Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook: Two letters on Shemitta

Shemitta Work at Israel National Fund Land 

Date and Place: 3 Sivan 5670 (1910), Yafo

Recipient and Background: Dr. Feichtwanger, who was apparently an official in the World Zionist Organization.

Body: I received your letter and am honored to tell you that the immoral matter of work being done on Israel National Fund land [during Shemitta] is just what they are doing of their own volition. They did not ask any question of which types of work may be done by a Jew, based on the sale of the land, and which types of work may only be done by a non-Jew. They did not present me with the facts of the matter at all, so that I could determine which things are so pressing that they cannot wait until next year and which things will not cause serious loss to the Yishuv if they wait until the non-holy, next year.

Realize that we have not allowed at all to plant new vegetation. There are only a small handful of exceptions, which involve unusually large loss, where we allowed non-Jews to plant, in addition to other known halachic reasons for leniency. All of this applies when parties come to ask halachic authorities, but when they treat Shemitta like any other year, without asking for the instruction of a religious authority, it desecrates the holy Torah regarding national property in the Holy Land. We must protest this with all our might, and whoever possesses sensitivity for the honor of our nation should accept our call. 

Requesting Limitations on Shemitta Stringency

Date and Place: 5 Sivan 5670 (1910), Yafo

Recipient and Background: Rav Yaakov David Wilovsky (Ridbaz), a leading rabbi who moved to Eretz Yisrael and was known, among other things, as a strong opponent of leniencies on Shemitta.

Body: I find it necessary to seek out my dear, illustrious colleague, when I heard that there are now those who cast aspersions on the produce of the vineyards and fields of the moshavim that have been sold to a non-Jew due to the restrictions of “the sanctity of Shemitta produce.” This will take away the meager livelihood of the members of the moshavim. Many of them are destitute, and they are looking toward the price they will get for the fruit to sustain them and the children who depend on them.

Regarding [the halachic status of] the fruit, there are not really halachic grounds to cast aspersions. Even according to the Mabit’s opinion, which is stringent regarding the sanctity of the fruit of a non-Jew during Shemitta, it is permitted to use them commercially, and the money spent to acquire them does not have sanctity of Shemitta(see Shut Maharit (the Mabit’s son) 43).

In the sale of the land, we have included renting it and including in the price non-Shemitta things, so that if there are questions about the sale because of the law of the land, then rental will work regarding the fruit even if it does not work for allowing working the land. Since in previous Shemitta years, in the lives of the great Rav Y.L. Diskin, Rav S. Salant, and my father-in-law, there were no new stringencies, it is improper to make new ones now and impoverish families of our brethren, which would raise great fears of major problems.

Therefore, I request of my beloved friend to please inform the members of the rabbinical court to not do anything new, and allow the people to rely on the halachic opinions upon which they relied in the past. This would promote the mitzva of increasing peace in Israel and preventing enmity and other things that we can’t even know in advance. I will rely on our warm relationship that you will act to do the right thing with full power, and Hashem will be with you to bring you success, along with the blessing of the multitude.

The Yishai Fleisher Israel Podcast: THE NEXT PHASE OF THE WAR

SEASON 2025 EPISODE 9: First, Malkah Fleisher on raising Jewish activists. Then, Gal Gadot on Jewish pride after October 7th. Then, President "Trump" visits Hebron. Finally, Yishai speaks with Yoni Bleichbard on the next phase of the war. Plus: Ben Bresky on the founding of Hebrew University.

When we educate our children, our job is to make ourselves un-necessary

by Rav Binny Freedman

In 1860, a relatively unknown one-term congressman (who had practiced law in the prairie towns of Illinois) named Abraham Lincoln stunned the country by prevailing over three prominent rivals—William Seward, Salmon Chase, and Edward Bates—to win the Republican nomination for President.

But even more surprising was what Lincoln did after being elected President: He appointed all three rivals to his cabinet—Seward as secretary of state, Chase as secretary of the treasury, and Bates as attorney general.

Reading up on Abraham Lincoln, one discovers that this was not an astute political move; rather, it was simply who he was.

In fact, even his enemies often became his friends. To quote David Chamber Mearns:

“Enemies seemed to be potential friends to Abraham Lincoln. When British writer
Edward Dicey was introduced to the president as one of his enemies, Lincoln’s
response was: “I did not know I had any enemies”. (Largely Lincoln pg. 93)

The same Dicey, in the June 1861 issue of Macmillan’s, wrote:

“In my life I have seen a good number of men distinguished by their talents or their station,
but I never saw anyone so apparently unconscious that this distinction conferred upon him
any superiority, as Abraham Lincoln.”

The commentaries note a fascinating detail in this week’s portion of Tetzaveh: This is the only portion in all the last four books of the Torah (after his birth) that contains no mention of Moshe’s name.

Many suggestions have been offered and the Midrash suggests that when Moshe, in his attempt to save the Jewish people after the debacle of the Golden Calf, pleas before G-d to be ‘erased from His book (the Torah) “if you will destroy this people” (Shemot 32:32), the decree of such a Tzaddik must be fulfilled to some degree. So Hashem leaves out the mention of Moshe’s name in this week’s portion.

The obvious question then is why specifically this portion?

This is the second of two portions that discuss the mitzvah to build a Mishkan and it focuses largely on the role of the Kohanim both in the daily lighting of the golden menorah, with which the portion begins, as well as the special clothing the Kohanim wore and some of the special parts of their daily Korban Tamid, and the offering of ketoret, discussing as well the special ceremony, the shmoneh ye’mei miluim, inducting Aharon and his sons into the priesthood.

In short, this portion actually introduces the Kehuna, the priesthood, even though the actual dedication and commencement of their service will only begin in the next (third) book of the Torah: Vayikra.

One might have expected to find some hint of jealousy or at least hesitation on Moshe’s part considering this was a role neither Moshe nor any of his offspring will ever be able to enjoy.

Yet, Moshe displays not a hint of jealousy or struggle. And, perhaps to make this point, does not even include his own name in the entire portion.

It is interesting to note that Moshe was perhaps following Aharon’s own lead on this topic. When Moshe debates with G-d Himself whether he is the most appropriate person to lead the Jewish people out of slavery, he suggests that Aaron might be a better choice especially as he remained with the Jewish people in Egypt whilst Moshe was leading a much easier life in Midian. Yet Hashem’s response is that:

“Aharon your brother will come out to greet you, and will rejoice in his heart.” (ibid. 4:14)

Indeed, Aharon himself displayed not a hint of envy or struggle with Moshe being appointed the leader of the Jewish people, he simply rejoiced in Moshe’s arrival.

This is especially significant given the enmity found so often amongst brothers in the Torah. In fact, the first murder was between brothers when Kayin killed Hevel, not to mention the conflict that existed between Yitzchak and Yishmael, Yaakov and Esau, and of course Yosef and his brothers.

One wonders where these two brothers, along with their sister Miriam, learned this impressive humility of attitude. They must have had incredible parents. Yet, we know very little about their parents; indeed, the first time we find mention of them, they are not even mentioned by name! They are simply described (ibid. 2:1-2) as a man and a woman (“Ish” and Isha”).

Interestingly, this the same term used in Pirkei Avot when describing the value of stepping up when there is no one else to do the job:

“Bemakom she’ein anashim, hishtadel le’hiyot ISH.”
“In a place where there are no men, strive to be a man.” (Avot 2:6)

Which can be summarized to mean; when there is no one to do the job, you have to try to be the one to step up and get it done.

One day, now a teenager (ibid. 3:11) Moshe ventures out and sees the suffering of his brothers, and sees an Egyptian beating a Jew, and (ibid. v.12) “he looks back and forth and sees there is no man (ISH) …”. Here too Moshe is not named , he is described as a ‘lad’.

Because to be a leader a person has to get out of the way; it has to be about the larger picture; the job that needs to get done; the greater cause, and the people….

In fact, the smaller the ego, the greater the leader. It is not accidental that Moshe’s greatest trait was his extreme humility. And character development most often centers around the ability of a person to make it less about him or herself, and more about the bigger picture, and the people and/or cause that is meant to be served.

In fact, Pirkei Avot (end chap. 4; and see Rambam Hilchot Deot 2:7) also tells us that there are three things that remove a person form the world (which may mean such a person is missing what life is all about):

1. Kinah (jealousy),
2. Ta’avah (self-centered desires) and
3. Kavod (running after honor).

And what these three character flaws share in common, is that they involve a person placing themselves at the center, rather than the cause or higher purpose which they are meant to serve.

If, as an example, a person is envious of what someone else has, be it position or property, it is a clear indicator he or she has not accepted that G-d (Hashem) has a different role or purpose in mind for them which is why they don’t have whatever it is they are jealous of….

In fact, healthy systems of government inherently have a well thought-out separation or balance of powers which entail leaders realizing not only what they are meant to do, but just as much what they are not meant to do. When the president starts to interfere with the judiciary, things get complicated quickly. And the same is true in healthy institutions and endeavors in general: if the CEO gets too involved with what the accounting department is doing, it doesn’t work….

And one last thought which provides such a great example in the realm of education:

Our portion opens with the mitzvah of the Kohein to light the Menorah every day in the Mikdash. Based on the word “le’ha’alot” (ibid. 27:20) which literally means the Kohein is meant to raise up the flame in lighting the menorah, the Talmud (Shabbat 21a) infers that the Kohein is meant to kindle the flame until it would rise on his own. The Kohein literally would not remove his hand from the wick he was lighting until there was an independently strong flame.

The Talmud suggests in numerous places that the Menorah was symbolic of the Torah. (See Baba Batra 25b as an example: R Yitzchak suggests a person should pray facing south if he wishes to gain wisdom, i.e., the wisdom of Torah, because the Menorah in the Beit HaMikdash stood in the South.)

Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch suggests therefore, that when we educate our children, our job is to make ourselves un-necessary; even superfluous; we have to get the flame to burn on its own.

Success in education is actually when our students or children can stand on their own. And the wisdom of a good educator is in fact to know when it is time to step back in order to let that child fly…. If we step back too soon, it can be disaster, as when the Jewish people (according to some commentaries) felt abandoned at the foot of Sinai in the debacle of the Golden Calf. But if we get it right, then they, our children and students, can build a Mishkan all their own…

Shabbat Shalom from Yerushalayim.

Rabbi Ari Kahn on Parashat Tetzaveh: Holy Healing (video)

Rebuilding Gaza is Pointless Unless Hamas is Eradicated

by Khaled Abu Toameh

• The establishment of a new government in the Gaza Strip while Hamas maintains its military capabilities there unfortunately will not work. Hamas's presence during reconstruction will only result in the emergence of the Lebanon model: Hezbollah, another Iranian proxy terror group, simply created a terrorist state-within-a-state.
• Worse, having a new government that would oversee reconstruction and humanitarian efforts in the Gaza Strip while Hamas is still there would exempt the Palestinian terrorist group from its responsibilities towards Gaza's residents. The new government would not be able to stop Hamas from rearming, regrouping, and preparing more attacks against Israel -- as Hamas has unremittingly vowed to do.
• The new government would be busy rebuilding homes and skyscrapers and delivering humanitarian aid, while Hamas and the other terror groups would have all the time in the world to rebuild tunnels and manufacture weapons.
• Hamas never cared about the well-being of the Palestinians under its rule in the Gaza Strip. The terrorist group could have built schools, universities, and hospitals. Instead, it chose to invest millions of dollars in building a vast network of tunnels to attack Israel, smuggle and hide weapons, and torture Israeli hostages.
• The reconstruction of the Gaza Strip and the resumption of humanitarian aid should be conditioned on the removal of Hamas from power and disarming of all of Gaza's terror groups.
• Hamas should be completely excluded from any plan to rebuild the Gaza Strip because all it cares about is pursuing its Jihad (holy war) to destroy Israel and murder as many Jews as possible.

As Arab and Western leaders continue to discuss plans to rebuild the Gaza Strip, the ran-backed Palestinian terrorist group Hamas has again rejected laying down its weapons. It is clear that the terrorist group is determined to hold on to its weapons and its power, even if that entails depriving Gazans of reconstruction and further humanitarian aid. Hamas must not only be removed from power; it must disappear altogether. Pictured: Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi (R) welcomes Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Cairo on March 4, 2025, photographed from a large screen at the Arab League summit. (Photo by Khaled Desouki/AFP via Getty Images)

As Arab and Western leaders continue to discuss plans to rebuild the Gaza Strip, the ran-backed Palestinian terrorist group Hamas has again rejected laying down its weapons.

For Hamas, preserving its weapons and military wing, Izz a-Din al-Qassam, is apparently more important than the reconstruction of thousands of homes and buildings destroyed during the Hamas-Israel war, which erupted after the terrorist group's October 7, 2023, bloodthirsty attack on Israel.

"Disarming Hamas is a red line," senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri was quoted as saying on March 4. He added that his group will not accept exchanging its weapons for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip and the resumption of humanitarian aid.

Abu Zuhri described the talk about Hamas's disarmament as "nonsense" and stressed that weapons are a red line for Hamas and all terror factions in the Gaza Strip. "The weapons are not subject to bargaining and are not up for discussion or negotiation," he said.

Continue Reading Article

The Miraculous Survival of the Jewish Nation

BS”D
Parashat Tetzaveh – Zachor 5785
by HaRav Nachman Kahana

PART ONE

Moshe descended from Mount Sinai with a message from HaShem to Am Yisrael (Shemot 19,6):

ואתם תהיו לי ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש

You shall be for me, a kingdom of Kohanim and a holy nation.

Question: It is estimated that only about 5% of the nation are Kohanim, so what is the meaning of “a kingdom of kohanim”?

We will return to this.

The Gemara (Yuma 5b) points out a discrepancy regarding the manner in which Aharon and his four sons donned the sacred Kohanic vestments, which bestowed upon them and their descendants the sanctified status as kohanim, until the end of time.

Our parasha Tetzaveh (Shemot 28:41) states:

והלבשת אתם את אהרן אחיך ואת בניו אתו

And you (Moshe) shall dress Aharon your brother (with the holy vestments) together with his sons.

With the understanding that Aharon and his sons were to dress in unison. However, in parashat Vayak’hel (Shemot 40,13-14), it states:

והלבשת את אהרן את בגדי הקדש ומשחת אתו וקדשת אתו וכהן לי:
ואת בניו תקריב והלבשת אתם כתנת

And you shall dress Aharon with the holy vestments and anoint him to serve Me. 

And you shall bring his sons and dress them in the tunics.

With the understanding that only after Aharon completed donning his holy vestments do his sons begin to don theirs.

At first, the rabbis of the Gemara saw the contradiction, but deemed it to be of no consequence, because at the time of the next Bet Hamikdash when the order of dress would become pertinent, there would be resurrection, and Moshe and Aharon would direct us regarding how to conduct the matter. But the rabbi who pointed out the contradiction continued to pose the problem for the purpose of solving the apparent contradiction. The issue ends with no definitive solution to the discrepancy. As it appears the yeshiva did not want to get involved with the spiritual and philosophic aspects of the two possibilities.

I submit that there is a huge difference between Aharon donning the garments first then followed by his sons vs. Aharon and his four sons donning their garments in unison. A difference which has fundamental implications for understanding the essence of Kohanic sanctity, and even beyond, as follows:

Had HaShem commanded Moshe to dress Aharon and his sons at one time, the implication would be that the sanctity of Aharon and his sons were at equal levels, but Aharon as Kohan Gadol (High Priest) was chosen to serve as first among equals. However, if Aharon was to complete his donning of the holy vestments before his sons, thereby completing his “initiation” into the Kehuna before them, the implication would be that the sacred order of Kehuna emanated from HaShem directly to Aharon as “transfer number one”, and then emanated from Aharon to his sons, as “transfer number two”. Meaning: the sanctified status of Aharon was closer to HaShem than that of his sons. With the implication being that the level of sanctity of all succeeding Kohanim Gedolim (High Priests) would be superior to the sanctity of the other kohanim.

However, in fact, the matter was resolved by the rabbinic authorities who codified the texts of our blessings and prayers. Kohanim recite an introductory blessing before invoking the three verse Kohanic blessings as brought in parashat Naso (Bamidbar chapter 6):

ברוך אתה ה’ א’ מלך העולם אשר קדשנו בקדושתו של אהרן וציוונו לברך את עמו ישראל באהבה

Blessed are You H’ E’ King of the universe Who has sanctified us with the sanctity of Aharon and commanded us to bless His nation Yisrael in love.

Meaning: Aharon was the initial receiver of the Kehuna directly from Hashem which he then passed down to all succeeding Kohanim.

This has great implications for our understanding of HaShem’s relationship with the Jewish nation as apart from all other nations, and permits us to understand the message:

ואתם תהיו לי ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש

You shall be for me, a kingdom of Kohanim and a holy nation.

As stated above, HaShem relates to Am Yisrael with the sobriquet ‘Mamlechet Kohanim’ – a Kingdom of Kohanim; however, only 5 percent of Jews are Kohanim, certainly not a “kingdom of kohanim”.

But this is the point:

HaShem’s revelation of His intimate relationship with the descendants of Avraham, Yitzchak and Ya’akov was identical to the process of sanctifying Aharon and his sons as Kohanim.

Just as Aharon was not equal to his sons in sanctity and was chosen by HaShem to be unique not first among equals, Am Yisrael, descendants of Avraham, Yitzchak and Ya’akov are not first among equals in the “family of nations”, but are essentially different just as the vegetable world is essentially different from the inorganic world, and the animal world is essentially different from the vegetable one, and human beings from the animal world, so too is the Jewish nation essentially different from the other forms of humanity.

Our being chosen is an expression of our intimate relationship with HaShem. Just as Aharon was the first and only Kohen in the world through whom the others received their Kehuna. Am Yisrael is the singular nation that has a direct and intimate connection with the Creator of heaven and earth, and only through us does the Creator deal with what is known as “humanity”. We are the essence of Creation whose life force gives life to all other nations.

It is told that Louis, the sixteenth, King of France, asked a philosopher for proof of the existence of God. The answer he received was two words “Les Juis” – the Jews.

Conclusion:

And indeed, as HaShem has planned it, He guarantees His guardianship and the miraculous survival of the Jewish nation, and in return our survival and unprecedented return to Eretz Yisrael after 2000 years in exile proves His existence as Creator and Master of all that exists.


PART TWO

In this “complex” period in our history, one might ask why we should believe that HaShem is zealously guarding Medinat Yisrael? Are we such great tzaddikim to deserve His supernatural miracles?

To this I would reply with two reasons:

1- There were very few generations where so many Jews were willing to put their lives in jeopardy to be in Eretz Yisrael for no other reason than they are Jews.

Both the Torah-observant and those who are not, have come to this Land to defend and restore her, and will never leave – because they are Jews. The proof of the love the people in Medinat Yisrael have for the Land of Israel is the millions of other Jews who choose to remain in the galut rather than risk their lives for the Jewish State. It is this love of being Jewish that resonates in the heavens and arouses HaShem’s love, devotion, and protection of His chosen people.

2: The TaNaCh in Melachim 2 chapter 14 says:

בשנת חמש עשרה שנה לאמציהו בן יואש מלך יהודה מלך ירבעם בן יואש מלך ישראל בשמרון ארבעים ואחת שנה: ויעש הרע בעיני ה’ לא סר מכל חטאות ירבעם בן נבט אשר החטיא את ישראל: הוא השיב את גבול ישראל מלבוא חמת עד ים הערבה כדבר ה’ אלהי ישראל אשר דבר ביד עבדו יונה בן אמתי הנביא אשר מגת החפר: כי ראה ה’ את עני ישראל מרה מאד ואפס עצור ואפס עזוב ואין עזר לישראל: ולא דבר ה’ למחות את שם ישראל מתחת השמים ויושיעם ביד ירבעם בן יואש::

23 In the fifteenth year of Amaziah son of Yoash, King of Yehuda, Yeravam son of (a different) Yoash, King of Yisrael, ruled over Shomron for forty-one years.

24 He did evil in the eyes of the Lord and did not turn away from any of the sins that Yeravam son of Navat had caused Israel to commit. 25 He (the evil Yeravam ben Yoash nevertheless) restored the boundaries of Israel from Levo Hamat to the Dead Sea, in accordance with the word of the Lord, the God of Israel, spoken through his servant Yonah son of Amittai, the prophet from Gat Chefer.

26 The Lord had seen how bitterly everyone in Israel was suffering, with no one to help them. 27 And since the Lord had said that He would never blot out the name of Israel from under heaven, He saved them by the hand of Yeravam son of Yoash.

Yeravam ben Yoash, King of the northern tribes, was very far from being a halachic person; indeed, he was a rasha. Yet, he was victorious in all his military campaigns, including enlarging the borders of the Land and capturing Damascus.

The reason for his great successes could not be attributed to his great ‘righteousness’. It was because “the Lord had seen how bitterly everyone in Israel was suffering with no one to help them. And the Lord had said that He would not blot out the name of Israel from under heaven”.

When the enemies of Yisrael are so many, and the merits of the nation are less than what they should be, HaShem has no choice but to save His chosen people just as a father protects his beloved child.

And this explains why the Medina exists and thrives within a sea of Amalek, in a veritable sea of war and hate.

This is the message we should be aware of on this Shabbat Zachor that promises the defeat of all our enemies.

Shabbat Shalom,
Nachman Kahana
Copyright © 5785/2025 Nachman Kahana

What does Purim have to do with accepting the Torah more willingly?

by Rabbi Pinchas Winston

​PURIM IS THE least straightforward holiday of all of them. There are some who treat Purim as a time to let go and have a blast, while others look at it as holy of holies. Some go no further than the Megillah’s childlike story to understand the holiday’s basis, while others see Purim as an intellectual and spiritual rabbit hole that just keeps going deeper and deeper.

One detail about Purim that isn’t given enough attention is this:

[The Torah says, “Moshe brought forth the people out of the camp to meet God,] and they stood at the base of the mountain” (Shemos 19:17). Rebi Avdimi bar Chama bar Chasa said: “The Jewish people actually stood beneath the mountain, and the verse] teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, overturned the mountain above them like a barrel, and told them: ‘If you accept the Torah, excellent, and if not, there will be your burial. Rav Acha bar Ya’akov said: “From here [there is] a substantial caveat to [the obligation to fulfill] the Torah. [The Jewish people can claim that they were coerced into accepting the Torah, and it is therefore not binding.]” Rava said: “Even so, they again accepted it willingly in the time of Achashveros, as it says: ‘The Jews fulfilled and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves unto them’ (Esther 9:27).” (Shabbos 88a)

What does Purim have to do with accepting the Torah more willingly?

Many hold that this did not apply to all of Torah. According to Tosafos, the Jewish people accepted the Written Law by saying, “We will do, and we will understand” (Shemos 24:7), for which they were praised. It was the Oral Law they struggled to accept, as has been the case with many breakaway factions over the generations, and required some coercion. It was at Purim, well into the future, that they finally accepted it with a full heart.

The question is, why, and why then? What was Purim that it inspired such an act of national self-sacrifice, since the topic doesn’t even show up anywhere in the entire Megillah?

The answer is in this week’s parsha, though you wouldn’t know it to just read it, especially since it has to do with the Menorah, the clothing of the Kohen Gadol, and the Mishkan in general. Although the world often says that “clothing makes the man,” this week’s parsha says that clothing reveals the person, the inner person.

The body is the vehicle that allows the soul to give expression to its will. But it is limited inasmuch as you live with the body you are born with because of genetics. You can enhance or lessen your body somewhat, but short of actual surgery, it is your body for life.

It is different with clothing. We have more flexibility with what we choose to wear, so in a sense our clothing is more an expression of our souls than our bodies might be. Whatever you buy to wear is a choice you make based upon how influenced you are by your body or soul.

The olive oil of the Menorah was similar with respect to how its inner essence—the oil—his hidden inside the olive like the soul is in the body. This made the Menorah a symbol of our devotion to reveal the hidden essence of the light of God in the world, of which our soul is a part. Once a person does, then they can finally appreciate just how much deeper life is, and can be, once you start looking deeper into reality for essential truths.

Like Torah Sh’b’al Peh—the Oral Law. The Oral Law is to the Written Law what the soul is to the body. So when the Gemora says that God only made a bris with the Jewish People because of the Oral Law, it is because we’re not really capable of of making a bris with God on any other level on any other level of Torah.

That’s what Purim showed the Jewish People. They obeyed the Oral Law, but not with a complete heart, which made the rest of the Torah rather perfunctory. The Oral Law may be complex and complicated, but so is a soul, and yet it is the soul that gives us life—all of it. After Purim, they understood that they could never really love Torah as much as they could without taking the Oral Law to heart.

How did they learn that? Because they watched God do His thing from behind the scenes. They realized it was God pulling all the strings that led to their miraculous redemption, out of eyesight. They learned that history is just the body, and God is its soul, no matter how Godless it may seem.

But the deeper one goes into Torah Sh’b’al Peh, which we call Pardes, the more one learns how to see history’s “soul,” and God where most people are blind to Him. That is how you become elevated above the mundane reality that shackles most of mankind, something the Mishkan and its service were meant to instill within us. And it is the only way to defeat Amalek in any generation, which is why “he” has fought so hard to keep people from it (see my book, Redemption to Redemption: The Very Deep & Intimate Relationship Between Purim and Pesach).

Latest books, Haggadah: “The Wise Son Says,” and “Taking It Even Higher: Going Beyond Everyday Reality.” Available through Amazon.com.

​I am giving a two-session webinar, b”H, called Kabbalah & Redemption. Part 1 was on March 4 and Part 2, on March 11. To register (and see Part 1 uploaded), go to https://www.shaarnunproductions.org/webinars.html. Shaarnun Productions, and to gain access to the recorded classes after. For more details, write to pinchasw@shaarnun.org.

Good Shabbos,
​Pinchas Winston
​Thirtysix.org / Shaarnun Productions

It’s Judea and Samaria, not the West Bank — and that matters hugely

By Cheryl K. Chumley

The Washington Times

OPINION:

GRAPEVINE, Texas — House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast has just issued a directive to his staff to refer to Judea and Samaria in Israel as Judea and Samaria — not the West Bank, as Palestinians and much of the international community call it. Prepare for more similar shakeup.

A growing and influential community of Jewish and Christian leaders in America and Israel have just petitioned President Trump to do the same — or more to truth, to stand back and just let Israel do the same without interference.

If any U.S. president would make that move and make that proclamation, it’d be Trump. He’s the president, after all, who dared to declare the capital of Israel as Jerusalem and to move the U.S. Embassy to Israel accordingly. That was Dec. 6, 2017 — the day America officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital, and subsequently relocated the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The nail-biters in government bit their nails and warned of wars and uprisings and chaos to come. They were wrong; their hysterical predictions were largely unrealized. But fast-forward a few years and now Trump stands to oversee a similarly politically and religiously charged action.

“There is no such thing as the West Bank,” said Troy Miller, CEO of National Religious Broadcasters, during an event of the American Christian Leaders for Israel at NRB in Grapevine, Texas. “There is only Judea and Samaria. … This is the land God has given to the Jewish people.”

The fight over Judea and Samaria is not so much about land and geography as it is about biblical truths and religious warring. Palestinians, Muslims and much of the international community, to include anti-Semites and terror group sympathizers, accuse Jews of illegally occupying the territories — ignoring historical and biblical facts that Jews have always lived in Judea. The land is holy to Christians, as well; Jesus was born in Bethlehem, in Judea; Jesus walked and taught and evangelized in Samaria.

Names matter.

To erase the names of Judea and Samaria is to erase their histories. And to erase their histories is to allow for different histories to take their place.

Thus — the warring within the region.

But the time, they are a-changin’.

It’s not just America’s political system that took a turn toward conservatism this past election season. It’s America’s culture and foreign affairs that have shifted in decidedly pro-Israel fashion.

This is not Joe Biden’s “let’s make a deal with terrorist devils” White House any more. There’s a new commander-in-chief in town, and Trump, along with all those he’s brought as part of his team, have signaled a return to America First — Israel Our Friend times. The word is already echoing around Israel.

“It feels like a dream,” said Josh Reinstein, director of the Knesset Christian Allies Caucus and the president of the Israel Allies Foundation, and a key host of the NRB event. “We are truly living in biblical times.”

The groups are pressing Trump, via a written petition, to stand alongside, silently if not overtly, Israel’s affirmation of Judea and Samaria as sovereign Jewish lands. After all, inalienable rights don’t require the permission of others, right?

The petition, in part, states: “Whereas the Jewish people have an enduring historical and biblical connection to Judea and Samaria, also known as the biblical heartland; whereas Judea and Samaria contain some of the most significant biblical sites … The undersigned signatories reaffirm the Jewish people’s inalienable right to the Biblical Heartland of Israel and reject all efforts — both from the United States and the international community — to pressure the Jewish people to relinquish their ancestral homeland in Judea and Samaria.”

The Jewish people don’t really need Trump or the United States to declare Judea and Samaria Israeli lands. They just need Trump and the United States, and the entire world, for that matter, to leave them alone to decide for themselves how best to label and populate those lands. But it’d be a good move for Team Trump to take. God does make clear that those who bless Israel will be blessed by God; conversely, those who curse Israel will be cursed by God. America can stand some blessings.

Besides, from a Jewish and Christian perspective, it’s abundantly clear: the Bible speaks of Judea and Samaria, but not the West Bank. The Bible tells who God gave the land to, as well, and guess what, lookie here, it’s the Jewish people. Read Genesis. Read Joshua. Read the Bible and see.

It’s only common sense — truth and common sense — to call these lands by their God-given names and to accept them as the home for God’s chosen Jewish people.

• Cheryl Chumley can be reached at cchumley@washingtontimes.com or on Twitter, @ckchumley. Listen to her podcast “Bold and Blunt” by clicking HERE. And never miss her column; subscribe to her newsletter and podcast by clicking HERE. Her latest book, “God-Given Or Bust: Defeating Marxism and Saving America With Biblical Truths,” is available by clicking HERE.

Which Judges are Defending Jewish Students?

And which are shutting them out?

by Daniel Greenfield

“The Court is dismayed by Cooper Union’s suggestion that the Jewish students should have hidden upstairs or left the building,” Judge John Cronan wrote, blasting the Manhattan college’s bid to dismiss a lawsuit by Jewish students who were trapped in the library by a mob of terrorist supporters. “These events took place in 2023—not 1943—and Title VI places responsibility on colleges and universities to protect their Jewish students from harassment, not on those students to hide themselves away in a proverbial attic.”

The strong language in the ruling was similar to how Judge Mark Scarsi had criticized UCLA.

“In the year 2024, in the United States of America, in the State of California, in the City of Los Angeles, Jewish students were excluded from portions of the UCLA campus because they refused to denounce their faith,” Judge Scarsi wrote in response to the university’s complicity in Hamas supporters setting up checkpoints and encampments to harass Jews.

The two federal judges who spoke forthrightly in defense of Jewish students had two things in common: both were conservatives associated with the Federalist Society.

And both men had been nominated by Trump.

To fully appreciate the moral courage of Judge Scarsi and Judge Cronan, compare them to their colleagues who had been nominated by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.



When Jewish students at Harvard and MIT turned to Judge Richard Stearns, a Clinton nominee, he dismissed the MIT lawsuit entirely, claiming that MIT had not reacted “in a clearly unreasonable manner”, and dismissed the lawsuit charging that Harvard had discriminated and retaliated against Jewish students, but allowed the lawsuit accusing the university of maintaining a “hostile educational environment” to move forward.

He did concede that, “Harvard failed its Jewish students.”

Judge Fernando Olguin, an Obama appointee, however sneeringly dismissed a complaint by Jewish parents and students against the antisemitic Los Angeles ‘ethnic studies curriculum, claiming that he could not understand it. Olguin, who had worked for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, a proponent of ethnic studies curriculums, proved to be one of the most unsympathetic judges yet.

In Pennsylvania, Judge W. Scott Hardy, a Trump appointee, refused a request by Carnegie Mellon to dismiss a lawsuit by a Jewish student who had been harassed by a professor over her Jewishness and Israel’s war on terror, upholding an allegation of “deliberate indifference” against the university.

Judge Haywood Gilliam, Jr, an Obama appointee, however showed outright skepticism of a lawsuit against the California College of the Arts in San Francisco brought by a Jewish professor who had been put through the wringer at her school for challenging Students for Justice in Palestine’s pro-terrorist student activists.

Judge Gerald Austin McHugh Jr, another Obama appointee, dismissed a complaint by Jewish students against Haverford College, mocking it as a collection of “every frustration and disagreement of Jewish students and faculty” that “reads more as an opinion editorial’ and tipping his ideological hand, accused them of strategically “seeking to blur the line between Zionism as a political philosophy and Zionism as a component of Jewish identity, and in the process implicitly sweep any and all criticism of Israel into the basket of antisemitism.”

The handling of lawsuits filed by terrorist supporters also varied wildly by federal judges.

Judge Peter Messitte, a Clinton nominee who had worked in Yemen, issued a preliminary injunction requested by CAIR, which had supported the attacks of Oct 7, to allow a pro-terrorist event on Oct 7. Messitte, now deceased, had also insisted on blocking a Trump order during his first term allowing local officials to stop terrorist refugee resettlement in their communities.

By contrast, Judge Mitchell S. Goldberg, a Bush appointee, had rejected a lawsuit by the Faculty for Justice in Palestine group against the University of Pennsylvania trying to force the university not to cooperate with a congressional investigation of campus antisemitism.

In Texas however, Judge Robert Pitman, an Obama nominee and the “first openly gay judge” in the Fifth Circuit, backed a lawsuit by CAIR and Students for Justice in Palestine, a campus hate group whose chapters cheered the Oct 7 attacks, against Gov. Abbott’s antisemitism policies.

And back in California, Judge James Donato, an Obama appointee who had waged a judicial war against the Trump administration, allowed pro-terrorist activists to help defend the University of Berkeley against Jewish students alleging campus antisemitism.

While much has been written about the direct actions by the Trump administration on behalf of Jewish students, President Trump’s judicial appointments are playing a significant role in challenging campus antisemitism. The moral clarity brought by Judge Scarsi redefined how judges could speak directly and succinctly about the state of hate on college campuses.

And Judge Cronan’s equally strong and forthright words show that is becoming the new norm.

Meanwhile the behavior of Obama appointees like Messitte, Olguin and Pitman show the other side of the equation, and what the stakes are for American Jews in federal judicial appointments. Trump appointees have stood up for the civil rights of Jewish students while Obama appointees, true to their president’s policy, have enabled campus antisemitism.

Democratic Jewish groups have warned about the alleged ‘extremism’ of President Trump’s judicial appointments and championed confirming Biden’s extremist judicial appointees..

“We urge the Senate to confirm President Biden’s judicial nominees and fill all 44 judicial vacancies before Trump and the GOP return to power,” the Jewish Democratic Council of America had pleaded.

That included Adeel Abdullah Mangi, who had served on a think tank that had promoted Islamic terrorist figures, calls for BDS and “vile antisemitic propaganda”. By contrast, fourteen conservative judges, most appointed by Trump, visited Israel after Oct 7.They included Judge Lee Rudofsky, a Trump appointee who had warned that he would reject any law clerks that supported Hamas.

Are American Jews better off with Judge Rudofsky or with Mangi on the bench?

Hollywood Hates Jews

by Daniel Greenfield

“I’ve had someone say to me, ‘Let’s not forget what Hollywood is made up of. Be careful,’” Guy Pearce told a Jewish writer at Vanity Fair in response to a question about his attacks on Israel.

In an industry where talent has been cancelled for the most minor perceived offenses against political correctness, Pearce’s remarks went unnoticed and he was rewarded with an Oscar nomination for playing an antisemite on screen in The Brutalist and in real life.

Contrast that with the backlash against ‘Karla Sofia’ Gascon, starring in Emilia Perez, the Oscar frontrunner, over old Spanish-language tweets speaking out against Black Lives Matter and Islam, which he has already apologized for several times.

Pearce’s friend was wrong. He had nothing to worry about from Hollywood. Jews however have plenty to worry about from Hollywood as the Oscar nominations once again show.

The Brutalist, a fictional exploitation of an equally fictional Holocaust survivor oppressed by American capitalism and racism, has received ten nominations. Brady Corbet, who wrote, directed and produced the movie, is non-Jewish and has promoted an anti-Israel documentary.

Like last year’s nominee, Zone of Interest, the movie exploits the Holocaust to score points against America. Most current Holocaust movies see Jews as vehicles for contemporary agitprop by non-Jewish liberals like Corbet or Jews like Zone’s director Jonathan Glazer or A Royal Pain’s star Jesse Eisenberg who symbolically shed their Jewishness as part of their promotional campaigns.



“We stand here as men who refute their Jewishness,” Glazer had declared at the Oscars last year. Jesse Eisenberg, whose movie’s depiction of the Polish role in the killing of Jews borders on Holocaust denial, told Bill Maher that he had obtained dual citizenship in Poland.

“A lot of American Jews of Polish descent, you know, have this kind of like negative attitude towards Poland that Oh, it’s anti-Semitic,” Eisenberg complained.

The symbolic shedding of Jewishness, the criticism of Jews and the embrace of antisemites has become an almost mandatory ritual in an industry formerly created by Jews, but where it is trendy to despise Jews and career suicide to stand up for them.

“From ‘A Real Pain’ to ‘The Brutalist’ and beyond, Jewish movies were everywhere in 2024. What does it mean?” the JTA asked. What it means is that these movies aren’t Jewish. They are the work of people who hate Jews and Jews who hate themselves.

Two years after life fundamentally changed for Israeli and American Jews, the industry continues to roll out highly fictionalized prestige Holocaust movies and neurotic shlock about Jewish hipster losers.

Only one movie, September 5, the story of the media coverage of the Munich massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes, dealt with anything remotely relevant to Jews after Oct 7.

And it was limited to one Oscar nomination.

The Academy Awards did not choose to recognize any of the documentaries about Oct 7, but did nominate, No Other Land, an anti-Israel agitprop doc also promoted by Brutalist’s Corbet.

It would be tempting to pretend that this is a recent problem, but it’s an old Hollywood tale.

The Pawnbroker, a 1964 Oscar nominated movie about a Holocaust survivor, featured a grotesque stereotype played by Rod Steiger whose experiences in the Holocaust have made him selfish and miserable, exploiting minorities for money, until he is finally redeemed by unselfishly coming to care for them.

Call it a liberal Christmas Carol parable for Holocaust survivors who needed to get over it. The New York Times compared the movie’s Jewish Holocaust survivor protagonist, to “the somber shadow of the legendary, ageless Wandering Jew… who taunted Jesus on the way to Calvary and was condemned to roam the world a lonely outcast until Jesus should come again.”

The Pawnbroker and Nazi propaganda shared the conviction that Jews were horrible people, where they differed was the idea that liberalism could redeem the Jews from damnation.

Understand that and you also understand Glazer, Eisenberg, Hollywood and the pathologies of Jewish liberalism which came to welcome any taunt and act of contempt from the Left.

Jews created Hollywood and were disproportionately responsible for its golden age. They could bring legends to life, invent gangsters, swoosh heroes across the screen, and even make iconic Christmas movies, but the one thing they could not do was talk about themselves.

After the Holocaust, two movies about antisemitism fought it out at the 20th Academy Awards.

Gentleman’s Agreement made by Darryl Zanuck, who was not Jewish, after being barred from joining the Los Angeles Country Club because members assumed he was Jewish. Gregory Peck serves as Zanuck’s much more handsome stand-in as a non-Jewish man whose life falls apart when people start believing that he is Jewish. The movie was sympathetically directed by Elia Kazan, another non-Jewish Hollywood figure who was also often mistaken for Jewish.

Jewish studio heads, including Sam Goldwyn, had pleaded with Zanuck not to make the movie to avoid causing problems for Jews. Instead it won a bunch of awards and everyone agreed that now that it was done with, Hollywood never needed to talk about Jews or antisemitism again.

Up against it was Crossfire, a much more baffling movie about an antisemitic murder, whose plot only makes sense if you understand that it was originally about gay men in the closet.

You can see why the saving grace of Hollywood was that it didn’t make movies about Jews.

Holocaust movies safely boxed off the Jews as hollow figures, convenient victims on stage to provide commentary about some larger social or political issue, a handful of Zionist movies that quickly came and went in the sixties, and then a parade of neurotic postmodern creeps.

Hollywood’s Jews don’t like being Jewish. And so they don’t like Jews very much. Their idea of a Jewish character is a neurotic, because they’re neurotic, and grotesque because they see Jews as grotesque. The handful of Jewish talent who defy the Hollywood establishment and stand up for Jewish issues, Ben Hecht during the Holocaust, and Debra Messing, Julianna Margulies and Selma Blair after Oct 7, damage their careers while the ‘Guy Pearces’ flourish.

Jews showing up in Hollywood movies is rarely something to celebrate. And the Oscars will invariably dole out some awards to The Brutalist or A Royal Pain whose awardees will use their moment in the spotlight to denounce the Jewish State. The Hollywood Jews who couldn’t bother to be heard after Oct 7, or to even stand up for the handful of their colleagues, Jewish (and non-Jewish like Patricia Heaton), will applaud and help fund the next horrible ‘Jewish’ movie.

Hollywood would rather that Jews not exist. Jews should return the favor.

Why Arabs Don't Want To Receive Palestinian Ex-Prisoners

by Khaled Abu Toameh 

• The Jordanians and Lebanese, for their part, have not forgotten how Palestinians sparked civil wars in their countries in the 70s and 80s.
• [The Arab countries'] refusal to take in Palestinian prisoners probably arises from the fact that these countries actually do not care about the Palestinians and even consider them an ungrateful people and troublemakers. Many Arabs also seem to have lost faith in the Palestinians' ability to implement reform and end rampant financial and administrative corruption in their governing bodies in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
• "The Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization. Help us modern-minded, secular, liberal Muslims marginalize their influence by declaring what they are: a terrorist organization." — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.
• "In point of fact, nothing would be more pro-Muslim than the marginalization of the Muslim Brotherhood and its direct affiliates. Making the Muslim Brotherhood radioactive would allow the light to shine upon the most potent antagonists in Muslim communities: those who reject political Islamist groups and believe in liberty and the separation of mosque and state." — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.
• "Call on American Muslim leaders to take a position on the Muslim Brotherhood and its overarching theo-political ideology. I ask my fellow Muslims: Will they be the side of freedom, liberty, and modernity, or will they be on the side of tyranny of the Muslim Brotherhood, Turkey's AKP, the Iranian Khomeinists, or Pakistan's Jamaat e-Islami?" — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.
• "Develop foreign policy mechanisms to disincentivize Qatari and Turkish Government facilitation of the Brotherhood and ultimately think about suspending Turkey from NATO." — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.
• "And please stop engaging Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups in government, media, and NGOs, and recognize their Islamist terrorist sympathies." — Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, in testimony before the US House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, July 11, 2018.
• Such a designation would also make it far more difficult for the countries that support the Muslim Brotherhood, especially Turkey and Qatar, to keep on doing so. The Muslim Brotherhood has already been declared a terrorist organization by the governments of Austria, Russia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

Most of the Arab countries are refusing to receive Palestinians released from Israeli prison, many of whom belong to the Iran-backed Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist groups, as part of the US-brokered Israel-Hamas ceasefire-hostage deal. The Jordanians and Lebanese, for their part, have not forgotten how Palestinians sparked civil wars in their countries in the 70s and 80s. Pictured: Crowds of celebrating Palestinians, some waving Hamas and Hezbollah flags, great Palestinian terrorists who were set free by Israel in exchange for Hamas releasing Israeli hostages, on January 20, 2025, in Beitunia, on the outskirts of Ramallah. (Photo by Zain Jaafar/AFP via Getty Images)

Most of the Arab countries are refusing to receive Palestinians released from Israeli prison as part of the US-brokered Israel-Hamas ceasefire-hostage deal. In the past few weeks, Israel released hundreds of Palestinian prisoners -- many of whom were imprisoned for acts of terrorism -- in return for Israeli hostages who kidnapped to the Gaza Strip during the Hamas-led October 7, 2023, invasion of southern Israel. At least 1,200 Israelis were murdered and thousands wounded on that day. Another 251 were kidnapped by Hamas terrorists and "ordinary" Palestinians.

Continue Reading Article

Rav Kook's Ein Ayah: The Placement of Yihiyu L’Ratzon

(based on Berachot 1: 119-120)

Gemara: Let us consider. The words, “Yihiyu l’ratzon imrei fi… (Let my mouth’s sayings and my heart’s thoughts be accepted in good will before You)” (Tehillim 19:15), are relevant both before and after prayer. Why did the rabbis institute it after the 18 blessings? It is because David said it only after 18 Tehilim. Isn’t it after 19 Tehilim? “Praiseworthy is the man…” (Tehillim 1) and “Why did the nations churn …” (ibid. 2) form one section.

Ein Ayah: Upon deliberating whether it is fit to make a short prayer that our prayers will be accepted before or after prayer, we see both possibilities have logic. There is an advantage to do it before prayer so that it will arouse a person’s heart to pray with proper intent. This is a great element of shleimut (completeness) beyond the gain achieved by our prayers being accepted and our requests fulfilled.

There is also an advantage to making this request after prayer because it is fit to notice that prayer is intended to impact on man’s behavior, which should be good and clean after the prayer in a manner that resembles the spiritual elevation he experienced during prayer. This is as the rabbi in the Kuzari said that the light of prayer should illuminate the spirit in a manner that lasts until the next prayer. It slowly dims until its light is renewed at the next prayer. Therefore, it is proper to pray after the prayer that the words and feelings be in good will, including that they should have their intended effect on the heart in the best way even during the time he is away from prayer. Therefore, it is most appropriate to say this prayer as he is ready to take leave of his prayers and become involved in dealings that are divorced from holy ideas.

One should not deny that during prayer one can reach very high emotions of holiness, which are too lofty to relate to life’s mundane elements. Thus, it would be good to request, as prayer commences, to succeed in reaching these lofty levels at the right time. We learned, though, from the fact that King David uttered this prayer after 18 chapters, that there is greater gain in attaching the uplifted state to one’s practical daily attributes and activities. This exceeds the gains of having lofty ideals that last only while one has them, even though those too are good and pleasant. That is why David is called “the pleasant psalmist of Israel” and “the man placed above” (Shmuel II, 23:1). In other words, his elevated spirit was preserved. He strove to have his actions resemble the high state that he had during his prayers, the prayers of the straight. We learn that the main gain from spilling out his spirit before its Maker in prayer is in its connection to the constant behavior in life. Thereby, one sanctifies his life until it is close to the holy emotions that are reached in the holy moments of prayer.

Man’s shleimut is when he tries to perfect himself individually as much as he can. However, he must realize clearly that no personal shleimut can be reached unless the whole (k’lal) is completed in Israelite national success. From that success will flow the success of all of mankind.

One should be careful that his interest in the shleimut of the klalnot compromise his personal shleimut in good actions and traits. The whole cannot be complete without its components being complete and successful. On the other hand, he should not think that he can reach personal shleimut without yearning with all his heart for the klal’s shleimut and success. Only when his diligent striving for personal shleimut joins together with interest in the klal’s shleimut will he reach true good fortune. That is why, “Praiseworthy is the man…,” which deals exclusively with personal shleimut and “Why do the nations churn…,” which deals exclusively with the matters of the klal form one section, and are combined with an “ashrei” in the beginning and the end.

Moshe and Aharon - The Menorah and the Aron

by HaRav Mordechai Greenberg
Nasi HaYeshiva, Kerem B'Yavneh

"You shall command Bnei Yisrael that they shall take for you pure, pressed olive oil." (Shemot 27:20) The placement of this topic here is strange; it should have been written earlier in Parshat Teruma, adjacent to the instruction of the Menorah!

Furthermore, what is the connection to Moshe of this specific mitzvah: "You shall command," "they shall take for you"?

The Netziv explains this based on the Midrash Rabbah on the Parsha:

"Bring near to yourself." (28:1) This is what it says, "Had your Torah not been my preoccupation, then I would have perished in my affliction." (Tehillim 119:92) When G-d said to Moshe, "Bring near to yourself Aharon, your brother," he was upset. [G-d] said to him, "I gave you the Torah. Without it I would not have created my world."

In many places in his commentary to the Torah, the Netziv addresses two styles of learning towards the correct Halacha. One is the method of comparing one case to another, and the other if called "pilpul" of Torah," which means clarifying the Halacha based on the methodologies through which the Torah is expounded. The Netziv generally writes against the method of learning through pilpul, and he degrades it, because the commonplace manner of differentiations and pilpul not for the sake of Torah do not bring to clarifying the truth. However, here we are dealing with "the laws that are the rules of the Torah," and this is leads to the climax of learning which is called "Torah lishma." [He calls this "pilpul of Torah," to exclude the disrespect of the maskilim who objected to involvement in theoretical issues.]

These two styles of learning have legitimate place in Am Yisrael, and they have paradigms, Moshe and Aharon.

In Nedarim (38a) it says: "The Torah was given only to Moshe and his descendents." The conclusion of the Gemara is that this refers to "pilpul." According to the Netziv, this was Moshe's strength, to reach a conclusion based on the rules through which the Torah is expounded. In contrast, it says about Aharon, "to instruct Bnei Yisrael," i.e., Aharon's strength was through comparing cases through logic. In one instance, he outreasoned Moshe on the issue of the goat sin-offering. There it says, "Moshe heard, and he approved." (Vayikra 10:20)

With this, he explains a fascinating point in the matter of the mekoshesh at the end of Parshat Shelach. After he desecrated the Shabbat, and "it had not been clarified what should be done to him," they "brought him to Moshe and Aharon, and to the entire assembly." (Bamidbar 15:33-34) However, Moshe and Aharon were relatives, so how could the two sit together on a case? Rather, the two of them were heads of different Sanhedrim, each one in his own way. When they were uncertain of the law of the mekoshesh, they brought the case before Moshe, perhaps he would rule through investigating the methods by which the Torah is expounded, and also to Aharon, perhaps he would clarify it through logic.

This is what it says, "If a matter of judgment is hidden from you ... you shall come to the Kohanim, the Levites, and to the judge who will be in those days." (Devarim 17:8-9) The kohen rules though the method of logic, whereas the judge through the method of "pilpul."

There are two vessels that indicate this in the Mikdash, the Aron and the Menorah. The Aron contains the two Luchot, which are the written Torah and represent comparing one to another. However, the Menorah is the "pilpul" of Torah. This is indicated by the seven candles, which correspond to the seven wisdoms, which are the kaphtorim and flowers of the Menorah. Therefore, when a talmid chacham would say something nice his colleagues would say "kaphtor vaferach." Therefore, in the times of the second Beit Hamikdash, when there were many Yeshivot and many students, they merited the miracle of the Menorah. One who sees olive oil in his dream, should expect the light of Torah.

Thus, we understand the placement of the portion here, and not in Parshat Teruma. Immediately after the commandment to Moshe, it says, "Bring near to yourself Aharon your brother," and the Midrash says that Moshe was upset. Therefore, G-d prefaced by saying to Moshe that his share in Torah in chiddush and pilpul is greater than Aharon's share. Thus, the making of oil applies especially to Moshe, and the Torah says, "You shall command," "they shall take for you" - for yourself. Therefore, the Midrash says, "Had your Torah not been my preoccupation" - by delving in deeply and analyzing it, and this is the joy of learning in a manner of pilpul!

Rabbi Doniel Glatstein: The Infinite Power of The Festival of Purim (video)

Rav Kook on Parashat Tetzaveh: The Sanctity of Har HaBayit

With the Jewish people’s return to the Land of Israel, the question of the Halakhic status of Har HaBayit became a hot topic. Does it still have the unique sanctity that it acquired when Shlomo consecrated the Bayit Rishon? Does a person who enters the area of the azarah while tamei transgress a serious offence, incurring the penalty of karet?1

Or did Har HaBayit lose its special status after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash?

This issue was the subject of a major dispute some 900 years ago. Rambam noted that the status of Har HaBayit is not connected to the question about whether the Land of Israel in general retained its sanctity after the first exile to Bavel. The sanctity of the place of the Beit HaMikdash is based on a unique source — the Shekhinah in that location – and that, Rambam argued, has not changed. “The Shekhinah can never be nullified.”2

Rambam buttressed his position by quoting the Mishnah in Megillah 3:4: “Even when [your sanctuaries] are in ruins, their holiness remains.

However, Rambam’s famous adversary, Rav Abraham ben David (the Ra’avad), disagreed vehemently. This ruling, Ra’avad wrote, is Rambam’s own opinion; it is not based on the rulings of the Gemara. After the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash, Har HaBayit no longer retains its special sanctity. A ritually-impure individual who enters the place of the Azara in our days does not incur the penalty of karet.

Rav Kook noted that even Ra’avad agrees that it is forbidden nowadays to enter the Temple area while impure. It is not, however, the serious offence that it was when the Beit HaMikdash stood.3

What is the source of this disagreement?


Illustration image: James Tissot, ‘Reconstruction of the Temple of Herod Southeast Corner’ (between 1886 and 1894)

Like a Tallit or Like Tefillin?
In Halakhah there are two paradigms for physical objects that contain holiness. The lower level is called tashmish mitzvah. These are objects like a garment used for a Tallit, a Shofar, or a Lulav. All of these objects must be treated respectfully when they are used for a mitzvah. But afterwards, they may be freely disposed of (covered and then thrown in the garbage). Their holiness is only in force when they are a vehicle for a mitzvah. The holiness of a tashmish mitzvah is out of respect for the mitzvah that was performed with it.4

But there is a second, higher level, called tashmish kedushah. These are objects which have an intrinsic holiness, as they are vessels for holy writings. This category includes Tefillin, Sifrei Torah, and Mezuzot. It also includes articles that protect them, such as covers for Sifrei Torah and Tefillin boxes. Unlike tashmishei mitzvah, these objects may not be simply disposed of when no longer used. They must be set aside (genizah) and subsequently buried.

For Ra’avad, the land under the Beit HaMikdash falls under the category of tashmish mitzvah. It facilitated the many mitzvot that were performed in the Beit HaMikdash. Without the Beit HaMikdash, however, the area no longer retained its special kedushah. It became like an old Tallit, no longer used to bear tzitzit.

Rambam, on the other hand, categorized Har HaBayit as a tashmish kedushah. This area was the location of the unique holiness of the Shekhinah, an eternal holiness. Like a leather box that once contained Tefillin scrolls, even without the Temple this area retains its special level of kedushah.

“Sanctified by My Honor”
All this, Rav Kook suggested, boils down to how to interpret the words “וְנִקְדַּשׁ בִּכְבֹדִי” — “sanctified by My Honor” (Shemot. 29:43). The Torah describes the holiness of the Mishkan — and later the Beit HaMikdash:

“There I will meet with the Israelites, and [that place] will be sanctified by My Honor (Kevodi).”

What does the word Kevodi mean?

We could interpret Kevodi as referring to the honor (kavod) and reverence that we give this special place. The Mishkan and Beit HaMikdash were deserving of special respect (like the mitzvah of mora Mikdash). But without the Beit HaMikdash functioning, it no longer retains its former kedushah — like the opinion of Ra’avad.

On the other hand, the word Kevodi could be understood as referring to Kevod Hashem — the Shekhinah, God’s Divine Presence in the Temple (see Rashi ad loc.). As the verse begins, “There I will meet with the Israelites.” This would indicate an intrinsic holiness which is never lost — like the opinion of Rambam.

In his Halakhic work Mishpat Kohen, Rav Kook explained our relationship to the place where the Beit HaMikdash once stood:

“The Beit HaMikdash is the place of revelation of the Shekhinah, the place of our encounter with God. We do not mention God’s holy Name outside the Temple due to the profound holiness of His Name; so, too, we do not ascend the Mount nor approach the Holy until we will be qualified to do so. And just as we draw closer to God by recognizing the magnitude of our inability to grasp Him, so too, we draw closer to the Mount precisely by distancing ourselves from it, in our awareness of its great holiness.” (p. 204)

(Adapted from Igrot HaRe’iyah vol. III, letter 926 by Rav Chanan Morrison)

_____________________________________________________________________________________

1 Karet, literally “cutting off,” is a spiritual punishment for serious transgressions. Karet can mean premature death, dying without children, or a spiritual severing of the soul’s connection with God after death.

2 Mishneh Torah, Laws of the Beit HaMikdash, 6:16

3 What would Ra’avad do with the Mishnah in Megillah that Rambam quoted? He could explain that this homiletic interpretation is only an asmakhta, and reflects a prohibition of the Sages. Or the Mishnah could be referring to other laws, such as the mitzvah of mora Mikdash — the obligation to show respect and reverence to the Temple area by not entering the Temple Mount with one’s staff, shoes, or money belt; by not sitting in the Temple courtyard; and so on. (See Berakhot 54a; Mishneh Torah, Laws of the Beit HaMikdash, chapter 7).

We might have expected a reversal of positions — that Ra’avad would argue for its eternal sanctity, given that Ra’avad was a Kabbalist, unlike Rambam the rationalist. Especially considering that Ra’avad explicitly notes that his position is informed by inspired wisdom — “God confides in those who fear Him” (Tehilim 25:14).

In fact, it could well be that Ra’avad’s opinion is based on his understanding of the distinct spiritual status of each Beit HaMikdash. Shlomo foresaw the higher spiritual state of the Third Beit HaMikdash, so he intentionally limited the sanctity of the First Beit HaMikdash. He conditioned its sanctity to expire with the destruction, in order to enable the future Beit HaMikdash to be established on a higher state of kedushah.

4 This is the explanation of Ramban, quoted by the Ran in Megillah, chapter 3.

Remembering Rav Tzvi Yehuda

by HaRav Zalman Baruch Melamed
Rosh HaYeshiva, Beit El

The Torah study is dedicated in the memory of Bayle' Finkle bat Yocheved

The Bigdei Kahuna
God commands Moshe: "Make holy vestments for your brother Aharon which are both dignified and beautiful." Later we bear witness to the great attention which the Torah pays to the clothing of the Kohen Gadol, Aharon. We find much care being taken when it comes to the style of the vestments - they are to be beautiful and embroidered with precious jewels. They are to be knit with exquisite threads: gold, sky-blue, dark red and crimson wool, and linen - the work of an artist.

Truthfully, the great attention given to the clothing of Aharon comes as quite a surprise. We are accustomed to thinking of pious people as remarkable in their inner, spiritual side, and not the sorts to stand out with beautiful clothes. Preoccupation with exterior beauty is foreign to them. What's more, we find the sages of the Gemara voicing criticism of the Babylonian rabbis because they were noted for their fine clothing. Why, then, does God trouble Himself to assure the outer beauty of none other than the high priest?

The chapter of the bigdei kahuna intends to drive home the essential point that everything must be anchored in sanctity. Beauty, gracefulness, splendor, and glory must all flow from the wellspring of holiness. The Beit Hamikdash is the splendor of the world, for it is the source of the world's beauty. The high priest is obligated to receive a hair-cut each week. He is obligated to appear before God in the height of his beauty.

In the case of the high priest, beauty stems from holiness and purity. This sort of beauty can only appear in the height of its perfection; one must be careful that absolutely nothing is lacking. All of existence evolves from the source of holiness, and when our physical world is connected to its source it must appear in flawless beauty, in glory, and in splendor.

When, though, there is a severance between the physical world and its holy source, beauty becomes like a "gold ring in the nose of a pig, a beautiful woman lacking purpose." Without purpose beauty possesses no value. Indeed, it constitutes a deficiency. Therefore, because we, the Jewish people, chased after the world's external beauty, and neglected the inner bond to the true source of beauty, we were exiled from our land and distanced from normal, natural life. We ascended to an inner, spiritual, abstract life, completely detached from the outer, natural aspects of existence. For the sake of purification, we were forced to confine ourselves to "the four cubits of the Law."

Yet we long for perfection. Our eyes are to the great future which awaits us, in which we will merit a complete and perfect union with the source of holiness, the source of all existence. Then there will be a complete appearance of life in all its glory and beauty, in all its splendor. Then the holy light will shine in all fullness, illuminating all of existence.

Rav Tzvi Yehuda HaCohen Kook, zt"l
(Parshat Tetzaveh is generally read on the Shabbat before Purim, the anniversary of the death of Rav Tzvi Yehuda HaCohen Kook, zt"l. Therefore, on Shabbat Parshat Tetzaveh Rav Melamed makes a practice of recalling Rav Tzvi Yehuda's approach to Torah, community leadership, and the education of his many students.)

We find ourselves once again faced with the question, how is it possible to educate others concerning the importance of the completeness of the Land of Israel, while at the same time stressing the importance of the complete unity of the People of Israel? On the face of things it would appear that the stubborn and extremist stance which expresses a lack of willingness to give up even an inch of the Land of Israel is the very factor responsible for the rift in the nation.

In addition, we ask ourselves, how is it possible to educate the masses towards the complete and unyielding fulfillment of all Mitzvoth , even the most seemingly insignificant, and at the same time educate towards the love of all Jews, even those who are estranged from the Torah and Mitzvoth? Does not this sort of guidance contain something of an inconsistency?

And on top of all this, how, we painfully ask, can we continue to show respect for the State of Israel and view it as the "first burgeoning of our Redemption," the foundation of God's throne in the world? Why, not only is it made up of many who are distant from the Torah, it is lead and its direction determined by Jews who have abandoned the Torah all together.

Indeed, it was towards this seemingly impossible end that Rav Tzvi Yehuda HaCohen Kook educated. Rav Tzvi Yehuda proved that not only is it possible to educate towards all of these values together - it is the only way to educate. He taught us, his students, that the Torah, the Nation of Israel, and the Land of Israel are completely interdependent. The Nation of Israel cannot exist without the Torah and the Torah cannot exist without the Nation of Israel. Similarly, the Nation of Israel and the Torah cannot exist without the Land of Israel, and there can be no Land of Israel without the Nation of Israel and the Torah. The completeness of the Torah depends on the completeness of the Nation and the Land.

Our master's love of the Land was beyond compromise; Rav Tzvi Yehuda stood opposed to even the slightest forfeiture of land. This extreme love of his stemmed from a clear understanding that the relinquishment of portions of the Land of Israel constitutes, in fact, a relinquishment of both the Torah and the Nation of Israel; the Land, the Nation and the Torah are one, and therefore a blow to one of these entities constitutes a blow to all of them.

This approach did not stem from a pragmatic, political, diplomatic, or security-orientated outlook. It stemmed from deep Jewish faith that the Land of Israel is the Land of God, the Land of life for the Jewish people, and that any division or separation of the Nation of Israel from its land is like separation from God Himself - a veritable death blow, Heaven forbid.

Rav Tzvi Yehuda's love for both Torah-observant and estranged Jews did not stem from humanistic kind-heartedness alone; neither was it the expression of a superficial nationalistic outlook. It flowed forth from the depths of faith and Torah. It stemmed from an acute awareness that each Jew, even the Jew who has altogether abandoned the Torah, possesses a pure and Divine soul. This soul, constituting as it does the Jew's true basic nature, is destined to overcome all transient outer weaknesses.

Our beloved Rav's affection for the entire nation stemmed from a recognition that the Jewish people are like one living body; though one part of the body is infected and diseased, it remains a part of us, our own flesh and blood. Even if that element denies the fact that it is part of the all-encompassing nation of God, the act denial itself is part of our shared sickness. It is impossible, taught the Rabbi, to sever the limbs of a living and united body.

Rav Tzvi Yehuda taught us that the State of Israel is not merely a formal, technical apparatus guaranteeing existence of the nation, an apparatus with no intrinsic value. Rather, the mere existence of the State of Israel has Divine meaning. He educated us not to err, thinking that the worth of the state can be gauged and measured according to the actions of the government; not to err, thinking that when the government acts as it should, the State has value, yet when it does not act as it should, it does not have value. The mere existence of the state possesses spiritual, Divine value, for it constitutes a meaningful stage in the ongoing materialization of the prophetic vision of our Redemption.

The ingathering of exiles, the settlement of the Land, the liberation the Land from foreign hands together with its return to the sanctity of Israel, and the freeing of the Jews from the yoke of the nations, are all stages in the Divine Redemption, for they belong to the essential aim of the State of Israel. The return of the Nation of Israel to its land and its independence is bringing, and will continue to bring about the return of the Nation of Israel to its Torah and to its God.

Because of his great love for the State of Israel, and because of his recognition of its Divine value, the Rav was shaken to the depths of his soul by the appearance of a minority government in Israel which relied on the votes non-Jews. At that time Rav Tzvi Yehuda spoke out vehemently, saying that such an act constitutes an "incomparable desecration of God's Name." He called the episode a "comic-tragedy of humiliation towards our people and our state... a great crime which will be remembered forever as an abomination in the history of the People of Israel, the eternal people."

Rav Tzvi Yehuda's extreme criticism of the government, though, did not effect in the least his recognition of the value of the state. The Rav made a clear distinction between our regard for the government - a body which is indeed measured according to its actions - and our relation to the state, which is Holy. Governments come and governments go. "We," the Rav used to say, "are commanded by the Torah - not the government. The Torah comes before the government. The Torah is eternal and the present disloyal government will pass on and disappear."

Finally, the Rav was not bewildered by obstacles standing in the way of the Redemption. He viewed hindrances as part of the process of redemption - a process which includes crises along the way. He educated us to maintain faith and to recognize God's salvation, to discern the acts of the Almighty, and to be active together with God, as Rebbi Yirmiya in the Talmud Yerushalmi said, "...In the future a heavenly voice will erupt in the tents of the righteous, saying, 'All those who worked together with God, come and accept your rewards!'"

Honoring the Kohanim in Our Time

by HaRav Dov Lior

This week's weekly Torah portion of Tetzave tells us of the choice of the Kohanim and how they are to be prepared for their service in the about-to-be-built Mishkan. Most of the attention in Tetzave is centered around the special garments they are to wear during the service.

The portion actually starts out with two verses discussing the oil for the Menorah in the Mishkan. It must be "pure beaten olive oil," and the lamp must burn perpetually in the Ohel Moed. The commentators ask: What are these verses doing here in the portion dealing with the choosing and preparation of the Kohanim? Why are they not in the passage of the Menorah?

The answer is that our holy Torah revealed to us here the great virtue of the Torah, called Torat Moshe, the Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu. How so?

Two utensils in the Tabernacle alluded to the light of Torah. One was the Aron that housed the Luchot HaBrit. The Aron represents the Written Torah, as well as Israel's acceptance of the Oral Torah from teacher to student through the generations. The second utensil was the Menorah, which stands chiefly for the idea of innovative Torah thought and investigative study. This was also given to Moshe, and he transmitted this power to the generations afterwards. The light that shines from the strength of the Menorah represents the power of the Chachamim of Israel to be innovative in Torah and to derive laws from the verses in accordance with the specified "Hermeneutical Rules."

By writing about the Menorah in the portion that discusses the Kahuna, the Torah is telling us that the Kahuna and the Divine Service are on a level close to that of the Torah itself. Parshat Tetzave opens with the Menorah and its oil – i.e., the Torah – and then immediately afterwards discusses the greatness of the Kahuna. This is why Moshe is told here, "Bring them – the Kohanim – close to you" (Sh'mot 28,1); they are coming close to Moshe, who stands for the Torah.

The choice of Aharon, Moshe's brother, to be the Kohen Gadol is not because of his talents or deeds. Rather, from the very beginning of Creation, his soul was designated for the Avodat Kohanim. And when Korach later came around and led a rebellion with the claim that the Kahuna was to be assigned based on character traits, God made it clear to all that this was an act of Creation that can never be changed.

Nowadays as well, though we do not have the Beit HaMikdash Service, the Kohanim retain a unique sanctity, and special commandments apply to them: They may not be defiled by the impurity of death (they many not enter a cemetery, etc.), and they must not marry certain women. In addition, the non-Kohanim amongst us are required by Biblical law to honor Kohanim in specific ways, such as not to take advantage of them, to give them the first Aliyah to the Torah, etc.

However, the primary aspect of safeguarding the status of the Kahuna is in preparation for the future. We anticipate that the day is near when the Nation of Israel will return to its Land with full strength, and will merit to build the Beit HaMikdash and renew the Avodah there. It is therefore important that the ohanim should begin preparing for this! For this purpose, the Chafetz Chaim – author of the Mishna Berurah, died in 1933 – compiled a set of laws for Kohanim. He wrote it in the style of the Rif, extracting the laws from the Mishnaic order of Kodashim. And thank G-d, we have merited in our day to see several Kollelim dedicated to this topic and to these laws, which are studied there in depth just as the orders of Nashim and Nezikim are studied in the mainstream yeshivot.

Just as we request every day in our prayers that G-d's presence should return to Tzion, so too we must act to advance the Beit HaMikdash service. We must encourage in our Kohanim the willingness to serve Israel in this manner, while we, for our part, will learn to honor and aggrandize them as in yore – until we merit to see G-d's salvation and the building of the Beit HaMikdash, speedily in our days.