthy that Hashem should save you"

Another Drasha taught in Gemara Sotah (44a) based on a phrase found only a few verses later, seems, however, to contradict the above.  The Shotrim make the following announcement:Mi Haish Hayoray Varecha Halevav Yalecha Viyashav Libito.  "What man is fearful and faint-hearted?  Let him go and return to his house."  Rabbi Yosef Haglili interprets the phrase Hayare Valecha Halevav, as follows: Hayare Haaverot Shebiyado "This refers to a person who's fearful of the transgression in his hand."  This is an individual who was encouraged to return home from battle. 

The Drasha of Rabbi Yosef states explicitly that a person should return home from battle if he is fearful of any possible transgressions he may have violated, yet previously the Gemara stated that Hashem assures salvation with the fulfillment of merely the recitation of the Shema?

R' Yechiel Reuven Mandelbaum in his Sefer Doadei Reuven answers this question by first posing two additional difficulties.  Firstly, why does Rabbi Yosef use the phrase Hayare Maaverot Shebiyado, the word Shebiyado is superfluous, Hayare Maaverot Shelo or simply Hayare Maaverot would have been sufficient; why must Rabbi Yosef mention "The transgressions that are in his hands?  Secondly, why does Rabbi Yosef see in this Pasuk a requirement for all those who are fearful of violating transgressions to return home?  If an individual is careful to follow the charge of the Kohen Mashiach and recite Shema with the proper Kavana then he has accepted Ol Malchut Shamayim and has therefore achieved Teshuva. 

 R' Mandlebaum explains that one of the requirements of Teshuva is Azivat Hachet.  Although one has accepted Ol Malchut Shamayim if a person's Yetzer Hara is too over-powering and he cannot remove himself from a particular sin, he has not accomplished Teshuva.  It is the individual that recites Shema with the purest of intent but cannot remove himself from sin and retains that sin Biyado that Rabbi Yosef orders to return home.  The term Biyado indicates that this individual has not performed Teshuva since he has failed in the challenge of Azivat Chet.  As a result his Shema cannot possibly be pure and its recitation is compared to one who immerses in the Mikvah with a Sheretz in his hand.

In conclusion, there is no contradiction between the charge of the Kohem Mashiach and the Shotrim.  The Shotrim come to clarify that of one has not performed Teshuva completely then his Shema will actually not save him.  Therefore he should preferably return home. 

 

PARSHAT KI TAYTZAY


Warring Women
by David Gertler

Parshat Ki Teitzei (24:5) states that a newly married couple is exempt from war.  Not only are they exempt from war but, unlike the other exemptions (20:5-7), they are also exempt from supplying the war and working behind the scenes.  However, as the Mishna in Sotah (8:7) says, this only applies to a Milchemet Reshut (a war for any other purpose than conquering or defending the initial land of Eretz Yisrael).  However, with regard to a Milchemet Mitzva (one for outside conquering), everybody is required to participate "even a groom from his chamber, and a bride from the wedding canopy."  This raises an interesting question, not whether women are permitted to fight in the wars, but perhaps obligated, as this Mishna seems to indicate.

This question brings out interesting answers.  The most interesting of them is that in a Milchemet Mitzva the groom is required to leave the canopy to fight.  Once he has left the canopy, why should the bride stay there?  She should also leave, not to fight, but because she has no reason to remain if the groom is gone!  However, this answer does not fit well with the words of the Mishna, and others therefore suggest that she should do behind the scenes work for the war effort.  The reason for this type of reaction to the Mishna is because it was absurd to think that women would go out to war.  It is only very recently that women are accepted easily to the armed forces.  (Some commentators attribute the disapproval of women entering the war to the prohibition of Kli Gever, claiming that armor is male garb.  The Ibn Ezra claims that it is largely because of promiscuity that will occur.  The Gemara (Kiddushin 2b, and others) simply states that it is not the way of a woman to be involved in war.)

This discussion may lead to another interesting thought.  This is the Mishnaic and Talmudic principle forbidding women to learn Torah (see Sotah 3:4 and compare with Nedarim 4:3, see also Rabbi Jachter's discussion on the topic printed in Vol. 9 No. 15).  Rav Schachter makes an interesting observation (which for me was the best solution to the problem that I had heard) regarding the issues.  He quotes a Gemara (Sotah 42), which states that Hashem put before Bnai Yisrael a book and a sword and told them to choose one.  The Gemara claims that Bnai Yisrael will always be engaged in one type of Milchama, either a Milchama Shel Torah or a Milchama Shel Cherev.  Now, comparing these two, since a woman is not permitted to engage in one battle to engage in the other is equally forbidden.  But what is the war of Torah?  Rav Schachter explains that it is all the arguing and counter arguing that goes on when one learns Gemara with a Chavruta.  I think that we can explain what a woman is permitted to learn and what she is not by analyzing the way the woman will learn.  The forbiddance is not the learning but rather the war that often accompanies the learning.

The two lessons to learn out is that in war time, it is extremely important to engage in Milchama Shel Torah, to end the war.  And regarding the wars with Torah or swords, women, while allowed to play a role, should not stand in the front line, as that is improper.

 

PARSHAT KI TAVO

 

Keep the Numbers Straight
by Dr. Joel M. Berman

Vayikach Shesh Maot Racev...
"And he [Pharaoh] took 600 chariots …"

Why exactly 600 chariots?  And what does Parshat Beshalach have to do with this week's Parsha?  Pharaoh was one of the wisest men in the world.  He even knew of the Tochachot in this week's Parsha.  He therefore knew that Israel is undefeatable when keeping Torah and Mitzvot.  At such a time the Torah teaches "if the enemy attacks us from one route, the enemy will flee (from us) down seven routes."  Pharaoh also knew that when Israel is not keeping Torah and Mitzvot two enemy soldiers will be capable of chasing 10,000 of ours.  Pharaoh felt, with some justification, that Bnai Yisrael were far from keeping Torah and Mitzvot, and therefore every two of his soldiers would be capable of vanquishing 10,000 Bnai Yisrael.

Since 600,000 Bnai Yisrael left Mitzrayim, simple dimensional analysis, (600,000 Bnai Yisrael)(2 Mitzri chariots/ 10,000 Bnai Yisrael), dictates that Pharaoh should have attacked Bnai Yisroel with 120 chariots, not 600.  R' Chaim Rappaport æö"ì has an explanation for this discrepancy.  We recall that Rashi teaches us that four fifths of Bnai Yisrael died during the plague of Darkness- unbeknownst to Pharaoh.  More simple arithmetic (600,000 x 5) shows us that there were 3,000,000 Bnai Yisrael before the Makah.  Since Pharaoh believed that he was attacking 3,000,000 Bnai Yisrael he therefore required (3,000,000 Bnai Yisroel) (2 Mitzri chariots/ 10,000 Bnai Yisroel) or 600 chariots.

Just as we appeared outnumbered when we left Mitzrayim we must constantly remind ourselves, especially during these worrisome times, that our wars have never been dictated by numbers of soldiers or numbers of weapons.  Our enemies have always outnumbered us, both in weapons and soldiers, many times over.  The last Mishna in Sotah explains how the last generation before the final Geula will have dog-like characteristics.  I have heard the following explanation.  A dog, if harassed with a stick, will bark at the stick instead of the person controlling it.  Our enemies are only a stick, sent by Hashem to punish us for not keeping Torah and Mitzvot.  The best strategy, along with Tzahal, is provided again by the last Mishna in Sotah; "Upon whom shall we depend?  Upon Avinu Shebashamaim."


Food for Thought

by David Gertler

1)    Why is Tzaraat an exceptionally fitting punishment for the Lashon Hara that Miriam said? (See Rashi 12:1 and Pasuk 10)

2)    What part of the Meraglim's report was inappropriate?  How is their punishment, as described by Rashi, even more appropriate than Rashi explains it to be? 

3)    Why are the names of Yehoshua and Kalev switched in order, in different places (ie. 14:30, 38)?  Which one of the two plays an active role throughout the story?

4)    Why was the majority of the nation kept from going into Israel?  What similarities can be drawn to the reason that Moshe is kept from entering?  [Consider Rav Soloveitchik's Shiur on Parshat Bahalotecha.]

5)      Regarding what was Bilam supposed to curse Bnai Yisrael?  Regarding what did he bless them?  Considering Moav's next attempt to destroy Bnai Yisrael, and the result, was the blessing effective? 

6)      Pinchas is described as the son and grandson of great people and since he too was a great person, his children would be observant forever.  How does this compare with the offspring of a Rasha, such as Korach (28:10-11)?  What practical ramifications does this have?

7)    Why should Bnai Gad and Bnai Reuven be rewarded, by getting land in Eretz Yisrael, if they do not help in conquering Eretz Yisrael?  Is this somehow admitting that the land that Reuven and Gad chose was better?

If you have a response to [this/these] question[s], please contact us at koltorah@hotmail.com Responses may be published upon agreement of the provider.

Staff at time of publication:

Editors-in-Chief:  Josh Dubin, David Gertler
Managing Editors:  Yair Manas, Uri Schechter

P
ublishing Manager: Zev Feigenbaum
Publication Editor: Ilan Tokayer
Business Managers:  Yehuda Goldin, Sam Wiseman
Staff:  Noam Block, Ami Friedman, Shuky Gross, Simcha Haber, Michael Humphrey, Oren Levy, Ari Michael, Effie Richmond, Dani Shaffren
Webmaster: Yisroel Ellman    
Faculty Advisor:  Rabbi Howard Jachter

Subscription information

Report an error

Back to the home page

This publication contains Torah matter and should be treated accordingly.