Where does Rashi derive this conclusion about the departure? Where is his source for this statement? It was no longer the B’er Sheva which it previously was. He felt that semantically Vayaytze tells a story. It contains a message B’er Sheva became a desolate place which previously it was a beautiful city.
In Hebrew the word Vayaytze appears with many suppositions as demonstrated in various places in the Torah. In chapter 11, sentence 8 of Sedra Bo in Chumash Shemot we find: "Vayaytze mayim paroh b’chori af." (And Moshe went out from Pharaoh in great anger.) We find it combined with the word "ays" when Pharaoh asked Moshe to pray for him and he answered that he could not pray here. "I will go out and spread out my hands to G-d!" There are three suppositions connected with "Vayaytze". It is combined with the words "ays", "m’ays" and "min" — all meaning "going out from". It means a physical departure — not a spiritual one. For instance, we find in Sedra Vayakal (section 35, sentence 20): when Moshe sent the people to obtain the ingredients necessary for the "chel moed", "Vayaytze kol adas bnai Yisrael milifnai Moshe." They went out to attend to important business — to return shortly with the "offering for the Mishkan." This is a departure not for ever but for a short time. They went just to get what they needed. It is a physical departure for a short time but not permanent. The same applies to what Moshe said to Pharaoh, "I’ll walk out to the city gate to pray." Again it is physical, "B’tzasi ays" — not "min". "Ays" is departure from a person — Moshe’s leaving Pharaoh. These are the semantics of the word. When it is combined with the word "min" (or a contraction of "min") it means something different; it means "permanent — forgotten."
Thus in "Vayaytze Yaakov mi’ber — means "I had to move away from something dear — something I loved. A "force" has displaced me. This is what Rashi means "Mi Be’r Sheva". He didn’t want to go but was uprooted. More over, "Vayaytze min" refers to something tragic — something sad which is reminiscent of a catastrophe — his moving from B’er Sheva. How do we know he felt like that? B’er Sheva felt it and Jacob felt it. It is hard to imagine a B’er Sheva without the personage of Jacob. They were one entity; he belonged to the city. His distinction was strange and foreign to him and he felt that he could never learn to live there. His tragedy was the necessity to live minus his father’s home. Why did he experience this in such tragic terms? Of course, it is understood that no one wants to leave his father and mother and the home he loves. But this was not Jacob’s main reason for he was not a child. The Torah would not talk merely about sentimental terms. The Patriarchs were not in the habit of turning natural events into tragedies.
There is a posek in Tehilim which reads, "I lift up mine eyes to the mountain; from whence shall mine help come!" This "posek" of Tehilim refers to Jacob when he left Be’r Sheva to go to Choron. It was a spiritual moment of tragedy for him. Interestingly, however, after he spent the night "B’mokom" (at the place), he became light-headed, happy — because he had experienced an encounter with G-d and assurance of Divine help. But it was not due merely to an encounter with G-d and not only the promise of protection and assurance. What did G-d tell him?
Abraham introduced the Covenantal Community. It was signed and sealed by G-d and it imposed an obligation not only on man but on G-d. It involved each side of the covenant. Was it unconditional or did Abraham have to meet certain conditions and obligations? Certain definite conditions were introduced as we find in Chapter 18, line 19 of Sedra "Vayera".
"For I know that he will instruct his sons and his community after him to observe the ways of G-d to do charity and righteousness in order that G-d will bring to Abraham that which He has promised concerning him."
He must transmit all his teaching to future generations. If Abraham leaves no "will", there is no obligation by G-d. It is said that every member of the Covenant must write two wills. There is the normal will which disposes of his personal wealth and belongings. But there is another will, the one of observing "Derech Hashem" (G-d’s way). "He (Abraham) will entrust the spiritual treasure to his children."
According to Rambam, a "mitzvah" is not merely a commandment but "m’tzoa she’ bal peh" — an utterance or a will. The word "mitzvah" is synonymous with the word "Tzavoah" (will). If it were not carved out, the covenant would have terminated.
Abraham was the first teacher, not to a few but to tens of thousands, according to Rambam. The Community consisted of "Talmidim" — students. The main thing was the "Teacher-father," not merely based on the biological factor but on the teaching aspect. Rambam calls it, "the nation which is in love with G-d." This is how he termed the Covenantal Community. We find in Tehilim often the phrase, "Shigoyun L’Dovid" as it introduces a psalm. The word "Shigoyun" means the "Madness of David." He was madly in love with G-d. Abraham’s responsibility was to see that there is someone to pass it on to. This was the type of community which Abraham passed on to Isaac and which Isaac then passed on to Jacob. It was "love of G-d" and it was consummated at Sinai.
Where in Torah do we find that "Yitzchak" took over the lead? In Chapter 26, line 25 of "Toldos" it declares, "Vayiven shom mizbayach" — and he built there an altar. Once he built the altar, he was now the teacher. Now he became the successor.
We also find that Abimelech, the King of Gror, recognized this greatness
as did the previous Abimelech of Abraham Here, immediately after being
told that Yitzchak built the "Mizbayach" Abimelech came to sign a treaty.
"Now I see that G-d is with you. Let there be a treaty between you and
me." A king does not sign a pact with an ordinary person but with a
person of equal importance. In Chapter 22 of "Sedra Vayera", Abimelech
made a treaty with Abraham and recognized him as a king. Also, he wouldn’t
have done this with an ordinary man. Thus, with both Abraham and Isaac
we find them recognized as kings. Therefore, lineage succession is clean.
Now as for Jacob, where do we find the leadership turned over
to him?
We find it in the second "Brochos" or blessings bestowed upon him by
his father Isaac before Jacob left his home. Chapter 27, line 4: "And may
He bestow upon you the blessings of Abraham." Isaac never intended these
blessings for Esau. He intended for Esau only "M’tal Hashamayim" — the
dew of heaven — the physical riches. The second ones, "Birchas Avrohom"
were for Jacob. "Travel and spread the words of G-d. Tell the people
who G-d is!" That is the trusteeship of the Covenantal Community. "Love
of G-d." Interestingly, here we find the name of G-d written as "Kal
Shadai" In the first blessing it is written Elokim. Shadai means
"limitation," not too big — not too much — limited. Jacob’s role
would now involve a limited group of people.
Jacob understood all this but there was something he didn’t understand. If he is the leader of the community, he thought it only could be carried out in Eretz Yisroel. He knew that his father Yitzhak wanted to leave the land but G-d stopped him. "You are the leader of the Community — one entity and cannot leave."
Here suddenly Jacob’s father tells him to leave the land with the "Birkos Avraham," — (Abraham’s blessings). This is what he couldn’t reason. We are told by Rambam that B’er Sheva was the "Ir M’Kudeshes" — the city as holy in the Patriarchs’ time as Jerusalem was destined to become. It was the center of Abraham’s activities. From time to time we are told that Abraham left B’er Sheva to expand his activities but invariably he returned to the city. Thus, if the city had such stature, Jacob couldn’t visualize leaving B’er Sheva. In fact, he was uprooted and taken by force from B’er Sheva. "It is not your place." These were his fears for he thought that his role would be taken away from him. It was hard for him to realize that he could be a leader — a teacher in a place of Pagans. B’er Sheva indeed lost a great man! The holiness is not B’er Sheva per se. It is not holy more with his departure and is similar to Mt. Sinai. Now it means nothing per se. "The moment the shofar "Tkiah G’Dolah" was sounded at Sinai and the "Shechina" departed, there was no longer holiness. Similar is B’er Sheva. Jacob was frightened! Perhaps, not only was Kedusha (holiness) taken from B’er Sheva but maybe from him too. Maybe there is another man. This was his great fear. This is why he declares almost hysterically, "Where shall I turn my eyes, etc." "Can I build a community in Choron? It is an impossibility." Why did G-d send him to Choron? Why start from scratch? Why lose the tens of thousands who Abraham trained, who Yitzhak trained? Apparently, the community was destroyed. However, it was G-d’s inscrutable will. In Choron he did start the community with a handful of children — with twelve people. Only this did G-d want! He left thousands and came back to an old blind father with a handful. Why?
I believe that G-d tried to teach Jacob this "Yehodus" — faith is recognizable and understandable even on the moon. If he didn’t leave, the community would have been limited only to Eretz. "Yehodus" wanted Jacob to realize this and to start from scratch. It also shows us that we can start from scratch.
There was "Churban rishon" — Churban sheni — destruction after destruction, and yet we picked up the threads and started from scratch. Yitzhak told him, "Lach Padena Arom" (go to Padan Arom). And Jacob had to experience this — not only Jacob but later Joseph. G-d wanted Jacob to experience "Golus" (Diaspora) — to be a stranger — to be rejected — not in a known land — to be exposed and persecuted. But why twice? First, it was father and then the son. Joseph resembled Jacob physically and also resembled Jacob’s awesome experiences. Jacob had to experience it in poverty and hard work. Joseph had to experience it both ways — in poverty and as a successful man with material wealth. It was to teach us, the later generations, that we can be part of the Covenantal Community under all conditions in all places.
This is what G-d wanted for Jacob. "Go, forget all your friends and your people — go to Choron. Try to convert the young girls - your wives - your children." And from the twelve cornerstones come the nation. There will be a Mokom Kodesh, a holy place, but not B’er Sheva. There he became happy with "B’Mokom" (the mount where he slept the night). "I realize I don’t have to worry. ‘B’er Sheva’ is not the place of destiny. It will be in time to come in another place."
It makes no sense to say that the "posek" refers to "Makers Josef" — the selling of Joseph! I doubt that this is the idea. It is general injustice and cruelty! Still, this Haftorah was selected for this Parsha by the Bal Ham’Sorah (the tradition). I believe the reason for the choice lies not only in the first "posek". When you recite the "payit" — the liturgy of Yom Kippur in Musaf dealing with the slaying of the ten righteous rabbis (Assora Arugak Hamalchus) and you portray the nature of the executioner, it declares, "He filled up his mansion with ‘shoes’". It means he killed them as an expiation for the selling of Joseph and the shoes they bought with the money.
We have three themes in today’s Sedra: (A) selling of Joseph; (B) the affair of Yehuda; (C) Joseph’s life in the master’s house and his encounter with the prisoners in the dungeon. What is the central theme? Until now, Jacob often met with opposition from sources outside of his house — not members of his own household. Thus, his problems were Esau, Laban, Schem. The actual house of Jacob enjoyed complete unity but all opposition came from without. Suddenly, a new confrontation developed — brother against brother. They hated Joseph — they couldn’t talk peaceably with him! What was their opposition which bothered them the most? It was motivated by the partiality showed to Joseph by his father.
Usually, parents do have preferences in children. Sometimes, the preference is the older child by the father because he is his assistant — his disciple. Mother’s usually favor the younger because they remain their babies. But parents try to imply that there is no preference. Despite preferences a parent tries to cover it up. Jacob, however, for good reasons of his own not only didn’t deny but gave the coat of colors to Joseph and it was the coat which symbolized leadership. He wanted them to know! Therefore, the first thing they did was to remove his coat — the symbol of leadership. What they hated most was the coat of colors or proclamation of his leadership.
Next, the Torah tells us of his dreams. The dreams complicated everything and their hatred for him increased. He (Joseph), himself, told them of his nightly vision and interpreted it even. The second dream was even worse; here there was open hatred. Had he not told them of the dreams it would have been perpetuated — tolerated. After all, the coat was Jacob’s doing, not Joseph’s. When he began to dream, he promoted Jacob’s doings and they became frightened. How do we know that the dreams complicated it? They called him not "Bal Hapassim" (master of the coat) but "Bal Hachalomos" (the master of dreams). Later in Egypt, Joseph remembered the dreams. The tragedy was caused by the dreams. Invariably, a "Bal Hachalomos" is not a dim person. He is a gifted — bright person - a leader — an innovator.
Now, what did the brother’s try to do? What was their desire? It was that Joseph be silenced — that he stop dreaming and stop talking of the dreams. Not only to them but to many others. They wanted to silence him! This is what we find in Tanach in Amos! They (the people of his time - wanted to silence his prophecies. We are told in a different Tanach, "The young prophets were instructed not to prophecy." The people were afraid of prophecies. Even though one knows disaster will strike they do not want to be told of it. Amos tells them: "You’ll never get rid of "Neviim" (prophets). "You will have to listen whether you want to or not. G-d speaks! Who can resist it?" Jeremiah declared: "The word of G-d became a fire in my bones; I was compelled to prophecy." The attempt was to stop the prophecy — the truth; this is indicative of Joseph. Rambam said, "He who is compelled and is moved must speak - must be heard." "The L-rd has spoken; who will not prophecy?" (Amos). From medrash we learned that Joseph must have had a spark of prophecy. The "cholomos" (dreams) has charismatic prophecy and they (brothers) tried to suppress it. Prophecy breaks through human personality. The Samaritans wanted Amos to go back to Judea where he was a shepherd but he declared, "Suddenly, I was possessed and cannot go back to Judea." This is exactly the "chet" (sin) of the brothers. They wanted to suppress him (Joseph) and that is why the Haftorah belongs to this Sedra. They wanted him to lose his visionary power.
I believe that here is the link between Chanukah and Sedra Vayeshev. Of course, the "nes" (miracle) of Chanukah occurred 200 years after scripture was completed. Therefore, it is not part of "Torah Sh’biksav" (written law). It is connected only with, "Torah Sh’Bal Peh" (oral Torah). Throughout the ages, most enemies have tried to suppress "Torah Sh’ Bal Peh" the small Jewish community in Jerusalem was told by its enemies (internal ones) to stop studying and practicing, the same as Joseph and Amos. It was not so much to stop being Jews, but to stop preaching - teaching - practicing. This is what Amos declares: "G-d speaks! Who can resist?"
There is another link between Chanukah and "Parsha Vayeshev". Of course, there are many experiences which the sages of Israel rejected which the enemy promulgated. Chief amongst these was sex modesty. That which aroused Matisyahu. The most was the nudity which was being flaunted. They (the enemies) tried to reject the modesty of the Jews. In fact, our whole Shulchan Aruch revolves around modesty. It is all represented by the story of Joseph. Modesty is what they wanted to undermine for it was the basis of Greek culture (display of the body). When Roman Emperor Caligula declared his intention of displaying the banner of the King’s image in the Temple, the Jews declared, "it means war." Philo the progressive Jew came to Caligula and said, "No, I’ll join my brothers in this matter. A human figure cannot be displayed in the Temple." Consequently, Caligula had to acquiesce. However, we have two distinct "Shvotim" (tribes) — Yehuda and Joseph. Yehuda is not strong and subject to stumbling while Joseph does not yield. Later, we find that Yehuda had the strength to rise once he had fallen.
So we have two reasons; the gentile world wanted the Jew to stop preaching and they wanted to remove modesty. There is a third reason which is subjective and some may disagree. There is a link between Chanukah and Joseph’s life. In Bais Rishon — the first Temple, the people and the land were one entity. There were no Jews outside the land, no Diaspora — no "Golus." In the era of Chanukah, it was different, for more lived outside the land tan within. Before the "Churban" the overthrow, there were circa 5 million people. Afterwards, most of them lived outside the land’s borders. The first Jews to experience "Golus" was Jacob, but even more so, it was Joseph. Joseph, however, experienced is as a slave and then as a viceroy. He experienced Diaspora from both the experience of poverty and that or riches. During the last 1900 years we have demonstrate that our greatest loyalty was when we were poor. Our record is not so good when we are affluent. Chanukah was not a fight only for the Bais Hamikdash but for the survival of the people. If the Maccabeans had lost not only the Temple would be lost but the people and the entire Diaspora. That Jews do not lost their loyalty in the Diaspora was manifested by Joseph!
Let us go back to Sedra "Vayetze", "Vayifaga Bamokom" (and Jacob lighted upon the place), (on his way to Choron). The logical translation is that Jacob suddenly discovered that he hit upon or lighted upon a place quite unexpectedly. He came across it; it did not promote his interest. He hit upon a place which he did not search for but was so tired and the sun had set that he decided to stay over at this place. The real translation is that at this place he prayed to Hashem. He interceded with G-d. The word "mokom" here means G-d — not place. (The word "mokom" is one of the names referring to the Alm-ghty.) Here, it means "prayed to G-d". This is why the Hebrew uses the word "Bamokom" instead of "B’mokom" (if it were B’mokom it would mean he arrived or lit at a place. Bamokom means appealing to G-d — according to Rashi.) Example in Prophet Jeremiah 7 — "Al Tifga Bi" (do not entreat me). It all can be traced back to one root. The word "Foga" — entreat or prayer — sometimes can be translated as interspacial and sometimes it can be as short as the distance of prayer itself. The intensity of the prayer determines the distance. If my heart is completely immersed, the distance is short. If it is not intense the distance is long. It is said that Moshe in his prayer defending Israel at the sin of the golden calf held onto G-d’s garment, so intense was his prayer. The more passionate, the stronger the appeal and surrender, the shorter the distance. Thus, this "Bamokom" of Jacob was very close. This "Poga" was "Noga" (meeting was touching). "In time of disaster, I come very close to Him." If the prayer is with fire, we have "P’giah" or close meeting. How does "Chazal" (sages) know that he prayed at night? Scripture tells us "Vayifga Bamokom Vayolen Shom Ki Voh Hashemesh." (And he tarried there because the sun set.)
What is the difference between Shacharis, Mincha and Maariv attributed to the three Patriarchs? It is not merely a prayer recited at different times. Th whole concept changes. Shacharis — what is its purpose? What does it want to achieve? There is a halacha which declares that one must not eat before Shacharis. Chazal says that "one prays for his blood." You do not eat before the blood is yours — before you own the blood. There must be no enterprise, no undertaking until I have davened. It is declared that each arising is compared to "T’chias Hamasim" — revival of the dead. And some say we should not even study before Shacharis prayer. Before I daven the world does not belong to me; with davening I possess my existence. Man does not belong to himself before Shacharis, he belongs to G-d.
What is Mincha? We are told always to be careful of Mincha. Whatever you want to start should not be done before Mincha such as sitting down at a barbers, etc, for fear that we will tarry too long and miss the time limit. Mincha mean interruption! It is very easy to lose the Mincha. I must interrupt my activity no matter how important. It is a retreat. The essence of Mincha is interruption of our work, all our activities — to turn our attention to G-d, our Creator. It is taught that it was at Mincha that the prayers of the Prophet Eliayhu were answered. It is most difficult.
What is Maariv? "Arvis" basically is a very strange "tefilah". Philosophically speaking, Maariv is the later stage in man’s life. When one is young, he doesn’t experience it; when he starts to get older he starts to feel the insecurity. In Maariv, we start by speaking of our experience in Mitzraim. Then we begin with "Hashkivaynu". It is a tefilah whose main activity is survival. It treats of death. This is the experience of having entrusted the soul to the Al-mighty and then the revival. In Maariv, we entreat G-d for survival. When an older man read the "Sh’ma" before his bed, it has more meaning and impact than 25 years previously. This is "Maariv". This is why Jacob introduced "Maariv" at the mokom — the "place". It was for survival. Abraham prayed for success — to convert thousands more to the new morality. Neither did Yitzhak have fear. Abraham was still alive — he had not the responsibility. Jacob, however, prayed the night he left B’er Sheva and the night he was to meet Esau. He prayed for the survival of Choron (Laban) and survival of the confrontation.
In our own era, we were exposed to complete annihilation. We prayed for survival and our prayers were partially accepted.
Tonight, I shall read and interpret a few sentences from Rambam on Hilchos (laws) Chanukah. If you read the Rambam, you note striking resemblances to the prayer "Al Hanisism". The Rambam declares that the mitzvah of Chanukah is an exceedingly precious mitzvah. One should be particularly careful in order to make known, to publicize the miracle and to add and offer additional praise to the Alm-ghty for the miracles He performed. Even if a man has no food except that received through Z’dakah (charity) he should beg for or sell a garment for oil for the Chanukah lamp. Maimonides declares that this mitzvah is so precious that it falls into the identical category with wine for Shabbos, "Arba Koses" (4 cups) for Pesach and the giving of "Shkolim" (Machatzes Hashekel) where also a man must borrow or sell something to perform these above mentioned mitzvos. Again, Rambam declares it precious and one should inform the people of the "nes" — the miracle.
There is a formal question! The reading of Megilas Esther is just as important. Why didn’t Maimonides include the mitzvah in that selective category. In fact, according to Rambam, when it was introduced it was fashioned after "Kriyas megilah" — the reading of the Megilah Esther. Purim preceded Chanukah by 200 years. We go to chapter three of Maimonides: "It happened during Bais Sheni." — the Second Temple. Why did we have to be told? Why is the time fixed in history? Apparently, Rambam tried to introduce something new — something we wouldn’t have known.
The answer is simple. All "Yom Tovim" (holidays) are mentioned in Torah Sh’Biksav (the written Bible — or the Holy writings) except Chanukah. Chanukah took place at a time when "N’vuah" (prophecy) was already absent — There were no more prophets. In other words, there is no biblical text (such as Chumash, Tanach - Neviim - or K’suvim). Esther prevailed in her arguments that the megilah should be incorporated into the biblical text. All we know of the "text" of Chanukah is merely found in "Torah Sh’Bal Peh" the oral-traditional law (mishnais- Gemoro). Gemoro asks "Mai Chanukah" — where is the text that authorizes or constitutes it as a "Yom Tov". Where is the text? The answer is "Moguls Tacos" — we get the authority from "Esther". However, the two holidays are similar in that we are obliged to publicize the miracle. The act of Chanukah and Purim, however, differ radically. Purim is limited to one act — namely the reading of Moguls Esther. It is standardized and fixed and must be read by all — sage, scholar and secular individual — no more — no less! There is no difference such as "m’hadrim" or "min m’hadrim" (zealously adhered to or super zealously adhered to). It is addressed to everyone alike. If I add something to the required text, I’d not accomplish anything. If I read less, I nullify the mitzvah. As with Torah Sh’biksav (the written Torah) any changes render it null and in this respect it resembles "Kriya shma" (which cannot be added to or subtracted from). The mitzvah of the Torah is "lo sosifo Hadovor, v’lo sitorv" (you shall not add or diminish). Again it is likened to "Birchas Kohanim" (the priestly blessing which cannot be altered).
In "pirsuma nissa" (publicizing the miracle) — in contradistinction to Purim, on Chanukah there is no text. It is Torah Sh’Bal Peh (Oral law). For whatever I do there is reward. For instance, if one reads the Chumash and does not understand a word, for the mere act of reading he has accomplished a mitzvah. Reading the Moguls Chanukah (which is found in some prayer books) is absurd because there is no written text. It is not applicable. On Chanukah, the "pirsuma nissa" — the publicizing is not through reading. It is through the naros (the candles). Do Naros tell a story? Actually, there was a period in history during persecutions when candles were used in windows to relate information to other Jews such as a Simcha — a wedding taking place. One would see the candles and would understand. That is the reason candles still are used at weddings. By reciting the "P’sukim" immediately after lighting the candles "Hanaros Halolu" we interpret the miracle. This is "limud" not "sippur" — teaching not declaring. We interpret the miracle. It is an esoteric act. We must understand that only Chanukah there is no limit to what a man can declare — can publicize. That which the scholar is capable of doing is beyond the capabilities of the ordinary man. The pious exceed the ordinary! There is no limit. What is "m’hadrin"? (the zeal or the action of a man). It is permissible for one to light one candle. If one is not satisfied with the basic structure of mitzvah and wants to express more gratitude, he can perform it (the mitzvah) on three different levels or plateaus. If someone for instance lit the candle and forgot to say the "brocho" he would be told, "say it over the second or third candle." It can be one candle for all — or candles for all. On Chanukah, if we light one candle we get one reward, for additional, we get additional rewards.
Not so the megilah! If we read it over several times we receive but one credit for one megilah. The rest is merely "kriah" reading. On Chanukah, however, there is the average, the "m’hadrin" (those with zeal) and m’hadrin min m’hadrin (above and beyond). My grandfather used to say that the hardest thing to take leave of during the entire year is the end of Yom Kippur — the end of nilah (when we recite Hashem Hu Elokim). The same applies to Chanukah. We would like to light candles endlessly but it is halachically impossible. This is what Rambam meant that is a very precious miracle and we want to express our gratitude to the Alm-ghty. It is precious and we should offer additional praise to G-d. I want to pour out my hear and thank Him. We want to experience the unlimited chesed which G-d poured onto His people. It is determined by the capabilities of the individual!
Gemoro Shabbos says (B’ameh madlikin) certain oils were interdicted on Shabbos because they don’t burn well or have odors. On Chanukah we can use any kind. Still, it all depends on the sensitivity of the individual all the way up to the purest "shem zais" (olive oil) because we fell the other is not beautiful enough. From the halachic point, all are alright. The "pirsuma hanes" (publicizing the miracle) varies with the individual. Interestingly, Gemoro says if I utilize the candle for profane reasons, no one will recognize it as a miraculous purpose. Every Chanukah a Jew should discover something new which he didn’t know. It should increase our capabilities and our sensitivities. I should "dig" and make an effort. Interestingly, it is a mitzvah on several levels. Some people demand more and can digest more. It is comparable to "sipur yetzias mitzraim" (relating the Egyptian exodus). We have "echod chochom - echod tom - echod sh’ayno y’dai lishol" - different capabilities and mentalities of children. It was made possible for us to relate the exodus on several levels from the child to the most learned. The reason there too is because the Haggadah is not a "kriyah" or biblical text but a "medrash". Wherever Torah Sh’Bal Peh is involved, there is no limit. The "Geonim" (great rabbis) excommunicated those that thought they could merely recite Sedrahs Voayrah and Bo on Pesach. (This would be in contradistinction because then they would be introducing the written text of the Torah).
Medrash raises the problem. The initiative must be seized by the people. "You seize the initiative and you’ll come close to G-d. On the other hand, G-d often helps not only one who prays but one who cannot help himself. The problem is, "Must initiative by seized by man?" What should be the criterion? Both methods are correct. Sometimes, man is silent; sometimes G-d waits for man to take the initiative.
The answer is: "It depends if people can survive without intervention."
Sometimes, it is painful and difficult but people can survive (example
milchemes Amalek). In Mitzraim, why did G-d "jump over the mountains"?
They were not there the 400 years told to Abraham; in fact, they were there
for less. He said, "if they remain there longer, there will be nothing
left. That is why He jumped over mountains. There simply was no time.
If people still have heroic power and can endure then G-d waits for them
to come. "Lachatz" is pressure. "Either they will be set free
or no nation will there be." Moshe said, "it is wonderful but the
400 years are not up!" G-d answered, "they cannot wait." There is either
"geulah" - redemption or vanishing. This is what Rambam says - there was
no prayer. We are told that the assimilation had penetrated the homes of
the Kohanim. Why did He bestow his chesed - His grace? Because it was so
difficult for them to live. They were not worthy of it but He bestowed
chesed.
Basically, I want to talk about Joseph and his brothers: to understand the story well, you have to read between the lines. I want to speak of three insights.
(1) I try to answer one question halachically. When the brothers come to Mitzraim for the first time to buy food and presented themselves before Joseph, were accused of espionage and denied the charges, Judah’s name is not mentioned. No matter where you look, he isn’t mentioned. We find in the conversation between the brothers and the Viceroy the word, "Vayomru" — (and they said) but it doesn’t mention "Who said." "Vayomru" is mentioned in fact several times but not specifically who.
Where does Yehudah appear? In his debate with Jacob (where he appeals to his father to let them go a second time to buy food and to take along their youngest brother Benyamin as requested by the Viceroy). At first, it is Reuven - the oldest brother who intervenes right away and is rejected by the father. Much later, it is Yehuda. Scripture tells us there was no food and then Yehuda repeated basically what his brother spoke before him. Suddenly, he emerges from the shadows to the forefront. Apparently, his appeal was irresistible and was accepted. He could have said it before the food was consumed but waited till the point of starvation. When they come to Joseph’s house Yehuda again disappears in the background. When they were caught with the silver chalice in Benjamin’s possession, again, Yehuda is not mentioned. The turning point is where Yehuda is singled out in a solemn manner. Yehuda took over the leadership. The fact that Joseph couldn’t contain himself any longer is due to Yehuda’s appeal. Yehuda takes over when the situation becomes grave. Thus, it was grave when the food became low. Before the goblet was found they thought it was a joke on the part of Joseph. When the goblet was found however, disaster threatened. Yehuda takes over in the time of crisis. Technically, Reuven’s power still had not been removed till Jacob’s blessings in Sedra "Vaychi". Yehuda takes over in the time of despair. "Chazal" (Sages) says, "Reuven bchor shota" - Reuven is a fool for he speaks of "Jacob killing his children if he fails to return Benjamin - Aren’t his children Jacob’s also? Yehuda however, wins over with his oration. When Yehuda takes over, the mission will be implemented. The reason is: Yehuda will be Melech. From him will arise the kingship.
I want to quote Rambam about the mission of a king. If a "novi" - prophet appoints a king, even if not from the house of David, and he follows the right path, he will be accepted. His ability must be to fight a war. He should think of one objective - to raise the standard - to establish justice, to break the arms of the wicked and to engage in a holy war because the whole purpose of appointing a king is to implement justice, to march ahead of the armies and to emerge victorious over our enemies. The job of the king is two-fold: to enforce justice and fight the war. The word war, however, has to be interpreted. The word milchama (war) by Rambam is in a much wider sense than the literal meaning.
I would say, "milchama" means time of crisis — military, economic, or spiritual. When there is a war it is a critical time. When times are normal there is no need for such unity. In times of war, we need unified, collected leadership. He is responsible for the well-being of the people and their continued existence. Secondly, the king is responsible for the principles of justice. The courts were composted of three, twenty three , or seventy one justices — and found in all the cities. But the king is necessary when justice is being trampled in time of crisis and is in danger of disappearing. When the principles of justice are being desecrated, where the people make mockery, the Bes Din (court) is not sufficient. For example, the Hashmonayim lived in critical times. They fought against the "mishyavnim" — the revisionists in combat and the power was seized by Yehuda Hamaccabee. He had the courage and ability of a king. These are the two objectives which a Melech should pursue: general crises and justice.
When the brothers first come to Joseph and he accused them of espionage, they thought he was irritated but not critical. After all, he acted like a gentleman, was handsome and in general conducted himself exemplarily. When they finished the food, Yehuda smelled danger. His conscience was affected. "I must come forward at once, it is a crisis!" Later, he withdraws because again there is no crisis. He becomes humble, modest, withdrawn. When he comes before Joseph, they exchange gifts etc. Again he withdraws and his name is not mentioned. When the goblet is discovered and they tear their clothes in despair, now he must emerge. It is a critical time. They all come to Joseph’s house and Joseph understands very well that he’ll have to deal with them, but he thought it would be collective bargaining. However, "Vayigash Yehuda" — Yehuda stepped forth. Joseph had an intuitive feeling that he’ll have to fight with Yehuda and this he’d want to avert. Of course, they were aroused by the initial charge of espionage for it is wrong to be suspicious. But this was a conspiracy. "This Egyptian is out to destroy the house of Jacob." After all, many nationalities came to Egypt and Joseph didn’t receive them personally. Here he singles out the house of Jacob. He is a fiend interested in destroying the house of Jacob and he will go on provoking and provoking. The possibility that the house of Jacob will be destroyed aroused the "Lion of Judah". It is time for the King Yehuda to come forth. Medrash says that the "Shvotim" (tribes) were not involved at all. It is a confrontation of 2 kings. The Torah characterizes Yehuda as a "lion". Often, the lion sleeps and is unaware of what is happening outside. This "lion" slept when Joseph was sold. In time, when courageous action was desired the "lion" aroused to defend the principles of justice and to defend Jacob’s house.
Yehuda appears courageous twice: — once in the affair with Tamar when she returned his goods for identification (when he accused her of harlotry and sentenced her to death. He could have remained silent but chose to forego his honor and publicly admitted his guilt). Secondly, was his defense of Benyamin. Yehuda was successful on both occasions. Why was he tested twice? Because there are two problems! Does he have power as an individual? Does he have power as a leader? Some people can only do one. Some have leadership but as an individual (over their own conscience) they have no power. Here he was tested on both levels. It was not easy to lower himself for an unknown girl. The second time he called the Viceroy of Egypt a liar.
Insight #2
Why did Joseph torture his brothers — charge them with espionage? I believe that Joseph pursued a double objective. First, Joseph wanted to make up his mind, "should I be loving and forgiving or should I be vindictive? Shall I be a brother or an Egyptian tyrant? The answer is: "It depends on them! Are they the wild Bedouins who sold me or have they grown up? Has the morality of Abraham taken hold of them? Are they or aren’t they ‘B’alay T’shuvah’ (repentant)? Have they changed in the course of time?"
Judah’s appearance changed his mind. He remembered Judah on that awesome day when he sold him. How Jacob would suffer to such a message. He had no compassion for his father’s feelings. Now we are told by medrash that Judah grasped the columns of the palace and shook them. He was ready to give his life. The one who repents is willing to give his life. I believe that Judah felt, Joseph will give in if he repeats the story. Here Judah shows his feeling for his father.
Deep down in his heart, Joseph wanted something which no one could give him. Joseph dreamt twice! Once he dreamt of the surrounding sheaves and the prostration of the sheaves. This was fulfilled! When the brother’s came and bowed there was no doubt about the reality in such a fantastic manner. His ego was satisfied. His brothers are beggars and prostrate themselves. Was the second dream a reality or is it a vision waiting to be recognized. Joseph wanted not only that the sheaves should prostrate themselves but also the celestial bodies! He was mainly interested in the second dream. This is related to the spiritual leadership which the "shvotim" (tribes) will prove. He wanted "malchus" (kingship) not in Egypt but in the Eternal City — the "Messiah". He wanted all to prostrate themselves and recognize that from him will the Messiah issue forth.
In order to have all this he had to have one condition. When Joseph beheld the second vision, this is the one which he revealed to Jacob. Jacob declared, "Do you expect me to bow to you?" Jacob is the sun! In order to recognize fulfillment of the second condition, Jacob must bow. Jacob had the key - the control. Jacob will never accept and Joseph can never lay claim to "malchus". His problem was, "How can he make Jacob prostrate himself?" Thus, he contrived the following plan. He will contain or retain Benjamin — fully knowing that Jacob will not remain in Canaan if Benjamin doesn’t return. He will come to Egypt, bow just once to the "Egyptian Viceroy" as a matter or protocol and the "malchus" will come to him. Judah did not understand all this but he felt that the strange Egyptian leader had an interest in making Jacob leave Canaan and come to Egypt. "Jacob will come without knowing the identity." Should he know, he surely will not bow and Joseph cannot take over "malchus".
What did Judah tell Joseph? "You are making a mistake. Jacob will never come. You cannot achieve you objective. If you keep Benjamin, Jacob will die but not in Mitzraim. You have lost your game! You’ll never force Jacob to come! "This is when Joseph broke down and realized that "Hasheocha" (providence) has different plans. Now he no longer could control his emotions!
3rd Insight
"Vayigash alov Yehuda" (And Yehuda drew near to him). It should have said, "Vayigash Yehuda el Yosef". This would have been perfectly acceptable Hebrew grammar. What is the difference semantically? In order to understand "alov", we must study the end of Sedra "miketz" to find out to whom. The brothers didn’t understand the Egyptian. They really didn’t believe he was an Egyptian. "What could we really have said about him had we been exposed to him? We he brutal, capricious? He never engaged anyone else in conversation — the thousands who same to buy. The others bought, they loaded - they departed. Here he asked them all sorts of personal questions. Also they couldn’t understand Shimon’s treatment. Having seen him arrested and bound before their very eyes when they first departed from home, yet when they returned and Shimon was released and was questioned, "How ere you treated?," he answered "Better than ever!" When they come to Joseph’s house, they were wined and dined and exchanged gifts. It was strange!
Even after the charge against Benjamin they were not brought to jail or to the executioner, but to his own house. It was customary even at the time of accusation to throw all into jail. Here the text reads, "Cholilah" (far be it from me to take you all as slaves). In that era, a Yehuda rebuttal against Pharaoh (as he did) would have led to the gallows. Therefore, "alov" is Joseph — the cryptical figure; on one hand an Egyptian — on the other hand, a different kind of person. Even the word, "Baso" (his house) had the opulence of a king but the reminiscence of the quality of their own home. Even when they were apprehended they were not assaulted and he didn’t shout. He used the language of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov. It is more of a complaint, not the language of a despot. Joseph was still the cryptical, mysterious figure which no one could describe. He was the man of their family!
In today’s Sedra, Jocob’s last wish to his children, assigning their historic role is also called "Tzavoh". He assigned the role to each child; his place was assigned in Knesseth Yisrael. Thus, also with Joshuah "qualify him to take the leadership which was Moshe’s till then!" It is the final address to a survivor. Here with Jacob, after the change he gathered in his feet and expired.
In today’s Sedra, we find the first time where the language of the Torah is not prose but poetry. Later, we find poetry in Sedras "Bishalach" (the song at the sea) "Hazinu" (the song which Moshe admonished the people before his death) and V’zos Habrach (the final blessing to the Tribes). Here, the prophecy is written in poetic category.
What is the general message which today’s Parsha addresses to us? Of course, it touches the very foundation of our existence. We find the principles which guided our leaders and teachers to perpetuate "Yehadus" (Faith). But the main message I believe is not merely the Kabalistic concept but it conveys the idea of Knesseth Yisroel -- not as much Am Yisroel (Am Yisroel would be merely the people collectively whereas Knesseth represents the different viewpoints, the individualistic complexities of the nation). Rambam says that Knesseth Yisroel is a community which is contradictory with various approaches and aspects. The word "Kallah" (bride) denotes "Klal". You mention the bride, all her qualities -- the culmination of everything good. The same applies to Klal Yisroel. Knesseth Yisroel is all inclusive, contradictory but not afraid of contradiction. On one hand, the Torah displays greater tenderness than a mother to her baby. On the other hand, Torah is so stern and requests such discipline. All ideas are good but not identical. What is meant by the prayer "Ose Sholom Bimromov" (He creates peace on high)? There is reconciliation of contradictions. This is Knesseth Yisroel. It is very committed to "Yehadus" and is not taken aback at a contradiction of ideas.
This is what "Birchas Yaakov" (the blessings of Jacob) describes. It did not excommunicate a single Tribe. Actually, the Torah does not record all which Jacob told them. Undoubtedly, he told them much more than is written. But he blessed every one of them -- each blessing in accordance with each man’s talents. There is no use in blessing a man contrary to his particular talents (such as blessing one to be a great scholar if it is obvious he doesn’t have much of a memory). In describing Yehuda as a "lion," he realized his strength but commanded him he should use it at the proper time. Shimon and Levi -- the way they acted particularly in Schem, was wrong but they should use their zeal for constructive purposes. According to the situation that may arise. When a community is in distress, we must have zeal to save it. Thus, we find with the "Chashmonoyim". What did he address to Shimon and Levi? They should be zealous when necessary but be careful. If they hadn’t killed the residents of Schem, what would have been the situation? It would have resulted in complete assimilation. "Anshe Shlamim Haym" (they are simple people). They (Schem) expected the Children of Jacob to become completely integrated and eventually would be swallowed up (won’t their cattle and possession be ours?). Thus, in their war it was the important element of surprise. Thus, they weren’t so horrible in their concept. With Joseph (advocating his death) they were completely wrong. Thus, Jacob admonished them: "Zeal must be employed correctly".
Then he came to Yehuda. The capabilities, courage and heroism granted to him by the Alm-ghty should be utilized in the proper time. To Joseph, he blessed him to utilize his beauty for the proper cause. Also, in this fashion, he blessed each Tribe.
Why was Pharaoh so excited about the arrival of Joseph’s family? He had a simple theory! Joseph was a great administrator in all ways and saved Egypt. There is a genetic code there! Why not have twelve geniuses and especially the father? They were very gifted, each one excelling in this particular area - one in commerce, one in courage, one in personality. They excelled as the animals of the field but for "Bnai Yaakov", they should turn their talents into a great experience. What is the conclusion drawn from Knesseth Yisroel? It can only come into reality if all the twelve people, unique singular personalities, excelling in different areas (those 12 who couldn’t agree on any subject) should combine and resolve their contradictions and forge a great community. Thus, the American Jew is full of contradictions but this is what he is supposed to be. When a Jew concludes the Shmomo Esrei and steps backwards, he declares "Oseh Sholom" - (create peace) in the transcendental world (Bimormov) - but may it become a reality in our world. It is peace in the metaphysical and philosophical sense. Hence, Joseph cannot touch his brothers for once he touches them and disrupts the "Shvotim", there will be no Knesseth Yisroel. It will vanish and disappear. "Ovicho Tzivo Lifnay Moso" (father delivered the message before his death to all of us). "Stop fighting, stop quarreling, stop combating! Persecution will lead to annihilation. It will all be terminated and lost. "Our father’s oration was "Ono Sono Pesha Avicah" - forgive your brother’s sin. It was a crime but brotherhood should prevail. After hearing this Joseph cried, ‘Why’? "Because your behavior determines the future of Knesseth Yisroel. This is why he felt moved to cry. The future of the Jews was entrusted and dependent upon him. It was a great responsibility.
This is not homoletical but far more. What was Reuven’s sin? He disrupted his father’s couch. After the death of Rachel, instead of arranging his couch in Leah’s tent as might seem logical, Jacob arranged it in the tent of Rachel’s handmaid, Bilha. Rashi declares that the reason he did so was because Benjamin was an infant and Bilha as handmaid took over the mothership. Wishing to be close to the infant, Jacob moved his couch into her tent. Reuven misunderstood the action and declared, "Must a maidservant also be a rival to my mother Leah?" And he moved Jacob’s couch into Rachel’s tent. Thus, Reuven sinned on account of moving furniture. It wasn’t such a terrible crime. Many was the time that Leah cried and with Rochel’s death, Reuven expected better things. Actually, it was Reuven who saved Joseph from death. It was his good intentions. Yehuda was responsible for the selling. Now Yehuda passes with flying colors and Reuven is given credit for nothing. Why? What is important is that Reuven made one mistake and thus indirectly became responsible for "Mechiras Yosef", the selling. If Reuven had not rebelled publicly, the brothers never would have had the "Chutzpa" to think of killing a brother and fooling a father. But by his thoughtless action, Reuven disrupted and split the camp of Jacob. He caused dissension. His rash action precipitated rashness on the part of his younger brothers. "If he can disrupt, so can we."
The question is: where was Reuven during this selling? He had gone off to repent, to fast, to offer prayers, to say "Anaynu" (answer me). Why did he wait so long? Why did he choose just this time to pray and repent? Because it was not until just that moment when he saw and understood his brothers actions and realized that their boldness was the result of his example that he realized his sin. At that very moment, he went to repent.
"Vayomer Yosayf El Echov - Onochi Mays, Vaylokim Pokod Yifkod Eschem." And Joseph said to his brothers, I die but G-d will surely remember you! This "Pokod Yifkod" was a password which Jacob entrusted to Joseph, Joseph to his brothers and they to the heads of their families. It was a password by which he let them know that there shouldn’t be a false redeemer, a false hope. Consequently, it was entrusted only to the heads, not to the common man. Joseph told them, "I don’t know when it will be. I don’t know who the redeemer is who G-d will send. It may take a few years or many years; it may come tomorrow. But come he surely will. First, three is the Tzavoh (the will) - then "V’alisem Es Atzmo - Sai Mizeh" (You shall carry my bones up from here). Interesting is it that the same "Posek" is related in Sedra "B’Shalach" - Chapter 13, line 19 of Chumash Shmos. "etc, V’Haalisem Es Atzmosi Mizeh Itchem." (And you shall take my bones hence with you.) We find that in Sedra Vaychi, Joseph telling the brothers that his bones shall be carried up, but in B’Shalach the word "Itchem" -- with you -- is added. Chazal declares that, in fact, all the skeletons of the brothers were taken up from Egypt at the departure.
Why did Jacob make Joseph take an oath? Why was it of such great importance? There is a great bond between the land where a person is buried and the living. The whole Exodus would have lost its dramatic appeal if all had left and Jacob was left buried there. Therefore, when Joseph felt he was dying, he didn’t say "Itchem" (with you). They felt like immigrants but he didn’t. The people would have felt he considered himself part of the Egyptians. When Moshe explained it, he said, "Itchem". Joseph was part of you -- not an Egyptian. He was well aware that he was a stranger
When Joseph had to ask Pharaoh about burying his father, to leave for a couple of weeks, he had to ask thorough courtiers, although he was second to none in the government. "He spoke to the house of Pharoah" -- he used a messenger. Apparently, he wasn’t sure of himself. Yes, he had accomplished miracles but socially he wasn’t equal. He was an Ivri (Jew) not Mitzri (Egyptian). If Egypt was good enough to feed and to become prosperous in, why wasn’t it good enough for a grave. He was afraid to speak directly, to prepare Pharoah for the request. The same situation occurred in France in 1948, when Edmund Rothschild died and requested previously that he be buried in Israel. DeGaulle declared, "I thought he was a good Frenchman. Isn’t France good enough to be buried in?" The conclusion is that "Goyim" don’t understand. DeGaulle acted such as Pharaoh. It shows that the origin of the Jew is something else.
Thus, Moshe said "Itchem" -- he revealed the secret. Joseph could have been buried royally in a pyramid as was befitting a ruler in Egypt but he didn’t want this. "After 80 years in Egypt, he is still part of Israel. Therefore "Itchem".
Today’s Haftorah, the death of King David is a continuation of the Haftorah of Sedra Chayesora (where David made known the choice of successor). It is really one Haftorah. What is the common denominator with the Sedra of today? It is the business of succession. Abraham handed down the succession to Yitzchak and was contested by Ishmael. With David, father selected a son and it was contested by another son. The challenger loses and the one chosen succeeded. Sholomo challenged, Adoniyahu contested! Adoniyahu was supported by the great leaders of his time. David decided in favor of Shlomo and Shlomo sat on the throne. What do we find in Vaychi? There is no contesting here. But here we find the last message of Jacob to Joseph such as David to Shlomo.
There are two wills, the material and the spiritual. The material is inherited and automatically but not necessarily the spiritual. No one can get the spiritual unless chosen by the predecessor. We can understand this but there is a special question. The Haftorah of "Chaye Sora" should have started with the matter of succession but there is the funny story of the "Shunamith" the unknown girl who was chosen as a companion to David in his final years. Why should we be informed of the strange story of the "Shunamith"? What is the significance?
The people supported Adoniyahu! The whole Tribe of Yehuda supported Adoniyahu. This is how David became King because he was supported by the people of Yehuda. Shlomo only had Noson the prophet and the security guard -- and for Adoniyahu it was tantamount to Coronation. They would have proclaimed him King on the spot and it would be the end of the contest. Their policy was simple! They knew that David wouldn’t support Adoniyahu and so they tried to isolate David -- that no one should approach him. He knew nothing of it and only found out when BasSheva came in to him at the advice of the Prophet. They declared David sick, not to be disturbed. The girl (Shunamith) ministered to him and was instructed none should enter. The inner clique hired her just for this purpose. Thus, Adoniyahu will be Melech (King).
But they made a mistake about her. If she kept out Bassheva, Adoniyahu would be king. The miracle was that she admitted BasSheva. The entire turn of events was due to this strange girl; she kept out the others and let in BasSheva and it determined the Kingdom. Adoniyahu was a warrior and Shlomo was a "Chochom" -- scholar but not warrior. David took the advice of Noson and Bassheva. Adoniyahu lost -- Shlomo won. Interestingly, we find another great woman called "Shunamith" -- at the time of Elisha the Prophet. Thus, "Shunamith" was the "Sheliach", the messenger of the Al-mighty.
Lecture delivered by Rabbi Soloveitchik on Saturday night, January 20, 1979
I shall elaborate on two "psukim" of last weeks Sedra ( which is very important in understanding that which follows. The brothers were afraid that with the death of Jacob, Joseph’s attitude towards them would change. "Chazal" says that is did change. It says that the brothers saw that their father is dead. It was a strange statement; he was dead. But what they saw was that his attitude was cooler in relationship to them. They sent a messenger declaring, "father comanded don’t take revenge, etc." As explained, this neer occured. Father never made such a statement. Joseph answered, "Do not worry, Am I in G-d’s stead?"
This answer, "Hasachas Elokim Oni." (Am I in G-d’s stead) is hard to understand. We find this expression also with Jacob in reference to Rachel during his time of childlessness. This type of statement is out of context. I have two answers to this question. What Joseph says, "Hasacha" is not in regard to their petition per se which incidentally was in place and justified. Regarding a sin, the law requires a confession of guilt and the promise taht it will no longer be repeated in the future. This regards sins between mand and G-d; confession and forgiveness. Concerning sins between man to man, in addition to confession to G-d there must be "mechilah" (asking for pardon) towards the man. Still, it is not the same text. On Yom Kippur, we employ both means. Towards man we ask "mechila"; to G-d we say "Al Chet". That which we say to G-d we do not say to man. There are two different apporaches and categories. I speak differently to G-d than the way I speak to man. When I approach someone for "mechila" before Yom Kippur, I don’t say "Ono, Slachno". This is only for G-d when man is completely dependent and G-d completely independent. The forgiveness of G-d is one of the Thirteen Attributes belonging only to G-d. To fellow man, I speak differently -- "I did wrong, pelase forgive me!" But to say ‘Slachno’ would be idolatry. It is two vocabularies - two dictionaries. "Vidu" is total surrender. "I am wrong, G-d is correct. Nothing mitigates my sin - it’s wrong!" How did the "shvotim" (tribes) approach Joseph? "Ono - Sono-" They used the language reserved for G-d. They used the language of "Vidu". Joseph answered them: "This is not the way to apporach me. Address yourself to G-d; I shouldn’t be present. "Yira" (fear) is only to Hashem Elokecho (your G-d). As far as I am concerned, "Yira" is wrong. "Hasachas Elokim Oni?" It shows Joseph’s humility!
I believe there is another answer -- more sophisticated but first I must discuss another problem. We all know there is a lot of trouble with "Ayin Tachas Ayin, Shain Tachas Shain" (eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth). Chazal has unequivocally ruled that it means monetary compensation -- not as it appears. In Torah Sh’Bal Peh (Gemoro) when Rabbi Tarfon began to discuss the implication of the matter, he was stopped immediately. The Gemoro was instantly cut off. Never was there a scholar hwo interpreted it literally. Gemoro says, "stop the discussion" and decides it must be cleared up. It means definitely monetary compensation. So, why does Torah write it that way? It should be "Kessef Tachas Ayin" etc. (Money for an eye, money for a tooth). The Rambam answers this question. The quintessence of the statement is such: If I say "Kessef Tachas Ayin", I could take the most precious gift which G-d gave and then merely pay damage if I become angry. There is the recent case of a Jewish father who in his anger towards a psychiatrist who advocated institutionalizing of a mental child, premeditatively shot the doctor in his eyes and blinded him. With "Kessef Tachas" he could have paid him money and that would be all. If it read "money" it would become a cruel manner - not a criminal one. There would be no human perception. To kill is criminal enough but to take away vision is sub-human. Is a million dollars "Tachas" for eyes? Would there be an equivalent? Also, can we compare eyes? What -- how does one see compared with another such as an artist. So we cannot say, "Kessef Tachas". How about "Ayin Tachas Ayin" (actually eye for eye)? Is a human court capable of measuring pain, tragedy, suffering? This there is neither! What Torah means is: "He is dersving of losing an eye and to go through some suffering but there is no implementation. It may demand it but we cannot implement this. No court can impose this.
The brothers said, "Lu Yistamaynu" -- we have fear that he will torture us. "V’Hoshayv Yoshiv" and he will turn the evil on us just as we did to him - by selling him into slavery. "I would like to see you in prison for eyars -- taken away from such a wonderful house a wonderful father. But I cannot measure it, I cannot do it. You’ll never understand what I went through. Instead, "Hasachas Elokim" -- am I in G-d’s stead. I cannot do "Ayin Tachas Ayin" - only G-d can do exactly. Therefore, there is no retaliation!
Sentence 24 and Sentence 25 of the final Chapter of Vaychi seem redundant. The first declares: Joseph said to his brothers, "I die but G-d will surely remember you and bring you out of this land to the land which he swore to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." Sentence 25 reads, "And Joseph took an oath of the Children of Israel saying, ‘G-d will surely remember you and you shall carry my bones up from hence!’" It seems superfluous - it is written twice. The first sentence is no request, no demand. He told them, "You are very well established in this land but don’t forget, "You are strangers. Remember you belong to the house of Abraham. This is not your land; you will go back." Who could consider himself more Egyptian than Joseph? He saved not only what we know as Egypt today but the entire Middle East and "Chazal" says it included Lebanon. "I do not know when the call will come but when it comes be ready to go. I don’t know how you will be treated, perhaps very well but remember to be ready to go. Why did Joseph want to be buried in Eretz? It was not necessarily to be buried near his ancestors (as his father) but in Eretz. "When it should happen do not rebel - join the redeemer.
In today’s Sedra we read two Haftorahs. The Misnagdim read from Isaiah, the Chasidim from Jeremiah. In Jeremiah, Egypt is not mentioned. So what is the common theme with the Sedra? Moshe didn’t want to accept the assignment and neither did Jeremiah. It took seven days fro the Alm-ghty to convince Moshe. What is the common theme with our Haftorah (Isaiah)? The people didn’t listen when the Prophet came with the word of G-d. But I think there is something more. In "Yitzias Mitzraim", not all left. Chazal says that four out of five didn’t leave and remained behind. There were agnostics, atheists who didn’t need Abraham and his ways. In the days of Moshiach, every Jew will be picked up. None shall remain behind. "You will be picked up every individual. You won’t have to be coerced. The Messiah with his great personality will attract the people. Those who didn’t join Moshe will join Moshiach. This is the common motif of the Haftorah and Sedra. It is not merely the motif of Mitzraim; it will be complete redemption.
Joseph’s oath was carried out! His bones were extricated! There is one commentary which says his remains were in a royal pyramid, others say it was in the Nile. On the night of the Exodus when all were ready to leave. Moshe was nowhere to be found. Where was he? He was the only one who remembered, the only one who sought out Joseph’s remains. In "Shir Hashirim" (Song of Songs), which is an allegory, we find, "Bikashti Balaylos" - (I was searching for the man I wanted most -- asking the night watchman). Finally, Moshe came, bearing the "Aron" the coffin, on the night of redemption.
What is so paradoxical about this? Moshe was a great man, he shouldn’t
forget. But the paradox is: It shows the Shvotim -- in spite of its
schisms and quarrels and splitting the house of Jacob. Who of them hated
Joseph the most? It was Shimon and Levi who declared, "Kill him." It was
animal hostility! It is strange but usually hatred is carried on from generation
to generation. "He who father hated, I may well hate without really knowing
why. What is anti-Semitism? It is handed down hatred. It is taht which
they cannot understand but carry on the hatred. It is inherited hatred
from generation to generation. Therefore, who should have been more prejudiced
about Joseph than Moshe? His great grandfather Levi called Joseph "vain
- proud -etc." Yet it was Moshe who searched for the coffin, and took "Atzoth
Yosef" into his tent for 40 years. He did not entrust it to anyone else.
He didn’t hand it over and treaed it with reverence. In his "brocho" to
Joseph before his death, Moshe said, "Blessed of the L-d be his land. Let
blessings come upon the head of Joseph!" Moshe realized the wrong which
had been done. Thus, in Mitzraim the people become completely unionized,
pursued the same way of life with unity. Had not Moshe united them, Yitzias
Mitzraim wouldn’t have occured. We are accused of being too clannish. If
we don’t care, who will care? You are supposed to support anyone but especially
your brother -- who becomes poor. All was dependent if Bais Yaakov will
become reconciled. Bereshis and Shmos are books of reconciliation. We find
this message in Haftora Viyigash (Ezekiel "It will become "One nation".
The Torah recorded three incidents about Moshe’s early years, his birth, his encounter with the Mitzri and subsequent defense against persecution and flight from Egypt, and his joining of Yisro (father-in-law to be). There could have been more!
When we read carefully, not only the words tell us a story, but we learn to decipher by that which is missing and not disclosed. Pharoah not only prosecuted him for murder but condemned him for murder. I would like to know what occured during that span of time, perhaps fifty to sixty years, between his young years and having a son Gershom. We have to read and interpret not the text but the gap (the time gap). What happened during those circa 60 years? We have no script. What does Torah tell us? By not telling us, it is recorded in clear unequivocal manner. Torah itself simply doesn’t tell!
It is a time when G-d covered His face. If we are judged on Rosh Hashanah on face value only, without considering extenuating circumstances, who can win? The whole concept of Rosh Hashanah is changing "Din" (strict justice) into "Rachamim" (mercy). Not even the Archangels can win and will be found wanting. But there is another aspect which is worse than "Midas Hadin" -- strict justice. It is called "Hester Ponim" -- hiding His face. "He has turned His back on Israel; there is no confrontation. We address our prayer; He doesn’t listen! This was the historical experience which the Jew underwent in that period. It was tragic.
We find in Parsha Vayelech of Chumas Dvorim - Chapter 31 - sentence 17, the following statement. "And My anger will wax hot against him on that day and I shall avoid him and hide my face from them and they shall be for prey when the many evils shall befall them; And he shall say on that day, "Behold it is because G-d is not with me that these evils have befallen me!" This is exactly what happened then to the people, "Hester Ponim". Why were they slaves is a different problem and does not concern us here. He executes the world in perfect justice and none said a word. They worked as slaves in silence. That is why Torah doesn’t record. His face was covered up.
Moshe wanted to become acquinted with his brethren about whom he learned from his parents Amram and Yocheved. It was not only, "Hester Ponim" on the part of G-d but on the part of Moshe on account of what happened. In Parsha "Shmosh" chapter 2, line 14, it records, "Ochayn Nodah Hadovor." "Now I understand. I was wrestling with a tremendous problem. Why are the Jews deserving of such a fate? Now I udnerstand; there is no devotion among them. You went and told the authorities; such people do not deserve salvation!" These words of denunciation come from the mouths of Jews against Moshe, their loving, devoted friend. For him, it was not only flight from Pharoah but flight from his brethren. He broke up his relationship with his brethren. "It is not what I hoped for or imagined. I thought I would find the doctrine and morality of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They are not ready! Thus, he broke relationship and wanted to remain in Midyan as a permanent resident, not a temporary sojourner. Jacob in his twenty years with Laban always had in mind to return. "Garti" (I was a sojourner); not so Moshe. In the same Chapter of Shmosh -2- line 15, the word "Vayeshev" is written twice. "He dwelt in the land of Midyon - he dwelt at the well." This double "Vayeshev" is the proof of his intention of remianing there. "Chazal" (sages) tell us taht the prince Moshe carried the burdens of his brethren on his shoulder while he was in Egypt. He would have lived with them and left with them. This incident, however, caused him to doubt if they were worthy of leaving. He was confused and settled in Midyon -- settled at the well. Moshe’s prayer was very important and never rejected by G-d (except for his own misdeed). This, however, was one silent period -- "Hester Ponim". Thus, the Torah tells us a story not by screaming but by silence. A motion of the hand sometimes tells more than a long story. Silence is the best story teller of suffering. The people who slaved in Egypt already felt that this is life; such should it be.
Yayhi Bayomim HoRabim HaHaym "And it came to pass after many days." What does this mean? -- Those days which have not been recorded -- the days of silence. It is interesting that the Torah says, "HoRabim HoHaym". Only G-d could interpret "how many days". People who suffer the torture of time lose the concept of time -- day, night, hour. Time becomes abstract! You cease to feel time. Sometimes it goes quickly, sometimes slowly. When one is a slave or one is in fear there is not appreciation of time. To people who are in danger or are very sick, time becomes a heap of minutes, days or hours. "HoRabim" -- there was nothing to count. It was same humiliation, the same ridicule. It was many days of silence. The only differentiation was that day was light, night was dark. Thus was it in the German concentration camps. They were days which merely piled up. Thus Torah uses this condition to convey a long time without significance. We Jews have experienced it not only in Mitzraim but much more in the Holocaust. This picture is projected merely by the few words. "Hayomim HoRabim HaHaym". What happened? "Vayomos Melech Mitzraim -- the Egyptian King died! Why is this so important for us to know? Rambam explains that quite often when the Jew meets with hostility or enmity, he is inclined to assume that merely a certain government leader displays hostility and calls it "Coincidental". People said it couldn’t happen in Germany because there had been good interrelationship for so many years. "How about Hitler?" The answer: "Merely coincidental! Once he achieves power, he’ll forget anti-Semitism!" However, unfortunately it isn’t so.
The same was in Egypt. They believed that once there is a change in government the new King will be progressive -- a different type of individual. Instead, according to Rambam, the old dies and the new is worse. I believe the answer is simple. We know what the death of a King in Egypt meant. They built pyramids and enshrined the royal dead. Now the Jews were assigned the job of building the pyramids. The job was assigned to them and that which was bad previously became unbearable now. This was in addition to their other labors. Torah is not merely a script but has a beautiful fragrance.
"Vayaonchu" -- and they sighed. We are told that they moaned; those were sounds emitted by people in pain. What Torah tells us is that "Vayaonchu" was unbearable. The same was in Germany. "To the right - to the left" - life or death according to the whims. Why "Vayaonchu"? It is a strange sound -- not intentional. I cry when I want G-d to help but "Vayonchu" is not speech. It is the sound which can be produced by animal as well as man. It is the defense mechanism of survival. G-d granted this defense mechanism to all creatures. Before the "Melech Chodesh" - the new King, there was not even a sound.
What is "Vayizaku"? Is is complaining! It is part of the defense mechanism. It is the natural instinct. "Vayizaku" is "asking why". These are the various stages. First, there is no complaining at all -- complete silence. "They night of silence". Second is the death of the King - "Vayaonchu"; they felt pain and began to moan. Third is "Vayizaku" -- they complained -- resented, protested. Suddenly, they regained human dignity. Dathan and Aviram were subhuman because a human doesn’t complain against one who is ready to help. Fourth was "Acceptance". "Vatal Shavosom" -- their appeal, their prayer arose. Once their prayers came up, He gave them credit for all the steps they had gone through in silence and G-d shortened their stay. These are the semantics, the fragrances of the text.
Now Torah should say, "Vayared Hashem L’Hatzil" (G-d descended to help them). Instread, Torah now begins to tell us of Moshe. "Vayar Elokim Es Bnai Yisroel" (And G-d saw the children of Israel). Of course, G-d saw the children of Israel. What is imparted to us? A few sentences later - sentence 7 - it says "Ro-oh Roisi". "You saw them superficially with one eye; I see them as well with both eyes!"
Moshe, you made a terrible mistake because one individual wronged you. You stil remember but after sixty years you should forget already. But you were wrong in your evaluation. They are not bad. Their surface may have been bad. Sometimes they do not display the "Chesed" of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov but deep down they are different. I looked deeply. Three months after "Yetzias Mitzraim" you will be confronted by a new people who understand "Onochi Hashem" (I am G-d). This is "Ro-oh Ro-Isi". I see them through and through but your estimation is wrong. They are worthy. You must awaken them, teach them! You escaped not only from Pharoah but from your brethren. These two words represent the finest words of Yahadus and T’Shuvah - faith and repentence. If the sin has penetrated the deepest recesses there is no possibility for "Tshuvah" except for the two words, "Ro-oh-Ro-Isi". I see deeper and more profoundly.
Then there is "Vayada Elokim" (and G-d knew them). "Yizaker" means to be concerned to to feel. We say on Rosh Hashanah "Habayn Yakir Li. Yeled Shaashuim." "It is a beautiful child to me -- my baby; every time I speak of him, I recollect, I feel, I share his trouble. I am restless when he is in trouble. I mention him with a tremor in my heart!"
Going back to Egypt, therefore "Vayada Elokim", "He suffered with him -- he felt with him. "Vayada Elokim" follows "Vayizaker Elokim" G-d liberated Himself with Israel. Liberation meant also liberation of G-d. This is confirmed by the double expression "Vayizaker" and "Vayada". He suffered with them and was freed from bondage with them. The whole drama of Yitzias Mitraim and the whole vision will be the final redemption.
All that depended on one thing, something which meant a lot to G-d. If this condition had not been met, it would have prevented the "Geulah" the redemption. Only if Moshe will accept the mission! -- providing Moshe accepts. If he refuses there is no redemption. G-d is the redeemer but likes to have the tool for redemption, the man to do the mission. Why did G-d have to explain all this? "Laych" (Go) would have been sufficient. Because G-d wanted Moshe to acquiese. A person cannot be a "sheliach" or an agent if he doesn’t want to accept. A mission must have the consent of the "sheliach". What else is Ro-oh Ro-Isi indicative of?
What new institution is introduced? What was Moshe doing? He was a shepherd;
he had forgotten the people. He wanted to forget, he tried to forget and
erase it from his mind. They were not deserving to be represtatives of
G-d. Moshe was not ready fro them and tried to get further and further
away from their sufferings. As long as he is merely "Roah Tzon" (a shepherd)
he cannot be the redeemer. When G-d wants to punish or to save, He doesn’t
send an angel but a human. He sends him as a "sheliach". Therefore, He
made everything dependent upon Moshe. He must change his opinion of the
people; he must change from shepherd to redeemer. That is why G-d spent
so much time, seven days, speaking with Moshe. And Moshe did not give in
until the final day. When he finally said he’ll go, G-d accepted. G-d’s
job was not to persuade Pharoah but Moshe.
We spoke last week of the "parsha" which tells the story of silence - "Hester Ponim" - G-d hides His face. Extreme despair is best described by not telling anything. Here we have an interim, a separation of approximately 60 years time. We know that Moshe accepted Yisro’s offer but much we don’t know. What he did. What he said. What events occured are not revealed. But is is not important. After the matter of keeping the flock of "Kohan Midyon" (the priest of Midyon - Yisro) - there is a strange word (Chapter 3 - line 1 of Shmosh) "Vayinhag Es Hatzon Achar Hamidbar") - "And he led the sheep towrads the wilderness". Instead of "Achar" it should be El Hamidbar which meant "to". Some interpret that Moshe actually kept the flock in the furthest part of Midyon - therefore "Achar" (after). This was in keeping with the principles of Abraham, namely removing one’s flocks from "G’zayla" - infringement upon other peoples properties.
In the previous sentence we find: "U’Moshe Hoyo Roeh Es Tzon" (and Moshe was keeper of the sheep). The word "Hoyo" teaches us that it is not past tense but rather a participle. It is not a statement about what he did but who he was, his work, his occupation. It is a description of the person - "Moshe, the shepherd". "Vayinhag Es Hatzon" and he led the flock, "Vayovo El Haar Elokim" (and came to the mountain of G-d). This is the past tense. "It once happened." He came to Sinai - to the place where he shouldn’t infirnge on other people’s territory. However, this is to mean, "Hu Hoyo Nohages Hatzon". He used to always come to the "Har Elokim". Thus Rashi informs us that it was always his custom to go there so that the sheep shouldn’t pasture or graze in other people’s place. This would be "G’zayle" - robbery as the conflict between Abraham’s and Lot’s shepherds. Abraham’s shepherds were trained to be careful of other people’s money. However, if you interpret the word "Vayinhag", it means he reached it only once in many years.
My suggestion is that the whole "posek" should be interpreted as a participle. If so how can Rashi make such a statement? It would seem that it were merely an accident his reaching the Mount.
Now the question, "Vayovo Har Elokim". If you interpret it in terms of a participle what does it mean? After all, why is it called "Har Elokim?" It did not have that connotation yet; it would only be so inthe future. If the whole "posek" is a participle (many, many times) why was it necessary to bring them here to a mountain? (Certainly not much of a place for grazing.)
The ansewr to this we find in Sedra "Shlach" of Chumash Bamidbar - Chapter 13, line 22. It states, "Vayalu Banegev Vayovo Ad Chevron". "Vayalu" (They all come up in the south - the 12 spies) - Vayovo (and He Caleb) (singular) came to Chevron to offer prayers that the counsel of the spies should fail). Otherwise, instead of "Vayovo" (singular) it should state Vayovou (They all came to Chevron). We have to understand taht here with Moshe it was identical. He was not the only shepherd of Yisro. Yisro was a rich man, had a very large flock and many workers. They were the other shpeherd with whom he left the sheep constantly and would go up himself to be alone at "Har Elokim". What did he do? It was the same objective as Caleb -- to pray for his people, his brother whom he left behind in Egypt. At the beginning, he wanted to leave them, to divorce himself from them. "Now I understand! Are they worthy of liberty?" They informed the authorities knowing only too well that he was defending hsi brethren. "They are not worthy." This is what prevented Moshe from accepting at once! Therefore, he was praying that his brothers should rise spiritually, with dignity -- not to inform on their own people. We understand from the Holocaust the principle of informing. When the Germans formed the "Judenpolizei" some gave their lives to save their brothers, many could not rise to the occasion and informed. Moshe was startled! "A Jew should collaborate with the enemy?" So he came always to Har Elokim to pray. How long Moshe prayed, we don’t know any more than Caleb. He also prayed concerning the Egyptians that tyrants should understand basic human rights. Converting people into slaves is not only immoral but this type of a society will eventually decay into ruin. He wanted to inform the Egyptian government of pragmatism. Thus, Moshe constantly made a pilgrimage to "Har Elokim".
What answer did he receive? It was silence! It was the time of "Hester Ponim" (hidden face). Hakodesh Boruch Hu has given us only the promise of hearing prayer, not answering Tefilah. This is applicable to all peoples and even to animals. Thus, no answer. What happened? Once after many years, on a routine visit -- this time something great happened. "Vayara Maloch" (An angel appeared). I would interject two words, "Pa’am Achas" (One time it happened).
When I interpret this posek the best I can, I turn to the "M’forstum" -- the commentators. There are two problems! At the very first revelation, when Moshe reached the "Har" and began to pray he saw the "Sneh" - the bush. "And an angel of G-d appeared to him in a flame in the center of the bush, etc." It tells us that an angel revealed himself, not G-d. Then it says, "And G-d saw that he turned aside to gaze, and the L-rd called to him from the midst of the bush, etc." Now, instead of angel, G-d Himself appears. What happened to cause this change, "Malach" to G-d? In fact, I’ll analyze it but first want to tell a story which occured in Europe. The Gaon of Vilna excommunicated the Chassidim of his time because of their desire to change certain vital tenets of faith. The letters urging excommunication were sent out by the Gaon of Vilna and his council to many European communties that the rabbis should sign the excommunication. There was one notable exception. Rav Rafael of Hamburg, a great halachic scholar received the letter and refused to sign. An argument commenced, a delegation was sent to him to convince him and yet he refused. Subsequently, in defending his stance, he employed the following rebuttal. When the Al-mighty sent Abraham on the mission of the Akedah of Yitzchak, who was it who sent Abraham. It was G-d Himself. When it came to the critical moment of saving Yitzchak it was the Angel who called to Abraham. The anser is that to kill a Jew only G-d can order it. To save a Jew even an angel can do it. The same applied here. "The Vilner Gaon may be an angel but in effect, excommunicating is tantamount to killing. For this I need the order from G-d!"
Also at the "Sneh" we have the same application. The first call was to liberate or save the Jews. This could be done by the "Malach". But we find directly the posek, "He (G-d) said "Do not draw nigh, remove the shoes from your feet for the place where you stand is holy.’" To draw too close to the "Shchina" of G-d could have been Moshe’s death. Therefore, G-d had to speak. Interestingly, the Torah tells us that the "Sneh" burned but was not consumed. "HaSneh Aynenu Ukol". It should say, "Maduah HaSneh Aynenu Ukol". (Why wasn’t the bush consumed?" Instead, the words are, "Maduah Lo Ivar HaSneh"? This was not just a unique event but a great event as far as events are concerned. He attributed great significance to this. Moshe already felt intuitively that something great was happening, that which he waited for many years. If he were merely interested why the bush was not consumed, he wouldn’t be so intrigued. What he saw was a fire in the middle (Mitoch) but did not spread to the periphery. This is what is meant by "Lo Ivar HaSneh". What kind of a fire is it which is limited to the center and doesn’t spread to the periphery? It is restricted only to the center.
Why did G-d do this? There are two separate miracles! In order to draw Moshe, to catch his attention is "Maduah lo Ukol" -- why isn’t it consumed. The second is "Lo Ivar" -- why is the fire limited to the center. Basically, it is the same answer. The "Sneh" didn’t burn; it retained its characteristic. The fire was limited to a center point. The point is, why didn’t the fire spread? This was a test of Moshe. If he merely asked, "Lo Ukol" , why isn’t it consumed, he might not receive the leadership. But, "Why doesn’t it spread," shows his capability to be a leader. "If I were looking for a diplomat, for an ambassador, I wouldn’t have chosen you. Ther are better qualified! But I am not looking for a military marshal; I need a teacher. I need someone to take a people, degraded by torture, by slavery, by humiliation and to elevate them. The time alloted is short -- merely three months. They are degraded. Some are informers. They didn’t cry loudly enough! Only one man can do it. It is Moshe despite "Kvad Peh" -- slowness of speech. Moshe understood at once what G-d wanted. This represents the quality of "Yahudus" - faith. Often G-d is far away but from the distance communicates with man. When G-d told Moshe to build a "mishkan", Moshe was frightened. "Is it possible that I shall build for a an abode of twenty foot square, Master of the Universe? " Shlomo Hamelech asked the same question. The founders of "Chabad" says that here we find Chassidus. G-d declares, "If I want, the Heavens cannot contain Me. But ‘Im Rotze’ - if it is My will, I descend from the transcendental world and compress Myself into one cubic foot of the "Kaporos" -- the cover of the Ark. This is waht G-d wants to teach Moshe. In the center of circle there is no dimension. G-d can expand ad infinitum and if He wants, He occupies no space at all.
Basically, what does Torah want the Jew to do? We must imitate G-d. Why is there slavery in the world? Because humans want power, to expand - more space, more space. "Midas Hatzimtzum is how to occupy space. This is humility. Moshe said, "Osuro Noh" - let me turn aside and see the great wonder. As G-d contracts let man contract. Let man demonstrate humility, smallness - let him contract, shrink. This was the Serpent’s wrong advice to Adam and Eve. "Expand like G-d!" What does G-d want? The opposite. "Contract." Sometimes ambition is good but only if guided by Divine law. In inter-human relationshiop absolute honesty is required. Contract yourself; do not try to grab all you can.
In Chumash Devarim - Sedra V’Zas HaBrocho, Chapter 33, line16, there is Moshe’s blessing to the tribe of Joseph, " Urtzon Shochni Sneh" (Him that dwelt in the bush). G-d who first dwelt in the bush. This was the blessing to Yosef, the most capable of the brothers, the greatest businessman and innovator. "G-d should grant him that he never forgets "Midas Hatzimtzum" -- humility. "Enjoy this world, be attractive, be successful, pass it on to your generations, but remember -- G-d does not just reside int he entire universe but in the "Sneh" -- the lowly bush. Try not only to satisfy all desires but learn humility!" Thus with Moshe! G-d could have spoken from thunder and lightning -from the entire universe, but it waas not so. It was from nothing. Yes, try to improve yourself but always keep in mind the "Sneh". Now Moshe realized at once why the fire didn’t spread. Now he learned humility and this is how he was appointed!
Lecture delivered by Rabi Soloveitchik Saturday evening, February 10, 1979. "Parsha B’Shalach"
In today’s Parsha B’Shalach we come across strange words in the first 5 P’sukim. "Vayhi B’Shalach Paroh Es Hu’om, V’loh Nochom Elokim Derech Eretz P’lishtim, etc." In all parshas, G-d is referred to by the name "Shem Havaya" -- the Tetragrammation (Yud Kay Vav Kay). Here it is written "Elokim". There in the entire Sedra we find the name "Hashem" straight through except for the very beginning. We find a similar question in the encounter between Hashem and Moshe at the "Sneh" -- the bush. (Shmosh, Chapter 2, line 23). "Vayhi Bayomim Horabim Hohaym"; we find again "Elokim". Also in Shmosh (Chapter 1, line 17), "And the midwives feared G-d and did not do as the King of Egypt bade them and saved alive th male children) -- again Elokim! Again at the "Sneh" in sentence 4, we find angel of "Hashem" and then "Hashem saw that he turned aside to see and "Elokim" called to him. Further in sentence 11, "And Moshe said to Elokim, who am I etc". Finally in sentence 14, G-d granted Moshe permission to call Him Hashem. "Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh". We’d like to have clarity why Torah changes it several times.
Let us analyze why Hashem and why Elokim. The name "Havayah" was revealed to Moshe when G-d was about to send him. Moshe asked His name and was answered, "Havayah". Before that we always imploy Elokim. The following was evolved by the great commentator Kozaya. After Creation we always find the "Havaya". When G-d reveals Himself to man it is through two media. There are for example the ideas of Y’hi Ohr (let there by light). It was called into existence and it does exist! Secondly, this also includes the function and existence of light. It is always constant; it never changes. A philosopher declared that he couldn’t see a tree changing its phenomena in a fraction of an instant. In other words, a tree cannot be barren one minute and covered with leaves the next. Such is with light. It is a steady identical performance. Creation is not only the beginning but the continued function. If there were Cosmos instability, there’d by no scientific research. This is "Y’hi Ohr". This is Elokim. As Elokim, He created, carries and sustains the world. And He makes it function constantly. We find this idea expressed in the 104th Psalm of Tehilim - "Borchi Nafshi". What is the idea in Sedra Haazinu that Moshe should invoke Heaven and Eearth? One interpretation is that he invoked longevity -- something which exists for ever as witnesses. Rashi quotes another interpretation. "Did heaven ever change its activities? Did the sun ever reverse its course, rising in the west and setting in the east? Did wheat planted ever produce rice or oats? There is a routine in nature and now should follow. Thus, Y’hi Ohr is not only creation ex nihilo but constancy. G-d supervises function of the Cosmos. This is basically the function of our daily Brochos. G-d reveals to man through the Cosmic nature. This is simply His dynamics. He is the Bal Hakochos -- master of strength.
Then there is the "Shem Havaya" as Kuzaya says. It is relationship of G-d and man. As two people become acquainted, G-d calls man and reveals Himself. "I am G-d!" It is the principle of prophecy. "Havayah" is direct relationship to man. The Alm-ghty befriends man and makes man talk to Him. This is Maimonides idea. There are two aspects of prophecy. "He inspires man -- man establishes a relationship. After the conversation ends man is burdened with a load. "Maaso B’yad Hashem" -- burdened by hand of G-d. One does not turn away just as that! It is not light, it is a heavy load for man. Thus Moshe was not eager to accept and the same was true of Jeremiah. Moshe’s burden was not as onerous but Jeremiah had to come to the people, tell them that the people will be killed, that their King will be blinded, that their Temple will be destroyed. It was not an easy job and it was easy to see his reluctance. Neither Moshe nor Jeremiah were eager to accept. According to Maimonides, prophecy (the state of it) should be the final objectiv for which every man should aspire. It is to reach a level spiritually at which "N’vuah" (prophecy) could be possible. When you meet with G-d, man is burdened a great load. A covenant is signed! G-d calls man often. We find ion scriptures, "Abraham, Abraham! Shmuel, Shmuel. Moshe, Moshe." In Abraham’s case he searched for G-d a long time- many years but at the end of the revelation it resulted in a covenant. No more was Abraham a free man! Thus not only a nation was formed but a great nation (Goy Godol). When he wants to redeem man, he will do it not by Himself but through the medium of man. It lasted seven days because G-d needed the "Sheliach" the messenger. Now G-d makes a promise, in spite of suffering the individual or antion will be redeemed and rewarded. If redemption is not possible in the natural way, G-d will suspend the Cosmic order for a fraction of a second to implement the promise which He made to the covenental founder. This is represented by the Tetragrammation - the "Shem Havaya". It is the "Shem Havaya" which suspends the natural. We find this in Exodus! There was no war. If there were, Israel would have lost, In today’s Sedra we find 600,000 Israelites against 600 Egyptian chariots. Why the great fear? We find this with Amalek. Amalek was not a major or powerful force. But here the Israelite had to fight. If G-d did not suspend the natural Cosmos the Jews would never have left. If it were postponed there would not be a community left -- died to assimilation. This suspension of the natural -- this speeding process is represented through "Shem Havaya".
Elokim works through a slow process. The people would not understand this. A basic change had to take place in their personality. Under these conditions of natural process it would have taken hundreds of years for them to be ready for "Kabalas HaTorah" -- receiving the Torah. "If I have to wait for them to repent and come back, they never will." "Midas Elokim" (natural order) should have been the entire 400 years. Instead, we find it in four generations (Moshe, Amram, K’hos, Levi). Rabbi Akivah says that the 400 years were converted to 4 generations. This is "Midas Havaya" the speeding process. Thus Moshe said, "It is too soon!" Medrash says, "When I tell them of redemption they will say, ‘It is too soon!’" G-d says, "if not now, it will never happen!"
"M’Karetz al Heorim." "Havaya" acts instantaneously it eliminates the slow process. If they acted differently, (no danger of Avodah Zorah). Elokim would have prevailed. Instead, "Havaya"! This is why the name told to Moshe was, "Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh." Thus they will be able to say in such a short time, "Naase, V’Nishma". The same will also apply in the days of Moshiach.
Events which are happening today - the painfully slow process, the accusations and counter accusations can be appreciated from the standpiont of Elokim. That is one explanation. Another explanation is that if you extend the idea of "Havaya" it should be extended to Esther. The idea that the megilah should be incorporated into the holy writings and that Purim should be accepted by Sanhadrin is indicative of "Havaya" - a sudden divine change. There have been instantaneous reactions in everyone’s life. That which profoundly changes our lives is "Havaya". We find in Torah, Etzba Elokim (a slow process) but at the sea they saw "Yad Hashem" - Havaya.
In today’s "Shira" not a word is mentioned about Mitzraim. There was no "Shira" about Mitzraim. The only one who praises G-d for Egypt is Yisro. "Blessed is G-d who saved you from Egypt!" Moshe only said "Shira" about that which the people saw and were impressed. The people didn’t realize "Havaya" at Egypt (the process was too painfully slow). They did
realize it at "Yam Suf". G-d can get along without thanks if we are not impressed. Moshe did not feel that "Shira" was necessary until the people were impressed, until they accepted G-d’s kingship. Then he said Shira! "Eser Makos" (the ten plagues) did not impress them.
The same applies to each person! Some are sensitive; some find Havaya every day. "The fact that I can walk, I can speak -- I can still teach Chumash every Saturday at my age!" It all depends on how we look at it. We need the double approach. Everything is natural and many are supernatural. It depends on the individual.
In Sedra "Vayera", in the first few lines, Rashi says: "They (the Patriarchs) knew me as "Kal Shaddai". (It is sufficient that I promise you). I was not known to them "B’Midas Hashem" -- the attribute of Havaya. They didn’t see the absolute truth! I made promises and I didn’t fulfill. (I promised them the entire land. Yet Abraham had to pay 400 Shkolim for a grave site. Yitzchak had to struggle for wells. Yaakov had to pay 100 pieces of silver for a parcel of land in Shchem.) It means their era was the era of promises. There is the era of promises (short - it is quick to promise) -- and the era of fulfillness (it takes long to fulfill). As humans, they die before the realization of the promies). "You Moshe are fortunate that you live in the time of fulfillment. Abraham knew me as Elokim. I could burden you as I did Abraham. It will take a long time! Those are the promises which we find in Sedra "Haazinu" - for the Messianic future. That which I promise now will come quickly because I reveal myself as "Havaya". "Havaya" has no patience. That which shall happen comes instantly.
Now reverting to the opening statement - we have all the Elokims in the first few sentences. For a short time, for a few seconds He availed Himself as "Elokim" - the circumventing of the land of the Philistines, the trek in the desert, the roundabout route. He took them out with "Havaya" but here there are tremendous risks with "Elokim" - with the slowness of natural order. He changed the route from straight to circuitous. Had the Havaya been used, then Bnai Yisrael would have reached Eretz in 10 days. There would have been a change in history. If Moshe would have brought them in, the Kings of Canaan would have given up instantly, there would have been no Temple destruction, no expulsion. The whole history would have changed. But we don’t understand and have no right to question! The risk of taking them by Philistia was dangerous. They might have returned. It is hard to reconstruct the route. Why so circuitous? Under "Havaya" they would have been protected - would have reached their goal very quickly. There is the circuitous route of Elokim because Moshe couldn’t entre and it is very tragic. Moshe wanted the kingship, not kingship as we know it for he was a King. He wanted the "Messianic Kingship" and G-d said "no". This is the kingship which was denied to him. Had he taken them by the "Plishtim" as "Havaya" it would have been completely different.
Now in Shmos (Chapter 3, line 3) why does does "Havaya" change to Elokim? G-d saw that Moshe turned aside (to see the burning bush). "Sor" does not mean to move. We find similar wording in Bereshis (Chapter 19- line 3) concerning the angels at Lot. "Vayosuru Aylov" - (they turned to him). The angels departed from the usual route to zig-zag -- to come through the back way in order to mislead the people of Sodom. Here we find with Moshe, "Osuro No" (I will turn aside). Not only Moshe saw the burning "Sneh"; -- others saw it and disregarded it. Their philosophy was simple, materialistic approach. Theirs was not to see miracles. To them, there would be some explanation why the bush didn’t consume faster. Only Moshe saw it as a G-dly process. Moshe said, "Osura - Hamarah Hagodol" -- "I’ll turn, I’ll study it; it is out of the ordinary. It belongs in the category of "Havaya". G-d declares "There is someone cpapble of representing me as "Havaya" -- not in natural terms but in transcendental terms. G-d addressed Himself as "Elokim" because Moshe would be confused. "You Moshe, will be the representative not only of Elokim -- the natural order, but a representative of "Shem Havaya". "I am the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I’ll have to change the order! You’ll have to represent me as "Havaya". All promises will be quickly revealed.
Lecture delivered by Rabbi Soloveitchik on Saturday night, Feb 17, 1979
There are some questions connected with this week’s Sedra of Yisro. The last chapter of the previous sedra B’Shalach ended with the story of the attack of Amalek. This week’s sedra commences with the advent of Yisro, Moshe’s father-in-law, and his advice to Moshe. What is the continuity? It is hard to understand. Another question is that we call it, "And Yisro heard" but basically the parsha is devoted to his coming to the desert, being received by Moshe, his introduction to the elders of Israel. The major part of the sedra of course is devoted to the giving of the Ten Commandments. Yisro was the first one to praise the name of G-d in connection with "Yetzias Mitraim". It is said that it is a shame that Moshe, Aaron and the 600,000 Israelites didn’t sing the "Shira" as soon as they left. They "Shira" at the sea doesn’t mention Mitzraim. The entire description is of the miracles at the Red Sea. Gemora is critical of this. The first one to praise the Exodus per se was Yisro.
First, it is strange why Moshe didn’t mention it. Second, the Torah is eager to single out Yisro as a great personality. He also intuitively guessed at the judicial system which the Torah was to incorporate and which G-d would sanction. Even now we have the same judicial system as recommended by Yisro. It is interesting that in sedra Devarim - Chapter 1, line 9 - Yisro is not mentioned. "And I said to you at that time, I cannot carry you alone!" This system would have been introduced even without his advice, but why is it recorded? The fact of his advice apparently is of great importance! He is described in positive terms. Moshe begged him to remain with Israel. According to Chazal, Yisro did join the community because it is recorded that the children of Kenites (Yisro’s family) lived in Eretz. Why didn’t the judicial system occur to Moshe? Why did it occur to Yisro? The following is why "Hashgocha" (Providence) precipitated the series of events on the strength of Yisro’s advice.
The main theme of today’s sedra is "Matan Torah" to the community which was started by Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They were already a great nation at the Exodus but at "Matan Torah" they became not only great but holy. "Kedusha" was added on Sinai. The purpose of elevating Israel to the exalted position has a universal aspect. Yisro was charged with passing on the Torah so that humanity should accept! It is yet a long distance to the goal but a goal it is. We have the vision portrayed by many prophets. Many peoples dislike that the Jews were charged with the mission. Whether we have fulfilled our part is a different story. "My spirit will flow over every spirit, every flesh!"
An entire prayer revolves about this theory! The Torah was given exclusively to us but for a limited time. At the Messianic age it will then be for all. This Tefilah is the one of "Machroysanu" of Rosh Hashanah, of which "Aleynu is part". "And it is said the saviours shallup on Mount Zion to judge the Mount of Esau and the sovereignty shall be the L-rd’s. And it is said the L-rd shall be King over all the earth; and in that day shall the L-rd be One and His name One!"
It means the Torah will bcome the universal book of morality. These "Tefilos" are based on the prophet Isaiah and others. At present, the Torah is the exculsive possession of Israel but at the Messianic age ti will be passed on to the entire world. That is why the Torah was given amongst thunder, lightning and noise. The whole world trembled! All the creatures taht came into the world were frightened. It started with a universal affair and ended with a private affair. After all, the 600,000 was a small group in relationshiop to the world. It was cvenant similar to marriage between man and wife; it was pirvate. Yet all knew it was of cosmic proportions, including not only the 600,000 ex slaves but all mankind. All knew although they didn’t understand. But basically it was a private affair. We have both propositions in "Shofros". Not only the human beings but all creatures were involved. It taught all of nature how to live together! The Torah will teach "Chesed" and kindness not only to humns but to all elements of nature - in the eschatological era of Moshiach! All will become cooperative. Question: was it private or for all? Answer: Yes -- but in the future. It is to redeem the world -- not only the Jewish people. For a limited period of time it is limited but ultimately it will become cosmic. When this will be we don’t know. Jacob wanted to reveal the "Eschatological Era" but it was removed from him. The element of "Chesed" will be injected into the cosmic nature. The Torah will become the guiding book of all nature. But again, for the present time it is a private affair.
This is why thunder and lightning accompanied it! Why? If it was a privated affair why not give it quickly and in solitude? Rashi says in sedra "Ki Sisso" that when G-d told Moshe to ascend and He will inscribe the second Tablets it was different. The first ascent was accompanied with thunder and lightening but the second time, "No one shall accompany you." It will be complete secrecy. Why? "Publicity caused the failure, the evil eye." Modesty is better. Then why the first time with alarm, audible throughout he cosmos? Because the peoples of the world had to know that this giving will have great significance for the entire world. The world had to be notified. Therefore, the second time the world know already. "Now I don’t want a single soul to know." There is a question to be raised! Who posed the question? Amalek! According to Chazal, G-d sent agents to several nations concerning acceptance of the Torah. All rejected. It is related "Lo Sirtzoch" - (do not kill). Esau rejected - "Do not steal - commit adultery" - others rejected. There is a low in "G’ayrus" (conversion). You cannot impose it unless a person is ready! A man cannot become a "gayr" unless he feels he is able to comply with it. If a person declares, "I am not morally strong enough, you cannot impose it! This in effect is what Esau and Ishmael declared and the Al-mighty accepted it. If you do impose it, it is invalid. Now is "Yehodus" (providence) ready to give this doctrine to the whole world? Is the world or mankind ready? Do men have the spirit to accept this? It means "losing money in the strict matter of honesty, etc." It is a very costly affair economically. The peoples are not ready. Is humanity per se ready to accept our way of life? Actually, we the teachers are lacking too. We engage in "Loshen Horah" (slander), we are not above chaeting the government, etc. Economy is very ruthless. Karl Marx criticised our form and introduced his own which is even worse. Many of the people today are not ready to accept the "Choshan Mishpat" (the breastplate of justice). If he is not ready, why should he be converted? Is the world ready to accept this kind of a Torah? This doubt was aroused with tremendous impact at the "Milchemes Amalek" (the war of the Amalekites). Is Amalek ready to accept the Torah? "The Throne is not whole as long as Amalek (evil) exists. Can this evil power accept the Torah? Pharoah said, "We are guilty." It was possible to convert Pharoah! But Amalek? Therefore it was a necessity to introduce to the people someone else - a non-Jew - Yisro! - who will be ready to accept. Intuitively, Yisro was a Jew. The Torah purposely left out Moshe at this instant. Yisro guessed the judicial system for a definite reason. The whole concept of "chesed" was instituted by Yisro, the non-Jew. This teaches that despite the unfortunate incident with Amalek, Yisro ahd to come to dispel the idea that an outsider cannot accept the Torah. Actually, Amalek knew nothing about Israel. It was merely irritated by a small group of people. This was the basic trait of Naziism. They were inspired by murder, inspired by "R’Tzicha" (evil). Doing a good thing is a source of inspiration; evil is also a source of inspiration. "Mitzvah gorereth mitzvah - Avayrah gorereth avayrah." (Good inspires good - evil inspires evil.) This was Amalek, inspired by doing evil. So, how can they be inspired by Torah?
We have to teach by deed - not by book. If a Jew is engaged in proper activity, he enjoys te respect of the world and this is the concept of "Kiddush Hashem" (Sanctifying the Holy Name) - and prohibition of "Chilul Hashem" (profaning the Holy Name). Why is "Kiddush Hashem" so great and "Chilul Hashem" so bad? If our ethical deeds are good, they bring others closer. Otherwise, it teaches others to do evil. You won’t be able to be "Mamleches Kohanim" (a priestly nation) unless you are members of "Goy Kodosh" (a holy nation).
Thus, Torah introduced Yisro! If there is one Yisro, there can be many Yisros, the antithesis of Amalek. Mankind will be converted to the Al-mighty. Will mankind ever be ready? Yes! Yisro confirmed it! Israel, in order to implement th message of Sinai must be on one hand the teacher and on the other hand the warrior. Are the two missions compatible? Yes! The idea that, "Yehodus" is absolute pacifism is wrong. Yes, we are for pacifism but not when we are threatened. Therefore, we have parsha Amalek befroe "Matan Torah". Even though "Asseres Hdibros" (commandments) has the injunction "Lo Sirtzoch" -- do not kill -- on the other hand, we often have to fight Amalek (evil). But there are people like Yisro! Why did Moshe send Yisro to proselytize other peoples? Because through a man like Yisro, the whole Torah assumes cosmic proportions. Even though Moshe would have known of the judicial system by word of the "Hashgocha" still it was Yisro who introduced it to make known that it will be possible by all - non-Jews alike - to accept the word of the Torah at the appointed time.
Lecture delivered by Rabbi Soloveitchik Saturday evening, February 24, 1979
Last week, we discussed the link between Yisro’s assignment with "Matan Torah". Tonight, I would like to continue in this vein by calling attention to the comments of Rashi and Rambam. Yisro basically asks Moshe two questions (chapter 18, line 14). A) "What is this thing that you do unto the people? It is obvious that although Yisro embraced Judaism, he didn’t fully comprehend the Jewish way. "People come in droves to you from morning till night! What do you do? What is your function? What do you accomplish?" He couldn’t understand it.
B) "Why don’t you distribute and delegate power? Why don’t you organize and delegate a hierarchy of pwer?" Yisro couldn’t understand that a Rav has to do it. Moshe gave one answer to their two questions. "Vayomer Moshe L’Chosno" (And Moshe answered his father-in-law) "Because they come to me to inquire of G-d. When they have a problem they come to me and I judge between one man and his neighbor and I make known the statutes of G-d and His Law." He told him what a Rav is supposed to do amongst his people. As to the second question, apparently the answer is not here. Where can it be found? There is one slight distinction. He didn’t quite implement Yisro’s program. Yisro indicated that Moshe should handle only the important cases, but I’ll return to it and show why Moshe did no implement all Yisro advised.
What is Moshe’s first task? "They come to me to inquire of G-d!" Onkelos in targum declares, "They come to me to inquire knowledge of G-d." Thus, the first task of the Rab is to teach. It is the best task! It is the best as far as effectiveness is concerned and the best regard of heartaches. (When I first came to Boston I became involved in Jewish politics and quickly discerned that one can sink spiritually to become involved in political problems. One is drawn away from Torah, forgets Torah and there is no reward of L’Olam Habah for political activity.)
The first task of the Rav is to study (without studying he obviously cannot teach) and to learn. The task of the King of Israel was to study and to teach. It was not to exercise political power. It was the same task as the Kohanim and the Leviim, homely teaching. The Prophet Moshe had the same power as a king -- to teach. This is Onkelo’s interpretation and Rashi sanctions it. The Rav asks enlightenment from "Pi Hagvorah" (Alm-ghty).
Rambam’s interpretation is a little different. Rambam says, "Moshe explained that the people come to me for many reasons. "Mispalel Al Chalayhem". I should pray to Hashem for the sick." In Hebrew, this praying is "Lidrosh Hashem". It is employed in Sedra Toldos. Rivka went "LiDrosh Hashem" -- to pray. Shlomo Hamelech defines "tefila" under the varied terms "sickness, exile, many crises with which man is confronted. This is what Rambam says Moshe answered, "Bikur Cholim" (visiting the sick). Many times the only recourse is to pray to G-d.
"Bikur Cholim" has three distinct aspects. A) ‘Tefilah’. In Tehilim we have the "posek" - "G-d will nurse me!" The first thing which the sick person wants to achieve is "help". A "talmud" of Rabbi Akivah had a severe infectious disease and all refused to come close to ehlp him, except Rabbi Akivah himself. The Rabbi nursed the sick person and brought him to health so that the person proclaimed taht his life was spared only through Akivah’s work.
B) Allay the feeling of loneliness. There is no lonelier person than the sick man and this has nothing to do with his family. Sickness generates loneliness. It is the job of the one who visits to show interest. The feeling of loneliness is, "I am not needed anymore." Thus he is told by the "M’vaker Chole" (the visitor), "How much he is needed."
C) The sick person desires that the visitor shall pray for him. "He shares in his distress, in his misery." Chazal says, "One should take sick in an imaginary manner and to understan