The Maharal Diskin as a young boy would sit at the entrance of his father's study and any question that would come before his father would be told to him first. After his father had ruled he would compare his own psak with that of his father's. He once said that he always thought of the same psak as his father, except for once. A qustion came before his father regarding a Sefer Torah that was burned. As the questioner was leaving the Maharal asked what was his father's answer. He said that his father upon hearing that a Sefer Torah was burnt fainted, it hurt him just as if a close friend was killed. That reaction of closeness to the living Sefer Torah the Maharal Diskin didn't have as a young child.
On Erev Shabbos Parshas Chukas Tzadikim fast for it was a day that twenty crates of Seforim were burnt in France. The Rishonim said that it was the the week of Chukas and not the day of the month that caused the tragedy. The Ramchal explains that the highest leval of tumah is death - the departure of the soul from the body. This tumah can only be rectified through Parah Adumah. The Ramchal says that in today's day when we are in exile and we ourselves distance our souls from our bodies through sin, there are two options instead of the Parah Adumah. The first punishment would be death c'v. Hashem in his infinite mercy is moser nefesh himself for our sake. The Marsha says that the Torah is made up of Hashem's names and is in essence Hashem himself. When a Torah is burnt Hashem himself is letting himself be burnt for Klal Yisroel's sake- just like the Parah Adumah in the times of the Bais Hamikdosh. The way we could save the Torah is if we are moser nefesh for Hashem and his Torah, as the Gemora derives from the Parsha of Parah Aduma- that Torah cannot be acquired only if one kills himself for its sake. This seems like an impossible level to attain, if one is dead how does he acquire torah?
The Chazon Ish (Igress Chazon Ish chelek aleph pg. 27) explains that Chazal aren’t referring to death in its actual meaning, rather a superficial death. A person is defined by his actions, the character traits he was born with. If one by nature is easily angered, by definition he’s an angry person. Every time this person doesn’t get angry he’s in essence ‘killing’ himself. With every bad middah we overcome we leave our previous lives and live a new life on a higher plane then before. That is what the Chazal teach us, Torah can only be acquired if we work on our middos, kill the bad traits we were born with and live the life that the Torah prescribes for us.
This week - Parshas Chukas in Eretz Yisroel- eight Sefri Torah were burnt. Did we even feel the pain? Was our reaction anywhere near that of fainting? Can you hear Hashem calling to us children look i'm putting myself into the fire just to protect you! Are we ready to sacrifice anything for His sake?
Mazel Tov to family Hollander on the birth of their adorable little girl.
26 June, 2009
18 June, 2009
Parshas Korach
The fifth Perek of Avos deals with numbers- the world was created with ten utterances, ten miracles happened at krias Yam suf and so on. The last few Mishnas of the chapter deal with subjects that apparently are off topic. The 20th Mishna states that any controvery that with a noble purpose- like those of Hillel and Shammai, will in the end endure. But one that is not for a noble purpose- like the argument of Korach, in the end will not endure. What is this Mishna doing in the chapter that deals with the numbers of creation?
The world was created with opposites- dark and light, fire and water, sun and moon etc. The Maharal explains that the reason for this is that we are supposed to be looking at the two opposing forces of nature and through that realize that there is one creater that brings them together to work in harmony. That is why the Mishna regarding machlokes is at the end of the perek that deals with numbers. This teaches that the fact that there are two opinions is a way of the world- just like the ten utterances of creation- and a vital part of Torah study. It is all a way to bring us to believe in Hashem Echod- that only the creator is One. When two people are arguing for the sake of heaven, like Hillel and Shammai, when both opposites are true- 'eylu veylu divrie Elokim chaim', it is that that shows us the Oneness of Hashem. That his Torah is supernatural where two opposite opinions are both true. On the other hand when there is an argument that's for personal gain- like that of Korach, it brings to the forefront that the individual is important and that it is 'I' that makes a difference in the world, that diminishes the kavod of Hashem.
If there is an 'I' in a contoversy it is a clear sign that it intent is personal gain. Hillel and Shammai had no problem getting along peacefully with eachother, even though when you look thru the Mishna they come across as fierce enemies. It all shows that thier arguments did not have a personal agenda, it was pure Torah study. As opposed to Korach (note there is no mention of Moshe in the Mishna) his agenda was why not him, why was he not the one that was chosen. He might of been right that he was ready for the role of leadership in Klal Yisroel but he got caught up in the kovod of it. Just look at the difference between him and Moshe. Moshe spend seven days begging Hashem not to send him, that he was not big enough to lead the holy nation. Korach was the exact opposite he asked why not I? Thus Moshe was able to say "for me and Aron are nothing" we are void of any personal agendas and Korach went down in history as a classic example of machlokas.
The world was created with opposites- dark and light, fire and water, sun and moon etc. The Maharal explains that the reason for this is that we are supposed to be looking at the two opposing forces of nature and through that realize that there is one creater that brings them together to work in harmony. That is why the Mishna regarding machlokes is at the end of the perek that deals with numbers. This teaches that the fact that there are two opinions is a way of the world- just like the ten utterances of creation- and a vital part of Torah study. It is all a way to bring us to believe in Hashem Echod- that only the creator is One. When two people are arguing for the sake of heaven, like Hillel and Shammai, when both opposites are true- 'eylu veylu divrie Elokim chaim', it is that that shows us the Oneness of Hashem. That his Torah is supernatural where two opposite opinions are both true. On the other hand when there is an argument that's for personal gain- like that of Korach, it brings to the forefront that the individual is important and that it is 'I' that makes a difference in the world, that diminishes the kavod of Hashem.
If there is an 'I' in a contoversy it is a clear sign that it intent is personal gain. Hillel and Shammai had no problem getting along peacefully with eachother, even though when you look thru the Mishna they come across as fierce enemies. It all shows that thier arguments did not have a personal agenda, it was pure Torah study. As opposed to Korach (note there is no mention of Moshe in the Mishna) his agenda was why not him, why was he not the one that was chosen. He might of been right that he was ready for the role of leadership in Klal Yisroel but he got caught up in the kovod of it. Just look at the difference between him and Moshe. Moshe spend seven days begging Hashem not to send him, that he was not big enough to lead the holy nation. Korach was the exact opposite he asked why not I? Thus Moshe was able to say "for me and Aron are nothing" we are void of any personal agendas and Korach went down in history as a classic example of machlokas.
12 June, 2009
Parshas Shelach
Rashi says that the story of the mekoshesh eitzim comes to tell us the downfall of Klal Yisroel. They kept the first Shabbos, but the second Shabbos they were mechalel. (Point to ponder; why was all of Klal Yisroel guilty of chilul Shabbos if only one person was guilty) The Mahral explains that Rashi saw from the Pesukim that the story happened when they were commanded about Shabbos. He asks how does Rashi Know that it happened the second Shabbos and not the first?
The 16th day of Iyar a Sunday, the Mon started to fall. That Friday the 21st of the month a double portion of mon fell and Yisroel was told of the hilchos Shabbos. The posuk tells us that on Shabbos Klal Yisroel went out to look for the Mon and they found none. The Marahal says it was that Shabbos that was the first one that Klal Yisroel rested and is the first time that the seventh day of the week is called Shabbos. Up until Parshas Beshalach- Parshas Hamon- there is no mention of the word Shabbos. The day only got the name Shabbos after klal Yisroel rested on that day. That is what Rashi means when they kept the first Shabbos- for had they not it wouldn't have been Shabbos at all. The first possible Shabbos that the story was able to take place was thus the second Shabbos.
What needs explanation is what does the term Shabbos mean and why was it only applied after Klal Yisroel rested?
The reason we have a Shabbos is to show our belief that Hashem created the world from nothing. The Bnie Noach are also obligated to believe in one G-d, so why is it a Goy that rests on Shabbos is punished by death?
The basic concept of the number seven s that every physical object has six sides- the seventh element is the inside- the hidden, that keeps it together. There are six day of the week and the seventh day- the belief in Hashem, is what keeps the world together. Every single society has a seven day week, nowhere in the world- to my knowledge- did they change that yet. For everyone has this basic belief ingrained in them. Klal Yisroels Shabbos is more then that. When we rest on Shabbos we connect to the source of creation- Hashem! Shabbos takes Klal Yisroel to 'Yom sheculo tov' out of the phyisical and into the world of Hashem. To that world the goyim have no connection. Up untill Klal Yisroel first forged that connection the seventh day was just that- the seventh day. No inherent kedusha, just the fact and belief that there is one G-d. When Klal Yisroel rested that first Shabbos they created a new reality- a reality called Shabbos, one that connects us to Olam Haba and the world of pure spirituality.
The 16th day of Iyar a Sunday, the Mon started to fall. That Friday the 21st of the month a double portion of mon fell and Yisroel was told of the hilchos Shabbos. The posuk tells us that on Shabbos Klal Yisroel went out to look for the Mon and they found none. The Marahal says it was that Shabbos that was the first one that Klal Yisroel rested and is the first time that the seventh day of the week is called Shabbos. Up until Parshas Beshalach- Parshas Hamon- there is no mention of the word Shabbos. The day only got the name Shabbos after klal Yisroel rested on that day. That is what Rashi means when they kept the first Shabbos- for had they not it wouldn't have been Shabbos at all. The first possible Shabbos that the story was able to take place was thus the second Shabbos.
What needs explanation is what does the term Shabbos mean and why was it only applied after Klal Yisroel rested?
The reason we have a Shabbos is to show our belief that Hashem created the world from nothing. The Bnie Noach are also obligated to believe in one G-d, so why is it a Goy that rests on Shabbos is punished by death?
The basic concept of the number seven s that every physical object has six sides- the seventh element is the inside- the hidden, that keeps it together. There are six day of the week and the seventh day- the belief in Hashem, is what keeps the world together. Every single society has a seven day week, nowhere in the world- to my knowledge- did they change that yet. For everyone has this basic belief ingrained in them. Klal Yisroels Shabbos is more then that. When we rest on Shabbos we connect to the source of creation- Hashem! Shabbos takes Klal Yisroel to 'Yom sheculo tov' out of the phyisical and into the world of Hashem. To that world the goyim have no connection. Up untill Klal Yisroel first forged that connection the seventh day was just that- the seventh day. No inherent kedusha, just the fact and belief that there is one G-d. When Klal Yisroel rested that first Shabbos they created a new reality- a reality called Shabbos, one that connects us to Olam Haba and the world of pure spirituality.
03 June, 2009
Halachic Point to Ponder- Parshas Behaloscha
A huge MAZEL TOV to the Singer family on the birth of their adorable prince. We cannot wait for the shalom zachor and bris. May we share many many simchas together!
Rashi (perek 11;8) says the Mon became ground and cooked- it changed it's physical nature- at the wish of the one eating it. If you wanted a cake all you had to do is want the Mon to taste like cake and so it became. In Parshas Beshalach when we learn of the Mon Moshe tells Klal Yisroel that all their cooking and baking of the mon that was needed for Shabbos should be done by Friday. The Moshav Zekainim (a Baal Tosfes) asks what kind of prohibition was there in cooking and baking Mon? If you were able to make it taste by just thinking of the food you wanted it to be why would that be assur on Shabbos? He answers that when you made it taste to your liking you are liable for the issur tikkun.
The question is what kind of tikkun would you be doing? There are two options and both of them are problematic. It can either be bishul or makeh bepatesh. The definition of the issur bishul is changing the form of an object through the medium of fire. That surely didn't apply here becuase there was no fire involved - only words or thoughts. The Pri Megadim says that one can be liable for makeh bepatesh when preparing food. The Mishna Berurah (simin 318 in the Beir Halacha) brings many proofs that that is not the case and that there is no issur of makeh bepatesh in regard to food preparation. Can we say that the Moshev Zekainim is a proof to the Pri Megadim?
R' Chaim Kanievski (Derech Emunah hilchos Shmita perek 1) raises another point. He ponders if one is permitted to do a melacha if it's not done in a natural teva way. He states a Shela Hakodosh that asks how was Moshe able to write thirteen Sifre Torah the day he died if it was Shabbos? The Shela answers that he didn't write it - he made the Sifre Torah through shaimos- pronounching Hashem's name. You see from there that doing a miraculous act and accomplishing somthing that is assur is permitted on Shabbos. If so the question of the Moshev Zekainim is stronger. What would be the problem with preparing the Mon on Shabbos?
Rashi (perek 11;8) says the Mon became ground and cooked- it changed it's physical nature- at the wish of the one eating it. If you wanted a cake all you had to do is want the Mon to taste like cake and so it became. In Parshas Beshalach when we learn of the Mon Moshe tells Klal Yisroel that all their cooking and baking of the mon that was needed for Shabbos should be done by Friday. The Moshav Zekainim (a Baal Tosfes) asks what kind of prohibition was there in cooking and baking Mon? If you were able to make it taste by just thinking of the food you wanted it to be why would that be assur on Shabbos? He answers that when you made it taste to your liking you are liable for the issur tikkun.
The question is what kind of tikkun would you be doing? There are two options and both of them are problematic. It can either be bishul or makeh bepatesh. The definition of the issur bishul is changing the form of an object through the medium of fire. That surely didn't apply here becuase there was no fire involved - only words or thoughts. The Pri Megadim says that one can be liable for makeh bepatesh when preparing food. The Mishna Berurah (simin 318 in the Beir Halacha) brings many proofs that that is not the case and that there is no issur of makeh bepatesh in regard to food preparation. Can we say that the Moshev Zekainim is a proof to the Pri Megadim?
R' Chaim Kanievski (Derech Emunah hilchos Shmita perek 1) raises another point. He ponders if one is permitted to do a melacha if it's not done in a natural teva way. He states a Shela Hakodosh that asks how was Moshe able to write thirteen Sifre Torah the day he died if it was Shabbos? The Shela answers that he didn't write it - he made the Sifre Torah through shaimos- pronounching Hashem's name. You see from there that doing a miraculous act and accomplishing somthing that is assur is permitted on Shabbos. If so the question of the Moshev Zekainim is stronger. What would be the problem with preparing the Mon on Shabbos?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)