Posted on

Balak 5779

[Print]

The repulsive idol and the lack of boundaries[1]

ויחל העם לזנות אל בנות מואב וגו’ וצמד ישראל לבעל פעור וגו’‏
The [Jewish] nation began[2] to commit lewd acts with the women of Moav…and the Jews clung to [the idol] Ba’al Peor[3]

At the end of this week’s parsha, the Jewish people hit a new low. They began to have illicit sexual relationships with women from the foreign nation of Moav, and they committed severe acts of idol worship. The Torah uses an unusual expression to describe their attitude towards the idol known as Ba’al Peor. It says וצמד, which is the verb form of the word which describes a tightly bound cover on a vessel[4]. This means that the Jews became tightly bound, or clung, to the idol Ba’al Peor. With some historical context, this is very hard to understand. The form of worship of this idol was one of the most repulsive things imaginable. The way to serve this idol was to eat and drink things which would cause diarrhea[5], and then to defecate on it[6]. How could the Jews be not only interested, but totally attached to such an idol?

Continue reading “Balak 5779”

Posted on

Behar 5779

The Mountain and the rested Land[1]

וידבר יקוק אל-משה בהר סיני לאמר: דבר אל-בני ישראל ואמרת אליהם כי תבואו אל הארץ אשר אני נותן לכם ושבתה הארץ שבת ליקוק
Hashem spoke to Moshe on Mount Sinai, saying: Speak to the Children of Israel, and say to them: When you arrive at the land which I give to you, the land shall rest, a Sabbath for Hashem[2]

This week’s parsha begins by introducing the mitzvah of shemittah, the Sabbatical year. Once every seven years the land of Israel is to lie fallow, and the fruits become ownerless. What’s unusual with this mitzvah is it’s introduced by specifying that Hashem spoke to Moshe on Mount Sinai. This specification isn’t done with any other mitzvah. What does shemittah have to do with Mount Sinai? Rashi says[3] to teach us that just like the general principles as well as the details of the mitzvah of shemittah were taught at Mount Sinai, the same is true for all mitzvos. However, this is only the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Yishmael holds that all other mitzvos had their general principles taught at Mount Sinai, and their details were taught at the Tent of Meeting[4] [5]. What then does he learn from the specification of Mount Sinai with the mitzvah of shemittah? As well, even according to Rabbi Akiva, why was shemittah chosen to specifically teach us this idea?

Continue reading “Behar 5779”

Posted on

Acharei Mos 5779

[Print]

The constant struggle[1]

ואל אשה בנדת טומאתה לא תקרב וגו’‏
Do not approach a woman in her impure state of niddah[2]

The gemarra relates[3] a conversation between a Sadducee[4], someone who rejected Rabbinic Judaism, and the Sages of his time. He asked Rav Kahana, how could a man and woman be trusted to be alone together when the wife is a niddah[5]? Once she has her period, she and her husband are forbidden to each other until she immerses in a mikveh at the right time. He asked is it possible for a fire to kindle and not burn?

Continue reading “Acharei Mos 5779”

Posted on

Tazria 5779

[Print]

Purifying our ways and ourselves[1]

דבר אל-בני ישראל לאמר אשה כי תזירע וילדה זכר וטמאה שבעת ימים כימי נדת דותה תטמא: וביום השמיני ימול בשר ערלתו: ושלשים יום ושלשת ימים תשב בדמי טהרה וגו’‏
Speak to the Children of Israel, saying: A woman who conceives and gives birth to a baby boy will be ritually impure for seven days; like the days of her monthly period she will be impure. On the eighth day [the baby’s] flesh shall be circumcised. For thirty-three days [the mother] shall remain in her state of purity…[2]

This week’s parsha deals with many types of ritual impurity. It begins by describing what happens when a woman gives birth to a baby boy. She becomes impure for a week, upon which she can then immerse in a mikveh, becoming pure again. Her baby has a bris milah on the eighth day. The Torah then says that for thirty-three days the woman has a presumed status of ritual purity. The Torah then proceeds to describe what happens when she gives birth to a baby girl. What’s unusual is the Torah mentions the mitzvah of bris milah here, of all places. It seemingly has no relevance to a parsha dealing with ritual purity. Why is this the place to put it? As well, why was this mitzvah sandwiched in between the verses describing the woman’s ritual purity status, interrupting the flow of the verses?

Continue reading “Tazria 5779”

Posted on

Terumah 5779

[Print]

The most desired form of service[1]

ככל אשר אני מראה אותך את תבנית המשכן ואת תבנית כל-כליו וכן תעשו
[Construct] as I have shown you, [i.e.] the form of the Mishkan and the form of all of its vessels, and so shall you do[2]

There’s a Midrash which brings[3] an interesting dispute: which verse contains the most all-encompassing mitzvah in the Torah? Ben Zoma feels it’s the famous verse Shema Yisroel, “Hear, O Israel!”[4]. It’s a declaration of a Jews’ faith in Hashem, and their dedication to follow His mitzvos. Ben Nanas disagrees, and says that the mitzvah of loving your neighbor as yourself[5] is more inclusive. Shimon ben Pazi brings an unexpected verse to show his opinion: Prepare one lamb in the morning, and the second lamb in the afternoon[6]. This verse refers to the twice daily tamid offering in the Temple. He somehow sees this verse as being more all-encompassing than the other two. Rabbi Ploni is described as having stood on his feet, declaring that the halacha is like Shimon Ben Pazi. He proves it from a verse in this week’s parsha: [Construct] as I have shown you, [i.e.] the form of the Mishkan and the form of all of its vessels, and so shall you do[7]. This is a very perplexing Midrash, which begs to be expounded.

Continue reading “Terumah 5779”

Posted on

Ki Savo 5778

Lively motivations[1]

לא-אכלתי באני ממנו ולא-בערתי ממנו בטמא ולא-נתתי ממנו למת וגו’‏
I did not eat of it during my intense mourning period, and I did not consume it in impurity, nor did I give of it to the deceased…[2]

The Torah obligates the separation and distribution of various types of tithes. Fruits and vegetables grown in the land of Israel are forbidden to be eaten until their various tithes are separated[3]. Some tithes are given to the Kohanim for consumption[4], some to the Leviim[5], and some to the poor[6]. One type of tithe is known as ma’aser sheni, the second tithe. It is for personal consumption, but only in Jerusalem[7]. Instead of transporting the heavy fruits to Jerusalem, a person can transfer the tithe status onto coins[8]. These coins are brought instead to Jerusalem, and used to purchase food and drink. These purchases are then consumed in Jerusalem. After[9] the third year of the seven-year agricultural cycle, everyone must remove all their remaining tithes which they have failed to donate or consume. There is subsequently a mitzvah to come to the Temple and perform vidui, confession[10]. The person proclaims that they have followed all the laws pertaining to tithes. They declare that they didn’t eat it at forbidden times. They state that neither they nor the food was impure when it was consumed. Finally, they say that they did not give of it to the deceased. What does this last confession mean?

Continue reading “Ki Savo 5778”

Posted on

Ki Seitzei 5778

A mitzvah drags another mitzvah with it[1]

כי יקרא קן-צפור וגו’ והאם רבצת על-האפרחים או על-הביצים לא-תקח האם על-בנים: שלח תשלח את-האם ואת-הבנים תקח-לך למען ייטב לך והארכת ימים: כי תבנה בית חדש ועשית מעקה לגגך ולא-תשים דמים בביתך כי-יפל הנפל ממנו: לא-תזרע כרמך כלאים וגו’ לא-תחרש בשור-ובחמר יחדו: לא תלבש שעטנז צמר ופשתים יחדו‏
When you chance upon a bird’s nest…and the mother bird is crouched on the chicks or on the eggs, don’t take the mother bird [with]2 the children. [Rather][2], send away the mother bird, and take the children for yourself. This is so it will be good for you and it will lengthen your days. When you build a new house, make a fence for your roof. Don’t place blood in your house, since a person will fall from [the roof without one]. Don’t sow your vineyard with mixed crops…don’t plow [your field] with an ox and donkey together. Don’t wear sha’atnez, [which is] wool and linen together[3]

This week’s parsha contains within it more mitzvos than any other, totaling seventy-three. Sometimes it’s easy to understand why the Torah grouped certain mitzvos together, and other times not as much. There are a series of mitzvos that describe forbidden mixtures in this week’s parsha, and they are understandably grouped together. There is a prohibition on sowing mixed crops together in the same vineyard. There is a prohibition against doing field work with two different animals together. There is a prohibition for our garments to be made of a mixture of wool and linen. However, the mitzvos that precede these mixture-mitzvos seemingly have no connection to what follows them. First, the Torah describes how to interact with a mother bird and her children. If the passerby wants the chicks[4], they have to first send away the mother bird. Subsequently, the Torah commands building a fence on our roof when we get a new house. This will prevent any mishaps from occurring. Afterwards is the above-mentioned mixture-mitzvos. What can we learn from this confusing juxtaposition[5]?

Continue reading “Ki Seitzei 5778”

Posted on

Acharei Mos-Kedoshim 5778

Blessings from the Almighty[1]

ובשנה הרביעת יהיה כל-פריו קודש הלולים ליקוק
In the fourth year, all of its fruit will be holy; a praise[2] to Hashem[3]

A Rabbinic enactment which is very comprehensive is that of berachos, or blessings[4]. We are required to make a beracha before and after we eat[5]. There are berachos before performing a mitzvah[6]. There are berachos of praise upon experiencing certain events[7], or witnessing certain sights[8]. There are berachos that are part of the daily prayers[9]. Chazal, when they created this enactment, had a basis for their invention. The gemarra asks[10] what that basis was, and one answer given is a verse in this week’s parsha. The Torah, when describing the mitzvah of orlah, the fruit of a new tree, says that the fruit is off-limits for the first three years of its growth. In the fourth year, the fruit becomes sanctified, and is to be eaten exclusively in Jerusalem[11]. The Torah describes the celebration of eating this fruit as a “praise to Hashem”. Chazal saw in this the concept that before one eats, they should make a beracha, which is a form of praise to Hashem[12]. One can ask, why of all places is this where the Torah hints to the concept of berachos? Why not anywhere else? There are other instances where the Torah describes eating food[13]…

Continue reading “Acharei Mos-Kedoshim 5778”

Posted on

Tzav 5778

The undisturbed student[1]

צו את-אהרן ואת-בניו לאמר זאת תורת העלה היא העלה על מוקדה על-המזבח כל-הלילה עד-הבקר ואש המזבח תוקד בו: ולבש הכהן מדו בד ומכנסי-בד ילבש על-בשרו והרים את-הדשן אשר תאכל האש את-העלה על-המזבח ושמו אצל המזבח
Command Aharon and his children, saying: “This is the law of the elevation offering. It is the elevation offering that remains[2] on the altar pyre[3] the entire night, until morning. The fire of the inner altar should be ignited from the outer one[4]. The Kohen will don his linen tunic and linen pants against his body. He will then raise up the ashes from the fire that consumed the elevation offering on the altar and place them next to the altar”[5]

This week’s parsha begins with a command to Aharon and his sons, the Kohanim. It is interesting to note that in the entire previous parsha, Aharon isn’t mentioned once[6]. Every command so far regarding the Temple offerings mentions only Aharon’s sons. For example, with regards to the elevation offering (which is the subject of our verse), the previous parsha said: “…the sons of Aharon, the Kohanim, will offer…”[7]. It later says: “The sons of Aharon will place a fire on the altar”[8]. Or with the flour offering, it says: “He will bring it to the sons of Aharon, the Kohanim…”[9]. Why is here where Aharon is specifically mentioned and not earlier?

Continue reading “Tzav 5778”

Posted on

Bo 5778

The difference between a request and a command[1]

אל תאכלו ממנו נא וכו’ ולא תותירו ממנו עד בוקר
Al (Don’t) eat from [the Pesach offering] insufficiently roasted[2]…VeLo (and don’t) leave over any of it until morning[3]

Many times, the Torah uses the word לא, lo (don’t), when it wants to express a negative statement. However, other times it uses the word אל, al (don’t). An example[4] of both is in this week’s parsha, in two adjacent verses. The Torah introduces the mitzvah of the korban Pesach, the Passover offering, with a list of several instructions for its preparation and consumption. All of these instructions constitute individual mitzvos. There’s a mitzvah[5] not to eat a korbon Pesach which wasn’t roasted properly over a fire[6]. Regarding this mitzvah, the Torah uses the word al, when it says not to eat from it insufficiently roasted. There’s another mitzvah[7] not to leave any of the korbon Pesach over until morning[8]. It must be entirely consumed. With this mitzvah, the Torah uses the word lo, when it says don’t leave any of it over. What’s the difference between these two words? Why does the Torah sometimes choose one over the other?

Continue reading “Bo 5778”