Brothers

By On · Add Comment

(וַעֲשִׂיתֶם לוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר זָמַם לַעֲשׂוֹת לְאָחִיו וּבִעַרְתָּ הָרָע מִקִּרְבֶּךָ’ (דברים יט:יט

‘And you shall do to him like he plotted to do to his brother’.

 Rashi explains this pasuk by saying ‘The pasuk says ‘like he plotted’ and not if he actually did [to his brother].’ The Mishna in Makos 5b learns this דין from the word ‘brother’ since ‘brotherhood’ only refers to live siblings.

The Ritva asks, ‘When it talks about יבום in דברים כ’ה:ז we find a reference to brotherhood despite the brother having deceased, thus contradicting the Mishna above. For example, despite their tragic death, Nadav and Avihu are also referred to as ‘brothers’.

 R’ Ezriel Hildesheimer answers with a most wonderful idea. He explains the difference between a blood brother and a friendship style brother. A blood brother will remain a brother even after he has deceased, hence the relevance of Yibum where the pasuk refers to them as brothers. Nadav, Avihu, Mishael and Elitzafon were blood cousins which hold the same importance, in their case only, as brothers. However, here we are discussing witnesses where they may not have any blood relativity at all. In this pasuk, the reason they are addressed as brothers is simply because they are ‘brothers in arms,’ I.e. they are both keeping the mitzvos. As is proven in Bava Kama 88a, ‘A Canaanite servant is a brother to us in mitzvos.’

This question over whether it is truly a blood brother or just a brother through mitzvos is only relevant if the ‘brother’ is still alive. We have already established that it refers to ‘brothers in mitzvos.’  However, once they are deceased they are free from the mitzvos so there is nothing binding them as brothers.

In conclusion, the posuk is cryptically trying to show us that, indeed, the victim in question is still alive and was not affected / killed by the ‘plot’ against him.

Good Shabbos

The Kruvim

By On · Add Comment

There is a Gemara in Baba Basra 99 that discusses the Kruvim (cherubs). It brings down conflicting psukim, that faced each faced the other, or whether they faced the wall ie away from each other. The Gemara concludes that when the Jews were righteous they faced each other, and when they sinned, they turned away. The symbolism is clear.

There is a Gemara in Yuma 54 that when the Temple was destroyed, the Gentiles who burst in found them hugging. Many commentators query this: the only reason the Temple was destroyed was because the Jews sinned, so why were they even facing each other, let alone hugging?

There are three answers, which have overlapping themes.

The Ritva explains that Hashem punishes us exactly, and when the punishment is finished He loves us again, we have gotten our due. The Temple was destroyed, and G-ds anger had subsided.

The Klausenberger Rebbe says that this occurred so as not to disgrace the Jews, as clearly the position of the Kruvim was noteworthy, so if the punishment was to see the destruction of the Temple, then further embarrassment would be pointless if word spread that the Kruvim were facing opposite direction, ie that G-d was angry with the Jews.

The Arizal says that the Gentiles were not the subject of G-d’ anger, the Jews were. As such, the Gentiles, who were just the objects through which G-d implemented His judgement. In this regard, they were insignificant, and could not hold a candle to the Jews, as it were.

During the destruction, there was a traitor called Yosef of Meshisa who informed for the Romans. As a reward for his treachery, he was allowed to walk into the Temple and take a treasure for himself. He went in and took the Menorah, but was informed that the Romans were unaware of the aesthetic beauty the treasures, so he could not have it, but could go back in and take something else. He refused, and said it had been bad enough he’d angered his G-d once, and would nto do so again. He was tortured, and killed, but it is noteworthy that just going into the Temple had affected him so much so that he was now willing to die rather than betray his people and religion again. There was something that was supernatural about the Temple, that Gentiles were not party to.