Archive for the ‘17. Yisro’ Category

Yisro heard – heard what exactly?

After the Jews left Egypt, and experienced the miracle of the Red Sea, we are told how people from all over heard about it, but particularly one man:

וַיִּשְׁמַע יִתְרוֹ כֹהֵן מִדְיָן, חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה, אֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה אֱלֹהִים לְמֹשֶׁה, וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵל עַמּוֹ: כִּי-הוֹצִיא יְהוָה אֶת-יִשְׂרָאֵל, מִמִּצְרָיִם – Now Moshe’s father in law, Yisro, chief of Midyan, heard all that God had done for Moshe and for Yisrael, His people; that Hashem had taken Yisrael out of Egypt. (18:1)

This seems rather strange – the Torah tells us twice that Hashem did something to the Jews – first אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה אֱלֹהִים לְמֹשֶׁה, וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵל עַמּוֹ, and then immediately after כִּי-הוֹצִיא יְהוָה אֶת-יִשְׂרָאֵל, מִמִּצְרָיִם. How are we to understand the repetition?

On hearing wonders the Jews experienced, he sought out to their encampment, along with Moshe’s family, and Moshe came out to greet them. We then find that:

וַיְסַפֵּר מֹשֶׁה, לְחֹתְנוֹ, אֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה ה לְפַרְעֹה וּלְמִצְרַיִם, עַל אוֹדֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל – And Moshe told his father in law all that Hashem had done to Pharoh and to Egypt, on behalf of Yisrael. (18:8)

Immediately after Moshe tells Yisro what happened, Yisro praises Hashem; בָּרוּךְ ה, עַתָּה יָדַעְתִּי, כִּי-גָדוֹל ה מִכָּל-הָאֱלֹהִים. This ought to be perplexing – we were first told how וַיִּשְׁמַע יִתְרוֹ – Yisro heard what had happened, he knew; what was there for Moshe to tell, that caused Yisro to react so?

I want to suggest an explanation.

Yisro was a man who believed in the idea of a god; he was a priest himself. What he heard was that אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה אֱלֹהִים לְמֹשֶׁה, וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵל עַמּוֹ – there had been an act of אֱלֹהִים, an act of god, that happened to the Jews. He came to investigate.

What Moshe told him was that this wasn’t just an act of god, but rather it was עָשָׂה ה לְפַרְעֹה וּלְמִצְרַיִם – it wasn’t just אֱלֹהִים, but rather, Hashem (we do not say His name). Moshe identified that God was Hashem, whom we have a name for and whom we have a relationship with. On hearing this, Yisro reacted the way he did, by praising Hashem specifically, not just the idea of a god.

This explains our difficulty in the first pasuk. וַיִּשְׁמַע יִתְרוֹ כֹהֵן מִדְיָן, חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה, אֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה

    אֱלֹהִים

לְמֹשֶׁה, וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵל עַמּוֹ – he heard what

    God

had done, but the remainder of the pasuk is not what he heard, but what actually happened -כִּי-הוֹצִיא ה אֶת-יִשְׂרָאֵל, מִמִּצְרָיִם. The second part is why he heard it, but not what he heard. He hadn’t heard of Hashem, only the general concept of god, and the pasuk tells us that he heard what god had done. Why did he hear it? כִּי-הוֹצִיא ה אֶת-יִשְׂרָאֵל, מִמִּצְרָיִם.

To illustrate: Steve was told to be somewhere. The reason, unknown to Steve, was that his friends had organised him a surprise party. But all Steve knew was to be somewhere. So we can say how Steve went somewhere, for his surprise party, but Steve only knows the first bit.

Print/Pdf

Moshe as a representative

In Parshas Chukas, Moshe sent emissaries to Edom, requesting that Bnei Yisrael traverse through their land on their way to Canaan, which Edom decline. Throughout the parsha of sending emissaries, the pasuk alternates between Moshe and Bnei Yisrael as having sent them (21:21 and onwards).
Rashi there explains that the pasuk is demonstrating that the leader is like the entire nation - שמשה הוא ישראל, וישראל הם משה, לומר לך שנשיא הדור הוא ככל הדור.

The Maharal points out a difficulty here. Rashi in Yisro (Shemos 18:1) writes that Moshe is equal to the whole Yisrael.
If this is so, how can we then extrapolate from Moshe to all leaders, that they are like the entire nation, if he was by definition different and greater than they could ever hope to be?

R’ Yehoshua Hartman explains that Moshe being parallel to Yisrael isn’t literal. To illustrate: if he were to eat, they wouldn’t all have to bentch afterwards.

The leader is an emissary, a representative of his people. Moshe was more, in that his being equal meant his actions carried the same weight as the nation itself. Sending emissaries is an act of any leader as a representative, and it is in this regard that we can deduce from Moshe to other leaders.

There is an idea in Chazal that Moshe could have utilised “אָנֹכִי הֹ’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ” as a defence for Bnei Yisrael at the Golden Calf, in that it was only said to Moshe, in the second person singular, so  technically, Bnei Yisrael had not violated אָנֹכִי הֹ’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ.
How is this possible?

R’ Hartman explains that the Maharal says that the Patriarchs didn’t receive Torah because they had no nation to speak of. They were individuals, and individuals die. The Torah is eternal, so must be given to a nation, as nations do not fade and die e the way an individual does. An individual represents only potential, whereas a nation has actualised it.
So how could Moshe, an individual, say that he received it alone?

Moshe was a microcosm of Yisrael. There were the 600,000 people at Sinai, and then Moshe, who represented their essence.
Whatever made Yisrael into Yisrael at Sinai, Moshe already was. (This is why his grave is unknown). He was saying that the qualities of Yisrael at Sinai that he represented were not guilty of the Golden Calf, that the people were not the very selves that had accepted it, and as such only he could be said to have heard it, exonerating the Bnei Yisrael.
Moshe was the pinnacle of Yisrael, and represented all that was good in the people of those days. It was in that capacity that he received and delivered the Torah, and the people he represented were not the self-same people who were guilty of the Golden Calf, and thus, the people who succumbed at the Golden Calf ought not to be held guilty at all..

Print/Pdf

To be an individual or a single entity

The opening pasuk in Parshas Vayakhel reads: “וַיַּקְהֵל מֹשֶׁה אֶת כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם אֵלֶּה הַדְּבָרִים אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה ה’ לַעֲשֹׂת אֹתָם’ – Moses gathered the whole community of the children of Israel to assemble, and he said to them: “These are the things that the Lord commanded to do” (35:1)

The Nesivos Shalom asks three questions.

This is the sole instance of וַיַּקְהֵל – an instruction to gather all the people together – in the entire Torah, where וַיַּקְהֵל is the first thing mentioned in the episode. What is so exceptional about this instruction of וַיַּקְהֵל, that makes it unique?

Secondly, the opening statement was “לַעֲשֹׂת אֹתָם” – to do – the instructions are not to light fire, and not to work. How is not doing something called “לַעֲשֹׂת אֹתָם” – to do?

Furthermore, this episode occurred directly after the Eigel (Golden Calf), as Rashi explains that Parshas Vayakhel occurred the morning after Yom Kippur, when Moshe returned with the second luchos. It seems obvious that his first public appearance upon his return would be a notable message to the people regarding the bridge between G-d’s wrath and appeasement. What was it that atoned for the sin of the Eigel? (more…)

Print/Pdf

To Know

.י: וַיֹּאמֶר יִתְרוֹ בָּרוּךְ יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֲשֶׁר הִצִּיל אֶתְכֶם מִיַּד מִצְרַיִם וּמִיַּד פַּרְעֹה אֲשֶׁר הִצִּיל אֶת הָעָם מִתַּחַת יַד מִצְרָיִם  :

10. [Thereupon,] Jethro said, “Blessed is the Lord, Who has rescued you from the hands of the Egyptians and from the hand of Pharaoh, Who has rescued the people from beneath the hand of the Egyptians.

יא: עַתָּה יָדַעְתִּי כִּי גָדוֹל יְ־הֹוָ־ה מִכָּל הָאֱ־לֹהִים כִּי בַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר זָדוּ עֲלֵיהֶם:
11. Now I know that the Lord is greater than all the deities, for with the thing that they plotted, [He came] upon them.” (18:10-11)

What is it that he now knew?

There is a well-known Midrash that Pharaoh had 3 advisers during the episode of the Jews slavery in Egypt – Bilam, Iyov (Job), and Yisro. When Pharaoh sought to annihilate the Jews by drowning the Jewish boys in the river Nile, Bilam supported this and Iyov abstained, whereas Yisro advised against this and subsequently had to flee to Midyan to escape Pharaoh’s clutches.

With regard to our question, (what did Yisro ‘now’ know) I heard a fabulous explanation on a pshat level. What he now knew was Hashem’s system of hashgacha – oversight – the system of midda k’neged mida, measure for measure.

Pharaoh had sought to destroy the Jews by drowning them, and the reverse had happened to him and the entire Egyptian army.

. יא: עַתָּה יָדַעְתִּי כִּי גָדוֹל יְ־הֹוָ־ה מִכָּל הָאֱ־לֹהִים כִּי בַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר זָדוּ עֲלֵיהֶם
11. Now I know that the Lord is greater than all the deities, for with the thing that they plotted, [He came] upon them.” (18: 11)

So now he saw that Hashem delivers justice, he realized that he was in a bad situation. Although he had fled Pharaoh when it became clear that official Egyptian policy was genocide, what had he done up until that point? The entire enslavement episode occurred whilst he was in Pharaoh’s cabinet government, and what had he advised then? Nothing in the Jews favor, as it was only when he did that he had to flee. So Yisro realized he had erred and required a tikkun, a solution, to achieve teshuva, repentance.

His solution to the bad advice he had given was to offer good advice.

‘13. It came about on the next day that Moses sat down to judge the people, and the people stood before Moses from the morning until the evening.’ (18:13) – after which he offered the solution of having elders judge as well, solving the inefficiency of the judicial system in the state it was in.

Print/Pdf

Deserving Honor

ה. וַיְהִי בִישֻׁרוּן מֶלֶךְ בְּהִתְאַסֵּף רָאשֵׁי עָם יַחַד שִׁבְטֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל

5. And He was King in Jeshurun, whenever the sum total of the people were gathered, and the tribes of Israel were together (Devarim 33:5)

This Pasuk teaches us that Moshe was appointed King of Yisroel, ‘בְּהִתְאַסֵּף רָאשֵׁי עָם’, after the Torah was given on Har Sinai.

In the Parsha this week, Yisro comes to Klal Yisroel in order to convert, slaughters a certain offering to Hashem, and makes a lavish feast. Rashi (18:12) says that Moshe didn’t sit and eat during the feast, rather he stood and served everyone.

The Meshech Chachmah asks, how was Moshe able to be forgo his honor by serving the guests? A Rav or Nassi can forgo their honor, but a King can never forgo their honor (see Kedushin 32b)? He answers that there is a Machlokes Tannaim in regards to when Yisro came to Klal Yisroel. One says before Matan Torah and one says after (could even be after the Hashkamas Hamishkan). If Yisro came before Matan Torah then we don’t even have a question because Moshe was only King after Matan Torah. But, if we say Yisro came after Matan Torah then our question stands and how was Moshe able to be Mochel his kovod? Thus the Meshech Chachmah has to answer that according to the one who holds Yisro came after Matan Torah, then the aforementioned Rashi doesn’t exist, that Moshe never served during the meal and he really sat and enjoyed like a King.

The Meam Loez gives a different answer. Gem. Sota 31b says that Agripas Hamelech used to read the Torah on Hakel standing up in the Bais Hamikdosh. Everyone knows that the King is allowed to sit, but Agripas would still stand. The Chachamim said that Agripas was absolutely right and righteous for standing in the Bais Hamikdosh. The Gemerah asks, but Agripas was a King, so how did he forgo his honor? The Gemarah answers that a Mitzvah is different. Meaning that since a Mitzvah was being done (Hakel) Agripas was able to forgo his honor for the sake of doing a mitzvah. Tosofos there asks that we know a King can’t be Mochel his Kovod from a Gem. in Kedushin 32b. There it retells the story how Rav Gamliel (a Nassi) served his guests at a certain Seudas Mitzvah. The Gemarah asks, how can he be Mochel? In which it answers a Nassi can be Mochel his Kovod and that only a King cannot be Mochel. There the Gemarah was dealing with serving his guests at a seudas mitzvah and the Gemarah says that a Nassi can be Mochel, but a King, even by a Seudas Mitzvah, isn’t allowed to be Mochel. So what is the Gemarah’s answer that a King can be Mochel his Kovod if he is doing a mitzvah if the Gemarah in Kiddushin clearly doesn’t hold that way? Tosofos answers that to accomplish a regular mitzvah the King wouldn’t be able to be Mochel his Kovod, whereas a mitzvah which involves the Shechina to come a King could be mochel. Therefore Agripas was able to stand up in the Bais Hamikdosh for the Shechina was there.

The very next Rashi in the aforementioned pasuk 18:12 says that when you eat at a meal with talmidei chachamim its as if you benefited from the ”Ziv Hashchina” (Maharsha says for Torah will be discussed at such a meal. For another reason see Gur Aryeh). Now we have a pashut answer. The meal Moshe was serving was a meal hosting many Talmidei Chachamim. Thus the Shechina was at the meal, (as Rashi pointed out) and even if we were to say that Yisro came after Matan Torah, Moshe could still be Mochel his Kovod for the sake of the Mitzvah which involves the Shechina. (Only question is, why wasn’t the Shechina by the meal of Rav Gamliel? There it was a Seudas Mitzvah with Talmidei  Chachamim and yet only a Nasi was able to be Mochel, but not a King? A bit of a Tzarich Iyun. This question could be why the Meshech Chachmah didn’t want to answer like the Meam Loez.)

Print/Pdf

An eighth of an eighth

There is a Gemara in Sota 5a says that it is good to be humble, and quantifies this as an eighth of an eighth (1/64). This is seemingly arbitrary as the number is random, and how would we measure 1/64th of arrogance to find the suitable degree of humility?

The Vilna Gaon (biography here) has classic answer, that the 8th pasuk in the 8th parsha (Vayishlach) says “קָטֹנְתִּי מִכֹּל הַחֲסָדִים וּמִכָּל הָאֱמֶת אֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתָ אֶת עַבְדֶּךָ – I have become small from all the kindnesses and from all the truth that You have rendered Your servant” – on which Rashi elaborates ” קטנתי מכל החסדים : נתמעטו זכיותי על ידי החסדים והאמת שעשית עמי – I have become small: My merits have diminished because of the kindnesses and the truth that You have rendered me”. This is a classic answer to what the Gemara is referencing, that we should assume that our merits have become small and that we are not actually all that, considering all G-d has done for us.

The Koheles Yitzchak delves deeper into the number 64, and says that the Gemara in Megila 29 tells the story of how all the mountains spoke to G-d, as it were, and competed for the right to have the Ten Commandents given on them, and Mt. Sinai “won” the right, and we are informed that one of the mountains was call Tabor.

In a Gemara in Bava Basra 73, the measurements of Tabor are listed, that it was 4 parsa tall, which is 16 mil, and a mil is the distance a person can walk outside a poulated area on Shabbos – 2,000 amot (cubits), so 16×2,000 cubits = 32,000.

There is a Mishna in Midos 2:1 that says that Mt Sinai was 500 cubits high. 500 fits 64 times into 32,000, ie Mt Sinai was 1/64th as tall as Tabor, and it was selected.

There is a third answered suggested by the Maharsha (biography here), that the word for arrogance in Hebrew – גס - has the numerical value of 63. Being a part of something greater (1/64th) is the way we should perceive things.

Print/Pdf

ראש חודש ניסן

This Weeks Parsha

Israel: Bechukosai

Categories