Archive for the ‘Mussar’ Category

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.

We find that Yakov while crossing a river at night, Yakov remains behind the rest of his family, and is accosted by Eisav’s guardian angel, which has many forms – Satan, the angel of death, the evil inclination etc:

וַיִּוָּתֵר יַעֲקֹב, לְבַדּוֹ; וַיֵּאָבֵק אִישׁ עִמּוֹ, עַד עֲלוֹת הַשָּׁחַר. וַיַּרְא, כִּי לֹא יָכֹל לוֹ, וַיִּגַּע, בְּכַף-יְרֵכוֹ; וַתֵּקַע כַּף-יֶרֶךְ יַעֲקֹב, בְּהֵאָבְקוֹ עִמּוֹ. וַיֹּאמֶר שַׁלְּחֵנִי, כִּי עָלָה הַשָּׁחַר; וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא אֲשַׁלֵּחֲךָ, כִּי אִם-בֵּרַכְתָּנִי. וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו, מַה-שְּׁמֶךָ; וַיֹּאמֶר, יַעֲקֹב. וַיֹּאמֶר, יַעֲקֹב לא יֵאָמֵר עוֹד שִׁמְךָ–כִּי, אִם-יִשְׂרָאֵל: כִּי-שָׂרִיתָ עִם-אֱלֹהִים וְעִם-אֲנָשִׁים, וַתּוּכָל. וַיִּשְׁאַל יַעֲקֹב, וַיֹּאמֶר הַגִּידָה-נָּא שְׁמֶךָ, וַיֹּאמֶר, לָמָּה זֶּה תִּשְׁאַל לִשְׁמִי; וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתוֹ, שָׁם. – And Yakov was left alone, and a man grappled with him until daybreak. And when he saw that he could not overcome him, he struck his hip, and dislocated his hip, as he grappled with him. And he said, “Let me go, because dawn is breaking!” – but Yakov said “I will not let you go, until you bless me”. So he said to him, “What is your name?”, and he replied, “Yakov”. And he said, “No longer shall your name be Yakov, for your name is Yisrael, because you have mastery with God and men, and you have prevailed”. And Yakov asked, and said, “Now tell me your name?”‘ and he replied, “Why is it you ask for my name?”‘ and he blessed him there. (32:25-30)

Rashi explains how the word וַיֵּאָבֵק – to wrestle/grapple, comes from the word אבק, dust, called so for the dust that is kicked up when moving and grappling for leverage. There is a Midrash that the dust kicked up from this epic struggle, reached all the way to Hashem’s throne.

R Tzvi Meir Silberberg explains how this relates to all of our struggles. People think that Judaism is about results, an end product. Not so. It was the not the victory that went up to Heaven; that remained with Yakov. But the struggle, the dust kicked up, went straight up to Hashem.

No one is born perfect. We are human, and we struggle. It is the human condition, and it’s what we are here for.

It is apt that this struggle occurs at night, which is darkness, the uncertain, the unknown. When confronted with light, which is truth and reality, the night is dispelled. This angel has to leave at sunrise, to sing in front of Hashem.

The Gemara in Suka teaches how at the end of days, Hashem will slaughter the Satan, and the righteous will cry because they will see it as a mountain, and they don’t understand how they overcame it, but the evil will cry because it will be as if it were a hair, and lament their lack of control and discipline to resist it. The Yetzer Hara is subjective.

The Steipler compares this to someone who hasn’t seen their family in a long time, and is certain that when they meet, they will all be happy, and never argue or fight again. It will never last. The imagination stage is always better that the reality, because when reality hits, the illusions disappear.

The angel had to leave when confronted with reality, and Yakov asks for his name. He asks for his name. The angel seems to refuse a real answer, “Why is it you ask for my name?”.
R’ Leib Chasman explains that this is the essence of what it is – nothing. It cannot be defined, because it’s almost a reflection of ourselves. There is no answer to what is, just what we make it into.

The parsha opens with:

ויאמר ד׳ אל אברם לך לך מארצך וממולדתך ומבית אביך אל הארץ אשר אראך – And Hashem said to Avraham, “Go for yourself, from your land, your homeland, and the house of your father, to the land which I will show you”.

This pasuk is loaded with inferences. Rashi points out that Hashem was telling Avraham that this journey would be לך – for his own benefit and growth, which seems difficult to understand. Did Avraham need a personal gain to do what Hashem had instructed?

Further, the pasuk uses an expression of leaving from, rather than exiting to, which seems odd, if the actual goal was to arrive at the land Hashem would show him.

Lastly, the requirement to go “from your land, your birthplace, and the house of your father, to the land which I will show you”, seems redundant – the goal is אל הארץ אשר אראך, the land he would be shown. Why include where he was leaving from at all?

Avraham is commanded to go first from his country, then his homeland, and lastly, his father’s house. Shouldn’t the sequence be reversed? When travelling internationally, you leave the house first, then the area and then the country. So why is the command in this order?

The Nesivos Shalom explains that Hashem was telling Avraham to leave his negative traits which he acquired in these locations. Our environment is instrumental to developing who we are as people. The more localised the environment, the greater the affect it can have.

As such, a home environment is more persuasive than a homeland, which in turn is more influential than a country. The command is brought to greater light; Hashem was telling Avraham to leave, abandon even, the negative influence he picked up from his country, homeland and father’s house. The order is listing in ascending difficulty.

This further bring to light that לך לך means “Go fro yourself”. Avaham understood that ultimate happiness is becoming close to Hashem, echoing the Mesilas Yesharim, that the supreme joy in this world is the joy of serving Hashem; acknowledging one’s purpose in life and fulfilling it. Hashem told him that in order to grow further, he needed to totally separate himself from the negative culture he’d lived his whole life in – מארצך וממולדתך ומבית אביך.

It’s not enough for a person to try to be the best they can be, where they are. To reach full potential, he also has to remove himself from the bad midos of his environment because they still have an affect on him.

Once Avraham abandoned his past, he could achieve אל הארץ אשר אראך.

This further answers why the command was to “go” from somewhere, not just to somewhere. He had to leave where he was to get where he was going.

In the beginning of Devarim 29, Moshe does a wrap up of what the Jews went through on their journey through the desert:

וַיִּקְרָא מֹשֶׁה אֶל-כָּל-יִשְׂרָאֵל, וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם: אַתֶּם רְאִיתֶם, אֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה יְהוָה לְעֵינֵיכֶם בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם, לְפַרְעֹה וּלְכָל-עֲבָדָיו, וּלְכָל-אַרְצוֹ. הַמַּסּוֹת, הַגְּדֹלֹת, אֲשֶׁר רָאוּ, עֵינֶיךָ–הָאֹתֹת וְהַמֹּפְתִים הַגְּדֹלִים, הָהֵם. וְלֹא-נָתַן יְהוָה לָכֶם לֵב לָדַעַת, וְעֵינַיִם לִרְאוֹת וְאָזְנַיִם לִשְׁמֹעַ, עַד, הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה – And Moshe called all the Jews, and said to them: “You saw all that Hashem did in Egypt, with your own eyes, to Paroh, his servants, and his land. The great miracles and signs you saw. And Hashem didn’t give you a heart to understand, eyes to see, nor ears to hear, until this day. (29:1-3)

Rashi elaborates that עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה has an undercurrent. In Devarim 31, Moshe writes the Torah in the form we have it, and give it to the Levi’im, who entrusted with the task of safeguarding and teaching Torah. Rashi says that עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה refers to that event. What was the appraisal of their faculties, that on “this day”, Moshe praised the Jews?

Rash explains how when Moshe gave the Torah to the Levi’im, the Jews protested their being singled out for keeping it, with the worry that perhaps Levi would claim the Torah for their own, and exclude the other tribes. When Moshe saw this, he saw the the Torah was precious to them, and said עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה.

R’ Leib Salomon has great difficulty with this. What was the protest going to be, exactly? It couldnt be that they were worried that perhaps the Levi’im would keep the whole Torah for themselves, how could they? Who would give ma’aser, among many other things?

R’ Matisyahu Salomon explains that the Jews were not worried about the Levi’im laying an exclusive claim to mitzvah performance, but rather, the capacity to be a Torah scholar, talmud Torah. When Moshe heard this, he understood how much the Torah meant to them.

R’ Matisyahu points out that “The great miracles and signs you saw” were not enough to persuade Moshe that they had לֵב לָדַעַת, וְעֵינַיִם לִרְאוֹת וְאָזְנַיִם לִשְׁמֹעַ – it was exclusively their desire and passion for Talmud Torah that precipitated this realisation.

Seeing miracles isn’t what makes someone a true servant of Hashem, it is the struggle, the slog, that comes with learning Torah that a Jew has his heart, eyes and ears.

The pasuk tell us:

 וְלֹא תַחֲנִיפוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אַתֶּם בָּהּ כִּי הַדָּם הוּא יַחֲנִיף אֶת הָאָרֶץ וְלָאָרֶץ לֹא יְכֻפַּר לַדָּם אֲשֶׁר שֻׁפַּךְ בָּהּ כִּי אִם בְּדַם שֹׁפְכוֹ – And you shall not deceive the land in which you live, for the blood corrupts the land, and the blood which is shed in the land cannot be atoned for except through the blood of the one who shed it. (35:34)

The word חניפה means flattery/deception/corruption/obfuscation. The expression seems highly odd in the context of the land.

R’ Moshe Feinstein draws a major distinction between the conventional wisdom of the world, and Jewish law. The world worries about peace and rights – if someone disturbs peace or rights, since the goal is peace, the person destroying it is therefore a target, as they are destroying the world as they see it. Countless wars are fought, with countless dead, because one nation has a claim to repairing and saving the world, or some other ideal.

For Jews, the Torah tells us “Do not murder.” – regardless of who – one may not kill another human being. Even someone who destroys the world is still taken care of by this.

What results from this is that someone who murders or wages war to ostensibly “save the world”, is יַחֲנִיף אֶת הָאָרֶץ – wherein the land takes precedence over a man. He is being murdered for the sake of preservation of the land, for peace!

The Torah tells us that the land is always secondary to the person – all land is worthless if the people on it aren’t upstanding individuals. חניפה is the disconnect between reality and an ideal – we must always know that we have to be real with ourselves, always trying to improve. This is what the pasuk means when it says וְלֹא תַחֲנִיפוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אַתֶּם בָּהּ.

The parsha opens with אִם בְּחֻקֹּתַי תֵּלֵכוּ וְאֶת מִצְוֹתַי תִּשְׁמְרוּ וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֹתָם – If you follow My statutes and observe My commandments and perform them (26:3)

Rav Shach quotes a pasuk from Neviim, Chabakuk 3:6 that הליכות עולם לו – that the ways of the world are Hashems. We say this when we say korbanos at the end of davening, and we quote the ma’amar Chazal that expounds אל תקרי הליכות אלא הלכות – Read it not as ways, but as laws. The הלכות, the Torah, that we bring in to the world, dictates the הליכות, the ways, of Hashem’s world.

Our performance of mitzvos has a very real effect on the world – the mitzvos dictate (more…)

Why is there suffering in the world? More specifically, why does the Torah give the tochacha, the list of all the curses that will afflict the people if they do not keep the Torah properly?

In this world, we have a body and a soul. The Yetzer Hara – the evil inclination – exists in the soul, and the Yetzer Tov – the positive inclination – exists in the body. Ideally, אִם בְּחֻקֹּתַי תֵּלֵכוּ וְאֶת מִצְוֹתַי תִּשְׁמְרוּ – the soul transcends the physical of the world, and the person becomes separate from the world, different, holy.

However, אִם בְּחֻקֹּתַי תִּמְאָסוּ – if the body sins, it comes to the fore, and it supersedes the soul, to the point where soul is almost strangled, as it were. If the soul were to die, the body would be no different to that of animal – lead by sense and impulse.

Suffering is an emergency safety measure that kicks in to avoid this. It minimises the physicality the body partakes in. It prevents the body from getting addicted to what will eventually destroy the soul. In this way, suffering cleanses us.

This applies to all suffering, including the Holocaust.

The victims were martyrs. Whatever they were in life, they were קדושים, holy martyrs, in death. They died על קידוש ה. The Gemara in Sanhedrin explains that in dying על קידוש ה, the victim becomes a figurative and actual korban, a sacrifice. All suffering is smaller degree of this, all suffering is in some way a קרבן לה. The Bluzhever Rebbe used to tell people to get a bracha from a Holocaust survivor for the very same reason.

All suffering reduces the domination of body over soul, of matter over mind,

People usually suffer most in their old age, toward the end of their lives. This is when they are older, and thus free from the sins of their youth. Hashem postpones suffering in the elderly in order that the person may greet his Creator in the most pure and direct way.

Parshas Behar and Bechukosai frequently appear together – Behar teaches about the Torah at Sinai, and Bechukosai is the blessings and curses. R’ Yaakov Minkus explains that they are together because they both take us to Har Sinai – Torah and suffering both.

Suffering removes the framework the Yetzer Hara operates and thrives in. It brings a person closer to Sinai and Hashem by breaking the hold his body has over his soul, purifying and cleansing him.

Regarding Shemitta, the sabbatical year, the pasuk says : וַיְדַבֵּר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה בְּהַר סִינַי לֵאמֹר – (25:1)

Rashi explains that in the same way that Shemitta was taught in detail at Sinai, all other mitzvos were taught in the same way.

Shemitta is a key mitzva, much like Shabbos, which is a reference point for other mitzvos. Through the performance of key mitzvos, we find a gateway to the performance of all others. The Sfas Emes explains that Shemitta here is truly the reference point for all mitzvos, utilising the above Rashi.

The pasuk (25:2) says כִּי תָבֹאוּ אֶל הָאָרֶץ – When you come to the land. The Torah says this many times in Chumash – that is to say that when the Jews get to Eretz Yisrael, the reason the land is given is to fulfil God’s will.

The way the Jews have freedom in the the land is solely in this way – through marginalising themselves and their egos, by subjugating themselves to Hashem. In the case of Shemitta, the subjugation manifests itself that we are told to refrain from working the land. The reason this is so is that people become enslaved by their work – it consumes them, and it becomes them. These people do not and cannot stop. The Sfas Emes explains that this concept enables us to serve Hashem – from being released from all consuming work, we can devote our strength to the same extent to His service.

This is why we were sent to Egypt, and why we were released. There must be a burden in order for us to realise how much we can carry – one the burden is removed, we can carry our faith freely. The Sfas Emes compares this to our eternal struggle with the Yetzer Hara, and why it starts immediately. In the same way, Eretz Canaan had to have idolatry and immorality to the degree that it’s inhabitants had to be destroyed, in order for it to become Eretz Yisrael, containing the Beis HaMikdash. This concept manifests itself freely.

The point of Shemitta and Shabbos is to bear witness that Hashem sustains existence anew every day. We say every morning that Hashem is ברוך אומר ועושה – Hashem says, and Hashem does. The Sfas Emes explains that Hashem said, and created something from nothing – but Hashem also does, every day, now that Creation exists, maintains it. 

The Sfas Emes develops this further, and says that the same is true of mitzvos. Every mitzva we do should arouse and inspire us – every day. The life we get from a mitzva’s performance should be anew each time, and the same with Torah. The Sfas Emes teaches us that the preparation and freshness, of everything, only serves to enable what comes after.

There is a very basic question one can ask about Olam Haba – the World to Come. It is our reward for being Jews, and as such, central to Jewish life. But if it so important, why doesn’t the Torah mention or discuss it anywhere?

The Maharal explains that the question is flawed. To promise something that is not empirically true or provable is cheap, and moreover, useless. The Rosh says that הרוצה לשקר ירחיק עדותו – about one who wants to lie, distance his testimony. We could be promised 72 golden cows, or similar, but the promise is essentially worthless, in the same way that a pop-up or scratch card assure you have won a billion dollars.

Hashem doesn’t have a problem telling us to keep the Shemittah, the Sabbatical year. It comes with a guarantee that for the farmers who keep it faithfully, the sixth year will yield a triple harvest – וְצִוִּיתִי אֶת בִּרְכָתִי לָכֶם בַּשָּׁנָה הַשִּׁשִּׁית וְעָשָׂת אֶת הַתְּבוּאָה לִשְׁלֹשׁ הַשָּׁנִים – I will command My blessing for you in the sixth year, and it will yield produce for three years. (25:21). There are countless stories even in recent years of farmers who have miraculously experienced a triple yield in spite of difficulties, such as drought, crop failure or insects plaguing neighboring fields. This is the strength of Torah.

It is no weakness in Judaism to not discuss Olam Haba. It is the strength of Torah to tell us about what is relevant in our lives, which Olam Haba is not.

קְדֹשִׁים תִּהְיוּ כִּי קָדוֹשׁ אֲנִי ה’ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם – You shall be holy, because I, the Lord, your God, am holy. (19:2)

The Midrash in Vayikra Rabba points out that Hashem did not say “Be קָדוֹשׁ, like I am קָדוֹשׁ”, but rather, “Be קָדוֹשׁ , because I am קָדוֹשׁ”. Hashem cannot tell us to be like Him, as Hashem’s קדושה is greater than ours.

Rav Shach quotes the Rambam which explains that we are instructed to perform the mitzva והלכת בדרכיו (Devarim 28:9) – to emulate Hashem’s ways. It would seem that since the pasuk said אֲנִי ה’ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם , the instruction was to be קָדוֹשׁ specifically because we are meant to attempt to be more spiritually inclined, which is what the Midrash addresses.

Rav Shach then contrasts this with a later halacha, which clarifies the previous one. The Rambam states that a person who removes himself from day to day life, refrains from eating meat or drinking wine, and has limited contact with people, is still following the wrong path, and it is forbidden to behave in such a manner.

As such, even though we are meant to emulate Hashem’s ways, we are incapable of being separate from existence in the way Hashem is. As the Midrash said; “Hashem’s קדושה is greater than ours.” Our ability to be קָדוֹשׁ is confined to this world, and it is only through this world that we can attain קדושה . R Shach thus explains that our attempts at והלכת בדרכיו with regard to קדושה is only because Hashem is קָדוֹשׁ , but we are incapable of being like Hashem.

The Aruch HaShulchan wonders why the subsequent pasuk is juxtaposed to אִישׁ אִמּוֹ וְאָבִיו תִּירָאוּ וְאֶת שַׁבְּתֹתַי תִּשְׁמֹרוּ אֲנִי ה’ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם – Every man shall fear his mother and his father, and you shall observe My Shabbosos – I am the Lord, your God. (19:3)

The Aruch HaShulchan explains that in the Ten Commandments, כבד את אביך and שמור את יום השבת were followed by כאשר צוה ה – As Hashem commanded. The reason this is so is that the people who gave you life, cared for you, and made you as a person, are logically deserving of respect. Equally, a day off of work makes a lot of sense too! A rested, happy, worker is more productive. The pasuk therefore stresses that we are not to perform these actions as logical decisions, but rather, kasher tziva hashem.

[It is worth noting that the first set of Luchos did not contain these last few words. The first set of Luchos were made entirely by Hashem (as opposed to hewn from actually rock by Moshe, like the second ones). It seems that Torah learned from the first set of Luchos would never be forgotten, and the people would become like angels. This is why Moshe did not forget the Torah, and why his face shone when he came down the first time at Har Sinai. The first set of Luchos was meant for people who would become like angels – there was no need to tell them כאשר צוה ה.]

This is why the pasuk also attached כאשר צוה ה – through doing these mitzvos purely because כאשר צוה ה, and אֲנִי ה’ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם ,we become קְדֹשִׁים תִּהְיוּ. This can be a reference point to us for all mitzvos – when we want to become קָדוֹשׁ, it is not purely through spirituality that we can do so, echoing what Rav Shach taught. By “taking a day off”, and observing Shabbos Kodesh, we become קָדוֹשׁ. This further brings the words of the Midrash to life, that “Hashem’s קדושה is greater than ours” – precisely because our קדושה is to be found in the physical,

(זאת התורה לעולה למנחה לחטאת ולאשם וגו’     (צו ז:לז

“This is the law of the burnt-offering, the meal-offering, the sin-offering, and the guilt-offering;” (Parshas Tzav 7:37)

The Gemara (Menachos 110a) extrapolates from this pasuk that one who toils in the parsha of the Korban Olah is considered as if he has brought a Korban Olah. One who toils in the parsha of the Korban Chatas considered as if he has brought a Korban Chatas, etc.

Rabbeinu Bachayei writes: “The idea [behind this Gemara] is that a person should contemplate and recognize the explanation of the Parsha [which he is learning] and to what it alludes. As a consequence of this, he will fathom and understand wonders from the Torah of Korbanos which will result in increased efforts in performing Torah and Mitzvos, and atonement for his sin as if he brought korbanos. For one cannot say that the intent [of this Gemara] is that a person should simply read the words of the Parsha without understanding them.

Similar to this, Chazal say [Gemara Brachos 4a]: ‘Anyone who says Tehila L’David [Ashrei] every day is promised to be a Ben Olam Habah.’ The intent being that by contemplating and recognizing what the pasukim teach and to what they allude, one will recognize the wonders of Hakadosh Baruch Hu and strengthen his heart with emunah in Hashem and His service, with which he will merit Olam Habah.”

Our great leader and sage, Rabbeinu Bachayei, student of the holy Rashba, has set down for us a significantly important cornerstone in our faith. The dissemination of this point is a mitzva. The Jewish religion is not one of superstitions. Rather, the objective is fairly simple: by doing what Hashem wants of us, like keeping the Torah and doing Mitzvos, we find favor in Hashem’s eyes and merit Olam Habah. And if not, chas v’shalom…

In Judaism there are no tricks or shortcuts or anything of that sort. On the contrary, practicing “segulas” makes Judiasm appear primitive and childish. The only reason why shaking a palm branch on Succos does not appear as such is because Hashem told us to do it. Had He not, but had there been some “tradition” that doing so would make the “shaker” wealthy or bring rain, this would not prevent him (not to mention the religion) from looking very foolish. Even when Chazal make statements that imply a guaranteed positive result to one who does or says a certain thing, Rabbeinu Bachayei is explaining to us that Chazal’s intention was in recognizing and working on the meaning behind the act or the saying. Avodas Hashem is just that: serving Hashem; it involves a cognizant (thinking and knowing) relationship, not just habitual acts.

Although there are certain things which can help our avoda (like looking into a siddur when davening to improve concentration), they are not “segulas” in the classic sense, but rather experience-tested methods which are basically guaranteed. A wilder example would be what Rabbi Akiva Eiger writes in his glosses to Shulchan Aruch (Yorah Deah 336:1): “The Maharil said, ‘We are forbidden to attempt any of the medical advice that is mentioned in the Talmud since we are unable to fully understand them. They will not be effective, resulting in criticism and mockery of the words of our Sages. This is not including the advice mentioned in the Gemara Shabbos (67a), the one who has a bone stuck in his throat shall bring from the very same type, that is to say the same type of bone, and place it on his forehead and say, ‘Chad chad nachis bula bula nachis chad chad.’ This incantation is guaranteed, therefore only this one are we allowed to continue to practice, and not a single one more.’” This tool is not simply “hocus pocus,” but rather an example of the medical knowledge of Chazal which even we are not inadequate enough to botch.

The bottom line is – we need to drum it into ourselves that the only way to serve Hashem is with full awareness and cognizance (see Isaiah 29:13-14 regarding “lip-service” in Avodas Hashem). If we do our part and try, Hashem will help us continue in the right path (see Menachos 29b בא לטהר מסייעין אותו). May we merit serving Hashem b’emes.

The parsha begins, “Eleh pekudei hamishkan, mishkan haedus asher pukad al pi Moshe…”. The Medrash refers this pasuk to the pasuk in Mishlei (28:20) “Ish emunos rav brachos”. The Sfas Emes explains that the Ish emunos is Moshe Rabbeinu and what the Medrash is telling us is that although counting something is not a siman brocha when the counting is done by an Ish emunos then brocha will be bestowed on the counted subjects.

The Kli Yakar in the beginning of parshas ki sisa explains the idea behind why one should not count and why counting brings ayin raah. When one counts something he is in essence giving this object its own individual importance, thereby creating additional awareness of it in shamayim. This awakens the debate as to the rights of the object, and all the relevant zechuyos and chovos are judged.

The Sfas Emes this week expounds this idea and with it beautifully explains the Medrash. All the good bestowed upon this world comes from a single higher source and as you distance from the source the good is diminished. From this shoresh hayachid hashmeymi branches out big then smaller and smaller branches, and the smallest furthest branch profits the least from the goodness supplied by those roots. When somebody counts something the individuality and importance that he applies to it separates it further from the source as it now has its own new identity. It is a new branch of its own. Before it was counted it was a part of the bigger branch, closer to the roots. This is why counting usually brings less brocha.

In many places the Sfas Emes explains that the root of the word emunah means connecting the subject back to its real true source. With this the medrash becomes beautifully clear. The medrash is explaining the pasuk as follows. Why does the pasuk mention that the counting was done by Moshe? (more…)

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…)

The pasuk says דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ לִי תְּרוּמָה מֵאֵת כָּל אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִדְּבֶנּוּ לִבּוֹ תִּקְחוּ אֶת תְּרוּמָתִי – Speak to the children of Israel, and have them take to Me an offering; from every person whose heart inspires him to generosity, you shall take My offering. (25:2)

The Midrash says that this pasuk is the same as the pasuk in Mishlei 4:2 כִּי לֶקַח טוֹב, נָתַתִּי לָכֶם; תּוֹרָתִי, אַל-תַּעֲזֹבוּ – For I gave you good teaching; forsake not My instruction.

The Midrash explains that this means that when we were given the Torah, Hashem was included as part of the deal, as it were. There is a parable here to which we can relate.

A powerful king had an only child, the princess. (more…)

Why does Parshas Mishpatim begin with the laws of an עֶבֶד עִבְרִי – a Hebrew servant? What is the significance of this topic that marks it out as the first of the laws after receiving the Torah?

The Gemara in Bava Metzia 10a introduces a key concept to Jewish law; that a hired worker can stop in the middle of the job for whatever reason he chooses, so long as he compensates the lost labour, ensures a replacement etc. He cannot be made to work. This is in contrast to an עֶבֶד  who is a slave, and is bound to his work.

The psukim say: כִּי תִקְנֶה עֶבֶד עִבְרִי שֵׁשׁ שָׁנִים יַעֲבֹד וּבַשְּׁבִעִת יֵצֵא לַחָפְשִׁי חִנָּם - Should you buy a Hebrew servant, he shall work [for] six years, and in the seventh [year], he shall go out to freedom without charge. (21:2)

וְאִם אָמֹר יֹאמַר הָעֶבֶד אָהַבְתִּי אֶת אֲדֹנִי אֶת אִשְׁתִּי וְאֶת בָּנָי לֹא אֵצֵא חָפְשִׁי – But if the slave says, “I love my master, my wife, and my children. I will not go free,” (2:5)

וְהִגִּישׁוֹ אֲדֹנָיו אֶל הָאֱ־לֹהִים וְהִגִּישׁוֹ אֶל הַדֶּלֶת אוֹ אֶל הַמְּזוּזָה וְרָצַע אֲדֹנָיו אֶת אָזְנוֹ בַּמַּרְצֵעַ וַעֲבָדוֹ לְעֹלָם – his master shall bring him to the judges, and he shall bring him to the door or to the doorpost, and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl, and he shall serve him forever. (2:6)

There is a basic rule in the Gemara that the term “עֶבֶד” alone demarks a Canaanite, a slave, which is a permanent service, whereas an עֶבֶד עִבְרִי is a temporary status, which is why it must be specified.  My rebbi pointed out to me that when he begins his service (21:2), he is an עֶבֶד עִבְרִי whereas after the allotted time has passed at which he is meant to go free, should he remain to say, he has become an עֶבֶד – a slave, with no עִבְרִי – the Jew has become a Canaanite slave. Although this is not halachically accurate, this is certainly hashkafically accurate.

But what has he done that is so reprehensible, that he is pierced, a form of branding of property? (more…)

א: וְאֵלֶּה הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים אֲשֶׁר תָּשִׂים לִפְנֵיהֶם

1. And these are the ordinances that you shall set before them (21:1)

The Yalkut Shemoni in the beginning of this week’s Parsha quotes Rav Alechsandri who gives a parable for this week’s Parsha. Two men, who hate each other, are leading their donkeys who are carrying large loads, along the way. One donkey stops walking, and crouches down, (for its load was too heavy) while the other (man and donkey) passes him by. The one who passes says, ”It’s written in the Torah (23:5), ‘Perhaps you will see the donkey of someone you hate lying under its burden, will you refrain from helping him?’ Immediately, the man returns and helps his brother unload his donkey. The man who is being helped thinks to himself how a moment ago they hated each other and now he is helping him! It must be that they aren’t really enemies at all! They then make peace with each other and all hatred is lost.

This is the meaning to ‘And these are the judgments’. Hashem knows what is moral and ethical, and what it takes to make this world a better place. We just have to do and learn His mitzvos and the rest will fall into place on its own.

There are a lot of different mitzvos in this week’s Parsha, so choosing one was very difficult, but here goes.

‘When you will lend money to my people, to the poor person who is with you, do not act towards him as a creditor; do not place interest upon him. If you will take your fellow’s garment as security, until the sun sets you shall have returned it to him. For it alone is his covering, it is his garment for his skin; in what will he lie down? So it will be that if he cries out to me, I shall listen, for I am compassionate’. (22:24-26)

Here the Torah teaches us three mitzvos. To lend money to poor people, not to act as a creditor when you know he has nothing to pay you with, and not to lend money with interest. The Kli Yakar points out that we refer to this pauper with three different names. In the beginning we call him in the name of ‘my people’, then we call him ‘the poor person who is with you’, then lastly we say ‘your fellow’s garment’. Why do we change his name and not just refer his to the poor person the entire time? Answers the Kli Yakar that the Torah was telling us three reasons why we are required to lend money to a poor person.

1.  Since he is part of ‘my people’, that is Hashem’s people. Hashem is the King and whoever gives money and food to the King’s men has a guarantee that the King will pay him back. Thus the Pasuk, ‘Malveh Hashem Chonain Dal’, that he who gives to poor people is considered as if he lent to Hashem.

2. The Gemara relates how Turnus Rufus asked R’ Akiva that if Hashem loves us so much why does our nation have poor people? R’ Akiva answered that it’s so that we can give Tzedakah which will save us from the Din of Gehinnom (hell) (See Gemara Bava Basra 10a for the rest of the discussion). If Tzedakah is so powerful that it could even save a person from the Din of Gehinnom then we see that the poor person does a lot more than the giver. The giver gives money (i.e. Olam Hazeh – this world) for only a small part of this poor person’s life, whereas the poor person gives this giver Olam Haba – the world to come – which is an immeasurable reward. Therefore the Torah’s second lashon of this pauper was, ‘to the poor person with you’. Why was this person poor? So that you could give Tzedakah and go to Olam Haba. Thus he is ‘with you’, meaning this poor person is here for your merit.

The Kli Yakar says that with these two reasons, we can now understand the next two mitzvos in the Torah.

Why should one not act like a creditor towards the pauper? We use reason number one, that since a person should be secure that Hashem is going to pay him back for that which he lent, he must then not act like a creditor thus proving he doesn’t believe Hashem is going to end up paying him back.

Why can a person not take interest for his loans? We use reason number two, that the poor person already gave him a pass through the Din of Gehinnom and now this person wants to make even more money from his loan? He is poor to help you become righteous, and you want to take advantage of him by making more money?

3. If we are dealing with a person who lacks faith that Hashem will pay him back and will therefore ask for a collateral, the end result that he will be will be borrowing his ‘fellow’s garment’. Meaning that he will be this poor man’s ‘friend’ in poverty. So what does Hashem say to this person? ‘If you stray off the straight path you can always come back.’ Give the man back his cloak before ‘the sun sets’.

There is a valuable lesson to be learned from the Mitzvos commanded in this week’s Parsha.

The Mishna in Pirkei Avos says: אם אין תורה, אין דרך ארץ; אם אין דרך ארץ, אין תורה – without Derech Eretz there can be no Torah, and without Torah there can be no Derech Eretz.

Rabbeinu Yonah explains that the first time there is a reference to Derech Eretz it means the basic and essential practices that anyone must be in possession of in order to learn Torah. This is the meaning that most people recognize today.

But the second time Derech Eretz is referenced it means a new kind of Derech Eretz. One that is rooted and sourced in Torah alone, about which we say “without Torah there is no Derech Eretz”.

What is the Derech Eretz of Torah? R’ Elya Lopian brings two example from our Parsha:

Within the laws regarding an עבד עברי – a Jewish servant – there is an obligation on the master’s part to address all the servant’s needs in the same regard that he would address his own needs. This is exemplified in a classic case: if there were only one mattress in a household, the servant would take precedence over the master. This is what the גמרא  in Kiddushin means when it says ‘קנה לו עבד עברי קנה אדון לעצמו’ – ‘one who acquires a servant has acquired a master over himself’.

With regard to ourselves, if one were to enter a house and saw two people sleeping, one on a mattress and one the floor, a sensible person would surely understand that the person asleep on the mattress is the master and the person sleeping on the cold, hard floor is the servant.

The Torah teaches us that this is not so, that the reverse is true. The master is obligated to give his sole mattress to the servant. It must be pointed out who exactly an עבד עברי is. This is a degenerate man who has brought himself into the situation he is in, he has robbed and stolen, and being unable to return his ill-gotten gains, has had sell himself to pay back his debts. For this man we are obligated to give up our beds.

R’ Elya Lopian explains that such Derech Eretz is uniquely a Torah sourced Derech Eretz. No other wisdom would generate such ethics for such a man.

The second example is:

ח:  אִם רָעָה בְּעֵינֵי אֲדֹנֶיהָ אֲשֶׁר [לא] לוֹ יְעָדָהּ וְהֶפְדָּהּ לְעַם נָכְרִי לֹא יִמְשֹׁל לְמָכְרָהּ בְּבִגְדוֹ בָהּ

ט: וְאִם לִבְנוֹ יִיעָדֶנָּה כְּמִשְׁפַּט הַבָּנוֹת יַעֲשֶׂה לָּהּ

8. If she is displeasing to her master, who did not designate her [for himself], then he shall enable her to be redeemed; he shall not rule over her to sell her to another person, when he betrays her. 9. And if he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her according to the law of the daughters [of Israel]. (21:8-9)

Rashi explains that it not only instructs the master to marry her, or let his sons marry her, but its actually a commandment – a mitzvah.

אשר לא יעדה: שהיה לו ליעדה ולהכניסה לו לאשה, וכסף קנייתה הוא כסף קידושיה. כאן רמז לך הכתוב שמצוה ביעוד ורמז לך שאינה צריכה קדושין אחרים

Who had not designated her as his wife: that he should have designated her and should have married her. The money used for her purchase serves as the “money” for executing the marriage. Here the Torah implies that it is a mitzvah for him to marry her. It [also] indicates to you that she requires no other marriage ritual.

The Jewish maidservant refers to the daughter of a man who has sunk from depth to new depth, and ended up in the terrible situation of having to sell his daughter as a maidservant as he can not afford to support her or whatever the reason. Specifically regarding this מיוחסת – “girl of such “noble” descent” – does the Torah instruct the man, who may really be of noble descent, to marry this girl or allow his sons to?

To what degree are we instructed to do so?

R’ Elya Lopian explains further: This girls’ world has been destroyed, and she is in turmoil and despair. She has been sold into slavery by her own father, and has no hope of finding the man she is to marry the way other Jewish girls would do. Therefore the Torah worries for her despair, and so obligates the master to rescue her from the danger that she has for the rest of her days, and marry her.

No cultural or academic pursuits would point one in these directions and draw these conclusions. You won’t find similar ethics elsewhere, only Hashem’s Torah could produce them. This is the “Derech Eretz of Torah”.

וּפַרְעֹה הִקְרִיב וַיִּשְׂאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת עֵינֵיהֶם וְהִנֵּה מִצְרַיִם נֹסֵעַ אַחֲרֵיהֶם וַיִּירְאוּ מְאֹד וַיִּצְעֲקוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶל יְ־הֹוָ־ה:

10. 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)

The Torah doesn’t say ’ – קרוב he came near’ i.e. that he and his army approached, but ’הקריב  - he brought near’. The Medrash says that what he “brought” was the Jews, closer to Hashem.

This is a pretty big merit to have – why is Pharaoh credited with it at all, and what is it he did which deserved such high recognition?

Prior to the Jews leaving Egypt, there was a debate in Heaven as to whether the Jews should be allowed to leave and have their redemption, but the mekatreig (prosecution) countered every argument put forward to absolve the Jews. (Just as the Jews believed in G-d, so did Pharaoh, as it says ‘Hashem hatzaddik v’ani v’ami harshaim’  - a clear recognition of Hashem – and so forth.)

The deciding factor in permitting Yetzias Mitzrayim to occur was when Moshe said “follow me” and they did – in the merit of following their leader faithfully, they were evacuated from Egypt.

Pharaoh sought to remove this merit -וּפַרְעֹה הִקְרִיב  (14:10) – and the result was 14:11:

וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֶל מֹשֶׁה הַמִבְּלִי אֵין קְבָרִים בְּמִצְרַיִם לְקַחְתָּנוּ לָמוּת בַּמִּדְבָּר מַה זֹּאת עָשִׂיתָ לָּנוּ לְהוֹצִיאָנוּ מִמִּצְרָיִם:

’They said to Moses, Is it because there are no graves in Egypt that you have taken us to die in the desert? What is this that you have done to us to take us out of Egypt?’

He severed their attachment to Moshe, and they cried out to Hashem directly but blamed Moshe for their troubles.

So Hashem replies in 14:15 –  מַה תִּצְעַק אֵלָי –  that the Jews have to have faith in Moshe Rabbeinu again, as that had been the deciding factor in their favor, without which there could be no salvation. What we see here is that Pharaoh bringing the Jews close to Hashem is no praiseworthy at all – his entire goal to bring the Jews close to G-d was at the exclusion of Moshe from the equation, surely dooming them.

So Hashem responds in 14:15:

וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֶל מֹשֶׁה מַה תִּצְעַק אֵלָי דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִסָּעוּ

15. The Lord said to Moses, Why do you cry out to Me? Speak to the children of Israel and let them travel.

Their salvation is not going to be based on Moshe’s prayers, as that wasn’t the problem.

There is a small side question here –   דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִסָּעוּ – what was the need for a dibbur, a speech, to tell them to go, why not just tell Moshe to lead them – rather than him being instructed to tell them that he is to lead them?

As we have established, the problem was that they weren’t interested in Moshe – so Hashem told him the solution דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִסָּעו – their salvation would be as it was on leaving Egypt – through following their leader.

As the Pasuk says upon their entering the Red Sea 14:31: וַיַּאֲמִינוּ בַּי־הֹוָ־ה וּבְמֹשֶׁה עַבְדּוֹ

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.

 ב. וְהָיָה אִם בִּן הַכּוֹת הָרָשָׁע וְהִפִּילוֹ הַשֹּׁפֵט וְהִכָּהוּ לְפָנָיו כְּדֵי רִשְׁעָתוֹ בְּמִסְפָּר . 

‘and it shall be, if the guilty one has incurred [the penalty of] lashes, that the judge shall make him lean over and flog him in front of him, commensurate with his crime, in number.’

ג. אַרְבָּעִים יַכֶּנּוּ לֹא יֹסִיף פֶּן יֹסִיף לְהַכֹּתוֹ עַל אֵלֶּה מַכָּה רַבָּה וְנִקְלָה אָחִיךָ לְעֵינֶיךָ

‘He shall flog him with forty [lashes]; he shall not exceed, lest he give him a much more severe flogging than these [forty lashes], and your brother will be degraded before your eyes.’ 

This is the famous parsha of malkos (flogging or lashes).

The  Gemara in Makkos 22a asks “How many times do we flog the receiver? – Because the passuk writes, “be’mispar arboim” (in the number 40) and so we understand that  the number must be close to 40 – therefore we give him 39 strokes.  However, R’Yehuda follows the line of the pasuk and says that he receives 40 strokes for a complete flogging.
When the Chiddushei Ha’rim was young, a man asked him the following question: Is there a chance that one day a person will receive the same amount of lashes according to both R’Yehuda and the Chachomim ?

 The young bochur gave a brilliant answer: A Shliach Beis Din  (someone who works for the Beis Din and carries out the punishments)  transgressed 39 issurim in the Torah and therefore deserved 39 floggings. However, before receiving his punishments, he was still doing his job in Beis Din and was flogging someone else. He gave the person 40 strokes. Now, according to R’Yehuda, who says that a person receives 39 strokes, this Shliach Beis Din has given too many, therefore he has transgressed the issur of  “Lo Yosif Le’hakoso”(in passuk 3), and he now must receive a further set on top of the 39 he deserves already. So, altogether, he is obligated to receive 40 sets of 39 strokes.

According to the Chachomim, who says that a person receives 40 strokes, this Shliach Beis Din has not given too many, and therefore, he is obligated to receive his original 39 floggings, each consisting of 40 strokes. When calculated it works out that 39 floggings times 40 strokes = 40 floggings times 39 strokes; so according to both R’Yehuda and the Chachomim, he receives the same amount.

 Upon hearing this answer, the man was so impressed with the sheer genius of the young man that he took the Chiddushei Harim to be his son-in-law.

On that note – Good Shabbos! 

י. כִּי תֵצֵא לַמִּלְחָמָה עַל אֹיְבֶיךָ וּנְתָנוֹ יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּיָדֶךָ וְשָׁבִיתָ שִׁבְיוֹ

10. If you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord, your God, will deliver him into your hands, and you take his captives
יא. וְרָאִיתָ בַּשִּׁבְיָה אֵשֶׁת יְפַת תֹּאַר וְחָשַׁקְתָּ בָהּ וְלָקַחְתָּ לְךָ לְאִשָּׁה:
11. and you see among the captives a beautiful woman and you desire her, you may take [her] for yourself as a wife. Rashi says:

 יאולקחת לך לאשה: לא דברה תורה אלא כנגד יצר הרע. שאם אין הקב”ה מתירה ישאנה באיסור. אבל אם נשאה, סופו להיות שונאה, שנאמר אחריו (פסוק טו) כי תהיין לאיש וגו’ וסופו להוליד ממנה בן סורר ומורה, לכך נסמכו פרשיות הללו -

You may take [her] for yourself as a wife: [Not that you are commanded to take this woman as a wife,] but Scripture [in permitting this marriage] is speaking only against the evil inclination [, which drives him to desire her]. For if the Holy One, blessed is He, would not permit her to him, he would take her illicitly. [The Torah teaches us, however, that] if he marries her, he will ultimately come to despise her, as it says after this,“If a man has [two wives-one beloved and the other despised]” he will ultimately father through her a wayward and rebellious son. For this reason, these passages are juxtaposed.]

The Rambam says that the pasuk’s instruction of ‘yefas to’ar‘ is a mitzva. Not just a heter (permit), Even if it is in a voluntary way ie and not milchemes mitzva.

We have two questions on the above pesukim:

Q1. The Gemara in Pesachim says ‘shluchei mitzva einam nezokin‘ – ‘people on the way to perform a mitzva are not harmed.’ So, how do we reconcile this gemara with the fact that according to the Ramban he is doing a mitzva, yet according to Rashi he will suffer  because he will hate her and that any child from this relationship is destined to become a בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה?

Q2. ‘לא דברה תורה אלא כנגד יצר הרע’ If it is indeed a mitzva like the ramban said, how is it connected to the yetzer hara? We know that mitzvos are for the side of the יצר טוב!

There are two answers that work together to answer the questions.

Firstly, the torah is guiding us even בשעת הירידה. It says that in a time when we are about to stumble, Hashem doesn’t leave us out in the proverbial cold – ‘we are permitted to take her for a wife.’ Note that it does not say ‘marry,’ and after 30 days of having her in the house, with a shaved head, unkempt, mourning and in sack cloth, the man will in theory realise who exactly he has in his house and will send her home after 30 days.

Secondly, כנגד יצר is in the here and now.  We have explained before that the יצר הרע is identified as impulsive and  so the torah permits this indiscretion, on the proviso that he gets rid of her after 30 days. If he marries her after the 30 days the יפת תואר‘s ‘loophole’ has expired, and he is, in fact, committing a sin and as a result, as mentioned above, he will have a ‘rebellious son.’

This dual concept is referred to in Rashi’s explanation – “אם נשאה, סופו להיות שונאה” – in the 30 days he is doing a mitzva, he is indeed not harmed – but after 30 days he is not a שליח מצוה. Hashem is both helping us and testing us and then telling us the consequences of failing the test.

רְאֵה אָנכִי נתֵן לִפְנֵיכֶם הַיּוֹם בְּרָכָה וּקְלָלָה - Behold, I am giving before you today a blessing and a curse. (11:26)

Q1. Why does the posuk start singular (רְאֵה) and turn plural (לִפְנֵיכֶם)?

Q2. Why does posuk say אָנכִי - ‘I’. Who else would be speaking?

Q3. Why does it say נתֵן - ‘giving’, should say נתתֵיֵ - ‘I have given’?

Q4. Why does it say לִפְנֵיכֶם - ‘before you’, and not לכֶםִ - ‘to you’?

Q5. What is the word הַיּוֹם, today, doing in the posuk?

The Gra explains that this posuk refers to a person trying to do teshuva and repent for past actions, all the while being tormented by his yetzer hara. The yetzer hara is that niggling doubt at the back of your head when doing something. It tells you ‘How can you fix that? You’ve done it for so long, its natural, you’re used to it! How are you possibly going to choose the correct path and to teshuva?’ Hashem assures us that נתן, He is ‘giving’ us the choice so that whenever we decide to repent, Hashem is right there offering you the opportunity. Effectively, it’s never too late.

Another tactic our yetzer hara uses to scare us off doing teshuva is to remind you of all your past misdeeds and flaunts them, taunting ‘Look what you’ve done! Look how much you’ve done! What hope do you have?’ So Hashem tells us that once you do teshuva it will change – הַיּוֹם - ‘today’. A Baal Teshuva is like a newborn child, everything in the past is gone, and all that he is being accounted for is the present, the ‘today’.

After being accustomed to the yetzer hara, a man will say ‘But how can I change and not sin any more? It is beyond my ability to battle and beat the yetzer hara, hence I am forced to listen to it blindly’ Hashem tells us, אָנכִי - ‘I’ am giving you the opportunity to conquer your yetzer hara. In essence Hashem is saying ‘I am with you; you need not be afraid of anyone or anything else.’ And this parallels what Chazal say:Yitzro Shel Adam Misgaber Alav Bechol Yom Veilmalai Hakadosh Baruch Hu Ozer Lo, Aino Yuchal Lo – “The evil inclination of a man strengthens himself upon a man each day and desires to destroy him, and if G-d wouldn’t help him he would not be able to defeat him”

A further dilemma one may have is with regard to choice: ‘Perhaps the yetzer tov isn’t so good, so why follow the unknown?’ The posuk tells us, אָנכִי נתֵן לִפְנֵיכֶם, Hashem wont help us make the choice, it is up to us to exercise our בחירה – (free will). The way to distinguish between the yetzer hara from yetzer tov is to act as a businessman with a large stock of commodities to sell. Will he take the first offer that comes his way? or will he survey the market, get quotes, and deliberate what price to sell at and which clients to sell to? An impulsive action will be detrimental in his case and ours too. If we wait a few days and on review, we still think something is a good idea, then it’s a positive sign that this is the yetzer tov’s instruction.

The final and most frequent dilemma a person seeking to do teshuva faces is ‘How can I break the trend on my own? I look around and everyone around me does as they please, is it possible for me to swim against the current?’ The posuk tells us ‘רְאֵה‘, in the singular. You judge yourself on an individual level with the framework I (Hashem) have given you alone, and don’t make a cheshbon for everyone else.

For all posts on Eikev click here

Eikev 7:12, וְהָיָה עֵקֶב תִּשְׁמְעוּן אֵת הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים הָאֵלֶּה וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֹתָם וְשָׁמַר ה’ אֱלֹ-ךָ לְךָ אֶת הַבְּרִית וְאֶת הַחֶסֶד אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ: And it will be, because you will heed these ordinances and keep them and perform, that the Lord, your God, will keep for you the covenant and the kindness that He swore to your forefathers.

תִּשְׁמְעוּן (you will listen) is written in plural, but לְךָ (for you) is written in singular. Why does the subject of the pasuk (verse) change?

There is a famous story in Gemara Shabbos 31a. A gentile once approached Shamai and offered to convert if Shamai would teach him all of Torah while he (the gentile) was standing on one leg. Shamai threw a piece of rubble from a building at him, interpreting the gentile’s words as mockery. The gentile approached Hillel and put forward the same request. Hillel said “וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ”: you shall love your neighbor as yourself.

We need to understand the premise of the gentile’s question. Clearly, his request to learn Torah on one leg is an absurd request to ask of the greatest Rabbis alive. In addition, Hillel’s response also requires some explanation. How does his answer include all the mitzvos, such as Shabbos, tefillin, bris mila, mezuzah etc.?

Sefer Beis Shmuel quotes the Arizal, who states that every Jew must perform every single one of the 613 mitzvos, or their soul returns in another form (gilgul) to complete the missing mitzvos.

Bamidbar 22:28, וַיִּפְתַּח ה’ אֶת פִּי הָאָתוֹן וַתֹּאמֶר לְבִלְעָם מֶה עָשִׂיתִי לְךָ כִּי הִכִּיתַנִי זֶה שָׁלֹשׁ רְגָלִים: The Lord opened the mouth of the she-donkey, and she said to Bilam, “What have I done to you that you have struck me these three times?“ The key to our understanding lies in the word רְגָלִים. Although it is usually interpreted as ‘legs’, it is interpreted as ‘times’ in the verse above.

The aforementioned Arizal begs for an explanation. It is impossible to accomplish all 613 mitzvos; many are mutually exclusive (ie – specific to gender, age, kohanim (priests), levi’ites, kings, during the time of the Temple etc.). Does this mean that everyone comes back as a gilgul many, many times so that they could fulfill each and every mitzva in the Torah? No. This was precisely what the gentile was asking – teach me Torah on one רגל – in one lifetime, with no gilgul.

Shamai beat him with a part of a building as an allusion. A building has many floors. Unless it has many floors, it’s not called a building. Torah has many, many levels, and many, many mitzvos. Unless you accomplish them all, you haven’t fulfilled your role in this world. Shamai was telling the gentile that the Torah cannot be actualised in one lifetime; it is impossible to be able to fulfill each and every mitzva.

Hillel pushed the idea of achdus (literally, unity). His directive of וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ meant that once you have achdus, the rest of the Torah just details specific actions you need to carry out. By uniting into one, we become כאיש אחד בלב אחד – as one man with one heart. If one person performs a mitzva, the rest are included in his mitzva. (Just as when a man dons tefillin we don’t say that his arm or head is wearing tefillin, we say he is wearing tefilin – he is one entity.) In three simple words, Hillel explained to the gentile how to perform Torah instructions. Since we are all united, and our mitzvos are shared with the rest of Klal Yisroel, together, as a unit, we are able to fulfill all 613 mitzvos!

The pasuk says, וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם וַעֲשִׂיתֶם (keep them and perform) in the plural form, which we can understand to mean that we need to keep and perform the mitzvos in unity. וְשָׁמַר (will keep for you – singular) connotes that one cannot perform all of the mitzvos, but each person must keep what they can, and will be rewarded as such!

Sefer Divrei Shaul quotes a Gemara in Uktzin that says that the only receptacle for G-d’s blessing is peace, as it says in Tehillim 29:11, ה’ עֹז לְעַמּוֹ יִתֵּן ה’ יְבָרֵךְ אֶת-עַמּוֹ בַשָּׁלוֹם: The Lord shall grant strength to His people; the Lord shall bless His people with peace. עֹז (strength) is the Torah. We can ask our original question of how we can each person can fully perform the mitzvos of the Torah. The answer is as we said - through unity - and the only way to achieve true unity is through shalom (peace). Via shalom and achdus, we can come together and fulfill the Torah in it’s entirety.

This explains why it was necessary to be כאיש אחד בלב אחד at Har Sinai (Mount Sinai – the giving of the Torah); without the unity, there would be no point in receiving a Torah we could not fulfill.

In conclusion, we are all considered to have done all the mitzvos, but how are we rewarded? Reward for mitzvos is not given in this world, so where do we see this manifested? The only reward we get is according to the exertion that was put into performing the mitzva.

According to what we now know, we have a great answer. עֵקֶב תִּשְׁמְעוּן is plural, as performance of mitzvos is collective when we are united. The subject changes to singular - לְךָ – to refer to the reward that is personal, based on the effort and exertion you personally put in when fulfilling mitzvos.

Rav Dessler refers to beis Shamai (lit. house of Shamai – his school of thought) as din (judgement), and beis Hillel as rachamim (mercy).  Rav Zevin refers to them as potential vs actual, while others bring the idea of shomayim (heaven) and oretz (earth). Most of the machlokes (disputes) between Hillel and Shammai are along a fixed criterion. Shammai ruled on how things ought to be l’chatchila (in Heavenly ideal), and Hillel ruled based on metzius (what we have before us). Shamai was saying that l’chatchila, each of us must perform all 613 mitzvos, and return numerous times in a gilgul. Hillel said that one can get around this l’chatchila with the b’dieved of achdus!

Disclaimer – this is not a license to do as we please with the mindset of,  ’we love Jews, so therefore we have achdus so I can do what I like and technically be fulfilling all the mitzvos still!’ This is wrong. This concept only applies to mitzvos that are impossible for us to fulfill personally (mutual exclusivity as opposed to “I don’t feel like it”).

Adapted from a shiur by R’ Shlomo Farhi

The Gemara relates a story about a gentleman called Nachum. He was a man who had a a difficult life, but whenever something bad happened, he would say “Gam Zu L’Tovah – this also is for the good”, and this is what he later became known as – Nachum Ish Gam Zu. But why does the Gemara call him Nachum Ish Gam Zu, literally, “Nachum Also”? He was famous for saying “Gam Zu L’Tovah” yet he is not called “Nachum Ish Gam Zu L’Tovah”! One would think that “L’Tovah” would be the key part of what he is remembered as, as opposed to the seemingly extraneous ‘also’.

To understand the answer, we must be aware that there is a fundamental misunderstanding with regard to what he did, and consequently what he is remembered for until today. He wouldn’t pass a car crash and point and say it was “l’Tova” – one cannot label an inherently bad thing as “good”. “Good” is clearly not an applicable adjective. The depth behind his words is as follows: What he did was recognise the masterplan of Hashem, and the web in which events in our lives unfold. He attempted to see the bigger picture, the greater good which is hidden from our direct sight. That web, that bigger picture, is l’tova. Parts of it may not be, or may not obviously be but in recognising that bad events are part of a good web, we should be able to say  ”Gam Zu L’Tovah!” So in fact ‘Gam Zu’ – his ability to see that this is “also (one more event)” is the key part of what Nachum said – it is the mechanism by which he could label bad as “also” being good. Not just “L’Tovah”.

It take a great inner strength to truly be able to say, in the face of a bad event ‘this too shall pass’ and to really believe in the bigger picture and the greater good. But by working on that strength, we will be able to get to the stage where we can say, as Nachum did, Gam Zu L’Tovah – This too is for the good. The word ‘also’ is the very mechanism that allowed him (and resultantly us) to state something was ‘L’Tovah’.

Matos, 31:14 says, וַיִּקְצֹף מֹשֶׁה עַל פְּקוּדֵי הֶחָיִל שָׂרֵי הָאֲלָפִים וְשָׂרֵי הַמֵּאוֹת הַבָּאִים מִצְּבָא הַמִּלְחָמָה: Moshe became angry with the officers of the army, the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, who had returned from war. The following verse continues, וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵיהֶם מֹשֶׁה הַחִיִּיתֶם כָּל נְקֵבָה: Moshe said to them, “Did you allow all the females to live?

From the first verse, we know that Moshe is angry and it is therefore logical for us to assume that he would be the one speaking the the next verse? Why specify that it was Moshe who spoke?

Rav Zalman Sorotzkin tells us that if one is angry, he should refrain from speaking until the anger settles. The long pause between vayiktzof and vayomer indicate a different/new person (as it were) due to break.

Rav Elya Lopian would never punish a talmid (student) at the time of an incident. He once waited two weeks to deal with a particular incident.

The Alter of Kelm had an “angry suit” that he would change into each time he was angry, delaying reaction and allowing himself to calm down

The Peleh Yoietz tells us that keeping quiet when angry is like pouring water on the base of a fire. It extinguishes the flame at its source.

Rav Yechiel Meir of Zlotchov had special tefillin (phylacteries) from his father. People wanted to buy these special tefillin from him, and bid huge amounts of money to have the the merit of possessing them. One Succos there were no esrogim (citrus fruit used as one of the four kinds) to be found in their town. After searching desperately, he heard that a man in another town had a spare esrog. He sold his tefillin and bought the esrog. When he returned home and told his wife what had happened, she became furious and as a result, she broke the esrog. Rav Yechiel Meir stayed calm. When asked how he was able to stay calm, he replied, “I lost my tefillin and I lost my esrog; I will not lose my shalom bayis (marital harmony) as well.” That night, his father appeared to him in a dream and told him that in shomayim (the heavenly spheres), his shalom bayis was worth much, much more than the tefillin or the esrog.

A childless couple once came to Rav Chaim Kanievsky begging for a brocha (blessing) for children. They had been childless for many years and there was no other solution except Divine Intervention. Rav Chaim told them that he couldn’t bless them. Devastated, they asked what else they could do. Rav Chaim told them to get a brocha from someone who had been publicly embarrassed and did not respond. Many months passed and they were still not successful in tracking such a person down. Two years later they attended a wedding. At the wedding, the host started shouting at a guest invited by other side, in middle of the crowded hall. Seeing their chance, the couple ran over to the person being shamed and begged him to keep quiet. When things calmed down, the couple broke down in tears and begged the shamed person to bless them with children. Nine months later, twenty four years after their marriage, this couple was blessed with a child.

Controlling ones temper is an extremely crucial tool that is a life-long struggle for most. Still, one must never give up; each time he succeedes in controlling his temper and holds back from retorting, it makes it easier for him the next time around, not to mention the mountain of reward he will reap, both in this world and the next.

For all posts on Pinchas click here

Pinchas 25:11, פִּינְחָס בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן הֵשִׁיב אֶת חֲמָתִי מֵעַל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּקַנְאוֹ אֶת קִנְאָתִי בְּתוֹכָם וְלֹא כִלִּיתִי אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּקִנְאָתִי: Pinchas the son of Elazar the son of Aaron the kohen has turned My anger away from the children of Israel by his zealously avenging Me among them, so that I did not destroy the children of Israel because of My zeal.

Rashi comments, פינחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן הכהן: לפי שהיו השבטים מבזים אותו, הראיתם בן פוטי זה שפיטם אבי אמו עגלים לעבודה זרה והרג נשיא שבט מישראל, לפיכך בא הכתוב ויחסו אחר אהרן: Pinchas the son of Elazar the son of Aaron the kohen: Since the tribes were disparaging him, saying, Have you seen the son of Puti, whose mother’s father [Jethro] fattened (פִּטֵּם) calves for idols (See Rashi, Exod. 6:25), and who killed a chieftain of an Israelite tribe? For this reason, Scripture traces his pedigree to Aaron.

Rav Yonasan Eibshutz raises a question on this Rashi. Why were they making fun of him? Weren’t they aware that Zimri was, in fact, chayav misah (deserving of death)?

He answers that they accepted that Zimri was chayav misah, but the reason they had not gone ahead and killed him themselves, was because they said, “If a great man kills him, then there’s no kiddush Hashem (sactification of God’s name); we’re great and you’re not, so we let you kill him”. The Torah disagrees with them and tells us that he actually was great. The Torah goes on to say that they were just using it as an excuse and after 120, they will have nothing to say.

Yirmiyahu 1:6, 1:7 states, וָאֹמַר אֲהָהּ ה’ הִנֵּה לֹא-יָדַעְתִּי דַּבֵּר כִּי-נַעַר אָנֹכִי: And I said, “Alas, O Lord God! Behold, I know not to speak for I am a youth. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֵלַי אַל-תֹּאמַר נַעַר אָנֹכִי  כִּי עַל-כָּל-אֲשֶׁר אֶשְׁלָחֲךָ תֵּלֵךְ וְאֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר אֲצַוְּךָ תְּדַבֵּר- And the Lord said to me; Say not, “I am a youth,” for wherever I send you, you shall go, and whatever I command you, you shall speak.

R Nosson Vachtvogel comments, “How many gedolei hador (Torah giants) have we lost, how many tzadikkim (righteous people) have we forfeited, because they didn’t hear al tomar naar onochi.”

We need to remember the concept of ‘bishvili nivra ha’olam’. Each person should think that the world was created just for him and all the other people, and everything around him, was created for the sole purpose of populating his world.

Gemara Gittin, 56 says, Reb Zecharia Ben Avkulos’ humility caused the destruction of second temple. Bar Kamtza, looking for revenge against the Jewish people, told the ceasar that if he (the ceasar) sent an animal to the Jews as a gift, they would refuse to bring it as a korban (offering to God). The ceasar, skeptical, sent an animal as a gift to the Jews, and told them to bring it as a korban. Bar Kamtza damaged the lip of the animal so that it would be invalid to be brought as an korban, and Reb Zecharia refused to bring the imperfect animal as a korban. They couldn’t kill Bar Kamtza even though he would tell the ceasar that the Jews rejected his offering. The Rabbis didnt step up and give orders to accept the offering or reject it and have Bar Kamtza killed. The quiet ‘sitting back, doing nothing’ caused the destruction.

There is a time and place for everything. There is a time to be humble and keep your opinion to youself, and there is a time to stand up and be counted.

In the beginning of the parsha, Rashi asks why the parsha of the spies is juxtaposed with that of Miriam speaking against Moshe. He answers that the spies saw what had happened with Miriam and didn’t learn the lessons of speaking loshon hora.

This answer may seem a little problematic. Why would they learn mussar from Miriam, who was speaking against her brother? After all, they were speaking against the insentient, inanimate land.
(more…)

אֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת הָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר שָׁלַח מֹשֶׁה לָתוּר אֶת הָאָרֶץ וַיִּקְרָא מֹשֶׁה לְהוֹשֵׁעַ בִּן נוּן יְהוֹשֻׁעַ – These are the names of the men Moses sent to scout the Land, and Moses called Hoshea the son of Nun, Joshua. (13:16)

The incident of the Meraglim occured on their return from Canaan on the 9th of Av, and was the precursor for all Jewish tragedies on that day, as the Gemara in Taanis (29a) explains that when the Jews began to cry at the “reports”, Hashem pledged “Since you cried for no reason, I will designate this day as a day of crying for all generations”. All tragedies that occured on 9th Av are resultant from this episode.

Moshe sensed that they would return bearing a bad report, and changed his disciple Hoshea’s name to Yehoshua, and prated for him.

The Zohar reveals to us that what caused the Meraglim (who were the nesi’im, princes of their respective Tribes) to sin, was their fear of losing their positions of influence and leadership on entry into Israel. The perceived threat to their authority distorted their vision of Israel, and everything they saw was misinterpreted and fell under the shadow of their negativity.

This Zohar leads us to a difficult question. We read in Parshas Behaloscha that when Eldad and Medad started prophesying, Yehoshua exclaimed that they should be imprisoned – he was distraught at the mere suggestion that he was worthy enough of being the leader.
(more…)

All of our Yomim Tovim are celebrated to commemorate an important incident that happened in our rich Jewish history. In the Torah’s discussion of each Yom Tov, it mentions the words ” Zecher Liyetzias Mitzrayim” (In commemoration to our exodus from Egypt). Each Yom Tov (and Shabbos) was established to celebrate and remember one part of the exodus. For example, on Passover we remember our redemption by eating matzo, marror (bitter herbs), four cups of wine, and the recitation of the whole story of our redemption, all the way down to the seemingly insignificant details. On Succos we remember the ananei hakavod (the clouds of glory that protected the Jews in the desert), by moving out of our homes and into succos. Why is there no special mitzvah on Shavuos? It would seem to us that this holiday in particular should have a special mitzvah. After all, it is the day we received the Torah-and our identity.
Rav Ahron Kotler answers that the simple understanding of a rememberance is something that one may forget, and therefore needs to be constantly reminded. However, the Yom Tov of Shavuos wasn’t a one-off event; the giving of the Torah is constant, as it says בכל יום יהיו בעיניך כחדשים – each day, it should be as if the Torah is new to you. There is no point in doing a mitzva to commemorate the festival, since we are actually living it!
Here’s a story to illustrate this point. (more…)

A very short Dvar Torah for Parshas Naso:

וְלָקַח הַכֹּהֵן מַיִם קְדֹשִׁים בִּכְלִי חָרֶשׂ וּמִן הֶעָפָר אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בְּקַרְקַע הַמִּשְׁכָּן יִקַּח הַכֹּהֵן וְנָתַן אֶל הַמָּיִם - The kohen shall take holy water in an earthen vessel, and some earth from the Mishkan floor, the kohen shall take and put it into the water. (5:17)

וְכָתַב אֶת הָאָלֹת הָאֵלֶּה הַכֹּהֵן בַּסֵּפֶר וּמָחָה אֶל מֵי הַמָּרִים – Then the kohen shall write these curses (containing G-d’s name) on a scroll and erase it in the bitter water. (5:23)

The ingredients to the concoction the Sotah is made to drink are: 1. Water, 2. Earth, 3. G-d’s name (- Rashi points out that the paper with G-d’s name is inserted into the water so it dissolves in the water is so that since she may confess before needing to drink it, we should wait until the last moment to avoid erasing G-d’s name in vain). What is the meaning and significance of these three ingredients?

The Mishna in Avos (3:1) says: עקביה בן מהללאל אומר, הסתכל בשלושה דברים, ואין אתה בא לידי עבירה–דע מאיין באת, ולאיין אתה הולך, ולפני מי אתה עתיד ליתן דין וחשבון:  מאיין באת, מליחה סרוחה.  ולאיין אתה הולך, למקום רימה ותולעה.  ולפני מי אתה עתיד ליתן דין וחשבון, לפני מלך מלכי המלכים הקדוש ברוך הוא – Akavia the son of Mahalalel would say: Reflect upon three things and you will not come to the hands of transgression. Know from where you came, where you are going, and before whom you are destined to give a judgement and accounting. From where you came–from a putrid drop of liquid (correlates to water); where you are going–to a place of dust, maggots and worms (correlates to earth); and before whom you are destined to give a judgement and accounting–before the supreme King of Kings, the Holy One, blessed be He. (G-d’s name).

Timeless lesson – never forget the mishna!

Geshmack short Dvar Torah or what? :)

Beautiful kesubot
and custom art by
Rav Yoel Rakovsky.
Call 02 628 5346 or
visit ituryn.com

Categories