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
Saturday 4 July 2020
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
Parsha: Balak, "Defining Evil"
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 Balak and the topic is the definition of evil.
How can someone act evilly if he knows absolutely that God exists? Balak clearly knew of God. He chose to defy God even though he clearly understood the repercussions. How can we explain this? We invite you to look at an article on this topic.
Shalom, RBH
How can someone act evilly if he knows absolutely that God exists? Balak clearly knew of God. He chose to defy God even though he clearly understood the repercussions. How can we explain this? We invite you to look at an article on this topic.
Shalom, RBH
Counterfeiter, Rodeif, Hatra'ah
Kitzur SA 184:9
Based upon Rema Cho"M 388:11
Paraphrasing Goldin Translation
«A person who is engaged in counterfeiting money ... Is a "rodeif" ... And should be warned to desist from his practice [lest he jeopardize the community]»
Q1 : If the counterfeiter is indeed deemed a rodeif, why should he even get hatra'ah? What are the Rema and the Kitzur SA teaching us?
Note: Rema adds "v'im eino mashgi'ach" , so we expect that sometimes the counterfeiter will heed that warning.
Q2: Do we have sources re: Pinchas and Zimri? IOW did Pinchas warn Zimri first?
Shalom,
RRW
Based upon Rema Cho"M 388:11
Paraphrasing Goldin Translation
«A person who is engaged in counterfeiting money ... Is a "rodeif" ... And should be warned to desist from his practice [lest he jeopardize the community]»
Q1 : If the counterfeiter is indeed deemed a rodeif, why should he even get hatra'ah? What are the Rema and the Kitzur SA teaching us?
Note: Rema adds "v'im eino mashgi'ach" , so we expect that sometimes the counterfeiter will heed that warning.
Q2: Do we have sources re: Pinchas and Zimri? IOW did Pinchas warn Zimri first?
Shalom,
RRW
Parshah: Huqqat, "Mixed Messages?"
It seems that many think that Moshe Rabbeinu's error at mei meriva was to hit the rock instead of speaking to it.
That seems pretty pashut! However, when Hashem tells Moshe "aseih lecha saraph," Moshe Rabbeinu actually: "Vaya'as Moshe Nechash Nechoshes.."
Now Hashem had said "Saraph" and Moshe instead made "Nechash nechoshes." Is this not, too, a deviation - albeit minor - from Hashem's statement? Does anyone comment on this apparent contradiction?
Shalom, RRW
That seems pretty pashut! However, when Hashem tells Moshe "aseih lecha saraph," Moshe Rabbeinu actually: "Vaya'as Moshe Nechash Nechoshes.."
Now Hashem had said "Saraph" and Moshe instead made "Nechash nechoshes." Is this not, too, a deviation - albeit minor - from Hashem's statement? Does anyone comment on this apparent contradiction?
Shalom, RRW
Parshah: Hukkat, Great Snakes
Given: Hashem asked Moshe to make a "S'raf"
Question: Why did Moshe change that and make a "n'chash n'choshet" instead?
-----------------------------------------
R Seplowitz:
CHUKAS (Numbers, 19:1-22:1) — "Tattle-Snakes & Copperheads" | Torah Talk
Best Regards,
RRW
Question: Why did Moshe change that and make a "n'chash n'choshet" instead?
-----------------------------------------
R Seplowitz:
CHUKAS (Numbers, 19:1-22:1) — "Tattle-Snakes & Copperheads" | Torah Talk
«Why copper? Why the play on words? By making it out of NECHOSHES, copper, Moses was emphasizing that the snake on the pole was a NACHASH, a snake defending G-d's honor, rather than a SARAF, a fiery serpent defending the honor of Moses. ...»http://torahtalk.wordpress.com/2010/06/16/chukas-numbers-191-221-%e2%80%9ctattle-snakes-copperheads%e2%80%9d/
Best Regards,
RRW
Re: [Avodah] Prohibition of Eating Blood
Originally published 1/10/08, 11:52 PM, Eastern Daylight Time.
From our Friend, Richard Wolberg:
On Jan 10, 2008 6:47 PM, Richard Wolberg, cantorwolberg@cox.net, wrote:
It is interesting to note that with modern forensic medicine we have found that once the slightest amount of blood is left on any object, there is no way of removing every trace of it. There is a substance called luminol. Luminol is a versatile chemical that exhibits chemiluminescence, with a striking blue glow, when mixed with an appropriate oxidizing agent. It is a white to slightly yellow crystalline solid that is soluble in water and most polar organic solvents.
Luminol is used by forensic investigators to detect trace amounts of blood left at crime scenes. It is also used by biologists in cellular assays (tests) for the detection of copper, iron, and cyanides . There is no way in eliminating every trace of blood once it has appeared.It would seem to me that perhaps the prohibition of blood centers around the fact that the tum'ah it conveys can never be fully eliminated.I see a parallel between the paradox of the ashes of the para aduma and blood. As the ashes can render someone tahor who is tamei, and someone tamei who is tahor, likewise, without blood already inside of you, you would die. And conversely taking blood from the outside in, will cause a spiritual death.ri
--
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)