All About Levi – Were All the Jews Enslaved in Egypt?

By On · Add Comment

We find in Parshas Shemos a potentially surprising fact: not all the Jews were enslaved:

ויאמר אלהם מלך מצרים למה משה ואהרן תפריעו את העם ממעשיו לכו לסבלתיכם – The king of Egypt said to them, “Moshe and Aharon, why do you disturb the people from its work? Go to your own burdens”. (5:4)

Rashi quotes a Midrash that the tribe of Levi were not oppressed by the Egyptians, which was why Moshe and Aharon, who were from Levi, were freely able to go where they pleased. But why were they exempt?

Ramban explains how every nation had elders and wise men to teach the nation their respective laws. Pharaoh therefore left Levi alone in order to allow them their role. R’ Simcha Ziesel Broide notes that if a person like Pharaoh could understand and accept that every nation, and even it’s slaves, need spiritual guidance and role models, how much more so do we need to respect and cherish Torah scholars, and help establish Torah as much as we can.

Daas Zkeinim explains how the Egyptians slowly manipulated the Jews into working, rather than a sudden enslavement, which could provoke a revolution. The Jews who participated at first were then forced to continue against their will. Yet the people from Levi, knowing that they were destined to serve Hashem, refused to compromise and cooperate. They did not participate on the first day, and never became committed or obligated.

Maharal questions how, if Hashem told Avraham his descendants would be enslaved, (Bereishis 15:13-14.) how could Levi not be included in the slavery? Maharal answers, that truly Sheivet Levi was not included in this prophesy. Levi are the “portion of Hashem” set aside from the rest of the Jewish Nation, dedicated to His service. Rabbeinu Bachye goes so far as to say that Levi was the “tithe” of his brothers.

Pharaoh knew according to the prophesy, that the nation that enslaved Avraham’s offspring would be severely punished. He interpreted that if he did not enslave the entire Jewish nation, he would be free of the repercussions. He chose Levi specifically out of respect, for even Yaakov honored Levi by not allowing them to take part in his burial. His mistake was that Levi are not counted among the rest of the Jews in that prophesy for the above reason, meaning that he did in fact enslave all of Avraham’s offspring as related to the prophesy, and was therefore punished.

The Mishneh L’Melech proves that inheriting the Land of Israel was only possible through being enslaved in Egypt. Anyone who would eventually get a portion in the Land would have to endure slavery; those who were not going to get a portion need not be enslaved. Esav left Eretz Yisroel for this reason; he wanted nothing to do with enslavement. Levi too, who were not to receive a portion in the Land, did not have a reason to be enslaved.

Maharil Diskin shares a fascinating idea. The prophesy to Avraham was that the oppression would start when his offspring would be “strangers in a land not their own.” Since the land of Goshen in Egypt was originally given to Sarah as a gift by Pharaoh, there the Jewish nation could not be “aliens” in Goshen. As long as the Jews resided in Goshen, the terms of enslavement would not begin. The verse states, “The Children of Israel were fruitful, teemed, increased, and became strong – very very much so; and the land became filled with them” (Shemos 1:7). The Maharil Diskin explains that it is implied by the population increase that the land would become filled with them. Why state the obvious? Rather, the pasuk is teaching that they did not want to stay isolated in Goshen, and instead they branched out into the rest of Egypt and became involved in their society. In leaving Goshen, they allowed for their own enslavement. Levi, however, stayed and served Hashem in Goshen.

The Maharil Diskin is also explaines a Zohar (Beraishis 27a). The Zohar expounds on the passuk in Shemos 1:14, וימררו את חייהם בעבודה קשה בחומר ובלבנים כו’, and says, קשה – זו קושיא, בחומר – זו קל וחומר, ובלבנים – זו ליבון הלכה. The Maharil Diskin enlightens us by saying that the enslavement to Egypt occurred only to those not already “enslaved” to Torah. The Gemara (Sanhedrin 99b) says that every person was created to work. The Mishna (Avos 3:5) says, “Whoever accepts upon himself the yoke of Torah, the yoke of the government is removed from him.” We see that when we fulfill our necessity to work by toiling in learning Torah, it “exempts” us from the necessity of doing other, potentially more physical labor. The Jews in Egypt who did not carry out their requisite work by exerting themselves with Torah, needed to fulfill it with the physical enslavement to Egypt. I heard many times from my Rebbe and Rosh Yeshiva, Rabbi Daniel Lehrfield Shlit”a, that proof of this is that Sheivet Levi was not enslaved. Since they continued to learn Torah at the same strenuous and laborious level as the slave-work of the rest of Klall Yisroel, they fulfilled the decree of slavery prophesized to Avraham by learning, instead of manual labor.

In a similar vein, Panim Yafos says that Sheivet Levi learned Torah and kept the mitzvah of bris milah, whereas the rest of the Jewish nation did neither. Sheivet Levi’s merits protected them, unlike the rest.

Finally, the Maskil L’David interestingly learns that the people of Levi were not fully enslaved due to Pharaoh’s own daughter’s intervention. In raising Moshe as her own, Bisya had an affinity towards him and asked of her father to exclude Moshe’s tribe, Levi.

This explanation is particularly fascinating for it implies that up until Basya took the initiative, Sheivet Levi too was oppressed. The Maskil L’David explicitly writes that Sheivet Levi was subjugated even after Basya’s intervention, the only difference being the intensity of the work. While the rest of the Jews worked unimaginably hard, Sheivet Levi only had to perform regular labor.

This would explain a question that has bothered me for a while. If Levi were not oppressed whatsoever, on Pesach, why would Kohanim and Leviim sit and say, “Avadim hayiinu” – “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt…”?

[The simple explanation that one could say according to the other opinions that Sheivet Levi was truly exempt from all labor, is that since most of the Jews went through what they did, therefore the Jews as a whole (including Levi) need to recognize and relive this on the Seder night. Another possibility is as the Chasam Sofer writes, there were two types of exiles happening in Egypt. One was physical, the other was spiritual; Bnei Yisrael had reached the 49th level of spiritual impurity due to their Egyptian surroundings and influences. If so, we can suggest that even if Levi was not enslaved physically, they certainly could have been affected and “enslaved” by Pharaoh in the spiritual sense. This would explain why Kohanim and Leviim say “Avadim hayiinu”; spiritual slaves.]

According to the Maskil L’David, however, new light is shed on the matter. Levi too were physically enslaved to Pharaoh.

Even according to the other opinions, that Levi were truly free from enslavement, this does not imply that living in Egypt was a walk in the park for them. Although they may not have been enslaved or worked helpless, their lives were still in danger. This is clear as we see that Moshe’s father, Amrom, went so far as to divorce his wife (Sota 12a). He did so because of the futility in childbirth due to the law that all male newborns be thrown into the Nile. Even after he was convinced by Miriam to take Yocheved back, by which they had their third child Moshe, there came a point when Yocheved could no longer hide Moshe. She was forced to place him in the little boat in the Nile. All this notwithstanding that their family was from Levi. Furthermore, the Meshech Chochma (4:20) writes that Moshe, concerned that the Jewish People would not believe his claims of imminent Heavenly redemption, decided to bring his wife and family to Egypt (a thing he would only do if he was certain that they would not be in danger) in order to heighten Klall Yisroels’ trust in Hashem. Now, if Sheivet Levi were completely above all cruel Egyptian devastation, what proof of Heavenly protection would it be for Moshe to bring his family there?

Furthermore, Yalkut Shimoni says that when Aharon met Moshe on the latter’s way down to Egypt, and saw him bringing his family, he said to him, “We are pained by [the distress of] those Jews already in Egypt, and you want to bring in more?!” Maharal points out that from this we see that clearly life was bitter for Sheivet Levi as well.

After writing all this, and after being bothered for a few years by the question of why Kohanim and Leviim say the Haggada, I was finally shown Simchas

 

Haregel, the Chida’s commentary to the Haggada. Commenting on the excerpt: “כל המרבה לספר ביציאת יצרים הרי זה משובך” – “All who speak plentifully of story of the exodus is praiseworthy,” the Chida writes that “כל” – “All” is meant to include even Kohanim and Leviim (כל – same initials as כהן לוי). Even they shall speak of the exodus, despite their not being oppressed. The Chida give two explanations for this.

Firstly, even though they were not oppressed, they were not able to leave Egypt of their own volition; so they too were freed by Hashem. Secondly, had the Jews stayed in Egypt but one more second than they did, they would have sunk to unimaginable lows and impurity which would have effected even Levi (similar to the Chasam Sofer quoted above). They too need to recognize and praise Hashem for His salvation. In fact, the Chida writes that he told this over to a Gadol, who replied that he too had thought of this interpretation, and added that converts too are included in “All.” It is for this reason that the next item in the Haggada is the story with R’ Eliezer, R’ Yehoshua, R’ Elazar Ben Azaria, R’ Akiva and R’ Tarfon who sat in Bnei Brak telling over the story of the exodus all night long. Rabi Yehoshua was a Levi, Rabi Elazar Ben Azaria and Rabi Tarfon were Kohanim, and Rabi Akiva came from converts.

From a somewhat historical standpoint, Rav Yaakov Kaminetzky explains at length all these goings-on regarding Levi. As a brief summary, it was all Yosef’s doing. Yosef had a particular wisdom – that of how to stay alive spiritually in a foreign environment. He learned this from Yaakov, who in turn learned it from Shem and Ever in order to survive living with Lavan. This wisdom enabled Yosef to recognize that to insure the spiritual (not to mention physical) survival of the Jewish People, he needed to take measures to isolate and protect Levi. This was in order that they in particular would continue to grow in Hashem’s service uninhibited by anything or anyone, to be a “light” and source of guidance to the rest of the nation. It was Yosef who established the law in Egypt that priests were to be excluded from taxes and other governmental rules and regulations. Due to Yosef’s foresight, Levi played the essential role in the Jewish People’s survival.

Incidentally, there is a fascinating Meshech Chochma in Parshas Vaeira (6:13). The passuk says, “וידבר ה’ אל משה ואל אהרן ויצום אל בני ישראל ואל פרעה מלך מצרים להוציא את בני ישראל מארץ מצרים” – “Hashem spoke to Moshe and Aharon and commanded them regarding the Children of Israel and regarding Pharaoh, king of Egypt, to take the Children of Israel out of the land of Egypt.” The commentaries offer various approaches to understand “ויצום אל בני ישראל” (literally: “to the Children of Israel”); we have translated according to Rashi’s logical interpretation (“regarding the Children of Israel”). The Meshech Chochma, however, learns the pasuk literally. Without quoting all of his proofs and extrapolations, simply put the Meshech Chochma learns that Sheivet Reuven, Shimon and Levi all held places of stature in Egypt. They were also slave-owners. Jewish slave-owners. That is why Hashem commanded Moshe and Aharon to not only tell Pharaoh to release the Jews from bondage, but even to command the Jewish slave-owners to do so as well. The Meshech Chochma writes further that the reason Hashem did not allow these three Shevatim to be enslaved was not because of a positive nature (i.e. some positive distinction that played a role in their protection); on the contrary, it was due to their spiritual weakness resulting from Yaakov Avinu’s strong final words to these particular Shevatim. Had they been enslaved, they would have been lost forever.

Qualities of a Leader

By On · Add Comment

The pasuk says in 3:4 : “וירא ה’ כי סר לראות ויקרא אליו אלוקים מתוך הסנה” – “The Lord saw that he had turned to look, and G-d called to him from within the thorn bush”

Moshe Rabbeinu was chosen by Hashem as our leader at the age of 80. It was after Moshe had reached heights that had never before been reached, on his own merit, and had developed the qualities necessary to lead Klal Yisrael out of the גלות – exile.

In fact the Meshech Chochma in his introduction to Sefer Shemos writes that at Har Sinai Moshe Rabbeinu was so elevated that he lost his free will and became something resembling an angel. This was accomplished through his crystal clear understanding of Hashem, as it were. Before this, Moshe was an ordinary man who achieved the extraordinary.

The Torah is short when relating the stories of Moshe before he was chosen. What is the common denominator between the three stories we are told about Moshe Rabbeinu? What is the thread that connects the killing of the Egyptian, to his reprimanding of a Jew, to the help Moshe gave to the 7 daughters of Yisro? Surely if these are the only stories the Torah relates to us about the history of our leader, a message is being taught about the qualities a person must have to be a good leader.

In all 3 episodes Moshe is shown to ‘care’ to step in to a fight that was not his, and to help the weak. When Moshe Rabbeinu saw a Jew being hit, or even gentiles being mistreated he would take action at his own risk. This was his quality and consequently the first trait to look for when selecting a leader. Maybe this is the meaning of the Pasuk:

“וירא ה’ כי סר לראות ויקרא אליו אלוקים מתוך הסנה” – “Hashem saw that Moshe would ‘turn and look’ – ‘כי סר לראות‘ – that is why Hashem chose Moshe as our leader.

But Moshe’s response to turn down the offer to save and redeem the Jews, is seemingly out of character and contradictory to the very reason why he was chosen. So why did he react like that?

It seems that Moshe Rabbeinu was on an even greater level. Moshe, when he helped people, had no ulterior motives, no self-interest. So when Moshe was asked to accept the title of leadership along with all the honor it carries he turned it down. Moshe was a natural helper, a complete giver, he wanted nothing for himself in return. This is the true quality of leader this is exactly what the Bnei Yisrael needed to take them out of Egypt into Eretz Yisrael.

Moshe’s protests were somewhat accepted when Aharon was given the job as the spokesperson of the nation.

The Bigger Picture

By On · Add Comment

The Ksav Sofer at the Hesped of his sister told the following story:

Beruriya (wife of the Tanna R’ Meir) had two children whom their father R’ Meir loved very much. One day when R’ Meir was in the Bais Medrash both the children passed away and Beruriya placed them on their beds and covered them with a sheet. When R’ Meir came home from his studies he asked his wife where his children were. Afraid that the news of the passing of his two beloved children would cause too great a harm to her husband, Beruriya told him that they were probably out the house.

While feeding her husband supper she asked, ‘Rebbe, I have a question.’ R’ Meir indicated that she proceed. She went ahead and asked, ‘If someone gave me a deposit to keep safe, when the time is done do I have to give it back to the rightful owner’? Answered R’ Meir, ‘of course you do!’.

Beruriya then got up, took her husband’s hand, brought him to the room and showed him his two sons. R’ Meir fell on the floor and started crying excessively. Beruriya then said to R’ Meir, ‘My husband, did I not just ask you what to do with a deposit and you answered me that I must give it back to the owner? So too Hashem gave us our children, but when he wants them back we have to give them’. With the words of his Aishess Chayil (woman of valour) , R’ Meir was comforted.

The Ksav Sofer explains that R’ Meir was afraid that his children died early because of his sins and if not for him his children would still be alive. Beruriya needed to comfort R’ Meir and let him know that it wasn’t because of his sins rather simply that their time in this world was done and they accomplished whatever it was they needed to accomplish.

The Ksav Sofer finishes off saying that one must realize that when anything bad happens to an individual it is really still within the Chasdei Hashem (G-d’s kindness). According to our sins we may well deserve much worse, but G-d with his compassion lightens the burden and only gives us a small amount of punishment based on what we can handle.

The Midrash in this weeks Parsha writes that if not for the 22 years of Yosef being in exile, (which caused everyone to have a massive Tikun [rectification] because, as a result, Yosef passed the greatest of tests, and all the brothers did Teshuva.) Yaakov would have been brought down to Egypt in chains and the exile would have started then. But, since Yosef was in Egypt and became King, it led to Yaakov being brought down through his own choice, and the exile of Egypt was able to be delayed.

After Yaakov came to Egypt he clearly saw that the pain and suffering that he had had for 22 years was truthfully the Chasdei Hashem, and that everything had worked out for the best. Ultimately, Hashem knows what’s best for us, it’s up to us to believe in Him.

The True Firstborn

By On · Add Comment

The pasuk at 4:22 says: “וְאָמַרְתָּ אֶל פַּרְעֹה כֹּה אָמַר ה’ בְּנִי בְכֹרִי יִשְׂרָאֵל”- “You shall say to Pharoah, so says G-d: My firstborn son is Israel”

Rashi writes: “ומדרשו כאן חתם הקב”ה על מכירת הבכורה שלקח יעקב מעשו” - “Here G-d had agreed to the fact that Yaakov had taken the firstborn right from Esav”.

What is the connection here?

The Lev Aryeh explains with the following: The next Pasuk, (verse 23) writes that eventually a plague would come in which the firstborn of each Egyptian household would die.

If we look at Makas Bechoros (plague of the firstborn) in Parshas Bo (12:30) it says: ”כִּי אֵין בַּיִת אֲשֶׁר אֵין שָׁם מֵת” – “In every house there was a death”

Rashi asks, how could every household have a firstborn son? He goes on to explain that the Egyptian wives would commit adultery and have sons with other men, each of these sons would be the oldest to its father, hence when the Torah said that the firstborn would die, it referred to the firstborn of the father not the mother.

“דבר אחר מצריות מזנות תחת בעליהן ויולדות מרווקים פנויים, והיו להם בכורות הרבה, פעמים הם חמשה לאשה אחת, כל אחד בכור לאביו”

Now look at the Pasuk about the famous birth of Yaakov and Esav, in Parshas Toldos (25:26): “וְיָדוֹ אֹחֶזֶת בַּעֲקֵב עֵשָׂו וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ יַעֲקֹב”- “His hand was holding unto the heel of Esav, and they called him Yaakov”

Rashi writes:

“נמצא עשו הנוצר באחרונה יצא ראשון, ויעקב שנוצר ראשונה יצא אחרון, ויעקב בא לעכבו שיהא ראשון ללידה כראשון ליצירה, ויפטור את רחמה, ויטול את הבכורה מן הדין” – “Yaakov was created first, but was only born second, so he claimed that he deserves the firstborn rights, because he was created first, therefore he clutched onto the heel of Esav as if to hold him back.”

Rashi explains that Yaakov was created first; i.e. he was the firstborn of his father, but Esav; who was born first, was firstborn to his mother.

So from the plague of the firstborn where we see that “firstborn” refers to the firstborn of the father, and we can bring a proof that Yaakov deserved the right of the firstborn, as he was also firstborn of his father.  That is the link with our original Rashi, showing because of Makas Bechoros, Yaakov was the true firstborn, in that Hashem passed judgment based on the formula Rashi presented at Yakov’s birth of being the father’s first son.

Amazing!

To be Complete

By On · Add Comment

Commentators like to find the connection between two seforim. I’d like to write about a common theme that we find in Parshas Vayechi and Sefer Shemos.

The Ramban, in his introduction to Exodus, explains that the book of Exodus is known as the ‘Book of Redemption’. Theis name speaks for itself since here the Torah explains in great detail how the nation of Israel was redeemed from Egypt. The Ramban points out that we can understand why it is called so until Parshas Mishpatim because this is the story of the redemption and the receiving of the Torah with all its laws could also be considered an integral part of the Redemption.

However, the latter part of Exodus discusses the building of the Mishkan. What connection does that have with the Redemption?

The Ramban explains that the book of Exodus reveals to us the full extent of the Redemption. Redemption of the body is incomplete until there is redemption of the soul too. The nation of Israel only reached an elevated status through attaining spiritual heights. That was only achieved once the Mishkan was built and the Shechina came to rest. Hence Exodus bears the name ‘Book of Redemption’ meaning it was a complete redemption materially and spiritually.

In Parshas Vayechi we find a similar concept.  The Ksav Sofer asks “Why did Yaakov say that in the future everyone should bless their children to be like Efraim and Menashe?

He explains that they symbolize the two perfect ways of serving Hashem. Efraim was the grandson who learned Torah all day and night with his grandfather. His whole essence was Torah, which is the most important way of becoming closer to Hashem.  On the other hand, Menashe helped Joseph with the administration of Egypt. A Jew also has to know how to relate to people, how to behave socially. Judaism is a religion that has a bearing on every aspect of life. Menashe excelled in that department.

Yakov blessed us that all our offspring should excel in both aspects of Judaism, in both the spiritual realm and in the material physical sense. The connection with the book of Exodus is now plain to see. It shows how important it is for a Jew to apply Judaism both materially and spiritually – to be a great all-rounder!

Arguing with the priest – not the best idea

By On · Add Comment

Based on a shiur by R’ Yehoshua Hartman

זִכָּרוֹן לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַעַן אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִקְרַב אִישׁ זָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא מִזֶּרַע אַהֲרֹן הוּא לְהַקְטִיר קְטֹרֶת לִפְנֵי הֹ’ וְלֹא יִהְיֶה כְקֹרַח וְכַעֲדָתוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר ה’ בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה לוֹ – As a reminder for the children of Israel, so that no outsider, who is not of the seed of Aaron, shall approach to burn incense before the Lord, so as not to be like Korach and his company, as the Lord spoke regarding him through the hand of Moshe. (17:5)

Rashi says: כאשר דבר ה’ ביד משה לו: ומהו ביד משה ולא כתב אל משה, רמז לחולקים על הכהונה שלוקין בצרעת, כמו שלקה משה בידו שנאמר (שמות ד, ו) ויוציאה והנה ידו מצורעת כשלג, ועל כן לקה עוזיה בצרעת – As the Lord spoke regarding him through the hand of Moshe: So what is the meaning of “by the hand of Moshe”? Why not just simply “to Moshe”? It alludes to those who rebel against the kehunah. They are stricken with tzara’as , as it says, “and he took it out, and behold, his hand was ‘leprous,’ like snow” (Exod. 4:6). For this reason, Uzziah was stricken with tzara’as. — [Midrash Tanchuma Tzav 11]

Hashem said to put pans on the altar to remind us not to be like Korach. Hashem instructs ‘by the hand of Moshe’. Rashi points that this is literal – one who argues with kehuna suffers tzara’as like Moshe did on his hand, and he adds that Uzziah Hamelech offered up spices and got tzara’as too.

Why did Moshe get it? He had spoken Loshon Hora and said the Jews wouldn’t listen. But what’s the comparison? He didn’t get it for rebelling against the kehuna… So why is Moshe’s example mentioned here?… It should have been compared to Miriam’s tzara’as which was the sidra before Korach, not to Moshe’s instance that occurred in Shemos.

So where’s the Midah Kneged Midah?

Rashi (17:1) says on וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח that he seperated himself to argue. The Maharal asks why doesn’t it say וַיִּקַּח at every argument then, if this is it’s actual meaning?

The Maharal says a regular machlokes is one man against another man, but they are equal, are there is no distinct separation between the two. But kehuna, the priesthood, has the entire nation reliant on it. The kehuna do our korbanos, birchas Kohanim, so if one goes against them, they’re really seperating themselves from the nation, as the nation be definition identify with the priesthood.

TheMaharal explains that the method for dealing with tzara’as is to be sent chutz lamachaneh – excommunication. The afflicted is on one side, everyone else on the other (in the camp). Moshe didn’t get tzaraas for arguing against kehuna, but for complaining about the entire Jewish nation and therefore this is the same formula as one who argues against the priesthood! So Moshe is a good source for tzara’as as a punishment for arguing against kehuna!

But what about Uzziah Hamelech, who got tzara’as on his forehead (see Divrei Hayamim). Where’s the midah kneged midah there?

The Maharal says that if all the Jews were one body, the king would be the heart, Sanhedrin the eyes, and the kehuna would be the forehead that has the brain behind it, the Tzitz on it, and soul on it. He brought incense when it wasn’t his place to, thereby challenging the authority of the kohanim – and he got tzara’as, the punishment for this sin, and the place was afflicted was his forehead – the part of the body that correlates to the kehuna!

Embittered Lives

By On · Add Comment

Hashem told Avraham that his children would be enslaved in a land not their own for 400 years. Yet we find that they left after just 210 years of actual enslavement. Where are the missing 190 years?

There is an answer suggested that Egypt treated the Jews much worse than they should have, so as we say in ברוך המקום during Seder night:

ש”הקבה חשב את הקץ – Hashem calculated the end. What “end” is this talking about? Hashem hastened the גאולה and reckoned off קץ – 190 (from 400)- leaving us with 210.

In the Haggada we read how וַיְמָרְרוּ אֶת חַיֵּיהֶם – They embittered their lives (Shemos 1:1)

The Vilna Gaon points out how this is very subtly hinted to by the notes. The notes on וַיְמָרְרוּ אֶת חַיֵּיהֶם are קדמא ואזלא, which literally means “they got up and went”. Additionally, the numerical value of this is 190! They were over-embittered to a value of 190, so they got up and went!

R’ Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld points out that the redemption from Egypt was only completed 7 days after it began, when the Red Sea parted and when Paroh and his army were destroyed, so where is this reflected in historical events?

He answers that the 400 years were counted from Yitzchak’s birth. The extra week is found at his circumcision. Yitzchak was only circumcised 7 days after his birth – so only became Jewish then, and only 400 years from then were the Jews genuinely free.

All over the place

By On · Add Comment

This is courtesy of D. It is a bombardment of questions, with answers that tie and unify the themes of the questions.

The Orach Chaim asks at Shemos 3:5, when G-d reveals Himself to Moshe, why G-d waits until Moshe is on the mountain and at the burning bush (the bush was on Mt Sinai, this episode occurred there) to tell him he must take his shoes off as he is on sacred ground. But why not warn him before he climbs the mountain?

At 3:11, he asks “who am I take them out?”, and G-d responds (3:12) that “וַיֹּאמֶר כִּי אֶהְיֶה עִמָּךְ וְזֶה לְּךָ הָאוֹת כִּי אָנֹכִי שְׁלַחְתִּיךָ בְּהוֹצִיאֲךָ אֶת הָעָם מִמִּצְרַיִם תַּעַבְדוּן אֶת הָאֱ־לֹהִים עַל הָהָר הַזֶּה – And He said, “For I will be with you, and this is the sign for you that it was I Who sent you. When you take the people out of Egypt, you will worship God on this mountain.” “

The first question: how is this remotely helpful as a reply to a slave in Egpyt querying his would-be saviour’s legitimacy? It’s not a proof, it’s a statement about the future, but does not ascertain anything at the time the proof is warranted.

The second question, where does תַּעַבְדוּן – worship, enter the equation? Apart from their acceptance, weren’t the Jews entirely passive? What worship did they perform on Mt Sinai?

In Beshalach, 17:1, the pasuk informs us that when the Jews camped in Refidim, they had no water. 5 verses later, G-d tells Moses to strike a rock at Horeb (Mt Sinai). Refidim is far from Horeb, so what’s going on?

In Yisro, 19:12, instructions are issued to build a boundary around Mt Sinai, and the next pasuk specifies laws “לֹא תִגַּע בּוֹ יָד כִּי סָקוֹל יִסָּקֵל אוֹ יָרֹה יִיָּרֶה אִם בְּהֵמָה אִם אִישׁ לֹא יִחְיֶה בִּמְשֹׁךְ הַיֹּבֵל הֵמָּה יַעֲלוּ בָהָר – No hand shall touch it, for he shall be stoned or cast down; whether man or beast, he shall not live. When the ram’s horn (Shofar) sounds a long, drawn out blast, they may ascend the mountain.”

Why is it that no one, not even an animal, can stray into the mountain, nor were they even allowed to touch it 3 days before the Torah was given?

There is a concept with Kadshim (sacred items and laws) about there being a permit, a mattir, to use something something that was once Kodesh(sacred). Why is it that there is such a requirement here?

Lastly, after the Ten Commmandments, there is an instruction to build a Mizbeach Adama, an earthen altar (20:21). What is the connection between G-d giving us the Torah and building an altar there?

End of questions.

The Rambam (Maimonides) explains that all instance of G-d speaking to a person are through messengers/angels and the like. The only “face to face” meeting with G-d was with Moshe

To answer our question of why wait until he is there to tell him to remove the shoes, the answer is simple once pointed out; וַיֵּרָא מַלְאַךְ ה’ אֵלָיו בְּלַבַּת אֵשׁ מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה הַסְּנֶה בֹּעֵר בָּאֵשׁ וְהַסְּנֶה אֵינֶנּוּ אֻכָּל – An angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire from within the thorn bush, and behold, the thorn bush was burning with fire, but the thorn bush was not being consumed.” (3:2)

Only at 3:4 does G-d appear – וַיַּרְא ה’ כִּי סָר לִרְאוֹת וַיִּקְרָא אֵלָיו אֱ־לֹהִים מִתּוֹךְ הַסְּנֶה וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמֶר הִנֵּנִי – The Lord saw that he had turned to see, and God called to him from within the thorn bush, and He said, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am!”

So this explains why he was only warned once he was there; as he ascended, there was no prohibition, G-d wasn’t there, an angel was! Only once G-d appeared did the land become holy so he would need to take off his shoes.

Bearing in mind that the land itself, Mt Sinai, was already holy from that moment, we can further understand the “proof” that Moshe was meant to tell people, which Targum Yonasan ben Uziel explains at 19:5 that the mountain of G-d was the proof; that there was a place waiting for the Jews where the Torah would be given, and the Mishkan would be built, they were now a nation in waiting.

So it has been established that the land was holy before the Torah was given, and the Chizkuni explains that in Refidim, when they had no water, Moshe went to Horeb, and brought back a rock from there, and it was this rock from Mt Sinai that he struck to make water.

What about the permit/mattir to use the land? Where does that enter the equation? The Ibn Ezra quotes R’ Hai Gaon that the Shofar was blown when the command to build the Mishkan was given, and this Shofar, coupled with the sacrifices brought on the Mizbeach Adama (earthen altar), transferred the holiness from the mountain to the Mishkan .

So the mountain was forbidden and holy once G-d revealed Himself at the burning bush. In shachris (morning prayers), in the section regarding the sacrifices, we say “olas hatamid ka’asuya b’har sinai” that we bring the Tamid sacrifice like on Mt Sinai. So when did we bring sacrifices on Mt Sinai? At the time the Mishkan was consecrated for the first time, on Mt Sinai!

With this we can understand why the pasuk said תַּעַבְדוּן – worship. They did worship at Mt Sinai, when they consecrated the Mishkan by bringing the sacrifices, using the earthen altar and blowing the Shofar, which transferred the innate holiness of Mt Sinai that had been there since G-d had revealed himself to the Mishkan.

I think that ties up all the loose ends. :)

Prayers… work!

By On · Add Comment

The Torah tells of the Jews desperation and anguish when hope seemed lost:

וּפַרְעֹה הִקְרִיב וַיִּשְׂאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת עֵינֵיהֶם וְהִנֵּה מִצְרַיִם נֹסֵעַ אַחֲרֵיהֶם וַיִּירְאוּ מְאֹד וַיִּצְעֲקוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶל הֹ – Pharaoh drew near, and the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and behold! the Egyptians were advancing after them. They were very frightened, and the children of Israel cried out to the Lord. (14:10)

Rashi remarks that תפשו אומנות אבותם – They seized the craft of their ancestors.

The seems to praise the Jews. But why identify it as something their ancestors would have done? At the beginning of the slavery we find that they cry out and the ancestral heritage is not mentioned: וַיְהִי בַיָּמִים הָרַבִּים הָהֵם, וַיָּמָת מֶלֶךְ מִצְרַיִם, וַיֵּאָנְחוּ בְנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל מִן-הָעֲבֹדָה, וַיִּזְעָקוּ; וַתַּעַל שַׁוְעָתָם אֶל-הָאֱלֹהִים, מִן-הָעֲבֹדָה – Now it came to pass in those many days that the king of Egypt died, and the children of Israel sighed from the labor, and they cried out, and their cry ascended to God from the labor.

Rashi does not explain that their cry was prayer – it obviously was – the tradition of prayer that dates back to the Patriarchs.

Perhaps it isn’t a praise at all. An insight into the people praying: וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֶל מֹשֶׁה הַמִבְּלִי אֵין קְבָרִים בְּמִצְרַיִם לְקַחְתָּנוּ לָמוּת בַּמִּדְבָּר מַה זֹּאת עָשִׂיתָ לָּנוּ לְהוֹצִיאָנוּ מִמִּצְרָיִם. הֲלֹא זֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר דִּבַּרְנוּ אֵלֶיךָ בְמִצְרַיִם לֵאמֹר חֲדַל מִמֶּנּוּ וְנַעַבְדָה אֶת מִצְרָיִם כִּי טוֹב לָנוּ עֲבֹד אֶת מִצְרַיִם מִמֻּתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר – They said to Moses, “Were there no graves in Egypt that you have taken us to die in the desert? What have you done to us by taking us out of Egypt?! Isn’t this what we told you in Egypt, saying, ‘Leave us alone, and we will serve the Egyptians, because we would rather serve the Egyptians than die in the desert?!’”. (14:11-12)

These people are clearly not the most righteous people; they go from prayer to wishing themselves back into slavery and rejecting G-d and Moshe in a heartbeat.

That is the point Rashi illustrates here. They did not pray because it was the right thing to do; they prayed because it was what their fathers would have done. תפשו אומנות אבותם – They seized the craft of their ancestors – not עבודה – service, but craftsmanship; it was work!

R’ Yitzchok Hutner queries that morning prayers before Az Yashir detail how Hashem listened to our cries. But these cries were hardly noble, so why are mention this in our prayers?

He answers with a parable, about a king who is friends with a nobleman, whose son is close to the prince. One day, whilst visiting the prince in the palace, the nobleman’s son bursts into the king’s chamber and starts shouting at the workers, and the king tells them to do as he says.

It’s not because of what the nobleman’s son said or deserved: it’s because his father is the king’s friend.

This is why we mention Zchus Avos in the opening paragraph of Shemona Esrei; in spite of our lack of merit, our lineage should stand us in good stead.

Why Moshe?

By On · Add Comment

Shemos starts by explaining how Yakov’s children thrived in Egypt, and only once the brothers had died, did the slavery begin. It then continues with the process of how the enslavement began.

Before Moshe is introduced, the Torah tells us:

וַיֵּלֶךְ אִישׁ מִבֵּית לֵוִי – A man of the house of Levi went…

This man is Amram, Moshe’s father, and the leader of the Jews at the time. But why doesn’t the Torah start with the part that matters; Hashem contacting Moshe the shepherd? Would it not make more sense to say, “A shepherd of the house of Levi, called Moshe…”?

From the Torah’s description of Moshe’s early life, perhaps there is a subtle description of his nature and personality, that directly led to his selection as being suitable to lead the Jews out of Egypt.

When Moshe is first found by Batya, she says “ וַתִּרְאֵהוּ אֶת הַיֶּלֶד - and she saw him the child“, but then the next words are “וְהִנֵּה נַעַר בֹּכֶה – and behold, he was a weeping lad“. He went from being a baby to a lad (a term to describe someone older). Various commentators note that it was a mature cry i.e. a cry for others, his suffering brethren, that subsequently led her to conclude “ מִיַּלְדֵי הָעִבְרִים זֶה- “This is one of the children of the Hebrews.” (2:1)

We must note that it is clear that although he grew up in an Egyptian palace, and Batya was like a mother to him, he knew that he was a Jew, as we are told ” וַיְהִי בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם וַיִּגְדַּל מֹשֶׁה וַיֵּצֵא אֶל אֶחָיו וַיַּרְא בְּסִבְלֹתָם וַיַּרְא אִישׁ מִצְרִי מַכֶּה אִישׁ עִבְרִי מֵאֶחָיו – Now it came to pass in those days that Moshe grew up and went out to his brothers and looked at their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian man striking a Hebrew man of his brothers“ (2:11). Rashi points out that looking at their burdens distressed him as it was his own brothers suffering, and yet he was a prince of Egypt!

This undoubtedly placed him in turmoil. Here he was, an Egyptian prince, yet he empathised with Hebrew slaves, who were his brothers. He was neither an Egyptian, nor a Jew.

We are told how he noticed his brothers suffering, and intervened when he saw a Jew being abused:

וַיִּפֶן כֹּה וָכֹה וַיַּרְא כִּי אֵין אִישׁ וַיַּךְ אֶת הַמִּצְרִי וַיִּטְמְנֵהוּ בַּחוֹל – He searched this way and that way, and he saw that there was no man; so he struck the Egyptian and hid him in the sand.” (2:12).

He made the decision to stand with his brothers, and murdered an Egyptian, which inevitably meant that he had cut himself off from those that had nurtured him.

R’ Nathan Lopez Cardozo explains how this pasuk describes the conflict Moshe had. “Moshe searched (within himself), this way? (Egyptian?); that way? (or Jew?) and saw there was no (complete) man (i.e. he was neither). So he struck the Egyptian (within himself) and hid him in the sand.”

Whether or not he actually killed an Egyptian police officer, he chose to side with the Jews, thereby alienating Egyptian society culture within him, as he would be rejected by them (for siding with the Jews and/or for murdering a police officer)!

The point we can draw from this is that Moshe’s past made him into who he was. He was a product of Egypt, and he knew Egypt. In a way, he was Egypt! And he made the choice to become a Jew and severed his ties with Egypt, and this choice made him who he was. It is telling that G-d only speaks to Moshe after these events unfold.

Quantifying Rewards

By On · Add Comment

There is a Tosfos in Sota 11a that quotes a Tosefta. The discussion there is about G-d’s kindness and the opening chapters of Shemos. It explains that Hashem punishes for up to 4 generations and rewards up to 2,000, a factor of 500:1 ie G-d rewards 500 times more than he punishes.

Miriam spoke Lashon Hara about Moshe Rabbenu, and got Tzaraas (mis-translated as leprosy) so was sent out the camp, but the Jews waited in the desert for a whole week until she got better before they moved on. And this is not just because it takes a week for someone with Tzaraas to get better, as there is no requirement to wait for their recovery. So why did they wait then?

The Tosfos says that the waiting for a week was a reward for what she did in this week’s Sidra:

“וַתֵּתַצַּב אֲחֹתוֹ מֵרָחֹק לְדֵעָה מַה יֵּעָשֶׂה לוֹ - His sister stood from afar, to know what would be done to him.” (2:14) – Some commentators point out that there are 7 words in this Pasuk, corresponding to each of the seven days they waited for her.

This is fine, but the comparison is superficial at best, how long did she wait already that they waited a week?

We can quantify this. There are 168 hours in a week ie they waited that many hours for her, and we established that G-d does kindness by a factor of up to 500. 168 divided by 500 is 0.3something or other, or a third, of an hour ie 20 minutes.

Miriam watched Moshe for 20 minutes!