Seeing what’s in front of you

By On · Add Comment

During the famine in Canaan, Yakov sent his sons to Egypt, and they were captured and imprisoned. Unbeknownst to them, their captor was actually their long lost brother Yosef. In prison, they discussed their situation:

וַיֹּאמְרוּ אִישׁ אֶל-אָחִיו, אֲבָל אֲשֵׁמִים אֲנַחְנוּ עַל-אָחִינוּ, אֲשֶׁר רָאִינוּ צָרַת נַפְשׁוֹ בְּהִתְחַנְנוֹ אֵלֵינוּ, וְלֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ; עַל-כֵּן בָּאָה אֵלֵינוּ, הַצָּרָה הַזֹּאת – The brothers lamented to each other, “We are guilty for what we did to our brother! We saw his suffering, when he pleaded with us, and we ignored him! We have brought this on ourselves!” (42:21)

But on reviewing the entire episode, no reference is made to Yosef talking to them once their decision was made to get rid of him.

R’ Shlomo Freifeld suggests a beautifully simple truism as a resolution.

When a person doesn’t want to see something, they are literally blind to it. To the brothers eyes, their minds were made up – he was gone. Of course he begged and cried; but did they notice? Not at all – and the Torah records that he didn’t make a sound, because they were the actors in that story. To their eye, he didn’t make a noise.

It was only in hindsight, sitting in jail, that they could take stock and relive their terrible ordeal. They saw events with no bias, and realised their folly. They couldn’t see the forest for all the trees.

Learning A Lesson

By On · Add Comment

We find that Yosef’s brothers harboured animosity to him almost from the beginning:

וַיָּבֵא יוֹסֵף אֶת דִּבָּתָם רָעָה אֶל אֲבִיהֶם – And Yosef brought evil tales to their father. (37:2)

Rashi explains he brought three issues he brought to his fathers attention. The first was that Leah’s sons allegedly mistreated Bilhah and Zilpah’s sons for being “slaves”, the second was that he suspected them of illicit, adulterous relationships, and the third was that they ate limbs of live animals.

Rashi notes how Yosef suffered in each of these three areas later on in his life. Having accused his brothers of taunting and mistreating “slaves”, he was sold into slavery himself. Having accused his brothers of forbidden relationships, he was challenged by Potiphar’s wife in this area. For accusing them of eating live animals; when he was sold, they slaughtered a goat and dipped his coat into it, which they then presented to their father, implying his death. They then ate it.

R Ezra Hartman points out an issue with this. Regarding the adultery and slavery, Yosef was the subject of the challenges – they happened to him, presumably to learn that he was wrong in these areas. However, the blood his coat was dipped in did not directly involve Yosef at all. Given that these occurrences appear to be lessons, what was Yosef supposed to learn from it if it didn’t happen to him?

R Chaim Shmulevitz explains that sometimes, people cannot concede that they were wrong. It hurts too much to admit to someone else they were right all along. Yosef saw how he was wrong, and was forced to accept that what he had reported to his father was not true, and had to suffer in silence and indignity. His humiliation at seeing he was wrong was the lesson to be learnt.

Money and Power – Worthy of Respect?

By On · Add Comment

We find that Yosef has two vivid dreams, that had trappings of prophecy:

וַיַּחֲלֹם יוֹסֵף חֲלוֹם, וַיַּגֵּד לְאֶחָיו; וַיּוֹסִפוּ עוֹד, שְׂנֹא אֹתוֹ. וַיֹּאמֶר, אֲלֵיהֶם: שִׁמְעוּ-נָא, הַחֲלוֹם הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר חָלָמְתִּי. וְהִנֵּה אֲנַחְנוּ מְאַלְּמִים אֲלֻמִּים, בְּתוֹךְ הַשָּׂדֶה, וְהִנֵּה קָמָה אֲלֻמָּתִי, וְגַם-נִצָּבָה; וְהִנֵּה תְסֻבֶּינָה אֲלֻמֹּתֵיכֶם, וַתִּשְׁתַּחֲוֶיןָ לַאֲלֻמָּתִי. וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ, אֶחָיו, הֲמָלֹךְ תִּמְלֹךְ עָלֵינוּ, אִם-מָשׁוֹל תִּמְשֹׁל בָּנוּ; וַיּוֹסִפוּ עוֹד שְׂנֹא אֹתוֹ, עַל-חֲלֹמֹתָיו וְעַל-דְּבָרָיו. וַיַּחֲלֹם עוֹד חֲלוֹם אַחֵר, וַיְסַפֵּר אֹתוֹ לְאֶחָיו; וַיֹּאמֶר, הִנֵּה חָלַמְתִּי חֲלוֹם עוֹד, וְהִנֵּה הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְהַיָּרֵחַ וְאַחַד עָשָׂר כּוֹכָבִים, מִשְׁתַּחֲוִים לִי. וַיְסַפֵּר אֶל-אָבִיו, וְאֶל-אֶחָיו, וַיִּגְעַר-בּוֹ אָבִיו, וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ מָה הַחֲלוֹם הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר חָלָמְתָּ: הֲבוֹא נָבוֹא, אֲנִי וְאִמְּךָ וְאַחֶיךָ, לְהִשְׁתַּחֲו‍ֹת לְךָ, אָרְצָה. וַיְקַנְאוּ-בוֹ, אֶחָיו …

And Yosef dreamt a dream, and told it to his brothers, and they continued to hate him. And he said to them, “Listen to this dream I dreamt! We were binding bundles in the field, and my bundle arose, and also stood upright, and then your bundles encircled and prostrated themselves to my bundle.” So his brothers said to him, “Will you reign over us, or will you govern us!?” And they continued to hate him for his dreams and for his words.

And he dreamed another dream, and he related it to his brothers, and he said, “I have dreamed another dream; the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were prostrating themselves to me.” And he told [it] to his father and to his brothers; and his father told him off and said to him, “What is this dream that you have dreamed? Will we come; I, your mother, and your brothers, to prostrate ourselves to you to the ground?” And his brothers envied him… (37:5-11)

The dreams were not empty visions – they were prophecies.

The Beis Halevi explains how the bundled grain dream related to the physical; Yosef’s incredible future rise to governor of Egypt, future owner of all the grain stores in the empire, and subsequently, his vast amounts of wealth. The dream about the stars and heavenly bodies correlated to spirituality – Yosef is called Yosef HaTzaddik, the righteous, the foundation of the universe.

R Ezra Hartman explains how this differentiated his brothers reactions to each dream. Wealth is external to a person; it does not define him, is not a part of him. This is related very subtly, where they did not bow to him, but to his bundle – אֲלֻמֹּתֵיכֶם, וַתִּשְׁתַּחֲוֶיןָ לַאֲלֻמָּתִי. Perhaps this is why they hated him, that they misunderstood him and though that somehow great wealth would mean he ought to rule them – אִם-מָשׁוֹל תִּמְשֹׁל בָּנוּ. The dream about the bundles engendered hatred – וַיּוֹסִפוּ עוֹד שְׂנֹא אֹתוֹ.

But with the stars, they did not bow to a representation of Yosef, but rather, כּוֹכָבִים, מִשְׁתַּחֲוִים לִי – they bowed to him, himself. This dream about the stars, hinting to his holiness and the spiritual attainments he would achieve, engendered jealousy – וַיְקַנְאוּ-בוֹ, אֶחָיו.

It seems that the dream about wealth did not engender jealousy, only hatred, perhaps as described above. The dreams about spirituality were not something to hate him for – they could use their jealousy as a motivational tool. But regarding his immense wealth, there was nothing to be jealous of – wealth doesn’t make someone better, hence their retort.

There was no such retort to the dream about spirituality. Bettering oneself is the only currency that counts, and they knew it.

To Honor Hashem

By On · Add Comment

There are many questions on this Dvar Torah simply because this is one of the most confusing pieces in all of Tanach. So if you have any questions I would suggest you try to fast for a year, get the Ben Ish Chai to come to you in a dream and ask him. :)

39:11-19 “And it was on this day and he (Yosef) came into the house to do his work…. And she (the wife of Potifar) grabbed him by his clothes saying lay with me!”

(Sota 36b) Yosef who was mekadesh Hashem secretly received a letter of Hashem’s name added upon his own (Y-eh-osaif). How was Yosef Mekadesh Hashem? For it says, “and it was on this day and he came into the house to do his work,” Rav Yochanan says both Yosef and the wife of Potifar had in mind to do an averah (immorality), but since Yosef was able to stop himself from sinning he was Mekadesh Hashem’s name. This line of Rav Yochanan is an argument between Rav and Shmuel. One says he came to do his regular work and one says to do his needs (immorality). “She grabbed his clothes saying lay with me!” At that moment the image of Yaakov Avinu appeared to him (in the window) and said, “Yosef, in the future your brothers names are going to be written on the Afod with you in between them. Is it your will to erase your name and write the ‘Haroeh Zonos’?” Ad Kan Divrei Hagemarah

The Maharsha asks, what in the world is going on in this Gemarah? Yosef, according to Rav Yochanan (and either Rav or Shmuel) apparently succumbed to his desires, was saved miraculously by his father’s image, and for this he was Mekadesh Hashem in which he got an additional letter added on to his name? What did Yosef do that was great? It sounds (Chalila) just the opposite – that he went in to have immorality with Ashes Potifar. It’s good that he was able to stop himself, but this is called being Mekadesh Hashem?

The Ben Ish Chai adds by asking what the big deal was with Yosef overcoming his evil inclination. We have seen time and time again how many Tanaaim, Amoraim, Rishonim and even Achronim were willing or did give up their lives rather to succumb to lewdness. For example the Yetzer Harah once decided to test Masya Ben Cheresh (a Tana), so he (the Yetzer) dressed up as a beautiful woman and stood in front of Masya. Wherever Masya turned the woman would appear, so having no other choice he blinded himself with an iron prod (Hashem then sent Raphael to heal him after promising to no longer test him with taavas isha). A little extreme, but we see and have seen, how one can fight against the Yetzer Hara, so what was so great about Yosef?

Answers the Ben Ish Chai with a chidush. A normal human being will have a constant conflict his entire life with his Yetzer Hara. Sometimes he wins, but sometimes he doesn’t. It is a back and forth battle until the day of his death. The reason for this is because when that person wins a battle, it means he is pushing his Yetzer away for the time being, but the Yetzer will return and fight even harder next time. This is all because if one does defeat his Yetzer, it is done by pushing it away, but rarely does he get rid of the Yetzer for good. For example if a person has a Tayva (Desire) to look at inappropriate images, and uses all of his power to stop himself, what will he do? He’ll run away from the images, or do something else to get his mind off the images for the time being. The problem with this is that the desire for doing that sin still remains inside him, he just stopped it for the time being. (Obviously this doesn’t have to be true by every single person or by every single sin.)

Yosef on the other hand was not so. Yosef wanted to get rid of his Yetzer Hara for good, so he fought in a different manner. He brought himself to the point where the sin was right in front of him, where the tayva would be the greatest, and yet he was able to stop himself. Yosef knew the only way he could completely stop the Yetzer from ever trying to fight with him, would be to prove to the Yetzer that even if the sin was in his face he still wouldn’t do it. By using his father’s image (according to this view Yosef himself thought of Yaakov to assist him in his fight against the Yetzer) he was able to control himself even at the time of the maasa itself, and say to the Yetzer, “you have nothing on me!” All the other stories consist of Tzaddikim who are able to push off the Yetzer, but there still remains a slight spark of desire in them, and therefore the battle rages on and on until his death. Yosef took on the Yetzer head on and came out successful. Yosef did this because he was afraid that if he were to leave a spark of desire in him, he may not have succeeded throughout his Galus in Mitzrayim. Thus he took on the Yetzer with all his strength and literally proved to the Yetzer that there is nothing he can do to make him sin. (Please don’t try this at home!) This says the Ben Ish Chai is why Yosef was Mekadesh Sham Shamayim to the point where he got a letter of Hashem’s name inserted into his own.

True Modesty

By On · Add Comment

In (37,21),   “Reuven heard and saved him from their hands.

“כא וַיִּשְׁמַע רְאוּבֵן וַיַּצִּלֵהוּ מִיָּדָם וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא נַכֶּנּוּ נָפֶשׁ

The Medrash writes on this : “Had Reuven known that the Torah wrote about him “Reuven heard and saved…” , he would have immediately taken Yosef on his shoulders and returned him to his father.”

We must understand  what is the pshat in the Medrash of why would Reuven suddenly return Yosef?

Also, how does the Passuk write that Reuven “saved” Yosef when he threw Yosef into a pit with snakes and scorpions?

The Toras Nesanel explains beautifully: The Mephorshim explain that the brothers had sentenced Yosef to death because he was a morid bemalchus; i.e. he had rebelled against the kingdom of Yehuda and had claimed that he was the one destined to be king, as they said to him “do you think you can rule over us?”  They assumed that Yosef was a dreamer, and that he wanted to have the kingdom instead of Yehuda.

The Gemara in Brachos 62a writes: כל הצנוע בבית הכסא נצול משלשה דברים מן הנחשים ומן העקרבים ומן המזיקין ויש אומרים אף חלומותיו מיושבים עליו

“One who is modest when he goes to the bathroom, he gets 3 rewards: He is saved from snakes and scorpions and demons, and additionally his dreams are destined to be true.”

With this all becomes clear;  Reuven was unsure of whether Yosef was dreaming to rebel against Yehuda, or whether his dreams were really the truth, and Yosef really would be king.

This would depend on whether Yosef was modest in the bathroom or not as the Gemara states.

In order to test whether he was modest or not, Reuven threw Yosef into a pit with snakes and scorpions and waited to see whether he would be injured or would be saved:

If he would be saved, then this is a sign that Yosef was modest as the Gemara states. In which case he receives the other reward that his dreams are true and so doesn’t deserve to die in the first place as he isn’t rebelling against Yehuda; for he dreamt the truth.That was the intention in Reuvens actions, if Yosef wouldn’t be harmed, this proves he is innocent. In this way he saved Yosef.

And now the Medrash can be understood. Had Reuven known that the Torah wrote about him that he “had saved Yosef” by throwing him into the pit, then that proves that he wouldn’t be injured by the snakes, in which case his dreams are also true, in which case he is completely innocent, therefore he would have immediately returned Yosef to his father.

Good Shabbos.

‘Gender’ally Speaking

By On · Add Comment

יוסף בן שבע עשרה שנה כו’ והוא נער כו’ (לז:ב) – “Yosef, at the age of seventeen years… But he was a youth etc.” (Vayeishev 37:2). Rashi cites the Medrash (בר”ר פ”ד ז’) that Yosef would practice “youth-like” activities, including beautifying his eyes and fixing his hair. Rav Schwab has a very nice explanation of Yosef’s behavior in his sefer. We will attempt another.

The Alshich HaKadosh in Parshas Vayishlach (34:1) writes a very elemental idea. ”ותצא דינה בת לאה כו’” – “Dina, the daughter of Leah, went out etc.” Rashi says that the passuk specifically calls her the daughter of Leah and not of Yaakov Avinu, for Leah also was a יצאנית – a woman who “goes out,” and “like mother like daughter.” The Alshich asks, however, that the cases are not similar. Leah went out to greet her husband, which presumably should not categorize her derogatorily as a יצאנית, unlike Dina who seems to unfortunately fit the bill. Which intrinsically begs the question of how Dina could be a יצאנית, a deprecating description for a girl of her stature? “כל כבודה בת מלך פנימה” – “Every honorable princess dwelling within etc.” (Tehillim 45:14). It is honorable and proper for a Jewish girl to keep to her privacy!

Says the Alshich, we know (גמ’ ברכות ס.) that Leah was pregnant with what was supposed to be a male. Yet since that baby was to be the eleventh born to Yaakov Avinu, even if Rachel were to be blessed with finally having a child (to be number twelve), both Bilah and Zilpa, the “Shfachos,” would have more of the Shevatim (two each) than Rachel. Leah therefore davened for Rachel, and Hashem turned Leah’s unborn male child into Dina. It is therefore no wonder, concludes the Alshich, that Dina was a יצאנית. Since her roots were of male origin, she possessed this male characteristic to be one who “goes out;” which is not a depreciating characteristic for men.

The Alshich, however, is learning the story according to the Gemara Brachos (60a), namely that what took place after Leah’s tefilos was that the male fetus became the female Dina (this view is also held by: ירושלמי ברכות פ”ט הל”ג (סו:), בר”ר ע”ב ו’, ותנחומא ויצא ח’). There is another opinion in Chazal, that of the Targum Yonasan (30:21, also shared by רבי צדוק בגמ’ נדה לא. לפי המהרש”א ח”א שם בשם פענח רזי) who learns that Rachel herself was pregnant with Dina at the same time that Leah was pregnant with Yosef. According to this opinion, Yosef and Dina switched places due to Leah’s tefilos, with Yosef going to Rachel and Dina going to Leah.

The Chida (ראש דוד, הובא בספר “תורת החיד”א” וישלח אות ס”ט) learns the story like the Targum Yonasan, that the babies switched wombs, yet says the exact same idea as the Alshich to explain the יצאני tendencies of Dina. Yet instead of learning that the roots of one’s own neshama being of a different gender can thereby effect one’s tendencies, like the Alshich, the Chida has to understand (and so he writes, according to how he learns the story) that Dina obtained male tendencies by entering a womb once occupied by the male Yosef.

What we are about to say is NOT “pshat,” and only possibly “drush.” Now, the advantage of learning in accordance with the Chida is that in the say way that the Chida says that Dina’s being in a womb formerly occupied by a male influenced her in a masculine way, so too did Yosef’s being in a “female womb” influence him in a feminine way. This would explain why Yosef had the tendency of beautifying himself. It would also shed new light on the Gemara Sota 10b that highlights a difference between Yosef and Yehuda. Yehuda sanctified Hashem’s name in public when he admitted to his being with Tamar. Yosef sanctified Hashem’s name in privet (when he refused to have anything to do with Potifar’s wife – Maharsha). Here we see in Yosef the attribute of doing great things specifically in private. As we mentioned, “כל כבודה בת מלך פנימה” – here we see this honorary “feministic” trait in Yosef.

Bird Dreams

By On · Add Comment

In the end of this week’s Parsha we find that whilst Joseph was in jail he had two prisoners incarcerated with him, Pharaoh’s personal Butler and Baker.

They both dreamt strange dreams and Joseph interpreted it for them. Lo and behold both interpretations turned out to be correct. The question is, how did Joseph know to interpret the Butler’s dream in a positive manner, explaining that he will be reinstated into his previous post, whilst interpreting the Baker’s dream negatively saying that he will be executed?

Rabbi Meir Shapiro, famed head of Lublin yeshiva and founder of the Daf Hayomi movement, explains that in his dream the Butler was serving Pharaoh a goblet of wine thus prompting Joseph to understand that his job was safe. However the Baker dreamt that a bird was pecking from the baskets, laden with loaves, on his head.

Birds or any other animals are afraid of man and the only time when they’re not afraid

to approach the human race is when they show no sign of life. If the Baker in his dream saw the bird resting so close to him it was a sign that he’d lost his status as Man and therefore it was clear that he would be meeting his death within the near future. This meaning is of great depth. It shows us that Man, even bearing all his special traits, still instills fear in every animal but only when he’s worthy of being defined as Man as it says in Genesis 9:2, ‘and I shall instill your fear into all the mammals that surround you’ etc.

Legend says that an Emperor once commissioned a sculptor to create a piece of

art for him. The sculptor went about his work and presented the king with a statue of a lion resting and a bird perched on his shoulder. The king was fascinated by the sculpture and said it was more real than life. In fact he offered anyone who could voice a valid criticism a handsome reward. No one could come forth with a legitimate criticism

Until a farmer stepped forth and said if the lion were real no bird would dare rest on his shoulder!

The parable is quite clear. When a human is in his full strength both physically and spiritually every mammal, bird of sea creature would have the utmost fear and respect for him!

Because That If….?

By On · Add Comment

Whilst imprisoned, Yosef sayid the following to the butler:” כִּי אִם זְכַרְתַּנִי אִתְּךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר יִיטַב לָךְ וְעָשִׂיתָ נָּא עִמָּדִי חָסֶד וְהִזְכַּרְתַּנִי אֶל פַּרְעֹה וְהוֹצֵאתַנִי מִן הַבַּיִת הַזֶּה – Remember me when things go well with you, and please do me a favor and mention me to Pharaoh, and you will get me out of this house.” (40:14).

The words כִּי אִם do not really belong here, as the translation above clearly shows – they do not add or change any meaning in the Pasuk. כִּי אִם translates loosely as “because that”. Certainly this translation is not helpful in understanding the Pasuk What is it then there for? As we have seen many times, it must be because we have not understood the context clearly enough.

There is a story told by the Brisker Rav in the name of his father R’ Chaim Brisker about the Rav of Kovno. The story occurred at the time that Napoleon’s armies were marching through Eastern Europe.The lords and gentry wanted to please Napoleon as his armies passed through their lands, and they wanted to honour him by making a lavish evening whereupon they would bestow gifts and treasures to him. The province’s leaders each took their turn to present him and his delegation with their offerings, and after a while, he noticed none of the Jewish community were represented. He was relatively good to the Jews, and was involved in their emancipation, and questioned why there were no Jewish leaders at the gathering. The pronvince’s leaders shuffled around uncomfortably, and explained that they did not feel the Jews to be members of society worthy of honouring Napoleon. He flew into a rage and insisted they bring a Rabbi, and the gentry grew nervous. They sent for the Rabbi from the nearest town, who happened to be the Rav of Kovno. He was rushed to the ball and Napoleon requested that he say something truthful, something he considered was lacking in the previous speeches. The gentry were quaking at this point.

The Rav referred to that week’s Torah portion, Vayeshev, and said that he had never understood why the Pasuk had said כִּי אִם until the sequence of events that had unfolded that night had enabled him to have an audience requested by Napoleon. He explained that without context, we do not see the bigger picture, with regards to what Napoleon was doing in this far flung corner of Europe. He said that things do not just happen coincidentally. Everything is ordained, everything is planned in Heaven. Yosef was saying to the butler that he was innocent, and certainly that was the case: how does one prevent a fly falling into the wine as it is being drunk? But nevertheless he was imprisoned. For what purpose?

כִּי אִם, “you are here because (I.e. – in order) that you must remember me when things go well with you”.

The Rav then proceeded to tell Napoleon that the reason he was near Kovno was because the Jews were being oppressed terribly, and he was here to save them. Napoleon applauded, and he saved them by removing the gentry’s stewardship over the Jews (albeit temporarily!).

Everything happens for a reason, sometimes we only realise this at the end.

Breaking the chain

By On · Add Comment

There are just four appearances of a שלשלת (Shalsheles), a rare cantor’s note in the entire Chumash– in Lech Lecha 19:16 – in Chayei Sarah– 24:12, in Vayeshev 39:8 and in Tzav 8:23. The Shalsheles is a tremendous literary device

In Chayei Sarah, we find that Eliezer, Avraham’s most trusted servant, is charged with finding a wife for Yitzchak. He is not allowed to take a wife from Canaan. The Midrash tells us that Eliezer had a daughter and it could have been that he might ‘just not have found’ a suitable wife outside Canaan. This could have left the path open for his daughter. Nevertheless, Eliezer overcomes any personal attachments and prays that Hashem heed his master’s request. This triumph over his own desires is signified by the Shalsheles on the word ויאמר – the opening word of his prayer.

In Vayeshev we see the tremendous personal struggle that Joseph had to overcome. Indeed, by running out and leaving his coat behind in the hands of his master’s wife, he got himself into more trouble in some ways. But on a personal level, he could not afford to be in the house a moment longer, refusing his master’s wife’s advances. That very word – וימאן (and he refused), has a שלשלת on it, denoting the breaking of his own potential negative desires.

As for the final appearance – in Tzav – the Midrash tells us that Moshe Rabbenu was the Kohen Gadol until the end of the Miluim, the first week of the Mishkan’s use, at which point he had to hand over the position to his brother Aharon (according to various sources, because he had argued at the burning bush). It must have been hard for him. Yet he overcame any personal desires and handed over the baton wholeheartedly. His final act as High Priest was וישחט…no surprises about the musical note on this word, at the point of his breaking with his own emotion.

Looking back at Lech Lecha, we see from Rashi that the Torah tells us that the angels had to grab hold of Lot because he was tarrying… leaving behind all his possessions. The first word of the Pasuk, which means he hesitated, contains a שלשלת – he overcame his physical desire for wealth and grabbed reality with both hands… literally.

It is no accident that Shalsheles actually means a chain. Furthermore, if you listen to its sound, it is elongated (3x a פזר – Pazer, another musical note – which is long already), yet comes to an abrupt end, thus breaking the chain. The person it is used about has transcended. See how wise Chazal are, even when ascribing the musical notes to the words.