Wrestling in the dark

By On · Add Comment

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.

Why there is suffering in the world

By On · Add Comment

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.

5635 First Ma’amar–What is Shemitta?

By On · Add Comment

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.

To be an individual or a single entity

By On · Add Comment

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 points out how this is the sole instance where וַיַּקְהֵל is the first act in an episode, not a speech or instruction. What is the significance of gathering everyone?

Furthermore, this episode occurred directly after the Golden Calf, as Rashi notes that Vayakhel occurred the morning after Yom Kippur, when Moshe returned with the second luchos. It is likely that his first public appearance upon his return would include a notable message to the people regarding the bridge between G-d’s wrath and appeasement. What was said or done that addressed their sin?

The Noam Elimelech explains that the duty to perform a mitzvah stems from the way in which it was given – to the entire nation. A corollary is that when a person sins, it stems from a desire to break apart from the nation, albeit momentarily. But a person who has sinned can still perform a mitzvah, by rejoining the people. The reason that the tzibbur, the collective, is safe is from the Yetzer Hara is simply that an individual does not stand out in a crowd.

Moshe argued that the Golden Calf should be attributed to rogue individuals, rather than the entire nation. As explained by the Noam Elimelech, what motivates sin, is a desire to act as an individual – as such, how could the nation be held accountable, regardless of how many had indeed sinned?

So Moshe pleaded on their collective behalf, and Hashem relented to Moshe’s prayers. On his return, the very first action he takes is וַיַּקְהֵל – he gathers the individuals into the collective tzibbur he had interceded on behalf of. Hashem’s wrath had been assuaged, and through וַיַּקְהֵל. This is what makes וַיַּקְהֵל unique – it is the introduction of the concept of כח הצבור – a team greater than the sum of its parts.

This has many parallels to the underlying concepts of all actions requiring a minyan.

Moshe told them laws Hashem transmitted לַעֲשֹׂת אֹתָם – “to make/do them” – but the instructions are about Shabbos; not to light fire, and not to work. How is not doing something called לַעֲשֹׂת – to do?

The Nesivos Shalom reads this back into the pasuk, that לַעֲשֹׂת אֹתָם isn’t discussing Shabbos at all. G-d’s command to Moshe was לַעֲשֹׂת אֹתָם – to make them, the Jews, into a collective – וַיַּקְהֵל.

This is why the two mitzvos instructed post-Eigel were to keep Shabbos and build a Mishkan – both are incumbent on the nation as a collective, incontrast to lulav, tefila, tzitzis. The Midrash in Bereishis Rabba says “שאמרה הק”בה לשבת – כנסת ישראל בן זבוגך” – Hashem said to Shabbos: “The כנסת ישראל is your pre-ordained”. כנסת ישראל is the Jewish national consciousness, a supersoul, a multitude that becomes a single unit.

The collective mitzva is the tikkun – the rectification – for the rash actions of the thousands of individuals.

The Mishkan rectified the sin of the Golden Calf in a similar vein, in that every individual was required to make donation – were several wealthy individuals to fund the entire Mishkan project on their own, the Mishkan would not have served it’s purpose. The construction bound the people together, and is quite reasonable to suggest that their donation purchased a small share in the Mishkan.

The following are other examples of this concept:

- We can develop this idea further, and attribute the collective/individual argument to the incident with the spies, that resulted in the 40 year wandering in the desert, and the whole generation dying out. The Torah in Parshas Shelach elaborates that all the spies were leaders of their respective tribes; indeed, they were the representatives of the people, and this is why they were sent. This could not be repaired, as apart from being the people’s representatives, the people were the ones who sent them, as it says: שְׁלַח לְךָ אֲנָשִׁים – send for yourself (13:2). The people could not be absolved of this.

- Furthermore, we can say the same of Korach. His Weltanschauung – his worldview – stemmed from the ideology that every individual had unlimited freedoms, and everyone could aspire to the same greatness – he said that “כולם קדושים” – that each individual alone could achieve this, and not that the nation itself was the source of the קדושה. His reasoning was that the nation was formed of individuals, and that nothing was to be gained from unity. Korach’s denial of the power of the tzibbur precluded Moshe’s prayers from helping him, and he was absorbed into the land.

- The same can be said of Purim, that Haman challenged the idea of Jews as a nation, and the solution in Esther 8:11 was לְהִקָּהֵל וְלַעֲמֹד עַל-נַפְשָׁם – to gather and stand for their lives. This is a direct parallel to the Eigel, wherein here too the people faltered and attended Achashverosh’s feast, which set the whole story into motion. Only through the tzibbur could they find redemption.

- The theme keeps recurring, with Pesach too. The Korban Pesach can only be eaten as part of a חבורה – a group. This was the mitzva through which the people were saved – they were at the lowest rung of the 49 levels of impurity, and this could only be remedied by the כח הצבור – and this unity carried them through Yetzias Mitzrayim, the Yam Suf, and Har Sinai, as Rashi quotes a famous Mechilta that says they encamped כאיש אחד בלב אחד – as if they were one man, with one heart, the perfect metaphor for perfect unity.

- We refer to Hashem as our father, but He is not physically our father, rather, He is conceptually our father. If we choose to be part of His people, then He is indeed our father, but if, Heaven forbid, one does not perceive himself to be part of the people, how can he lay claim to Hashem being his father? We say in the Amida every day: ברכנו אבינו כולנו כאחד באור פניך – the Nesivos Shalom explains that when we are כולנו כאחד, only then will we see ברכנו אבינו.

The individual’s role in a national event

By On · Add Comment

Sefer Bamidbar opens with a Jewish national census.

Rashi explores the function and timing of a census, and explains that Hashem counted the Jews three times over a year and two weeks, because they were dear to Him; particularly after the Golden Calf, לידע מנין הנותרים – to know the number of the survivors. 0.5 percent of the Jews perished after the sin of the eigel, which means that 99.5 percent ‘survived’.

Why does Rashi use the word ‘survivors’ if the vast majority of the Jews did not perish?

Are people who don’t die on the way to work considered “survivors” when they get home?

It’s not the same; because all Jews are connected – like a puzzle. A puzzle is never complete unless all the pieces are in place, forming a picture. The Jews are incomplete unless all the Jews are included. Every Jew matters.

The Jews were not counted at Matan Torah – most critically important day in history. G-d revealed His reality to us, all of us – all the past, present and future generations of Jews are considered to have been at Sinai. Yet on the most significant day, on the day the relationship between God and his people was at its absolute peak, we were not counted. Why? The Torah records that the Jews assembled at Sinai כאיש אחד בלב אחד – like one man with one heart.

There is a very logical principle that אין מנין באחד – that you don’t count to one. Things that are clearly unique don’t lend themselves to numerical speculation. The question “Where do you live?” implicitly assumes that you have one address. Whilst our souls may have been there, did we ever have the option of saying no? Why should we be be obligated a commitment the first generation of Jews made?

When a family converts to Judaism, the children are asked at their bar/bas mitzva if they want to continue being Jews. If they say no, which they can, then they are no longer Jewish and not bound to Judaism. Why aren’t born Jews offered a similar choice?

The reason it sounds like a good question is that we are all influenced by western culture, where the individual is the epicentre of existence. But this is a mistake. Hitler’s policy did not discriminate between religious or secular. Hitler also used the concept of collective responsibility. If one Jew stepped out of line, be it stealing, practising Judaism, escaping, or disrespecting a Nazi, all the Jews in that camp, city, or ghetto were punished. That concept comes straight from the Torah.

Collective acceptance obligates everyone. Our primary identity is our Judaism. We are Jews who speak English, and not English speakers who happen to be Jews. You, and every single Jew you meet, are worthwhile. No matter the background, mistakes, ability, age, or anything. No one can ever take that away from you, nor you from anyone else. If you ever meet a Jew in a strange place, make sure to start a conversation!

Perseverance under duress

By On · Add Comment

וְכִי יָמוּךְ אָחִיךָ וּמָטָה יָדוֹ עִמָּךְ וְהֶחֱזַקְתָּ בּוֹ - If your brother becomes destitute and his hand falters beside you, you shall support him (25:35)

The interpretation of the words “וְהֶחֱזַקְתָּ בּוֹ - you shall support him”, although this is not reflected in English, in Hebrew it is in the present tense. This is taken to mean that no mater how may times someone needs help, we must continue to offer the guiding and helping hand. Our Yetzer Hara may tell us that this person is wasting our time, and we’re worse off for helping him, he’s getting in the way of your life etc, but the pasuk is telling us these aren’t legitimate excuses, we must persevere.

There is a story told about the Chafetz Chaim, who went to the first Aguda convention in Vienna in 1923, and he stayed in the house of one R’ Akiva Schreiber. Naturally there was a crowd permanently camped outside the house clamouring to get an audience with the holy tzaddik. An English Jew had travelled to Austria to get advice on an issue from him, and he told the the host about the urgency of the issue, so the host invited him for a meal, at which the Chafetz Chaim would be present, and they could meet afterwards.
Read Full Dvar Torah →

Torah as part of creation

By On · Add Comment

דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר אִשָּׁה כִּי תַזְרִיעַ - Speak to the children of Israel, saying: If a woman conceives…. (12:2)

Rashi comments:

אשה כי תזריע : אמר ר’ שמלאי כשם שיצירתו של אדם אחר כל בהמה חיה ועוף במעשה בראשית, כך תורתו נתפרשה אחר תורת בהמה חיה ועוף – If a woman conceives: Rabbi Simlai said: “Just as in the Creation, man was created after all domestic animals, wild beasts, and birds, so too, the law [concerning the cleanness] of man is stated after the law [concerning the cleanness] of domestic animals, wild beasts, and birds.”- [Vayikra Rabbah 14:1]

Theoretically, man should have been created before animals, as man is the focus of existence.

The Gemara (Sanhedrin 38a)  gives 4 reasons why man was created after everything else: 1. That if man becomes haughty and arrogant, he can be told that even the insignificant mosquito too precedence in creation. 2. People might speculate that since man would have preceded everything, he is somehow on par with G-d. 3. It is not fitting for man, the focal point of existence, to come into an emtpy world. 4. It is fitting for man’s existence to start with the observance of Shabbos.

R’ Simlai says that כשם – just like - man was secondary to the creation of animals at Genesis, here too. But the problem is, it’s not just as at all! We can’t say that the reason that the laws of man are secondary to the laws of animals in our parsha due to it being fitting to begin existence with Shabbos (4), or that the world should not be empty (3). The reasons given for Creation don’t seem relevant at all here, so how is it כשם – just like ? R’ Simlai should have said כיון – since - which simply indicates they are reflecting each other superficially ie in order.

R’ Yehoshua Hartman expounds on how the Maharal explains this. In Bereishis, (and kiddush) we say יום השישי - and Rashi there wonders why the definite article – ה - is used there, and not by any of the other days. There are two explanantions Rashi provides: 1. the ה (numerical value 5) is what are attention should be drawn to, the 5 books of the Chumash – that creation was completed, and there was a condition that the Jews had to accept the Torah. 2. The definite article is drawing attention to what we are defnining –  שישי - the sixth, of Sivan, Shavuos, the day the Torah was given to us. That sixth day was the completion of creation, and up until that point, existence was not ascertained yet, and risked being undone if the Jews had not accepted the Torah. So what’s the difference between these two explanations? Both say that existence is dependent on accepting the Torah?

Not at all. The first possibility meant that creation was over 6 days from when it started. The second possibility means that creation was finished when we accepted the Torah – this means that Torah is the quintessence of Beriah – it is the crescendo of creation. This means that whatever happens in the Beriah happens in the Torah, as the two are inextricably linked – existence depends on the Torah as an anchor.

It is logical to say that the world was incomplete until the Torah was given – there was a Yetzer Hara, yet no Torah with which to fight it.

This means that the word כשם – just like is exactly the right word to use, as whatever is applicable to creation is applicable here, because Torah is part and parcel of existence.

 

The Wicked Son

By On · Add Comment

In the Haggada, the Rasha asks a question, and the father rebukes him, and the Haggada remarks that the father should הקהה את שניו – knock out his teeth – and rebuke him that אלו היה שם לא היה נגאל – if he had been in Egypt at the time, he would not have been redeemed.

What do his teeth and potential non-redemption from Egypt have to with each other, as part of a cogent reply?

R’ Shlomo Freshwater explains that prior to Matan Torah, people who were evil stayed that way – Yishmael, Esav, all the Jews who died during the 9th plague. Before Matan Torah, the only people God would choose to save were the people who chose God.

After Matan Torah, this changed – Hashem had chosen us unconditionally! This enabled everyone to be saved – even if they weren’t righteous – and any and everyone could do teshuva, as opposed to falling by the wayside like Yishmael, Esav etc.

So what the father tells his son is that if he had been in Egypt, he simply would not have had the merit to be redeemed. But after Matan Torah, anyone can do teshuva – even a Rasha! But a puzzle remains – we just have to “knock out his teeth” – what does this mean?

רשע is gematria 570. If we “knock out” שניו – gematria 366 – we are left with 204. What is gematria 204?

צדיק!!

The 4 sons are meant to be allegorical, but clearly this section of the Haggada is an inpirational piece about teshuva – no matter what we have done, we can always make amends, we just need to want it and remove the negativity.

How we have a Yetzer Hara

By On · Add Comment

Before man ate from the tree, we are told:

וַיִּהְיוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם עֲרוּמִּים, הָאָדָם וְאִשְׁתּוֹ וְלֹא יִתְבֹּשָׁשׁוּ – They were both naked, the man and his wife, and they weren’t embarrassed. (2:25)

Rashi points out that they were not ashamed because they did not know about modesty – they were literally being “natural”. They could not distinguish between good and evil; and although a degree of knowledge was initially granted to man, ie enabling Adam to name all the animals, nonetheless they were not imbued with the evil inclination until they ate of the tree, after which he knew the difference between good and evil.

The purpose of creation is to grow close to Hashem by resisting the natural tendencies and inclinations that prevent us from fulfilling our duties, thereby overcoming them. This being the case, what function would creation have served if there were no inclination for evil?

R’ Chaim Volozhin explains that Adam had all faculties, particularly free will, instilled within him before the original sin, to enable to him to do as he saw fit. What he didn’t have though, was an internal urge to sin or do evil. The snake/Satan figure, the personification and embodiment of evil, was an external being to Adam, and had to physically manifest itself as the snake to ensnare Adam and Eve – unlike today, where this battle is an internal battle, choice, decision.

The original quote from Rashi implies this: that the Evil Inclination only became an innate thing in man once he consumed the fruit and it became part of him.

The Pardes Yosef adds that the Gemara concludes that the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil was an Esrog tree – a פרי עץ הדר – the final letters of the words are י – צ – ר – יצר! When the פרי עץ הדר entered their bodies, the יצר did too!