Parshas VaYishlach: December 14, 2024

On Friday, December 13, 2024 of this week my son-in-law was not well and vomiting.  He went to the emergency room at Bethesda West in Boynton Beach.  In the ER, the doctor touched his stomach and asked him if he felt pain.  Danny projected vomit all over the doctor and the ER.  Danny was admitted to the hospital and my daughter, Shoshana, stayed with him over Shabbos.  Due to dehydration, Danny’s kidneys started shutting down.  He was given hydration and antibiotics.  He felt better, but is still weak.  They discharged him right after Shabbos.  The doctor told him not to drive or extend himself for a week  so he could recover.

I heard Rabbi Shnayer Leiman speak three times this Shabbos and Sunday at 10:00 AM.  He was scholar in residence at Anshe Chesed.   All of his speeches were excellent.  I would like to discuss his Shalos Suedas presentation.

Professor Leiman read part of a Tshuva (halachic essay) from the Chasom Sofer.  It was emotional.  However, the part he did not read was more impactful to me.

History:

Kotzker  lived from 1787 to 1859  – 72 years

Kozker’s first wife dies in 1836.  They have one child.

The Kotzker remarries in 1838, at the age of 51.

The Kotzker has twin daughters and two sons with his second wife.

The Chasam Sofer’s teacher  was Rabbi Nosson Adler who lived from  1741 to 1800 – 60 years

The Chasam Sofer lived from 1762 to 1839 – 77 years.

The Chasam’s Sofer first wife dies in 1812.

He remarries in 1813 and has 3 boys and 8 girls with his second wife.

The Chasam Sofer’s children become Torah giants and are still impactful today.

Wikipedia:

Nathan Adler devoted himself to the study of the Kabbalah, and adopted the liturgical system of Isaac Luria, assembling about himself a select community of kabbalistic adepts. He was one of the first Ashkenazim to adopt the Sephardi pronunciation of Hebrew, and gave hospitality to a Sephardi scholar for several months to ensure that he learnt that pronunciation accurately. He prayed according to the Sephardic ritual (despite being in Germany, ground zero for Ashkenziac tradition), pronounced the priestly blessing every day, and in other ways approached the school of the Hasidim, who had at that time provoked the strongest censures on the part of the Talmudists of the old school.  These were the years of the strongest opposition to Chasidium, with the GRA signing the second ban against Chassidium in 1782.  His followers claimed that he had performed miracles,[3] and turned visionaries themselves, frightening many persons with predictions of misfortunes which would befall them. The rabbis and congregational leaders intervened in 1779 and prohibited, under penalty of excommunication, the assemblies in Nathan Adler’s house.[1]

Professor Leiman said that Rabbi Nosson Adler was forced to flee from Frankfort in 1781.  As Rabbi Nosson Adler was leaving Frankfurt, the Chasam Sofer told his Rebbe that the Gemora says that a teacher who goes into exile, his students must go with him into exile.  Rabbi Nosson Adler told him that your family are all in Frankfort, you are not to come with me.  The Chasam Sofer persisted and ran after the carriage for many Parsa’s. A Parsa is about 2.5 miles.  When he caught up with his Rebbe, Rabbi Nosson Adler said, you will come to me, and I will be like a father.  Rabbi Nosson Adler ended up in Boskowitz 1782 and in 1785 returned to Frankfort.  The Chasam Sofer never returned to Frankfort and ended up being the Chief Rabbi of Pressburg, the capital of Slovakia.  Pressburg is now known as Bratsalivia.  

The Chasam Sofer was married to his first wife and they had no children.  She died in 1812 and in 1813, when he was 51, he married a second wife and they had 11 children.  Chasam Sofer died in 1839 at the age of 77.  

Read the below from the writings of the Chasam Sofer.  The Hebrew is on the last page.    

“And It was when I poured water on his hands when he first came to Boskowitz, he had a small son and one daughter about 12 years old.  He loved her, the daughter was like her mother, and it was impossible to adequately  speak her praise.    And due to our sins, she died.  (Rabbi Nosson Adler) did not cry.  He was מצדיק הדין – justified God’s judgement  with great joy (effectively saying God gave and God took).  It was wondrous that I did not see that much joy at this time as praying during Simchas Torah.  (Rabbi Nosson Adler had a custom  every Shabbos  of the year to be called up to the Torah twice, once for Cohen and also for Mafter.) On Shabbos Parsha Va’era, during the 7 days of morning he received his normal two Aliyos.  When Rabbi Nosson Adler read the Haftorah of the Parsha, one tear came from his eye and it landed in his hand.  He immediately returned back  to joy and he did not show any sign of sadness and never mentioned his daughter again.  He had no other children.”

A true Talmud watches every action of their teacher.  The Chasam Sofer noticed the tear,  This is true of the Kotzker’s Talmidim.

Professor Leiman added that the Haftorah of Vayera is the story of the Isha Hashunamis, the woman from the city of Shunam, who is the central figure in this haftarah. This Haftorah spoke to Rabbi  Nosson Adler and the loss of his precious daughter.

The story of the Isha Hashunamos:

The prophet Elisha sent his servant, Geichazi, to the Isha Hashumanis to ask her if he could repay her kindness in some way. Elisha was extremely thankful for the hospitality she showed him, always preparing a place for him to stay in her attic when he was in the area.

She asked Elisha for a child and he gave her a bracha, there in the village of Shunam. When Elishas gave her the blessing, she told him not to play with her.  Do not promise and not deliver.  

The Isha Hashunamis gave birth to a boy. Who did this young child become?  Chazal tell us he was the Navi Chabakuk. His name is derived from the word chobeik, to hug, since the pasuk (Melachim Beis, 16:4) describes how Elisha blessed his mother, saying she would be chobeikes ben, hugging a child, within a year’s time.

While working with his father in the fields, the young boy falls ill with a head ailment, perhaps a high fever. His father brings the sick boy to his mother and he later dies in her arms. She goes to find Elisha and shortly after he brings the dead son of the Isha Hashunamis back to life.

The Isha Hashunamis gave birth to a boy. Who did this young child become?  Chazal tell us he was the Navi Chabakuk. His name is derived from the word chobeik, to hug, since the pasuk (Melachim Beis, 16:4) describes how Elisha blessed his mother, saying she would be chobeikes ben, hugging a child, within a year’s time.

The next part was not read by the Professor, but is fascinating.

“And he did not use any (Kabbalistic) means (for his wife to get pregnant and replace his beloved daughter.)  I knew that his wife was older and  did not have the capacity to get pregnant.  He did not want to bother the heavens to change nature, because (if he were to change nature) it could possibly cause death to his wife.  Therefore I did not ask him at all to ask mercy for my first wife for this reason. (The Chasam Sofer’s first wife didn’t have any children.)   If you do not push nature – to change it, then nature will not push you. (meaning if you ask God for a blessing to change what is destined for you, there can be a pushback and something bad will happen to you).   God has many ways of bringing relief and saviour.  God is the healer of those that have broken hearts, and who is imprisoned by their agony.  He will provide closure for their wounds and will rebuild that which is in ruins and will cause their sorrow and agony to flee.”

This is comparable to the Kotzker.  The Kotzker was not one to storm the heavens for himself or his family for blessings. The Kotzker did not pray for his family to be healed or for blessings. 

 He said, if this is the decree from God he is willing to accept it.  God knows what he needs.  He did pray for others.

When the Kotzker Rebbe’s first wife died, he was stoic and did not cry.  When they lowered her body into the grave, he stood over her and two tears fell from his eyes only the body.  Then he told the Chevra Kadisha to pour dirt on the grave and close it.  He remarried at age 51.   

Shabbos Parshas VaYeitzei

December 7, 2024

Relationship:

  Lukover Rebbe 1858-1920

Avrohom Meir Morgenstern        -Brothers-       Yosef Ahron Morgenstern – both died in Holocaust 1942

                  ↓                                                                   ↓                                         ↓

Yisroel Yakov Morgenstern    -First Cousins-            David Morgan     ————– Esther  ————Mina            

   Holocaust survivor             Survived in Siberia

                   ↓                                                                   ↓                                         ↓  

Mitchell Morgenstern          – Second Cousins-          Yosef Morgan                      Rosette

Avrohom Meir and Yosef Ahron Morgenstern were brothers.  My grandfather, Avrohom Meir, was a businessman in Warsaw and Yosef Ahron was a Talmud Chacom who had a Yeshiva in Warsaw on the first floor of the apartment building where he lived.  I believe that Yosef Ahron was a type of person who learned nonstop and would never look at a woman.  About 15 years ago, I met Mina, another sister of David and Esther..  I believe it was she who told me that when my father got engaged in 1938, Yosef Ahron did not go to the Vort.  I believe he felt it was Bitul Torah and not wanting to mingle with women.

Mina told me a story and confirmed by Rosette that both Mina and Esther remembered that as kids in Warsaw, many times on Shabbos they had to eat in the kitchen and at times there was not enough food for them.  This must have been because he invited guests over who were in Shul. In Europe, it was common for people who traveled to go to the local Shul on Shabbos to sleep and to be invited out for meals.  The guests were served first and the kids always ate last.  I read about this phenomenon in Europe.

Look at the Yad Vashem testimony on Yosef Ahron Morgenstern. https://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000010251693211?album_type=photos_of_me&photo_id=6000000062687105050

Parsha:

Question #1 – Verse 28:11

וַיִּפְגַּ֨ע בַּמָּק֜וֹם וַיָּ֤לֶן שָׁם֙ כִּי־בָ֣א הַשֶּׁ֔מֶשׁ וַיִּקַּח֙ מֵאַבְנֵ֣י הַמָּק֔וֹם וַיָּ֖שֶׂם מְרַֽאֲשֹׁתָ֑יו וַיִּשְׁכַּ֖ב בַּמָּק֥וֹם הַהֽוּא׃

 When does it say וַיִּקַּח֙ מֵאַבְנֵ֣י הַמָּק֔וֹם.  It should say “and he took stones” why does it say “of the place”.

I did not see anyone who has an answer.

Yakov falls asleep.  He dreams of a ladder which Hashem is standing over to protect Yakov.  Rashi says that Yakov was at Mount Moriah in Jerusalem.  Then in 28:17 it says that really Mount Moriah moved north to Bais El.  It seems that Rashi contradicts himself.  

Rembrandt’s Jacob’s Ladder – 1655

The following is a painting by Rembrandt that shows Jacob not lying on the ground but in the middle of the ladder. Rabbi Meir Yakob Soloveichik feels that he drew Jacob in the middle of the ladder due to the advice and Torah of Menashe Ben Israel.  I recall Rabbi Soloveichik saying that just like Jerusalem is the middle of the world, Jacob and the Jews are the center of the world and this is why he drew jacob in the middle of the ladder.

Yaakov makes it to Charan – Padan Aram.  He meets Rachel, kisses her. I have Torah on “he kissed” her.   Yakov has an agreement with Lavan that he will work seven years for the hand of Rachel in marriage.  

Question #2:   Verse 29:20 says וַיַּעֲבֹ֧ד יַעֲקֹ֛ב בְּרָחֵ֖ל שֶׁ֣בַע שָׁנִ֑ים וַיִּהְי֤וּ בְעֵינָיו֙ כְּיָמִ֣ים אֲחָדִ֔ים בְּאַהֲבָת֖וֹ אֹתָֽהּ׃

So Jacob served seven years for Rachel and they seemed to him but a few days because of his love for her.

The reality should be the opposite.  It should have seemed forever to him. They had seven years of talking , planning.  It is a long time that should have been excruciating.

Question #3

Verse 29:21 – וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יַעֲקֹ֤ב אֶל־לָבָן֙ הָבָ֣ה אֶת־אִשְׁתִּ֔י כִּ֥י מָלְא֖וּ יָמָ֑י וְאָב֖וֹאָה אֵלֶֽיהָ׃

Rashi – מלאו ימי. שֶׁאָמְרָה לִי אִמִּי, וְעוֹד מָלְאוּ יָמַי, שֶׁהֲרֵי אֲנִי בֶן פ”ד שָׁנָה וְאֵימָתַי אַעֲמִיד י”ב שְׁבָטִים? וְזֶהוּ שֶׁאָמַר וְאָבוֹאָה אֵלֶיהָ, וְהֲלֹא קַל שֶׁבַּקַּלִּים אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר כֵּן? אֶלָּא לְהוֹלִיד תּוֹלָדוֹת אָמַר כֵּן:

The plain meaning is that Yakov worked the seven years of the agreement.  I have completed my seven years of working and held up my end of the bargain.  This is how the Rashbam and the Ibn Ezra explain the Pasuk.  However, the truth is that the words of כִּ֥י מָלְא֖וּ יָמָ֑י are extra. The previous Pasuk says that he worked for seven years, so obviously he completed his days.   Rashi is telling us the deeper understanding of what Yakov was saying.  Not only did I agree to my part of the bargain, but my mother wants me home and I have to get married to have 12 children.  Maybe this understanding of the Pasuk that Yakov is telling Lavan will leave to go home, resulted in Lavan plans to detain Yakov so that  he and his city continues to get a blessing from Yaakov’s presence.    

Idea #1

I asked years ago.  What did Yakov and Rochel think about the older sister, Leah.  Rochel was the younger sister.  Didn’t she worry that Leah would have to marry Eisav, the evil one.  

Rashi on Verse 29:17 says – רכות. שֶׁהָיְתָה סְבוּרָה לַעֲלוֹת בְּגוֹרָלוֹ שֶׁל עֵשָׂו וּבוֹכָה, שֶׁהָיוּ הַכֹּל אוֹמְרִים שְׁנֵי בָנִים לְרִבְקָה וּשְׁתֵּי בָנוֹת לְלָבָן, הַגְּדוֹלָה לַגָּדוֹל וְהַקְּטַנָּה לַקָּטָן (בבא בתרא קכ”ג):

רכות TENDER — She thought she would have to fall to the lot of Esau and she therefore wept continually, because everyone said, “Rebekah has two sons, Laban has two daughters — the elder daughter for the elder son, the younger daughter for the younger son” (Genesis Rabbah 70:16).

The Medresh adds more color to Leah’s prayers.

Bereshis Rabbah 70:16

Leah’s eyes were delicate and Rachel was of beautiful form and of beautiful appearance” (Genesis 29:17).

“Leah’s eyes were delicate” – Rabbi Yoḥanan’s disseminator interpreted: Leah’s eyes were weak. *From birth. He said to him: ‘Your mother’s eyes were weak.’ What is delicate? They were delicate from weeping, as they *People would say. would say: ‘These were the stipulations: The elder to the elder and the younger to the younger.’ *Leah was to be married to Esau and Rachel to Jacob. She would weep and say: ‘May it be His will that I will not fall to the lot of that wicked man.’   Rav Huna said: Prayer is powerful, as it nullified the decree. Moreover, she preceded her sister.

It seemed that according to Rav Huna, Leah’s prayer changed the world.  Was this good or bad?  Should Leah have married Eisav?  Perhaps it was not good for the world.  

Rabbi Yinon Ben Moshiach showed me a beautiful Brisker Rov.  The Brisker Rov brings down on Toldos Verse 27:45.

עַד־שׁ֨וּב אַף־אָחִ֜יךָ מִמְּךָ֗ וְשָׁכַח֙ אֵ֣ת אֲשֶׁר־עָשִׂ֣יתָ לּ֔וֹ וְשָׁלַחְתִּ֖י וּלְקַחְתִּ֣יךָ מִשָּׁ֑ם לָמָ֥ה אֶשְׁכַּ֛ל גַּם־שְׁנֵיכֶ֖ם י֥וֹם אֶחָֽד׃

The Brisker Rov asks why would Rivka lose both kids on the same day?  He answers that if Yaakov is killed then there is no chance for Eisav to become good so it will be as if she lost both of them on the same day.  Based on this Brisker Rov, you see that Rivka wanted her older son to repent and become good.  This also could have happened with Leah and then Dinah.  Both could have reformed Eisav.

We see from the Medresh that Leah was destined to marry Eisav.  Perhaps this is why they did not step in to find Leah a marriage partner.  They knew that she was to marry Eisav.  Were they concerned that Leah would be marrying an evil monster?  Yossi Frank suggested based on my Torah on Dinah that Leah also had a tremendous power to influence people positively.  This is why she was destined to marry Eisav.  We know that Eisav was to be a Zevulam, supporting Yakov.   Perhaps had Leah and afterwards Dinah married Eisav, Eisav would have done Teshuvah and become a good person that would have changed the world.  Unfortunately this did not happen.   See my Torah on Parshas VaYishlach on Verse 34:1

Yossi Frank’s Pshet fits in with Rashi on Parshas VaYishlach on Verse 34:1. Rashi says that  Dinah was just like her mother.  Perhaps It means that both had a tremendous capacity to be a positive influence on the world and this is what Rashi means that both were יַצְאָנִית – they were able to go out, speak to people, and bring the world closer to God.  Just like Avrohom.

Verse 34:1

וַתֵּצֵ֤א דִינָה֙ בַּת־לֵאָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר יָלְדָ֖ה לְיַעֲקֹ֑ב לִרְא֖וֹת בִּבְנ֥וֹת הָאָֽרֶץ׃

Now Dinah, the daughter whom Leah had borne to Jacob, went out to visit the daughters of the land.

Rashi says בת לאה. וְלֹא בַת יַעֲקֹב? אֶלָּא עַל שֵׁם יְצִיאָתָהּ נִקְרֵאת בַּת לֵאָה, שֶׁאַף הִיא יַצְאָנִית הָיְתָה (בראשית רבה), שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וַתֵּצֶא לֵאָה לִקְרָאתוֹ (וְעָלֶיהָ מָשְׁלוּ הַמָּשָׁל כְּאִמָּהּ כְּבִתָּהּ):

Bava Basra 123 talks about Leah praying to God not to marry Eisav:

אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: שֶׁמַּתְּנוֹתֶיהָ אֲרוּכּוֹת. רַב אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם רַכּוֹת מַמָּשׁ, וְלֹא גְּנַאי הוּא לָהּ, אֶלָּא שֶׁבַח הוּא לָהּ. שֶׁהָיְתָה שׁוֹמַעַת עַל פָּרָשַׁת דְּרָכִים בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: שְׁנֵי בָנִים יֵשׁ לָהּ לְרִבְקָה, שְׁתֵּי בָנוֹת יֵשׁ לוֹ לְלָבָן, גְּדוֹלָה לַגָּדוֹל וּקְטַנָּה לַקָּטָן. וְהָיְתָה יוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל פָּרָשַׁת דְּרָכִים וּמְשָׁאֶלֶת: גָּדוֹל מָה מַעֲשָׂיו? אִישׁ רַע הוּא מְלַסְטֵם בְּרִיּוֹת. קָטָן מָה מַעֲשָׂיו? ״אִישׁ תָּם יֹשֵׁב אֹהָלִים״. וְהָיְתָה בּוֹכָה, עַד שֶׁנָּשְׁרוּ רִיסֵי עֵינֶיהָ. וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיַּרְא ה׳ כִּי שְׂנוּאָה לֵאָה״ – מַאי ״שְׂנוּאָה״? אִילֵּימָא שְׂנוּאָה מַמָּשׁ; אֶפְשָׁר בִּגְנוּת בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה לֹא דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב, בִּגְנוּת צַדִּיקִים דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב?! אֶלָּא רָאָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שֶׁשְּׂנוּאִין מַעֲשֵׂה עֵשָׂו בְּפָנֶיהָ, 

Rav says that there is a different explanation of the verse: Actually, the verse means that her eyes were literally weak, and this is not a denigration of her but a praise of her. As she would hear people at the crossroads, coming from the land of Canaan, who would say: Rebecca has two sons, and her brother Laban has two daughters; the older daughter will be married to the older son, and the younger daughter will be married to the younger son.

וְהָיְתָה יוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל פָּרָשַׁת דְּרָכִים וּמְשָׁאֶלֶת: גָּדוֹל מָה מַעֲשָׂיו? אִישׁ רַע הוּא מְלַסְטֵם בְּרִיּוֹת. קָטָן מָה מַעֲשָׂיו? ״אִישׁ תָּם יֹשֵׁב אֹהָלִים״. וְהָיְתָה בּוֹכָה, עַד שֶׁנָּשְׁרוּ רִיסֵי עֵינֶיהָ.

Rav continues: And she would sit at the crossroads and ask: What are the deeds of the older son? The passersby would answer: He is an evil man, and he robs people. She would ask: What are the deeds of the younger son? They would answer: He is “a quiet man, dwelling in tents” (Genesis 25:27). And because she was so distraught at the prospect of marrying the evil brother, she would cry and pray for mercy until her eyelashes fell out. Since the weakness of her eyes was due to this cause, characterizing her eyes as weak constitutes praise. This is Leah’s prayer for mercy to which Rabbi Yonatan referred.

וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיַּרְא ה׳ כִּי שְׂנוּאָה לֵאָה״ – מַאי ״שְׂנוּאָה״? אִילֵּימָא שְׂנוּאָה מַמָּשׁ; אֶפְשָׁר בִּגְנוּת בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה לֹא דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב, בִּגְנוּת צַדִּיקִים דִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב?! אֶלָּא רָאָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שֶׁשְּׂנוּאִין מַעֲשֵׂה עֵשָׂו בְּפָנֶיהָ, ״וַיִּפְתַּח אֶת רַחְמָהּ״.

The Gemara comments: And her desire not to marry Esau is the basis of that which is written: “And the Lord saw that Leah was hated, and He opened her womb” (Genesis 29:31). What is the meaning of “hated”? If we say that she was literally hated, is it possible? The verse there did not speak to the disparagement of even a non-kosher animal, so did the verse here speak to the disparagement of the righteous? Rather, the Holy One, Blessed be He, saw that the behavior of Esau was hated by her, and therefore: “And He opened her womb.”

February 17, 2024 – Avrohom Chase Bar Mitzvah

Parshas Truma – Verse 25:2 – starts on Page 5

This past Wednesday night was Avrohom Chase’s Bar Mitzvah.  He is Mayer and Chanie Chase’s son.

Shabbos was at  the Adas, Rabbi Kaufman’s Shul.  I davened shabbos at the Bar Mitzvah and had an Aliyah.

Sidney Glenner, Lisa Glenner, Esther Chase, Pesach Chase, Mitch Morgenstern, Serka Morgenstern

Mordy Siegal, Meyer Chase

Mordy Siegal, Itamer Yaakov Siegal

Aron Hoch, Sholem Chase, Pesach Chase, Yaakov Chase (Lakewood)

My Torah:

I love the opening Rashbam on this Parsha:  פרשיות של משכן חשן ואפוד אקצר בפירושן וימצאו בפירושי רבינו שלמה אבי אמי ז”ל.

The second pasuk in Truma Verse 25:2 states:

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

The plain meaning of the Pasuk is that Moshe should speak to the Jews and they should take (from their possessions) a donation from every man who generously offers that gift, you should take My donation.

Questions:

1 – the last three words of  תִּקְח֖וּ אֶת־תְּרוּמָתִֽי are redundant.

2 – The Alsich and many others ask why does is say  וְיִקְחוּ and not  ויתנו?

These are answered by the  אפּריון.  See details below.

Both answered  

3 – Rashi says on the word לִ֖י – the word לִשְׁמִי.   What does Rashi exactly mean?  I do not have a good answer for Rashi.  I did see somewhere that Rashi means do not give donations to the Mishkan because of social pressures or for other reasons, give only to serve God.

The Seifsei Chacomin explains why Rashi says לִשְׁמִי because   לִ֖י cannot mean “take 

from your possessions for me” because everything in the world is His, [therefore it

cannot mean, “so it will be Mine.”]  This is difficult because in this world people 

have ownership rights and people have a right to make decisions on their property.

Translations of this Pasuk:

Almost all of the English translations translate “Li” with the plain meaning “Me”.  Only Rabbi Kahane brings in Rashi.

JPS 2006

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

Mesudah:

Speak to the B’nei Yisrael and have them “take for Me” a terumah-offering. From every man whose heart impels him to generosity shall you take My terumah-offering.

Rabbi Charles Kahane:

Tell the Children of Israel to appoint collectors for taking a voluntary gift for “My Name’s sake”; you shall take My voluntary gift from every man whose heart willingly offers the donation.

Only one who brings in Rashi.

Artscroll

Speak to the children of Israel and they shall “take for Me” a portion, from every man whose heart will motivate him you shall take My portion.

The  אפּריון   based on the Tanna Dvei Eliyahu:

Speak to the children of Israel.  And they will “take My gifts”; (this is done) by Moshe taking donations from all people whose heart will motivate him.  Ther Aperion will be explained below.

My Torah:

I want to start off something I read in Paul Newman’s autobiography this Shabbos morning, how coincidental.

Last year and today, I learned and analyzed the following  אפּריון.  See my blog post from last year.

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 אפּריון starts by bringing down 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:

First Step:

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.

When accused of being drunk, Chana’s first response should have been, “I did not drink” and then she should have said, “I am a very unhappy woman”.  However, she reversed the order.

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.  Meaning Chana was not a drunk, even if she drank at that time she only drank because of her bitterness.  This is what Chana is telling to Eli.  

Chana, even if she was drunk cannot be called a drunkard because if she had drunk, it was only because she was bitter.

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.  This is the mean of our verse of “וְיִקְחוּ־לִ֖י תְּרוּמָ֑ה “.

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, so 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”.  

The language of the Aperion:

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

The  אפּריון 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.

The Pasuk is thus translated:

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

Speak to the children of Israel.  And they will take My gifts; this is done by Moshe taking donations from all people whose heart will motivate him.

Analysis of Tanna Dvei Eliyahu:

Chapter 17:

כיון שקבלו ישראל עול מלכות שמים בשמחה ואמרו כל אשר דבר ה’ נעשה ונשמע מיד אמר הקב”ה למשה שיאמר לישראל 

שיעשו לו משכן שנאמר (שמות כה) דבר אל בנ”י וגו’ ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם וגו’. 

This Tanna Dvei Eliyahu is the source for the following Daas Zekeinim:

ויקחו לי תרומה. פרשה זו נאמרה בתוך ארבעים יום שהיה ממתן תורה וצוהו הקב”ה להיכן מניח’ שיעשו משכן ובית קדשי הקדשים ובתוכו ארון ובתוך הארון לוחות ושם תשרה שכינה וישראל סביב כמו המלאכים סביב כסא הכבוד ושכינה ביניהם וכן כתוב ושכנתי בתוכם כמו בתוך המלאכים ועל זה נאמר אמרתי אלהים אתם ובני עליון כלכם להיות שכינתי ביניהם:

The Oz Vehadar Chumash in their Perush of the Da’as Zekanimu says that the source of the above Da’s Zekanim is this very Tanna Dvei Eliyahu:

Da’as Zekanm translated into English:

ויקחו לי תרומה, “they shall take for Me a contribution;” this portion had been told to Moses during the forty days that Moses was on Mount Sinai, immediately after the revelation at that Mountain, [In other words, before the smashing of the Tablets, and the golden calf episode. Ed.] G–d, at that time, had already told Moses where to erect the Tabernacle, and that it would house the Holy Ark, inside the Holy of Holies, symbolizing G–d’s presence on earth. He told him that it would contain the Tablets, and that the Israelites would be encamped around the Tabernacle. This is what is meant in verse eight of our verse where G–d described Himself as residing in the midst of the people, i.e. as if surrounded by angels as He had been in heaven. Concerning this state of affairs, David had said in Psalms 82,6: אמרתי אלוהים אתם ובני עליון כולכם, “I had said: ‘you are the children of G–d all of you children of the Supreme Being.” [David bemoans the demotion of the Jewish people that followed the golden calf episode in the verse following. Ed.]

Continuation of the Tanna Dvei Eliyahu:

באותה שעה אמר הקב”ה בלבבו שמא לא יביאו בנ”י נדבתם לפני ושמא יהיו אומרים כלפי מעלה וכי לכסף וזהב הוא צריך והלא כל כסף וזהב ואבנים טובות ומרגליות וכל כלי חמדה שלו הוא שנאמר (חגי ב) לי הכסף ולי הזהב נאם ה’ צבאות. ומפני מה אומר לבני אדם הביאו לי נדבה ועשו לי מקדש אבל מה שביקש הקב”ה מישראל נתנו לו ישראל והוא עושה לישראל מה שאמר להן. וכשעשו ישראל רצון הקב”ה במדבר והקב”ה מצא בהן קורת רוח כמה שנאמר בהן (שמות לה) ויבואו כל איש אשר נשאו לבו וכל אשר נדבה רוחו אותו וגו’. ו

Avrohom Chase Bar Mitzvah

February 17, 2024

Parshas Truma – Verse 25:2 – starts on Page 5

This past Wednesday night was Avrohom Chase’s Bar Mitzvah.  He is Mayer and Chanie Chase’s son.

Shabbos was at  the Adas, Rabbi Kaufman’s Shul.  I davened shabbos at the Bar Mitzvah and had an Aliyah.

Sidney Glenner, Lisa Glenner, Esther Chase, Pesach Chase, Mitch Morgenstern, Serka Morgenstern

Mordy Siegal, Meyer Chase

Mordy Siegal, Itamer Yaakov Siegal

Aron Hoch, Sholem Chase, Pesach Chase, Yaakov Chase (Lakewood)

My Torah:

I love the opening Rashbam on this Parsha:(פרשיות של משכן חשן ואפוד אקצר בפירושן וימצאו בפירושי רבינו שלמה אבי אמי ז”ל).

The second pasuk in Truma Verse 25:2 states:

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

The plain meaning of the Pasuk is that Moshe should speak to the Jews and they should take (from their possessions) a donation from every man who generously offers that gift, you should take My donation.

Questions:

1 – the last three words of  תִּקְח֖וּ אֶת־תְּרוּמָתִֽי are redundant.

2 – The Alsich and many others ask why does is say  וְיִקְחוּ and not  ויתנו?

These are answered by the  אפּריון.  See details below.

Both answered  

3 – Rashi says on the word לִ֖י – the word לִשְׁמִי.   What does Rashi exactly mean?  I do not have a good answer for Rashi.  I did see somewhere that rashi means do not give donations to the Mishkan because of social pressures or for other reasons, give only to serve God.

The Seifsei Chacomin explains why Rashi says לִשְׁמִי because   לִ֖י cannot mean “take 

from your possessions for me” because everything in the world is His, [therefore it

cannot mean, “so it will be Mine.”]  This is difficult because in this world people 

have ownership rights and people have a right to make decisions on their property.

Translations of this Pasuk:

Almost all of the English translations translate it with the plain meaning.  Only Rabbi Kahane brings in Rashi.

JPS 2006

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

Mesudah:

Speak to the B’nei Yisrael and have them take for Me a terumah-offering. From every man whose heart impels him to generosity shall you take My terumah-offering.

Rabbi Charles Kahane:

Tell the Children of Israel to appoint collectors for taking a voluntary gift for My Name’s sake; you shall take My voluntary gift from every man whose heart willingly offers the donation.

Only one who brings in Rashi.

Artscroll

Speak to the children of Israel and they shall take for Me a portion, from every man whose heart will motivate him you shall take My portion.

The  אפּריון   based on the Tanna Dvei Eliyahu:

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

My Torah:

I want to start off something I read in Paul Newman’s autobiography this Shabbos morning, how coincidental.

Last year and today, I learned and analyzed the following  אפּריון.  See my blog post from last year.

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 אפּריון starts by bringing down 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:

First Step:

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, so 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”.  

The language of the Aperion:

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

The  אפּריון 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.

The Pasuk is thus translated:

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

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

Analysis of Tanna Dvei Eliyahu:

Chapter 17:

כיון שקבלו ישראל עול מלכות שמים בשמחה ואמרו כל אשר דבר ה’ נעשה ונשמע מיד אמר הקב”ה למשה שיאמר לישראל 

שיעשו לו משכן שנאמר (שמות כה) דבר אל בנ”י וגו’ ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם וגו’. 

This Tanna Dvei Eliyahu is the source for the following Daas Zekeinim:

ויקחו לי תרומה. פרשה זו נאמרה בתוך ארבעים יום שהיה ממתן תורה וצוהו הקב”ה להיכן מניח’ שיעשו משכן ובית קדשי הקדשים ובתוכו ארון ובתוך הארון לוחות ושם תשרה שכינה וישראל סביב כמו המלאכים סביב כסא הכבוד ושכינה ביניהם וכן כתוב ושכנתי בתוכם כמו בתוך המלאכים ועל זה נאמר אמרתי אלהים אתם ובני עליון כלכם להיות שכינתי ביניהם:

The Oz Vehadar Chumash in their Perush of the Da’as Zekanimu says that the source of the above Da’s Zekanim is this very Tanna Dvei Eliyahu:

Da’as Zekanm translate into English:

ויקחו לי תרומה, “they shall take for Me a contribution;” this portion had been told to Moses during the forty days that Moses was on Mount Sinai, immediately after the revelation at that Mountain, [In other words, before the smashing of the Tablets, and the golden calf episode. Ed.] G–d, at that time, had already told Moses where to erect the Tabernacle, and that it would house the Holy Ark, inside the Holy of Holies, symbolizing G–d’s presence on earth. He told him that it would contain the Tablets, and that the Israelites would be encamped around the Tabernacle. This is what is meant in verse eight of our verse where G–d described Himself as residing in the midst of the people, i.e. as if surrounded by angels as He had been in heaven. Concerning this state of affairs, David had said in Psalms 82,6: אמרתי אלוהים אתם ובני עליון כולכם, “I had said: ‘you are the children of G–d all of you children of the Supreme Being.” [David bemoans the demotion of the Jewish people that followed the golden calf episode in the verse following. Ed.]

Continuation of the Tanna Dvei Eliyahu:

באותה שעה אמר הקב”ה בלבבו שמא לא יביאו בנ”י נדבתם לפני ושמא יהיו אומרים כלפי מעלה וכי לכסף וזהב הוא צריך והלא כל כסף וזהב ואבנים טובות ומרגליות וכל כלי חמדה שלו הוא שנאמר (חגי ב) לי הכסף ולי הזהב נאם ה’ צבאות. ומפני מה אומר לבני אדם הביאו לי נדבה ועשו לי מקדש אבל מה שביקש הקב”ה מישראל נתנו לו ישראל והוא עושה לישראל מה שאמר להן. וכשעשו ישראל רצון הקב”ה במדבר והקב”ה מצא בהן קורת רוח כמה שנאמר בהן (שמות לה) ויבואו כל איש אשר נשאו לבו וכל אשר נדבה רוחו אותו וגו’. ו

Toras HaKotzker

The Kotzker and Sachachover

May 13, 2024

We see that the Kotzker learned all the classical Seforim and he valued the same Torah as the Litvisha world.  

 Amud HaEmes starting on page 246 details what the Kotzker said about various leaders and Seforim.    The Kotzker talks about the Rambam,  Korban Nesaniel, Maharal M’Prague, the Sefer Chovos Halevovos, the Pri Megadim, Mesudos Dovid, Pnei Yehoshua, and all the Chassidic leaders starting with the Baal Shem Tov.   

We see that the Kotkzer learned all the classical Seforim that were and are learned in the Misnagdishe – Litvishe world.  He knew each one and understood their Dereck Lemudo – their method of learning.    This is because first and foremost learning Torah was first and foremost.  They learned Gemora, the Rishonim, the Posikim, and Achronim.  I read in Professor Morris Faierstein’s book that the Chassidim did not learn Zohar and Kabbalah.  There is no question that the Kotzker did learn Zohar and Kabbalah but his  main learning was Neglah and not Nistar.

The Kotzker learned the Chovos Halevovs with his son Admor Dovid Morgenstern.  In HTC I heard Shiurim from the Rosh Hayeshiva, Rabbi Revah, on the Chovos HaLevoros.  This year Rabbi Weg of the Yeshiva is learning it with his Shiur.

The Kotzker learned and knew the Pri Megadim and the Chavos Daas, the Lissa Rov.  The Pri Megadim died in 1792 and the Chavos Daas died in 1832.  Kotzker was born in 1787 and I doubt that he ever met the Chavos Daas.  There is a story in Siach Sarfei Kodesh where the Chidushei Harim met the Chavos Daas.  

Read the following from the Emes Ve Emunah and Aber Harayim.  Aber Harayim is the history of Rabbi Avrohom Bornstein, known as the Avnei Nezer, and the Sachochever Rebbe, and was the son-in-law of the Kotzker.  The Avnei Nezer married the Kotzker’s oldest twin daughter, Sara Tzina, in 1853, when he was 13 or 14 years old.   He spent six  years learning by the Kotzker and the Kotzker felt that it was his job to make the Avnei Nezer the leading Torah scholar in Poland.  

The Pri Megadim:

The Kotzker said about the Pri Megadim that he learned Torah for the sake of Hashem.

Rabbi Yehuda Gordon told me the following story.  Reb Chaim Kenievsky said that the Chazon Ish put Sefroim written Leshem Samayim on a higher shelf than Seforim he felt were not written Leshem Shamayim.

The Pri Megadim was Joseph ben Meir Teomim 1727–1792. יוסף בן מאיר תאומים was a Galician Rabbi, best known as author of Pri Megadim, by which title he is also referenced. He was one of the foremost Torah Scholars of his time.  Rabbi Teomim’s Pri Megadim (פרי מגדים, “choice fruits”, published 1782) [3] is a widely referenced work on the Shulkhan Aruch. It is composed, essentially, as a supercommentary on the major commentators there: Pri Megadim is however seen as authoritative in its own right, often quoted, for example, by the Mishna Berurah.

The following story is brought down about the Pri Megadim and the Chovavos Daas, the Lissa Rov –Yaakov Lorberbaum – Wikipedia.  Page 435 of the 2022 edition of Emes Vemunu put out by Reb Simcha Morgenstern contains the following story.


Translation:

The Chasid Reb Ezriel Lowy from Kanstantin told me the story that when his father, the Goan and Chasid Reb Yaakov Aaron HaLevi, the head of the Jewish Court of Kanstantin,  went to get Smicha from the Avnei Nezer TZL, the Avnei Nezer asked him, from where do you rely on to determine Halachic questions?  Is it the Pri Megadim or the Chavos Daas, the Lissa Rov.  My father answered  that he uses the Lissa Rov because the Lissa Rov says the Halacha clearly, however, the Pri Megadim leaves many issues unresolved.   The Avnei Nezer told him in the name of the his father-in-law, the Kotzker, that one who makes a mistake in the Pri Megadim (and Paskens against the Pri Megadim) is a  טועה בּדבר משׁנה –  someone who makes a mistake in a clear Halacha.   Because our Reshonim are now like the words of a Mishnah and the Pri Megadim explains the Rishonim.  This means that one can issue Jewish law only if the Posak knows the Reshonim, and the Pri Megadim clarifies the opinions of the Reshonim.

The Avnei Nezer concluded that I am not telling you who to use, and you can Paskim as you see fit, but I am telling you that a Posek who doesn’t know what the Pri Megadim says and if that Posak would know the Pri Megadim, he would have decided like the Pri Megadim, then it is that the Posak was  טועה בּדבר משׁנה – made a clear mistake.  In a sense the Kotzker felt that the Posak is committing malpractice.                                                        

The beautiful following story is told by the Avnei Nezer about the Pri Megadim:

The Avnei  Nezar told that once when he entered the holy place he saw an elderly man with a regal manner that he did not recognize because he had never seen him in Kotzk.  He spoke to the Kotzker with affection  and love.  When he, the Avnei Nezer, came into the room they both gave him their full attention to the words of his Pilpul – Talmudic discourse – that he laid out before the Kotzker and the guest.  (It seems to me that in the above-mentioned Talmudic Discourse that he said in front of his father-in-law and the guest, who was the Pri Megadim, was also an answer to a question on the Pri Megadim.)   When he left his room, the above-mentioned elderly man still remained with our Rabbi in the room.  When he entered the second time, our Rabbi revealed to him that the above-mentioned elderly man was the tzaddik, the genius was the Pri Megadim. Because the Avnei Nezer worked hard to reconcile the words of the Pri Megadim, he was privileged to see him in the actual daylight. And he said that his father-in-law (our Rabbi) informed him of the names of the deceased tzaddikim who were with him that night.

I further explained that this story about the Pri Megadim visiting the Kotzker took place in 1854 or later. even though the Pri Megadim died in 1792.  

I listen to Rabbi Sugerman’s Daf Yomi Shiur. As I have said in the past, when the Torah was given at Har Sinai, it was said in the voice and words of Ben Sugerman.  Ben Sugerman has a unique way of saying and explaining the Gemora, in that he makes the Gemora three dimensional.  The Gemora comes alive.  Once while listening to Rabbi Ben Sugerman explain a Gemora that had a dispute between Rebi Yochanan and his brother-in-law, Resh Lakish, I felt as if I was in the Bais Medrash of Rebi Yochanan and Resh Lakish and could see Reb Yochanan saying his viewpoint and Resh Lakish arguing and saying, no, the Halacha is different. They went back and forth bringing proofs, refutations, and attempts at logic.  It was a unique experience that happened only once.

I explained the above story about the Pri Megadim coming to the Kotzker in a similar manner.   “The Kotzker who learned Torah day and night for over 60 years, and the Pri Megadim did not come to him?”

There is a very important story about the relationship between the Avnei Nezer and his father-in-law, the Kotzker.   We see from the below story that the Avnei Nezer had complete access to learn and ask questions to the Kotzker.  It cannot be emphasized enough that during the last 19 years of his life, known as the “days of Hester” that the Kotzker still engaged his family, learned Torah day and night, and taught.

Translation:

The Avnei Nazer, TZL, had a holy duty to come daily one time before his Holy father-in-law from Kotzk, and offer some of his innovations that he had innovated in his study, and he,  the Holy one would proofread them if they were true to the Torah and if they were said in depth as befits the root of his high soul.  More than once a day he would give him permission to enter without restriction.  The Kotzker answered him in length and did not hold anything back from him.

In his introduction to the Eglei Tal, the Avnei Nezer writes:

Translation:

And Avrohom responded and said, this time I will give thanks to Hashem (mirrors Leah’s words when naming her fourth son Yehuda) that my portion is with those that dwell in the study hall.  And I was always one who searches out the wisdom of the Torah.  When I was young I was taught by my master, my father, and my teacher the method of Pilpul.  When I was ten years old, I was was writing my own  חידושׁים.  Then I entered the inner rooms  of the house of my father in law, the Admor of Kotzk, the source of wisdom and understanding.   (a reference to the Kodesh Hakodashim where the ark was located in the Temple)  From him, I learned my method of learning Torah in depth.  And from him I learned  what is a true statement of Torah.  Because not all thoughts are חידושׁים.  It is unbelievable when I tell about the extra effort that he watched over me with his wise eyes also in learning and חידושׁים.

And it has always been my way to write new things that I am pleased with. But to print the things and spread them over the world did not occur to me, and you have no beauty in modesty. And if it is from heaven that the things will be brought to print, it will be after a hundred years. That was my thinking, but I chose to learn with listening students. To teach the children of Yehudar a bow to fight the battle of the Torah, because in the 17th century the Torah is written. The commandment to teach. He teaches the ways of learning. But now at the time of my old age, in my seasons, I was overcome by the cough, R.A., and I could not study with students.

The following is another story that reflects on the Kotzker is a statement he made about his future son in law:

Professor Morris Faierstein lists five practices that form the practical expression of Kotzker Hasidism.

Most  things the Professor got right.  I would add one more and diminish #5.  The first item I 

I would add is Ahavas Yisroel.    This is true of the Kotzker Rebbe and would like to believe that his Chassidim followed in his footsteps.  

When I spoke about this list at Rabbi Sidney Glenner’s house, Rabbi Moshe Roberts said that Emes should be at the top.  I did not agree.  Perhaps Emes would be true of the Kotzker himself, but not of his Chassidim.  Perhaps #4 on the list is Emes.

I do not know his source of #5, although I have heard it in the past.  There is a story of Reb Leibele Eiger when his father Reb Shlomo Eiger sent a messenger to look in on his son with an ignorant farmer.  #5 may still be true, but it may have not been so pronounced as Professor Faierstein says it is.

The understanding to #5, I believe, is that they were Torah scholars and they had no use for the mundane matters and gossip discussed by the masses.  The masses felt excluded and that created animosity between the groups.  This is only natural.  

Emes:

The below is in an article from Kotzk Blog: 459) Chassidic literature – beyond the Hebrew texts

Introduction

This article – based extensively on the research by Professors Evan Mayse and Daniel Reiser[1] − examines a fascinating anomaly within Chassidic literature: Most of the formal Chassidic texts used today are in Hebrew, but Hebrew was not the medium through which the discourses were generally transmitted. The original teachings were mainly presented orally and in Yiddish. 

The question is whether or not this is a significant distinction, and can it have some bearing on how we read the popular Chassidic texts today? 

This is what they write on Kotzk.

Kotzk through a Yiddish lens

The Kotzker Rebbe is known for his search for Truth (Emet). Astoundingly, however, by basing ourselves on the Hebrew word Emet, we actually have a very limited understanding of what he was really looking for. 

“Heschel cites an oral Hasidic tradition maintaining that the Kotsker rebbe never uttered the word emet (or emes in Yiddish), the term often rendered as ‘truth.’ Rather than this standard Yiddish term, Menahem Mendel used the less common vorhayt, a word related to the German Wahrheit (truth, verity)” (Mayse and Reiser 2018:146). 

To be accurate, Heschel informs us that, the Kotzker Rebbe used the word Emes, only once – but he quickly corrected himself by replacing the word with “oyf der vorhayt.” Language is so important because in this case, Vorhayt means something that neither the Hebrew word Emet nor the Yiddish word Emes, can capture: 

Vorhayt gestures not toward an abstract or philosophical conception of truth but rather to a concept of verity that is totally grounded in reality. This tradition suggests that the Kotsker rebbe was uninterested in philosophical emes, which can be proven and cut down…Menahem Mendel of Kotsk was seeking an entirely different level of existential reality. 

The Kotzker Rebbe was not so much searching for technical ‘truth.’ In Yiddish, ‘vorhayt does not mean ‘truth’ – it means ‘realness,’ ‘genuineness,’ or ‘authenticity.’ Perhaps the English expression ‘salt of the earth’ conveys its meaning well. There is a vast, philosophical and existential difference between these two concepts which can only be comprehended by understanding the language of transmission. 

January 27,  2024: Isaac Rothman’s Bar Mitzvah

We drove to Toronto on Wednesday, January 23, 2024.  We stayed at Chani Janowski’s house which was an 8 minute walk to the Shul, Aish Hatorah of Thornhill.  The Rabbi is the grandfather of the Bar Mitzvah boy.  The Rabbi spoke beautifully.  Friday night at Shul Rabbi Rothman spoke the Kotzker on the  Verse  וַיָּבֹ֣אוּ מָרָ֔תָה וְלֹ֣א יָֽכְל֗וּ לִשְׁתֹּ֥ת מַ֙יִם֙ מִמָּרָ֔ה כִּ֥י מָרִ֖ים הֵ֑ם עַל־כֵּ֥ן קָרָֽא־שְׁמָ֖הּ מָרָֽה׃.   The Kotzker on  כִּ֥י מָרִ֖ים הֵ֑ם says that it does not go on the waters but on the people.  The people were bitter.

Shabbos morning Rabbi Rothman spoke about the need to be awed.  He started  his speech about the piano of Beethoven.

I did not speak and it bothered me.  I did not  feel it was appropriate for me to ask.  

Alesha’s oldest son, Shimi, came in from Israel.  Joany Noble-Shokiet came in from Miami.  Joany was very close with my mother in law and Joany comes in for every Simcha.  Her father was my mother in law’s twin brother.

It is always a shame when the Simchas are over and on Sunday we drove back to Chicago.

If I had spoken, I would have spoken the below Vort in the Sefer Emes Ve Emunah, page 56 in the  new addition

BeShalach Verse 14:15 says “And the Lord said to Moshe, Why dost thou cry to me? speak to the children of Yisrael, that they go forward”.

“The Goan, Chosid Reb Yaakov Dovid, the head of the Bais Din in Koshnitz was a

student of Reb Shlomo Leib from Lentshna and he came to Kotzk.  The Kotzker

asked Reb Yakov Dovid, he is your teacher, I love him very much.   But what can I do?

He cries to God in prayer to send the Mosiach, why can’t he cry to the Jews to repent.

The Kotzker ends by saying that this is the explanation of the verse.  Things are dependent 

on man.  Inspire the people to make themsleves better and this is the way to bring Moshiach.

Two comments on the Kotkzer. 

First Comment:

Reb Yaakov Dovid was the community leader in Koshnitz.  When we say Koshnitz we tremble.  The  holy Koshnitzer Magid  lived in Kozhnitz.  Koshnitz is the name of a Hasidic dynasty founded by the Kozhnitzer Maggid, Rebbe Yisroel Hopsztajn. Kozhnitz is the Yiddish name of Kozienice, a town in Poland.  Rebbe Yisroel Hopsztajn, the Maggid and founder of the Kozhnitz dynasty, and one of the three “patriarchs” of Polish hasidism, was a disciple of Rebbe Elimelech of Lizhensk (Rabbi Elimelech Lipman of Lizhensk), author of Noam Elimelech. The Rebbe Elimelech was a disciple of the Rebbe Dovber, the Maggid (“preacher”) of Mezeritch, the primary disciple of the Baal Shem Tov, the founder of Hasidism.

Yisroel Hopsztajn (c. 1733 – 1814), author of the classic Avodas Yisroel.    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kozhnitz_(Hasidic_dynasty).  My Zedi Sholem Skar would raise his hand when  he mentioned the Koshnitzer Magid.

Second Comment:

What is the Kotzker saying with his Vort?  Is it just a cute Vort?.  I think the answer is no.  This Vort tells us how the Kotzker advised people and how he looked at the world.  He had confidence in humans that with proper teaching and inspiration they will do the right thing.  We do not have to pray to Hashem as leaders, we have to lead and the Jews will do the right thing and bring Moshiach.  This is the Kotzke’s life outlook.  This is the Kotzker’s message to  Reb Shlomo Leib from Lentshna.  Inspire people and you can bring them to the mountain of God.

Thursday February 1, 2024 – 165th Yahrzeit of the Kotzker Rebbe.

I had a zoom with my family to discuss the Kotzker and his legacy.  I started with the above Vort.  I then played Avrohom Fried’s cappella, I Am I.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-HvhT8OPs0. The words are:

  • “If I am I because I am I, and you are you because you are you, then I am I and you are you. But if I am I because you are you and you are you because I am I, then I am not I and you are not you!”

This theme is consistent with many sayings of the Kotzker.

Serka, Debbi Janowski – grandmother of the bar Mitzvah boy, and Joany Noble-Shokit – our cousin.

Serka Morgenstern and Alesha Rothman – mother of Isaac.

Parshas VaYera – January 14, 2024

On Shabbos January 14, 2024 I finished reading the book, The Jewish Confederates, by Robert N. Rosen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jewish_Confederates

Robert Rosen writes about why Jews supported the Confederacy.  The Jewish leaders of the Confederacy, the Jewish fighters, antisemitism, and how the Jews reacted to the defeat of the South.  On January 16, 2024 I finished the book.

There were 20,000 Jews in the South and 100,000 Jews in the North.  Roughly 2,000 Jewish men fought for the South.

The Jews in the South felt welcome.  Many were Jewish immigrants from Germany.   They went from oppression in their home countries to freedom in America.  They breathed fresh air and not the putrid air of repression in Germany and eastern Europe.  They became part of the culture of the South and some had slaves.  They supported the Southern cause and hated the Yankees.  The Jewish women  equally supported the Southern cause.  They looked up to Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis.

It is true that in Europe the ghetto walls fell down in Vienna in 1848 and in Germany around the same time; however, it did not approach the freedom the Jews felt in America, especially the South.

Page 14 states:

Thus, overwhelmingly, almost unanimously, some with fear and trepidation, others with courage and enthusiasm, some with reservations, other with a firm unflinching resolve, Southern Jewry cast its lot with the Confederate State of America.  Many like “Ike” Hermannn, had found the land of Canaan.  Othrs, like Gustavus Poznanski, had found their Jerusalem, their Pastime.  Still others, l Marcus Baum, Jacob Samuels, Adolph Proskenaur, and Herschel Kempner had found finally their fatherland.

Pages 15 and 16:

Southern Jews had been breathing the free air of Dixie for two hundred years.

The Jews arriving from Eastern Europe, and the German states such as Prussies and particularly Bavaria, which stood first in the row of intolerant states.” infamous for “its Pharaoh-like registration laws,” its restriction of trade, marriage, and even the Jew;s right to reside in the place of his choice.

The Jews of the South lived in a slaveholding society, and they accepted the institution as part of everyday life.  

There was some anti-semitism in the South before and during the civil war but by and large the Jews were accepted as part of Southern society.

Many Jews married out of the faith.  Judah Benjamin, considered the  most successful Jewish man in the South became a confidant of President Jefferosn Davis and in his war cabinet, married out of the faith.  Nonetheless he was known as a Jew.  Per Wikipedia:

Judah Philip Benjamin, QC (August 6, 1811 – May 6, 1884) was a United States senator from Louisiana, a Cabinet officer of the Confederate States and, after his escape to the United Kingdom at the end of the American Civil War, an English barrister. Benjamin was the first Jew to hold a Cabinet position in North America and the first to be elected to the United States Senate who had not renounced his faith.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judah_P._Benjamin

Page 356 of Robert N. Rosen books state:

Why did Judah Benjamin’s memory survive?  “Without a question,” Rabbi Korn  wrote, “he achieved greater political power than any other Jew in American  history.”  Rabbi Calisch of Richmond explained his meaning for Southern Jewry in 1902: “I stand here in the name of the Jeiwsh community of this city .  Judah P. Benjamin was born of Jeiwsh parents and reared as a Jeiwsh child.  I have not yet been able to discover if he was an observing Jew or not.  But this I know, had he been a traitor we would have had to bear the ignominy of his wrong doing – but as he was a hero, a statement. a gentleman  and a partrit, we claim the privilege of sharing in the reflection of his glory.” 

The cover of the book depicts Major Adolph Proskauer at Gettysburg.  Major Proskauer, a n immigrant from Prussia to Mobile, led the 12th Alabama Infantry at Culp’s Hill during the Battle of Gettysburg.  This 1999 painting re-creates the moment described in the history of the regiment by Capt. Robert E Ory Park, “Our gallant Jew Major smoked his cigars calmly and cooly in the thichest of the fight.”  (Painting by Dan nance of Charlotte, North Caroline.  Author’s collections.)  Page 360 details life for Adolph Proskauer after the civil war.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolph_Proskauer

Another prominent Jew in the south was David Yulee.  He was born David Levy, but he changed his name to Yulee and became a Presbyterian.  Pages 60 and 61 discusses Yulle’s life.

It appears that the Jews of the South were assimilating.  My guess is that this was also happening in the North and probably by the early early to mid 1900s most of the jews in America at the time of the Civil war assimilated and there are few of their descendants identifying as Jewish.

There were some anti-semitci outbursts but they were short lived and the Jews were defended. Pages 266 through 272 in the book. There is little evidence of anti-semitism in the Army.  To restate, overall the Jews had it good in the South.

Robert N. Rosen concludes in his last three pages of the book.

My questions:

1 – how many Jews in the South and for that matter in the North trace their ancestry back to the Civil war?

2 – what was the  intermarriage rate both in the South and the North?

3 – what changed in the south after the Civil War that the South is/was considered to be heavily anit-semetic?

4 – were the Jews less accepted in the south after the Civil War and did intermarriage go down.

My answer is that because of the Civil War the South became impoverished.  People having troubles blame outsiders and they blamed the Jews.  Before the war, the south was a wealthy country.  Throughout  history when times are hard, jews are blamed.

December 9, 2023

Shabbos Chanukah

Parshas VaYeshev 

I loved the following story about Lt. Colonel Marcus Spiegel in the book. Lt. Colonel Marcus Spiegel also has a wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_M._Spiegel

Marcus M. Spiegel (December 8, 1829 – May 4, 1864) was one of the highest ranking Jewish officers in the U.S. Army during the American Civil War.[1] He served in the 67th and 120th Ohio Volunteer Infantry. During the course of the war he became a staunch abolitionist. He served at the Siege of Vicksburg, and was mortally wounded during the Red River Campaign in May 1864.

Early life and education[edit]

Spiegel was born in the hamlet of Abenheim, Germany, near the city of Worms, on December 8, 1829, to a Jewish family that had lived in Germany since the sixteenth century.[2] While peddling in Ohio he met Caroline Hamlin, daughter of a prominent Quaker. They married and moved to Chicago, Illinois where she studied Judaism and German-Jewish cooking. She converted to Judaism in 1853 in Chicago.[3] He was the older brother of Joseph Spiegel, founder of Spiegel Catalog.[4]

Career[edit]

Spiegel volunteered for the Union Army and soon rose through its ranks. He wrote over 150 letters to his wife Caroline during the course of the war, most of which still survive. In one of his letters wrote:

I am [in] favor of doing away with the institution of Slavery…never hereafter will I either speak or vote in favor of Slavery; this is no hasty conclusion but a deep conviction.[5]

In late 1862 Spiegel was transferred to the recently formed 120th Ohio Volunteer infantry, and was promoted to lieutenant colonel. He was officially commissioned colonel on March 20, 1863, and took formal command of the regiment.[6]

He served at the Battle of Vicksburg (May 18 – July 4, 1863). Soon after the fall of Vicksburg, he was badly wounded by an exploding shell. Spiegel survived the incident and was sent home to recuperate, and in March 1864 he returned to front line duties.[6] Several weeks after his return, Confederate forces succeeded in ambushing the Union transport ship City Belle, at a location near Snaggy Point on the Red River, during the Red River Campaign in Louisiana. The result of the ambush was a disaster for the Ohioans; most of the 120th infantry were taken prisoner. Spiegel was again wounded by a shell burst; this time fatally.[6] He died of his wounds on May 4, 1864.

Parshas VaYechi – December 30, 2023

Walked to Chabad and got there at 11:20 AM.  I came at the end of leining. I gave the Dr. Leonard Kranzler memorial to Shiur.

Attendees were Paul, Marcel, Henry, Peggy, Tamar, Jeff, Ray, Alex, Sara, Mia, Herb, and one or two other people.

I focused on the first Pasuk and three Pasukim at the end of the Parsha.

Genesis Verse 48:28

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

Rashi – ויחי יעקב. לָמָּה פָּרָשָׁה זוֹ סְתוּמָה? לְפִי שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּפְטַר יַעֲקֹב אָבִינוּ נִסְתְּמוּ עֵינֵיהֶם וְלִבָּם שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל מִצָּרַת הַשִּׁעְבּוּד, שֶׁהִתְחִילוּ לְשַׁעְבְּדָם; דָּבָר אַחֵר: שֶׁבִּקֵּשׁ לְגַלּוֹת אֶת הַקֵּץ לְבָנָיו, וְנִסְתַּם מִמֶּנּוּ. בִּבְ”רַ:

How is Rashi translated?   Sefaria, Arscroll, and Chabad say the same thing.

Sefaria – Artscroll says the same Pshat.

Why is this section (Sidra) totally closed? Because, comprising as it does an account of the death of Jacob, as soon as our father Jacob departed this life the hearts and eyes of Israel were closed (their eyes became dim and their hearts troubled) because of the misery of the bondage which they then began to impose upon them. Another reason is: because he (Jacob) wished to reveal to his sons the date of the End of Days (i.e. when Israel’s exile would finally end; cf. Rashi on Genesis 49:1), but the vision was closed (concealed) from him (Genesis Rabbah 96:1).

Chabad from Mesudah:

And Jacob lived: Why is this section [completely] closed? Because, as soon as our father Jacob passed away, the eyes and the heart of Israel were “closed,” (i.e., it became “dark” for them) because of the misery of the slavery, for they (the Egyptians) commenced to subjugate them. 

These three English translations say that the Jews in Egypt walked around with a cloud over their heads.  They were depressed because they saw slavery starting.  It was like being in America for the Jews in 1935

I was shocked.  This is not the way I understood this Rashi and this Medresh for the first 70 years of my life.  I understood  מִצָּרַת הַשִּׁעְבּוּד as “from the misery of the enslavement”, not “because of the misery of enslavement.”  Meaning the slavery in some fashion started and they did not realize it, consciously or subconsciously. After all, Yosef lived for another 54 years after Yaakov died so they were doing quite well.  

Everyone asks that even after Yaakov dies Joseph was viceroy for another 54 years and the slavery did not start for over 20 years after Joseph’s death to when Levi died at 137 years. What does Rashi who quotes the Medresh mean that the slavery started at Yaakov’s death.

Explanations are given but I love Rabbi Riskin’s Vort based on the Rov’s Torah.  His Vort is in his Sefer, Torah Lights – Bereshis, quoted below.  Pages 307-311.

At the end of Vayechi 50:4-6 the Pasukim state:

וַיַּֽעַבְרוּ֙ יְמֵ֣י בְכִית֔וֹ וַיְדַבֵּ֣ר יוֹסֵ֔ף אֶל־בֵּ֥ית פַּרְעֹ֖ה לֵאמֹ֑ר אִם־נָ֨א מָצָ֤אתִי חֵן֙ בְּעֵ֣ינֵיכֶ֔ם דַּבְּרוּ־נָ֕א בְּאׇזְנֵ֥י פַרְעֹ֖ה לֵאמֹֽר׃

אָבִ֞י הִשְׁבִּיעַ֣נִי לֵאמֹ֗ר הִנֵּ֣ה אָנֹכִי֮ מֵת֒ בְּקִבְרִ֗י אֲשֶׁ֨ר כָּרִ֤יתִי לִי֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ כְּנַ֔עַן שָׁ֖מָּה תִּקְבְּרֵ֑נִי וְעַתָּ֗ה אֶֽעֱלֶה־נָּ֛א וְאֶקְבְּרָ֥ה אֶת־אָבִ֖י וְאָשֽׁוּבָה׃

וַיֹּ֖אמֶר פַּרְעֹ֑ה עֲלֵ֛ה וּקְבֹ֥ר אֶת־אָבִ֖יךָ כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר הִשְׁבִּיעֶֽךָ׃

Everyone asks why couldn’t Yoseph speak to Pharaoh directly? Why did he have to ask בֵּ֥ית פַּרְעֹ֖ה?   I assume that  בֵּ֥ית פַּרְעֹ֖ה were high ranking offcials.

There are three answers.

1 – Sferno and Tur HaAruch both say that Yosef could not speak to Pharaoh directly because he was in mourning and wearing sackcloth.

Meshech Chochma says the same thing:

וידבר יוסף אל בית פרעה כו’ כו’ לשיטת רמב”ן אונן כ”ז שלא נקבר אסור לסוך ולרחוץ ולקשט וגם לרמב”ם דאונן שרי אין זה מדרך הנימוס וכבוד אביו לסוך וללבוש בגדי שררות כפי הראוי להיות בבואו אל המלך בעוד אביו מת מוטל לפניו לכן לא היה יכול לכנס אל פרעה לדבר עמו.

This is the simple answer.  We see that although Achasverosh loved Esther, she could not approach him unless he called her.  There is protocol.  You just do not go into the king unless you are summoned or dressed in mourning clothes.

2 – Maskil L’Dovid (see November 25, 2023 – Shabbos Parshas Vayetzei – Exploring Kotzk about the Maskil L’Dovid)

 When Yaakov died Joseph’s profile in Egypt was lowered and he no longer had direct access to Pharaoh. 

ונלע״ד דמ״מ מיד אחר מיתת יעקב אע״ג דהוה יוסף קיים מיד ראו סימני שעבוד וכדאמרי׳ נמי בפ״ק דסוטה מ״ש מעיקרא דכתיב ויעל יוסף לקבור וכו׳ ויעלו אתו כל עבדי פרעה וכו׳ והדר וכל בית יוסף ואחיו וכו׳ ומ״ש לבסוף דכתיב וישב יוסף מצרימה הוא ואחיו והדר וכו׳ אר״י בתחלה עד שלא ראו בכבודן של ישראל לא נהגו בהן כבוד וכו׳ הרי דמיד אחר מיתת יעקב התחיל סימן לשעבוד שהיו המצריים רוצים להשתרר עליהם ובר מן דין חזי׳ נמי שיוסף עצמו לא היתה גדולתו כ״כ כמו אביו שהוצרך לדבר עם בית פרעה ולחלות פניהם שיתחננו לפרעה שיניחהו לילך לקבור את אביו שכן כתיב אם נא מצאתי חן וכו׳ והיכן גדולתו וקורבתו עם המלך אלא שמיתת הזקן עשתה רושם ולפי׳ זה דייקי שפיר דברי רש״י שכתב מצרת השעבוד וכו׳ ולא קאמר מן השעבוד שלא היה שעבוד ממש אלא סימן המורה צרת השעבוד שהיה עתיד לבוא

3 – Rabbi Shlomo Riskin based on the Rov – Reb Yosef Ber Solovecihik.  Gevaldig.  The Pshat is as written in the following pages and is that Yosef was asking Pharaoh to bury Yaakov in Israel.This was a very tough ask and Yosef could not ask Pharoh directly.  Read Rabbi Yosef Ber Soloveichik’s and Rabbi Shlomo Riskin’s words of Torah.

Rabbi Soloveichik says his Pshat on verse 50:5 on the first two words of the Pasuk  אָבִ֞י הִשְׁבִּיעַ֣נִי .

Verse 50:5

 אָבִ֞י הִשְׁבִּיעַ֣נִי לֵאמֹ֗ר הִנֵּ֣ה אָנֹכִי֮ מֵת֒ בְּקִבְרִ֗י אֲשֶׁ֨ר כָּרִ֤יתִי לִי֙ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ כְּנַ֔עַן שָׁ֖מָּה תִּקְבְּרֵ֑נִי וְעַתָּ֗ה אֶֽעֱלֶה־נָּ֛א וְאֶקְבְּרָ֥ה אֶת־אָבִ֖י וְאָשֽׁוּבָה׃

Picture of the Torah from the Rov’s Chumash.

Rabbi Risken beautifully uses the above to explain verse 50:4 of why Joseph could not ask Pharoh directly. 

He then uses his explanation of verse 50:4 to understand the first explanation of Rashi in verse 48:28

Pages (bottom of) 309, 310, and 311 from Rabbi Riskin’s Sefer, Torah Lights – Bereshis.

“Joseph may have reached the top of the social ladder in Egypt. He speaks Egyptian, dresses as an Egyptian, has become named Egyption (Tzanat – Pane’ah), and is married to a native Egyptoins (perhaps even to his previous master’s daughter).  From slave to Prime Minister, Joseph  has certainly lived out the great Egyptian dream. Now, however, he is forced to face the precariousness and vulnerability of his position.”

“Ordinately a person wants to be buried in his own homeland where his body will  become part of the earth to which he feels most deeply connected.  Indeed, in the ancient world the most criticall right of citizenship was he right of burial.  The wise Jacob understands that Pharaoh expects Joseph to completely identify with Egypt, to bring up generations of faithful and committed Egyptians after all that his adopted country has given to him.  But this was impossible for Jacob- and the pariah hoped that it would also be impossible for his children and grandchildren as well.  They were in Egypt but not of Egypt.  They might contribute to Egyptian society and economy, but they never become Egyptionas. Jacob understood that his burial in Canaan would be the greatest test of Joseph’ career, and would define the character of his descendants forever.  Hence he makes his beloved son solemnly swear not to bury him in Egypt.”

Joseph , too, understood that Pharaoh would be shocked at the request, a petition expressing the Hebrew rejection of the most powerful and civilized nation on earth. Indeed, it is such a difficult and sensitive matter that Joseph could not face his patron Pharaoh directly with it.  At that moment Joseph understands an even deeper truth: were he, his brothers, his children and grandchildren to make the choice to live as Egyptians and to die as Egyptians, the chances are that they would be totally accepted in the mainstream of the land and life in that country.  However,were they to choose to live as Jews, with their own concept of life and death, they would never be accepted and would probably be persecuted.  It is this realization in the aftermath of Jacob;’s death which Rashi correctly sees as the beginning of the slavery of the Israelites. In Egypt, Joseph’s kinsman may have everything: Goshen Heights and Gopshen Green, progeny and patrimony.  But as long as they are determined to remain Jews, servitude and persecution are inevitable.  They may rejoice in the preferred Egyption status, where they ‘took possession of it and were fruitful and multiplied exceedingly’, but they cannot ever pause to enjoy the good fortune.  The realization upon Jacob’s death of the transient and illusory nature of their good fortune comes upon them inexorably and imperceptibly, as in the blink of an eye, as in the following sentence without a change of paragraph.”

“And so this portion is closed just as Egypt will soon be closed to their children.  Such is the ultimate fate of the children of Israel in every exile.”

I love it.