December 18, 2021 – Parshas Vayechi

On January 5, 2024 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn Divrei Torah, Synogagues I AttendedLeave a comment

Week in Toronto

Shem Hagedolim Hachodah and the Tur HaAruch

Congregation Ateres Mordechai – Rabbi Bitterman

Noam Horowitz – Matt Schwartz

I purchased two Seforim at the Lubavitch in Chabad Gate.

The first Sefer is Shem Hagedolim Hachadosh written by Ahron Walden. It is interesting to note that in the Shem Hagedolim Hachadosh’s face page, the author’s name is not listed. The Chida is listed. This Sefer is a continuation of the Chida’s Sefer, Shem Hagedolim. Rabbi Ahron Walden updated the Chida’s Sefer with a list of Rabbis and scholars where the Chida’s sefer ends. The Chida died in 1806 and I think his Sefer came out in 1775..

Rabbi Ahron Walden also compiled Kol Simcha from the Rebbe, Reb Bunim of Peshischa.

The second Sefer purchased was the Tur HaAruch. I was made aware of the Tur HaAruch through Sefaria. I was overjoyed to obtain my own copy of this Reshon.

Spent this week in Toronto. My mother in law is doing well.

December 17, 2021 – Friday night

Davened in the Conservatory building Minyan They require masks and the Gabbai lectured everyone. Very distasteful.

Had a great meal with my mother in law. After the meal went to visit Yosef and Heather Kelman. Yosef Kelman is Auntie Ruthie’s grandson. Auntie Ruthie is my mother-in-law’s sister. Yosef’s mother, Beverly, was my Shadchan. Yosef and Heather’s daughter is getting married in Lakewood during January 2022. Heather is a runner and has corresponded with Beatie Duetsch. We had running in common. I found out that Heather grew up in Denver, CO. In November I was in Denver for the 50th anniversary of Yeshiva Toras Chaim’s first graduation class and we spoke about Denver. Yosef Kelman has a beautiful family and is doing well. The below is a picture of his mother in the high chair, his grandparents, Marvin and Ruth Lister, and his great grandparents, Rabbi Leibush and Zelda Bayla Noble.

Zelda Baila Noble (my mother-in-law’s mother), Ruth Noble-Lister, Rabbi Leibush Noble, with Beverley in the high chair.

December 18, 2021 – Shabbos Morning

Got up at 1:00 AM, read and learned Chumash. Went back to sleep at 4:00 AM. Got up at 8:00 AM. Walked to Ateras Mordechai, Rabbi Bitterman is the Rabbi. It was snowing and for me this was the first snow of the season. The first snow of the season is beautiful and I felt joy, a lightness. I was invited by Jason Lapidus to daven at his Shul. I sat with the South African contingent at Ateres Mordechai.

The Shul is at 230 Arnold, a converted home. I was invited there by Jason Lapidus. They davened relatively slowly. There was a Bar Mitzvah, last name of the family is Dabush. The boy leined nicely. His Bar Mitzvah speech was on the father’s Bracha of Bracha Sh’Petrani.

Rabbi Bitterman spoke nicely on the following Verses 50:15-21, especially Verse 50:17.

Verse 15 – וַיִּרְא֤וּ אֲחֵֽי־יוֹסֵף֙ כִּי־מֵ֣ת אֲבִיהֶ֔ם וַיֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ ל֥וּ יִשְׂטְמֵ֖נוּ יוֹסֵ֑ף וְהָשֵׁ֤ב יָשִׁיב֙ לָ֔נוּ אֵ֚ת כׇּל־הָ֣רָעָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר גָּמַ֖לְנוּ אֹתֽוֹ׃

Verse 16 – וַיְצַוּ֕וּ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֖ף לֵאמֹ֑ר אָבִ֣יךָ צִוָּ֔ה לִפְנֵ֥י מוֹת֖וֹ לֵאמֹֽר

Verse 17

כֹּֽה־תֹאמְר֣וּ לְיוֹסֵ֗ף אָ֣נָּ֡א שָׂ֣א נָ֠א פֶּ֣שַׁע אַחֶ֤יךָ וְחַטָּאתָם֙ כִּי־רָעָ֣ה גְמָל֔וּךָ וְעַתָּה֙ שָׂ֣א נָ֔א לְפֶ֥שַׁע עַבְדֵ֖י אֱלֹהֵ֣י אָבִ֑יךָ וַיֵּ֥בְךְּ יוֹסֵ֖ף בְּדַבְּרָ֥ם

אֵלָֽיו׃

Verse 18 – וַיֵּלְכוּ֙ גַּם־אֶחָ֔יו וַֽיִּפְּל֖וּ לְפָנָ֑יו וַיֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ הִנֶּ֥נּֽוּ לְךָ֖ לַעֲבָדִֽים

Verse 19 – וַיֹּ֧אמֶר אֲלֵהֶ֛ם יוֹסֵ֖ף אַל־תִּירָ֑אוּ כִּ֛י הֲתַ֥חַת אֱלֹהִ֖ים אָֽנִי

Verse 20 – וְאַתֶּ֕ם חֲשַׁבְתֶּ֥ם עָלַ֖י רָעָ֑ה אֱלֹהִים֙ חֲשָׁבָ֣הּ לְטֹבָ֔ה לְמַ֗עַן עֲשֹׂ֛ה כַּיּ֥וֹם הַזֶּ֖ה לְהַחֲיֹ֥ת עַם־רָֽב

Verse 21 – וְעַתָּה֙ אַל־תִּירָ֔אוּ אָנֹכִ֛י אֲכַלְכֵּ֥ל אֶתְכֶ֖ם וְאֶֽת־טַפְּכֶ֑ם וַיְנַחֵ֣ם אוֹתָ֔ם וַיְדַבֵּ֖ר עַל־לִבָּֽם

Rabbi Bitterman commented on Yosef’s crying. Yosef cried because he realized that their fighting was so counterproductive. He was responsible for the animosity. How much was lost because they fought. They did not grow and lost many opportunities to move forward. People fight over nothing. He mentioned a Rabbi Efraim Goldberg story, https://mishpacha.com/what-kind-of-friend/., how a little mistake can create major fights. Rabbi Bitterman said how many family fights are over nothing and years later, people do not even know why they are fighting. Rabbi Bitterman mentioned the story of Kamtza and Ben Kamitza.

After the davening, I stayed for the Kiddush. Delicious. I sat across from Jason Lapidus, Sheldon Tennabaum, and Stan Vanik; and next to Douglas Chillovitz. Douglas Chillovitz employed my nephew, Dovie Janowski. Dovie’s mother told me that Doug Chillovitz is a nice guy and was good to Dovie. I told them my Torah from this week that I learned in the early morning.

I ended up being the last to leave. I looked around to find someone to walk with however, no one was around. I started walking home. On Atkinson near Clark I saw someone walking in the opposite direction, wearing a knit hat. I stopped him and asked where he Davened this Shabbos morning. He davened at Netivot. I asked him if I could say over my Torah and he said yes. I started and after a few minutes, I said that I do not want to hold him from his Shabbos meal. He said no problem with me saying over the Torah and that he would walk me. I asked, but you are walking the opposite way from your destination, and he said no problem. He turned and accompanied me. After I finished my Vort we were at Clark and Hilda, across the street from my mother in law. I was not sure if he was married and asked if he wanted to come over for lunch? He told me that he is married and has four kids. I apologized for making him late for his family meal. He said no problem. I asked his name and he is Noam Horowitz. He is a Levi and from the Shelah Hakodesh. He learned in the Gush. I told him how much I love Rabbi Moshe Teragin, https://mizrachi.org/speaker/rabbi-moshe-taragin/. Rabbi Moshe Teragin is one of the few people in the world that can say Torah in perfect English, using the right descriptive words, being efficient while speaking, and able to teach and be understood. Additionally, he teaches history while he speaks Torah. I mentioned that my nephews learned at the Gush, Matt and Elyasaf Schwartz. He responded, of course. I am good friends with Matt and that they were also together at YU. His Rebbi was Rabbi Rosenzweig. After Shabbos Matt told me that Noam Horowitz is a great guy, will do anything, has a great wife, and four cute kids. Noam Schartz walking me, and going out of his way is Noam Horowitz. He is an inspirational Rebbe. Gevaldig. I met the only person who knows Matt Schwartz in Toronto.

The picture on the following page is Noam Horowitz and Matt Schwartz. Matt is my nephew. This picture is from December 2023.

Got to my mother in law, walking on a cloud. Had the Shabbos meal, cold cuts sandwiches.

Torah #1 – the Theme of Yakov Kissing and being Kissed:

This week I focused on kissing. It seems that more than anyone else in the Torah, kissing played a role in Yakov’s life. How are we to understand this? Is it just happenstance or is there something deeper.

We find Yakov kissing or being kissed in the following six times:

1 – Yitzchok kissing Yakov when he blessed Yakov posing as Eisav. Berehsis 17:27 – וַיִּגַּשׁ֙ וַיִּשַּׁק־ל֔וֹ וַיָּ֛רַח אֶת־רֵ֥יחַ בְּגָדָ֖יו וַֽיְבָרְכֵ֑הוּ וַיֹּ֗אמֶר רְאֵה֙ רֵ֣יחַ בְּנִ֔י כְּרֵ֣יחַ שָׂדֶ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר בֵּרְכ֖וֹ יְהֹוָֽה

2 – When he meets Rochel for the first time

Bereshis 29:11 – וַיִּשַּׁ֥ק יַעֲקֹ֖ב לְרָחֵ֑ל וַיִּשָּׂ֥א אֶת־קֹל֖וֹ וַיֵּֽבְךְּ׃. Rashi comments on why Yakov cried and gives two reasons. ויבך. לְפִי שֶׁצָּפָה בְרוּח הַקֹּדֶש שֶאֵינָהּ נִכְנֶסֶת עִמּוֹ לִקְבוּרָה. דָּ”אַ לְפִי שֶׁבָּא בְּיָדַיִם רֵקָנִיּוֹת; אָמַר, אֱלִיעֶזֶר עֶבֶד אֲבִי אַבָּא הָיוּ בְיָדָיו נְזָמִים וּצְמִידִים וּמִגְדָּנוֹת וַאֲנִי אֵין בְּיָדִי כְלוּם; לְפִי שֶׁרָדַף אֶלִיפַז בֶּן עֵשָׂו בְּמִצְוַת אָבִיו אַחֲרָיו לְהָרְגוֹ וְהִשִּׂיגוֹ, וּלְפִי שֶׁגָּדַל אֶלִיפַז בְּחֵיקוֹ שֶׁל יִצְחָק, מָשַׁךְ יָדָיו. אָמַר לוֹ מָה אֱעֱשֶׂה לַצִּוּוּי שֶׁל אַבָּא? אָמַר לוֹ יַעֲקֹב טֹל מַה שֶּׁבְּיָדִי, וְהֶעָנִי חָשׁוּב כַּמֵּת.

Both reasons are powerful. Yakov found his soulmate, the love of his life, the one who he would give his everything to. Rashi says that Yakov saw with his holy spirit that they would not be buried together. Yakov’s kiss with Rochel was tragic. Yakov sensed that something would happen that would get in the way of true happiness in marriage. He cries over this impending darkness.

3 – Lavan kissing and hugging Yakov. Bereshis 29:13 – וַיְהִי֩ כִשְׁמֹ֨עַ לָבָ֜ן אֶת־שֵׁ֣מַע ׀ יַעֲקֹ֣ב בֶּן־אֲחֹת֗וֹ וַיָּ֤רׇץ לִקְרָאתוֹ֙ וַיְחַבֶּק־לוֹ֙ וַיְנַשֶּׁק־ל֔וֹ וַיְבִיאֵ֖הוּ אֶל־בֵּית֑וֹ וַיְסַפֵּ֣ר לְלָבָ֔ן אֵ֥ת כׇּל־הַדְּבָרִ֖ים הָאֵֽלֶּה.

Lavan kissed and hugged Yosef not out of love but to see if Yakov was hiding diamonds in his mouth and money around his chest. Lavan reasoned that Eliezer, the servant of Avrohom, come with ten camels full of riches, so he thought Yakov would also be coming with great wealth, Lavan did not see camels laden with riches, so he kissed and hugged to see if Yakov was hiding the wealth on his body protecting it from thieves. This kissing has an ulterior motive. Yakov tells Lavan that he is penniless and the reason as Rashi says in 29:13. .ויספר ללבן. שֶׁלֹּא בָא אֶלָּא מִתּוֹך אֹנֶס אָחִיו, וְשֶׁנָּטְלוּ מָמוֹנוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ

Yakov feels compelled to say what happened. Not sure if Yakov admitted to taking the Brochos deceitfully, but he did reveal that Eisav wants to kill Yakov and he gave his money to Eliphaz. Lavan got the upper hand, as Yakov is a pauper, estranged from his family. He knew that Yakov did something to antagonize his brother and that Yakov could not go home.

This is another example of Yakov divulging too much information. See my Torah from last year.

4 – When Yosef revealed himself to his brothers, he kissed his brothers.

Bereshis 45:15 – וַיְנַשֵּׁ֥ק לְכׇל־אֶחָ֖יו וַיֵּ֣בְךְּ עֲלֵהֶ֑ם וְאַ֣חֲרֵי כֵ֔ן דִּבְּר֥וּ אֶחָ֖יו אִתּֽוֹ

5 – hugging and kissing Ephraim and Menashe

Bereshis 48:10 – וְעֵינֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ כָּבְד֣וּ מִזֹּ֔קֶן לֹ֥א יוּכַ֖ל לִרְא֑וֹת וַיַּגֵּ֤שׁ אֹתָם֙ אֵלָ֔יו וַיִּשַּׁ֥ק לָהֶ֖ם וַיְחַבֵּ֥ק לָהֶֽם

The Sferno says –וישק להם ויחבק להם כדי שתדבק נפשו בהם ותחול עליהם ברכתו.

Translated as “the physical contact was designed to make Yaakov more attached to them so that his blessing would be correspondingly more effective.”

6 – when Yakov passes away. Pasuk 50:1 – וַיִּפֹּ֥ל יוֹסֵ֖ף עַל־פְּנֵ֣י אָבִ֑יו וַיֵּ֥בְךְּ עָלָ֖יו וַיִּשַּׁק־לֽוֹ

It does say in Verse 32:1 that Lavan kissed his daughters and grandchildren – וַיַּשְׁכֵּ֨ם לָבָ֜ן בַּבֹּ֗קֶר וַיְנַשֵּׁ֧ק לְבָנָ֛יו וְלִבְנוֹתָ֖יו וַיְבָ֣רֶךְ אֶתְהֶ֑ם וַיֵּ֛לֶךְ וַיָּ֥שׇׁב לָבָ֖ן לִמְקֹמֽוֹ׃, however, since it was not Yakov we will ignore it.

Let us trace Yakov’s life using the above mileposts.

Yakov is kissed by his father and results in getting the blessings in a deceptive manner. This is the beginning of the tragedy of Yakov’s life and is the סיבּה, the cause of all of Yakov’s trevails. Yakov deceives his brother. His brother swears revenge and Yakov has to flee. As Yakov was making his way to Choron, he is overtaken by Eliphaz who is told to kill Yakov. Yakov gives Eliphaz all of his money and Yakov arrives at Choron penniless. He does not arrive at his uncle’s home as the honored family member. As a result he has to work for Lavan for seven years for Rochel’s hand in marriage. Yakov is tricked to marry Leah and Leah’s justification is that Yakov tricked his own brother Eisav, saying whatever goes around, comes around. Yakov is powerless to dictate anything because he arrived in a weakened position. Had Yakov come with money, Yakov would have been treated as an honored guest and in all likelihood married Rochel immediately without seven years of work and not having to marry Leah. Yakov sensed this tragedy when he kissed Rochel. All this traces itself back to when Yakov deceived his father.

The dysfunction continues. Yakov’s marriage to Leah created friction in his marriages and between the brothers. This friction leads to animosity and the animosity leads to the brothers selling Yosef and splitting the family. Yosef is sold into slavery and Yakov does not see his beloved son for twenty two years. During this time Yosef became monarch in Egypt. Finally at age 130 father and son are reunited. It takes a dramatic scene of Yosef revealing to his brothers that this despot, this Egyptian they were dealing with, is indeed their brother and Yosef kisses them and they cry. This is the kiss of Godliness, of brotherhood, of unity.

Yakov is now 130 years old and is able to live out the last seventeen years of his life in total peace and harmony. As the Medresh Rabah says, 96:1, דָּבָר אַחֵר, לָמָּה הִיא סְתוּמָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁסָּתַם מִמֶּנּוּ כָּל צָרוֹת שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם and the Kli Yakur elaborates:

וללשון שלישי הדורש, לפי שנסתמו ממנו כל צרות שבעולם יאמר הכתוב אע״פ שהיה כל ימיו בצרה וגרות כמ״ש ימי מגורי ק״ל שנה מעט ורעים, מ״מ לגודל השלוה שהיה לו תוך י״ז שנים שראה ישיבת בניו בשלום ויאחזו בארץ ויפרו וירבו נשכחו ממנו כל הצרות הראשונות שעברו עליו והיו כלא היו, לכך נאמר ויהי ימי יעקב שני חייו קמ״ז שנה כי *אותן ק״ל שנים לא היו נחשבים מכלל ימי חייו לגודל צרותיו, ועכשיו למפרע נחשבו כולם שני חייו, וזה לפי שנסתמו ממנו כל הצרות שעברו וכאילו היה חי חיים נעימים ועריבים בכל שנותיו, שהרי באמת יוסף היה חי, לכך סמך ויחי יעקב אל הפסוק הקודם,

The Kli Yakur is explaining the first pasuk on a deeper level than the plain meaning. The plain meaning is that Yosef lived for 17 years in Egypt and his total life was 147 years.

*וַיְחִ֤י יַעֲקֹב֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם שְׁבַ֥ע עֶשְׂרֵ֖ה שָׁנָ֑ה וַיְהִ֤י יְמֵֽי־יַעֲקֹב֙ שְׁנֵ֣י חַיָּ֔יו שֶׁ֣בַע שָׁנִ֔ים וְאַרְבָּעִ֥ים וּמְאַ֖ת שָׁנָֽה

“Jacob lived seventeen years in the land of Egypt, so that the span of Jacob’s life came to one

hundred and forty-seven years.”

The Medresh and Kli Yakur are saying that Yakov’s life of 17 years in Egypt was in

such bliss and peace, that Yakov was able to forget the pain and suffering of the first

130 years of his life, so much so that he felt as if he lived for 147 years in

goodness and sweetness. To expand on this, Yakov felt that he did not live the first 130

years. He was tossed and turned by life and he had no control over life. He could not smell

the roses and every breath he took was loaded with stress. Once he went to Egypt and was

supported by Yosef and surrounded by his other kids, did he feel alive. He had a joy of

waking up every day.

Now that Yakov has had 17 years of life of peace and harmony, he is able to kiss his grandchildren with this same kiss of Godliness that Yitzchok blessed him with, however, that kiss ended in tragedy and Yakov kiss was full of light and ended in greatness for his grandchildren.

As Yakov leaves this world, Yosef kisses his father, the kiss of one’s soul being bound up in another soul.

Torah #2:

The Tur HaAruch and understanding the kiss and hug Yakov gave to Ephraim and Menassha:

This past Tuesday I davened in Lubavitch on Chabad Gate in Toronto. There is a bookstore in Lubavitch and they have many older Seforim on sale. I picked up two Seforim that I was looking for for years. One is a Shem Hagdolim Hachodesh by Rabbi Ahron Walden, published in 1864. He has two great paragraphs of a first person account of the Kotzker. It is very poetic and draws on many Pesukim in which one has to understand. I had Barnea Sellavan translate it. The second is the Tur HaAruch. I did not know that the Tur HaAruch existed until I saw it on Sefaria a number of years ago. I was B’Simcha Gedolah when I found these Sefroima nd was able to purchase.

Torah on Verse 48:10.

#1 – The Tur HaAruch:

וְעֵינֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ כָּבְד֣וּ מִזֹּ֔קֶן לֹ֥א יוּכַ֖ל לִרְא֑וֹת וַיַּגֵּ֤שׁ אֹתָם֙ אֵלָ֔יו וַיִּשַּׁ֥ק לָהֶ֖ם וַיְחַבֵּ֥ק לָהֶֽם

This Pasuk is saying that Yakov was blind from old age and he (Yosef) brought Ephraim and Menashe close to Yakov. Yakov hugged and kissed them.

The Tur HaAruch says

וישק להם ויחבק להם. שאין שכינה שורה אלא מתוך שמחה וכדרך שנעשה לו שאביו חבקו ונשקו כשברכו:

Yakov hugged and kissed his two grandchildren to create Simcha so that the Schinah should rest on him to bless his grandchildren, just like Yitzxhok kissed Yakov posing as Eisav. However in Bereshis Verses 27:26 and 27:27 speaks to the kiss of Yakov, as follows:

Bereshis 27:26 – וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֵלָ֖יו יִצְחָ֣ק אָבִ֑יו גְּשָׁה־נָּ֥א וּשְׁקָה־לִּ֖י בְּנִֽי׃

Bereshis 27:27 – וַיִּגַּשׁ֙ וַיִּשַּׁק־ל֔וֹ וַיָּ֛רַח אֶת־רֵ֥יחַ בְּגָדָ֖יו וַֽיְבָרְכֵ֑הוּ וַיֹּ֗אמֶר רְאֵה֙ רֵ֣יחַ בְּנִ֔י כְּרֵ֣יחַ שָׂדֶ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר בֵּרְכ֖וֹ יְהֹוָֽה׃

Translated as:

And Yitzchok his father said come close and kiss me, my son. Yakov approaches and kisses his father and smells the smell of his clothes and he blesses him, saying see the smell of my son is that of a field that Hashem has blessed.

However, the Tur HaAruch does not say that Yitzchok’s kiss was done to create Simcha. The Tur HaAruch gives a very practical reason –

גשה נא ושקה לי בני. אמר הנה שני סימנין בקול דומה ליעקב במשוש דומה לעשו אראה עוד סימן ג’ בבגדיו ויכריע בין

ב’ סימנים ועל כן כשקרב אליו והריח ריח בגדי עשו ברכו:

Yitzchok was not sure who was standing in front of him, Yitzchok performed one more test to see if he has an earthy smell or would the person smell like Yakov, so he kissed him to test him. Yirzchok was being practical. Kissing his son, Yizchok smelled the smell of the field (not someone sitting in the Bais Medrash), confirmed in his mind it was Eisav and blessed him.

We seem to have a contradiction in the Tur HaAruch. In Breshis 27:27 the Tur HaAruch gave a practical reason for Yitzchok’s kiss, for a test; however, in the week’s Sedra the Tur HaAruch refers back to Yitzchok’s kiss and said it generated Simcha. Both kisses in VaYicha and in Toldos were for Simcha.

The answer is that while true the purpose of the kiss was very practical, the outcome was that it created great Simcha. What was the joy? On a simple level you can say that Yakov felt he had proof that the person in front of him was Eisav and was now happy that he can give a Bracha to Eisav. In both cases the kiss created joy, by Ephreim and Menashe he hugged and kissed to create joy, by Yitzchok the outcome of the kiss was joy and Yitzchok had clarity. I think the answer is much deeper than this. Yitzchok already had a good meal and wine. Knowing with clarity would seem to bring some joy, but not great joy.

I think the Pshet is that Yitzhok’s kiss created unbelievable joy for him and this is what the Tur HaAruch is saying. Everyone asks the question, what was Yitzchok thinking? He knew Eisav was an evil person, albeit mitigated by Eisav’s fulfillment of honoring his parents. The mainstream answer said by Rabbi Aaron Solovechik in 1974 is that Yitzchok options were to either give the blessing to Eisav and teach Eisav to do good, after all Eisav excelled in the commandment of honoring one’s father and mother; or give the Bracha to Yakov, who was physically and emotionally weak, not equipped with the strength to be the foundation of the Jewish perople. Yitzchok felt it is best to give the blessing to Eisav and Rivka understood the disaster that would occur if Eisav received the blessing.

When Yitzchok kisses the person in front of him and smells a field, it is a field of blossoming floors, a touch of Gan Eden. As Rashi on this Pasuk says,

“ ’וירח וגו AND HE SMELLED etc.— Surely there is no more offensive smell than that of washed goat-skins! But Scripture implicitly tells us that the perfume of the Garden of Eden entered the room with him (Genesis Rabbah 65:22)” .

The smell of blossoming flowers, enhanced by the smell of Gan Eden brought tremendous Simcha to Yitzchok. Yitzchok according to the Tur HaArcuh has now confirmed in his mind that Eisav is standing in front of him ready to receive the blessing and Yitzchok smells Gan Eden. Yitzchok is overjoyed. He confirmed in his mind that he made the right decision, Eisav is the correct person to receive the blessing of the nation of Israel. This was his great Simcha and this is the comparison between the two kisses, one in Toldos and the other in Vayechi.

This is exactly what the Tur HaAruch is effectively saying in his next piece on the next Pasuk, which discusses the actual kiss.

ראה ריח בני כריח שדה. פי’ ראה הוא הדבור במחשבת הלב שאמר בלבו ודאי עשו הוא זה שריח בגדיו מריחים כריח השדה פי’ כציצי הפרחים שהוא איש שדה וקלטו בגדיו ריח השדה ועל כן ברכו. וי”מ שהיה בגדיו מגומרים בבשמים הגדלים בשדה:

ראה ריח בני כריח שדה, “indeed the fragrance of my son is like the fragrance of the field.” The meaning of the word ראה here is that the expression does not reflect something Yitzchok saw with his eyes, but that this is what he observed internally, when thinking about what his son Esau’s presence projected. He felt that there could not be any doubt that of his two sons it was Esau who represented the fragrance of blossoming flowers and all the blessings associated with nature when it unfolds. This is why he determined to accord him the blessing. Other commentators see in this statement about the fragrance simply a reference to the perfume with which Esau sprayed his garments, something which matched what could be found in the field.

Torah #3 – Yakov’s blindness and kissing and hugging his two grandchildren are in the same Pasuk, Verse 48:10. Is there a connection?

Bereshis 48:10 – וְעֵינֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ כָּבְד֣וּ מִזֹּ֔קֶן לֹ֥א יוּכַ֖ל לִרְא֑וֹת וַיַּגֵּ֤שׁ אֹתָם֙ אֵלָ֔יו וַיִּשַּׁ֥ק לָהֶ֖ם וַיְחַבֵּ֥ק לָהֶֽם

Pasuk is saying that Yakov was blind because of old age. The same Pasuk that talks about his blindness also says Yakov hugged and kissed his two grandchildren. There seems to be a connection.

I believe that the answer is based on the above Torah. Kissing represents connecting to someone on a deep level, your soul’s touch one arbiter. I believe that the juxtaposition of Yakov’s blindness and his kissing his two grandchildren is to tell us although a poor person and a blind person are both considered “dead”, when Yakov lost his money before going to Choron, this was “death” for Yakov. This led to bad outcomes in Yakov’s life. You can even say that Yitzchaks blindness also led to “death”, to the deception which defined UYakov’s life for years and not seeing Yakov for 22 years. However, in this Parsha Yakov’s blindness did not result in “death”. Yakov saw and radiated light. He woke up every day with joy knowing that he had another day to be with his family, to learn Torah with his grandchildren. He was able to kiss and hug his grandchildren to pass on Yakov’s neshama of purity and holiness.

An alternative explanation and other Reshonim discussing Yakov’s blindness.

The Ohr Hachaim is bothered by this connection and says:

ועיני ישראל וגו’. צריך לדעת למה כתיב הודעה זו במקום זה, ומה קשר ושייכות לדבר זה עם הסמוך לו וישק להם ויחבק להם. עוד צריך לדעת אומרו להם שהיה לו לומר וישק אותם. ואולי ששני דקדוקים אלו כל אחת מתרצת חברתה כי לצד שכבדו עיניו מזוקן היה מחבק שלא במקום החיבוק ומנשק שלא במקום הנישוק ולזה אמר להם ולא אמר אותם והבן:

Israel’s eyes were heavy with old age, etc. Why did the Torah choose this point to inform us of Jacob’s failing eyesight? What does it have to do with his proceeding to embrace and kiss Joseph’s children? Besides, why did the Torah have to describe these kisses as להם instead of אותם? Perhaps one of these details will help us understand the other detail. Jacob embraced the children in the wrong places and kissed them in the wrong places due to his failing eyesight. If that were true the expression להם instead of אותם is quite understandable.

The Ohr Hachaim’s explanation leaves us wanting more.

Contrast Yakov blindness to Yitzchok’s, Verse 27:1

וַֽיְהִי֙ כִּֽי־זָקֵ֣ן יִצְחָ֔ק וַתִּכְהֶ֥יןָ עֵינָ֖יו מֵרְאֹ֑ת וַיִּקְרָ֞א אֶת־עֵשָׂ֣ו ׀ בְּנ֣וֹ הַגָּדֹ֗ל וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֵלָיו֙ בְּנִ֔י וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֵלָ֖יו הִנֵּֽנִי׃

Rashi says ותכהין. בַּעֲשָׁנָן שֶׁל אֵלּוּ. דָּ”אַ כְּשֶׁנֶּעֱקַד עַ”גַּ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְהָיָה אָבִיו רוֹצֶה לְשָׁחֳטוֹ, בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה נִפְתְּחוּ הַשָּׁמַיִם וְרָאוּ- מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת וְהָיוּ בוֹכִים, וְיָרְדוּ דִמְעוֹתֵיהֶם וְנָפְלוּ עַל עֵינָיו, לְפִיכָךְ כָּהוּ עֵינָיו. דָּ”אַ כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּטֹּל יַעֲקֹב אֶת הַבְּרָכוֹת

Notice that Rashi does not say that he lost his sight due to old age, even though the Pasuk says he was old. The Rashban says that Yitzchok did lose his sight because of old age.

Rashbam – ותכהין עיניו – מן הזקנה, כמו שמצינו בספר שמואל: ועיניו החלו כהות.

The Netziv in his Hemek Dvar and others say that Yitzchok was only 127 and he was not old enough to lose his sight from age, rather there is another reason.

ותכהין עיניו מראות. אין לפרש שהזקנה גרמה זאת שהרי לא הי׳ זקן כ״כ לפי ערך ימי חייו. שהי׳ חי עוד ששים שנה. אלא סיבה הי׳ מן השמים. וכמבואר עוד ברבה הרבה טעמים וגם דקדקו לשון מראות שהוא מיותר אלא נרמז בזה הסיבה לכך וא״כ צריך לפרש ויהי כי זקן יצחק אירע סיבה שכהו עיניו. אבל הזקנה גרמה לו לחשוב מחשבות כי קרבו ימיו שהוא בעצמו לא שיער שהוא סיבה מן השמים. אלא חשב כי סוף ימיו המה

August 26, 2023 – Parshas Ki Seitzei

On September 11, 2023 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn Divrei Torah, Parsha, Synogagues I AttendedLeave a comment

Levirate Marriage – Mitzvah of Yibum

Devarim 25:5-10:

Shiur at Chabad of Lakeview

Walked the six miles to Chabad of East Lakeview. On the way there I stopped off by Eli and Xi. I go to Shul at 10:50 AM. They were at Shilshi. The Kiddush was great. I just love the Cholent. I spoke about the Mitzvah of Yibum. I also told them the speech by Rabbi Meir Yaakov Soloveichik, the Yibum of Henry the 8th. See my blog posit of September 4, 2023

Levirate Marriage and Halitzah

Pesukim of Yibum:

Verse 5:

כִּֽי־יֵשְׁב֨וּ אַחִ֜ים יַחְדָּ֗ו וּמֵ֨ת אַחַ֤ד מֵהֶם֙ וּבֵ֣ן אֵֽין־ל֔וֹ לֹֽא־תִהְיֶ֧ה אֵֽשֶׁת־הַמֵּ֛ת הַח֖וּצָה לְאִ֣ישׁ זָ֑ר יְבָמָהּ֙ יָבֹ֣א עָלֶ֔יהָ וּלְקָחָ֥הּ ל֛וֹ לְאִשָּׁ֖ה וְיִבְּמָֽהּ׃

Artscroll:

When two brothers live together and one of them dies, and he has no child, the wife of the deceased may not marry outside to a strangman; her brother in law shall come to her, and take her to himself as a wife, and perform levirate marriage..

Rabbi Charles Kahane:

When brothers from one father live together at the same time, and one of them dies childless, the wife of the deceased may not marry one outside of the family, a stranger. Her husband’s brother must marry her; take her to be his wife, and take the place of the former husband.

(רמב”ן, רש”י, א”ע.)

Silverstein

When brothers dwell together [i.e., when they had dwelt concurrently in the world (This excludes from yibum (levirate marriage) the wife of one’s brother who had never been “in his world”). They must also be “together” vis-à-vis inheritance (This excludes from yibum the wife of one’s maternal brother)], and one of them dies, and he has no son [or daughter, or son of a son or daughter of a son, or son of a daughter or daughter of a daughter], then the wife of the dead one shall not be outside to a strange man. Her levir (her husband’s brother) shall come upon her and take her for himself as a wife, and he shall have her in levirate marriage.

Rashi:

כי ישבו אחים יחדו. שֶׁהָיְתָה לָהֶם יְשִׁיבָה אַחַת בָּעוֹלָם, פְּרָט לְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְעוֹלָמוֹ (ספרי; יבמות י”ז):

יחדו. הַמְיֻחָדִים בַּנַּחֲלָה, פְּרָט לְאָחִיו מִן הָאֵם (שם):

ובן אין לו. עַיֵּן עָלָיו, בֵּן אוֹ בַת אוֹ בֵן הַבֵּן אוֹ בַת הַבֵּן אוֹ בֵן הַבַּת אוֹ בַת הַבַּת (עי’ יבמות כ”ב):

We see that the Mitzvah of Yibum applies to a couple who had a child and that child dies. Thus when the brother dies, he is childless and his wife falls to Yibum.

Verse 6:

וְהָיָ֗ה הַבְּכוֹר֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר תֵּלֵ֔ד יָק֕וּם עַל־שֵׁ֥ם אָחִ֖יו הַמֵּ֑ת וְלֹֽא־יִמָּחֶ֥ה שְׁמ֖וֹ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵֽל׃

To understand this Pasuk the following four separate phrases that have to be understood.

וְהָיָ֗ה הַבְּכוֹר֙

אֲשֶׁ֣ר תֵּלֵ֔ד

יָק֕וּם עַל־שֵׁ֥ם אָחִ֖יו הַמֵּ֑ת

וְלֹֽא־יִמָּחֶ֥ה שְׁמ֖וֹ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵֽל׃

There are two main explanations. The A Pshat which is the plain meaning of the text and the B Pshat which Drush as stated by the Sefrei and the Gemora in Yevomes 24A.

What does וְהָיָ֗ה הַבְּכוֹר֙ mean?

A – Either the oldest son

B – The oldest brother is first in line to perform Yibum.

What does אֲשֶׁ֣ר תֵּלֵ֔ד mean?

A – Either it goes with the oldest son that is born. “And it will be when a son is born”

B – The Yevamah has to have the ability to have children in her lifetime. It excludes an Aylones

What does יָק֕וּם עַל־שֵׁ֥ם אָחִ֖יו mean?

A1 – The son born to the Yavum and Yevamah takes on the same name as the deceased brother

A2 – The son inherits the deceased brother.

A3 – The son is a continuation of the soul of the dead brother

B – The brother who performs Yibum inherits the deceased brother’s property

What does וְלֹֽא־יִמָּחֶ֥ה שְׁמ֖וֹ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵֽל mean?

A – Not sure

A3 – by taking on the soul of the dead brother, the dead brother will not be wiped out from this world.

B – Inheritance

The following is how the various Meforshim learn this Pasuk.
What is very interesting is that only Rashi learned the text like the Gemora. The Gemora in Yevamos 24A clearly learns the explanation like the Drush. Rava totally rejects the plain meaning of the text.

Onkelys – A, B, A, not sure. According to Avrohom Morgenstern

it is A, B, A3, Not sure

Targum – A, A, A2, not sure

Ibn Ezra – A, A, A1, B

Rashbam – A, A, A1, not sure

Ramban – A, A, A3, B Also Rabbeinu Bachya and the Tur HaArych

Sforno – A, A, A, A3

Rashi – B, B, B, not sure

Group 1 – follows the plain meaning of the text. You name the kids after the deceased brother. This is said by Onkleyos, Tragum Yonasam Ben Uziel, Ibn Ezra, and the Rashbam.

Group 2 – Kabblistic Pshat that the Neshama of the deceased brother goes into the firstborn child (son or even a girl?). Ramban, Rabbinu Bachya and Tur HaAruch. Rabbi Avrohom Morgenstern in his Sefer on Onkelys says that Onkelys agrees with the Ramban.

Group 3 – The child is considered the child of the deceased brother. This is the Sforno. Slightly different than the Ramban.

Group 4 – The Drasha’s that Rashi quotes are from the Gemara in Yeovms 24A. It appears that Rashi holds like Rava in the Gemara that we do not use the plain meaning at all, not for Pshat and not for Halacha.

There are a number of questions. Rava in Yevamos 24A clearly says the explanation of the Pasuk does not at all go like the plain meaning of the text. The plain meaning is that you call the son born of the Yavam by the name of the deceased brother. How can the four under Group one use the plain meaning of the text. Onkelyos and Targum Yonasan Ben Uziel were Tanium and predated Rava by 300 plus years. Maybe they simply argue on Rava and say that we do explain is based on the plain meaning and also on the Drashas. Perhaps. Rava is so adamant that we do not follow the plain meaning.

Reb Moshe Solovecichik wants to explain Rava that in Pasak Halacha we do not use the plain meaning, although in most other instances we will Pasken like the plain meaning and like the Drasha’s Chazel. Here we do not. Perhaps because of Rus and Boaz not meaning their kid Machlon. However, this is not proof because perhaps they did not want to use the name Machlon because he was a traitor to the Jewish people. Reb Moshe Soloveichik speculated perhaps there would be a Mitzvah Kiyumos to name the eldest son by the name of the child born to the Yavam and the Yevamah. Like Matza after the first night of Pesach.

Where does the Ramban get his Pshat and say it has a Kabbalistic explanation. Could be that he feels that to say the Pasuk in means that you give the same name to the newborn child cannot be, because we do not see this by Boaz and Rus. The Ramban felt that there has to be a plain meaning to the verse, so he said the plain meaning is the Kabbilistic meaning, which fits in with the words.

This is difficult because even if it does mean you name the child after the name of the deceased brother, thi is only Lechatchilah, B’dieved you can name the child a different name. And perhaps by Boaz and Rus they did not want to use the name Machlon because he betrayed the people of Israel.

Group 1:

Onkelys:

וִיהֵי בוּכְרָא דִּי תְלִיד יְקוּם עַל שְׁמָא דַאֲחוּהִי מֵתָנָא וְלָא יִתִּמְחֵי שְׁמֵיהּ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל:

It shall be that the firstborn, when she is capable of bearing children, shall be established in place of his deceased [father’s] brother, so that his name may not be obliterated from Yisroel. Avrohom Morgenstern in the Artscroll translation in footnote 12 page 268 that Onkelyos is referring to the idea that the first son born to the Yavum and Yevama in a spiritual sense is the son of the dead brother.. Meaning he is the Neshma of the brother.

Avrohom Morgenstern in Artscroll says that Onkleys agrees with the Ramban and Rabbinu Bachya.

Targum Yonasan Ben Uziel

יהֵי בּוּכְרָא דְתוֹלִיד יְקוּם בְּאַחְסַנְתָּא עַל שׁוּם אָחוֹי שְׁכִיבָא וְלָא יִתְמְחֵי שְׁמֵיהּ מִיִּשְרָאֵל

And the first-born whom she beareth shall stand in the inheritance in the name of the deceased brother, that his name may not be blotted out from Israel.

Ibn Ezra:

הבכור אשר תלד. יקרא בשם אחיו:

ולא ימחה שמו. על הנחלה ידבר. וכבר פירשתי אשר תלד בפסוק לעם נכרי:

Rashbam: יקום – הבן על שם [אחיו] – לפי הפשט.

יקום הבן על שם אחיו, he will arise in the name of his brother (deceased). This is the plain meaning.

Group Two:

Ramban:

וטעם והיה הבכור אשר תלד יקום על שם אחיו המת איננו כפשוטו שיקראו הבן הראשון בשם המת ראובן או שמעון כמוהו שהרי בבעז נאמר כן (רות ד י) ולא יכרת שם המת מעם אחיו ומשער מקומו ולא קראו אותו מחלון אבל הכתוב הזה על דרך האמת הבטחה והנה הוא כפשוטו

וסמכו בו רבותינו (ספרי קנו יבמות כד) מדרש שיהא גדול האחים מיבם ושהאילונית אינה מתיבמת וכן אשת הסריס ששמו מחוי וזה כולו אסמכתא כי האילונית ואשת הסריס מגופיה דקרא נפקי:

Rabbeinu Bachya:

והיה הבכור אשר תלד יקום על שם אחיו המת. ע”ד הפשט בכתוב הזה הוא דרך הקבלה, כי

הבכור אשר תלד אשת המת יקום על שם אחיו המת, ואין זה שם ממש שיהיה שמו כשמו, אלא יקום על שם אחיו המת בנפש ידבר הכתוב, זהו שאמר ולא ימחה שמו מישראל, שאם לא יקום ימחה שמו מישראל סבא, וזה מבואר. ומה שפירשו בו רז”ל, והיה הבכור אשר תלד, אמו של מת, הוא יקום בנכסים על שם אחיו המת ויזכר שם המת בנחלתו, אין זה פשוטו של מקרא, אבל הוא מדרש לרז”ל ומשם הוכיחו שמצוה בגדול ליבם, וזהו שהזכיר לשון בכור.

Tur Haruch also learns like the Ramban.

Group 3:

Sforno:

ולא ימחה שמו מישראל. שיהי’ הולד נחשב אצל ה’ יתעלה קיום פריה ורביה למת שהרי נולד ע”י קדושיו של מת ואין היבם צריך לקדשה קדושין אחרים וזה מאס אונן בשנאתו את אחיו ובזאת הי’ עליו קצף:

ולא ימחה שמו מישראל, in that the child born from this union will be considered by G’d as if the deceased had fulfilled the commandment to be fruitful. This is easily understood when we consider that this child is the product of a legal marriage entered into by the deceased husband of his mother. The fact that the deceased’s brother did not have to go through a marriage ceremony with the widow of his brother makes this clear to everyone. This explains why G’d would be angry at the brother who refuses to marry his sister-in-law, as he thereby deprived his deceased brother forever from fulfilling the mitzvah of being fruitful

Group 4:

Rashi:

והיה הבכור. גְּדוֹל הָאַחִים הוּא מְיַבֵּם אוֹתָהּ (ספרי; יבמות כ”ד):

אשר תלד. פְּרָט לְאַיְלוֹנִית שֶׁאֵינָהּ יוֹלֶדֶת:

יקום על שם אחיו. זֶה שֶׁיִּבֵּם אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ יִטֹּל נַחֲלַת הַמֵּת בְּנִכְסֵי אָבִיו:

ולא ימחה שמו. פְּרָט לְאֵשֶׁת סָרִיס שֶׁשְּׁמוֹ מָחוּי (יבמות כ”ד):

Gemara Yevamos 24A:

מַתְנִי׳ מִצְוָה בַּגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֵּם, וְאִם קָדַם הַקָּטָן — זָכָה. גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְהָיָה הַבְּכוֹר״ — מִיכָּן שֶׁמִּצְוָה בַּגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֵּם. ״אֲשֶׁר תֵּלֵד״ — פְּרָט לְאַיְלוֹנִית, שֶׁאֵין יוֹלֶדֶת. ״יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָחִיו״ — לְנַחֲלָה. אַתָּה אוֹמֵר לְנַחֲלָה, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לְשֵׁם: יוֹסֵף — קוֹרִין אוֹתוֹ יוֹסֵף, יוֹחָנָן — קוֹרִין אוֹתוֹ יוֹחָנָן. נֶאֱמַר כָּאן ״יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָחִיו״, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן: ״עַל שֵׁם אֲחֵיהֶם יִקָּרְאוּ בְּנַחֲלָתָם״, מָה שֵׁם הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן — נַחֲלָה, אַף שֵׁם הָאָמוּר כָּאן — לְנַחֲלָה. ״וְלֹא יִמָּחֶה שְׁמוֹ״ — פְּרָט לְסָרִיס שֶׁשְּׁמוֹ מָחוּי. אָמַר רָבָא: אַף עַל גַּב דִּבְכׇל הַתּוֹרָה כּוּלָּהּ אֵין מִקְרָא יוֹצֵא מִידֵי פְשׁוּטוֹ — הָכָא אֲתַאי גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה אַפֵּיקְתֵּיהּ מִפְּשָׁטֵיהּ לִגְמָרֵי. וְאִי לָאו גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא ״שֵׁם״ — שֵׁם מַמָּשׁ? לְמַאן קָמַזְהַר רַחֲמָנָא? לְיָבָם — ״יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָחִיךָ״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ!

Malbim:

[קנו] והיה הבכור אשר תלד הפסוק הזה אם כמובנו הפשוט שהבן הראשון שתלד היבמה יקרא על שם המת. למשל אם נקרא ראובן יקרא הבן ראובן, אינו מתקבל על הדעת כי ענין היבום נאמר גבי ער בכור יהודה. ושם נאמר שהזרע יהיה לאחיו ולא שיקרא בשמו גם לא הזכיר שם בכור. וכן נזכר בכתובים גבי רות ושם אמר להקים שם המת על נחלתו. ב’ שבכ”מ שנאמר והיה יבא או על הדבר המובטח או על דבר הרגיל, וכאן אולי לא תלד כלל ואם תלד אולי נקבה וגם אולי לא יהיה בכור כי יתכן שכבר ילדה. ואם הדין הוא רק בבכור היה לכתוב אם תלד או אשר תלד בכור יקרא ע”ש אחיו, ג’ שאם מוסב על הבן הנולד היה לומר יקום על שם אחי אביו, ואף שיש ליישב בדוחק כדאיתא בגמ’ דהצווי על הב”ד שיאמרו להיבם שיקרא את הבן בשם אחיו, אבל הוא רחוק שהלא לא נזכר בפסוק זה היבם כלל, ולכל הפחות היה לכתוב ועל שם אחיו המת יקום הבכור אשר תלד שהיה סמוך שם אחיו המת לויבמה, ד’ שאם בבן הנולד מדבר למה הזכיר שני פעמים יקום על שם אחיו ולא ימחה שמו מישראל, ואף שחז”ל דרשו מזה פרט לסריס ששמו מחוי זאת הוא דרש, וגם היה לכתוב אשר לא ימחה שהוא נתינת טעם, ומדאמר ולא ימחה משמע שהוא ענין בפ”ע, ולכן ההכרח לפרש כדברי חז”ל, אף שאמרו בגמ’ שבכ”מ אין מקרא יוצא מידי פשוטו, רק כאן ההלכה עוקר את הפשט אבל לא את הפשט שהוא על דרך ההגיון, וזה, כי ענין הקמת שם מצינו על ב’ אופנים. א’ הקמת שם בנחלה, שהנחלה תקרא על שמו כמ”ש על שם אחיהם יקראו בנחלתם, ב’ הקמת שם ע”י הבנים שהבנים נקראו על שמו. כדמצינו בבנות צלפחד שאמרו למה יגרע שם אבינו מתוך משפחתו שאין פי’ על הנחלה שלא יקרא על שם אביהם דא”כ היה כתוב למה יגרע שם אבינו מנחלתו, אלא הפי’ הוא כך, למה נגרע אנחנו אשר אנו שם אבינו בשביל שאנו זרעו, מתוך משפחתו תנה לנו אחוזה בתוך אחי אבינו, ואחרי שמצינו ב’ עניני הקמת שם. וזכר ב’ פעמים בפסוק א’ יורה על שניהם, בזרעו כמו גבי יהודה, ובנחלה כמו גבי רות, והמייבם הוא הקם על שם המת בנחלתו ולא הבן אשר יולד, כמו שנאמר שם ביום קנותך השדה גם אשת המת קנית וכדפי’ רש”י מפני שאשת המת נכנסת ויוצאת בנחלת המת ותזכר הנחלה ע”ש המת, ועתה נבא לבאר את הכתובים, כי מליצת הכתוב כך היא, אחרי שאמר הכתוב מצות היבום ובאר לנו התועלת שיוצא מזה, ואמר כי ע”י היבם שהוא בענין הזה כבכור שיורש את נחלתו, וע”י היבמה שראויה להוליד בנים מהיבם יהיו שני הקמות, הקמת שם בנחלה שזה נקרא הקמת שם אחיו כמ”ש על שם אחיהם יקראו בנחלתם, וגם הקמת שם ע”י זרעו שיקרא הקמת שם בישראל. שע”ז אמר קודם להקים שם אחיו בישראל (שהוא ענין רוחני וע’ ברמב”ן ורבינו בחיי) וכה יתפרש הכתוב “והיה הבכור” ר”ל ע”י הבכור שהוא היבם שכנה אותו בכור מפני כמה דינים כדאיתא בגמ’, “אשר תלד” ר”ל וע”י אשר תלד, היא היבמה, וכנה אותה בשם אשר תלד להורות שאם היא אילונית אינה מתיבמת, ועתה מבאר התועלת שיהיה ע”י היבם שקראו הכתוב בכור “יקום על שם אחיו המת” שפי’ הקמת שם בנחלה, והתועלת שיהיה ע”י היבמה “ולא ימחה שמו מישראל” שהוא הקמת שם בזרע כנ”ל:

How do the English translations translate Verse 6:

Artscroll:

“It shall be that the firstborn son whom she will bear shall stand in the name of his dead [father’s] brother, and his name shall not be blotted out from Israel.”

Rabbi Charles Kahane:

“The first son that she bears will perpetuate the deceased brother’s name and estate, so that his name will not be extinct from Israel.”

(רש”י, א”ע.)

Rabbi Kahane explains it as the first son that she bears. After I saw this I believe Artscroll meant the same thing, although confusingly. Rabbi Kahane stated that Rashi is one of his sources. This is not Rashi at all.

Silverstein

And it shall be, the first-born [i.e., the eldest of the brothers] (in an instance) where she can bear [(a woman who cannot bear is excluded from yibum)], he shall be invested in the name of his dead brother [with the latter’s inheritance in his father’s property], and his name shall not be wiped out of Israel. [(This excludes from yibum the wife of a saris (one who is impotent), whose name is already “wiped out.”)

Second Analysis – not sure if this has any value. I wrote this up initially before I spoke to Reb Moshe Solovecihik on August 29, 2023:

This is a very difficult Passuk to translate. The Gemora offers two interpretations, one literal and one using a Gezra Shava. The Gemora in Yevamos 24A clearly explains this verse that the words ״וְהָיָה “הַבְּכוֹר means the oldest brother has the priority to perform Yibum and the one who performs Yibam gets the deceased bother’s land. The son born of the union between the Yavam and Yevama has no status at all. It is the Yevam who gets the inheritance.

The literal Pshet according to the Gemora is that the first born (oldest son) is called by the dead brother’s name. What about inheritance? It does not say. It may be that all of the brothers get the inheritance or since the name of the first born is the same as the deceased brother, the kid gets the inheritance.

Rava said that we do not use the plain meaning because we have a Gerrah Shava. Why can’t we use both the plain meaning and the Gezerah Shave meanings? I do not know why.

Using this as a backdrop, Rashi is going like the Gemara. The Ibn Ezra and the Rashbam interprets the Pasuk like the plain meaning, which was rejected by Rava. The Ibn Ezra adds that when it says the first born son will be called by the deceased brother’s name, this first born son also gets the inheritance.

It seems that Onkelys and Targum Yonasan ben Uziel translate ״וְהָיָה הַבְּכוֹר״ as the son, however, at least Targum Yonasan ben Uziel translates שֵׁ֥ם אָחִ֖יו as inheritance.

The Ramban offers an interpretation not like the Gemora. The שֵׁ֥ם אָחִ֖יו is referring to the eternal soul, the the soul of the dead brother enters the child.

Rashi chooses not to translate the Pasuk in its simple plain meaning. Rabbi Shraga Silerstein and the Gutnick Lubavitch translate like Rashi.

Verse 7:

וְאִם־לֹ֤א יַחְפֹּץ֙ הָאִ֔ישׁ לָקַ֖חַת אֶת־יְבִמְתּ֑וֹ וְעָלְתָה֩ יְבִמְתּ֨וֹ הַשַּׁ֜עְרָה אֶל־הַזְּקֵנִ֗ים וְאָֽמְרָה֙ מֵאֵ֨ן יְבָמִ֜י לְהָקִ֨ים לְאָחִ֥יו שֵׁם֙ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א אָבָ֖ה יַבְּמִֽי׃

Artscroll:

But if the man will not wish to marry his sister-in-law, then his sister-in-law shall ascend to the gate, to the elders, and she shall say, ”My brother-in-law refuses to establish a name for this brother in Israel, he did not consent to perform levirate marriage with me”

Rabbi Charles Kahane:

But if the man does not want to marry his brother’s widow, his sister-in-law will go up to the judges who sit at the gate and say: “My husband’s brother refused to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he will not take his place by marrying me.”

(רש”י, רמב”ן.)

Silverstein:

And if the man does not desire to take his yevamah, then his yevamah shall go up to the gate [of beth-din] to the elders, and she shall say: My yavam does not desire to invest for his brother a name in Israel; he does not desire to have me in yibum.

Verse 8:

וְקָֽרְאוּ־ל֥וֹ זִקְנֵי־עִיר֖וֹ וְדִבְּר֣וּ אֵלָ֑יו וְעָמַ֣ד וְאָמַ֔ר לֹ֥א חָפַ֖צְתִּי לְקַחְתָּֽהּ׃

Artscroll:

Then the elders of the city shall summon him and speak to him and he shall stand and say, “I do not wish to marry her.”

Rabbi Charles Kahane:

The judges of the city will summon him, and counsel him in the right course he should follow. But if he takes a stand and says: “I do not want to marry her,”

(רש”י, ספורנו.)

Silverstein:

Then the elders of his city shall call to him and they shall speak to him; and he shall stand up and say [in the holy tongue]: I did not desire to take her.

Verse 9:

וְנִגְּשָׁ֨ה יְבִמְתּ֣וֹ אֵלָיו֮ לְעֵינֵ֣י הַזְּקֵנִים֒ וְחָלְצָ֤ה נַעֲלוֹ֙ מֵעַ֣ל רַגְל֔וֹ וְיָרְקָ֖ה בְּפָנָ֑יו וְעָֽנְתָה֙ וְאָ֣מְרָ֔ה כָּ֚כָה יֵעָשֶׂ֣ה לָאִ֔ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־יִבְנֶ֖ה אֶת־בֵּ֥ית אָחִֽיו׃

Artscroll:

Then his sister-in-law shall approach him before the eyes of the elders; she shall remove his shoe from his foot and spit before hom; she shall speak up and say, “So is done to the man who will not build up the house of his brother.”

(רש”י, יונתן.)

Rabbi Charles Kahane:

his brother’s wife will approach him in the presence of the elders, pull his shoe from off his foot, as a sign of acquiring the deceased estate from him, spit on the ground in front of his face, and call out and say: “So must it be done to a man worthy of contempt, for refusing to build up a family which his brother began to form.”

(רש”י, יונתן.)

Silverstein:

Then his yevamah shall draw near to him before the eyes of the elders, and she shall remove his shoe from his foot, and she shall spit before his face [on the ground], and she shall answer and say [in the holy tongue]: Thus shall it be done with the man who will not build [(he may not perform yibum at a later date)] the house of his brother.

Verse 10:

וְנִקְרָ֥א שְׁמ֖וֹ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל בֵּ֖ית חֲל֥וּץ הַנָּֽעַל׃ {ס}

Artscroll:

Then his name shall be proclaimed in Israel,: “The house of the one whose shoe was removed.”

Rabbi Charles Kahane:

And his name will be known in Israel as: “The house of the stripped shoe.”

(רש”י.)

Silverstein:

And his name shall be called in Israel: “the house (of him) chalutz hana’al” (“whose shoe was removed”). [It is a mitzvah for all who are standing there to say: “chalutz hana’al.”]

׃ {ס}

July 22, 2023 – Shabbos Parshas Devarim

On August 1, 2023 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn Divrei Torah, Parsha, Synogagues I Attended1 Comment

Rabbi Aaron Finkelstein – https://www.asbi.org/leadership.html

Devorim 1:9:

וָאֹמַ֣ר אֲלֵכֶ֔ם בָּעֵ֥ת הַהִ֖וא לֵאמֹ֑ר לֹא־אוּכַ֥ל לְבַדִּ֖י שְׂאֵ֥ת אֶתְכֶֽם׃

Thereupon I said to you, “I cannot bear the burden of you by myself.”

Devorim 1:12

אֵיכָ֥ה אֶשָּׂ֖א לְבַדִּ֑י טׇרְחֲכֶ֥ם וּמַֽשַּׂאֲכֶ֖ם וְרִֽיבְכֶֽם׃

How can I carry alone your troublesomeness, your burdensomeness, and your contentiousness?

Got a late start walking to Anshe Sholom and Chabad. I left my house at 8:45 AM. Serka walked me for two miles. Got to Anshe Sholom at 10:45 AM. Listened to the new Rabbi’s Shabobs Drasha. He is Rabbi Aaron Finkelstein. Speech was good, although it is two days later as I am writing this and I do not recall the content of his speech. I just looked at the sermon to remember it. Devarim-TheBreakdownandRebuildingofCommunity5783-GoogleDocs.pdf (shulcloud.com)

Walked over to Chabad and got there as they were finishing leining. Kiddush was good. Eli came for the Kiddush. The Shiur started at 1:15 PM. There was a big crowd. Paul, Batya, Herb, Ray, Marcel, Tamar, Avigail, Henry, Aaron, Jeff, Mial, and others. Shiur was over at 3:45 PM. I walked past Wrigley Field and the Cubs were playing the St. Louis Cardinals. I did watch a half an inning on their big screen. During the walk home it rained and I had to stop under a canopy for 30 minutes.

I really did not have a good Torah thought, but I asked questions. On Tuesday, July 24, 2023 I worked on the Torah and think I have the answer.

I would like to divide the first 21 verses into three separate groupings:

Grouping 1 – The introduction to Devorim

Verses 1 and 2 Gives Moshe’s first purpose in speaking and that is to rebuke children of Israel

Verse 3 When? On the 1st day of Teves, 36 days before Moshe’s death

Verse 4 Happened after war with Sichon and Og

Verse 5 Second purpose of speaking at this time, which was to explain the Torah,

especially the laws that will be important entering the land of Israel.

Grouping 2 – Verses 6 -11 and Verses 19 – 21

Moshe picks up the story from Behaaloscha in Bamidbar when God told the Jews that we are going to Israel. This happened 38 years earlier. Moshe is rebuking the Jewish people.

Grouping 3 – Verses 12 – 18

Moshe rebukes them for events one year earlier when Yisro came to Moshe.

Verse 19 -21 – Returns to Grouping 2

Verse 22 continues the storyline and is about the spies.

Explanation:

Grouping 2

Verses 6 – 8 sets up the time period and it corresponds to Bamidbar Verse 10:11.After being at Har Sinai, Hashem tells the people that it is time to go into Israel.

Verse 6 יְהֹוָ֧ה אֱלֹהֵ֛ינוּ דִּבֶּ֥ר אֵלֵ֖ינוּ בְּחֹרֵ֣ב לֵאמֹ֑ר רַב־לָכֶ֥ם שֶׁ֖בֶת בָּהָ֥ר הַזֶּֽה

Verse 7 פְּנ֣וּ ׀ וּסְע֣וּ לָכֶ֗ם וּבֹ֨אוּ הַ֥ר הָֽאֱמֹרִי֮ וְאֶל־כׇּל־שְׁכֵנָיו֒ בָּעֲרָבָ֥ה בָהָ֛ר וּבַשְּׁפֵלָ֥ה וּבַנֶּ֖גֶב וּבְח֣וֹף הַיָּ֑ם אֶ֤רֶץ הַֽכְּנַעֲנִי֙ וְהַלְּבָנ֔וֹן עַד־הַנָּהָ֥ר הַגָּדֹ֖ל נְהַר־פְּרָֽת׃

Verse 8 רְאֵ֛ה נָתַ֥תִּי לִפְנֵיכֶ֖ם אֶת־הָאָ֑רֶץ בֹּ֚אוּ וּרְשׁ֣וּ אֶת־הָאָ֔רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֣ר נִשְׁבַּ֣ע יְ֠הֹוָ֠ה לַאֲבֹ֨תֵיכֶ֜ם לְאַבְרָהָ֨ם לְיִצְחָ֤ק וּֽלְיַעֲקֹב֙ לָתֵ֣ת לָהֶ֔ם וּלְזַרְעָ֖ם אַחֲרֵיהֶֽם׃

Verse Nine starts the rebuke.

וָאֹמַ֣ר אֲלֵכֶ֔ם בָּעֵ֥ת הַהִ֖וא לֵאמֹ֑ר לֹא־אוּכַ֥ל לְבַדִּ֖י שְׂאֵ֥ת אֶתְכֶֽם׃

Thereupon I said to you, “I cannot bear the burden of you by myself.”

When did Moshe say this? In Bamidbar 11:14 by the incident to the מִתְאֹ֣נְנִ֔ים – complaining that we have no meat. Moshe said – לֹֽא־אוּכַ֤ל אָנֹכִי֙ לְבַדִּ֔י לָשֵׂ֖את אֶת־כׇּל־הָעָ֣ם הַזֶּ֑ה כִּ֥י כָבֵ֖ד מִמֶּֽנִּי׃. This Pasuk took place in the second year after leaving Egypt, right as they were leaving Har Sinai. Here Moshe was very upset when he said this Pasuk.

Devorim continues and Moshe says in verses 10 and 11 despite your inappropriate complaints we still have a future, we will go to Israel and we will become a great nation.

יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶ֖ם הִרְבָּ֣ה אֶתְכֶ֑ם וְהִנְּכֶ֣ם הַיּ֔וֹם כְּכוֹכְבֵ֥י הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם לָרֹֽב׃

Your God יהוה has multiplied you until you are today as numerous as the stars in the sky.—

יְהֹוָ֞ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י אֲבֽוֹתֵכֶ֗ם יֹסֵ֧ף עֲלֵיכֶ֛ם כָּכֶ֖ם אֶ֣לֶף פְּעָמִ֑ים וִיבָרֵ֣ךְ אֶתְכֶ֔ם כַּאֲשֶׁ֖ר דִּבֶּ֥ר לָכֶֽם׃

At this point in Moshe’ narration, it is still before the sending of the spies which changed everything.

Dvorim Verses 12-13-14 diverge and bring an earlier similar response of Moshe to the Jewish people. Moshe references a year earlier when Yisro came and Moshe was judging the people morning to night. Yisro said you must have a court system. Two important questions. A) Here Moshe does not say that all this was Yisro’s advice. B) Moshe introduces this time period in Verse 12 – אֵיכָ֥ה אֶשָּׂ֖א לְבַדִּ֑י טׇרְחֲכֶ֥ם וּמַֽשַּׂאֲכֶ֖ם וְרִֽיבְכֶֽם׃ . Moshe did not say the Jews were the problem back in parshas Yisro?

Rashi explains this Pasuk differently than what we would think and we do not see this dialogue happening. Therefore you must say that this dialogue did take place at that time, a year earlier. Yisro said you need a court system. Moshe goes to Hashem and says I am okay with no court system to which God replied, Yisro is correct, appoint judges and develop a judicial system.

What about the Pasuk where he calls them troublesome people. Perhaps looking back, Moshe now realizes that the people caused the need for an expanded court system because they were troublesome, Apikorsim – undermined me, and were quarrelsome. Additionally, Moshe is rebuking them that they had ulterior motives in agreeing to the court system and nothing to do with proper justice.. .

Rashi famously says that they were troublesome and would never admit defeat in a court case even if they were wrong, they were Apokosim – they talked evil against Moshe and tried to undermine him.

In Verses 13 through 18 Moshe recaps the setting up of a judicial system. Rabbi Aaron Hoch added that perhaps this is one of the necessary items for the Jews being in Israel, a functioning and impeccable court system, so this is why these Pesukim are received here.

Verse 13 propses a solution, הָב֣וּ לָ֠כֶ֠ם אֲנָשִׁ֨ים חֲכָמִ֧ים וּנְבֹנִ֛ים וִידֻעִ֖ים לְשִׁבְטֵיכֶ֑ם וַאֲשִׂימֵ֖ם בְּרָאשֵׁיכֶֽם׃

Verse 14 says that the people were happy with with Moshe’s solution וַֽתַּעֲנ֖וּ אֹתִ֑י וַתֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ טֽוֹב־הַדָּבָ֥ר אֲשֶׁר־דִּבַּ֖רְתָּ לַעֲשֽׂוֹת׃

Verse 15 says that Moshe executed the plan – וָאֶקַּ֞ח אֶת־רָאשֵׁ֣י שִׁבְטֵיכֶ֗ם אֲנָשִׁ֤ים חֲכָמִים֙ וִֽידֻעִ֔ים וָאֶתֵּ֥ן אוֹתָ֛ם רָאשִׁ֖ים עֲלֵיכֶ֑ם שָׂרֵ֨י אֲלָפִ֜ים וְשָׂרֵ֣י מֵא֗וֹת וְשָׂרֵ֤י חֲמִשִּׁים֙ וְשָׂרֵ֣י עֲשָׂרֹ֔ת וְשֹׁטְרִ֖ים לְשִׁבְטֵיכֶֽם׃

Rashi on verse 15 says that Moshe used persuasion to have them accept leadership positions.

אקח את ראשי שבטיכם. מְשַׁכְתִּים – אַשְׁרֵיכֶם, עַל מִי בָּאתֶם לְהִתְמַנּוֹת? עַל בְּנֵי אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב, עַל בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁנִּקְרְאוּ אַחִים וְרֵעִים, חֵלֶק וְנַחֲלָה, וְכָל לְשׁוֹן חִבָּה (שם):

Fascinating that in Verse 12 Moshe severely criticized them, calling them troublesome, burdensome and quarrelsome. Rashi says that this means they were litigious, Apikorsim, and quarrelsome. Yet in Verse 15 Rashi says you are fortunate. Huh! You can answer that yes there are problems with them but they are the sons of great people who were called brothers and friends “to God:” a portion and an inheritance of God. I think that you have to add in Rashi either A) therefore it is worthwhile just to please the Avos or 2) that the Jewish people because of the Avos have great potential. With proper leadership, things can change.

Verses 19 – 21 picks up the original narrative timeline of Moshe and in Verse 22 Moshe brings up the sin of the spies.

Questions:

Why does Moshe in the middle of his timeline from the second year from Bamidbar interrupt with an incident a year earlier and at that time there is no criticism of the Jeiwsh people? Additionally, why doesn’t he give credit to Yisro.

Answer:

I believe that Moshe is saying to the people, don’t think that only recently you were difficult, it goes back to when you had just left Egypt and we were on a high, even at that time you were difficult. Because you were litigious, I had to set up an extensive court system. You also worked to undermine my authority by being Apikorsim. I should not have had to do this. I assume that Moshe did not criticize them because they were on a high and through the giving of the 10 commandments and going into Israel they would change. Once the people proved to constantly complain, he saw that this is a problem and a major one.

As to why Yisro is not mentioned, the Ramban deals with this question.

Now Moses did not mention Jethro’s advice here, nor did he attribute to him anything that Jethro proposed. It appears to me that Moses did not want to mention it [the fact that he was following his father-in-law’s advice] in the presence of all Israel because of his humility, *For people would think that, were it not for Jethro’s counsel, Moses would not have needed any assistance from the other judges. But would he have brought in Jethro’s name into this affair it might have appeared that Moses himself never thought that he would need assistance of other people. Moses humility is thus made apparent when he states his own inability to cope with all the problems of the people (Keseph Mezukak). See further in my Hebrew commentary p. 349. or it may be that it would not be to his honor to mention to that generation that he had married a Cushite woman. *Numbers 12:1. — Since in the case of Zimri the son of Salu they chided Moses about the Cushite woman [that he had married before the Torah was given — see Rashi, Numbers 25:6], he therefore avoided referring to it in order to prevent them from stumbling into evil speech (see my Hebrew commentary, p. 533). It is also possible that the reason [for not mentioning Jethro’s name] was because he had consulted the Divine Glory and this matter was done at the command of the Almighty. *Mechilta, Yithro 2: “And Moses hearkened to the voice of his father-in-law and did all that ‘amar’ (he, [i.e. G-d] had said” Exodus 18:24). The Mechilta thus explains the word amar as referring to G-d, and not to Jethro.

Maskil L’Dovid

The Maskil L’Doivd may disagree with my whole explanation.

איכה אשא וכו׳. ק״ל דהא כבר כתיב לעיל לא אוכל לבדי וכו׳ ומה בא כאן להוסיף. ומשני דכאן בא לפרש לאמר שאמר לעיל

Parshas Terumah – February 25, 2023

On March 1, 2023February 25, 2024 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn Divrei Torah, My Life, Synogagues I AttendedLeave a comment

February 25, 2023

ParshasTerumah

Shiva Call to Rabbi and Rebbitzen Moscowitz

Amy Tarlow – Cousin

Rabbi Yitzchok Knoffler – Santiago, Chile

Aperion – אפּריון

Rabbi Shomo Ganzfried – 1800s

Tanna Dvie Eliyahu – Second Century – Rabbi Levi Cooper’s Article

Alshich Hakadosh- 1500s

Sunday, February 19, 2023

We started out the week in Boynton Beach.

Went for Daf Yomi in Boca, however, Rabbi Sugerman’s Rosh Yeshiva passed away and he went into New York for the funeral. I went to pay a Shiva call to Rabbi and Rebbetzin Philip Mocowitz who lost their 9 year old daughter. Afterwards I met Amy Gross-Tarlow at the BRS field. Amy is Zlat and David Gross’s daughter from Teaneck, NJ. The Shul has a soccer league for kids and her son Henry is in the league. Amy moved to Boca two years ago when her company relocated to Fort Lauderdale during the pandemic. She loves living in Florida and loves the Shul. She said that the center of her life is the Shul. Later in the afternoon we went with the entire family to Orchid Gardens for the Shloshim of my mother in law, Blanche Janowski.

Amy Gross-Tarlow and myself.

Monday – February 20, 2023

Drove to Miami Beach, FL and settled into Tower 41.

Tuesday – February 21, 2023

At Shacharis, I found the Sefer אפּריון in the bookshelf of the Shul in Tower 41. My Zedi, Rabbi Sholom Sklar, had an earlier edition of the Sefer in his house. I am going back to the 1960s. I remember opening the Sefer as a bochur and could not figure out his Torah. It simply made no sense to me. I could not let this opportunity pass; and during davening I studied his first piece of Torah on Sefer Terumah. Boruch Hashem, I succeeded in understanding his words. I turned to the person sitting at the same table with me and showed him the Sefer. We worked on it together. It came out that this person is Moshe Hirth who is an uncle (father’s brother) to my nephew and niece in Lakewood, Heshie and Chavie Hirth.

Moshe Hirth and myself.

In the afternoon we went to lunch with Michelle and Avi Beer’s kids. Nina and Sam Beer and their beautiful baby Charlotte. We went to 41 Pizza and Bakery. Food was great.

Shabbos Parshas Terumah – February 24 and 25, 2023

Friday night Naftali ate over and it was a treat.

Serka and I sponsored the Kiddush at Chabad of East Lakeview.

Face Page of the Sefer:

I was excited to discover that the person who reprinted the Sefer is Yitzchok Knofler who lived in Santiago Chile. There was a sizable Sephardi community in Chile after WWII with a number of Sefardi Chacomin.

This is the Torah we worked on and I spoke over at the Shiur in Chabad.

I gave the class at the Dr. Leonard Kranzler memorial Shiur at Chabad and read through and explained this אפּריון and discussed who author was. In the piece of Torah we met Reb Shlomo Ganzfried, the Tanna Dvei Eliyahu and the Alshich. The author of the Aperion, Reb Shlomo Ganzfried lived in the 1800’s, the Tanna Devei Eliyahu goes back to the third century and was first printed in the 10th century, while the Alshich lived in Sefes in the 1500s. Torah spans generations and that is what we have here.

Herb, Peggy, Marcel, Ray, Jeff Flicker, and a young Jeff Camras who had quite the beard going. along with Aaron Lustiger. I told them that we are the only people in the world learning the Torah of Reb Shlomo Ganzfried.

אפּריון – Canopy, sedan-chair

Synopsis of the Torah of the Aperion:

Verse 25:2 – First Verse in the Parsha

דַּבֵּר֙ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְיִקְחוּ־לִ֖י תְּרוּמָ֑ה מֵאֵ֤ת כׇּל־אִישׁ֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִדְּבֶ֣נּוּ לִבּ֔וֹ תִּקְח֖וּ אֶת־תְּרוּמָתִֽי׃

Tell the Israelite people to bring Me gifts; you shall accept gifts for Me from every person whose heart is so moved.

The plain meaning is that the Jews in the desert were to give donations to build the Mishkan.

The Aperion starts by quoting a Tanna Dvei Eliyahu that says that when the Jewish people said we will do and we will listen, immediately Hashem said וְיִקְחוּ־לִ֖י תְּרוּמָ֑ה. What is the connection?

By explaining the connection in the Tanna Dvei Eliyahu we can answer the Alshich’s question of why didn’t the Torah say, give me a gift.

Answer:

Step 1:

Chana and Eli, the High Priest. Eli misunderstood Chana.

The following verses in Shmuel 1:13-15 are explained.

וְחַנָּ֗ה הִ֚יא מְדַבֶּ֣רֶת עַל־לִבָּ֔הּ רַ֚ק שְׂפָתֶ֣יהָ נָּע֔וֹת וְקוֹלָ֖הּ לֹ֣א יִשָּׁמֵ֑עַ וַיַּחְשְׁבֶ֥הָ עֵלִ֖י לְשִׁכֹּרָֽה׃

Now Hannah was praying in her heart; only her lips moved, but her voice could not be heard. So Eli thought she was drunk.

וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֵלֶ֙יהָ֙ עֵלִ֔י עַד־מָתַ֖י תִּשְׁתַּכָּרִ֑ין הָסִ֥ירִי אֶת־יֵינֵ֖ךְ מֵֽעָלָֽיִךְ׃

Eli said to her, “How long will you make a drunken spectacle of yourself? Sober up!”^-e

וַתַּ֨עַן חַנָּ֤ה וַתֹּ֙אמֶר֙ לֹ֣א אֲדֹנִ֔י אִשָּׁ֤ה קְשַׁת־ר֙וּחַ֙ אָנֹ֔כִי וְיַ֥יִן וְשֵׁכָ֖ר לֹ֣א שָׁתִ֑יתִי וָאֶשְׁפֹּ֥ךְ אֶת־נַפְשִׁ֖י לִפְנֵ֥י יְהֹוָֽה׃

And Hannah replied, “Oh no, my lord! I am a very unhappy woman. I have drunk no wine or other strong drink, but I have been pouring out my heart to the LORD.

Step 2:

Describing people through their actions and why the purpose and result of their actions is the true definition of that person, not the action itself in a vacuum.

Step 3 – Just like Chazal says that if the Omer is brought on the second day of Pesach Hashem will bless the crops, so too the Mishkan and its vessels bring down “Shefah” – goodness

Step 4: The Gemara in Shabbos:

The Gemara relates that a heretic saw that Rava was immersed in studying halakha, and his fingers were beneath his leg and he was squeezing them, and his fingers were spurting blood. Rava did not notice that he was bleeding because he was engrossed in study. The heretic said to Rava: You impulsive nation, who accorded precedence to your mouths over your ears. You still bear your impulsiveness, as you act without thinking. You should listen first. Then, if you are capable of fulfilling the commands, accept them. And if not, do not accept them. He said to him: About us,

88b

who proceed wholeheartedly and with integrity, it is written: “The integrity of the upright will guide them” (Proverbs 11:3), whereas about those people who walk in deceit, it is written at the end of the same verse: “And the perverseness of the faithless will destroy them.”

Step 5 – As it says in the Gemara in Shabbos, when the Jews said “we will do and we will listen”, we understood that everything God does for us is good and we do not hesitate to say, we will do before we will listen.

Step 6 – so too the idea of giving the donations to the Miskan was to receive blessings. It was appropriate for the Torah to use the language of taking. Had the Jews not said “we will do and we will listen” then the appropriate language would have been “ויתנו”. Meaning they understood the reference of taking.

The language of the Aperion:

Although the Jews were giving money for the Mishkan the ultimate goal was to take blessings from God.

The Aperion based on the Tanna Dvei Eliyahu is translating the Pasuk, וְיִקְחוּ־לִ֖י תְּרוּמָ֑ה, that the Jewish people are to take gifts from God. They do this by giving donations for the construction of the Mishkan. You could say the you read וְיִקְחוּ־לִ֖י תְּרוּמָ֑ה as the Jews should take form their possessions a donatin for me, so that I will give them gifts.

The Pasuk is thus translated:

Speak to the children of Israel. And they will take my gifts; (this is done) by Moshe taking donations from all people whose hearts will motivate them.

The question on the Aperion is that even if the Jews did not say “we will do and we will listen”, it does not change the purpose of the giving, which was to take. There had to be a Mishkan which would be the source of blessing to Klal Yisroel and this would have been the lesson for Hashem to the Jewish people that when you give to me, you get back more than you gave.

On Shabbos February 18, 2024 I was reading an autobiography of Paul Newman and saw this vignette which tangentially expresses the above.

Introducing the Players:

Shlomo Ganzfried (or Salomon ben Joseph Ganzfried; 1804 in Ungvár – 30 July 1886 in Ungvár) was an Orthodox rabbi and posek best known as the author of the work of Halakha (Jewish law), the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (Hebrew: קיצור שולחן ערוך, “The Abbreviated Shulchan Aruch“), by which title he is also known.^[1]

Biography[edit]

Ganzfried was born in 1804 in Ungvár, in the Ung County of the Kingdom of Hungary (present-day Ukraine). His father Joseph died when he was eight. Ganzfried was considered to be a child prodigy and Ungvár’s chief rabbi and Rosh yeshiva, Rabbi Zvi Hirsh Heller assumed legal guardianship; Heller was known as “Hershele the Sharp-witted” for his piercing insights into the Talmud. Heller later moved to the city of Bonyhád, and Ganzfried, then fifteen, followed him. He remained in Heller’s yeshiva for almost a decade until his ordination and marriage. After his marriage he worked briefly as a wine merchant.

In 1830, he abandoned commerce and accepted the position of Rabbi of Brezovica (Brezevitz). In 1849, he returned to Ungvár as a dayan, a judge in the religious court. At that time Ungvár’s spiritual head, Rabbi Meir Ash, was active in the Orthodox camp, in opposition to the Neologs. Through serving with Ash, Ganzfried realized that in order to remain committed to Orthodoxy, “the average Jew required an underpinning of a knowledge of practical halacha (Jewish law)”. It was to this end that Ganzfried composed the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch. This work became very popular, and was frequently reprinted in Hebrew and in Yiddish. This work often records more stringent positions.

Rabbi Ganzfried remained in the office of Dayan until his death on July 30, 1886.

Works[edit]

Kitzur Shulchan Aruch[edit]

Main article: Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (book)

The Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, first published in 1864, is a summary of the Shulchan Aruch of Joseph Karo with reference to later commentaries. This work was explicitly written as a popular text, in simple Hebrew, and does not have the same level of detail as the Shulchan Aruch itself.

Other works[edit]

Kesset HaSofer (קסת הסופר), a halachic primer for scribes published in 1835. Ganzfried composed this while he was still engaged in business.
Pnei Shlomo (פני שלמה), an elucidation of portions of the Talmud.
Torat Zevach (תורת זבח), a halakhic handbook for practitioners of shechita, ritual slaughter.
Sefer Apiryon (ספר אפריון), a commentary on the Bible. It contains a piece on every weekly Torah portion except for Parshat Massei, which is also the week in which his yahrzeit falls.
Lechem V’simlah (לחם ושמלה) on the laws of Niddah.
Ohalei Sheim (אהלי שם) on the official spellings of Hebrew names, as pertaining to gittin.
Sheim Shlomo (שם שלמה) on various sugyos in Shas.
Sefer Galuy A letter written at the time of the Congress of 1869.

Tanna Dvei Eliyahu

Tanna Devei Eliyahu: The divine, legal determination

What was the initial trigger for an unprecedented hasidic commentary on an aggadic work?

By LEVI COOPER Published: APRIL 22, 2021 02:16

THE PROPHET Elijah, as depicted in this 17th-century icon in the Hermitage’s Winter Palace, St. Petersburg

(photo credit: Wikimedia Commons)

Tanna Devei Eliyahu is unlike other nonlegal rabbinic works: As its name suggests, it is attributed to the biblical prophet Elijah.

The work is an eclectic collection of midrashim that does not follow the order of any particular book in the Bible.

The narrative of the source of this work can be found in the Babylonian Talmud: Elijah would regularly visit Rav Anan and study with him. On one occasion, Elijah objected to a ruling of Rav Anan that led to an inadvertent miscarriage of justice. Elijah, therefore, ceased these mystical rendezvous. Rav Anan fasted and prayed until Elijah returned. Alas, the relationship was not as before: Rav Anan was awestruck and frightened by his study partner. Rav Anan’s solution was to construct a box where he would sit while they studied.

Rav Anan’s notes from these study sessions with Elijah were divided into two sections: teachings inside the box and teachings outside the box. The resulting work was comprised, therefore, of two distinct parts. The Talmud identifies this work as Tanna Devei Eliyahu, made up of the longer Seder Eliyahu Raba and the shorter Seder Eliyahu Zuta (Ketubot 106a).

This foundational narrative linking the work to Rav Anan would suggest that Tanna Devei Eliyahu dates to third-century Babylonia. At the very least, the work predates the redaction of the Babylonian Talmud in the second half of the fifth century. Yet the text before us includes passages that are dated to the 10th century. Thus – like many other works of Aggada that have reached us – Tanna Devei Eliyahu has numerous historical layers.

Tanna Devei Eliyahu was first published in Venice in 1597-1598, yet a further distinct aspect of this work is the manner in which the 1676 Prague edition was produced by Rabbi Shmuel Haida (d. 1685). Since the text was corrupt, Rabbi Shmuel Haida fasted and prayed until Elijah appeared to him in a dream and directed him as to how to produce an accurate Tanna Devei Eliyahu text. Thus the production of the 1676 edition reenacted an aspect of the work’s foundational story.

BESIDES ITS mystical origins and inimitable reproduction, Tanna Devei Eliyahu stands out for a third reason: It is the only work of rabbinic Aggada to be published with a commentary from the hasidic school.

The hasidic commentary does not necessarily set out to explain the passages of Tanna Devei Eliyahu; rather, it associatively offers hassidic teachings and ideas that are linked – often tenuously – to the base text.

Tanna Devei Eliyahu with its hasidic companion was first published in Warsaw in 1881 and titled Ramatayim Tzofim – the biblical hometown of the prophet Samuel (I Samuel 1:1) and an allusion to the name of the author, Rabbi Shmuel of Sieniawa (1785-1873).

After serving in Sieniawa, Rabbi Shmuel continued to serve in the rabbinate in other places in Poland: Włodowa, Brok, Siedlce, Łowicz, and Nasielsk.

In addition to hasidic teachings, Ramatayim Tzofim includes invaluable personal recollections of the author. The work contains many teachings from Rabbi Shmuel’s teacher, Rabbi Simha Bunim of Przysucha (d. 1827), whom he first visited in 1803-1804. Even after Rabbi Shmuel took up rabbinic positions, he continued to visit his master in Przysucha.

What was the initial trigger for an unprecedented hasidic commentary on an aggadic work? For Rabbi Simha Bunim, Tanna Devei Eliyahu was key to the curriculum of study (Ramatayim Tzofim on Eliyahu Raba, ch. 1, sec. 34). When Rabbi Simha Bunim lost his eyesight in his old age, Rabbi Shmuel of Sieniawa would read Tanna Devei Eliyahu before his blind master. These study sessions led to a unique hasidic work fashioned around a work of aggada.

THE WORK includes a fascinating passage that relates to the interface between Jewish law and mysticism (Ramatayim Tzofim on Eliyahu Zuta, ch. 16, sec. 17). Rabbi Shmuel of Sieniawa recounted a halakhic ruling of Rabbi Yaakov Yitzhak Halevi Horowitz (1745-1815) – popularly known as the Seer of Lublin.

A married woman had spent private time together with a man other than her husband, raising suspicion of infidelity. The case came before the Seer of Lublin for a determination as to whether Jewish law permitted the husband and suspect wife to continue living together.

The Seer ruled that the husband and wife need not separate. Despite the wife having been in an inappropriate situation, we do not assume she had been unfaithful; hence, there was no divorce requirement.

This determination followed the ruling of Rabbi Yosef Karo (1488-1575) in his code of Jewish law: Without formal advance notification of suspicion by the husband, spending time alone with another man does not automatically lead us to assume that a married woman had an adulterous affair (Shulhan Aruch, EH 178:6).

The permissive ruling of the Seer was questioned. Rabbeinu Nissim – a 14th-century Spanish authority – had suggested that person who cares about his soul should be extra careful and not rely on such a license. Rather, the soul-sensitive husband should assume the worst-case scenario and separate from his wife (Ran, Nedarim 91b). Raising this medieval source as a challenge to the Seer’s ruling assumed that a person from the hasidic milieu who asked the Seer such a question was the type of person who cares deeply about his spiritual well-being. Alternatively, the Seer’s own spiritual insight should have influenced his ruling. Thus the Seer should have advised the couple to separate.

The Seer stood his ground and reiterated: According to the letter of the law, the husband and wife are allowed to continue living together. Only those who are scrupulous about the well-being of the soul need to separate. In such soul matters, I am allowed to rely on my own ru’ah hakodesh, communication by divine holy spirit, and I see – explained the Seer of Lublin – that the married woman was not adulterous.

The Seer added an important postscript: Had the prohibition been rooted in the letter of the law, employing ru’ah hakodesh when determining the law would not have been permitted.

The writer is on the faculty of Pardes Institute of Jewish Studies and is a rabbi in Tzur Hadassah.

Levi Cooper	Thu, Feb 23, 5:16 AM (7 days ago)		Reply
to me, David

R. Mitchell, shalom

I am honoured that you participated in that zoom class and have followed up with that JPost article.

Alas, I have yet to do further work on TDE and RT. So I don’t really have anything of substance to add at this time.

When I first read “I am a Kotzker” – I thought you meant a Kotzker chossid, but then I noticed your surname and realized that you are probably a Kotzker einikl! You will be happy to learn that in my forthcoming Hasidic Relics – there is some good material about Kotzk traditions of writing and printing. The book will be out later this year; stay tuned …

Best regards to Rabbi Wolkenfeld and the cong.

Kol tuv

Levi

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 5:07 PM Mitchell Morgenstern <mitchellamorgenstern@gmail.com> wrote:

Rabbi Cooper:

I “met” you when you did a Zoom class for Anshei Sholem in Chicago. I just read your article from the Jerusalem Post on the Tanna Devei Eliyahu from April 22, 2021. Thank you so very much. I plan to speak Shabbos and wanted some background of the Tanna Devei Eliyahu. I have the Ramatayim Tzofim and the fact that the Rebbe, Reb Bunim was involved is important to me as I am a Kotzker. I like what you said that the Ramatayim Tzofim is associatively related to the text is important because for me it is important to understand the Pshat and if one goes far afield fine, but we must understand the meaning first.

Do you have lectures on this?

—

Mitchell A. Morgenstern

773-647-8097

Levi Cooper

FACULTY

T: +972 (0)2 673-5210

C: +972 (0)50 690 5490

F: +972 (0)2 673-5160

Moshe Alshich

Moshe Alshich Hebrew: משה אלשיך, also spelled Alshech, (1508–1593), known as the Alshich Hakadosh (the Holy), was a prominent rabbi, preacher, and biblical commentator in the latter part of the sixteenth century.

The Alshich was born in 1508 in the Ottoman Empire, and was the son of Hayyim Alshich. He later moved to Safed (now in Israel) where he became a student of Rabbi Joseph Caro. His students included Rabbi Hayim Vital and Rabbi Yom Tov Tzahalon. He died in Safed in 1593.

Significance[edit]

Only a few rabbis were granted the title “Hakadosh” throughout Jewish history. Alongside the Alshich were the Shelah HaKadosh, the Ari HaKadosh and the Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh, all of them distinctive personalities in their times.^[1] Various reasons have been suggested as to why the Alshich received the “HaKadosh” (“Holy”) title.^[2]

His homiletical commentaries on the Torah and the Prophets enjoy much popularity and are still studied today, largely because of their powerful influence as practical exhortations to virtuous life.

Life[edit]

He was a disciple of R. Joseph Caro, author of the “Shulchan Aruch“; and his own disciples included the Kabbalist R. Hayim Vital. Although the Alshich belonged to the circle of the Kabbalists who lived at Safed, his works rarely betray any traces of the Kabbalah. He is celebrated as a teacher, preacher, and casuist.

Little is known of his life. In his works he avoids mention of himself, telling only of his course of study; thus in the preface to his commentary on the Pentateuch he says:

I never aimed at things too high or beyond me. From my earliest days the study of the Talmud was my chief occupation, and I assiduously attended the yeshivah where I made myself familiar with the discussions of Abaye and Raba. The night I devoted to research and the day to Halakha. In the morning I read the Talmud and in the afternoon the Posekim (Rabbinic legal decisions). Only on Fridays could I find time for the reading of Scripture and Midrash in preparation for my lectures on the Sidra of the week and similar topics, which I delivered every Sabbath before large audiences, eager to listen to my instruction.

Legend has it that his son was taken as a child and became a Moslem, and the Arizal authored a special prayer for the son’s return.

Works[edit]

These lectures were afterward published as “Commentaries” (perushim) on the books of the Holy Scriptures, and Alshich gives a remarkable reason for their publication: “Many of those who had listened to my lectures repeated them partly or wholly in their own names. These offenses will be prevented by the publication of my own work”. These lectures, though somewhat lengthy, were not tedious to his audience. The author repeatedly declares that in their printed form (as “Commentaries”) he greatly curtailed them by omitting everything which was not absolutely necessary, or which he had already mentioned in another place.

Like Abravanel and some other commentators, Alshich headed each section of his comments with a number of questions which he anticipated on the part of the reader; he then proceeded to give a summary of his view, and concluded with answering all the questions seriatim. His Commentaries abound in references to Talmud, Midrash ^[3] and Zohar, but contain scant references to other commentaries, such as the works of Abravanel, Gersonides or Maimonides. His explanations are all of a homiletical character; his sole object being to find in each sentence or in each word of the Scriptures a moral lesson, a support for trust in God, encouragement to patient endurance, and a proof of the vanity of all earthly goods as compared with the everlasting bliss to be acquired in the future life. He frequently and earnestly appeals to his brethren, exhorting them to repent, and to abandon, or at least restrict, the pursuit of all worldly pleasures, and thus accelerate the approach of the Messianic era. Alshich possessed an easy and fluent style; his expositions are mostly of an allegorical character, but very rarely approach mysticism. In his commentary on the Song of Solomon, he calls peshaִt (literal explanation) and sod (mystical interpretation) the two opposite extremes, while he declares his own method of introducing allegorical exposition to be the safe mean between these extremes. Alshich wrote the following commentaries, most of which have appeared in several editions:

“Torat Mosheh” (Commentary on the Pentateuch), first ed. Belvedere near Constantinople, about 1593. Complete, with Indexes, Venice, 1601.
An abstract of this commentary was prepared by Jos. b. Aryeh Loeb, and has appeared in various forms (entitled: “Qitsur Alshich ‘al ha-Torah”), Amsterdam, 1748.
“Marot ha-Tsobeot” (Collected Visions), on the prophets and their prophecies, Venice, 1803–7.
Extracts from this commentary are included in “Minhah Qe’tannah,” a commentary on the earlier prophets; published in the Biblia Rabbinica (Qohelet Mosheh), Amsterdam, 1724.
“Romemot El” (Praises of God), on the book of Psalms, Venice, 1605.
“Rab Peninim” (Multitude of Pearls), on Proverbs, Venice, 1601.
“Helqat Mehoqeq” (The Lawgiver’s Portion), on Job, Venice, 1603.
“Shoshanat ha-‘Amaqim” (Lily of the Valleys), on the Song of Solomon. This commentary was the first to appear in print, and was edited by Alshich himself in 1591. According to this commentary, the Song is an allegory, and represents a dialogue between God and exiled Israel on the latter’s mission.
“‘Ene Mosheh” (Eyes of Moses), on Ruth. Alshich says of the book of Ruth, “Surely from it we might take a lesson how to serve God”; and illustrates this statement throughout his commentary, Venice, 1601.
“Devarim Nihumim” (Comforting Words), on the “Lamentations of Jeremiah“. The title is not merely a euphemism for Lamentations; the author repeatedly attempts to show that there is no cause for despair, God being with Israel, and though the Temple is destroyed the Shekinah has not departed from the Western Wall, Venice, 1601.
“Devarim Tovim” (Good Words), on Ecclesiastes. Alshich calls Ecclesiastes, on account of its deep thoughts, “Waters without end” (oceans). He endeavors in the commentary to illustrate, as the central idea of the book, the dictum, “All is vain, except the fear of the Lord, which is the essential condition of man’s real existence,” Venice, 1601.
“Massat Mosheh” (Moses’ Gift), on the book of Esther, presented by the author to his brethren as a Purim gift, Venice, 1601.
The commentaries of Alshich on these last-named five books (“megillot“, “scrolls”) appeared in an abridged form, edited by Eleazer b. Hananiah Tarnigrad, Amsterdam, 1697.
“Habatselet ha-Sharon” (The Rose of Sharon), on the book of Daniel, Safed, 1563, and Venice, 1592.
A commentary on the “Hafִtarot” called “Liqqute Man” (Gatherings of Manna), was compiled chiefly from “Marot ha-Tsobeot,” by E. M. Markbreit, Amsterdam, 1704.
“Yarim Mosheh” is the title of a commentary on Abot, gathered from the works of Alshich by Joseph B. M. Schlenker, Fürth, 1764.
A commentary of Alshich on the Haggadah appears in the edition of the Haggadah called “Beit Horim” (House of Free Men). The commentary is full of interesting remarks and earnest exhortations (Metz, 1767). Even in the introduction the laws for Passover and the order for the evening are treated allegorically, and made the vehicle for religious meditation. It is, however, not likely that Alshich wrote these notes for the Haggadah. They were probably gathered from his works long after his death, as otherwise the Haggadah would have been published with his commentary much earlier.
“Responsa“; as a casuist he was frequently consulted by other rabbis, and his decisions were collected in a volume of responsa (Venice, 1605; Berlin, 1766). His contemporaries frequently quote his opinions. During his lifetime Azariah dei Rossi produced his “Meor Einayim” (Light for the Eyes), in which the author rejected some beliefs generally received as traditional; Alshich, at the request of his teacher, R. Joseph Caro, wrote a declaration against the “Meor Einayim” as being contrary and dangerous to the Jewish religion (Kerem Chemed, v. 141).
Alshich wrote also a poem, “Dirge on the Exile of Israel,” in a very simple style in ten rhyming verses. It has been introduced into various earlier morning rituals, such as “Ayelet ha-Shachar” (The Morning Dawn). It is also contained in the collection of prayers and hymns called “Sha’are Zion” (The Gates of Zion).

12-22-2022 – Parshas Miketz

On December 30, 2022January 5, 2023 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn Divrei Torah, My Life, Parsha, Synogagues I AttendedLeave a comment

12-22-2022

Parshas Miketz

Shabbos at the BAYT

Anshei Minsk

This week on Wednesday, December 21, 2022 went to Anshei Minsk for their Chanukah party. I parked my car by the Yorkdale Shopping Center and took the train. Anshei Minsk is in the Kensington Market Area, the old Jewish area of Toronto and is considered downtown. There are numerous schools and hospitals nearby. Dundas Street, one block to the South is China town.

David Atlman and myself. He went to the Diaspora Yeshiva and spent two years at Aish in Jerusalem. He heard classes from Rabbi Noah Weinberg. His family Shul was Beth Emet Kol Yehuda, a relatively strong Conservative Shul. He confirmed what I suspected that the Shul in the later half of the 20th century had the highest concentration of Holocaust survivors davening in the Shul

My mother in law is critical but stable. She is just not eating.

Shabbos Chanukah at the BAYT:

What a Shabbos. I got to Shul at 8:15 AM. It was 8 degrees outside. I wore the coat my kids got for me and was warm. The Minyan started at 7:45 AM and I arrived in time for Hallel. I davened Hallel and heard Leining at this Minyan, and went next door to the Turk Bais Medrash for Shacharis. I then grabbed Robert Benmurgy, David Fishman, and Nosson Weissreich and told him my Torah of Verse 41:12 as detailed below, I schmoozed with Nosson Westreich and discovered that his wife is a Siegal from Baltimore and is a third cousin to my cousin in Baltimore,, Elya Caplan. We talked for about 45 minutes, talking about Rabbi Price and many other topics. I then went into the Turk Bais Medrash for Kiddush and told my Torah to a Mr. Romain from South Africa. I then went upstairs to the main Minyan for Musaf. The Rabbi spoke excellently.

Rabbi Korobkin spoke about his recent trip with Shul members to Dubai. His speech is at the end of this Blog Post.

My Torah

I copied all the Verses in Chapter 41 Verse 1 – 57 and my Torah is in blue.

Verse 1 – וַיְהִ֕י מִקֵּ֖ץ שְׁנָתַ֣יִם יָמִ֑ים וּפַרְעֹ֣ה חֹלֵ֔ם וְהִנֵּ֖ה עֹמֵ֥ד עַל־הַיְאֹֽר

Verse 2 – וְהִנֵּ֣ה מִן־הַיְאֹ֗ר עֹלֹת֙ שֶׁ֣בַע פָּר֔וֹת יְפ֥וֹת מַרְאֶ֖ה וּבְרִיאֹ֣ת בָּשָׂ֑ר וַתִּרְעֶ֖ינָה בָּאָֽחוּ׃

Verse 3 – וְהִנֵּ֞ה שֶׁ֧בַע פָּר֣וֹת אֲחֵר֗וֹת עֹל֤וֹת אַחֲרֵיהֶן֙ מִן־הַיְאֹ֔ר רָע֥וֹת מַרְאֶ֖ה וְדַקּ֣וֹת בָּשָׂ֑ר וַֽתַּעֲמֹ֛דְנָה אֵ֥צֶל הַפָּר֖וֹת עַל־שְׂפַ֥ת הַיְאֹֽר׃

Verse 4 – וַתֹּאכַ֣לְנָה הַפָּר֗וֹת רָע֤וֹת הַמַּרְאֶה֙ וְדַקֹּ֣ת הַבָּשָׂ֔ר אֵ֚ת שֶׁ֣בַע הַפָּר֔וֹת יְפֹ֥ת הַמַּרְאֶ֖ה וְהַבְּרִיאֹ֑ת וַיִּיקַ֖ץ פַּרְעֹֽה׃

Verse 5 – וַיִּישָׁ֕ן וַֽיַּחֲלֹ֖ם שֵׁנִ֑ית וְהִנֵּ֣ה ׀ שֶׁ֣בַע שִׁבֳּלִ֗ים עֹל֛וֹת בְּקָנֶ֥ה אֶחָ֖ד בְּרִיא֥וֹת וְטֹבֽוֹת׃

Verse 6 – וְהִנֵּה֙ שֶׁ֣בַע שִׁבֳּלִ֔ים דַּקּ֖וֹת וּשְׁדוּפֹ֣ת קָדִ֑ים צֹמְח֖וֹת אַחֲרֵיהֶֽן׃

Verse 7 – וַתִּבְלַ֙עְנָה֙ הַשִּׁבֳּלִ֣ים הַדַּקּ֔וֹת אֵ֚ת שֶׁ֣בַע הַֽשִּׁבֳּלִ֔ים הַבְּרִיא֖וֹת וְהַמְּלֵא֑וֹת וַיִּיקַ֥ץ פַּרְעֹ֖ה וְהִנֵּ֥ה חֲלֽוֹם׃

Verse 8 – וַיְהִ֤י בַבֹּ֙קֶר֙ וַתִּפָּ֣עֶם רוּח֔וֹ וַיִּשְׁלַ֗ח וַיִּקְרָ֛א אֶת־כׇּל־חַרְטֻמֵּ֥י מִצְרַ֖יִם וְאֶת־כׇּל־חֲכָמֶ֑יהָ וַיְסַפֵּ֨ר פַּרְעֹ֤ה לָהֶם֙ אֶת־חֲלֹמ֔וֹ וְאֵין־פּוֹתֵ֥ר אוֹתָ֖ם לְפַרְעֹֽה׃

Verse 9 – וַיְדַבֵּר֙ שַׂ֣ר הַמַּשְׁקִ֔ים אֶת־פַּרְעֹ֖ה לֵאמֹ֑ר אֶת־חֲטָאַ֕י אֲנִ֖י מַזְכִּ֥יר הַיּֽוֹם

Verse 10 – פַּרְעֹ֖ה קָצַ֣ף עַל־עֲבָדָ֑יו וַיִּתֵּ֨ן אֹתִ֜י בְּמִשְׁמַ֗ר בֵּ֚ית שַׂ֣ר הַטַּבָּחִ֔ים אֹתִ֕י וְאֵ֖ת שַׂ֥ר הָאֹפִֽים

Verse 11 – וַנַּֽחַלְמָ֥ה חֲל֛וֹם בְּלַ֥יְלָה אֶחָ֖ד אֲנִ֣י וָה֑וּא אִ֛ישׁ כְּפִתְר֥וֹן חֲלֹמ֖וֹ חָלָֽמְנוּ

My Torah:

Verse 12 – וְשָׁ֨ם אִתָּ֜נוּ נַ֣עַר עִבְרִ֗י עֶ֚בֶד לְשַׂ֣ר הַטַּבָּחִ֔ים וַ֨נְּסַפֶּר־ל֔וֹ וַיִּפְתׇּר־לָ֖נוּ אֶת־חֲלֹמֹתֵ֑ינוּ אִ֥ישׁ כַּחֲלֹמ֖וֹ פָּתָֽר

A Hebrew youth was there with us, a servant of the chief of the slaughters, and when we told him our dreams, he interpreted them for us, telling each of the meaning of his dream.

Rashi 1) נער עברי עבד. אֲרוּרִים הָרְשָׁעִים, שֶׁאֵין טוֹבָתָם שְׁלֵמָה, מַזְכִּירוֹ בִּלְשׁוֹן בִּזָּיוֹן:

Rashi 2) נער. שׁוֹטֶה וְאֵין רָאוּי לִגְדֻלָּה – a lad, unwise and unfitted for a high position.

Rashi 4) עבד. וְכָתוּב בְּנִמּוּסֵי מִצְרַיִם שֶׁאֵין עֶבֶד מוֹלֵךְ וְלֹא לוֹבֵשׁ בִּגְדֵי שָׂרִים

I saw a Pshet and do not remember who said that either Pharaoh ignored this law when it came to Joseph or that he discovered that Joseph was stolen by his brothers who sold him. They had no right to sell so Yoseph was never really a slave and therefore despite being a foreigner could be royalty in Egypt.

Rashi 3) עברי. אֲפִלּוּ לְשׁוֹנֵנוּ אֵינוֹ מַכִּיר – a Hebrew, who does not even know our language.

What was the שַׂ֣ר הַמַּשְׁקִ֔ים per Rashi trying to do? If you read the word of the Chumash it seems that the שַׂ֣ר הַמַּשְׁקִ֔ים was reporting the facts and there was no evil intent. However, all four Rashis on this Pasuk tell us that this was not the case. He purposely meant to denigrate Yoseph. The שַׂ֣ר הַמַּשְׁקִ֔ים was one of the officers of Egypt, a cabinet minister. He knew that Yosef would present well and knew that Yosef was talented, successful, and a leader of men. He was afraid that Yosef would be promoted into a leadership role, into a cabinet minister position and even into royalty. The שַׂ֣ר הַמַּשְׁקִ֔ים was protecting his turf. Rashi 2 the word גְדֻלָּה and Rashi 4 uses the word מוֹלֵךְ. He was trying to preempt this and effectively was saying that although Yosef will interpret your dream, do not be impressed. Yosef is still immature, just a lad (even though Joseph was 30 at the time) and cannot rise to greatness. Yes Pharaoh, Yosef has a talent but it is a unique, limited talent. Rashi 2 says that נער as in שׁוֹטֶה. I think Rashi is saying that because Yosef is immature he is a fool. Or you can say that Joseph was an idiot savant. All three things that the שַׂ֣ר הַמַּשְׁקִ֔ים said was to preempt Pharosh from making Yoseph a cabinet minister like himself or even higher. Despite his efforts, not only did Joseph rise to a high level, he became the #2 man in Egypt.

The explanation of the Rashis:

Rashi 1) נער עברי עבד. אֲרוּרִים הָרְשָׁעִים, שֶׁאֵין טוֹבָתָם שְׁלֵמָה, מַזְכִּירוֹ בִּלְשׁוֹן בִּזָּיוֹן:

Rashi 2) נער. שׁוֹטֶה וְאֵין רָאוּי לִגְדֻלָּה – a lad, unwise and unfitted for a high position.

See above. Rashi is not translating נער as a fool, but rather he is a lad and immature, foolish.

Rashi 3) Let us now analyze this Rashi. עברי. אֲפִלּוּ לְשׁוֹנֵנוּ אֵינוֹ מַכִּיר – a Hebrew: who does not even know our language.

Rashi says that the Sar Hamashkim was denigrating Yoseph by saying he does not know our language! Huh! Yoseph spoke to the שַׂ֣ר הַמַּשְׁקִ֔ים, assumingly in Egyption. Yosef was in Egypt for twelve years at this point.

I would think that the translation of Rashi should be that he is a foreigner. How can he be a leader in Egypt? It is like the President of the US has to be born in America and not an immigrant.

I asked this question to an 11th grader from Darchai Torah who answered that perhaps it does not mean that Yosef could not speak Egyption; rather, that the Sar Hamashkim was saying he is not part of our culture. Language is culture. Rashi is telling us in a sophisticated way that the Sar Hamashkim was saying that Yosef is a foreigner, is not sensitive to our concerns, and doesn’t truly understand us. We can now understand Rashi as the Sar Hamashkim is saying that Yoseph will never be one of us and cannot be a leader in Egypt..

This fits in perfectly with the following Midrash Tanchuma quoted below from Rabbi Poliakoff of The Schwartz Institute Kollel, Jerusalem, Israel

אָמַר פַּרְעֹה, חֲלוֹם חָלַמְתִּי. כְּשֶׁבָּא לוֹמַר לוֹ אֶת הַחֲלוֹם, בִּקֵּשׁ לְבָדְקוֹ וְהָיָה מְהַפֵּךְ לוֹ אֶת הַחֲלוֹם. אָמַר לוֹ: “וְהִנֵּה מִן הַיְאֹר עֹלֹת שֶׁבַע פָּרוֹת בְּרִיא֥וֹת בָּשָׂ֖ר וִיפֹ֣ת תֹּ֑אַר וַתִּרְעֶ֖ינָה בָּאָֽחוּ” (בראשית מא, יח). אָמַר לוֹ יוֹסֵף, לֹא כָךְ רָאִיתָ אֶלָּא יְפוֹת מַרְאֶה וּבְרִיאֹת בָּשָׂר – “וְהִנֵּ֣ה מִן־הַיְאֹ֗ר עֹלֹת֙ שֶׁ֣בַע פָּר֔וֹת יְפ֥וֹת מַרְאֶ֖ה וּבְרִיאֹ֣ת בָּשָׂ֑ר וַתִּרְעֶ֖ינָה בָּאָֽחוּ” (בראשית מא, ב). אָמַר לוֹ: הִנֵּה שֶׁבַע פָּרוֹת דַּלּוֹת וְרָעוֹת (בראשית מא, יט). אָמַר לוֹ: לֹא כָּךְ רָאִיתָ, אֶלָּא רָעוֹת מַרְאֶה וְדַקּוֹת בָּשָׂר (בראשית מא, ג). אָמַר לוֹ: הִנֵּה שֶׁבַע שִׁבֳּלִים מְלֵאוֹת וְטוֹבוֹת (בראשית מא, כב). אָמַר לוֹ: לֹא כָּךְ רָאִיתָ, אֶלָּא בְּרִיאוֹת וְטֹבוֹת (בראשית מא, ח). אָמַר לוֹ: וְהִנֵּה שֶׁבַע שִׁבֳּלִים צְנֻמוֹת דַּקּוֹת (בראשית מא, כג). אָמַר לוֹ: לֹא כָךְ רָאִיתָ, אֶלָּא דַּקּוֹת שְׁדֻפוֹת קָדִים (בראשית מא, ו). הִתְחִיל פַּרְעֹה תָּמֵהּ בְּעַצְמוֹ. אָמַר לוֹ: אַחֲרַי הָיִיתָ כְּשֶׁחָלַמְתִּי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: אַחֲרֵי הוֹדִיעַ אֱלֹהִים אוֹתְךָ אֶת כָּל זֹאת. And Pharaoh said unto Joseph: “I have dreamed a dream (ibid.). As he).

When you look closely at this Medrash, there is a question. Did Pharaoh change any of the facts? Did he say there were 6 or 8 cows, there were sheep. No, all he changed was the order of how the cows and sheaves were described. Pharaoh dreamt the cows were good looking and healthy. He related to Yoseph they were healthy and good looking. Is this really a test? The facts were the same. Yospeh could have chosen to ignore this slight discrepancy of how Pharoh perceived them. This would not change the interpretation of the dream.

As Rabbi Poliakoff said – “The Midrash Tanchuma says that the reason for the inconsistent reporting of the dreams is that פרעה was testing יוסף. Nevertheless, there must be a reason that Pharaoh chose the particular details as his test.”

I think that the MedreshTanchuma is explaining the dialogue just like Rashi. The Sar Hamshkim told Pharaoh that Joseph does not understand our culture. This test is to see if the Sar Hamashkim is correct or if he is wrong that Yoseph understands Egyptian culture and can be an Egyptian leader. Pharaoh dreamt יְפוֹת מַרְאֶה וּבְרִיאֹת בָּשָׂר – good looking first and then healthy. Pharaoh’s initial reaction to these cows were beauty and then strength – healthy. This is because Egyptian culture worshiped beauty. His first reaction was יְפוֹת מַרְאֶה and only afterwards was he thoughts on וּבְרִיאֹת בָּשָׂר .

This is similar to Greece – Athanians who worshiped beauty vs. Spartans who worshiped war.

Pharaoh was testing Yosef to see if he understood Egyptian culture. Yoseph undersood this and told Pharoh you dreamt יְפוֹת מַרְאֶה וּבְרִיאֹת בָּשָׂר . Same thing when Pharaoh changed the language of the bad cows. The sheaves are a little more difficult to fit in.

Rabbi Elya Caplan from Baltimore, married to my cousin Chani added a beautiful Pasuk which I believe supports my Torah.

In Yirmiyahu 46:20 the Pasuk says: עֶגְלָ֥ה יְפֵה־פִיָּ֖ה מִצְרָ֑יִם קֶ֥רֶץ מִצָּפ֖וֹן בָּ֥א בָֽא

Rashi translates as – עגלה יפהפיה. מלכותא יאייא – a fair heifer – A beautiful kingdom.

Fascinating Medresh and Rashi.

We can have a deeper level of understanding in Rashi. Rashi is talking about the Jewish experience in Galus.

Throughout history Jews were always loyal to the country they lived in. Yet they were in most countries rejected as foreigners. There is a quote from Chaim Weitzman I found in Wikipedia:

The assimilated Jewish community in Germany, prior to World War II, has been self-described as “more German than the Germans”. Originally, the comment was a “common sneer aimed at people” who had “thrown off the faith of their forefathers and adopted the garb of their Fatherland“.^[1] The German assimilation, following the Enlightenment, was “unprecedented”.^[2]The quote is sometimes ascribed to Chaim Weizmann.^[3]

By extension Rashi is also alluding to us that we may know the language and the culture, but we are always considered as foreigners.

Jews by nature are good hearted and just want to do good. When the Jews are living in a foreign land they want to survive, raise their families, and live a Jewish life; be productive citizens and help the country. Be part of the solution.

The Meshech Chochma in Bechukosai talks about the phenomena when Jews try to assimilate and drop their Jewishness. However, that is not the subject of this Vort.

There is a Medresh that Yoseph knew 71 languages.

Verse 13 – וַיְהִ֛י כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר פָּֽתַר־לָ֖נוּ כֵּ֣ן הָיָ֑ה אֹתִ֛י הֵשִׁ֥יב עַל־כַּנִּ֖י וְאֹת֥וֹ תָלָֽה

Verse 14 – וַיִּשְׁלַ֤ח פַּרְעֹה֙ וַיִּקְרָ֣א אֶת־יוֹסֵ֔ף וַיְרִיצֻ֖הוּ מִן־הַבּ֑וֹר וַיְגַלַּח֙ וַיְחַלֵּ֣ף שִׂמְלֹתָ֔יו וַיָּבֹ֖א אֶל־פַּרְעֹֽה

Verse 15 – וַיֹּ֤אמֶר פַּרְעֹה֙ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֔ף חֲל֣וֹם חָלַ֔מְתִּי וּפֹתֵ֖ר אֵ֣ין אֹת֑וֹ וַאֲנִ֗י שָׁמַ֤עְתִּי עָלֶ֙יךָ֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר תִּשְׁמַ֥ע חֲל֖וֹם לִפְתֹּ֥ר אֹתֽוֹ

Verse 16 – וַיַּ֨עַן יוֹסֵ֧ף אֶת־פַּרְעֹ֛ה לֵאמֹ֖ר בִּלְעָדָ֑י אֱלֹהִ֕ים יַעֲנֶ֖ה אֶת־שְׁל֥וֹם פַּרְעֹֽה׃

And Yosef answered Pharaoh saying, it is not me: God shall give Pharoh a favorable answer.

The word שְׁל֥וֹם is translated as:

Koren – favorable

Chabad – that will bring peace to Pharaoh

JPS 2006 – see to Pharaoh’s welfare.

Verse 17 – וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר פַּרְעֹ֖ה אֶל־יוֹסֵ֑ף בַּחֲלֹמִ֕י הִנְנִ֥י עֹמֵ֖ד עַל־שְׂפַ֥ת הַיְאֹֽר

Verse 18 – וְהִנֵּ֣ה מִן־הַיְאֹ֗ר עֹלֹת֙ שֶׁ֣בַע פָּר֔וֹת בְּרִיא֥וֹת בָּשָׂ֖ר וִיפֹ֣ת תֹּ֑אַר וַתִּרְעֶ֖ינָה בָּאָֽחוּ

Verse 19 – וְהִנֵּ֞ה שֶֽׁבַע־פָּר֤וֹת אֲחֵרוֹת֙ עֹל֣וֹת אַחֲרֵיהֶ֔ן דַּלּ֨וֹת וְרָע֥וֹת תֹּ֛אַר מְאֹ֖ד וְרַקּ֣וֹת בָּשָׂ֑ר לֹֽא־רָאִ֧יתִי כָהֵ֛נָּה בְּכׇל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם לָרֹֽעַ׃

. This is an editorial comment by Pharoh – לֹֽא־רָאִ֧יתִי כָהֵ֛נָּה בְּכׇל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם לָרֹֽעַ׃

Verse 20 – וַתֹּאכַ֙לְנָה֙ הַפָּר֔וֹת הָרַקּ֖וֹת וְהָרָע֑וֹת אֵ֣ת שֶׁ֧בַע הַפָּר֛וֹת הָרִאשֹׁנ֖וֹת הַבְּרִיאֹֽת׃

Verse 21 – וַתָּבֹ֣אנָה אֶל־קִרְבֶּ֗נָה וְלֹ֤א נוֹדַע֙ כִּי־בָ֣אוּ אֶל־קִרְבֶּ֔נָה וּמַרְאֵיהֶ֣ן רַ֔ע כַּאֲשֶׁ֖ר בַּתְּחִלָּ֑ה וָאִיקָֽץ׃

Not in actual dream, rather an editorial comment by Pharaoh.

וָאֵ֖רֶא בַּחֲלֹמִ֑י וְהִנֵּ֣ה ׀ שֶׁ֣בַע שִׁבֳּלִ֗ים עֹלֹ֛ת בְּקָנֶ֥ה אֶחָ֖ד מְלֵאֹ֥ת וְטֹבֽוֹת׃

וְהִנֵּה֙ שֶׁ֣בַע שִׁבֳּלִ֔ים צְנֻמ֥וֹת דַּקּ֖וֹת שְׁדֻפ֣וֹת קָדִ֑ים צֹמְח֖וֹת אַחֲרֵיהֶֽם׃

Verse 24 – וַתִּבְלַ֙עְןָ֙ הַשִּׁבֳּלִ֣ים הַדַּקֹּ֔ת אֵ֛ת שֶׁ֥בַע הַֽשִּׁבֳּלִ֖ים הַטֹּב֑וֹת * וָֽאֹמַר֙ אֶל־הַֽחַרְטֻמִּ֔ים וְאֵ֥ין מַגִּ֖יד לִֽי

*Does not say וְהִנֵּ֥ה חֲלֽוֹם׃ like in verse 41:7

Verse 25 – וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יוֹסֵף֙ אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֔ה חֲל֥וֹם פַּרְעֹ֖ה אֶחָ֣ד ה֑וּא אֵ֣ת אֲשֶׁ֧ר הָאֱלֹהִ֛ים עֹשֶׂ֖ה הִגִּ֥יד לְפַרְעֹֽה

Verse 26 – שֶׁ֧בַע פָּרֹ֣ת הַטֹּבֹ֗ת שֶׁ֤בַע שָׁנִים֙ הֵ֔נָּה וְשֶׁ֤בַע הַֽשִּׁבֳּלִים֙ הַטֹּבֹ֔ת שֶׁ֥בַע שָׁנִ֖ים הֵ֑נָּה חֲל֖וֹם אֶחָ֥ד הֽוּא׃

Verse 27 – וְשֶׁ֣בַע הַ֠פָּר֠וֹת הָֽרַקּ֨וֹת וְהָרָעֹ֜ת הָעֹלֹ֣ת אַחֲרֵיהֶ֗ן שֶׁ֤בַע שָׁנִים֙ הֵ֔נָּה וְשֶׁ֤בַע הַֽשִּׁבֳּלִים֙ הָרֵק֔וֹת שְׁדֻפ֖וֹת הַקָּדִ֑ים יִהְי֕וּ שֶׁ֖בַע שְׁנֵ֥י רָעָֽב׃

Verse 28 – ה֣וּא הַדָּבָ֔ר אֲשֶׁ֥ר דִּבַּ֖רְתִּי אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֑ה אֲשֶׁ֧ר הָאֱלֹהִ֛ים עֹשֶׂ֖ה הֶרְאָ֥ה אֶת־פַּרְעֹֽה

Verse 29 – הִנֵּ֛ה שֶׁ֥בַע שָׁנִ֖ים בָּא֑וֹת שָׂבָ֥ע גָּד֖וֹל בְּכׇל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃

Verse 30 – וְ֠קָ֠מוּ שֶׁ֜בַע שְׁנֵ֤י רָעָב֙ אַחֲרֵיהֶ֔ן וְנִשְׁכַּ֥ח כׇּל־הַשָּׂבָ֖ע בְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם וְכִלָּ֥ה הָרָעָ֖ב אֶת־הָאָֽרֶץ

Verse 31 – וְלֹֽא־יִוָּדַ֤ע הַשָּׂבָע֙ בָּאָ֔רֶץ מִפְּנֵ֛י הָרָעָ֥ב הַה֖וּא אַחֲרֵי־כֵ֑ן כִּֽי־כָבֵ֥ד ה֖וּא מְאֹֽד

Verse 32 – וְעַ֨ל הִשָּׁנ֧וֹת הַחֲל֛וֹם אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֖ה פַּעֲמָ֑יִם כִּֽי־נָכ֤וֹן הַדָּבָר֙ מֵעִ֣ם הָאֱלֹהִ֔ים וּמְמַהֵ֥ר הָאֱלֹהִ֖ים לַעֲשֹׂתֽוֹ

And as for the repetition of the dream to Pharaoh twice; it is because the thing is fast determined by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.

What is the understanding of וּמְמַהֵ֥ר הָאֱלֹהִ֖ים לַעֲשֹׂתֽוֹ? Strange language.

Verse 33 – וְעַתָּה֙ יֵרֶ֣א פַרְעֹ֔ה אִ֖ישׁ נָב֣וֹן וְחָכָ֑ם וִישִׁיתֵ֖הוּ עַל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃

Verse 34 – יַעֲשֶׂ֣ה פַרְעֹ֔ה וְיַפְקֵ֥ד פְּקִדִ֖ים עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ וְחִמֵּשׁ֙ אֶת־אֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם בְּשֶׁ֖בַע שְׁנֵ֥י הַשָּׂבָֽע

וְחִמֵּשׁ֙ – Means either to prepare or take ⅕ of the produce.

Verse 35 – וְיִקְבְּצ֗וּ אֶת־כׇּל־אֹ֙כֶל֙ הַשָּׁנִ֣ים הַטֹּב֔וֹת הַבָּאֹ֖ת הָאֵ֑לֶּה וְיִצְבְּרוּ־בָ֞ר תַּ֧חַת יַד־פַּרְעֹ֛ה אֹ֥כֶל בֶּעָרִ֖ים וְשָׁמָֽרוּ׃

אֶת־כׇּל־אֹ֙כֶל֙ הַשָּׁנִ֣ים – All? probably means all the produce that they took in.

Verse 36 – וְהָיָ֨ה הָאֹ֤כֶל לְפִקָּדוֹן֙ לָאָ֔רֶץ לְשֶׁ֙בַע֙ שְׁנֵ֣י הָרָעָ֔ב אֲשֶׁ֥ר תִּהְיֶ֖יןָ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם וְלֹֽא־תִכָּרֵ֥ת הָאָ֖רֶץ בָּרָעָֽב

וְהָיָ֨ה הָאֹ֤כֶל לְפִקָּדוֹן֙ לָאָ֔רֶץ – Implies a security that the people will get back. However, Yoseph made them pay a steep price, made the Egyptians purchase it and impoverished the entire country.

Verse 37 – וַיִּיטַ֥ב הַדָּבָ֖ר בְּעֵינֵ֣י פַרְעֹ֑ה וּבְעֵינֵ֖י כׇּל־עֲבָדָֽיו

Verse 38 – וַיֹּ֥אמֶר פַּרְעֹ֖ה אֶל־עֲבָדָ֑יו הֲנִמְצָ֣א כָזֶ֔ה אִ֕ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֛ר ר֥וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֖ים בּֽוֹ

Pharaoh is setting up his ministers. He got them to acknowledge that Joseph’s plan is excellent. In the next two verses Pharaoh pulls a major surprise. All of his ministers are thinking that one of them will be appointed to be in charge of gathering all the grain. They will have Yoseph be the brains of the operation. Pharoah does not do this, but rather to their shock appoints Yospeh, the slave, the Hebrew, not only to be in charge of the crops but to be the second in command of Egypt. Their mouths open in shock. You can bet that they had their knives out for Yoseph. They were waiting for him to slip up, so they could destroy him. Yospeh always had to watch his back. Perhaps this is why he never contacted his father because he would be accused of plotting to overthrow the government.

Verse 39 – וַיֹּ֤אמֶר פַּרְעֹה֙ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֔ף אַחֲרֵ֨י הוֹדִ֧יעַ אֱלֹהִ֛ים אוֹתְךָ֖ אֶת־כׇּל־זֹ֑את אֵין־נָב֥וֹן וְחָכָ֖ם כָּמֽוֹךָ׃

Verse 40 – אַתָּה֙ תִּהְיֶ֣ה עַל־בֵּיתִ֔י וְעַל־פִּ֖יךָ יִשַּׁ֣ק כׇּל־עַמִּ֑י רַ֥ק הַכִּסֵּ֖א אֶגְדַּ֥ל מִמֶּֽךָּ׃

יִשַּׁ֣ק – the same word by Yaakov in Bershis 29: 10 and 29:11 when he met Rochel.

וַיְהִ֡י כַּאֲשֶׁר֩ רָאָ֨ה יַעֲקֹ֜ב אֶת־רָחֵ֗ל בַּת־לָבָן֙ אֲחִ֣י אִמּ֔וֹ וְאֶת־צֹ֥אן לָבָ֖ן אֲחִ֣י אִמּ֑וֹ וַיִּגַּ֣שׁ יַעֲקֹ֗ב וַיָּ֤גֶל אֶת־הָאֶ֙בֶן֙ מֵעַל֙ פִּ֣י הַבְּאֵ֔ר וַיַּ֕שְׁקְ אֶת־צֹ֥אן לָבָ֖ן אֲחִ֥י אִמּֽוֹ׃

וַיִּשַּׁ֥ק יַעֲקֹ֖ב לְרָחֵ֑ל וַיִּשָּׂ֥א אֶת־קֹל֖וֹ וַיֵּֽבְךְּ׃

Verse 41 – וַיֹּ֥אמֶר פַּרְעֹ֖ה אֶל־יוֹסֵ֑ף רְאֵה֙ נָתַ֣תִּי אֹֽתְךָ֔ עַ֖ל כׇּל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃

Verse 42 – וַיָּ֨סַר פַּרְעֹ֤ה אֶת־טַבַּעְתּוֹ֙ מֵעַ֣ל יָד֔וֹ וַיִּתֵּ֥ן אֹתָ֖הּ עַל־יַ֣ד יוֹסֵ֑ף וַיַּלְבֵּ֤שׁ אֹתוֹ֙ בִּגְדֵי־שֵׁ֔שׁ וַיָּ֛שֶׂם רְבִ֥ד הַזָּהָ֖ב עַל־צַוָּארֽוֹ׃

Verse 43 – וַיַּרְכֵּ֣ב אֹת֗וֹ בְּמִרְכֶּ֤בֶת הַמִּשְׁנֶה֙ אֲשֶׁר־ל֔וֹ וַיִּקְרְא֥וּ לְפָנָ֖יו אַבְרֵ֑ךְ וְנָת֣וֹן אֹת֔וֹ עַ֖ל כׇּל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃

Verse 44 – וַיֹּ֧אמֶר פַּרְעֹ֛ה אֶל־יוֹסֵ֖ף אֲנִ֣י פַרְעֹ֑ה וּבִלְעָדֶ֗יךָ לֹֽא־יָרִ֨ים אִ֧ישׁ אֶת־יָד֛וֹ וְאֶת־רַגְל֖וֹ בְּכׇל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃

Verse 45 – וַיִּקְרָ֨א פַרְעֹ֣ה שֵׁם־יוֹסֵף֮ צָֽפְנַ֣ת פַּעְנֵ֒חַ֒ וַיִּתֶּן־ל֣וֹ אֶת־אָֽסְנַ֗ת בַּת־פּ֥וֹטִי פֶ֛רַע^*(בספרי תימן פּֽוֹטִיפֶ֛רַע בתיבה אחת) כֹּהֵ֥ן אֹ֖ן לְאִשָּׁ֑ה וַיֵּצֵ֥א יוֹסֵ֖ף עַל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃

The Midrash says that Osnas was the daughter of Dina. Perhaps this is why she is called the daughter of פּ֥וֹטִי פֶ֛רַע and not Potiphar because she was an adopted daughter.

Verse 46 – וְיוֹסֵף֙ בֶּן־שְׁלֹשִׁ֣ים שָׁנָ֔ה בְּעׇמְד֕וֹ לִפְנֵ֖י פַּרְעֹ֣ה מֶֽלֶךְ־מִצְרָ֑יִם וַיֵּצֵ֤א יוֹסֵף֙ מִלִּפְנֵ֣י פַרְעֹ֔ה וַֽיַּעֲבֹ֖ר בְּכׇל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם

What is the first thing Yoseph does? He goes out and inspects the land. Similar to Moshe when he was appointed over the house of Pharaoh. Exodus 2:11 וַיְהִ֣י ׀ בַּיָּמִ֣ים הָהֵ֗ם וַיִּגְדַּ֤ל מֹשֶׁה֙ וַיֵּצֵ֣א אֶל־אֶחָ֔יו וַיַּ֖רְא בְּסִבְלֹתָ֑ם וַיַּרְא֙ אִ֣ישׁ מִצְרִ֔י מַכֶּ֥ה אִישׁ־עִבְרִ֖י מֵאֶחָֽיו׃ . I have to work on this.

Verse 47 – וַתַּ֣עַשׂ הָאָ֔רֶץ בְּשֶׁ֖בַע שְׁנֵ֣י הַשָּׂבָ֑ע לִקְמָצִֽים׃

Verse 48 – וַיִּקְבֹּ֞ץ אֶת־כׇּל־אֹ֣כֶל ׀ שֶׁ֣בַע שָׁנִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֤ר הָיוּ֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם וַיִּתֶּן־אֹ֖כֶל בֶּעָרִ֑ים אֹ֧כֶל שְׂדֵה־הָעִ֛יר אֲשֶׁ֥ר סְבִיבֹתֶ֖יהָ נָתַ֥ן בְּתוֹכָֽהּ׃

Verse 49 – יִּצְבֹּ֨ר יוֹסֵ֥ף בָּ֛ר כְּח֥וֹל הַיָּ֖ם הַרְבֵּ֣ה מְאֹ֑ד עַ֛ד כִּי־חָדַ֥ל לִסְפֹּ֖ר כִּי־אֵ֥ין מִסְפָּֽר

Verse 50 – וּלְיוֹסֵ֤ף יֻלַּד֙ שְׁנֵ֣י בָנִ֔ים בְּטֶ֥רֶם תָּב֖וֹא שְׁנַ֣ת הָרָעָ֑ב אֲשֶׁ֤ר יָֽלְדָה־לּוֹ֙ אָֽסְנַ֔ת בַּת־פּ֥וֹטִי פֶ֖רַע^*(בספרי תימן פּֽוֹטִיפֶ֖רַע בתיבה אחת) כֹּהֵ֥ן אֽוֹן

Verse 51 – וַיִּקְרָ֥א יוֹסֵ֛ף אֶת־שֵׁ֥ם הַבְּכ֖וֹר מְנַשֶּׁ֑ה כִּֽי־נַשַּׁ֤נִי אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶת־כׇּל־עֲמָלִ֔י וְאֵ֖ת כׇּל־בֵּ֥ית אָבִֽי׃

Why did he say he wanted to forget his father’s house? Perhaps he did not forget his father, but wanted to forget the house and the issues he had.

Verse 52 – וְאֵ֛ת שֵׁ֥ם הַשֵּׁנִ֖י קָרָ֣א אֶפְרָ֑יִם כִּֽי־הִפְרַ֥נִי אֱלֹהִ֖ים בְּאֶ֥רֶץ עׇנְיִֽי׃

Verse 53 – וַתִּכְלֶ֕ינָה שֶׁ֖בַע שְׁנֵ֣י הַשָּׂבָ֑ע אֲשֶׁ֥ר הָיָ֖ה בְּאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃

Verse 54 – וַתְּחִלֶּ֜ינָה שֶׁ֣בַע שְׁנֵ֤י הָרָעָב֙ לָב֔וֹא כַּאֲשֶׁ֖ר אָמַ֣ר יוֹסֵ֑ף וַיְהִ֤י רָעָב֙ בְּכׇל־הָ֣אֲרָצ֔וֹת וּבְכׇל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם הָ֥יָה לָֽחֶם׃

Verse 55 – וַתִּרְעַב֙ כׇּל־אֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם וַיִּצְעַ֥ק הָעָ֛ם אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֖ה לַלָּ֑חֶם וַיֹּ֨אמֶר פַּרְעֹ֤ה לְכׇל־מִצְרַ֙יִם֙ לְכ֣וּ אֶל־יוֹסֵ֔ף אֲשֶׁר־יֹאמַ֥ר לָכֶ֖ם תַּעֲשֽׂוּ׃

Verse 56 – וְהָרָעָ֣ב הָיָ֔ה עַ֖ל כׇּל־פְּנֵ֣י הָאָ֑רֶץ וַיִּפְתַּ֨ח יוֹסֵ֜ף אֶֽת־כׇּל־אֲשֶׁ֤ר בָּהֶם֙ וַיִּשְׁבֹּ֣ר לְמִצְרַ֔יִם וַיֶּחֱזַ֥ק הָֽרָעָ֖ב בְּאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם

Verse 57 – וְכׇל־הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ בָּ֣אוּ מִצְרַ֔יְמָה לִשְׁבֹּ֖ר אֶל־יוֹסֵ֑ף כִּֽי־חָזַ֥ק הָרָעָ֖ב בְּכׇל־הָאָֽרֶץ

August 10 – 21, 2022 Trip to Toronto

On September 7, 2022September 7, 2022 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn Divrei Torah, My Life, Parsha, Synogagues I AttendedLeave a comment

We had a beautiful 11 day trip to Toronto

People I met:

Rabbi Chaim Metzger

Rabbi Lescher of the BAYT

Rabbi Yitzchok Yagod

David Max Spiegel

Dr. Barry Levi

Allen and Ellen Siegel

David Woolf

Mr. Shiel – cousin to Gary Bajtner

Allen and Josh Gutterman and family

August Belmont and Naomi Maimon

Birnbaum and Kushner

Professor Sharon Green and Cantor Jonathan Green

Rabbi Sholom Gold – read his book, Touching History

Wednesday August 10, 2022

We drove to Toronto and arrived at 11:30 PM. Serka drove for 7 of the 10 hours. We ended up not taking a hotel room in Port Huron at 8:00 PM – we drove on.

Thursday August 11, 2022

Serka went to purchase 50 muffins from Amazing Muffins. After Maariv, I was speaking to Rabbi Chaim Metzger about the dating issue with 2 Kings 18. He told me that Rabbi Alex Israel discusses it in his book which is available online on the Gush Etzion website. Rabbi Metzger and his wife are making Aliyah in two weeks. His wife is a daughter of Moshe Lichtman, who translates Seforim into English. He translated Eim HaBanim Semeicha. I recently obtained a copy of his book. I was leafing through it and I was reading tragedy. He is in Hungary in 1943, with the Nazi menace growing daily, wanting to talk about the need to go to Israel and the people just shutting him down.

Eim HaBanim Semeicha was written by Rabbi Yisachar Shlomo Teichtal, and published in 1943 in Budapest, Hungary.^[2] The title is taken from Psalms and means “A Joyous Mother of Children”.

Teichtal grew up as a staunch anti-Zionist Chasid of the Munkatsher Rebbe. However, during the Holocaust, Rabbi Teichtal changed his position from the one he espoused in his youth. The physical product of that introspection is the book, Eim HaBanim Semeicha, in which he specifically retracts his previous viewpoints, and argues that the true redemption can only come if the Jewish people unite and rebuild the land of Israel. Many of his coreligionists viewed the book with skepticism, some going so far as to ban Rabbi Teichtal from their synagogues.

In the book, Rabbi Teichtal strongly criticizes the Haredim for not supporting the settlement of the Land of Israel. When it was written, it was a scathing criticism of the Jewish Orthodox establishment, and Agudat Israel in particular.

He writes:

It is clear that he who prepares prior to the Sabbath will eat on the Sabbath (Avodah Zarah, 3a), and since the Haredim did not toil, they have absolutely no influence in the Land (of Israel). Those who toil and build have the influence, and they are the masters of the Land. It is, therefore, no wonder that they are in control… Now, what will the Haredim say? I do not know if they will ever be able to vindicate themselves before the heavenly court for not participating in the movement to rebuild the Land. (p. 23)

Friday August 12, 2022

Shabbos Nachamu. Friday night davened at the Conservatory. It was outside. Just beautiful.

August 13, 2022 Shabbos Parshas Ve’eschanan and Shabbos Nachamu

Davened at the BAYT. Rabbi Korobkin’s speech was okay, not his normal dynamic speech.

Went back at 7:30 PM for the Pirkei Avos Shiur and for Mincha.

At Shalosh Suedas Rabbi Yitzchok Yagod spoke. He was excellent. Rabbi Yagod is Rabbi in three small communities: Rabbi of Congregation Tiferes Israel, Moncton, NB, Canada; Congregation Beth Avraham of Bethlehem, PA http://www.bethavraham.org/ and Congregation Beth Avrohom of Bangor, Maine http://koshertravelinfo.com/the-frum-jewish-community-of-bangor-maine/

He is the founder and head of the Vaad HaKashrus of East Canada and Maine. https://easternkosher.com/

He is in Toronto because his wife is sitting Shiva for her mother, Mrs. Sylvia Spiegel. About 18 months ago, Sylvia Spiegel got Parkinsons, so her daughter moved from the east coast into her apartment to take care of her mother. Syliva Spiegel was just shy of her 97th birthday when she passed away. Sylvia Spiegel’s sister was Gilda Spiegel-Nussbaum. Gilda was best friends with my mother-in-law Blanche Janowski. David (Max) Spiegel is her son and is sitting Shiva. He was my roommate in the Ner Israel Yeshiva in 1973 with Reb Yosef Spiro. The oldest brother, Dr. Shmuel Spiegel, is a radiologist and dated Serka. It was just one date. My wife could have been married to a doctor.

Sunday August 14, 2022

I walked into the Froom wedding at the BAYT and met my nephew.

Tuesday August 16, 2022

I was davening at the Conservatory and afterwards I was talking to David Woolf. I also mentioned to him the dating issues of Nach. He directed me to Dr. Barry Levy.

David Woolf gave me his book, newly publoshed:

Wednesday August 17, 2022

At 11:00 AM I met with Dr. Barry Levy. Dr. Barry Levy was a professor at McGill University, Montreal, CA in Jewish studies, He had a stroke 10 years ago and his left side has been impacted. I asked him my question about Chizkiyahu and he told me that there is no clear answer. I had a delightful conversation with him about Jewish history. Wow. I am in awe of him. He has a collection of Mikraos Gedolos going back hundreds of years and is writing a book on the historical progression of the Mikraos Gedolos on Chumach. He had finished his manuscript and the publisher, Tzvi Mauer of Urim Publications wanted a final chapter discussing, ‘What does the history of the Mikraos Gedolos mean to us today?’ He will send a copy of his final chapter to me.

B. Barry Levy

Emeritus Professor

Areas of Interest – Bible and the History of Jewish Interpretation of the Bible

Education- B.A., M.A., BRE (Yeshiva University), Ph.D. (New York University)

Publications:

Refereed books

LEVY, B. Barry. Jewish Masters of the Sacred Page (Jerusalem: Urim Publishers, forthcoming).

LEVY, B. Barry. Fixing God’s Torah: The Accuracy of the Hebrew Bible text in Jewish Law. Oxford University Press, 2001.

LEVY, B. Barry. Rabbinic Bible Interpretation after the Holocaust. Strange Fire: Reading the Bible After The Holocaust, edited by T. Linafelt, New York University and Sheffield Academic Press, May 2000.

Refereed journal articles

LEVY, B. Barry. Jewish, Christian and Muslim Responses to the Hebrew Bible. ARC, 27, 1999, pp. 161-205.

Dictionary entries, book reviews, commentaries

LEVY, B. Barry. Review: The Bible As It Was, by James Kugel, ARC, 27, 1999, pp. 220-221.

LEVY, B. Barry. Review: The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of the Bible, Reviews in Religion and Theology, 7, 2000, pp. 118-119.

LEVY, B. Commentary: Decoding the Torah’s secrets: Why can we not accept what the text actually says? Canadian Jewish News, 1-2, 1998.

LEVY, B. Review: The context of scripture. Volume I: Canonical compositions from the Biblical World, edited by William Hallo, Arc, vol. 26, 1998, pp. 147-149.

LEVY, B. Review: Magic and divination in ancient Palestine and Syria, by Ann Jeffers, Arc, vol. 26, 1998, pp. 149-151.

Scholarly Activities:

LEVY, B. Jubilee. Ottawa-Montreal Synod of United Church of Canada, May 1998.

LEVY, B. The History of Jewish Interpretation of the Bible Since the Holocaust. Thirtieth Anniversary Conference of the Department of Jewish Studies, McGill University, May 1999.

LEVY, B. The Ethics of Educational Leadership. Conference on Ethics, Faculty of Management, McGill University, May 1999.

Department and University Information

Department of Jewish Studies

Leacock Building, 7th floor

855 Sherbrooke Street West

Montreal, Quebec H3A 2T7

Tel.: 514-398-6543

Afterwards I saw Ellen Siegel and she showed me the book about Jewish Kitchner. Kitchner is about one hour west of Toronto. Ellen Siegal is married to Allen Siegal. Allen Sigel’s family had a major produce company in Kitchener, Ontario from the 1920s through the 1970s. Ellen’s brother is a relative to Lynn Stone-Borlat’s husband. Aunt Rose Noble-Stone was Lynn’s mother, making her a first cousin to my wife. Rose and Blanche are sisters. Aunt Rose lived in the Conservatory and she would come over for Shabbos meals. Ellen told me that Lynn lives nearby. I called Lynn the next day to invite her over to our Shabbos meal. She is having a wedding in three weeks and her husband’s father is in Hospice at Sunnybrook Hospital.

Shimon Siegel opened a fruit stall which his sons, Louis, Norman and Gerald, expanded into a thriving fruit business located at 270 William Street. Gerald Siegel used to appear on a televised cooking show to discuss fruits and vegetables. Thursday August 18, 2022

I was sitting with my mother in law and my wife in the Conservatory garden. She received a wedding invitation to the Parshan and New wedding. The News are from Montreal. I dealt with Levi New, the older brother of the Chosen in April 2021. anny Levy’s mother in-law passed away, Tzipporah Bas Mordechai, and he arranged to have a Minyan at the funeral and Zoomed us in. It was a bchovidik funeral thanks to Levi New. I had to report the Chesed of Levi New to the Parshans and to his father, Rabbi Moshe New. At 6:30 PM I went over to the Parshans and had them call their Mechutan, Moshe New, in Montreal.. I had to tell his father, Rabbi Moshe New about what his son did for us and I found out I had not given them a donation. This was a sign from Hashem. I would normally not see a wedding invitation that my mother in law would receive and only because I was sitting in the garden with her and that she had her mail brought to her that I was able to thank the New family.

I davened Mincha and Maariv at the BAYT. I picked up the below Sefer that came out in 1981. It was published by “Zecher Naftali”, an institution set up by Naftali Carlebach’s son, Rabbi Eliyahu Chaim Carlbach. Eliyahu Chaim Carelbach’s brother was Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach. Rabbi Eliyahu Chaim was a huge Torah Scholar and wrote Torah for the Bobover Rebbe. Reb Eliyahu Chaim passed away in 1995. I was fortunate to attend a wedding and Sheva Brachos of Rabbi Eliyahu Chaim Carlebach’s grandson’s wedding right before Pesach 2021. The boy was a Citron, whose great – great grandmother was the daughter of Eliyahu Chaim. The Citron boy married the daughter of Rabbi and Nechama Dina Turk. The boy’s grandfather is Rabbi Chaim Citron who is a Rosh Yeshiva at Lubavitch Mesivta in LA and is the Rabbi of Ahavas Chesed, a Shul in LA on LaBrea just north of Melrose. In 2002 when we were cleaning out my father’s apartment in LA, we davened at Ahavas Chesed. Rabbi Citron spoke Friday night and Shabbos. Phenomenal. Shabbos he compared the wording in Parshas Ki Tatzeh Verses 25:13-16 of the laws of proper measures and a similar Parsha in Kedoshim 19:35-36. I remember him saying that in D’varim it says the word Toavah – abomination and not in Kedoshim.

The Choson’s father, Rabbi Naftali Citron is the Rabbi in the Carlebach Shul in the upper west side. I watched a video he did on the Kotzker Rebbe. Rabbi Eliyahu Chaim’s widow is still alive, Hadassah Carlebach and was a Schneerson. She came in for the wedding and gave my family a Bracha at the Sheva Brochos.

Ki Teitzei 25:13-16

לֹֽא־יִהְיֶ֥ה לְךָ֛ בְּכִֽיסְךָ֖ אֶ֣בֶן וָאָ֑בֶן גְּדוֹלָ֖ה וּקְטַנָּֽה׃ You shall not have in your pouch alternate weights, larger and smaller.

לֹא־יִהְיֶ֥ה לְךָ֛ בְּבֵיתְךָ֖ אֵיפָ֣ה וְאֵיפָ֑ה גְּדוֹלָ֖ה וּקְטַנָּֽה׃ You shall not have in your house alternate measures, a larger and a smaller.

אֶ֣בֶן שְׁלֵמָ֤ה וָצֶ֙דֶק֙ יִֽהְיֶה־לָּ֔ךְ אֵיפָ֧ה שְׁלֵמָ֛ה וָצֶ֖דֶק יִֽהְיֶה־לָּ֑ךְ לְמַ֙עַן֙ יַאֲרִ֣יכוּ יָמֶ֔יךָ עַ֚ל הָֽאֲדָמָ֔ה אֲשֶׁר־יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ נֹתֵ֥ן לָֽךְ׃ You must have completely honest weights and completely honest measures, if you are to endure long on the soil that your God יהוה is giving you.

כִּ֧י תוֹעֲבַ֛ת יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ כׇּל־עֹ֣שֵׂה אֵ֑לֶּה כֹּ֖ל עֹ֥שֵׂה עָֽוֶל׃ {פ}

For everyone who does those things, everyone who deals dishonestly, is abhorrent to your God יהוה.

Kedoshim Verses 19:35-36

לֹא־תַעֲשׂ֥וּ עָ֖וֶל בַּמִּשְׁפָּ֑ט בַּמִּדָּ֕ה בַּמִּשְׁקָ֖ל וּבַמְּשׂוּרָֽה׃ You shall not falsify measures of length, weight, or capacity.

מֹ֧אזְנֵי צֶ֣דֶק אַבְנֵי־צֶ֗דֶק אֵ֥יפַת צֶ֛דֶק וְהִ֥ין צֶ֖דֶק יִהְיֶ֣ה לָכֶ֑ם אֲנִי֙ יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹֽהֵיכֶ֔ם אֲשֶׁר־הוֹצֵ֥אתִי אֶתְכֶ֖ם מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃ You shall have an honest balance, honest weights, an honest ephah, and an honest hin.I יהוה am your God who freed you from the land of Egypt.

Rabbi Chaim Citron, my Rebbe, and myself at the Citron-Turk wedding, April 2021.

The below are pictures: I showed it to Rabbi Lescher, the assistant Rov of the BAYT.

Friday, August 19, 2022

Went to Dr. Barry Levy’s unveiling for his wife, Cookie Levy, who passed away last year from cancer.

Debbi Krakowski-Janowski’s parents:

Shabbos Parshas Eikev – August 20, 2022

Aleasha and Mordy Rothman

Ateres Mordechai – Rabbi Bitterman’s Shul

Mr. Shiel – cousin to Gary Bajtner

Josh and Allen Gutterman

August and Naomi Maimon – Belmont

Birnbaum and Kushner

Professor Sharon Green and Cantor Jonathan Green

Rabbi Sholom Gold

Friday night:

On Friday night davened in the Conservatory Minyan at their Paleg Minyan. Ate a delicious meal at my mother-in-law’s house. At about 9:30 PM I went to visit Aleasha and Mordy Rothman and their kids. Hillel Janowski was there. Had a good time. Spoke over my Torah on Chizkiyahu. Shimmy listened to some of it. Egg Rolls were great. Went home at about 11:15 PM.

Shabbos Morning:

At 8:45 AM I walked onto Clark Street and it was magnificent. 75 degrees and sunshine. On the way to Shul I met Allan Fink who told me that he has never been to Boca Raton Synagogue, but listens to Rabbi Efreim Goldberg every day. I decided to daven at Ateres Mordechai, Rabbi Bitterman is the Rov. Rabbi Bitterman is the son-in-law of Aaron Grubner, a lawyer from Toronto that has studied with my brother, Pesach, for 40 years. There were only 20 Talisim and I was a little surprised because I thought the Shul is always packed. People must be away at the cottages up North.

The Rabbi first spoke about verse 10:12:

וְעַתָּה֙ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל מָ֚ה יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֔יךָ שֹׁאֵ֖ל מֵעִמָּ֑ךְ כִּ֣י אִם־לְ֠יִרְאָ֠ה אֶת־יְהֹוָ֨ה אֱלֹהֶ֜יךָ לָלֶ֤כֶת בְּכׇל־דְּרָכָיו֙ וּלְאַהֲבָ֣ה אֹת֔וֹ וְלַֽעֲבֹד֙ אֶת־יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֔יךָ בְּכׇל־לְבָבְךָ֖ וּבְכׇל־נַפְשֶֽׁךָ׃

The Gemora says that we learn from the word מָ֚ה that one must make 100 blessings every day. What is the purpose? Rabbi Bitterman answered, we should always say thank you Hashem and that should lead us to say thank you to everyone we meet. Today was a beautiful day, thank you Hashem, your wife served you breakfast, thank you. We cannot be complaining and complaining nonstop.

Verse 9:24 says מַמְרִ֥ים הֱיִיתֶ֖ם עִם־יְהֹוָ֑ה מִיּ֖וֹם דַּעְתִּ֥י אֶתְכֶֽם׃

As long as I have known you, you have been defiant toward יהוה.

The Ba’al Haturim says that the Pasuk begins with a Mem and ends with a Mem to say that all forty years in the desert the Jews complained. Non Stop complaining for forty years. What did they have to complain about, yet they did. As human beings we have to condition ourselves to appreciate what we have and say thank you, whether to Hashem or the waiter or to our spouses, and to everyone. This is great rebuke and I decided that I will change my attitude.

Saw Jason Lapidus, the erstwhile South African and gave him a heartfelt hug. Davening was over at 11:30 AM. I talked to the Gabbai, whose last name is Shiel. He is about 62. His aunt is Paula Gassel who grew up in Winnipeg and is married to Arnold Gassel. Arnold’s first wife died of cancer about 25 years ago. Our family has known the Gassel family since the west side 90 years ago. Arnold Gassel is in the high 90s. He is the only person in Chicago that I knew that had Bubi Sklar as a kindergarten teacher. My mother was best friends with Arnold Gassel’s ex sister-in-law. In fact my mother got her a job at Kemper Insurance in the 1960s.

On the walk home met Allen Guttenberg and his son Josh Guttenberg. Two months ago Josh made a Bris that I crashed. I actually was looking for Josh. He spoke for a women’s group about Mechitzas in Shuls which in the 1930, 1940s, and 1950s was a major dividing line between Orthodox and non Orthodox. I told him what Rov said and my comments on it. Please see my blog post at https://kotzk.com/?s=eleff.

Then I met August Belmont and his wife Naomi, whose maiden name was Maimon. She grew up in the Bnei Torah area and knows Abie’s and Sarah’s kids. Belmont’s family name was Blumnekrantz, but his father came to Toronto in the 1930s and wanted to completely assimilate. He loved the Belmont race track and its founder, August Belmont, Jr., so he changed his last name to Belmont and named his son August.

Then I met a young couple in their 20s who had one child in a stroller. His last name is Birnbaum and she is a Kushner. He toldme that his grandfather, Nathan Birnbaum, was a Zionist with Herzel, etc., but became more Othordox, became disillusioned, and ultimately rejected Zionism.

From Wikepedia:

Nathan Birnbaum (Hebrew: נתן בירנבוים; pseudonyms: “Mathias Acher”, “Dr. N. Birner”, “Mathias Palme”, “Anton Skart”, “Theodor Schwarz”, and “Pantarhei”; 16 May 1864 – 2 April 1937) was an Austrian writer and journalist, Jewish thinker and nationalist.^[1]^[2] His life had three main phases, representing a progression in his thinking: a Zionist phase (c. 1883 – c. 1900); a Jewish cultural autonomy phase (c. 1900 – c. 1914) which included the promotion of the Yiddish language; and religious phase (c. 1914–1937) when he turned to Orthodox Judaism and became staunchly anti-Zionist.

He married Rosa Korngut (1869–1934) and they had three sons: Solomon (Salomo) Birnbaum (1891–1989), Menachem Birnbaum (1893–1944), and Uriel Birnbaum (1894–1956).

The last people I met were Professor Sharon Green and her three children. Her son is Jonathan Green and is Cantor at the Manhattan Davening was over at 11:30 Jewish Center and is friendly with my own nephew, Matt Schwartz. https://ca.linkedin.com/in/sharon-hart-green-764924a

Davening was over at 11:30 AM and I made it back to my mother-in-laws at 12:50 pm.

I read Sholom Gold’s autobiography most of Shabbos afternoon. Mendel Rubinoff lent it to me and I have to return it tomorrow on Sunday.

Went to the BAYT for Daf Yomi, Michas, and Maariv. Josh (?) Stein The speaker at the Shalosh Suedas

discussed Mishne 2:9 of Pirkei Avos:

אָמַר לָהֶם, צְאוּ וּרְאוּ אֵיזוֹהִי דֶרֶךְ יְשָׁרָה שֶׁיִּדְבַּק בָּהּ הָאָדָם. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, עַיִן טוֹבָה. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, חָבֵר טוֹב. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, שָׁכֵן טוֹב. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, הָרוֹאֶה אֶת הַנּוֹלָד. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, לֵב טוֹב. אָמַר לָהֶם, רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דִּבְרֵי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ מִדִּבְרֵיכֶם, שֶׁבִּכְלָל דְּבָרָיו דִּבְרֵיכֶם.

He spoke over a Sfas Emes who says that Lev Tov doesn’t mean a good heart but rather someone who controls his heart and his desires to do good. It is about self control.

Letter to Rabbi Ciment, Chabad of Boynton Beach

On October 20, 2021June 30, 2022 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn My Life, Synogagues I AttendedLeave a comment

October 5, 2021

Rabbi Sholom Ciment
℅ Chabad of Boynton Beach
10655 El Clair Ranch Road
Boynton Beach, FL 33437

Dear Rabbi Ciment:

Thank you for a beautiful Simchas Torah that I was able to celebrate with my grandkids.
Your speeches were excellent over Yom Tov. If you have them written down or an outline, please email me.

Your Yizkor speech was about connecting generations. I saw a beautiful paragraph in a book titled, The Miracle of Intervale Avenue written by Professor Jack Kugelmass. The book was first published in 1986 and again in 1996 with an update. The book is about the last remaining Orthodox Shul in the South Bronx, the Intervale Jewish Center. Professor Jack Kugelmass was an anthropology graduate student and first entered the Shul in February 1980 thinking he would write a magazine article on the last remaining Jews in the South Bronx. He ended up spending over 5 years visiting the Shul on a regular basis and wrote a 250 page book about the Shul and its people.

Jack Kugelmass talks about why these elderly Jews stayed in the South Bronx and attended the Interval Jewish Center and talks about the expected. Towards the end of the book, Jack Kugelmass comes to realize something important about the Shul to its members and why they stayed in the South Bronx. He writes, “For congregants concerned about their legacy and needing the reassurance that they will be remembered, the Intervale Jewish Center has come to serve as a communal kaddish, guaranteeing to each member the recitation of the memorial prayers.” and “For some congregants yorsayt is a major reason for attending.”

Then Professor Jack Kugelmass sums this up with a powerful, powerful conclusion. He writes, “Ultimately, only the knowledge that one is part of something greater than familial bonds and obligations, something that reasserts the existence of a higher order of things, gives man the sense that death and life are linked, that they are both part of a divine plan, and that one gives meaning and purpose to the other. The communal rites of the shul provide that sense of order if only because they tie congregants to the world of their fathers and even, as I argued in an earlier chapter, to the world of their biblical forefathers.”

I have reread this paragraph numerous times and it is profound. Professor Jack Kugelmass was not Frum, yet he came to realize the ultimate purpose of a Shul, and what it should mean to its congregants. For most of my life I thought that Shul was just a place to daven and it really did not make a difference where I davened. I discovered that a Shul must be more than just a place to daven. It must connect the person to his past and to the Jewish people.

This is also what a Rabbi must do. He connects his congregants to something greater than their lives. In your case, it is the Rebbe, events, and Torah. I connected to Boca Raton Synagogue and never wanted to leave. Rabbi Lopatin at Anshei Sholom in Chicago connected his congregants to Rabbi Lopatin’s world. Through Rabbi Lopatin, I was able to experience an AIPAC convention, and a CUFI convention. When Rabbi Lopatin attended a Friday morning breakfast for the dedication weekend of the Holocaust Meusem in Skokie, that Shabbos in his Drasha, Rabbi Lopatin expressed his displeasure with the breakfast. I was part of Rabbi Lopatin’s world. His successor, Rabbi Wolkenfeld, connects me to beautiful Torah. Once he explained a Rashbam magnificently. His recent Shabbos Shuva Drasha was perfect. He discussed a question a congregant asked him, which Rabbi Wolkenfeld then asked Rabbi Tzvi Rimon. Rabbi Rimon wrote back discussing the basic laws of Shmitta, going through the Pesukim, then the Rishonim, the Rambam, Shulchan Aruch, etc. Rabbi Wolkenfeld’s Drasha, was Rabbi Rimon’s answer. He connected his congregation to Rabbi Rimon, the Salsheles of Torah and made them part of it. I am watching Rabbi Kotlarski of Chabad of East Lakeview trying to establish a new congregation out of nothing and I am able to be part of it. When I take the one hour and forty-five minute trek to Lakeview, I first walk to Anshei Sholom to hear Rabbi Wolkenfeld’s speech, then I walk over to Chabad of East Lakeview . Additionally, I am able to give a Shiur at Rabbi Kotlarski’s Chabad house. While it is only a small group, my goal is to connect these people who never learned to the world of the Chumash and to the great Reshonim. To a Rashi, an Ibn Ezra, a Sferno, a Ramban so that they feel part of the Reshonim’s world, the Torah world. I hope to make them feel that they are present when Rashi wrote his commentary. I know this is arrogance on my part that I think that I am accomplishing this, but at least in my mind I am.

I loved attending Anshei Sholom that at times. I would drive there Friday, right before Shabbos, Daven for 30 minutes, and walk 5.5 miles back home. I needed the inspiration of Davening in that Shul. I was under tremendous pressure at work and I needed to feel a connection to Hashem. Other times going to Shul Friday night, before I could Daven I had to read Rabbi Jonathan Sacks’ Torah.

Best Regards,

Mitchell A. Morgenstern
773-647-8097

Toronto Redux – November 7 – 11, Veterans Day Weekend 2019

On November 21, 2019 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn My Life, Synogagues I AttendedLeave a comment

Shabbos Parshas Lech Lecha

My Bar Mitzvah Parsha – 1966

Monday – November 4, 2019:

Woke up late and ended up davening at Chodorov. I was rewarded for my tardiness. I realized that the person who was leining also leined 53 year ago at my Bar Mitzvah at Rabbi Isaac Small’s Shul on Lawrence Avenue. It was Rabbi Avrohom – Allen Isenberg who was about 18 years old at the time. He only shaved once a week as an 18 year old and now his beard is quite fully grown.

Thursday – November 7, 2019:

Left at 10:00 AM driving to Toronto with the wife and two of my son’s, Sholom and Tzvi. Arrived in Toronto at 10:00 PM.

Friday – November 8, 2019:

Went to Shul at 8:00 AM. Went to Daf Yomi. Too fast. Afterwards sat down to learn. I met Larry Gladstone. We talked for about an hour about kids and other matters. Met Avi Janowski, who is in Kollel at the BAYT. Told him my Torah. I spoke to him for another hour on Sunday and discovered he is a Green Bay Packer fan and knows everything Green Bay.

In the afternoon I set up shop at the desk and learned Daf Yomi.

Shabbos – Friday Night November 8, 2019:

Walked with Sholom and Tzvi to Shul. Got there when they were already starting Maariv. Introduced Sholom to Rabbi Korobkin.

Shabbos meal was great. It was nice being with my mother in law,. Serka’s great nephew Shimmy ate with us. He learns at Ohr Chaim in Clanton Park. Nice kid. After the meal I walked him home, stayed there for about an hour talking Torah to Mordy. I discussed the Kotzker Rebbe with him and corrected his misconceptions about the Kotzker. I had some great egg rolls.

Shabbos morning – Saturday 9, 2019 – What a great Shabbos

Woke up at 4:00 AM in the morning and learned Chumosh. I did not have my Mikros Gedolas. I found Chok L’Yisroel from the Zedi, the Holy Jew, Rabbi Yehuda Leibush Noble. My son, Tzvi Yehuda Leibush, is named after him. What Siattah Dishmaya. I learned from the same Sefer our Zedi learned from and held.

I focused on Chapter 12, Verse 2:

בוְאֶֽעֶשְׂךָ֙ לְג֣וֹי גָּד֔וֹל וַֽאֲבָ֣רֶכְךָ֔ וַֽאֲגַדְּלָ֖ה שְׁמֶ֑ךָ וֶֽהְיֵ֖ה בְּרָכָֽה:

The beginning of the Verse say I will bless you and the end of the Pasuk says, you will be blessed. The Chok has a Perush that I have only seen in the old Mikros Gedolas put out by Penimim that can no longer be found.

The bottom Perush asks: why does Chapter 12, Verse 2 say at the end of the Verse repeat that Avrohom should be blessed, when it says it 4 word earlier that he will be blessed? He answered that when earlier in the verse it says that Avrohom will have a great name and be well known, people with become jealous and cast on him the “evil eye”. The Eiyan Harah will cause Avorhom to lose his wealth, so he needed a blessing that despite people’s jealousy, the “evil eye” will not have any affect on Avrohom.

At about 6:00 AM went back to sleep. Got up at 7:15 AM and went to the BAYT for their 7:30 AM Minyan. Met Idelis who played with the Diaspora Yeshiva Band. Afterwards when to an hour long Shiur

Went upstairs to the main Shul to hear the Rabbi’s speech. Rabbi Korobkin spoke eloquently. After the speech, I finally found Frank Diament. At my last trip I was Desperately Seeking Frank, and I found him. We schmoozed for over 30 minutes about Jabotinsky, Menachem Begin, Israel, the book The Prime Ministers, CUFI. He was familiar with all of it. His father was a Beitar (Jabotinsky) member and Frank grew up being a member. I mentioned that Rabbi Shmuel Bowman talked about Christian Evangelicals at BRS about 5 years ago. Frank mentioned that Rabbi Shmuel Bowman is at the Conservatory visiting his father. I fulfilled the Chazel that says, if you mention a thought in the name of the person who said it, you bring redemption to the world and I was rewarded with the chance of being re-united with Rabbi Shmuel Bowman. My mother in law lives in the building.

It was already 12:30, very late and I walked to Yisroel and Chai’s house to visit Hudi. She was sleeping. I showed Yisroel the Chok L’Yisroel from his grandfather. I spoke over all my Torah, especially the Kotzker on Chanoch. I was smoking. It was 30 minutes of Torah discussion. Got home at 1:30 PM. Label walked me home. Had a great Shabbos meal.

Mincha at 4:45 PM.

I asked the two Gabbais if I could speak right after Mincha and right before the regular speaker for two minutes. Right before I was getting up to speak, one of the Gabbis, with his British accent that gave off a very Yekkish vibe, said that no, I cannot speak. The other Gabbai said I should be allowed to speak and did. I proceeded to praise Rabbi Shmuel Bowman, mentioned exactly what he said 5 years earlier, how much I was inspired by him, hugged him and gave Nachas to his father. I felt the entire time the Yekkish Gabbai and other were staring daggers at me.

The speaker was excellent. He is a retired professor of Jewish Studies at McGill University in Montreal.

After Davening I walked and rode with Rabbi Bowman with his father to and on the elevator and to the 6th floor. He lives on the 7th floor with my mother in law on the 6th floor. I found out the Rabbi Bowman is a Sofer STAM and a motivational speaker, besides operating his NGO, Operation Lifeshield. I asked Rabbi Bowman, what his thoughts were of the Kotzker Rebbe. Rabbi Bowman answers, Ahavas Yisroel, love of fellow Jews. I was astounded and asked him how did you know this. Most people would not answer that the Kotzker was all about Ahavas Yisroel. Rabbi Bowman told me through Rabbi Shlomo Carlbach.

Rabbi Bowman lives in Efrat, a few doors down from his good friend, Dovid Willner, my cousin. Wow.

Saturday Night – November 9, 2019:

Went to a movie at the BAYT – Prosecuting Evil: The Extraordinary World of Ben Ferencz. After the movie the Rabbi and Jordanna Leibowitz spoke. She is only 23 and was impressive. She is the granddaughter of Judy and Anshel Leibowitz, good friends and neighbors of my in laws, in Clanton Park. They had the corner home in the Cul-de-Sac. Jordanna’s father is Shlomie Leibowitz. I also saw the other brother, Hymie, whom I hadn’t seen in over 20 years. He looked the same. There were over 200 people there.

https://www.cjnews.com/news/canada/survivors-granddaughter-attended-groening-trial-germany

Sunday – November 10, 2019:

Davened at the BAYT. Went to the Hakomas Matzvah for Aunt Ruth Noble-Lister. Label and Yosef Lister spoke. Miriam Lister-Klein came in.

For Dinner went to Dr. Laffa in the Soby shopping center. Danny Noble form New York and Shimmy Rothman came with us for dinner.

Monday – November 11, 2019:

Left for Chicago at 10:00 AM. It was snowing and the road snow covered. It took me 13 hours and 10 minutes, I stopped every hour.

Shabbos Parshas Breshis 2019

On November 7, 2019May 27, 2022 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn Divrei Torah, My Life, Synogagues I Attended1 Comment

October 25-26, 2019

Another great Shabbos at ASBI.
Shabbos Mevorchim Cheshvan
Shabbos in Lakeview
Carlbach Friday Night Davening
Rabbi Wolkenfeld’s Torah
Midrash Mordechai on Breishis – Rabbi Moshe Mordechai Morgenstern

I am excited. Nothing better than Shabbos in Lakeview.

We are now starting from the Beginning of the Torah, Sefer Breishis. The Torah of the Breshis is magnificent. We get to spend the next two months delving into our origins and our holy forefathers. This alone is a major Simcha and a reason to celebrate.

The Friday night davening was down in the social hall, was a Carlbach davening, and was magnificent. I was greatly inspired. Sholom davened with me. Rabbi Wolkenfeld spoke out the Malbim at the beginning of Breishis. Rabbi Wolkenfeld listed the multiple questions of the Malbim on the first Passuk. Each letter and word had an anomaly and the Malbim asked about 10 questions. Rabbi Wolkenfeld said that my purpose now is not to say the answers, but to show how much one can ask and learn from every Passuk in the Torah. 1. He read the Malbim’s opening questions on the first verses of Bereshit and made the point that every act of translation is itself an act of interpretation and that there was no way to derive even a simple Pshat understanding of any Pasuk without engaging in significant questions about the very meaning of words. Is “Bereishit” in construct form (Rashi) or not (Rambam…and King James)?

Went to Tzvi and Sholom’s apartment for the Shabbos meal. Serka prepared a great meal. Eli ate with us.

Shabbos Morning:

Got up at 4:00 AM, learned until 5:15 AM, slept until 7:15 AM. Finished the Parsha. Went to Daven at the Hashkamah Minyan, had the third Aliya. Falk davened nicely. Great Cholent. Brought the Diet Faygo pop. Faygo was started by two brothers with the last name Feginson out of Detroit . Went to the main sanctuary. Sat in the Shul to listen to Rabbi Wolkenfeld. He shared his wife’s observation that we read the beginning of the Torah having just completed it and we read the end of the Torah just moments before starting it again. So, even though these chapters are far apart, they are still linked very closely. Moshe is invited to “see” Eretz Yisrael before he dies and how good it is. That isn’t a cruel tease, but an echo to the opening actions of God in Sefer Bereishit who “sees” the new creations and how good they are. Rabbi Wolkenfeld introduced this by saying that Moshe’s death appears to be depressing and he answered it with his wife’s thought. Rabbi Wolkenfeld said for years he thought the death of Moshe was unfair and depressing. Zipporah asked at our Simchas Torah table and I tried to answer it. However, Rabbi Wolkenfeld and his wife gave the answer a beautiful thought. Rabbi Wolkenfeld spoke nicely about the Pittsburgh massacre. Went to the Kiddush and saw Eli.

I gave a large portion of the Dr. Leonard Kranzler memorial Parshah Shiur. My Torah starts at the next page.

The Shiur was over at 2:30 PM after we learned from Sefer Yehoshua. Tzvi came by and sat in the Shiur. Tzvi is great. Orson Welles’s name came up and Tzvi knew about Citizen Kane and his other great movie, The Magnificent Ambersons. It was raining all day. I sat and walked in Shul with Tzvi.

Davened Mincha, learned some Daf Yomi, Davened Maariv, and went home.

Vort #1:

I read the first Kotzker Vort in the Sefer Ohel Torah. The Sefer is called Ohel Torah because the numerical value of Ohel Torah is the same as Rabbinu Menachem Mendel Z”L.

I had to read the Vort four times until its brilliance emerged. Rabbi Wolkenfeld helped in my understanding. I had these thoughts for a number of years, however, Rabbi Wolkenfeld gave it form and expression. Source (Ramasaim Zophim 20A)

Translation:

The Midrash Tanchuma states – This is what the Torah means when it says in Mishlei 3:19 – “God with wisdom founded the earth”. That is when Hashem was about to create the world, He consulted the Torah and then created the world, as it says in Mishlei 8:14: Council and wisdom is mine , I am understanding and, power is mine. How was the Torah written? It was written with letters of black fire on a surface of white fire as it says in Shir HaShirim 5:11 – This means that each crowned stroke on the letters of the Torah contains heaps and heaps of law. This is the language of the Midrash Tanchuma.

The Gemoro in Menachos 29B brings down the statement of Rabbi Yehuda in the name of Rav that when Moshe ascended the heavens, Moshe found God tying crowns to the letters of the Torah. He said, God, who is preventing you form giving the Torah as it, without the adornments. God responds – there is one man at the end of many generation and Akiva Ben Yosef is his name that in the future will expound of even crown and crown heaps and heaps of law . . .

The Kotzker continues – with these ideas we can understand the words of our teacher, the Rebi, Reb Bunim of Pershischa, TZL who said, “that they learn with him the letters”. This is to be understood like we said that Rabbi Akiva learned many laws from the crowns of Torah, how much more so from every letter there is great amount to expound. Every letter has within it many letters, Milui and Milui of Melium, and the forms of each letter. The Rebi, Reb Bunim continued “that he learned from the heavens,”, like the Gemoro says that this learning can only be learnt from the heavens.

The end means that the Torah is so great infused with almost infinity of laws and explanations, put into the Torah by God himself to be learnt and expounded, uncovered by man. Perhaps the Rebi is referring to learning with an angel, but I think he is also saying that we can uncover this heavenly Torah but it is hard coded in the words of the Torah. If I may add that once the Kotzker explained the actions and once the Rebi Reb Bunim learned Torah form the heavens. He bought it down to us and once it was exposed to our world we can learn the same Torah.

Vort #2:

Chanoch walked with God then he was no more, for God took him. Rashi explains that Chanoch was a righteous mans, but his mind was easily induced to turn form his righteous ways and to become wicked, God therefore took him away quickly and made him die before his full time . . .

It appears to be very difficult to anyone who reads this Rashi. Is it possible to say about Chanoch who was the angel “Mitatat”, the official angel of the inner sanctum of God, was heaven forbid easily influenced to do evil.

It seems that the explanation is just the opposite – it was easy for Chanoch to speak to the heart of a sinner to leave his path of wickedness. God was therefore afraid through Chanoch that free choice (in the world) would be gone; therefore He hastened to remove Chanoch from this world before his time. Meaning Chanoch was a super Lubavitcher Rebbe. (Source Lekutai Magadim, Volume 1 (Page 11A).

Wow. The Kotzker turns Rashi 180 degrees and says that Rashi is talking in praise of Chanoch.

A few years ago Rabbi Pilchik told me the above Vort and said the below follow-up in the name of an anonymous Rebi. Rabbi Ephraim Twerski confirmed the Vort and after math and told me that it was his Zedi, the Dizikor Rebbe.

The follow-up – The night after saying the Vort the Dzikov Rebbe had a dream where Rashi appeared to the Dizikor Rebbe and thanked him for the explanation. Rashi told him that when Rashi saw Chanoch in the next world, they did not look at each other because Rashi disparaged Chanoch. Now that you explained what I said regarding Chanoch positively we are friendly. After they told me this Vort, I found the Vort in this Sefer and also in the name of the Kotzker’s son, Admor Dovid Morgenstern TZL (1809-1873), and was ecstatic. The Kotzker lived from 1787-1859.

2019 addition – perhaps both interpretations in Rashi can be true at the same time. The more a Tzadik and people are out in the world interacting with people, the more he can be susceptible to be negatively influenced by the people and society he is trying to help, especially if they are speaking to the inner Neshmah of that person. Perhaps you can say similar to what happened to Rabbi Shlomo Carlbach and this is why Reb Shlomo Carlebach’s music is greater than ever, because it came from a holy place.

This Maamer lends an important insight into the Kotzker. He was always looking to find the positive and good in everyone and everything. I have found that this mindset influences the writings, ideas, and thought of his descendants.

Third Vort:

This is from my great-Uncle, Rabbi Moshe Mordechai Morgenstern. He took over after the death of his father, the Pilaver Rebbe. Rabbi Moshe Mordechai Morgenstern was the fourth generation Kotzker and I am the seventh. Beautiful.

Shabbos Parshas Bechukosi: June 1, 2019 – 27 Iyar 5779

On July 2, 2019June 2, 2023 By Avrohom Meir MorgensternIn Divrei Torah, My Life, Synogagues I Attended2 Comments

How do I communicate the joy of this Shabbos, so the reader feels my joy.

Highlights:

Staying in Lakeview for Shabbos
Friday night Carlebach Davening at ASBI
Sholom davening with me Friday night
Inviting a guest for our Friday night meal
Eating by my kids on Shabbos
Having great Friday night conversation with our guest
Walking our guest partially home
Davening at the Hashkamah minyan and having Cholent at the Kiddush
Discovering my Chiddush in the Ahavas Shaul
Listening to the Rabbi’s Drasha (speech at end of this post)
Giving the Chumash Shiur at 12:30 – great Shiur
Listening to Professor Ruth Lander giving a class on the origins of the Siddur

Friday Night – May 31, 2019:

I decided to stay in Lakeview for Shabbos by my sons, Sholom and Tzvi. This Shabbos is Shabbos Mivorchim Sivan and ASBI has a Carlebach Shabbos Friday night service. I arrived at the Shul a little late with Sholom. The davening was magnificent. Rabbinit Sarna spoke and afterwards I told her it was the best Torah I heard from her.

I walked out of Shul after davening and saw Danielle sitting outside the Shul. I understood that she needed a meal. Although I was staying at my sons’ house, I invited her. It was a great meal. Danielle writes movie reviews, interviews directors and other movie personalities to various film festivals, such as Toronto, Cannes, etc. She talked about her experiences. Look her up at solzyatthemovies.com. Tzvi also loves movies. I brought cold cuts and salad. We had plenty to go around. After the meal we walked her halfway home. It was a beautiful evening. Danielle had no invitations for Friday night and she appreciated a meal and the company.

Shabbos Morning – June 1, 2019:

Arrived at ASBI at 7:55 AM and davened at the Hashkama minyan which started at 8:00 AM. I received an Aliyah. They served tasty Cholent at the Kiddush.

Went upstairs and learned from Rabbi Shaul Yedidya Shochet’s Sefer Ahavas Shaul with Binyamin Cohen. He helped me understand the Torah. I joyously discovered that I had the merit to be M’Chavin to his Torah and added to it. Went into the main Shul to hear Rabbi Wolkenfeld’s Shabbos Drasha. Excellent speech, copied below.

After Davening I went to the Kiddush. Sholom Morgenstern came and we talked.

I gave the 12:30 PM Chumash Shiur and read the Torah of Rabbi Shaul Yedidya Shochet on Bechukosi. I also gave historical background using the attached three pages from the book Jews of Chicago, written by Irving Cutler. I also discussed the Haskomos in the Sefer from the Ridvaz, Rabbi Yaakov Dovid Wilovsky written in 1902 and from Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak HaCohen Kook written in 1903 when he was still Rabbi in Boisk, before he made Aliyah.

The following is the Torah I said from the Ahavas Shaul, pages 76 and 77 – on Parshas Bechukosi: Comments in brackets are what I added.

Chapter 26, Verse 6:

ווְנָֽתַתִּ֤י שָׁלוֹם֙ בָּאָ֔רֶץ וּשְׁכַבְתֶּ֖ם וְאֵ֣ין מַֽחֲרִ֑יד וְהִשְׁבַּתִּ֞י חַיָּ֤ה רָעָה֙ מִן־הָאָ֔רֶץ וְחֶ֖רֶב לֹא־תַֽעֲבֹ֥ר בְּאַרְצְכֶֽם:

“And I will grant Peace in the Land, and you will lie down with no one to frighten you; I will remove wild beats from the Land , and no army will pass through the land.”

The explanation is that through the merit of learning our holy Torah, we will be protected from baseless hatred among us Jews, there will be actual peace among us. Because Torah scholars increase peace in the world. Therefore, even when you sleep, you will have nothing to fear. (This is what the Ibn Ezra says using one word on ווְנָֽתַתִּ֤י שָׁלוֹם֙ בָּאָ֔רֶץ – “Benachim” – Among Yourselves.)

The Torah continues “ and I will drive out wild beasts from the land”. This means that God will remove wild beasts from the land of Israel and it does not mean that he will destroy them completely.

The Ahavas Shaul spends the better part of page 76 on this – that the wild beasts will be moved out of Israel and into surrounding lands.

The Ahavas Shaul concludes beautifully on the top of page 77 as follows:

“It comes out from everything I have laid out that when the Jews are dedicated to Torah for its own sake, even inanimate objects sprout and produces. Nothing natural stands in our way. In addition, Hashem Yisborach promises us that he will give peace amount us.

The problem is this:

The Gemara in Brcohos 33 states that everything is in the hands of God, except for fear of heaven. Free choice is up to man and the greatest sin is Machlokes – bitter disagreement and separation of hearts. This was borne out by the second temple, that just because you have Torah, you may not have fear of heaven. The second temple, despite being full of Torah, was destroyed because of internal fighting. Their Torah was “Sh’lo Leshmah” not for the sake of heaven.

Although we find there is value in learning Torah “Sh’lo Leshmah” – not for the sake of heaven. As we find in Pesachim 50B that people should learn “Sh’lo Leshmah” because learning not for the sake of heaven leads to learning for the sake of heaven. However, when you are still learning Sh’lo Lishmah, not for the sake of heaven, and have not yet arrived to Leshmah, there will be Machlokes – bitter disagreement.

However, a person who is able take his Torah to a level of אִם־בְּחֻקֹּתַ֖י תֵּלֵ֑כו and learns Torah Leshmah – for its own sake and watches the commandments to keep them will bring peace in the world.

How do we understand the Gemoro Kedushim 30B:`

“What is the meaning of the phrase “enemies in the gate” with regard to Torah study? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says: Even a father and his son, or a rabbi and his student, who are engaged in Torah together in one gate become enemies with each other due to the intensity of their studies. But they do not leave there until they love each other,”

That even a father -son, teacher-student that learns Torah together start out as enemies. Since בְּחֻקֹּתַ֖י תֵּלֵ֑כוּ refers to learning our holy Torah, it would seem that disagreements will spread among the Jews, but in truth the Gemara concludes that they do not leave there until they love each other. Therefore, through learning Torah, I will give peace among the Torah scholars and not only will there be peace among them but there will be peace in the land. Meaning, there will be no war, enabling the people to lie down and not be afraid, not from war and not from hatred between men.

What the Ahavas Shaul is saying that learning Torah Leshmah brings peace. Is the peace on a metaphysical level or on a practical level? About ten years ago I said based on the Rashi quoted above on Chapter 26, Verse 3 that Im Bechukosi Talachu means that if you learn intensely then God will provide plenty for the Jews in Israel. Then, as the Ibn Ezra says on Chapter 26, Verse 6 on the words וְנָֽתַתִּ֤י שָׁלוֹם֙ בָּאָ֔רֶץ, I will give peace Among Yourselves”. What the Ahavas Shaul is saying is based on this Ibn Ezra that if there is true learning Torah intensely then there will be peace. How does this work?

The answer is that we all have our own understanding Torah. I will understand Torah using my abilities different than others. It may be subtle or major. If a Rosh Yeshiva says an explanation, I can disagree with it and we can both be correct, or I alone can be correct. Through going through the battle of Torah which is Truth, we will develop mutual respect and love for one another and this will bring Peace in Klal Yisroel. Meaning, if the Rosh Yeshiva in Ponovich gave Shiur at Atareth Cohanim in the old city and all the students wore knit Yarmulkes, the love between them will be intertwined.

People arguing and fighting over ideology, Hashkafah, how to dress, will not lead to mutual respect but bitter fights. Learning Torah intensely and arguing over Torah leads to love and respect. 45 years ago my study partner, Harold Katz. said that after Purim in Israel, no one learns. I said at the time, wouldn’t it be great if after Purim all the Rosh Yeshivas have to say Shiur in other Yeshivas. The Rosh Yeshiva of Mir say a Shiur in the Gush, the Rosh Yeshiva of Gush in Ponovich, the Rosh Yeshiva of Ponovich in Bar Ilan University Imagine the Ahavas Yisroel that would have been created over the last 30 years that Klal Yisroel has lost.

There is a story of the Chidusshi Harim and the Lissa Rov on my website that illustrates this point.

Rabbi David Wolkenfeld’s Drasha:

Rabbi David Wolkenfeld
ASBI Congregation
Behukotai 5779

Safety in Numbers
Some of you may know that I went to a specialized math and science high school. I don’t often draw upon that element of my education but I do want to work through an arithmetic problem with you all this morning.
Five is to one hundred, as one hundred is to….
Well…five times twenty is one hundred, and so one hundred times twenty is two thousand.
But the opening verses of our Torah portion this week present a different sort of mathematics:
וְרָדְפ֨וּ מִכֶּ֤ם חֲמִשָּׁה֙ מֵאָ֔ה וּמֵאָ֥ה מִכֶּ֖ם רְבָבָ֣ה יִרְדֹּ֑פוּ וְנָפְל֧וּ אֹיְבֵיכֶ֛ם לִפְנֵיכֶ֖ם לֶחָֽרֶב׃
“Five of you shall give chase to a hundred, and a hundred of you shall give chase to ten thousand” Five victorious Israelites can pursue one hundred adversaries, and one hundred victorious Israelites, blessed with Divine favor can pursue ten thousand adversaries. This is not a linear progression, this is an accelerating growth curve. How can we understand or explain this mathematical progression?

Rashi explains:
אֵינוֹ דּוֹמֶה מֻעֲטִין הָעוֹשִׂים אֶת הַתּוֹרָה לִמְרֻבִּין הָעוֹשִׂין אֶת הַתּוֹרָה
“A small number who follow the Torah cannot be compared through a simple comparison to a large number of people who follow the Torah.”

The verse illustrates the power of a community coming together. When we join together we become force magnifiers for one another other. A friend can offer a hug or a shoulder to cry on – but a community can fill a shivah home with visitors offering condolence and can provide a minyan for kaddish. A brother or sister can slap you on the back with joy when hearing your good news, but that cannot replace being surrounded by a community dancing at a wedding or a bar mitzvah or at some other simcha.
אֵינוֹ דּוֹמֶה מֻעֲטִין הָעוֹשִׂים אֶת הַתּוֹרָה לִמְרֻבִּין הָעוֹשִׂין אֶת הַתּוֹרָה
“A small number who follow the Torah cannot be compared through a simple comparison to a large number of people who follow the Torah.”

The context of the mathematical dynamic in our parsha, however, relates to self-defense and confronting our enemies. Everyone understands there is safety in numbers, two are stronger than one, but not as strong as three, which in turn, is not as strong a four. Even Kohelet, in its most cynical and world-weary mood tells us that two are stronger than one and three is stronger than two. It doesn’t get more simple that that. Or does it? The Torah is saying something different in this week’s parasha. The Torah’s numbers demonstrate that the
safety in numbers multiplies at a faster rate than do our numbers. When just a few more of us stand together, we become so much safer and can confront our adversaries in a much more effective way.

I thought about this dynamic a lot this week. I traveled to Springfield this Wednesday with the Orthodox Union to speak to legislators on behalf of an initiative to secure state funding for security enhancements for communities that are at threat of being victimized by hate crimes. Rabbi Yehiel Kalish, a new State Representative from the Northern suburbs is one of the co-sponsors of this initiative and he welcomed our delegation from the statehouse floor and then called, one by one, each of our representatives to come off the statehouse floor to speak with us. When you are introduced as “the rabbi of the synagogue that was firebombed two weeks ago” people pay attention and listen. But standing side by side with a Baptist pastor from the South Side and a Syrian priest, a Muslim cleric, a Sikh scholar, and a Hindu communal leader gave each one of us added weight and authenticity to speak. That too is a form of safety in numbers. The coalition of men and women of good will from various faiths and diverse ethnic backgrounds, who all recognize that none of us are safe so long as all of us are not safe, is a force multiplier just as the Torah describes.

Another story from earlier this week brought home that same message. In response to a worrisome rise in antisemitism in Germany, the government’s own commissioner responsible for combating antisemitism, Felix Klein, announced that Jews should take responsibility for their safety by refraining from wearing a kippah or other outward identification marker as Jews. “I cannot advise Jews to wear the kippah everywhere all the time in Germany.” he said. Indeed, the common practice, of many observant Orthodox Jews in Italy and France and elsewhere is in line with these recommendations. I have vivid memories of visiting Paris almost 15 years ago and seeing not one single outwardly identifiable Jew on a street with four kosher restaurants. (Sara and I went incognito; I wore a wool newspaper-boy cap and Sara wore a bright blue tichel; we fit right in). But the story in Germany, at least this week, took a different turn. One German tabloid newspaper printed a cut-out kippah on their front page and encouraged their readers to cut it out and somehow wear it proudly in solidarity with Germany’s Jewish community. (I’m imagining something akin to those cardboard kippot they give out at the kotel). Julian Reichelt, the newspaper’s editor, wrote, “”If even one person in our country cannot wear the kippah without putting themselves in danger, then the only answer must be that we all wear the kippah. The kippah belongs to Germany!”

There is safety in numbers. These two examples are the safety in numbers that are available to us when non-Jewish allies step forward and stand beside us, whether they are Germans committed to combating antisemitism or our own neighbors in Chicago. But what about our own numbers? Three people, all strangers whose names I do not know, approached me on the street in the past two weeks and said, “I think I recognize you from television.” I have to admit that in none of my previous delusions of grandeur (and I have many delusions of grandeur) have I ever imagined that someone would say those words to me. These three individuals spoke to me to offer their solidarity and support for our community. And, indeed, nearly 100% of the interactions I have had with strangers on the street in Chicago because I wear a kippah in the nearly six years that I have lived here have been positive (including the random joggers and bikers and passers-by who routinely wish my family Shabbat Shalom as they swoosh past on Shabbat afternoons).

But, the reluctance of many European Jews to be visible in public as Jews stems from an anxiety I sometimes feel too. A close friend of my father’s once characterized their differences by saying, “I am American Jew and could not believe anything bad could happen; he was a European Jew and knew that it had.” And each of us need to balance the American Jewish optimism with the sober awareness of the nature of Jewish history and an awareness of the darker potentials of the Jewish present. But, I want to encourage you to think about what you might gain through a more public expression of your Jewish identity and your Jewish commitments. The earliest references in the Talmud to Jews covering our heads as a form of religious devotion occurs in the context of a discussion of an apparent obligation of married women to have some form of head covering whenever they are in public. Later in the Talmud, there is evidence of some very pious, but not all men, covering their heads as well.

Rabbi Nahman bar Yitzhak’s mother, according to a Talmudic legend, was told by a Chaldean astrologer that her son would grow up to be a thief. To prevent this from happening she ensured that his head was always
covered. She raised him to keep his head covered and to, “cover your head so that the fear of Heaven will be upon you.” He had no idea why she said this. Until one day, sitting under a fruit tree that did not belong to him, a gust of wind uncovered his head, and overcome by desire, he reached up and plucked fruit that was not his to take. Somehow his head covering had kept him from theft all those years.

The head covering of women, the head covering of pious men, the head covering that prevents theft, are perhaps all motivated by the same ethos of cultivating an awareness that one stands in the presence of God. All of these forms of head coverings could be our way to echo the head coverings worn as part of the
uniform by the kohanim as they served in the beit ha’mikdash . Indeed, all of the rabbinic restrictions on heating food on Shabbat, (such as shehiyah and hazzarah) are motivated by a fear that we will forget it is Shabbat and stoke embers into a fire on Shabbat to speed up the warming of our food. But in the beit hamikdash there were no rabbinic restrictions on heating food on Shabbat because the kohanim would remind one another to be aware of God and the sanctity of Shabbat.

We too are enlisted in the service of God no less than the kohanim. I am very lucky that I work for the Jewish community and it is considered quite appropriate for me to embrace this Jewish practice even where I work. I understand that it might not be considered professionally appropriate to wear an identifiably Jewish head covering or even a Jewish necklace at the courthouse or hospital or factory or school where you work. But I do know that when we are not at work, we have more freedom to express ourselves and embrace parts of our identities and religious practices that we might keep more hidden when we are on the job.

I also know that the more of us who make the choice to display our Judaism in an outward way in the supermarket or on the playground, the more comfortable it will be for each one of us to do so. Years ago, when Noam was three years old, we drove from Princeton into Manhattan to attend the Salute to Israel Parade. We parked our car near my mother’s apartment and began the walk through Central Park towards the parade route on Fifth Avenue. As I pushed Noam’s stroller through the park, he saw another Jewish man headed for the parade and called out while pointing, “there’s a Jew!” And then two minutes later, as we saw someone else headed for the parade, he called out again, “I see another Jew!” Fortunately, the novelty of seeing other Jews on the street wore off before we reached the parade and its tens of thousands of marchers.

Let us find ways to recognize the presence of God above us always, whether we are at work or in the supermarket or in the park. And let us support one another, each one of us on his and her unique path of growth in Torah and mitzvot. In this way, may we merit the blessings of this morning’s Torah portion:

וְנָתַתִּ֤י שָׁלוֹם֙ בָּאָ֔רֶץ וּשְׁכַבְתֶּ֖ם וְאֵ֣ין מַחֲִר֑יד

“I will grant peace in the land, and you shall lie down untroubled by anyone.”
Through coming together, within our community, and with allies on the outside, may we recognize that it is God’s own blessing that entails:
אֶתְכֶ֖ם קֽוֹמְמִיּֽוּת׃ 􀋂 וָאוֹלֵ֥

“It is I,” God says, “who cause you to walk upright.”
(We have found that internal strife brings destruction in Klal Yisroel. The most famous is during the destruction of the second temple, when the Romans were at the gates of Jerusalem, there was civil war within the city or when the city supply of food and fuel were destroyed. The other example was in the late 1700s when a Misnaged went to the authorities to libel the Ba’al Hatanya thinking he was doing a virtuous act, endorsed by the Torah scholars.)

Moshe Alshich
Alshich’s grave in Safed
Personal
Born	1508
Died	1593Safed, Ottoman Empire
Religion	Judaism