Archive for the ‘Baal Haturim’ Category

Parshas Tetzaveh is an anomaly in the Torah. It is the only parsha in the narrative of the Jews of that time in which Moshe Rabbeinu’s name does not appear at all, from his birth until the end of the Torah (barring certain parts of Devarim, where he was the person speaking).

The Ba’al HaTurim comments on the first pasuk in Tetzaveh (27:20) that in Parshas Ki Sisa, after seeing the Golden Calf and subsequently Hashem’s wrath through the plague, Moshe pleaded that “ וְעַתָּה אִם תִּשָּׂא חַטָּאתָם וְאִם אַיִן מְחֵנִי נָא מִסִּפְרְךָ אֲשֶׁר כָּתָבְתָּ – And now, if You forgive their sin But if not, erase me now from Your book, which You have written.” (32:32). The Ba’al HaTurim explains that although Hashem did indeed refrain from destroying the nation, a tzaddik’s word is always fulfilled.

The parsha in which Moshe’s name does not appear is about the kehuna, the priesthood, which was given to Ahron. R’ Yakov Minkus explains that there are 2 ways for Torah (representing Heaven) and mankind (representing Earth) to intersect:

1. The first way is that the Torah descends from Heaven. Moshe embodied this, as exemplified when he brought down the luchos from the mountain to the people.
2. The second is that we elevate become elevated ourselves. Ahron embodied this, as the ultimate “people’s person”. He was אוהב שלום ורודף שלום – a lover and pursuer of peace. The entire priesthood was based on helping the people interact with Hashem through the services.

The Gemara in Sanhedrin concludes that there are two ways to settle litigation, through din emes (an actual judgement), or a pshara (a compromise). The fact that both are valid settlements shows that both are equally powerful at achieving their goal, settling a dispute.

The role of the kohen is to play the arbiter, the middle man. As a man of the people, he is meant to feel their emotions, guide them through the services in the Beis HaMikdash, and follow the path that Ahron set.

If we are to say that this way of getting to the intersection of people and Torah is equally valid, Moshe almost had to be left out, to show that here is another, equally valid way.

There are various incidents in the Torah where Ahron and Moshe are mentioned, with Ahron preceding Moshe, as opposed to the usual Moshe first, and Ahron second. This is meant to show their equality. But as pointed out in many places, Moshe was the greatest man to have ever lived, without equal, so to what ends can we suggest their equality?

Knowing what we now know, the answer is simple. Their equality was not as people, as indeed Moshe was without equal, but rather, their equality was in the validity of their approaches in how to get the Torah to the people.

‘וְלִבְכֹּתָהּ’ – “and he wept for her” (Chayei Sarah 23:2)

The Baal Haturim says that there is a small ‘כּ to explain that he only cried a bit because she was old.

The Bikurei Avraham asks, ‘How this can be the explanation of וְלִבְכֹּתָהּ’?  The Torah is emphasizing that he only cried a bit for his deceased wife – is this a praise of Avraham?!

Furthermore, this was Sarah Imeinu – whilst Avraham converted many people, it was she who converted all the women, she was a great prophetess of her own right, she was the first of the matriarchs, all of whom experienced regular miracles. In an instant this was lost – was it not necessary to weep without end at the loss of such an important person? At the passing of both Moshe and Aharon at the ages of 120 and 123 respectively, the entire nation had a 30 day mourning period – how are we to understand that Avraham did not greatly mourn his wife?

In truth, the Torah is trying to tell us what a special and unique person Avraham Avinu was. When he got back from the Akeida, he found his wife had passed, and knew it had happened when she’d heard about the Akeida – ‘ונסמכה מיתת שרה לעקידת יצחק’ (Rashi 23:2)
The way the Yetzer Hara works is that he doesn’t just dissuade us from trying to do something – he approaches us even after we’ve achieved our goal. He tried to manipulate Avraham into regretting the Akeida that was the cause of his wife’s death.

What Avraham did was distance himself from such thoughts – he justified her death to himself  (refer to the above quote from the Ba’al Haturim) by saying her time had come to die anyway because ‘she was old’. The fact that the Torah publicized that he wept briefly for his deceased wife is indeed a huge praise for Avraham.

This methodology used by the Yetzer Hara – discourage from performing, bad intentions while performing, haughtiness or regret after – all cause a person to forfeit any reward due for performing Mitzvahs. It has no value in G-D’s eyes, since it has no value in man’s eyes. This is what we pray for in Ma’ariv every day when we say “v’hoser satan milfaneinu” (“before us [our action] and after us”).

Based on a shiur by R’ Yehoshua Hartman

Avraham is blessed by Hashem after the Akeida at Mt. Moriah:
כִּי בָרֵךְ אֲבָרֶכְךָ וְהַרְבָּה אַרְבֶּה אֶת זַרְעֲךָ כְּכוֹכְבֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם וְכַחוֹל אֲשֶׁר עַל שְׂפַת הַיָּם וְיִרַשׁ זַרְעֲךָ אֵת שַׁעַר אֹיְבָיו - That I will surely bless you, and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens and as the sand that is on the seashore, and your descendants will inherit the cities of their enemies. (Bereishis 22:17)

Lavan blesses Rivka as she leaves to marry Yitzchak:

וַיְבָרֲכוּ אֶת רִבְקָה וַיֹּאמְרוּ לָהּ אֲחֹתֵנוּ אַתְּ הֲיִי לְאַלְפֵי רְבָבָה וְיִירַשׁ זַרְעֵךְ אֵת שַׁעַר שֹׂנְאָיו – And they blessed Rebecca and said to her, “Our sister, may you become thousands of myriads, and may your seed inherit the cities of those who hate you.” (24:60)

Rashi informs us that Lavan is paraphrasing Avraham’s bracha.

If Lavan is paraphrasing, why is the terminology different, and if there is a difference between the two blessings, what is the difference between אֹיְבָיו/enemies and שֹׂנְאָיו/those who hate you?

Our parsha says:

וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה קוּמָה ה’ וְיָפֻצוּ אֹיְבֶיךָ וְיָנֻסוּ מְשַׂנְאֶיךָ מִפָּנֶיךָ – So it was, whenever the ark set out, Moses would say, Arise, O Lord, may Your enemies be scattered and may those who hate You flee from You.

Rashi says: ויפוצו אויביך: המכונסין – May Your enemies be scattered: Those [enemies] who are assembled [for battle].

וינסו משנאיך: אלו הרודפים - (may) Those who hate You flee:  These are pursuers.

We can draw a distinction between an enemy and one who hates you now. The word אויב is is similar in root to the word אוהב - to love. Both verbs are a result of being together.  A שונא however, is someone who hates someone even when they are nowhere near them, and will pursue them.

This is hinted to by Rashi, where he writes אלו - these, ie they are close enough to be pointed out.

Eisav is referred to as Soneh Yisrael, and Yishmael is referred to as Oyev Yisrael.

Our situation with the Arabs reflects this – if we’d been in Uganda, there would be no problems, and vice versa – the situation is a result of being together. Conversely, Hitler and the Nazis had little or nothing to with Jews, and yet they hated us, and hunted us down across the globe, truly the definition of a רודף – but the terminology used in the Torah reflects the sad reality of our situation today.

To be really Geshmack: we asked why Rivka and Avraham received different brachos. At Mt. Moriah, the bracha was to Avraham, so the bracha was for Yitzchak, regarding his other son Yishmael – and Yishmael is an אויב, therefore the pasuk says שַׁעַר אֹיְבָיו. In contrast, Rivka received a bracha that was for Yakov regarding Esav, and Esav is a שונא, and therefore the pasuk says שַׁעַר שֹׂנְאָיו!

Interestingly:

-Ramban points out that at Avrahams bracha that was the first time there was a promise of Moshiach

-Baal Haturimpoints out that the final mention of Yishmael is עַל פְּנֵי כָל אֶחָיו נָפָל – right at the end of Chayei Sara (25:18). The following pasuk is the beginning of Toldos - וְאֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת יִצְחָק בֶּן אַבְרָהָם - Baal Haturim writes that the ultimate rise of Moshiach is tied to the fall of Yishmael.

When the brothers apologise to Yosef, he rebutted this by saying אַל תִּירָאוּ כִּי הֲתַחַת אלֹהִים אָנִי – “Don’t be afraid, for am I instead of God?” (50:19). It is unclear what exactly he means, but certainly he is not annoyed.

The Baal Haturim suggests that this is is poetic justice as this is precisely what his mother had been told when she begged for children from their father, at which point he said “הֲתַחַת אֱ־לֹהִים אָנֹכִי אֲשֶׁר מָנַע מִמֵּךְ פְּרִי בָטֶן - “Am I instead of God, Who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?” (30:2)

The Maharil Diskin wonders why a simple yes/no answer isn’t enough, and we can (and have) explained that he did not actually forgive them, but did not say this. We can look deeper into his words: In Parshas Matos (30:7-9) the pasuk describes a woman who makes a vow, but then her husband annuls it. In an event where she did not know he had annulled it, and she thinks she is deliberately breaking it, the pasuk says “והֹ יִסְלַח לָהּ – “…and the Lord will forgive her.” This is astounding – she has technically done absolutely nothing wrong – her vow had been annulled at the time of her actions, and yet there is a certain something that requires forgiveness! And the same thing was true here:

The brothers thought they had committed a horrendously evil act to their brother, and even though circumstantially it turned out for the best in the end, and the family were reunited – just as in the case of a woman who circumstantially did nothing wrong – there was still a certain something that required forgiveness. The Maharil Diskin suggests an alternate explanation to that which the Baal Haturim suggested, that this is exactly what Yosef was saying here.  Due to the turn of events they had done nothing wrong, but he was not in the place of Hashem, because as we said by the woman, they needed G-d’s forgiveness.

In layman’s terms, the ends do not justify the means. Yosef was telling his brothers that they were only circumstantially sorry.

Rabbeinu Bachaye  shares a frightening thought that is brilliant. He takes the concept of Yosef not forgiving his brothers a step further, and suggests that this resulted in the Asara Harugei Malchus, one of the greatest tragedies in Jewish history, and one died in lieu of each of the group who’d sold Yosef. Yaakov was not told, as an oath was made as a group of 10 (a minyan) to not tell him, and such an oath cannot be annulled.

But why were there 10 martyrs then, as there weren’t 10 men present at the sale? Binyamin was not there, Reuven had gone home, and we can’t include Yosef as part of such a minyan? There is a concept that a minyan can take place with 9 as Hashem joins in – Hashem was the 10th member of this group.

R’ Shamshon Ostropolier points out that we can expand the pasuk in Bechukosai - וְכָל מַעְשַׂר בָּקָר וָצֹאן כֹּל אֲשֶׁר יַעֲבֹר תַּחַת הַשָּׁבֶט הָעֲשִׂירִי יִהְיֶה קֹּדֶשׁ לַהֹ – Any tithe of cattle or flock of all that pass under the rod, the tenth shall be holy to the Lord” (27:32)- and there is a deeper meaning to this pasuk, in reference to Rabbi Akiva - וכי למא מת עקיבא, שהוא רואה בקר וצאן הכֹּל אֲשֶׁר יַעֲבֹר תַּחַת הַשָּׁבֶט הָעֲשִׂירִי יִהְיֶה קֹּדֶשׁ לַהֹ – Why did Akiva die? He was just a shepherd! When he passed under the staff (judgement?) he was the tenth, holy for G-d.

There is another allusion to this in Parshas Vayigash (45:15), that “וַיֵּבְךְּ עֲלֵיהֶם – and he cried on them” – we can break up עֲלֵיהֶם and read it על י ה”םfor the ten Harugei Malchus.

Scary. So not that any of us are like Yosef and his brothers, but it’s clear that we should be more forgiving to people for what they may do to us.

ראש חודש ניסן

Categories