North Jerusalem Maggid of Dubno Project http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog Devoted to the teachings of Rabbi Yaakov Kranz, the Maggid of Dubno Wed, 16 May 2012 18:38:10 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 Haftaras Bechukosai http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/05/16/bechukosai72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/05/16/bechukosai72a/#comments Wed, 16 May 2012 18:38:10 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1592 In this week’s haftarah it is written (Yirmiyah 17:11): “Like a partridge summoning chicks it did not bear, so is one who amasses wealth unjustly; in the middle of his life it will leave him, and at his end he will turn into a spoiled man.” The Maggid explains this verse as follows. A partridge that broods over chicks not its own will not gain from its efforts, for ultimately the birds it is raising will leave it. Similarly, Yirmiyahu says, it is a waste of effort to try to gain wealth through theft, deceit, and other unjust means, for such ill-gotten gains will ultimately be lost. A person might think this does not matter, for he can enjoy the wealth while he has it. Yirmiyahu therefore adds that the man who has amassed wealth unjustly will turn into a spoiled man.
The Maggid brings out the idea with an analogy. It is the nature of a river, as it flows across a stretch of land, to pick up all kinds of refuse: stones, carcasses, various foul creatures, and so on. On occasion it will dump such refuse near a city or on a good plot of land, thereby causing spoilage. Yet, if the river runs through the same area constantly, the spoilage it causes will ultimately be rectified, for after dumping a pile of refuse in a certain spot, it will eventually pick the refuse up again and carry it somewhere else. It is different, however, when the river temporarily overruns its regular channels, dumps a great pile of refuse on a distant plot, and then returns to its normal course. In this case, the spoilage will be permanent, for no team of men will be able to clear away the refuse.
The parallel is as follows. It is the nature of wealth to cause a person to develop bad tendencies. It can divert him from studying Torah and performing mitzvos. And it can cause him to turn brazen and use the power of his wealth to pursue his every whim. Indeed, wealth has produced many moral casualties. Yet, just as wealth can cause a person great spiritual harm, it also can bring a person great spiritual benefit: A wealthy person can atone for his sins by using his wealth for charity, acts of kindness, building synagogues and houses of study, marrying off orphans, and so on. It is known that charity is more powerful than any Temple offering. Thus, Daniel told Nevuchadnetzar (Daniel 4:24): “Redeem your sin through charity, and your iniquities through compassion for the poor.”
But a person can achieve spiritual gains from his wealth only when he is able to retain it. He can then use his wealth to rectify his misdeeds. It is different, though, when a person acquires wealth unjustly. In this case, Yirmiyahu says, the person loses his wealth in midlife. And then he is left only with the spiritual damage his wealth brought him: evil-hearted tendencies, debased thinking, and corrupt behavior. He cannot rectify the damage through righteous giving, for all his wealth is gone. This fate is what Yirmiyahu refers to when he says that a person who amasses wealth unjustly will turn into a spoiled man: He will be irreversibly habituated to evil.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/05/16/bechukosai72a/feed/ 0 On Giving http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/05/09/behar72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/05/09/behar72a/#comments Wed, 09 May 2012 19:52:13 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1586 In last week’s piece, we discussed a situation where a relatively small amount of help can produce a tremendous benefit. This week we discuss another such situation. Parashas Behar, the Torah portion read this week in Eretz Yisrael, contains a section devoted to caring for the poor. The piece below is from the Maggid’s commentary on this section, in Ohel Yaakov, Parashas Behar.
The Midrash states (Vayikra Rabbah 34:1, end):
R. Pinchas said in the name of R. Reuvein: “When someone gives a perutah coin to a pauper, does Hashem repay him with perutos? Behold, with a perutah a person gives a pauper his life! How so? For example, if a loaf of bread costs ten perutos and the pauper has only nine, when someone comes and gives him a perutah, he is able to buy the bread, and when he eats it, he is revived. Accordingly, the Hashem says to the giver, ‘You, too, when your soul is pressing to leave your body, I will repay you.’”
The Maggid comments that Hashem’s promise to the giver seems baffling. Why does Hashem give him a blessing that is linked to a curse? Why does Hashem tell him to wait until he is on the verge of death, and then He will repay him?
The Maggid then goes on to describe how, with a deeper look, we can marvel at the way Hashem’s promise to the giver reflects eminent kindness and justice. The giver gave the pauper a single perutah. This small donation enabled the pauper to buy a loaf of bread. So Hashem credits the giver as if he had given the pauper the whole loaf. Moreover, since the bread revived the pauper, Hashem credits the giver as if he had given him added life. But, now, let us examine the situation more deeply. Exactly how much added life did the giver give the pauper by enabling him to buy the bread? How long did this bread sustain the pauper? Eight hours, maybe ten. So, at most, the giver deserves to get back ten hours of added life. But Hashem, in His great wisdom, arranges affairs so that the added ten hours have a tremendous impact.
The matter is as follows. Consider a person who is gravely ill. The family typically will ask the doctor what the prognosis is. And, based on his knowledge of the dynamics of the disease in question and the patient’s general condition, the doctor may answer: “If he makes it through the night, he will pull through and recover.” In such a case, if the family could only somehow buy ten hours of life, surely they would give everything they have for these hours, for after their loved one survives the ten hour period, he may well live on for many more years. Now, suppose this patient once gave a pauper a perutah and thereby enabled him to buy a loaf of bread and survive another ten hours. By this act, he earned himself an added ten hours of life. And Hashem, in His kindness, holds this reward in store for him until just the right moment. He pays him the added ten hours at a time when his soul is pressing to leave his body, so that these added hours make the difference between immediate death and long life.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/05/09/behar72a/feed/ 0 On Yom Kippur http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/05/03/emor72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/05/03/emor72a/#comments Thu, 03 May 2012 19:06:29 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1578 This week’s Torah reading is Emor in Eretz Yisrael and Acharei Mos – Kedoshim elsewhere. Both readings have a connection with Yom Kippur: Acharei Mos describes the Yom Kippur Temple service, while Emor, in presenting the yearly festival cycle, includes a section on Yom Kippur. Accordingly, this week I present a selection from one of the Maggid’s essays on Yom Kippur (taken from Ohel Yaakov, parashas Emor).
It is written (Tehillim 57:3): “I shall call upon God, Most High – to the God who concludes matters for me.” The Midrash expounds (Bereishis Rabbah 98:1, paraphrased): “‘I shall call upon God, Most High’ – on Rosh Hashanah. ‘To the God who concludes matters me’ – through the lots between the goats on Yom Kippur [arranging for the lot marked ‘for Hashem’ to be the one that appears in the Kohen Gadol’s right hand, as an omen for good].” The Maggid explains this Midrash through a parable.
A poor man had a son who made a good impression on a rich man. The rich man decided to make a match between his daughter and the poor man’s son. The rich man offered a large dowry and a regular stipend for the couple’s living expenses. He imposed only one condition: that the groom have a proper suit to wear at the wedding. The poor man was in a quandary, for he was so short of money that he could not afford a good suit. He was sorely pained that such a small hindrance was keeping him from such a great fortune. Clearly, if someone would give the poor man a suit for his son, he would be doing him a favor worth a thousand times more than the amount he spent.
The parallel is as follows. The period between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur is one during which a Jew can acquire a large measure of holiness. He need only fulfill the Torah’s charge (Vayikra 16:30): “Make yourselves pure before Hashem.” That is, he need only prepare his heart, through sincere repentance and regret over his past misdeeds, to receive the infusion of holiness that Hashem is ready to convey to him. If a person is unable to take this elementary preliminary step, he loses the opportunity for a great gain. Therefore, on Rosh Hashanah we stand up and declare: “I shall call upon God, Most High – to the God who concludes matters for me.” We plead with Hashem to help us make the necessary start, so that He can then conclude the matter on Yom Kippur and grant us the wondrous spiritual treasure that He has in store for us.
The Maggid compares our situation during the Ten Days of Repentance to the Midrash’s description of David HaMelech’s plight after the incident with Bas-Sheva. The Midrash states (Yalkut Shimoni, Nach 764):
What was David’s plight like? We can portray it with a parable. A person with a wound on his arm went to a doctor, and the doctor told him: “I cannot treat you. The wound is extensive, and you don’t have the money to cover the cost.” The person replied: “Please, do me a favor and have mercy on me. I beg of you, take all the money I have and cover the rest of the cost from your own resources.” In this vein, David pleaded (Tehillim 51:2-3): “Show me favor, O God, in accordance with Your kindness; in Your abundant compassion erase my sins. Abundantly cleanse me of my iniquity, and purify me of my transgressions.”
David was telling Hashem: “I have made a start at cleansing myself, but I need You to finish the job.”
The final Mishnah in meseches Yoma, the tractate that deals with Yom Kippur, states: “Said R. Akiva, ‘Fortunate are you, O Yisrael. Before whom do you become purified, and who purifies you? Your Father in Heaven.’” The Maggid explains the double language in this teaching as follows. There are two key differences between a human doctor and Hashem, the Supreme Healer. First, no human doctor can heal every illness. Rather, doctors specialize in certain areas – some are eye specialists, some are heart specialists, and so on. Hashem, however, can cure every malady; in Tehillim 103:3, David HaMelech, speaking to his own soul, describes Hashem as “the Healer of all your illnesses.” Second, a human doctor demands payment for the treatment he provides, to the point where a human doctor will sometimes say, as in the parable in the Midrash above, “I cannot treat you. The wound is extensive, and you don’t have the money to cover the cost.” Hashem, however, seeks only words of contrition, as it is written (Hoshea 14:3): “Take with you words, and return to Hashem.” The double language in R. Akiva’s teaching corresponds to the above two aspects of Hashem’s care. To whom do we go to be purified? To Hashem, the Supreme Healer, who is capable of curing every malady. And who purifies us? Hashem, our loving Father, who is ready to help us as soon as we call out to Him.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/05/03/emor72a/feed/ 0 On Speech http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/26/acharei-mos-kedoshim72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/26/acharei-mos-kedoshim72a/#comments Thu, 26 Apr 2012 13:23:05 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1571 This week’s Torah reading is Acharei Mos – Kedoshim in Eretz Yisrael and Tazria – Metzora elsewhere. Both readings relate to the sin of evil speech (loshon hara). In parashas Kedoshim, the Torah commands us to refrain from evil speech, saying (Vayikra 19:16): “You shall not be a talebearer among your people.” Tazria – Metzora deals with the affliction of tzaraas, of which one of the causes is loshon hara (Arachin 15b). Accordingly, this week I present a digest of the closing two chapters of the Maggid’s Sefer HaMiddos, which deal with the topic of guarding one’s speech (shemiras ha-lashon).
The main function of the tongue is to serve Hashem through Torah study and prayer. Now, when a person offers a gift of homage to a nobleman, he must make sure the gift is fitting: that the gift item itself is respectable, and that it is conveyed in a respectable vessel. Similarly, when a person offers Hashem a prayer, he must make sure that he does so with proper devotion and humility, and that the mouth that conveys his prayer is pure – not sullied by sins of speech such as vulgarity, deceit, and lashon hara. Our Sages condemn is the strongest terms those who engage in lashon hara. In Arachin 15b, the Gemara teaches that one who speaks loshon hara is like one who denies that Hashem is the master of the world. And in Vayikra Rabbah 16:6, the Midrash teaches that speaking lashon hara is tantamount to violating the entire five books of the Torah. The Maggid expounds on why the sin of lashon hara is so grave. He notes three key characteristics of speech: its importance, its rapid and free flow, and its delicateness.
Speech is of prime importance in that it is one of the two key features that distinguish man from the animals. The faculty of thought is man’s internal distinguishing feature, while the faculty of speech is his external distinguishing feature. The faculty of thought was given to man solely to enable him to recognize his Creator, to love, fear, and trust in Him, to absorb His teachings, and to carry out His will. Similarly, the faculty of speech was given to man as a sacred vessel for praising Hashem and thanking Him for all His kindnesses, the greatest of which is His giving us the privilege of serving Him. As noted above, the tongue is the instrument through which we carry out the sacred duties of Torah study and prayer. Even without an explicit command in the Torah against improper speech, we could recognize by reason alone that an instrument designed for such exalted duties should not be profaned through lowly uses. Thus, the Gemara states (Yoma 19b): “One who talks idly transgresses a positive commandment, as it is written (Devarim 6:7), ‘And you shall speak in them [words of Torah].’” The reason this is so is not simply because one who talks idly is squandering an opportunity for Torah study, for the same could be said of one who keeps silent. Rather, the transgression arises from employing the tongue, which is meant for Torah study, for an improper use.
Regarding the rapid and free flow of speech, we can note that, although a person has the power to keep silent, once he starts talking he must guard his tongue with extreme care; unless he exercises the utmost vigilance, he almost surely will slide into improper speech. In this vein, Shlomo HaMelech declares (Mishlei 10:19): “In a multitude of words there will be no lack of sin.” Accordingly, at the end of the Amidah prayer, we entreat: “My God, guard my tongue from evil and my lips from speaking deceit.” It is so easy to commit sins of speech that we plead to Hashem to help us avoid them.
The delicateness of speech is like that of a special knife designed for precision work. If the knife is used indiscriminately, it grows blunt and less effective for its intended use. The same is so of speech, which is the instrument we use for the lofty spiritual pursuits of Torah study and prayer. Regarding devout Jews, David HaMelech writes (Tehillim 149:6): “Exaltations of God are in their throats, [like] a double-edged sword in their hands.” Our prayers are the sword with which we battle our enemies. Our mouths have a wondrous power to tear down the barriers that separate us from Hashem and generate beneficial effects in the upper worlds. But if we use our faculty of speech indiscriminately, it grows blunt and less effective. We must therefore guard our mouths carefully. We should strive to minimize the use of our mouths for mundane matters. Indeed, R. Shimon bar Yochai said that if he had been at Mount Sinai, he would have asked for two mouths, one for Torah study and prayer and one for mundane speech (Yerushalmi, Berachos, ch. 1, halachah 2). Surely we should do our utmost to avoid idle chatter, coarse talk, and loshon hara.
Improper speech not only diminishes a person’s subsequent capacity for Torah learning, but even displaces the Torah learning that he previously accumulated. Thus the Sages teach (Shir HaShirim Rabbah on Shir HaShirim  1:3): “Every frivolous word that a person speaks displaces from him correspondingly a word of Torah that he previously learned.” This principle sheds added light on the teaching we mentioned earlier, that a person who speaks idly transgresses the commandment “and you shall speak in them” – we can say that idle talk, in displacing a person’s learning, nullifies his previous fulfillment of this commandment.
In this vein, Shlomo HaMelech teaches (Mishlei 5:1-2): “My son, listen to my wisdom and incline your ear to my understanding teachings. To keep hold of wise strategies and let you lips guard knowledge.” One who restrains his mouth from idle talk keeps hold of his wisdom, while one who speaks indiscriminately lets his wisdom leave him. We must therefore keep close watch on what we say. May Hashem help us do so, and thereby enable us to behold the light of His Torah.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/26/acharei-mos-kedoshim72a/feed/ 0 Haftaras Machar Chodesh http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/19/tazria-metzora72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/19/tazria-metzora72a/#comments Thu, 19 Apr 2012 20:29:00 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1549 This Shabbos is erev Rosh Chodesh, and we therefore read the special “machar chodesh” haftarah. The haftarah begins (Shmuel Alef 20:18-22):
And Yonasan said to him [David]: “Tomorrow is the New Moon, and you will be asked about, for your place will be empty. Stay [in the field] for three days, and then go far down and go to … the marker stone. I will shoot three arrows toward that direction, as if I were shooting at a target (l’shalach li l’matarah). Behold, I will then send the lad, [saying]: ‘Go find the arrows.’ If I say to the lad, ‘Behold, the arrows are this side of you,” then you take the arrows and come, for all is well with you. But if I say this to the young man – ‘Behold, the arrows are beyond you’ – then go, for Hashem has sent you away [my father (Shaul) seeks to kill you].”
On the third day, Yonasan shoots the arrows and tells his attendant: “Behold, the arrows are beyond you.” Yonasan and David then have a parting meeting before David flees. For years I wondered why Yonasan used the signal of the arrows rather than simply telling David how he should proceed, given that the two of them were ultimately going to meet. The Maggid offers two answers to this question. Both involve homiletical readings of the phrase l’shalach li l’matarah.
The first answer is that Yonasan, due to his great righteousness and his sensitivity regarding evil speech, sought to avoid saying outright that Shaul was planning to kill David. He therefore used the signal of the arrows in lieu of a verbal report. He deliberately used three arrows, to hint that evil speech harms three people: the speaker, the listener, and the one who is being spoken about. And we can read the phrase l’shalach li l’matarah as expressing Yonasan’s hope that, just as a target acts as a barrier, the signal of the arrows should serve him as a shield, protecting him from liability for evil speech.
The second answer is that Yonasan used the mechanism of the arrows to elicit from Hashem a sign as to whether or not He had decreed that David should have to flee. A threat from Shaul would not be conclusive, for it is Hashem’s word, and not the word of any man, that determines how events will unfold. Here we can read the phrase l’shalach li l’matarah as expressing Yonasan’s hope that the arrows would aid him in achieving his goal of learning what Hashem had decreed regarding David [the word matarah can be rendered either as target or as goal]. This answer is in line how Rashi comments on Yonasan’s instructions to David. Yonasan says: “If I say to the lad, ‘Behold, the arrows are this side of you,” then you take the arrows and come, for all is well with you.” Rashi comments: “You need not fear. All is well with you. The Holy One Blessed Be He wishes for you to stay here without fear, even though my father expressed evil plans.” Yonasan continues: “But if I say this to the young man – ‘Behold, the arrows are beyond you’ – then go, for Hashem has sent you away.” Rashi comments: “The Holy One Blessed Be He wants you to flee and escape.” Now, had Yonasan meant the arrows as simply a device for conveying a message to David, surely he would tailor his message to match Shaul’s sentiments: If Shaul had expressed evil plans, Yonasan would tell his attendant that the arrows were beyond him, and if not, he would tell him that the arrows were further in. But since Yonasan indicated that the sign of the arrows might run counter to what Shaul had said, we can see that Yonasan was using the arrows not as a mere communication device, but as a means of determining how Hashem wanted David to proceed.
The above explanation fits well with the sequence of events when Yonasan shot the arrows. Yonasan told his attendant that he should run to bring the arrows. Obviously if the attendant started running at the same time as Yonasan shot the arrows, there would be no way that the attendant would get beyond the arrows, for no man can run faster than an arrow flies. Yonasan therefore first told his attendant to run, and afterward he shot the arrows (ibid. 20:36). That is, Yonasan gave the attendant got a head start on the arrows, thereby creating the possibility that he might get beyond where the arrows landed. In this way, Yonasan set up a mechanism for Hashem to indicate what He wanted David to do.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/19/tazria-metzora72a/feed/ 0 On the Aftermath of Exile http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/10/shemini72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/10/shemini72a/#comments Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:20:55 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1535 Parashas Shemini recounts the events of the day the Mishkan (Tabernacle) was inaugurated. Correspondingly, one of the Midrashim on parashas Shemini discusses the era of the third Beis HaMikdash (Holy Temple) in the end of days, which is also the topic of the haftarah for the eighth day of Pesach outside of Eretz Yisrael. The Midrash, as the Maggid explains it, also sheds light on the aftermath of the Exodus from Egypt. The Midrash reads as follows (Vayikra Rabbah 11:2):
“With all forms of wisdom she built her house” (Mishlei 9:1) – this refers to the [third] Beis HaMikdash …. “She hewed out its seven pillars” (ibid., end) – these are the seven years of Gog. … All these seven years, the handles of swords, spears, and knives will be used for firewood. As it is written (Yechezkel 39:9): “Then the inhabitants of the cities of Yisrael will go out and kindle fires and fuel them with weapons, with shields and bucklers, with bows and with arrows, with clubs and with spears – they will fuel fires with them for seven years.” These seven years are the preliminary feast of the righteous before the future era, as indicated by the saying: “Those who dine at the pre-wedding feast will dine at the wedding feast.”
The Maggid explains this Midrash as follows. When we were in Egypt, we lived in a state of deprivation. We did not receive the standard measure of bounty that Hashem usually allots. Hashem made up for this deficit later, when we entered the Land of Israel. Just before we entered the land, Hashem told us that He would grant us “large and goodly cities that you did not build, houses filled with all sorts of good that you did not fill, hewn cisterns that you did not hew, and vineyards and olive-trees that you did not plant,” and He cautioned us to take care that these blessings not lead us to forget Him (Devarim 6:10-12). The word of caution was vitally necessary here, since the blessing was an unconditional grant that Hashem was conveying irrespective of how we would behave. Hashem was giving us an abundance of bounty which we did not have to work for at all or earn in any way, and which had no strings attached, as restitution for the bounty He withheld from us during our stay in Egypt. Similarly, at the time of the final redemption, Hashem will convey to us all the bounty He withheld from us during our time in exile. The Midrash above relates to this payment of restitution.
The Maggid brings out the point with an analogy. Suppose a traveler buys various food items at an inn. He can then ask the innkeeper to let him use a stove and some pots, and the innkeeper will surely oblige. But if he buys food from one inn and then goes to the inn next door and asks the innkeeper there for the use of a stove and some pots, the innkeeper will baldly turn him away, saying: “Go to where you bought this food, and use their stove and pots.” The parallel is as follows. At each given point in time, Hashem provides food to the world, and makes available the means for cooking the food, such as, for example, trees of the forest that can be used for firewood. Now, at the time of the final redemption, Hashem will give us extra bounty, as restitution for bounty He withheld from us previously. It stands to reason that the fuel for cooking the extra food not come from the trees standing at that time, but rather from wood that is available from before, and, indeed, thus the Midrash teaches. The seven years of Gog constitute the preliminary stage of payment of the reward stored away for the righteous, and during these seven years the firewood will come from wood already at hand – the handles of swords, spears, and knives.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/10/shemini72a/feed/ 0 Pesach – Shir HaShirim http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/02/pesach72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/02/pesach72a/#comments Mon, 02 Apr 2012 10:21:44 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1526 During Pesach, we read Shir HaShirim, the song that portrays the bond between Hashem and the Jewish People. Verse 3:6 describes the nations of the world observing the Jewish People in the wilderness, on their way from Egypt to the Land of Israel, and exclaiming: “Who is this rising up from the wilderness like a column of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, and with all the compounds of the perfume merchant?” The Midrash elaborates (Yalkut Shimoni, Torah 890):
When the People of Israel were in the wilderness, they were enveloped with clouds of glory and a pillar of fire. The nations of the world exclaimed in shock: “Who are these [people], whose every move is accompanied by fire? ‘Who is this rising up from the wilderness like a column of smoke?’” The Holy One Blessed Be He replied: “‘[They are] perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, [and with all the compounds of the perfume merchant].’ They have firm posts on which to support themselves – they have the merit of their forefathers.” [The Midrash goes on to link the myrrh, the frankincense, and the perfume merchant’s compounds to Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov, respectively.]
The Maggid explains this Midrash using an analogy to different types of business ventures. A conservative venture yields a low return, but presents little risk of major loss. A bold venture can yield fabulous gain but also presents serious risk of major loss. Most people do not have the wherewithal to engage in high-stakes ventures. But such a venture is feasible for a rich man whose father is also rich. If the venture succeeds, he will make a great fortune. And if the venture fails, and he loses everything, he can go back home to his rich father.
Now, as indicated in last week’s piece, the Jewish People’s acceptance of the Torah was like embarking on a high-stakes venture. The Maggid elaborates on this theme in his commentary on the Midrash above. By accepting the Torah, the Jewish People formed a bond with Hashem and committed themselves to fulfilling 613 commandments. These commandments gave them the potential to soar to the heavens. Indeed, even before receiving these commandments, the Jewish People rose in stature simply by promising to accept them, with the words “we shall do and we shall listen” (Shemos 24:7). Hashem wrought miracles for them in Egypt and at the Sea of Reeds because He knew that they were headed toward accepting the Torah. Likewise, Hashem granted them clouds of glory, a miraculous well, and manna before they accepted the Torah, because He knew they were going to accept it. And when they did, they rose in stature even more.
But this loftiness came with a risk. As Shlomo HaMelech put it (Koheles 1:18): “With increased wisdom comes increased turmoil.” And we see that Hashem meted out strict justice to the Jewish People for very slight transgressions, such as complaining (see Bamidbar Chapter 11) and the like. This strictness was due to the closeness to Hashem that they had achieved. Indeed, it is written that Hashem’s “environs are very stormy” (Tehillim 50:3), and our Sages infer from this statement that Hashem is exacting with the righteous to a hairsbreadth (Bava Kamma 50a, based on the similarity between the word nisarah, meaning “stormy” and the word saarah, meaning “hair”). In several instances, Hashem poured out His wrath against the Jewish People with a vigor unheard of among other nations.
When other nations saw the great wrath that the Jews incurred by violating the Torah, they criticized them: “How did they have the nerve to take on a venture with such high stakes?” This is what the Midrash means when it describes the other nations exclaiming: “Who are these people, whose every move is accompanied by fire?” These onlookers were pointing out that, just as the Jewish People had the potential to soar swiftly upward by fulfilling the mitzvos, they had the potential to plummet swiftly downward by neglecting them. The onlookers contended that the Jewish People had no justification for risking themselves by accepting so many commandments. To this, Hashem replied: “Do not be taken aback by the Jewish People’s willingness to accept the Torah, for they have firm posts to support themselves on.”
The Jewish People are just like the investor with a rich father in our analogy, for they are the children of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov. After the sin of the golden calf and after the sin of the spies, the Jewish People suffered a great fall in fortune. Yet they were not wiped out entirely, for they took refuge in the shelter of their forefathers. Indeed, when Moshe pled for the people after the sin of the golden calf, he invoked the merit of the forefathers (Shemos 32:13). This merit enabled them to recover when they fell.
Chag Kasher V’Sameach!
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/04/02/pesach72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Tzav http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/30/tzav72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/30/tzav72a/#comments Fri, 30 Mar 2012 08:40:09 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1519 The readings for the first three aliyos in week’s parashah present various laws concerning offerings. One section concerns the laws of the korban shelamim (peace-offering). In connection with this section, the Midrash expounds as follows (Tanchuma, Tzav 4):
It is written (Tehillim 85:9): “I indeed shall hear what the Almighty, Hashem, will speak – for He speaks peace to His people and to His devout ones.” Said the nations of the world to Bilaam: “Why did God tell the Jewish People to bring offerings and not say anything about this to us?” Bilaam replied: “The offerings are only to make peace. Those who accepted the Torah need to bring offerings. But you who originally declined the Torah, now you seek to bring offerings?” Those who accepted the Torah bring offerings, as it is written (Tehillim 29:11): “Hashem gives might to His people [with the term “might” alluding to Torah]; Hashem blesses His people with peace.” Hence it is written: “I indeed shall hear ….”
The Maggid explains this Midrash with a parable. A rich merchant had a poor brother to whom he would send a certain sum of money every year. Eventually, though, he stopped sending the money, and his poor brother fell into dire straits and heavy debt. After some years, the merchant traveled to a fair held in the city where his poor brother lived. He went to his brother’s home and told him: “Figure up how much money you need, and I will give it to you.” The poor brother figured up how much money he needed to cover his debts and marry off his daughter, and the merchant gave him the entire sum. He then said to him: “I came to take care of you now, before starting in with my business here. Tomorrow the fair will begin, and I will be occupied with my business. I ask you please to leave me alone during the fair, and not disturb me with more requests for money.” The poor brother’s heart melted like wax before a flame, for he knew that soon he would be strapped for funds again.
The next day the merchant set up his trading booth, where he sold various types of silk patches for mending expensive silk clothes. The poor brother’s wife saw how well her brother-in-law was doing, and she cajoled her husband to ask his brother for more help. The poor brother demurred, saying: “I promised my brother I would not bother him during the fair.” His wife told him to take an indirect approach – he should go to his brother’s booth and look over the merchandise along with the customers there, and while discussing the merchandise with his brother he should mention that he needs some more money. Feeling he had no choice, the poor brother did as his wife said. The merchant caught on to the ruse, and he said to his brother: “Why are you rummaging through these patches? You have no silk clothes to mend, so you have no need for patches like these.”
The parallel is along the lines of a teaching in Bamidbar Rabbah 12:12. The world stands on three legs: charitable kindness, Torah, and service to Hashem through offerings (with prayer substituting for offerings when the Beis HaMikdash is not standing). Initially, man had only a limited set of duties – the seven Noachide laws – and the world operated through charitable kindness. People extended charitable kindness to each other, and Hashem extended charitable kindness to the whole of mankind. After 26 generations, the Jewish People accepted the Torah, taking upon themselves the obligation of fulfilling the 613 mitzvos. At this point, the world was in a shaky state, like a table standing on only two legs. Afterward, the Mishkan was built and the Jewish People began to bring offerings according to a designated system, and then the world became firmly settled.
Why was the world in a shaky state when the Jewish People accepted the Torah? The Maggid explains that the acceptance of the Torah as a set of obligations created the possibility that a Jew could lapse in fulfilling his obligations. The Jews were thus in a precarious position. Offerings provided the remedy, enabling a Jew to atone for a lapse. Hashem gave us the system of offerings as a means of solidifying our relationship with Him, repairing rifts in this relationship when they occur.
The nations that consulted Bilaam thought that offerings served some other function. They therefore asked him why Hashem told the Jewish People to bring offerings but did not tell them to do so. Bilaam explained that the offerings are only to make peace – to compensate for a lapse in carrying out one’s duties. The nations that declined the Torah had no lapses to compensate for, no holes to mend. Hence they had no need to bring offerings. It is for those who accepted the Torah that the system of offerings was designed.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/30/tzav72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Vayikra http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/23/vayikra72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/23/vayikra72a/#comments Fri, 23 Mar 2012 09:20:06 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1509 Sefer Vayikra focuses mainly on offerings. From the Jewish perspective, an offering is not a “gift” we give Hashem to prompt Him to grant us blessing. Hashem does not need gifts. Rather, when a Jew brings an offering, his aim is to express the idea that he is offering himself to Hashem and devoting himself to Him.
Our Sages note that, in the verses in Chapter 1 of Vayikra that describe an animal offering being placed on the altar, the Torah uses different phrasing in connection with sheep and goats than it does in connection with bulls. When discussing the procedure with a bull, the Torah says: “The Kohen shall cause it all to go up in smoke (v’hiktir) on the altar.” But when discussing the procedure with a sheep or goat, it says: “The Kohen shall bring it all (v’hikriv) and cause it to go up in smoke (v’hiktir) on the altar.” The Midrash remarks (Vayikra Rabbah 2:12): “It is written hikriv in connection with sheep and goats, but not in connection with bulls. This is so that a person should not say to himself: ‘I will go and commit improper acts, and I will then offer a bull, which has a lot of meat. I will bring it to be placed on the altar, and Hashem will have mercy on me and accept my repentance.’” In a previous d’var Torah, we presented a selection from the Maggid’s commentary on this Midrash. The basic theme is that Hashem prefers a less impressive offering brought with humility to a more impressive offering brought with a boastful attitude. We elaborate here with some further portions of the Maggid’s commentary on the Midrash.
In discussing the differences between one righteous person and another, our Sages state (Avos D’Rabbi Nassan 37:9, paraphrased): “When both are eating the same dish, the flavor each tastes is according to his deeds.” For instance, when two people are eating steaks from the same cut of meat, one of them may enjoy his steak more than the other because he put more effort into the preparation. Similarly, when two people perform the same mitzvah, one person’s mitzvah may be more pleasing to Hashem than the other’s because he put more devotion into it. Hashem actually has no need for the mitzvah act itself, just as He has no need for gifts from us. Thus, it is written (Iyov 22:3): “Is the Almighty gratified when you do right? Does He benefit when you perfect your ways?” Rather, what matters to Hashem is the devotion with which the mitzvah is done. In particular, when a person brings a sin-offering, what interests Hashem is not the offering itself, but rather the contrition that accompanies the offering and the commitment to exercise more care in the future. Hashem is pleased by a humble and devoted heart.
In Chanah’s song of thanks to Hashem on the birth of her son Shmuel, she declares (Shmuel Alef 2:7): “Hashem makes poor and makes rich; He brings low and also raises up.” We may ask why Chanah added the word “also” to the second half of this declaration. The Maggid explains the import of this added word as follows. It is Hashem’s practice to feel compassion for the lowly and elevate them, and to feel antipathy toward the lofty and lower them. Because of this Divine practice, a person might find himself constantly oscillating between poverty and wealth. While he is poor, he feels humble, so Hashem elevates him and grants him wealth. And then, while he is rich, he feels haughty, so Hashem lowers him. The cycle can continue indefinitely. The only way a person can break the cycle and stay wealthy is to maintain a dual attitude: He should appreciate and feel glad about his wealth, yet continue to view himself as lowly. Even when wealthy, we depend constantly on Hashem’s compassion, and to receive it, we have to stay humble. We must be lowly while also elevated.
The above discussion is reflected in the following verse (Yeshayah 61:10): “I shall rejoice greatly in Hashem – my soul shall jubilate in my God. For He has clothed me in the raiment of salvation and cloaked me in a robe of charity.” To bring out the connection, the Maggid introduces a parable. A pauper went traveling from city to city collecting alms. After some time, he accumulated a sizeable sum. He thought to buy himself some fine clothes to make himself look more respectable, like other workers do when they make a good sum of money. A friend of his chided him for this plan, saying: “You fool! Don’t consider yourself the same as others. With other workers, wearing fine clothes will not impair their earning ability; they can continue their work just as before. But with you it is very different. Right now, people give to you because they see you wearing rags and pity you. If you start wearing fine clothes, people won’t pity you anymore, and they won’t give you a thing.”
The verse from Yeshayah points to the dual attitude that a person must take, as explained above. The first part of the verse uses the Divine Name Hashem, representing the Attribute of Compassion, while the second part of the verse uses the Divine Name Elokim (God), representing the Attribute of Justice. On the one hand, a person must “rejoice greatly in Hashem,” feeling joy over the blessings the Ribbono Shel Olam gives him through His Attribute of Compassion. On the other hand, he must also “jubilate in Elokim,” maintaining an awareness of Hashem’s Attribute of Justice and along with it a sense of humility. Yeshayah speaks of Hashem’s clothing us in “a raiment of salvation” and cloaking us in “a robe of charity” to hint at how Hashem seeks to imbue us with a proper sense of humility. Just as the pauper’s tattered clothes leads people to pity him and help him, so, too, an attitude of humility leads Hashem to show us compassion and bless us.
The Gemara in Berachos 34b relates a story in which R. Yochanan ben Zakai’s son fell ill, and R. Yochanan ben Zakai asked R. Chanina ben Dosa to pray for the lad’s recovery. R. Yochanan ben Zakai’s wife asked him why he sought R. Chanina’s prayers rather than relying on his own prayers. He answered: “Because he is like the king’s servant, while I am like the king’s minister.” The expression the Gemara uses for “like” is the double expression domeh k’ – an odd expression, since the prefix k’ would have been enough. The Maggid interprets the double expression as relating to how the person being spoken of viewed himself. R. Yochanan ben Zakai sought R. Chanina ben Dosa’s prayer because he knew that R. Chanina was humbler. Humility plays a critical role in the effectiveness of prayer. As David HaMelech writes (Tehillim 51:19): “A broken and humbled heart, O God, You will not despise.” Similarly, in expounding on Michah’s statement that Hashem pardons iniquity and overlooks transgression “for the remnant of His estate” (Michah 7:18), the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah 17a-b states that Hashem forgives those who regard themselves as “leftovers.” In the same vein, the Torah associates the term hikriv specifically with the one who offers a sheep or goat, and not with the one who offers a bull, to stress the role of humility in drawing close to Hashem and gaining His support.
]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/23/vayikra72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Parah http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/16/vayakhel72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/16/vayakhel72a/#comments Thu, 15 Mar 2012 22:52:55 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1500 This week, the final Torah reading consists of a special selection describing the parah adumah (red heifer) procedure, where a completely red and unblemished heifer that never bore a yoke is slaughtered and burned, and the ashes are used for purifying people who became defiled through contact with a human corpse. The description of the procedure is introduced with the following preface (Bamidbar 19:2): “This is the statute (chukas) of the Torah, which Hashem has commanded.” The parah adumah procedure is the classic example of a chok – a Torah law whose rationale is hidden from us, and which we must simply accept as a Divine edict. Regarding this procedure, the Midrash describes Hashem declaring (Yalkut Shimoni, Nach 989; cf. Bamidbar Rabbah 19:1): “I have legislated a statute and issued a decree, and you are not permitted to harbor reservations about it.”
In Sefer HaMiddos, Shaar Avodas HaElokim, chapter 1, the Maggid elaborates on this idea. In Vayikra 26:3, Hashem declares that if we follow His statutes, we will thrive. The Maggid says that we should regard all of the mitzvos as statutes to be followed simply because Hashem ordered us to do so, without regard to the beneficial effects that we may see in them. Thus, the Mishnah in Berachos 33b rules that if a prayer leader says “Your mercies extend to the bird’s nest,” we silence him. The reason we do so, according to one opinion in the Gemara, is that the prayer leader’s words suggest that Hashem gave us the mitzvah of shiluach ha-kein (sending away the mother bird before taking her eggs or chicks) out of His compassion for the birds, whereas the mitzvos should be regarded as pure Divine decrees designed to refine those obey them. This is true even of Torah’s civil laws – for example, the Torah prohibits stealing not to protect the would-be victim (Hashem could do this in other ways), but rather to prevent the would-be thief from damaging his soul.
Our subservience to Hashem is most clearly shown when we perform a mitzvah without knowing the reason behind it. When we perform a mitzvah whose reason we understand, it could always be that we are doing so not out of a desire to fulfill Hashem’s word, but rather out of our own affinity for the mitzvah act. But when we perform a mitzvah whose reason is hidden from us, it is clear that we are doing so simply out of a desire to follow Hashem’s directives.
The Maggid teaches further that we must perform all the mitzvos exactly as handed down to us, without subjecting them to our own judgment and taking the liberty to make additions, omissions, or changes. At the end of its account of creation, the Torah declares (Bereishis 1:31): “And God saw all that He had done, and, behold, it was very good.” The Midrash remarks (Yalkut Shimoni, Torah 16; cf. Bereishis Rabbah 9:10): “‘Good’ – this is the angel of life. “‘Very’ – this is the angel of death.” The Maggid interprets this Midrash as saying that any attempt to introduce improvements to the mitzvos is bound to produce a bad result. A person who tries to tinker with the mitzvos is like a craftsman’s toddler son who tries to tinker with his father’s work – some damage is sure to ensue.
In Bamidbar Rabbah 19:8, the Midrash says that the red heifer atones for the sin of the golden calf. In a number of places in his commentaries, the Maggid explains, following the Kuzari, that the calf was not made for idolatrous purposes. Rather, the Jewish People panicked when Moshe did not return from Mount Sinai when they expected, and they rushed to develop an alternative mechanism for connecting with Hashem. The people had engaged in tinkering, introducing a new form of worship that Hashem did not mandate. The remedy for this error was the law of the red heifer – a law that calls for us simply to follow Hashem’s word, without any understanding of the reason behind it.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/16/vayakhel72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Ki Sissa http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/08/ki-sissa72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/08/ki-sissa72a/#comments Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:36:00 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1493 When Moshe came down from Mount Sinai and saw how the Jewish People had sinned with the golden calf, he broke the Tablets of the Law that Hashem had given him. Later, Hashem told him (Shemos 34:1): “Carve for yourself two stone tables like the first ones, and I shall write upon the tablets the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke.” The Midrash comments (Yalkut Shimoni, Torah 397):
Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai was asked why the first tablets were the handiwork of Hashem but the second tablets were the handiwork of man. He replied: “I will explain this to you with a parable. A king took a wife, and he himself supplied the paper for the marriage contract. He gave the woman a crown and took her into his home. Later, he saw her jesting with one of his servants. He got angry with her and divorced her. Her marriage agent approached him and said: ‘Don’t you know where you took her from? She grew up among servants, and that is why she is close with them.’ The king responded: ‘What do you want from me? That I reconcile with her? Bring me some paper and I will write her a new marriage contract.’ Similarly, when the Jewish People sinned with the golden calf, Moshe said to Hashem: ‘Don’t You know where you took them out from? A place of idolatry.’ Hashem responded: ‘What do you want from Me? That I reconcile with them? Bring me some tablets of your own, and I will put my writing on them.’”
The Maggid explains this Midrash with a parable of his own. A certain merchant was accustomed to do all his business through an agent. Initially, he had an agent who was very trustworthy, but this agent died, so he had to hire another one. The only candidate available was a man who was efficient but dishonest. For lack of choice, the merchant hired this man, saying to himself: “Even though this fellow will steal a considerable sum from me, I will still gain some profit from his efforts.” When the time came to draw up the contract between them, the merchant told the man: “Go get a contract written according to the terms we discussed, bring it to me, and afterward I will sign it.” The man asked in surprise: “Why are you treating me differently from your first agent? I understand that when you hired him, you wrote the contract yourself.” The merchant replied: “The difference is this. With my first agent, I knew that his efforts would be entirely on my behalf. I therefore felt that I should write the contract myself. But with you, I know that you will first pocket for yourself a sizable percentage of what you collect, and afterward hand over to me what is left over after you have taken what you consider a satisfactory amount. So I figured we should work it the same way with the writing of the contract: You first get the contract written up, and afterward I will sign it.”
The parallel is as follows. At the revelation at Sinai, the Jewish People were purged of the primeval defilement and thus stripped of the evil inclination. They were still in this pure-hearted state when Moshe went up to the mountain to receive the first set of tablets. Accordingly, it was certain that the Jewish People’s Torah study and mitzvah observance would be entirely for Hashem’s sake, without any personal motives. Hashem therefore provided the tablets Himself. But through the sin of the golden calf, the evil inclination was infused within the Jewish People once again, and their hearts were no longer pure. Their Torah study and mitzvah observance would no longer be entirely for Hashem’s sake; rather, initially they would learn Torah and perform mitzvos for their own benefit, and only afterward would they reach spiritual maturity and engage in these activities for Hashem’s sake (mitoch shelo lishmah yavou lishmah). Therefore, with the second tablets, Hashem told Moshe: “First bring me some tablets of your own, and afterward I will put my writing on them.”
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/08/ki-sissa72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Zachor and Megillas Esther http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/01/tetzaveh72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/01/tetzaveh72a/#comments Thu, 01 Mar 2012 09:21:20 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1485 In his commentary on Megillas Esther, the Maggid discusses a Midrash that links a verse in the Megillah with a verse in the haftarah for parashas Zachor. The Midrash states (Esther Rabbah 4:9, slightly paraphrased):
Royalty was given to Esther through the same type of statement with which it was taken from her forebear. Shmuel said to her forebear Shaul HaMelech (Shmuel Alef 15:28): “Hashem has torn the kingship of Israel away from you today, and has given it to your fellow man who is better than you (l’reiacha hatov mimcha). In regard to Vashti’s being replaced, ultimately by Esther, it is written (Esther 1:19): “Let the king give her royal estate to her fellow woman who is better than she (lirusah hatovah mimenah).”
The Maggid uses this Midrash to bring out a key insight regarding Vashti’s dethroning and eventual execution. This episode, on close examination, seems perplexing. If a man has a wife who is truly bad, and causes him constant consternation, then he no choice but to divorce her. It is different, though, when a wife commits a momentary and minor offense against her husband, but he still wishes to divorce her, because he wants a totally perfect marriage. In this case, common sense dictates that the husband consider carefully whether he will be able to find a better wife than his current one. Maybe the new wife will be the same as or worse than the old one.
Now Vashti’s offense against her husband Achasheveirosh was a momentary, relatively minor one: She refused to obey a summons from him to appear before him and his entourage, a refusal that could be viewed leniently since the summons – issued while Achasheveirosh was drunk – was accompanied by the outrageous demand that she present herself in an indecorous state (Esther Rabbah 3:13). We thus may wonder how Achasheveirosh could know definitively that his new wife would be better than his old one.
The Midrash answers this question through a comparison with how kingship of the Jewish People was taken from Shaul and given to David. In a moment of weakness, Shaul acceded to the people’s request to save some of the Amalekites’ livestock for sacrifices rather than destroying all the Amalekites’ property as Hashem had commanded. While this was a clear violation of Hashem’s word, it was not such an egregious offense, for it was not committed out of wickedness. How, then, could Hashem tear the kingship away from Shaul for this offense? True, Hashem is exacting with the righteous to a hairsbreadth (Bava Kamma 50a). Still, given that man has free will, how could it be clear beyond doubt that Shaul’s successor would be better than he? How could it be certain that he would never commit a similar act of disobedience?
The answer is that Hashem knew that Shaul’s successor would learn a lesson from Shaul’s severe punishment. The new king would perforce refrain from committing a similar offense, in order to avoid receiving a similar punishment. Thus, Shaul was told that the kingship will be given l’reiacha hatov mimcha – to your fellow man who is better on account of you [rendering mimcha as meaning from you instead of than you]. Even if the successor is comparable in character to you, still he will learn the necessary lesson from what happened to you. Likewise, Achasheveirosh was sure that his new wife would be better than his former wife Vashti, as a result of seeing the punishment that Vashti received. The new wife would learn the necessary lesson from what happened to Vashti and thereby would avoid committing the same offense.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/03/01/tetzaveh72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Terumah http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/24/terumah72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/24/terumah72a/#comments Fri, 24 Feb 2012 07:40:48 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1478 This week’s parashah presents the design of the Mishkan (Tabernacle) and its vessels. The Midrash records the following discussion that took place when Hashem instructed Moshe about building the Mishkan (Yalkut Shimoni, Torah 369, slightly paraphrased; cf. Tanchuma, Terumah 9):
Said the Holy One Blessed Be He to Moshe: “Make for Me a Tabernacle, for I desire to dwell among My children.” When the ministering angels heard this, they began to protest: “Master of the Universe! Why are You descending to the earthly realm? Your glory calls for you to abide in heaven. As it is written (Tehillim 8:2): “You who has set Your glory within the heavens!’ Said the Holy One Blessed Be He to them: “By your lives, I have been doing as you said, but My praise is infused through the earth [cf. Havakkuk 3:3].
The Maggid explains this Midrash using an insight from Rav Yosef Albo’s Sefer HaIkarim. Some prominent philosophers denied that Hashem manages the affairs of our world, arguing that He is too lofty to concern Himself with earthly matters. They claimed that heaven is the only place fit for Hashem to emplace His presence – earth is too lowly to serve as His abode. Rav Albo says that these philosophers thought they were promoting Hashem’s honor, but they were actually denigrating it. By saying that heaven is an abode that suits Hashem’s honor, they were implicitly setting a limit on the honor He is due. In truth, heaven is not a fitting abode for Hashem either; even heaven is infinitesimally puny in comparison with Hashem’s infinitude.
The discussion in the Midrash reflects the philosophers’ argument and Rav Albo’s counterargument. The angels protested Hashem’s seeking a dwelling place on earth, arguing that His glory called for Him to abide in heaven. They were asserting that heaven was the abode that befits His glory. Hashem replied: “By your lives, I have been doing as you said.” He was saying: “Here in heaven, I have already put Myself in the situation you I said I would be in by establishing an abode on earth, for heaven is equally ill-suited to My glory. Emplacing My presence on earth will actually bring Me praise, for it will make it all the more clear that, despite My greatness, I am prepared to humble Myself.”
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/24/terumah72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Mishpatim http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/16/mishpatim72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/16/mishpatim72a/#comments Thu, 16 Feb 2012 20:51:33 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1470 This week’s parashah presents some basic elements of the Torah’s code of civil and criminal law. In connection with the general topic of law, the Midrash (Shemos Rabbah 30:1, middle) relates a discussion the Jewish People have with Hashem about when He will impose judgment on our their enemies. The Jewish People ask Hashem: “Until when will You delay bringing our enemies to justice?” Hashem answers: “Until the time comes to harvest them up.” The Midrash elaborates:
As it is written (Yeshayah 27:2): “On that day it will be proclaimed about them – a vineyard yielding fine wine.’” No one harvests his vineyard before the grapes have ripened. It is after they have ripened that he picks them, puts them in the winepress, and tramples them. Then he sings, and those with him respond in song after him. In this vein, Hashem said to the Jewish People: “Wait for Me until Edom’s time comes, and then I will trample them.”
The Maggid explains this Midrash as follows. Retribution against an evildoer can be set in motion in one of two ways: either Hashem decides on His own that it is time to bring the evildoer to justice or someone petitions Hashem to do so. The Taz on Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 118 uses a similar idea to explain the difference in the eleventh blessing of the Shemoneh Esrei between the ending “the King of justice” that we use during the Ten Days of Repentance and the ending “King who loves righteousness and justice” that we use during the rest of the year: During the Ten Days of Repentance, Hashem Himself initiates the process of justice, whereas during the rest of the year He carries out justice only when someone enters a complaint that he has been wronged. In regard to retribution against evildoers, Hashem generally does not take action on His own initiative until the evildoer reaches his measure of sin, but He can be petitioned to take action. A person who puts forward a petition is taking a risk, however, for he himself will be judged either before or along with whoever he complained about. As the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah 16b says: “One who submits a case against his fellowman is punished first [for his own wrongdoings].” The reason is that a petition for Divine judgment leads Hashem to open His records and examine the petitioner’s file to see whether he is worthy of calling others to justice.
Accordingly, if we submit a complaint against our enemies to Hashem when we ourselves are not clean, we take the risk of having Hashem punish us for our misdeeds. It is thus better for us to keep quiet and wait until our enemies reach their measure of sin and Hashem brings them to justice on His own. This is what the Midrash is teaching. Once our enemies “ripen” – that is, they reach their measure of sin – Hashem will proceed to trample them. He then will sing, and we will be able to sing after Him – we will be able to present our indictments against our enemies without any risk of harm.
This message is reflected in the passage in Yeshayah which begins with the verse that the Midrash quotes. The passage runs as follows (Yeshayah 27:2-8, slightly paraphrased):
On that day it will be proclaimed about them – a vineyard yielding fine wine. … I have no wrath – if only I were at war with the weeds and thorns, I would trample them and set them altogether afire. Or let them grasp onto My stronghold and make peace with Me – yea, let them make peace with Me. … According to their measure [of sin] He contended against their farmland.
Hashem is saying: “I Myself have no wrath against your enemies now, for they have not yet reached their measure of sin. And if you lead Me to wage war against your enemies, you may be trampled together with them. Alternatively, you can grasp onto My stronghold – cling to My Torah and make yourselves whole, free of any defect or impurity. If you do so, you will be at peace with Me – you will be able to ask Me to bring your enemies to justice without putting yourselves at any risk that My wrath will also be turned toward you. But until then, it will be best for you to be quiet.”
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/16/mishpatim72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Yisro http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/08/yisro72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/08/yisro72a/#comments Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:46:56 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1461 This week’s parashah recounts the revelation at Sinai. In the period leading up to the revelation, Hashem told Moshe (Shemos 19:9): “Behold, I am going to come to you in a thick cloud, in order that the people will hear as I speak with you, and also will believe in you forever.” The Maggid asks why Hashem used the phrasing “believe in you” (yaaminu becha) rather than simply saying “believe you” (yaaminu lecha)? Seemingly it would have been more correct to say “believe you,” just as Moshe said previously – when Hashem first told him to lead the Jewish People out of Egypt – “but they will not believe me (yaaminu li)” (Shemos 4:1). The Maggid asks further: What did Hashem mean by “forever”?
The Maggid explains as follows. It is a basic principle that the strength of a person’s belief depends on how critical-minded he is. Some people readily accept anything they hear. But such people can be just as readily convinced to abandon an idea they accepted previously, in favor of a contrary one. With a critical-minded person, it is just the opposite. He will not accept any claim until he investigates it thoroughly and obtains clear evidence for it. Once he is convinced, however, his belief is firm and unwavering.
This principle played a pivotal role in the discussion between Hashem and Moshe at their first meeting at the burning bush. Moshe told Hashem that the Jewish People “will not believe me.” Hashem replied (Shemos Rabbah 3:12): “They are believers, the children of believers.” Hashem was telling Moshe: “I call them believers because they are critical-minded.” We can see a hint to this idea in a homiletical reading of Yeshayah 25:1: “Hashem, You are my God. I shall exalt you and give thanks to Your Name, for You have done wondrously. From a distance, faith was firmly adopted.” That is, Hashem performed a wonder in implanting into the Jewish soul a critical nature, so that they would accept only claims that are proven reliable, and their faith would thus have a firm basis.
The Jewish People refuse to listen to charlatans who try to peddle their own fabricated ideas. In matters of basic world outlook, they accept only those ideas that are reliably known to have been taught by Moshe and handed down from generation to generation. When critical analysis reveals that a claim runs counter to this tradition, the claim is rejected.
This is what Hashem meant when He told Moshe that He will come down to him and speak with him before the Jewish People, in order that the people will “believe in you forever.” The revelation at Sinai firmly established the authenticity of Moshe’s teachings. The Torah testifies elsewhere to Moshe’s status as a true prophet of the highest order, saying (Bamidbar 12:17): “In My entire house, he is the trusted one.” By virtue of Moshe’s status, the one whom Moshe ordained as a reliable teacher – Yehoshua – is worthy of our trust, and is worthy as well of ordaining his successor. In this way, our faith is handed down through the chain of tradition, from teacher to teacher and from generation to generation. Moshe is the foundation of the entire chain, and thus our reliance on him continues forever.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/08/yisro72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Beshallach http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/02/beshallach72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/02/beshallach72a/#comments Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:01:23 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1455 In the middle of this week’s parashah, the Torah discusses the manna that the Jewish People ate in the wilderness. Hashem says to Moshe (Shemos 16:4): “Behold, I shall cause bread from heaven to rain down for you, and the people shall go out and gather each day’s portion every day, so that I can test them, whether they will walk in My law, or not.” The Maggid analyzes how the manna represented such a test. He begins with the following Midrash about the manna (Shemos Rabbah 25:9):
“The people shall go out and gather each day’s portion every day.” It is written (Tehillim 68:20): “Blessed is Hashem day after day.” Said Hashem to the People of Israel: “It is with the instrument that a person uses for measuring that I measure out for him. I gave you the Torah so that you should involve yourselves with it day after day, as it is written (Mishlei 8:34): ‘Praiseworthy is the man who listens to Me, to keep watch at My doors day after day.’ And similarly (Yeshayah 58:2): ‘They seek Me day after day and desire to know My ways.’ By your lives, I will satiate you with bread from heaven day after day.’”
The Maggid expounds on the verse from Mishlei that the Midrash quotes. He notes that just as Hashem provides us with sustenance for the body, in the form of food and drink, He provides us also with sustenance for the soul, in the form of Torah, mitzvos, and good deeds. In this vein, Shlomo HaMelech compares wisdom to bread and wine (Mishlei 9:5). And just as a person can choose to subsist on a bare minimum of food and drink, so, too, a person can choose to subsist on a bare minimum of Torah – the daily morning and evening recital of the Shema, which covers the obligation to study Torah day and night (Menachos 99b). Commoners suffice with this minimum ration of Torah, but the eminent seek more. Thus David HaMelech declares (Tehillim 111:1): “Praiseworthy is the man who fears Hashem and greatly cherishes His commandments.” Here, David is speaking of the man whose soul thirsts and yearns for Hashem’s word so much that even if he studied Torah day and night for a lifetime, his desire would not be satisfied.
The Maggid brings out the idea with an analogy. He describes two similar scenarios. The first scenario involves a servant is standing in an outer room of his master’s house waiting for orders. He is not allowed to leave – he must remain in the room ready for his master’s call. The second scenario involves a merchant is standing in an outer room of someone’s house waiting to show him merchandise. The man of the house is busy, and tells the merchant that he will call him when he is able to speak with him. In the first scenario, the servant is waiting for his master’s call but he is actually hoping not to be called – he would rather stand idle than do chores. In the second scenario, by contrast, the merchant is eagerly awaiting his customer’s call.
In the verse from Mishlei, the Maggid says, Shlomo HaMelech is teaching us the attitude we should take toward Hashem’s directives. We should not be like the servant, hoping to be left alone. Rather, we should be like the merchant, eagerly awaiting Hashem’s call. Shlomo describes Hashem as saying: “Praiseworthy is the man who listens to Me.” Note the phrasing: “listens to Me” rather than “listens to My word.” Hashem’s statement can also be rendered another way: “Praiseworthy is the man who listens for Me.” Under this rendering, we can understand the statement as referring to the man who inclines his ear toward Hashem and waits expectantly for Hashem’s call – the man who serves Hashem out of love and constantly strives for added duties.
Now, it is generally not possible to tell how much a person cherishes Hashem’s word, for what the person shows to the outside world does not fully reflect what is in his heart. But there is one way to get a clear indication: by seeing how the person reacts to errands that will interrupt his Torah study. If a person considers such errands a nuisance, and is thankful whenever a friend offers to take care of such errands, this shows he loves Torah. But if a person is happy to have the chance to close his books and go out on an errand, this shows he lacks interest in Torah. We can now see easily how the manna represented a test of whether or not the Jewish People desired to walk in Hashem’s law. The manna relieved them of the need to work for their sustenance; they could gather their daily portion without any effort. If they rejoiced over being free to spend their time in Torah study, it would be clear that they considered the Torah precious.
]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/02/02/beshallach72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Bo http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/26/bo72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/26/bo72a/#comments Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:30:55 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1446 In this week’s parashah, Hashem tells us to designate the month of Nisan, the month in which the redemption from Egypt took place, as the first month of the year (Shemos 12:2): “This month shall be unto you the chief of the months; it shall be the first unto you of the months of the year.” The Midrash expounds (Shemos Rabbah 15:12):
The redemption was for Me and for you: I, so to speak, was redeemed along with you. As it is written (Shmuel Beis 7:23): “Who is like Your people, like Yisrael, a unique people within the world – for whom God went forth to redeem for Himself as a people, gaining Himself renown, and performing for you great works and awesome acts for your land, before Your people whom You redeemed for Yourself from Egypt, [subduing] nations and their gods.” [The verse includes the phrases “for Himself” and “for Yourself” as well as the phrase “for you.”] Designate this month for Me and for you, because I see the blood of the Pesach offering and bring you atonement. … And let your joy be complete, even the one who is poor. A perfectly whole male lamb or kid, within its first year (Shemos 12:5) – A lamb or kid, because it was said (Bereishis 22:8), “God will seek out for Himself the lamb or kid for the burnt offering, my son.” Perfectly whole, for sake of the Name of Hashem, of whom is written (Devarim 32:4): “The Rock – perfect is His work.”
In discussing this Midrash, the Maggid begins by examining the directive that our joy should be complete, even the one who is poor. We find that Hashem consistently tells us to see to it that when we celebrate times of joy, we attend to the poor and make sure they also can rejoice. Thus, after assembling the Jewish People on Rosh Hashanah to teach them Torah, Ezra and Nechemiah told them to rejoice, and to send portions to those who lack (Nechemiah 8:10). Similarly, the laws of celebrating Purim include an obligation to give gifts to the poor. Likewise, in connection with the declaration the Torah tells a person to make in regard to the handling of tithes, in which a person is suppose to affirm that “I acted according to everything You commanded me,” the Sages teach that the intent of this affirmation is to say that “I rejoiced in the bounty You granted me, and I also distributed the proper tithes to make others rejoice” (see Yerushalmi, Maaser Sheini 5). The Maggid asks: Why is it crucial, in times of joy, to make sure the poor also rejoice?
He answers as follows. When someone is downcast because of misfortune, seeing a successful and happy man does not bring him joy. On the contrary, it makes him feel worse. Imagine a man who is starving for bread watching someone else eat his fill of fine delicacies. Not only does the sight not quiet his hunger, it magnifies it many times over. The same pattern appears in the emotional realm. When a rich man celebrates without providing for the needy, he creates a mixed situation: At the same time that his festivities bring him joy, they bring his less fortunate neighbors pain. The outcome is the very opposite of “perfectly whole,” and is contrary to what Hashem desires. In this vein, Shlomo HaMelech writes (Mishlei 10:22): “Hashem’s blessing is what brings wealth. Let it not bring along with it an increase of grief.” As a person rejoices in the wealth Hashem granted him, he must take care not to bring grief to the poor. Thus the Midrash tells us that we should make our joy complete, extending even to the one who is poor, and then concludes by saying that our offering should be perfectly whole, for the sake of the Name of Hashem, whose works are perfect.
The Maggid then turns to the Midrash’s opening segment. Hashem says: “The redemption is for Me and for you: I, so to speak, was redeemed along with you.” The Maggid analyzes the connection between this statement and the Midrash’s later statement, discussed just above, that we should make our joy complete, including even the one who is poor. Apparently the Midrash is saying that it is because the redemption is for Hashem and for us that we should provide for the poor. What does one have to do with the other? The Maggid explains as follows. The main reason Hashem redeemed us from Egypt was for the sake of His great Name, for He Himself, so to speak, was in exile along with us. Thus, Hashem told Yaakov (Bereishis 46:4): “I shall go down with you to Egypt.” Our hope for the final redemption is founded on the same notion. Hashem tells us (Yeshayah 48:11): “For My sake, for My sake, I shall do it, for how can [My Name] be profaned? And I shall not yield My honor to another.”
Various Midrashim teach that the Jewish People in Egypt did not deserve in their own right to be redeemed. In Shemos Rabbah 1:35, for example, the Sages teach that the Jewish People were bereft of good deeds, as hinted at in Yechezkel’s words (verse 16:7): “You were naked and bare.” Since Hashem granted us salvation from the Egyptian exile as a pure gift, it stands to reason that our rejoicing over this salvation should include every member of our people on an equal basis.
The Maggid brings out the point with a parable. A group of paupers was going together door to door seeking money to live on. They had with them some simple wares of the kind poor people typically sell: tzitzis, mezuzahs, and the like. Sometimes the person they approached was generous, and would give them a sum of money as a gift. And sometimes the person was not so generous, and would just buy a bit of what they had to sell. We can note one key difference between these two situations. If the person they approached had bought their wares, even if he handed over the money to just one of them, they would divide the money according to what each was due on account of the merchandise he had sold. But if the person gave them money as a gift, they would divide the money equally, for regarding a gift they were all on the same footing.
Similarly, if the Jewish People had attained redemption through the merit of their own good deeds, each Jew would have been entitled to rejoice in proportion to the contribution he made to the redemption. But, in fact, the redemption was not on our account. Hashem subdued the Egyptians for His own sake – to restore His honor, which had been impugned. He was, so to speak, redeeming Himself from exile. In the process, He redeemed the Jews as well, as a pure act of generosity. Hence all the Jews were on the same footing, and it would thus only be right for them to rejoice equally. Since the redemption was for the sake of the Name of Hashem, whose works are perfectly whole, it behooves us to take care – for the sake of Hashem’s Name – that our rejoicing is perfectly whole, encompassing all members of the community. The rejoicing that will take place at the time of the final redemption will also be for the sake of Hashem’s Name, and thus, in the same way, will extend to all segments of the Jewish population. Thus it is written (Yirmiyah 31:12): “Then the maiden will rejoice with dance, and the young men and the elders together.”
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/26/bo72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Vaera http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/19/vaera72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/19/vaera72a/#comments Thu, 19 Jan 2012 21:44:15 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1434 This week’s parashah presents the first seven of the ten plagues that Hashem brought upon Egypt. In telling Moshe to warn Pharaoh about the initial plague of blood, Hashem said (Shemos 7:14-18):
Pharaoh’s heart is stubborn; he refuses to let the people go. Go to Pharaoh in the morning … and say to him: “Hashem, the God of the Hebrews, sent me to you, saying, ‘Let My people go, that they may serve Me in the wilderness,’ and, behold, you have not listened up to now (ad coh). Thus (coh) says Hashem: ‘Through this you shall know that I am Hashem – behold, with the staff that is in my hand I shall strike the waters that are in the river, and they shall turn into blood. And the fish that are in the river shall die, and the river shall become foul, and the Egyptians shall be repelled from drinking water from the river.’”
Commenting on this passage, the Maggid analyzes the difference between the expression “Thus says Hashem” that appears here and the expression “This is the word that Hashem commanded” that appears in Bamidbar 30:2. The Midrash in Yalkut Shimoni, Torah, Sec. 784 notes that other prophets, just like Moshe, conveyed prophecies using the expression “Thus says Hashem,” but only Moshe conveyed prophecies using the expression “This is the word that Hashem commanded.” Both expressions serve to introduce a directive to perform or refrain from some action. The Maggid explains the difference between the two expressions as follows. The expression “Thus says Hashem” prefaces a substantive description of the nature and consequences of the action in question. By way of analogy, suppose Reuven wants to get Shimon to do something, but Shimon has no obligation to comply with what Reuven says. Shimon will first insist on knowing what the action entails, and Reuven will tell him: “Thus-and-so.” The expression “This is the word,” on the other hand, characterizes the directive as a order which must be obeyed no matter what it entails.
The fact that Moshe alone used the expression “This is the word,” whereas all other prophets used only the expression “Thus says Hashem,” reflects Moshe’s unique status as the premier prophet. Through the revelation at Sinai, Moshe was authenticated among the Jewish People as a consummately trustworthy agent of communication from Hashem to them – an agent whose reliability is beyond all doubt. Hence, whenever Moshe told the people what Hashem had said to him, the people accepted the message unquestioningly. Moshe could say “This is the word that Hashem commanded,” and the people would be prepared to accept the command without any analysis of its content. The messages of other prophets were not accorded this blanket acceptance; rather, the people first examined whether the message comported with the Torah tradition handed down from Sinai, and if they identified any conflict, they would reject the message. The person who related the message would be declared a false prophet, and would be put to death as the Torah prescribes (Devarim 13:2-6). Accordingly, all other prophets aside from Moshe introduced their prophecies with the expression “Thus says Hashem,” an expression that puts emphasis on the content of the message, because the people had to analyze the content to determine whether the message was reliable.
With this background, the Maggid turns to the statement Hashem told Moshe to make to Pharaoh. The statement begins: “Hashem, the God of the Hebrews, sent me to you, saying, ‘Let My people go, that they may serve Me in the wilderness.’” The fact that Hashem, the Master of the Universe, had issued this order should have been enough for Pharaoh to comply with fearful alacrity. But Pharaoh refused, saying (Shemos 5:2): “Who is Hashem, that I should heed His voice to send out Yisrael? I do not know Hashem, and I will not send Yisrael out!” Pharaoh’s words suggested that once he came to “know” Hashem and was firmly convinced of His existence, He would obey Hashem’s orders. In response, Hashem told Moshe to show Pharaoh a miracle – converting his staff to a snake and then converting it back again. Hashem’s intent was that these supernatural effects would make Pharaoh convinced of His existence and thus prepared to accept His orders regardless of their content. But, even after being shown the miracle, Pharaoh maintained a hard heart and refused to listen to what Moshe and Aharon told him in Hashem’s Name. From that point on, it became necessary to spell out to Pharaoh the consequences he would suffer if he failed to obey Hashem’s command to release the Jewish People – he had to be warned of the fearsome plagues Hashem would cast upon him for his disobedience. A simple statement that Hashem had ordered him to do something was not enough.
Accordingly, the quote from Hashem continues: “Behold, you have not listened “ad coh.” Hashem was saying: “I see that you will not listen until you receive a message of the type prefaced by coh – a substantive description of the consequences of refusing to comply.” And Hashem told Moshe to follow up with a detailed message of precisely this form: “Thus (coh) says Hashem: ‘Through this you shall know that I am Hashem – behold, with the staff that is in my hand I shall strike the waters that are in the river, and they shall turn into blood. And the fish that are in the river shall die, and the river shall become foul, and the Egyptians shall be repelled from drinking water from the river.’”
In his Yerios HaOhel footnote on the Maggid’s commentary here, Rav Flamm expands on the concept of accepting Hashem’s decree for the simple reason that Hashem decreed it. He notes that the Jewish People’s pledge at Sinai – “we will do and we will listen” – was along these lines: When presented with the Torah, they were prepared to comply first and receive explanations later. Rav Flamm also calls attention to the Midrashic teaching (Bereishis Rabbah 39:9) that when Hashem gives a righteous person a mission, He initially conceals the details of what the mission entails and only afterward discloses them. A righteous person is prepared to accept Hashem’s decrees without knowing in advance exactly what they entail. Similarly, in one of the discussions between Moshe and Pharaoh about the Jewish People’s journey to the wilderness to serve Hashem, Moshe said (Shemos 10:26): “We will not know in what way we will serve Hashem until we arrive there.” An essential element of the Jewish People’s mode of serving Hashem is not knowing exactly what they will be called upon to do until the time comes for them to do it.
As we go through life, we face situations that may lead us to wonder: “What exactly is it that Hashem is asking from me now?” (I personally have found myself thinking this way many times ….) We must strive to press ahead with the missions Hashem gives us, even when we do not know exactly where they will lead to, and maintain faith in Hashem’s plans.
]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/19/vaera72a/feed/ 0 Parashas Shemos http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/12/shemos72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/12/shemos72a/#comments Wed, 11 Jan 2012 22:15:33 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1427 In the opening segment of this week’s parashah, the Torah relates (Shemos 1:6-12):
And Yosef died, and all his brothers, and that entire generation. And the Children of Israel were fruitful, and swarmed, and multiplied, and grew very, very mighty, and the land was filled with them. And a new king arose over Egypt, who did not know Yosef. And he said to his people: “Behold, the people of the Children of Israel are too many and too mighty for us. Come, let us deal wisely with them, lest they multiply, so that it may be, if war occurs, that they also join our enemies and fight against us, and go up from the land.” Thus, they set taskmasters over them to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh storage cities, Pisom and Raamses. And just as they afflicted them, thus did they multiply and thus did they spread, and they became disgusted because of the Children of Israel.
The Maggid comments as follows. Our Sages teach that the Jewish People’s enslavement in Egypt did not begin until all of Yaakov’s sons had died. Thus, Yosef’s death triggered the onset of the enslavement. Now, the enslavement was put into effect by the new king who arose over Egypt, as indicated at the end the above passage. But before the enslavement was put into effect, Hashem caused the Jewish People to grow extremely numerous.
Hashem brought about this great population increase for a specific purpose. Our Sages teach that the exile and enslavement in Egypt caused the Jewish People to degenerate. As David HaMelech writes (Tehillim 106:35): “And the mingled among the nations, and learned their ways.” Similarly, the statement that “the Egyptians did us evil” (Devarim 26:6) can be interpreted a meaning “the Egyptians made us evil.” Hashem saw in advance that this degeneration would take place, and that the Jewish People would lose their spiritual wholeness. He therefore arranged for them to become extremely numerous, so that there would be enough virtues among all of them together to make up one upright and spiritually whole man. And as the enslavement continued, Hashem maintained this state of affairs. In this vein, the Torah says: “And just as they afflicted them, thus did they multiply and thus did they spread.” The added afflictions that the Egyptians imposed on the Jewish People caused further degeneration, and to compensate Hashem made the Jewish People grow ever more numerous.
Note: Today, the 17th of Teves, marks the Maggid’s 207th Yahrzeit.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/12/shemos72a/feed/ 0 Haftaras Vayechi http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/05/vayechi72a/ http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/05/vayechi72a/#comments Thu, 05 Jan 2012 20:00:52 +0000 David Zucker http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/?p=1420 This week’s haftarah records David HaMelech’s last words before his death, including a final charge to his son and successor Shlomo. One of these charges runs as follows (Melachim Alef 2:7): “And be gracious to the sons of Barzilai the Gileadite, and let them be among those who eat at your table, for they drew close to me when I fled your brother Avshalom.” With this charge, David was seeking to repay the sons of Barzilai for the favorable reception they extended him. Why, then, asks the Maggid, does David frame the matter in terms of “being gracious” when apparently he was merely telling Shlomo to return the favor that the sons of Barzilai had done for him?
The key to understanding David’s intent, the Maggid explains, is the phrasing he chose in describing what the sons of Barzilai had done: David did not say that they had drawn him close, but rather that they drew close to him. The difference between the two phrasings can be explained as follows. A person who draws close to a great man gains honor thereby, but the great man himself gains much more honor – the fact that someone else sought a connection with him demonstrates his greatness. Now, through that reception that the sons of Barzilai gave David, they extended him two benefits. First, they gave him food and drink, and supplied him with his other needs. Second, in the way they acted toward him, they demonstrated that they did not view him as an ordinary person, but still regarded him as the king. The proof was that they drew themselves close to him, thereby showing him special honor. David’s choice of words in describing their actions stresses this point.
David did not regard the food and drink that the sons of Barzilai gave him as a notable kindness, for it is basic human decency to provide food and drink to a person in need, even if the person is lowly. But he did regard as a notable kindness their maintaining allegiance to him as king. He therefore commanded his Shlomo to reciprocate and show them special graciousness and honor, going beyond simple compensation for their hospitality.
Specifically, David told Shlomo that they should be “among those who eat at your table.” Here again we have a careful choice of phrasing: “eat at your table” rather than “eat from your table.” Had David said that they should eat “from your table,” the message would have been that Shlomo should provide them food, which would have been really no more than simple compensation. But instead he said that they should eat “at your table” – that they should be made part of the esteemed inner circle of men who dine with the king himself. In granting this special honor, Shlomo would be extending them a considerable kindness. True, the sons of Barzilai had previously honored David, but the honor that David told Shlomo to show them went go well beyond the honor they showed him. In the reception the sons of Barzilai gave David, they did not really grant him added honor – they simply took care to show him the honor he was rightfully due as king, rather than rebelling against him or impugning his position as others were doing. By contrast, they would now be receiving a great boost of honor – originally they were ordinary citizens, and now they would become members of the king’s inner circle. Such a boost of honor is truly an act of graciousness.
David Zucker, Site Administrator]]> http://jlm-dubno-maggid.org/blog/2012/01/05/vayechi72a/feed/ 0