From the archives of Nishma's Online Library at http://www.nishma.org/, we have chosen an article that relates to the week's parsha, both to direct you to this dvar Torah but also for the purposes of initiating some discussion.
The topic is the the term to'evah, usually translated as abomination. The term is often used by proponents of different ethical perspectives as a further indication of the significance of their ethical stance. The fact is, though, that the use of this term in the Chumash itself may not actually provide support for such assertions. We invite you to look at an article on this topic at http://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/spark5754-27.htm.
Saturday, 8 August 2020
Parsha: Emor, "Is Sefirat ha'Omer One Mitzva or Two?"
originally posted August 9, 2015
The Rambam firmly construes Sefirat Ha'Omer as one Mitzvah. Sefer HaHinuch concurs with the Rambam's read. Abbaye, however, affirms in the Talmud that just as it is a Mitzva to count days – so it is a Mitzva to count weeks.
These passages strongly suggest two separate Mitzvot. In Parshat Emor we read, "Tisp'ru Chamishim YOM" (Vaykira: 23: 16), while the text states in Parshat R'eih, "Sheva Shavuot Tispar Lach" . (Devarim: R'eih: 16:9) Doesn't it seem obvious that the two verses in the Torah describe two separate but equal actions?
I asked the speaker how he had found this relatively obscure source. He had noted that the new edition of the Minhat Hinuch has this source cited in the footnotes. This indicates that the matter assumed to be a slam dunk by the Hinuch is, in reality, a matter of dispute. Rabbeinu Yerucham had already articulated this voice of opposition, so I need no longer be concerned about the silence of the peer review.
-------------------------------------------------
Sometimes we see something and we assume it to be axiomatic, mutually agreed upon. In attempting to master rational thinking, I came across the concept of "not jumping to conclusions". After all, if Jews are always questioning, why was the Rambam's ruling of only one mitzva never questioned? It seemed likely that seeing it as two mitzvoth was an equally good read.
Failing to research this myself, I humbly concluded that Rambam won by acclamation. Case Closed. QED.
However, after attending a Shiur in which the rabbi found a source that did challenge this Rambam, I had to recant. Now I realized that my question - my observation - had some validity in classic sources. It was just unnecessary for other sources to question the Rambam once Rabbeinu Yerucham posed his challenge. I could no longer construe their silence as acquiescence to the Rambam's decision.
In fact, I could now conclude nothing. Although, I now suspect that the silence is possible confirmation that both reads are about 50-50. and therefore no one needs to enter the fray to reject either side as off-target.
This is an important principle to realize: just because we have not seen a competing source does not mean it is not there! I must also confess to not researching the matter in depth. It therefore has also taught me a bit of humility.
Shalom,
RRW
The Rambam firmly construes Sefirat Ha'Omer as one Mitzvah. Sefer HaHinuch concurs with the Rambam's read. Abbaye, however, affirms in the Talmud that just as it is a Mitzva to count days – so it is a Mitzva to count weeks.
These passages strongly suggest two separate Mitzvot. In Parshat Emor we read, "Tisp'ru Chamishim YOM" (Vaykira: 23: 16), while the text states in Parshat R'eih, "Sheva Shavuot Tispar Lach" . (Devarim: R'eih: 16:9) Doesn't it seem obvious that the two verses in the Torah describe two separate but equal actions?
Problem: How can an individual nowadays simply argue with the Rambam - especially without any further support? Furthermore, must I not construe the silence of so many peer reviews that as implicit acquiescence?
A rabbinic intern recently provided an informative answer in his shiur. Rabbeinu Yerucham considers Sefirah as two separate Mitzvot! He also posits that as well. My hypothesis now has supporting evidence.
A rabbinic intern recently provided an informative answer in his shiur. Rabbeinu Yerucham considers Sefirah as two separate Mitzvot! He also posits that as well. My hypothesis now has supporting evidence.
I asked the speaker how he had found this relatively obscure source. He had noted that the new edition of the Minhat Hinuch has this source cited in the footnotes. This indicates that the matter assumed to be a slam dunk by the Hinuch is, in reality, a matter of dispute. Rabbeinu Yerucham had already articulated this voice of opposition, so I need no longer be concerned about the silence of the peer review.
Case Closed
-------------------------------------------------
Comment On Original Post.
Aside from a bit of Talmud Torah - why did I post this comment?
Failing to research this myself, I humbly concluded that Rambam won by acclamation. Case Closed. QED.
However, after attending a Shiur in which the rabbi found a source that did challenge this Rambam, I had to recant. Now I realized that my question - my observation - had some validity in classic sources. It was just unnecessary for other sources to question the Rambam once Rabbeinu Yerucham posed his challenge. I could no longer construe their silence as acquiescence to the Rambam's decision.
In fact, I could now conclude nothing. Although, I now suspect that the silence is possible confirmation that both reads are about 50-50. and therefore no one needs to enter the fray to reject either side as off-target.
This is an important principle to realize: just because we have not seen a competing source does not mean it is not there! I must also confess to not researching the matter in depth. It therefore has also taught me a bit of humility.
Shalom,
RRW
Sunday, 2 August 2020
Parsha: Eqev, "Who Wrote the Second Luchot?"
It always seemed Pashut to me that Moshe carved the second set of luchot and that Hashem wrote on them.
Once, a Rav happened to briefly mention that Moshe wrote the latter set of luchot in his drasha. I found this far-fetched at the time. Today, I find it completely untenable.
Just take a look at the parsha. It seems clear that Hashem wrote on the second set of luchot. (Eqev: 10: 2-4)
Shalom,
RRW
Once, a Rav happened to briefly mention that Moshe wrote the latter set of luchot in his drasha. I found this far-fetched at the time. Today, I find it completely untenable.
Just take a look at the parsha. It seems clear that Hashem wrote on the second set of luchot. (Eqev: 10: 2-4)
Shalom,
RRW
Parsha: Equev, "Defining 'Eqev' via the 'Concordance Technique' "
Rashi uses the Concordance Technique to define some difficult or ambiguous words. A great illustration is the verb "PSCh" as in "Ufasachti alleichem" (Shmoth 12:13) There Rashi offers 2 definitions:
Now for the background of "Eqev."
Although Rashi himself did not choose to use the Concordance Technique here, Rashi frequently offers a subset of the range of "valid" techniques and definitions.
"Eqev" appears in Humash five times:
Now four and five can be understood.
4. "And it shall be when you obey Under Duress (you shall be blessed...)" (Devarim: 7:12)
5. "...and when you fail to obey Under Duress..." (Devarim: 8:20)
And abandon Hashem...
Shalom,
RRW
- "V'hamal." "Hashem will have mercy." Rashi bases this upon Yeshaya 31:5. It matches the Targum "v'Yeihos"
- "V'dileig" based upon Melachim I 18:21. This matches the modern "passover" to skip over or to jump over
Now for the background of "Eqev."
- Targum states Halaf meaning "in exchange."
- Rashi Midrashically puns: "Those mitzvoth that one tramples with one's heel"
Although Rashi himself did not choose to use the Concordance Technique here, Rashi frequently offers a subset of the range of "valid" techniques and definitions.
"Eqev" appears in Humash five times:
- Eqev asher shama Avraham Beqoli (Breishit 22:18)
- Eqev asher shama Avraham b'Kqoli (Breishit 26:5)
- Eqev hayeta Ruch Achereth imo (Bamidbar 14:24)
- Appears in Eqev itself, in conjunction with the verb "lishmo'a" totaling four of five instances. (Devarim: 7:12)
- Again, in Eqev. (Devarim: 8:20)
- The Aqeida
- This is a generic use of the word "Equev," but since they both refer to Avraham, it is feasible to hook it onto one.
- The Meraglim
Now four and five can be understood.
4. "And it shall be when you obey Under Duress (you shall be blessed...)" (Devarim: 7:12)
5. "...and when you fail to obey Under Duress..." (Devarim: 8:20)
And abandon Hashem...
Shalom,
RRW
Eqev: Who Inscribed the Second Luchos?
Originally published 8/5/09, 6:45 pm.
Given:
Hashem both carved and inscribed the First Luchos.
Moshe hewed the Second set of Luchos
Who inscribed this second set?
We have some ambiguities in the text.
We can resolve them by means of the 13th principle of Rabbi Yishma'el: 'Vechein sh'nei ch'suvim amach'chishim ze es zeh..'
First the conflicting bit:
1. Shnei Ch'suvim:
Shmos 34:1, HKBH writes the Second Luchos: "V'chasavti al halluchos"
2. Sh'mos 34 "K'sav lecha.." Moshe is writing on (luchos? Or something else?)
Although the two do not completely contradict each other, they do seem ambiguous.
This week's Parsha, Eqev, to the rescue!
The scale tipper: Hakkatuv hashlishi:
3. Dvarim Eqev Ch. 10:2-4 "v'echtov al halluchos" where it is clear that HKBH wrote on the 2nd Luchos.
I think this structure is clear. Therefore, in #2, Moshe probably wrote something else or wrote the dibros upon something else, like parchment.
KT,
RRW
Given:
Hashem both carved and inscribed the First Luchos.
Moshe hewed the Second set of Luchos
Who inscribed this second set?
We have some ambiguities in the text.
We can resolve them by means of the 13th principle of Rabbi Yishma'el: 'Vechein sh'nei ch'suvim amach'chishim ze es zeh..'
First the conflicting bit:
1. Shnei Ch'suvim:
Shmos 34:1, HKBH writes the Second Luchos: "V'chasavti al halluchos"
2. Sh'mos 34 "K'sav lecha.." Moshe is writing on (luchos? Or something else?)
Although the two do not completely contradict each other, they do seem ambiguous.
This week's Parsha, Eqev, to the rescue!
The scale tipper: Hakkatuv hashlishi:
3. Dvarim Eqev Ch. 10:2-4 "v'echtov al halluchos" where it is clear that HKBH wrote on the 2nd Luchos.
I think this structure is clear. Therefore, in #2, Moshe probably wrote something else or wrote the dibros upon something else, like parchment.
KT,
RRW
Friday, 31 July 2020
Parsha: Va'etchanan, "The Perception of Torah"
How does the world view us?
On the one hand, many see our laws as somewhat odd. Rashi himself writes, in the beginning of parshat Chukkot, that the nations of the world will mock us. Yet, doesn't Devarim 4:6 declare that the nations of the world will also see us, through our laws, as a "wise and understanding people"? So, which is it?
Should we expect the world to mock or praise us and our observance of mitzvot?
We invite you to look at the following Nishma Spark of the Week for a response to this question.
Shalom,
RBH
Yitro Vs. Ruth
originally published on 1/12/14
We read the 10 Dibrot on both P. Yitro and on Shavuot, and technically on vo'Etchanan, too! We also read the Scroll of Ruth on Shavuot so we can easily "connect the dots" between Ruth and the Dibrot
Now let's ask -
What do Yitro and Ruth have in common, and where do they differ?
What they do have in common is the discovery of the ONE TRUE G-D! No denying the sincerity of their common quest for that Holy Grail - so to speak.
Where do they differ?
Yitro found G-d, but - despite his relationship to his daughter and son-in-law - he subsequently abandoned the Jewish People to return to Midian.
Ruth, however, cleaved to Naomi and abandoned Moab to live the life of a beggar in Judea. Her commitment motto? Ameich Ami Veilokayich Elokai!. Her declaration of loyalty to the Jewish Nation preceded her commitment to G-D!
Blasphemy? Adearrabbah - a prerequisite! Yitro is the prototype of the Noahide who has found the True G-d but needs no society.
Ruth is the true convert, the prototypical "Ger Tzedeq" (actually Giyoert of course!). There is one reason to convert to Judaism following one's Spiritual Journey - to join the Priestly Kingdom and the Holy Nation. In truth, to live a life of G-dliness as an individual spiritual seeker needs no Judaism or Peoplehood.
Ruth's progeny? David and Mashiach. Her affiliation to our peoplehood earned her common destiny with us.
Yitro? A good guy to whom we say "fare thee well". Who of Yitro's descendants makes a glorious impact? Not the descendants of Hever haKeini who are allies.
Any sincere spiritual seeker can find G-d as an individual Noahide, but the prototypical Ger/Giyoret shares Jewish Destiny and Torah, as well as G-d.
Shalom,
RRW
We read the 10 Dibrot on both P. Yitro and on Shavuot, and technically on vo'Etchanan, too! We also read the Scroll of Ruth on Shavuot so we can easily "connect the dots" between Ruth and the Dibrot
Now let's ask -
What do Yitro and Ruth have in common, and where do they differ?
What they do have in common is the discovery of the ONE TRUE G-D! No denying the sincerity of their common quest for that Holy Grail - so to speak.
Where do they differ?
Yitro found G-d, but - despite his relationship to his daughter and son-in-law - he subsequently abandoned the Jewish People to return to Midian.
Ruth, however, cleaved to Naomi and abandoned Moab to live the life of a beggar in Judea. Her commitment motto? Ameich Ami Veilokayich Elokai!. Her declaration of loyalty to the Jewish Nation preceded her commitment to G-D!
Blasphemy? Adearrabbah - a prerequisite! Yitro is the prototype of the Noahide who has found the True G-d but needs no society.
Ruth is the true convert, the prototypical "Ger Tzedeq" (actually Giyoert of course!). There is one reason to convert to Judaism following one's Spiritual Journey - to join the Priestly Kingdom and the Holy Nation. In truth, to live a life of G-dliness as an individual spiritual seeker needs no Judaism or Peoplehood.
Ruth's progeny? David and Mashiach. Her affiliation to our peoplehood earned her common destiny with us.
Yitro? A good guy to whom we say "fare thee well". Who of Yitro's descendants makes a glorious impact? Not the descendants of Hever haKeini who are allies.
Any sincere spiritual seeker can find G-d as an individual Noahide, but the prototypical Ger/Giyoret shares Jewish Destiny and Torah, as well as G-d.
Shalom,
RRW
Parsha: V'etchanan, "Yashar and Tov"
This week's parsha is Va'etchanan. The topic is the source of ethics, and most specifically, the terms yashar and tov. In our ethical behaviour, do we search solely for Divine approval? Is there value in human approval? We invite you to look at an article on this topic at Nishma's Online Library.
Shalom,
RBH
Shalom,
RBH
Sunday, 26 July 2020
Sinat Chinum - Purposeless Hatred
We are told that the churban Bayit Sheni, the destruction of the Second Temple, was a result of sinat chinum. But what does this term mean?
Most define it in the realm of "cause", focusing on a negative cause for hatred -- which is then expanded by many individuals to include any reason for hatred.
Is it true that there are no possible acceptable or even good reasons to hate? More significantly, though, is one able to control this emotional response of hatred?
Reviewing the sources seeming about the concept of sinat chinum brings someone into the general halachic discussion on hatred in general. This discussion focuses on how one should deal with this emotion, and what is the correct effect of hatred, not on hatred's cause. In this light, the term sinat chinum may not really be describing anarchy in the causes of hatred but rather anarchy in the effects of hatred.
Further on this subject, I invite you to read a further discussion of this issue in Nishma Insight 5757-22,23: Defining Sinat Chinum on the Nishma website.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
Most define it in the realm of "cause", focusing on a negative cause for hatred -- which is then expanded by many individuals to include any reason for hatred.
Is it true that there are no possible acceptable or even good reasons to hate? More significantly, though, is one able to control this emotional response of hatred?
Reviewing the sources seeming about the concept of sinat chinum brings someone into the general halachic discussion on hatred in general. This discussion focuses on how one should deal with this emotion, and what is the correct effect of hatred, not on hatred's cause. In this light, the term sinat chinum may not really be describing anarchy in the causes of hatred but rather anarchy in the effects of hatred.
Further on this subject, I invite you to read a further discussion of this issue in Nishma Insight 5757-22,23: Defining Sinat Chinum on the Nishma website.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
JVO Blog: National Despair
Jewish Values Online (jewishvaluesonline.org)
is a website that asks the Jewish view on a variety of
issues, some specifically Jewish and some from the world
around us -- and then presents answers from each of the
denominations of Judaism. Nishmablog's Blogmaster Rabbi
Wolpoe and Nishma's Founding Director, Rabbi Hecht, both serve
as Orthodox members of their Panel of Scholars. Nishmablog, over the years, has also featured the responses on JVO by one of our two Nishma Scholars who are
on this panel.
The Jewish Values Online website now offers a new service -- a blog which presents comments on various topics within Judaism and the Jewish world. See
http://www.jewishvaluesonline.org/jvoblog/index?aid=0. Rabbi Hecht is also a blogger on this blog.
His latest post
National Despair
is now available at http://jewishvaluescenter.org/jvoblog/despair
A link is also up on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/JewishValuesOnline/
The Jewish Values Online website now offers a new service -- a blog which presents comments on various topics within Judaism and the Jewish world. See
http://www.jewishvaluesonline.org/jvoblog/index?aid=0. Rabbi Hecht is also a blogger on this blog.
His latest post
National Despair
is now available at http://jewishvaluescenter.org/jvoblog/despair
A link is also up on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/JewishValuesOnline/
Haftara of Tisha b'Av - Hacham, Gibbor, Ashir
ירמיהו פרק ט
כב כֹּה אָמַר ה`, אַל-יִתְהַלֵּל חָכָם בְּחָכְמָתוֹ,
וְאַל-יִתְהַלֵּל הַגִּבּוֹר, בִּגְבוּרָתוֹ;
אַל-יִתְהַלֵּל עָשִׁיר, בְּעָשְׁרוֹ.
כג כִּי אִם-בְּזֹאת יִתְהַלֵּל הַמִּתְהַלֵּל, הַשְׂכֵּל וְיָדֹעַ אוֹתִי--כִּי אֲנִי ה`, עֹשֶׂה חֶסֶד מִשְׁפָּט וּצְדָקָה בָּאָרֶץ: כִּי-בְאֵלֶּה חָפַצְתִּי, נְאֻם-ה`.
מסכת אבות פרק ד
ד,א בן זומא אומר, איזה הוא חכם--הלמד מכל אדם, שנאמר "מכל מלמדיי, השכלתי" (תהילים קיט,צט). איזה הוא גיבור--הכובש את יצרו, שנאמר "טוב ארך אפיים, מגיבור" (משלי טז,לב). איזה הוא עשיר--השמח בחלקו, שנאמר "יגיע כפיך, כי תאכל; אשריך, וטוב לך" (תהילים קכח,ב): "אשריך", בעולם הזה; "וטוב לך", לעולם הבא. איזה הוא מכובד--המכבד את הברייות, שנאמר "כי מכבדיי אכבד ובוזיי ייקלו" (שמואל א ב,ל).
Notice how neatly Ben Zoma in Avot 4:1 darshens the P'sukkim in Yirmiyahu 9:22-23 in such a way as to allow for a genuine Hacham / GIbbor / Ashir to emerge
For sources
See EG Ikkar Tosafot Yom Tov 1 how this works.
Kol Tuv,
RRW
כב כֹּה אָמַר ה`, אַל-יִתְהַלֵּל חָכָם בְּחָכְמָתוֹ,
וְאַל-יִתְהַלֵּל הַגִּבּוֹר, בִּגְבוּרָתוֹ;
אַל-יִתְהַלֵּל עָשִׁיר, בְּעָשְׁרוֹ.
כג כִּי אִם-בְּזֹאת יִתְהַלֵּל הַמִּתְהַלֵּל, הַשְׂכֵּל וְיָדֹעַ אוֹתִי--כִּי אֲנִי ה`, עֹשֶׂה חֶסֶד מִשְׁפָּט וּצְדָקָה בָּאָרֶץ: כִּי-בְאֵלֶּה חָפַצְתִּי, נְאֻם-ה`.
מסכת אבות פרק ד
ד,א בן זומא אומר, איזה הוא חכם--הלמד מכל אדם, שנאמר "מכל מלמדיי, השכלתי" (תהילים קיט,צט). איזה הוא גיבור--הכובש את יצרו, שנאמר "טוב ארך אפיים, מגיבור" (משלי טז,לב). איזה הוא עשיר--השמח בחלקו, שנאמר "יגיע כפיך, כי תאכל; אשריך, וטוב לך" (תהילים קכח,ב): "אשריך", בעולם הזה; "וטוב לך", לעולם הבא. איזה הוא מכובד--המכבד את הברייות, שנאמר "כי מכבדיי אכבד ובוזיי ייקלו" (שמואל א ב,ל).
Notice how neatly Ben Zoma in Avot 4:1 darshens the P'sukkim in Yirmiyahu 9:22-23 in such a way as to allow for a genuine Hacham / GIbbor / Ashir to emerge
For sources
See EG Ikkar Tosafot Yom Tov 1 how this works.
Kol Tuv,
RRW
Saturday, 25 July 2020
Liturgical Parallels between Tisha B'Av and Purim
Previously posted around Tisha b'av 2009, then reposted March 6, 2011, on Nishmablog.
The following outline lists some of the parallels, primarily liturgical, between Purim and the 9th of Av.
1 Maariv - Nighttime A. Only Megillos that are read at night. - Eicho - Esther B. Similar Structure with Kaddish Tiskabel and v'Ato Kodosh 2 Shacharis - Omissions A. Purim - A "miracle" Holiday , no Hallel (Megilloh instead) B. 9th of Av - A Fast Day without - Selichos (Kinnos instead) - Tachanun & Ovinu Malkeinu 3 Shacharis - Chazoros Hashatz A. Only weekday repetitions of the Amido having Krovos/Krovatz
at least in the common Ashkenaz / Yekke Litrugy
4 Preceding Shabbos
A. Purim preceded by Zachor
B. 9th of Av preceded by Chazon
5 The Tanach's Pattern - Special Torah and Haftoro readings are read on the Shabbos
before the event, with the corresponding Megilloh on the day of the event. A. Purim - The Amalek Connection - Torah- Zachor - Navi - Haftoro of Zachor (Shaul's War with Amalek in Shmuel) - Kesuvim Esther B. 9 Av - The Eicho Connection - Torah - Eicho in Devorim - Navi - Eicho in the Haftoro of Chazon (Yeshaya) - Kesuvim - Eicho 6. Month-wide A. Mishenichnos Adar Marbin b'Simcho B. Mishenichnos Av M'maatin b'Simcho 7. Miscellaneous A. Some Pesukim in Esther are read to Eicho's melody (in particular Asher Heglo) B. Chiyuv S'eudo vs. Chiyuv Taanis C. Similar Minhogim not to work
Shalom,
RRW
Saturday, 18 July 2020
THE MITZVAH TO JUDGE
Saturday, 11 July 2020
Parshah Mas'ei
Train Ride: R Eliyahu Safran
Kol Tuv,
RRW
"It is good to have an end to journey toward; but it is the journey that matters, in the end."http://www.ou.org/torah/parsha/parsha-from-ou/masei-journey-lives/
~ Ernest Hemingway
Kol Tuv,
RRW
P. Matot: Umikneh Rav liv'nai R'uvein, Gad - So How did M'nasheh get Included?
R'uvein and Gad approached Moshe Rabbeinu requesting TransJordan. When Moshe acquiesced, he added Hatzi Shevet M'nasheh. Why?
Below is a an answer based upon the structure of the Tribes throughout Sefer Bamidbar - here is that dynamic at work
When Levi drops out of the "tribes" a shuffle occurs in Parshas Bamidbar, Nasso, B'haalot'cha. *
1. Gad is promoted to Honorary Ben Leah, camping with R'uvein and Shim'on
2. Yosef is divided into Two, Ephraim and M'nasheh to restore the number to 12
The 4 camps now are structured as follows
East - 3 from Leah
South - 2 from Leah plus Gad
West - 3 from Rachel
North - 3 from the "sh'fachot" - 1 from Zilpah, 2 from Bilhah
Levi was now in a circle inside
-------------------
When R'uvein and Gad chose TransJordan, then we have
20% of Leah
25% of the Sh'fachot
0% of Rachel
To Remedy this Moshe takes 1/2 of M'nasheh which comprises about 25% of Rachel - thereby restoring a balance of Imahot. [Counting Bilhah/Zilpah as a unit]
Why M'nasheh and not Ephraim? I'm not sure - but perhaps it is since he is the b'chor and so are R'uvein and Gad.
-------------------
* Note whenever Levi IS counted in the 12, Joseph is reunited.
Shalom,
RRW
Below is a an answer based upon the structure of the Tribes throughout Sefer Bamidbar - here is that dynamic at work
When Levi drops out of the "tribes" a shuffle occurs in Parshas Bamidbar, Nasso, B'haalot'cha. *
1. Gad is promoted to Honorary Ben Leah, camping with R'uvein and Shim'on
2. Yosef is divided into Two, Ephraim and M'nasheh to restore the number to 12
The 4 camps now are structured as follows
East - 3 from Leah
South - 2 from Leah plus Gad
West - 3 from Rachel
North - 3 from the "sh'fachot" - 1 from Zilpah, 2 from Bilhah
Levi was now in a circle inside
-------------------
When R'uvein and Gad chose TransJordan, then we have
20% of Leah
25% of the Sh'fachot
0% of Rachel
To Remedy this Moshe takes 1/2 of M'nasheh which comprises about 25% of Rachel - thereby restoring a balance of Imahot. [Counting Bilhah/Zilpah as a unit]
Why M'nasheh and not Ephraim? I'm not sure - but perhaps it is since he is the b'chor and so are R'uvein and Gad.
-------------------
* Note whenever Levi IS counted in the 12, Joseph is reunited.
Shalom,
RRW
Parsha: Matot/Maasei, "How did Hatzi Shevet Menashe Get There?"
The tribes of Gad and Reuven approach Moshe about staying in East Jordan...
- Bamidbar: 32
Question: how did the "half-tribe of Menashe" get in the picture? Why Menashe and not another tribe?
I have a surprise answer....
...OK...
clear your minds.
I taught a parsha class for many years at Congregation Mt Sinai in Washington Heights. I found that many of the tribal dynamics had to do with the Matriarchs, Jacob's four wives. I don't have the time or space to explain it all now, but use that as a prism for viewing these inter-tribal dynamics. Now apply that here.
Rachel
Now take a loot at the proportions:
Leah gave birth to six sons. However, Levi didn't receive any land, leaving five to inherit the land of Israel. So Reuven is about 20% of of the inheriting sons of Leah. Gad is about 25% of the maidservants' children.
What's needed? 20-25% of Rachel's children. Half the tribe of Menasseh is about 12.5 to 20% depending on how you compute the population. Shevet Menasseh is much larger than either Shevet Ephraim or Shevet Benjamin.
So Moses' agenda was to assert a matriarchal balance over East-Jordan. Half (or part of) Menasseh did the trick
Proof?
None
Hint?
Look at the configuration of the tribes in pasrshiot Bamidbar and Beha'alotecha. The tribes march along according to matriarch - except one. Gad, who is promoted to replace Levi along with Reuven and Shim'on.
This model "suggests" the Torah had a matriarchal proportion re: tribe vs tribe. Since half-Menasseh seems to jump out of nowhere, I simply plugged them in. Voila! It conformed to a an existing model.
Shalom,
RRW
- Bamidbar: 32
Question: how did the "half-tribe of Menashe" get in the picture? Why Menashe and not another tribe?
I have a surprise answer....
...OK...
clear your minds.
I taught a parsha class for many years at Congregation Mt Sinai in Washington Heights. I found that many of the tribal dynamics had to do with the Matriarchs, Jacob's four wives. I don't have the time or space to explain it all now, but use that as a prism for viewing these inter-tribal dynamics. Now apply that here.
- Reuven, one of Leah's sons.
- Gad, one of the two maidservants' sons. (Zilpah)
Rachel
Now take a loot at the proportions:
Leah gave birth to six sons. However, Levi didn't receive any land, leaving five to inherit the land of Israel. So Reuven is about 20% of of the inheriting sons of Leah. Gad is about 25% of the maidservants' children.
What's needed? 20-25% of Rachel's children. Half the tribe of Menasseh is about 12.5 to 20% depending on how you compute the population. Shevet Menasseh is much larger than either Shevet Ephraim or Shevet Benjamin.
So Moses' agenda was to assert a matriarchal balance over East-Jordan. Half (or part of) Menasseh did the trick
Proof?
None
Hint?
Look at the configuration of the tribes in pasrshiot Bamidbar and Beha'alotecha. The tribes march along according to matriarch - except one. Gad, who is promoted to replace Levi along with Reuven and Shim'on.
This model "suggests" the Torah had a matriarchal proportion re: tribe vs tribe. Since half-Menasseh seems to jump out of nowhere, I simply plugged them in. Voila! It conformed to a an existing model.
Shalom,
RRW
Saturday, 4 July 2020
Parsha: Pinchus - "WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?"
We have chosen an article that relates to the week's Parsha from Nishma's Online Library archives, both to direct you to this d'var Torah and in order to initiate some discussion.This week's Parsha is Pinchus and the topic is the generation of the desert.
The behavour of the generation of the desert is simply perplexing. How can we explain this? We invite you to look at an article on this topic at https://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5768-35.htm .
Shalom, RBH
The behavour of the generation of the desert is simply perplexing. How can we explain this? We invite you to look at an article on this topic at https://www.nishma.org/articles/insight/insight5768-35.htm .
Shalom, RBH
Parsha: Pinchas, "Leadership"
A local leader of a certain sect recently told me that while their World Leader may no longer walk the earth, he is still there for consultation. After all, no shepherd would leave his flock (צֹאן מַרְעִיתוֹ.) unattended.
I then began to wonder - why couldn't Moshe Rabbenu A"H lead his flock after passing away? It seems he was very concerned about having a successor appointed before his passing.* What compelled Moshe to find a LIVING successor instead of relying upon consultations from beyond?
It is also interesting that Shaul required a witch from Ein Dor to help him commune with the departed Sh'muel Hannavi. Why didn't Shmuel just advise Shaul from the afterlife, too?
Shalom,
RW
------------------------------
* במדבר פרק כז
I then began to wonder - why couldn't Moshe Rabbenu A"H lead his flock after passing away? It seems he was very concerned about having a successor appointed before his passing.* What compelled Moshe to find a LIVING successor instead of relying upon consultations from beyond?
It is also interesting that Shaul required a witch from Ein Dor to help him commune with the departed Sh'muel Hannavi. Why didn't Shmuel just advise Shaul from the afterlife, too?
Shalom,
RW
------------------------------
* במדבר פרק כז
טז יִפְקֹד ה”, אֱלֹהֵי הָרוּחֹת לְכָל-בָּשָׂר, אִישׁ, עַל-הָעֵדָה. יז אֲשֶׁר-יֵצֵא לִפְנֵיהֶם, וַאֲשֶׁר יָבֹא לִפְנֵיהֶם, וַאֲשֶׁר יוֹצִיאֵם, וַאֲשֶׁר יְבִיאֵם; וְלֹא תִהְיֶה, עֲדַת ה”, כַּצֹּאן, אֲשֶׁר אֵין-לָהֶם רֹעֶה.
H. Of Pinchas, is it the rarest?
For the statistical reality see:
Calendar - What is the rarest Haftarah? - Jewish Life and Learning - Stack Exchange
http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/3898/what-is-the-rarest-haftarah
Shalom,
RRW
Calendar - What is the rarest Haftarah? - Jewish Life and Learning - Stack Exchange
http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/3898/what-is-the-rarest-haftarah
Shalom,
RRW
Sunday, 28 June 2020
Parsha: Balak, "Schadenfreude I"
The Torah Claims that Balak hired Bil’am because: “Those whom he blessed were blessed, and those whom he cursed were cursed.”
Rashi objects to a literal read. After all, Balak is seeking only a curse and he considers the blessings just so much flattering blather.
What would happen if this were true and Bil’am was equally capable of blessing as well as cursing? If that were the case, then Balak would have had a choice in how to deal with the Israelite threat to his territory:
What does the Torah tell us about life in general? The Torah teaches us: It is more important for the Anti-Semite to do harm to the Jews than it is for him to obtain his own success. We will, BEH, explore this further on a series of posts
Shalom,
RRW
. Background Information:
Dictionary: schadenfreude (shäd'n-froi'də) n.
Pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others.[German : Schaden, damage (from Middle High German schade, from Old High German scado) + Freude, joy (from Middle High German vreude, from Old High German
Word Overheard: schadenfreude
Columnist George Will, who seems to enjoy the seven deadly sins almost as much as he does baseball, decided to add a pleasurable eighth — schadenfreude. "Sins can be such fun. Of the seven supposedly deadly ones, only envy does not give the sinner at least momentary pleasure. And an eighth, schadenfreude — enjoyment of other persons' misfortunes — is almost the national pastime."
Link: The economics of baseball — George Will
Posted October 15, 2006
Rashi objects to a literal read. After all, Balak is seeking only a curse and he considers the blessings just so much flattering blather.
What would happen if this were true and Bil’am was equally capable of blessing as well as cursing? If that were the case, then Balak would have had a choice in how to deal with the Israelite threat to his territory:
- Curse the Israelites to make them vulnerable
- Bless the Moabites to make his nation invincible.
What does the Torah tell us about life in general? The Torah teaches us: It is more important for the Anti-Semite to do harm to the Jews than it is for him to obtain his own success. We will, BEH, explore this further on a series of posts
Shalom,
RRW
. Background Information:
Dictionary: schadenfreude (shäd'n-froi'də) n.
Pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others.[German : Schaden, damage (from Middle High German schade, from Old High German scado) + Freude, joy (from Middle High German vreude, from Old High German
Word Overheard: schadenfreude
Columnist George Will, who seems to enjoy the seven deadly sins almost as much as he does baseball, decided to add a pleasurable eighth — schadenfreude. "Sins can be such fun. Of the seven supposedly deadly ones, only envy does not give the sinner at least momentary pleasure. And an eighth, schadenfreude — enjoyment of other persons' misfortunes — is almost the national pastime."
Link: The economics of baseball — George Will
Posted October 15, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)