Rav Kook on Parashat Vayikra: The Inner Light of Destruction

Flooding, wars, earthquakes, plagues - every day we are bombarded with news of catastrophe and disaster. Is this how God envisioned His world? How can we relate to the many destructive forces in the world?

The offering of a korban in the Temple culminated in the ritual of zerikat ha-dam, as the kohen sprinkled the animal’s blood - its life-force - around the Altar.

“He will slaughter [the offering] near the Altar’s base, on the north side before God. The kohanim, descendants of Aaron, will then dash its blood all around the Altar.” (Lev. 1:11)

What is the significance of the offering being slaughtered on the northern side of the Temple compound? Why does the verse note that the kohanim are “descendants of Aaron” - is that not well-known? And why does it say the blood was dashed all around the Altar, when in fact it was just sprinkled twice, on the two diagonally opposite corners of the Altar?



Concealed Before God
Slaughter is an act of severe judgment. When performed on an offering, it serves to connect all the terrible decrees, disasters, and destruction that take place in the world to the hidden Divine rule of the universe. Everything emanates from the secret ways of the merciful God. All is ultimately good, leading to blessing and kindness.

From our limited perspective, slaughtering is held in low regard. It is thus performed near the base of the Altar. But it conceals a hidden light of kindness. The offering was slaughtered tzafonah lifnei Hashem. Literally, this means “on the northern side, before God.” But the word tzafon also means ‘hidden,’ so the verse may be translated as “concealed - before God alone.”

The task of revealing the inner light in the forces of destruction was given to the kohanim, the descendants of Aaron. Why the emphasis on Aaron’s lineage? Aaron was renowned for his compassion and kindness. “Be a disciple of Aaron: Love peace and pursue peace; love people, and draw them to Torah” (Avot 1:12). Aaron’s descendants inherited the special qualities necessary to uncover this hidden light.

The Temple service teaches us that destruction of life has a place even in the holiest of services. It is precisely due to their connection to the highest level - the most all-encompassing perspective of reality - that phenomena which appear inexplicable and destructive from our limited outlook may be seen as contributing to the world. Our physical perception can discern only a sliver of reality; it is severely limited in terms of time, space, and true understanding of events. We lack knowledge of the overall context, and are unable to see the full picture.

The method the kohanim used to dash the blood is a fitting metaphor for our superficial perception. The physical eye only sees a partial reality, broken and disconnected. It sees the kohen dashing blood on two opposite corners. But on a higher plane, the vision is continuous and complete. The sprinkling encompasses the entire Altar.

Thus the compassionate children of Aaron, as they performed the service of zerikat ha-dam around the Altar, provided a glimpse of the hidden source of good and kindness in the universe.

(Sapphire from the Land of Israel. Adapted from Olat Re’iyah vol. I, p. 134 by Rabbi Chanan Morrison)

Cleaving to God protects us from the Virus trying to cleave to us

by Rabbi Pinchas Winston

And He called to Moshe… (Vayikra 1:1)

LIFE IS EXTREMELY complicated and so phenomenally complex. And yet, it all comes does to only ONE thing, one’s relationship with God. Is it good? Is it bad? Are you close to or distant from Him. Anything and everything else is secondary to these questions.

The Torah says this in many places, but hints to it as well right at the beginning of this week’s parsha. The first word is “vayikra—and He called,” except that the final letter of the word, an aleph, is written smaller than the first four letters of the word. As Rashi explains, it is to indicate God’s love and respect for those who are close to Him, and just the opposite regarding those who annoy Him.

A lot of details pertaining to sacrifices will follow in the upcoming parshios. There are many different kinds of sacrifices, and each one has its own set of instructions to be followed so that it will remain a fitting offering. In some cases, details are similar from one sacrifice to another. In other cases, there are differences, and making a mistake can result in the rejection of the sacrifice, necessitating a replacement.

Yet Dovid HaMelech wrote very clearly:

The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; O God, You will not despise a broken and crushed heart. (Tehillim 51:19)

A broken spirit sounds rather harsh, even sadistic. What’s wrong with feeling good about yourself? What’s wrong with walking with a bounce in your step? Why isn’t it better to serve God with a WHOLE spirit, rather than with a BROKEN one?

Nothing. On the contrary, we’re told to serve God with joy! If so, what’s with the broken spirit?

The key word is “sacrifice.” The broken spirit is not the way of life, but it is the way of sacrifices. In fact, that is what a sacrifice was supposed to cause, especially a sin offering. There was the purchasing of the animal, and the shlepping of it to the Bais HaMikdosh. The one who brought it had to place his hands on it, as if to pass his sins over to the animal…which was about to lose its life because of the person’s sin.

Even if the person was not an animal lover, the whole process had to humble them. When WE sin today, we just have to worry about making it to Yom Kippur to atone for it, and then start again. Life and death, and therefore the value of life, is not nearly as real to us as it became to the sinner who had an animal slaughtered on his behalf!

Today we do not have a Temple, and therefore we cannot perform the Temple service. We still do slaughter animals, but mostly just to eat them. We barbecue steaks, dress up hamburgers, and eat juicy hotdogs. Rather than use animals to atone for our sins these days, they can often be the cause of some of them, including overeating or a lack of sensitivity to the life that was lost to provide the food.

In fact, life has become so convenient in so many ways. Recently I traveled to the States, and in one city there must have been at least ten kosher restaurants and food shops in two blocks. I had a great time in two days…but something didn’t seem quite right. And though it is less so where I live, still many families have learned to enjoy the “good life,” especially when it comes to homes, cars, etc.

Judaism is clearly not anti-materialism, as Shabbos and Yom Tov prove. But as long as we have a yetzer hara the question will always be, “How much?” and “At what cost?” As the Talmud states, few people get to eat from both “tables” in this world, the spiritual one and the material one. If you’re enjoying one, it will undoubtedly be at the cost of the other. The extent to which one enjoys one table or the other is the person’s own free will choice, for which they will either be rewarded or punished on their personal day of judgment.

Before Moshe Rabbeinu died, he warned the Jewish people that their success on the land would make them forget about God, which it did. They began to take Torah less seriously, and some began to sin. At that point, God would send in a neighboring nation whose attack would wake the Jewish nation up, and make them do teshuvah. It would break their haughty spirit, opening the door for Divine mercy and military victory…until the cycle repeated itself again.

And again.

And again, etc.

One might get the impression that God made this world for man to do as he pleases, within certain boundaries. He has rules for man, but beyond them, people might think, man can go about his business and barely ever think about or thank God. For the most part, that is the way mankind has lived for thousands of years, and many Jews for at least the last 100 years.

God made the world for one reason and one reason only, to give man a chance to have a relationship with Him, the closer the better. Imagine it. Everything in the known and unknown universe was created JUST to facilitate that relationship. It may be unfathomable, but it is true. How does some black hole help man come closer to God? Somehow and in some way. And that sun that went supernova long ago? That too is for the sake of man’s relationship with God. How? I can only guess.

And all of this is alluded to by that little Aleph at the end of “vayikra.” Perhaps that is why it is so small. It is hinting to us that our relationship to God is something that should be impossible to overlook and yet IS overlooked by so many. For them, it’s as if the Aleph barely exists because they do not work on closeness to God, and that’s a BIG problem.

The rest of the word tells us that. “Vayikar” means that a person’s relationship with God gets relegated to the back burner, in their mind first and in God’s mind, so-to-speak, next. God says, “You may believe in Me and even learn Torah and perform mitzvos. But if you basically deal with ME as if I am only ‘nature,’ then I will deal with YOU as if I am only nature.”

That may work fine when history isn’t doing or expecting much, like about two months ago. That’s when people got up and went to minyan as they always do, and went to learn or work as they were used to doing. It’s when taking public transportation was not an issue, and flying abroad was commonplace. The only time a person was homebound, was if they caught the flu or just a cold and WANTED to stay home to nurse it.

That’s when going shopping was an everyday occurrence you never had to think twice about (just how you were going to pay for everything). Two months ago, Chasans and Kallahs fulfilled their dreams by making the Chasanah of their planning, and making a bris or a siyum was easy to arrange. It all seemed to happen…well…just so NATURALLY.

Not today. In a relatively short time, the world has shut down, and if hasn’t shut down, then it has slowed down considerably. Even my prayer has slowed down considerably. At shul, I had to keep pace, and deal with the distractions of a minyan. I felt rushed, and frustrated when I lost my train of thought, or had to repeat words that didn’t get the chance to come out of my mouth just right.

At home there is quiet. There is no minyan to keep pace with. I can go slow enough to not only get each of the words right, but I can actually think about them as they pass through my brain. And remarkably, just that change alone has allowed me to feel them, and more importantly, feel GOD more than ever before. It has allowed me to work on my “Aleph” and change “vayikar” into “vayikra.”

Viruses come and go, some quickly, some slowly. Some are only dangerous but others are deadly. Either way they slow life down, which in our super fast paced world, is quite an accomplishment…a GODLY accomplishment. We need to fight against it, because the Torah tell us to. But we need to work with it too, because when the Torah tells us to choose life, it is talking closeness to God. As it says:

But you who cleave to God your God are alive, all of you, this day. (Devarim 4:4)

Not ironically, the word for “infectious” is from the same root as the one used for cleaving to God, “davuk.” Let our cleaving to God protect us from the virus trying to “cleave” to us.

The Rationale of Sacrifices

by HaRav Mordechai Greenberg
Nasi HaYeshiva, Kerem B'Yavneh

After Sefer Shemot concludes with the construction of the mishkan and the dwelling of the Divine Presence in it, Sefer Vayikra opens with the sacrificial service in the mishkan. The Rishonim dispute the rationale of sacrifices:

The Rambam, in Moreh Nevuchim, explains that the sacrificial service comes to draw man away from idolatry. The Torah took man's nature into account, and since common practice then was to sacrifice on altars to the gods, the Torah did not want to detach Israel entirely from this service. "That would have been as if a prophet were to come in our time, who would call for the service of Hashem and say: "G-d commanded you not to pray to him, not to fast, and not to ask his salvation in times of trouble." Therefore, the Divine wisdom retained the form of service that they were accustomed to, and moved it to the service of G-d.

The Rambam brings proof to this from the pasuk in Parshat Beshalach, "G-d did not lead them by the way of the Philistines ... for G-d said, 'Perhaps the people will reconsider when they see a war and they will return to Egypt.'" (Shemot 13:17) G-d was concerned there that Bnei Yisrael were not yet accustomed to act as free men. Here, too, he did not forbid them from offering sacrifices, until they would be detached entirely from idolatry. In short: There is no inherent value to the sacrificial service, but rather it is a means to distance the people from idolatry. Thus, we find in many of the Prophets that there is no inherent purpose in sacrifices, but instead they say: "Does Hashem delight in elevation-offerings and feast-offerings as in obedience to the voice of Hashem?" (Shmuel I 15:22) "'Why do I need your numerous sacrifices?' says Hashem." (Yeshaya 1:11)

The Ramban objects strongly to the Rambam's view, since according to him the entire idea of sacrifices is only, "to counter the wicked and foolish [people] of the world," whereas the Torah says that they have a "pleasing fragrance." He also asks from the sacrifices that Hevel and Noach offered, even before there was idolatry in the world. Rather, the Ramban writes that it is more logical that all the actions in a sacrifice indicate that man deserves to have all of these actions done to him:

He sinned to his G-d with his body and soul, and he deserves that his blood be spilled and his body be burned, were it not for the mercy of the Creator who took from him a substitute. This sacrifice atones, so that its blood should be in lieu of his blood, a soul in lieu of a soul, etc.

However, the Ramban concludes that while this fits well in an Aggadic manner, in the Kabalistic approach, "there is a hidden secret to sacrifices" The Meshech Chochmah, in his introduction to Sefer Vayikra explains that "it is to draw close all the forces of the worlds. It is something electric, spiritual, which, through the actions of the priest, do wonders in the various worlds."

The Meshech Chochmah further explains that, in fact, there is no dispute between the Ramban and the Rambam. The Rambam talks about sacrifices on an altar, which are truly to wean from idolatry, while the Ramban talks about sacrifices in the Temple, which have inherent worth, and about them it says that they have a "pleasing fragrance." These are the sacrifices that Noach and Hevel offered, and even the Rambam agrees to this. He explains with this the reason why it is forbidden to offer on an altar after the destruction of the Temple. This is because then the desire for idolatry no longer exists, and therefore there is no reason to sacrifice on an altar.

Perhaps we can bring proof to his suggestion that the Rambam does not negate the Ramban's words that there is inherent rationale for sacrifices. The Rambam writes in Hil. Me'ilah (8:8) as follows: "All of the sacrifices are in the class of chukim (decrees). Chazal said that the world exists for the service of sacrifices."

Why Do Children Start With Vayikra?

by HaRav Shaul Yisraeli, zt"l
Rosh HaYeshiva, Mercaz HaRav
Rosh Kollel, Eretz Hemda Dayanut
Chaver, Beit Din HaGadol Yerushalayim

For many generations there has been a custom to begin a child’s learning of Chumash with Sefer Vayikra, which Chazal call Torat Kohanim. The explanation is found as far back as the midrash (Yalkut Shimoni, Tzav 479): "Why do young children start with Torat Kohanim? Let them start with Bereishit? Since the korbanot (sacrifices) are pure and the children are pure, let the pure come and deal with the pure."

Vayikra is not a book whose purpose is just to provide practical instructions on the way to bring sacrifices. Rather, it deals, on a fundamental basis, with Bnei Yisrael as a mamlechet kohanim v’goy kadosh (kingdom of priests and a holy nation). There is no more appropriate time to inculcate these values into children as when they have the freshness and purity of young age.

The bringing of korbanot is the essence of avoda (service of Hashem), which along with Torah and gemilut chasadim (acts of kindness) are the pillars that keep the world standing (Avot 1:2). The Torah represents the thought-related element of Judaism; gemilut chasadim is the active part between man and his fellow man. However, these two are insufficient without avoda, the active part of our proper connection with Hashem, which also must exist in order that the proper behavior between man and man will have its full meaning. We need to use the hand (action) and the heart (thought) in making our relationship with Hashem complete. The avoda must come from within a person, as korbanot should not be offered as some sort of external donation but as a gift from one’s essence The prophets (see Yeshaya 43:23, for one example) spoke very strongly against the phenomenon of people offering korbanot without the correct frame of mind or actions, which Hashem said He has no interest in.


On the other hand, we must reject that which some say that since the main thing is what is in a person’s heart, it is enough to serve Hashem with one’s heart. This reminds us of the gemara (Yevamot 109b) that says that whoever says that he has only Torah does not even have Torah. The heart does not have real value if it is in a manner that is disconnected from action.

Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai said that the pasuk, "This is the Torah of the olah sacrifice" refers to the atonement for the thoughts to sin (Vayikra Rabba 7:3). This is because the heart itself needs protection. Therefore, actions are needed to protect the heart from going into morally dangerous thoughts. On one hand, the korbanot are given as if from our very essence, by means of the thought process. In practice, though, they are brought from the cattle and the flock of sheep.

This matter of avoda has to be learned well and from an expert teacher. That is why Moshe, who thought he had finished his leadership role after the Exodus and the giving of the Torah, was told that he had a greater role still ahead of him: to teach Israel the laws of purity and of korbanot (Tanchuma, Vayikra 4).

His Partners

by Rav Meir Goldvicht
Rosh HaYeshiva, Yeshiva University

Dedicated to the memory of Yaakov Ben Behora

Parashat VaYikra opens with Hashem commanding Moshe Rabbeinu to tell B’nei Yisrael, "A man, when he sacrifices from you (adam ki yakriv mikem) an offering to Hashem, from the animals, from the cattle and from the flock shall you bring your offering." This passuk could have been written more succinctly as follows: "When you bring a sacrifice to Hashem...," leaving out the superfluous words "adam, a man," and "mikem, from you." Why does the Torah add these words?

Rashi explains that the word "adam" teaches us that, like Adam HaRishon, who sacrificed animals belonging to him, we must not bring sacrifices from stolen animals. Rashi does not, however, address the superfluousness of "mikem." What is the reason behind the Torah’s uncharacteristic verbosity here at the beginning of VaYikra?

Additionally, in next week’s parasha, Tzav, the Torah discusses the daily service of the kohen, beginning with the siluk hadeshen (removal of the ashes and leftovers of the korbanot), as it says, "And he shall separate the ash (deshen) of what the fire consumed" (VaYikra 6:3). The question that must be asked is why the daily service of the kohen doesn’t begin in an active, positive way, such as sacrificing a korban or lighting the Menorah. Why does the daily service of the kohen begin with the removal of the deshen?

To answer these two questions, it is helpful to understand the following: After we eat a k’zayit of bread, we recite Birkat HaMazon, consisting of four brachot. After eating any one of the seven species for which Eretz Yisrael is praised (grapes, figs, pomegranates, etc.), we say only one bracha, the bracha achat me’ein shalosh. Why the difference? R’ Soloveichik explains that bread represents a partnership with HaKadosh Baruch Hu. We actively participate in the "creation" of bread, planting, plowing, harvesting, etc. This enables us to recognize our Partner that much more, and our gratitude is therefore much greater. For fruit, on the other hand, our input is much less significant. We plant the tree and HaKadosh Baruch Hu basically does the rest. Our partnership is much less recognizable and therefore so is our gratitude.

If we develop the Rav’s reasoning a bit further, it becomes clear that HaKadosh Baruch Hu wants us to be His partners in all acts of creation. This is perhaps the reason why the first mitzvah a Jew does is brit milah - through this act, HaKadosh Baruch Hu allows us to complete ourselves, so to speak, thereby completing our own creation.

But in order to truly be partnered with Hashem, we must make room for Him in our lives. This is why the first part of the daily service in the Beit HaMikdash was the siluk hadeshen, making room both literally and figuratively.

This may explain why the Torah says, "Adam ki yakriv mikem korban laShem, A person, when he sacrifices from you an offering to Hashem." Everyone must sacrifice of himself, a part of himself, to make more room for HaKadosh Baruch Hu in his life.

This is why the midrash homiletically derives from the word "mikem," which totals 100 in gematria, that one who recites 100 brachot per day is as if he offered a sacrifice. The Tur explains in Orach Chaim that in the time of David HaMelech there was a terrible plague during which 100 people died mysteriously on a daily basis. David didn’t know how to end the plague, until it was revealed to him through ruach hakodesh that the plague would end if he instituted the practice of saying 100 brachot per day. The Tur’s explanation poses some difficulty, however, because the gemara in Menachot (43b) suggests that this practice was already instituted in the time of Moshe Rabbeinu. What did David HaMelech add? The answer is that in the time of Moshe Rabbeinu, every person would make 100 brachot of his choosing. David HaMelech instituted a specific set of 100 brachot to be recited over the course of the day, realizing that the brachot would then "escort" a person from the moment he woke up until he went back to sleep that night, protecting him from danger and granting him long life.

Chazal say on the words "lech lecha," again totaling 100 in gematria, that when a neshama descends to this world, HaKadosh Baruch Hu tells it to remember one thing: I give you 100 "keys of brachot," with which you must open doors for Me to make room for Me in the world. This is how our lives begin.

The first to harness the power of the 100 brachot was Avraham Avinu, who opened doors for the Creator in places His Name had never been. Therefore "Hashem blessed Avraham with everything (bakol)" - bet kol, twice kol, again totaling 100. The reason why the recitation of this passuk after Hallel on Rosh Chodesh is a segulah for longevity is now quite clear.

One who recites 100 brachot per day is as if he offered a sacrifice because through the 100 brachot, this person realizes that his task in this world is to increase the glory of Hashem and to make more room for Him, even if this requires sacrificing of himself. This is the very idea that lies behind bringing a korban in the Beit HaMikdash.

This is also the meaning of the gemara in Sanhedrin (7a): "When the love between my wife and I was strong, we were able to lie together on the blade of a sword." In other words, neither of us took up space, each of us giving space to the other. "But when our love was weak, there was not enough room for us to lie together even in a bed of 60 amot." The more we let HaKadosh Baruch Hu into our lives, into our world, the more room we will have with which to continue to sanctify His Name in all of our actions.

Listening To God

by Rabbi Dov Berl Wein

With the beginning of the reading of the book of Vayikra this Shabat in the synagogue services the title of the book itself calls out to us for understanding what is meant when the Torah tells us that God called out to Moshe. Moshe experiences a special and unique method of Godly revelation. The Torah itself testifies to this by describing that God so to speak talks to Moshe 'face to face.' The prophets of Israel received Godly communuication while in a dreamlike trance state. But the thrust of Jewish tradition is that even though there is no longer any type of Godly prophecy present in our world and society God still communicates with humans. But He does so in very subtle means, in reflections of human behavior and world events themselves. Free will allows humans to behave as they will, yet there is visible to those who wish to see it a guiding heavenly hand in world affairs. A few decades ago two scientists won a Nobel Prize for being able to hear yet the echo of the sounds of the original birth of the universe at the moment of its creation. We all know that human hearing is possible only within a limited range of hearing wave frequencies. Judaism preaches that good deeds and moral behavior, Torah observance and loyalty to traditional Jewish values help attune and expand our hearing ability to now listen to heavenly sound frequencies which were originally blocked to us. And that is the auxiliary message of Vayikra - that God called out to Moshe and Moshe's hearing is so perfectly attuned to heavenly communication he is always 'face to face' with his Creator. That is the true indication of the greatness of Moshe, it is what makes him the most unique of all the world's prophets, teachers and leaders.

The word Vayikra as written in the Torah contains a miniature letter 'aleph.' This indicates to us that God's message to us is subtle, quiet, easy to ignore temporarily but nevertheless persistent and ongoing. As the Lord told the prophet Elijah 'I do not appear in the great wind or in earthquakes or other terrifying natural phenomena but rather in a small, still voice.' Listening to a still, small voice requires good hearing acumen and intense concentration. Casual hearing will never do it anymore. Therefore in our times the small 'alef' requires us to really listen and pay attention to what transpires in our personal and national lives. Oftentimes we, like the prophet Yonah, attempt to flee from the still small voice that continually echoes within us. But it remains persistently within us and it patiently awaits our ability to improve our hearing to the extent that it truly is listened to in our everyday lives.The Bible teaches us that Shimshon began his career as the savior and Judge of Israel when he was able to hear the spirit of the Lord beating within his heart and person. In our busy and noisy lives, with so much incessant sound exploding all around us constantly, we really have little time or ability to listen to our true selves that are always speaking to us. That inner voice of ourselves is the medium that Judaism teaches us that the Lord uses to speak to us, to call out for our attention and to give us moral guidance and courageous guidance. But it can only be of value to us if we listen to that inner voice and that requires concentration, thought and committment.

A great sage once remarked that when a Jew prays to God he or she is talking to God. But when a Jew studies Torah than God so to speak is talking to him or her. That is one of the reasons that Judaism places such a great emphasis on Torah study. As the Talmud puts it: 'The study of Torah outweighs all other commandments.' It is the proven method for the attuning of the spiritual frequencies of our hearing to enable the sound of our Creator that beats within us to be heard by us. We should make every effort to improve our hearing and enable ourselves to listen to iour Creatoe Who constantly calls out to us.

Closeness

by HaRav Yossef Carmel
Rosh Kollel, Eretz Hemda Dayanut

There are so many types of korbanot (sacrifices or offerings; it is a word that cannot be accurately translated along with its nuances). Some are private, and some are communal. Some are for sins, and some are to celebrate holidays. Some are to offer personal thanks, and some deal with complex personal situations of a variety of types (sota, metzora, nazir).

Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch points out that korbanot are described as brought for and before Hashem (the main Name, Yud-Keh-Vuv-Keh). The Name of Elokim is never used in this context. As we know, the former represents the more merciful side of Hashem, whereas the latter represents His side of din (strict judgment). He explains that Hashem did not introduce the korbanot to demand that which is coming to Him but to present an opportunity. A person brings forth an object that relates to him and presents it toward Hashem in a manner that represents the person’s desire to himself draw closer to Him.

The first of the korbanot presented in Sefer Vayikra, where the personal korbanot are listed and the rules and categories are taught, is described as follows: "Should a person bring forth from amongst you a korban to Hashem" (Vayikra 1:2). It is appropriate and telling that this is referring to a korban nedava (voluntary) (Rashi, based on Torat Kohanim ad loc.). After all, the whole concept starts with the desire that one draw close to Hashem, and this is accomplished best when one does so in a voluntary manner.

The Torah continues (ibid. 3): "To the opening of the Tent of Meeting shall he bring it forth, according to his will." On the one hand, the Torah seems to cling to the idea of volunteerism and personal desire. However, the gemara (Arachin 21a) says that it is actually referring to forcing the person to bring the korban that he accepted. In order to be able to reconcile coercion with "his will," the gemara explains that we force him until he declares that it is his will. The gemara (Bava Batra 48a, although the idea is usually quoted from the Rambam, who expounds slightly) explains that a person wants to do the right thing and the coercion helps him combat those elements that are keeping him away from doing so.

The picture we receive of this entire korban process is the following. The point of the korban is for it to be an expression of one’s desire for closeness to Hashem. As such, there is little point of doing it as a technical act that does not capture a person’s sincerity. Nevertheless, while such a matter can start as one’s own voluntary idea, it cannot remain voluntary forever. Once he becomes obligated, it is enforceable. Yet, the desire to go through with the korban is a basic truth that relates to a person’s inner nature, which we can assume yearns to cling to Hashem (Tehillim 42:3). One needs to know that when he makes the promise to bring a korban, it will be done according to the strict rules that apply and that his promise will not be dismissed easily.

What makes the Palestinian Authority run? A reminder!

by Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger

Is the vision of the Palestinian Authority limited to the establishment of a state in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank)? Is the vision of the Palestinian Authority amenable to alteration through financial inducements? Shouldn’t the pursuit of peace be based on a realization of the de facto – rather than hopeful - vision of the Palestinian Authority?

The Middle East context
In the Arab/Muslim Middle East - contrary to Western democracies - regimes are authoritarian, suppressing the majority. They are not scrutinized by legislators and constituents, unconstrained by checks and balances, unchallenged by election cycles, and highly motivated by long-term visions. These visions quash constituents’ preference, and supersede tempting Western financial packages.

Therefore, unlike the relatively short-term, election-driven strategy pursued by Western policy-makers, Arab policy-makers are driven by long-term strategy and vision, supported by short term tactics, which frequently aim to mislead, while camouflaging the actual vision.

The de facto, pre-1967 Palestinian vision
According to the de facto Palestinian vision – as documented by the current K-12 Palestinian hate curriculum – Palestine extends from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean, erasing the “infidel” Jewish State (The term Palaistine was coined by the Greeks in the 5th century BCE, referring to the Land of Israel).

The de facto Palestinian vision was determined before the 1967 Six Day War; before the Jewish State reunited Jerusalem and regained control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria (which was renamed the West Bank during the 1950 Jordanian occupation).

The de facto Palestinian vision was articulated by the 1964 charter of the PLO, which is the source of power of the Palestinian Authority, hence Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas, leaders of the PLO, and therefore of the Palestinian Authority. The 33 articles of the PLO charter envision a multi-generational struggle for “the liberation” of the whole of British Mandate Palestine and the destruction of “Zionist occupation,” focusing on Tel Aviv, Haifa and the entire pre-1967 Israel.

The 1964 PLO charter did not refer to Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza - which were occupied by Jordan and Egypt - only to pre-1967 Israel.

The 1968 edition of the PLO charter – which is still in effect, in defiance of a 1993 (Oslo) PLO commitment to amend it and desist from terrorism and hate education – refers to the entire area from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean. It can be amended only by a 2/3 majority of the Palestinian National Council.

The boundaries of “liberated Palestine” are delineated by the PLO emblem, highlighting the pre-1967 area of Israel. It demonstrates that the crux of the conflict is not the size – but the existence – of the Jewish State.

Moreover, the largest organization within the PLO, Fatah – headed by Mahmoud Abbas - was established in 1959, eight years before the 1967 War, proclaiming the aim “to liberate Palestine,” from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean, as displayed by the Fatah emblem.

The Palestinian ‘Phased Plan”
On September 13, 1993, a few hours before signing the Israel-Palestinian Oslo Accord on the White House lawn, Arafat told the Jordanian TV that the accord is an interim agreement - the first phase of the PLO’s June 1974 “Phased Plan.” The latter legitimizes the establishment of a Palestinian Authority over any part of British Mandate Palestine, as a beachhead for vanquishing the enemy, and establishing a Palestinian state over the whole of Palestine.

The August 14, 2009 and November 16, 1998, January 30, 1996 and May 10, 1994 speeches by Mahmoud Abbas and Arafat reiterated the step-by-step Palestinian tactic toward the attainment of the de facto Palestinian vision, drawing inspiration from Mohammed’s Hudaybiyya Treaty – a major precept of traditional and contemporary Islam and Arab policy-making.

The 628 AD Hudaybiyya Treaty – when Mohammed signed an agreement, regrouped, breached the agreement and vanquished his enemy in Mecca - has been a role model for agreements between Muslims and “infidel” entities. These agreements do not constitute a goal, but rather a means. They are merely a truce, not a final peace – merely a stepping stone to victory over the “infidel.”

The Western challenge
In 2020, the Palestinian hate curriculum; the popularity of the anti-Semitic Mein Kampf and The Elders of Zion on the Palestinian street; the glorification of suicide bombers; the systematic incitement by the Palestinian clergy; the monthly subsidies to families of terrorists, and the bolstering of the terrorist infrastructure in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza, underscore the de facto Palestinian vision.

Notwithstanding the aforementioned documentation – which is reflected by unprecedented Palestinian terrorism, hate education and violation of commitments – most Western democracies experience suspension of disbelief, overlooking the Palestinian walk. They embrace the “screen-saving,” misleading Palestinian talk, and delude themselves that financial benefits might divert the Palestinian leadership from its real goal.

They ignore the fact that financial benefits have failed to produce intra-Arab peaceful coexistence during the last 1,400 years, and have not altered the de facto Palestinian vision despite unprecedented economic and political benefits extended by the 1993 Oslo Accord and by Israel’s 2005 disengagement from Gaza.

As expected, each Israeli concession added fuel – not water – to the fire of Palestinian terrorism, which has not modified the pro-Palestinian Western policy.

The Western tendency to sacrifice reality on the altar of wishful-thinking and oversimplification has generated major blows to regional and global stability. This was demonstrated when Western democracies facilitated the 1978/79 emergence of Iran’s Ayatollahs, embraced Saddam Hussein until his 1990 invasion of Kuwait, and welcomed the Arab Tsunami (since 2010) as if it were really an “Arab Spring” and ‘Facebook Revolution.” This bolstered Iran’s pursuit of conventional, ballistic and nuclear capabilities (2015), and crowned Arafat with a Nobel Prize for Peace (1994).

When it comes to the de facto Palestinian vision, will Western democracies learn from past, self-destructive mistakes by avoiding – or repeating – them?!

Thoughts in the Shadow of Corona

by HaRav Eliezer Melamed
Rosh HaYeshiva, Har Bracha

The stringencies of the rules of hygiene is an opportunity to strengthen etiquette and cleanliness on ordinary days as well * The problem of eating and drinking from one person’s mouth to another, and using a central serving dish with one’s own cutlery * The similarities between rules of hygiene and the laws of ritual purity * It is important to strictly observe the rules in synagogues, and one who prays by himself, will be blessed * For weddings planned to take place during this time – it is a mitzvah to hold them in a home-setting, and not to postpone * Weddings at these times are an opportunity to focus the joy on its fundamental nature. Perhaps when we return to normal life, we will be able to find the golden path to joyous weddings, without excessive spending

Etiquette and Hygiene
Lifestyles are changing, and along with the stricter precautions concerning health cleanliness, we are given the opportunity to re-examine various habits, some of which are not the most praiseworthy, such as “wiping-up” humus with a half-eaten pita from a plate designed for a number of people, or taking side dishes from a central serving plate with one’s own cutlery. There are two reasons this should be avoided: one, it nauseates some people, and second, for fear of transmitting diseases. The correct practice is that there should be a serving spoon for each shared side dish with which each person takes the food to his plate, and does not put his own cutlery in the central serving central dish.

Eating and Drinking from One Person’s Mouth to Another
Similarly, we also find that our Sages instructed in the tractate ‘Derech Eretz,’ and codified in the Shulchan Aruch: “One should not bite off a piece of food and place it on the table or on a serving plate in front of others, or do something else others consider disgusting… and for health reasons, one should not drink from the same cup that another person drank from” (O.C. 170: 15-16).

Rabbi Joel ben Samuel Sirkis-Jaffe (1561-1640), also known as ‘Bach’ – an abbreviation of his magnum opus, ‘Bayit Chadash’) and Rabbi Solomon Luria (1510-1573), also known as ‘Rashal’ – an abbreviation of his name in Hebrew, explained that it is forbidden for someone to give another person food he had bitten, or to drink from a glass he had used. This is because the other person may not want to eat or drink because it disgusts him, or because he is afraid of contracting a disease and endangering his health, but ashamed not to eat or drink lest he be thought of as being overly sensitive and spoiled – he would eat or drink, and imperil himself as a result of disgust or infection. However, if on his own initiative one wants to eat or drink from his someone else’s leftovers, it is permissible.

Rabbi David ha-Levi Segal (1586–1667), also known as the Turei Zahav, abbreviated ‘Taz’ (170:8), quoted their remarks, adding that some poskim (Jewish law arbiters) say one should not drink or eat from one person’s mouth to another, for he wrote: “In the book of the will of Rabbi Eliezer HaGadol (one of the Gedolei Ashkenaz in the generation before Rashi) who warns about drinking from somebody else’s cup, lest the other person is sick and transmits his illness. And it seems that about this, he said it is also a sakanat nefashot (endangering one’s health).” Both Rabbi Yechiel Michel ha-Levi Epstein (1829 – 1908), also known as Arukh HaShulchan [170:16], and Rabbi Yosef Hayim (1835 – 1909), also known as Ben Ish Hai [Parshat ‘Behar’] wrote both explanations, and also took into consideration the will of Rabbi Eliezer HaGadol. And in Ben Ish Hai, he concluded: “And the widespread minhag of family members drinking from the kiddush cup of the baal ha’bayit who made kiddush, is because they know that the baal ha’bayit is not sick with an illness that can harm them.”

Placing a Bitten Piece of Food on the Table
Our Sages said in the Tractate ‘Derech Eretz Zuta’ Chapter 6: “One should not take a bite of food and place it on the table.” And this was codified in the Shulchan Aruch: “One should not bite off a piece of food and place it on the table.” (O.C. 170:10). This is because placing a bitten piece of food on the table, with its teeth marks and residual moisture from one’s mouth, is liable to cause a feeling of disgust with others at the table (M. A. 15, M. B. 26). In Tractate Brachot 8b, Rabbi Shmuel Eidels (1555 – 1631), also known as ‘Maharsha’, a Hebrew acronym for “Our Teacher, the Rabbi Shmuel Eidels”, wrote a minhag of derech eretz (good manners) according to Midrash Yalkut – “one should not bite a piece of food, rather, cut off a piece and eat it.” In other words, so as not to leave a piece of bitten bread in one’s hand, a small piece should be cut off, and then eaten. And this was the minhag of Moreinu ve’Rabbeinu, HaRav Tzvi Yehuda HaKohen Kook (this is also what Rabbi Yaakov Chaim Sofer (1870–1939), the ‘Kaf HaChaim’, wrote (170:38).

Some poskim explained that someone who took a bite out of a piece of bread [or other food items], should not put it back in middle of the table, as it is unappetizing to other people, and they will not eat from it after it was bitten from (Prisha 170:12; E.R. 18; M.B. 36).

And Bach (170:12) wrote that one should be careful not to cut off a piece of food he is eating over the central serving plate, lest crumbs fall from it into the central serving plate, as it is unappetizing to others.

Handshakes, Hugs and Kisses
A handshake exressing peace and friendship has become a routine gesture for us, and there is hardly anyone who feels uncomfortable about it. As a result, shaking hands doesn’t express any type of special connection. Many people even hug and kiss their friends, and for those who do, hugs and kisses have become a trite gesture that does not express a special connection.

When the precautionary health measures are over, we will be able to re-give handshakes a profound expression of heartfelt camaraderie between friends, all the more so, for hugs and kisses.

Restrictions in the Synagogue
When restrictions on gatherings were published at the end of last week, followed by more severe restrictions, I feared in my heart that we would not, God forbid, reach a situation where precisely in synagogues – places where holiness and life are revealed – people would infect their friends with the virus. For people are used to kissing the sifrei Torah, and those called up to the Torah, touch the etzei ha’chaim (Torah scroll handles) to which the Torah scroll is attached. Therefore, I requested that the etzei ha’chaim be cleaned with alcohol gel, or with soap. I found a source for this in the chumra of our Sages regarding machalei kodesh (sacred foods) over and above all other foods, for in all foods there is only “sheni le’tumah“, in terumah “shilishi le’tumah”, and in kodesh, “revi’i le’tumah” as well.

And yet, I was still not satisfied, fearing that people might infect one another in synagogue, seeing as in every minyan, different people sit on the same chairs, and through physical contact with the chairs, tables, shtenders, and door handles, illnesses were liable to be transmitted. So when the gabbaim (sextons) announced the adding of additional minyans and their dispersion in the various synagogues in the community so as to reduce the number of worshipers in each minyan, I asked to add a preliminary statement: “In these times, someone who prays with kavana (intention) be’yachid (individually) – tavo alav bracha” (will be blessed) [as of Motzei Shabbat, and perhaps today, this should be said more emphatically].

It is common to say that thanks to the mitzvah of tevilat nashim (women’s ritual immersion) and netilat yadayim (ritual washing of the hands upon rising in the morning, before eating bread, etc.), throughout the ages, epidemics that spread among the Gentiles, affected the Jews less. If today, God forbid, because of religious practices the virus is more widespread, it will be a chilul Hashem (desecration of God), and we will have to undergo a serious reckoning – because God gave us the Torah so that its light and guidance will add life and blessing to us, and not the opposite.

Laws of Taharah and Hygiene
As a result of the carefulness of becoming infected with the virus, the common sides between the halakha’s of taharah (ritual purity) and hygiene can be discussed. Every tumah (impurity) expresses death and loss of life, both in the real sense, and in the sense of mental and spiritual weakness manifested by depression, and lack of faith. This is the type of tumah which, in order to purify oneself from it, an act of cleansing and purification must be performed.

Avi avot ha’tumah (the “father” of all tumah) is a corpse. In terms of the health danger, it is self-evident that in a dead body, infections and viruses proliferate; all the more so, when the deceased died of illness. Mentally as well, touching a dead body shocks the soul, and can cause physical and spiritual weakness. Therefore, in Biblical times, those who came into contact with the dead were isolated from the rest of the people who kept taharah, and had to wait seven days and follow through a process of purification – by being sprinkled with mei chatat (purification water) on the third and seventh day, and immersion in a mikveh at the end of the seven days (Kuzari 2: 60-62).

Even an animal’s dead body possesses a spiritual impurity, and at the same time, the danger of decay, and spreading of disease. There is a similar problem with shratzim (vermin). The tumah of a metzora (leper) is also associated with spiritual and physical death.

Tumat nida also expresses death, for there was the possibility of a pregnancy and a life, that was lost and died. Tumat shichvat zera l’vatala (the waste of seed) is also an expression of this, for that seed could have given birth to life, but it was lost and died. We also learned that giving birth makes a woman ritually impure. The notion is that every lofty idea that comes down to this world possesses a certain sense of death, because the vision is always greater than its fulfillment. The hopes leading up to birth are wonderful, the heart is inclined to believe that after birth the whole world will change for the better, and the new child will be perfect. In reality, after birth, we fall once again into the routine of life, to the pains and fatigue. Despite the miracle of birth, even the new baby eventually will have to face all the challenges that accompany a person’s life. Even the body feels it, and this is the depression that often accompanies maternity in the postpartum period.

The Joy of Weddings at this Time
Weddings are currently being held in a limited setting, and even such weddings are thought-provoking. At the wedding I officiated this week in the community, I said: “Presently, we find ourselves in special times, in which, to prevent the spread of the virus, care must be taken to ensure proper health, and this limits the joy of the wedding. But on the other hand, it puts more focus on the joy itself. Usually, we want the wedding to be as happy as possible, with as many people as possible, and as much fraternity and friendship as possible, in order to show that the joy is not a personal joy of the bride and groom alone, but the joy of all of Israel, and of all generations. Whereas now, we cannot have the usual joy. But like I said, on the other hand, it will be more profound, because you will rejoice in the actual joy itself – in the unity and connection revealed between the chatan and kallah. And God willing, you will have many happy days, births, brits, bar mitzvahs, bat mitzvahs, and weddings.”

My feeling was that the joy of the chatan and kallah was no less than usual. It was focused on the joy itself, and it was immense. Maybe from this wedding, when we return to ordinary life, we will find the golden path worthy of joyous weddings, without excessive spending.

Not to Postpone Weddings
Couples that have arranged a wedding – it is a mitzvah to have it in a home setting, and not to postpone it until they can hold it at a wedding hall as customary. The gravity of postponing of a marriage can be learned from hilchot aveilut (laws of mourning), that a wedding is not postponed due to aveilut. Similarly, we have learned that one of the reasons for the prohibition to marry on Chol Ha’Moed, is that if it was permitted to marry on Chol Ha’Moed, there is concern that couples who could get married in the months beforehand, will postpone their wedding until the Moed, so that more people will participate in their joy – and by this postponement, will annul the mitzvah of chatuna and puru u’revuru (procreation).

Bibi Derangement in the Age of Corona

by Victor Rosenthal

If there is one theme that PM Netanyahu’s opponents are banging away at – and that includes not just his political opposition, but most of the mainstream media in Israel and a small army on social media – it is that he is “destroying democracy,” or even trying to turn Israel into a dictatorship. If you don’t believe me, just google “Israel democracy Netanyahu” and you will get pages and pages of the same old … stuff.

Democracy, in the broadest sense of the term, means that the citizens of a state determine its policies by voting. Usually they vote for representatives to run things according to their understanding of what’s best for everyone, like parliaments or senators and congressmen, prime ministers or presidents. They grant these representatives power for a limited period of time, and then review their performance by holding elections.

Different countries have developed different systems for doing this, and some are better than others. Israel has a system of proportional representation by political party, which has some theoretical advantages but one big disadvantage: it doesn’t work. We have had three elections in about one year and none of them has enabled the formation of a government coalition.

The system is what is preventing us from having a functional democracy, not Bibi Netanyahu. Netanyahu’s Likud party got a plurality of seats in the Knesset, although no one party ever gets a majority. His bloc, which means the Likud plus some religious and right-wing parties is short of a majority, too. So why doesn’t the opposition have a majority? Because it has two parts: the part composed of the Blue and White party and a few other parties on the (more or less) Zionist Left, and the part which is the 15 seats held by anti-Zionist Arab parties.

Not one of the Arab legislators will agree that Israel should be a Jewish state in any sense of the word. The most moderate would prefer it to be a “state of its citizens” like the USA, for example. The slightly less moderate would like it to become a binational state, while the rest are Islamists, or Palestinian or pan-Arab nationalists. I like to think that the political forces that produced them are not an expression of the true attitudes of Israel’s Arab citizens, but I’m not sure.

Most of Blue and White’s leaders could not bring themselves to include the Arab parties in the coalition (would you?), but apparently they are not averse to forming a minority government that depends on their votes. Our system allows a coalition of a minority of the members of the Knesset, as long as they don’t lose a vote of confidence.

This would mean that the Arab parties would have a veto over all the actions of the government. Given their ideologies, that is unacceptable. And at least three members of the opposition agree with me, so this will not happen. There is a law, by the way, that says that someone who “[negates] the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state” can’t sit in the Knesset, but the Supreme Court has prevented its application to Arabs.

The other alternative is to form a unity government in which the leaders of the two major parties would take turns at being Prime Minister. That is the direction we are going now, and they are negotiating terms – who will fill the various ministerial slots, who will be PM first and for how long, and so on.

At the same time, the opposition is trying to pass laws that will prevent Netanyahu from being PM at all, because he is under indictment for alleged corruption. In a way it is not ex post facto because he has not yet tried to form a government; but in a way it is, because the people voted with the understanding that he could.

It is also possible that if Netanyahu were to be offered the position of PM of a unity government, the Supreme Court will jump in and find a way to disqualify him. They have received petitions to this end, but they chose not to decide because until the moment that he actually tries to take the position, the issue is considered “theoretical.” The present law says that a Prime Minister can continue to serve when indicted, and only can be removed upon conviction. But here the situation is that he is presently PM of a caretaker government, and the government is about to change.

I should mention that some of the charges against Netanyahu appear justified, and some clearly don’t. It is also true that the behavior of the police and state prosecutor’s office during the three years of his investigation was reprehensible, bordering on criminal. There were daily leaks to hostile media, improper treatment of witnesses, and violations of privacy. In any event, he has not been convicted of anything.

Netanyahu says that the true danger to democracy is the combination of non-elected forces – the Attorney General (in Israel, he has far more power than the equivalent official in the US), the State Prosecutor, and the Supreme Court – acting against an elected Prime Minister. The selection of all of these is controlled to a great extent by one organization, the Bar Association.

It is also true that from an overall perspective, the people of Israel have consistently voted for a right-wing government in recent years, especially since the debacle of the Second Intifada. They didn’t always get one, as when Yitzhak Rabin promised that he wouldn’t talk to the PLO and then ended up on the White House Lawn with Arafat, or when the formerly right-wing Ehud Olmert took over from Ariel Sharon after his stroke, and tried to negotiate a withdrawal from virtually all of Judea and Samaria.

Today the explicitly left-wing parties like the Labor party that ruled Israel from its founding until 1977, have withered away to almost nothing. Since Menachem Begin’s victory, we’ve had a situation in which a usually right-wing prime minister and Knesset confronts not only political opposition, but also left-wing media, legal, cultural, and educational establishments. Blue and White, which has no real ideology other than a burning desire to oust Netanyahu, is supported by these groups.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu has been dealing with the coronavirus crisis appropriately, mostly following the guidance of the Health Ministry, which includes taking and enforcing unpopular decisions. His opposition, both in politics and the media, have been claiming that he is using the issue as a “pretext” to “seize authoritarian powers.” One writer even suggested that an order banning gatherings of more than 10 people was issued to prevent demonstrations! Their self-absorption is remarkable.

Bibi has been appearing on TV almost every evening, explaining the steps the government is taking and why. Personally, I find it reassuring and I think he is doing the right thing to calm a nervous public – and to influence them to comply with the rules. But his enemies claim that it is all done for looks. The fact is that anything that he does will irritate them – especially when he projects competence.

So what does democracy demand? Unfortunately, we can’t tell from our badly broken system. Until we can fix it maybe it would be better to ask which of the possible outcomes is best for our country at this difficult time. The answer is a unity government, which need not contain either the extreme Left or the Haredi Right, and which does not depend on the votes of anti-Zionist Arab politicians. And probably the best person to lead it (eat your hearts out, Bibi derangement people) is Binyamin Netanyahu.

Rav Kook's Ein Ayah: Too Great to Start the Necessary Exile

(condensed from Ein Ayah, Shabbat 9:147)

Gemara: Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: It would have been fit for Yaakov Avinu to have been brought down to Egypt in chains of iron. It was just his merit that caused that [he did not], as the pasuk says: “With ropes of a person (Rashi – because of My affection for the person, I brought him with ropes and not chains), with bonds of love; I will be for them like one who lifts the yoke [Rashi – with the use of various instruments], and I gave them [Rashi – the strength] to bear” (Hoshea 11:4).

Ein Ayah: The exile was fit to imprint its deep insignia on the entire nation from its first root. This started from the time that the nation had its uniqueness set as a special characteristic. This began with Yaakov.

Realize that the exile in Egypt did not arise as an opportunity to cleanse the people of a specific sin. Rather, the exile occurred in order to prepare the nation to be able to remain alive and intact as a defined national unit, which maintains its character, even under the conditions of exile, without having its form blurred. It would have been fitting if this stamp, of being capable of withstanding the yoke of exile and standing strong, would have started from the beginning of the “flowering of the nation” in a unique manner. This was set out to be the lot of Yaakov, as the personality with whom the character of the nation began.

However, due to the great level of sanctity that Yaakov possessed as an individual, it was impossible for the exile to take hold upon him. Therefore, [the oppressive part of] his exile remained only in potential but not in actuality. The fact that there was an exile in potential had an impact in the area of adjusting to the new life without allowing for the erasure of its essential form.

Yaakov’s special merit caused him to have a life of greatness and grandeur during his stay in Egypt. This also served as an omen for all future exiles, that they can become the cause of all of mankind seeing the high value of the Jewish people and their exalted uniqueness. In this way, the “enslavement” was done through ropes of a person and bonds of love. The yoke, even though it was only a yoke in potential, was raised up. The movement in the direction of supplying the spiritual and material needs was so great that it gave light through the darkness even for generations of descendants throughout their forced travels. All of these elements together, the darkness of exile and its small elements of life, were able to lead to the final goal – the revelation of the grandeur of Hashem, through the honor and grandeur that Israel reached. This is as the pasuk says, “All who see them will recognize them as the seed that is blessed by Hashem” (Yeshayahu 61:9).

Ask The Rabbi, Part 2

by Rabbi Steven Pruzansky

A few months ago, I was invited to be part of a panel of rabbis to submit answers to questions posed by the editor of the Jewish Press. The column appears bi-weekly, and I take this opportunity to present my approach to the questions raised. Each question is fascinating in its own right, as are the variety of answers proffered. All the answers can be viewed at Jewishpress.com.

Here is the second selection with my take on these issues – RSP

Should a person lend any significance to his dreams?

Well, none of us are Yaakov Avinu or Yosef Hatzadik whose dreams were prophecies, messages from G-d that guided their (and our) futures. Dreams were the typical means of conveying prophecies for all prophets except for Moshe. But even if dreams are not prophecies, and not all are noteworthy, Chazal recognize with extraordinary prescience the importance of dreams.

The Gemara (Masechet Berachot 55b) states that a person only dreams at night of what he thinks about during the day. That is, dreams are a way of reconciling conflicts in one’s conscious life, or giving unconscious expressions to one’s fears or fantasies, or sometimes dealing with a painful reality in a way that is less provocative or distressing. Certainly, it bears mention that (ibid 54a) just like there is no wheat without chaff, so too there is no dream without some nonsense. The true nature of dreams is masked to make their deeper messages more palatable and most will be unremembered and unremarkable.

Occasionally, dreams will enable us to think more intensely about an issue or problem or person or event that is troubling us, and sometimes troubling us in a way that we refrain from thinking about openly. Certainly, the higher our spiritual level, the more elevated will be the substance of our dreams. But one who goes even seven days without a dream is called “evil,” i.e., unfortunate (ibid 14a). Dreams are divine gifts that clear our minds, ease our hearts and sometimes call attention to potential problems that are resolved without us being fully cognizant of it.

Should a person think highly of himself?

No. And yes.

This calls to mind the two divergent schools of musar – of Novardok and Slabodka. The former, founded by Rav Yosef Yoizel Horowitz, taught that striving for perfection required the internalization of shiflut ha’adam, the lowliness of man – how man is driven by his desires and fantasies and routinely succumbs to sin. Thus, man can only improve by nullifying the ego, which would be accomplished, in theory, by performing acts of self-abasement. Famously, a student would enter a hardware store and request a dozen eggs; the subsequent mockery and humiliation presumably did wonders to rein in the pleasures of the ego.

The Alter of Slabodka disagreed sharply and focused his musar on the recognition of gadlut ha’adam, the inherent greatness of man, created in G-d’s image and with a soul that could apprehend G-d’s wisdom and morality. The descendants of the Avot and the heirs to the illustrious traditions of Israel must have a healthy self-worth. The people that stood at Sinai and received G-d’s Torah must always act in a dignified and refined way befitting their royal status.

In a sense, these are but reverberations of the aphorism of Rebbe Simcha Bunim of Pshischa: “a person should always carry two pieces of paper, one in each pocket. On one is written ‘the world was created for me’ (Sanhedrin 37a) and on the other ‘I am but dust and ashes’ (Breisheet 18:27). The test of life is to know when to reach into which pocket.”

The modern self-esteem movement is misguided, to the extent that it cherishes everyone, even those devoid of real accomplishment. Life doesn’t award participation trophies, but as Jews, we must know our place – and adorn that place with spiritual achievements.

May one use data derived from unethical research (an extreme example of which would be data from Nazi research that used human test subjects instead of lab rats and caused unimaginable suffering)?

It is tempting to think that use of data from the research of evildoers might serve some productive purpose, notwithstanding they are the fruits of the poisonous tree of diabolical sadists. It purports to make the torture and death of the victims slightly less gruesome and gratuitous and perhaps even adds an element of purpose. We should utterly resist that notion.

Even assuming that the science derived is legitimate and not distorted by the twisted minds that produced it, use of that data is grossly immoral and would tend to legitimize what is perverse and insufferable conduct. If the question is asked this way – Should Dr. Mengele be construed as a genuine scientist and researcher? – the answer becomes much clearer.

Judaism has a concept of an object that is otherwise neutral or indistinguishable from other objects but is nonetheless assur b’hana’ah, proscribed from providing any benefit or pleasure to another. In terms of foodstuffs, the issur hana’ah supplements the prohibition of consumption. It is not just that it cannot be eaten or drunk – yayin nesech, for example – it cannot even be given away to someone as a gift. Any type of benefit is precluded. That is how this data should be treated: total ostracism.

To think otherwise is to sanction the worst atrocities under the guise of serving a greater purpose, which invariably cheapens human life and incentivizes mass murderers. Nazis should not be glorified as scientists nor their dastardly deeds rationalized as even a partial good. That is the only way to perceive evil as evil, identify it and then eradicate it from the face of the earth.

Learning to Live in the Moment

by Rav Binny Freedman

Corona; Isolation; Quarantine; Closed schools and synagogues, flights cancelled, and travel limited; no large public gatherings… what is going on?

Years ago, during what has become known as the first Intifada, I recall a particularly hairy day, when one of our patrols got into some serious trouble. We were stationed near Jebalya, a nasty piece of real estate in the Gaza strip, home to approximately 120,000 Arab ‘refugees’, and in the spring of 88’ things were really heating up. We didn’t have enough officers and men to handle the load so we were working with additional units, and an urgent radio call came in from one of these neighboring patrols who were apparently surrounded by hundreds of rioters with rocks and Molotov cocktails and found themselves hemmed in an alleyway with nowhere to retreat and not enough ammunition.

I couldn’t understand where this huge riot had sprung up from, as I had just finished a patrol in the same area and had even passed the cross street he described on patrol less than half an hour earlier, but there was no time to think about it.

Standard operating procedure in such situations was to muster up as many vehicles as were available, as quickly as possible and offer the rioters both a second ‘front’ (or contact point) with which to contend, as well as an easy and natural avenue of retreat. A few well-thrown tear gas grenades (which were basically harmless in the long term) would usually suffice to cause an entire riot to begin dispersing in the direction of the avenue they had open to them. Our company commander (I was a lieutenant at the time) sent us in different strategic directions so we would all arrive at the right places at the right time. Only when we got there, there was no riot… and no Israeli patrol.

It took us over half an hour, which for those eight men caught between a rock and a hard place was a very long time, to finally figure out where this patrol actually was. And it transpired that this entire mess had occurred because this new officer had at one point taken a left turn instead of a right one, and was in a completely different area from where he thought he was. In fact, he had led his patrol into an area we were not even supposed to be venturing into, as it was a hot spot far enough away from the main road that it wasn’t part of our mission (which was to keep the road open to civilian traffic).

In the process of this frantic search, not only the battalion, but the brigade level got involved, and by the time we finally arrived, expecting a huge fight and worse, the rioters took one look at all the vehicles roaring down the streets, and dispersed entirely before we even reached the alleyway.

I still remember our battalion commander, Rami, who understood the value of an officer learning from his mistakes rather than being broken by them, taking the young second lieutenant aside for a quick de-briefing.

The young officer was obviously pretty shaken; he and any number of his men could have been injured or worse and an entire brigade had just spent the better part of an hour diverting valuable manpower and equipment all because he had made a wrong turn. All I caught were the first words Rami said as he walked him off to the side: “Well, we needed a good exercise for the men, so I’m glad you found an original way to set one in motion….”

That sentence carried more lessons in commanding men, and for that matter counseling life, than many entire books I have read on the subject.

This week’s portion, Va’Yakhel, begins with a moment of pure potential:

“Va’Yakhel Moshe Et Kol Adat B’nei Yisrael, Va’Yomer Aleihem:”

“And Moshe gathered together the entire congregation of Israel and said to them:” (Shemot (Exodus) 35:1)

Rashi points out that this day was the day after Yom Kippur, when Moshe came down with the second tablets, the Luchot Ha’Brit, signifying that the Jewish people had been forgiven (or at least their sentence had been commuted) following the transgression of the golden calf.

Moshe had first gone up on Mount Sinai on the seventh day of Sivan, only to return forty days later on the seventeenth day of Tammuz to discover his people dancing with idolatry (the golden calf). He went up again, for an additional forty days coming down on Rosh Chodesh (the beginning of the month of) Elul, having achieved forgiveness. But that just meant they had gotten back to where they had been before the experience of Sinai. Now they had to re-commit to receiving the Torah all over again, this time with tablets fashioned by man, and not by G-d (ibid. 34:4). So Moshe went up yet a third time, again for forty days, finally coming back down to the people on Yom Kippur with the two new tablets (Luchot) of stone, (containing the Ten Commandments) signifying Hashem’s forgiveness of the Jewish people, and allowing them to start over again.

Moshe however was a very wise leader; just because G-d had forgiven the Jewish people did not necessarily mean they had forgiven themselves. What were the Jews thinking and how were they feeling the morning after Yom Kippur? They had barely seen Moshe in the last three months, and it was entirely their fault. G-d had basically decreed that the consequences of this transgression (the sin of the golden calf) would be suffered by the Jewish people for thousands of years (ibid. 32:34), and one wonders how the Jews must have felt, now that the immediate danger of annihilation was past and the enormity of their mistake had begun to sink in.

So Moshe, a true leader, rises to the challenge of the moment, and gathers the entire people together with, it would seem, the goal of inspiring them to pick up the pieces and begin again.

And this was Moshe’s challenge: how, now that the Jewish people had been made to realize the error of their ways, and the guilty had suffered the necessary consequences, to find the right words that would offer the Jewish people a sense of comfort, hope, and even inspiration after the trying events of the past few months.

Which makes the message Moshe actually shared with the Jewish people so puzzling. We might have expected him to tell the Jewish people that they were on their way to the land of Israel, or even, as he begins to do subsequently (35:4), to review the mitzvoth concerning the Jewish people’s mission to build the Mishkan (Tabernacle), meant to be a resting place for the Divine presence which, at least according to Rashi, represented some level of atonement for the debacle of the golden calf.

Instead, inexplicably, Moshe shares with them a most unlikely mitzvah: Shabbat.

“These are the words Hashem has commanded to do: Six days shall you labor, and the seventh day shall be holy for you, a day of complete rest for G-d… You shall not kindle fire in all your dwellings on the Sabbath day.” (35:1-3)

What does Shabbat have to do with Moshe’s desire to comfort the Jewish people after their terrible error in building a golden calf? And what does the prohibition against fire (and labor in general) have to do with all this?

In order to understand this, we need to take a closer look both at the sin of the golden calf, and the concept of sin in general, as well as the true purpose of Shabbat.

What was the golden calf all about? The Jewish people, at the foot of Mount Sinai, not six weeks after hearing the Ten Commandments which include a specific injunction not to worship idols, forget the words they heard from G-d Himself and believe that a calf of molten gold is their true god? The Jewish people come to Aaron, struggling with what they perceive to be a new reality: Moshe, who has ‘brought them up out of Egypt’ (32:1) is gone, and they are obviously looking for a substitute.

So, Aaron throws their gold into the fire and fashions it into a golden calf, and they say: “This is your god O’ Israel, which brought you up from the land of Egypt.” (32:4)

It is hard to imagine the Jewish people believing that a calf of gold they have just seen fashioned in the fire is the One who brought them out of Egypt; after all, they witnessed the ten plagues and the splitting of the sea! It is worth noting that this phrase corresponds directly to their description of Moshe (in verse 1) who also is described as having brought them out of Egypt, despite the fact that Moshe is clearly known to be a messenger of G-d, and takes great pains to ensure that this is indeed the viewpoint of the people.

Obviously, then, what the people are looking for is not to replace G-d, but rather a substitute vehicle in relating to G-d. Indeed, when G-d speaks directly to the people in the first two commandments, the people are overwhelmed, and beg Moshe to speak the word of G-d instead (ibid. 20:16). The problem the people have is not that they forgot G-d exists, rather, they are so aware of G-d’s existence, they aren’t sure what to do with it. How do you maintain a relationship with something so intangible as G-d?

Essentially, the Jewish people are struggling to find a way of bringing G-d into the physical world, and that’s good; but in choosing the path that is not Hashem’s will (i.e. fashioning a calf on their own, instead of waiting to see how Hashem will instruct them to proceed) they inevitably distance themselves from Hashem’s will, and that was their tragic mistake.

How often do we have goals that are so noble and so pure, and yet get lost along the way when the means by which we attempt to attain those goals are not nearly as noble as the goals themselves? And one day, we wake up and take a look around, and can’t quite figure out how something that started so right, became so wrong. And we realize it is wrong, because we have somehow strayed off the path that Hashem (G-d) really wanted us on; we have substituted, on some level, His will for ours.

So how do we tap into the reality of everything as the will of Hashem, and let go of the illusion that what I do is what is real in this world?

That, finally, is the secret of Shabbat. On Shabbat, I get a taste of the world to come, because after six days of work and labor where I do so much to be in partnership with G-d, I take a day to consider what that is all about. And I manage, if only in a small way, to let go of the illusion that this world is what is real. On Shabbat we try to access what Hashem really wants of us, and why we were put here in the first place, and we get back in touch with the reality that it’s all good, and that whatever happens is ultimately all part of Hashem’s plan.

Which is why on Shabbat we don’t light fires, which are representative (along with all the categories of labor we desist from on Shabbat) of what we do in this world. According to the Midrash (Jewish rabbinic legend), fire was the first thing we created, and it thus represents our creative abilities, and our partnership with G-d in creating the world. And I let go of that on Shabbat, because on Shabbat I realize that everything I am creating is really G-d’s will, I am just a tool, and my only challenge is to make myself a willing tool.

Perhaps this is why Moshe begins here in our portion with Shabbat. The Jewish people, struggling with the immense tragedy of their mistake (the golden calf) are stuck in the world of ‘Oh, what might have been…” And Moshe here is reminding them that while looking forward we are supposed to imagine it is all up to us, nonetheless when reflecting on events passed, everything is ultimately in G-d’s hands, and part of that master plan….

Shabbat is all about learning to live in the moment; so often, we are so busy trying to get somewhere, we don’t realize where we already are. And the ability to really see things as they are and let go of where we think things should be going, is also what Shabbat is all about.

In these trying times when so many people are being forced to take a step back spending even two weeks alone; sequestered; quarantined, perhaps we are all being given a chance to do a little ‘re-set’ and consider what we are all doing here in the first place.

Shabbat Shalom, from Jerusalem.

Successful People Are Unaccomplished

by Rabbi David Aaron

Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy, a day of solemn rest to the Lord. (Exodus 35:2)

During the forty years that the Israelites wandered in the desert they carried with them a portable temple referred to as the Tabernacle or the Mishkan. The creative acts that are forbidden on Shabbat are those acts similar to the skills that went into building or assembling the Mishkan. The Talmud outlines 39 different categories of such creative acts that are forbidden to do on Shabbat. They represent our ultimate power of creativity which is to build a temple that accommodates the presence of G-d on earth. Of course we know that G-d does not literally dwell in the Mishkan, however, the Mishkan symbolizes our ability to serve G-d and infuse every moment and every place with the presence of G-d. In other words, the greatest accomplishment of a human being is to serve to make manifest G-d’s presence in the here and the now.

The building of the Mishkan represents the greatest accomplishment that we could ever imagine to accomplish in our lives. G-d created the world for you and me and our joy, task and service is to take this world and build it into a sanctuary for the presence of G-d. The greatest accomplishment that we could ever do is to do something for G-d. This is one of the most amazing ideas in Torah tradition, that we human beings can do something for G-d. It is human nature to feel great when we can do something for an important or famous person. Torah teaches that we can even do something for He who is the greatest — G-d. This is one of the most mystical ideas in Jewish tradition–G-d created work for us to do for Him. When I act on my own behalf it is no great shakes but when I act on G-d’s behalf it takes me beyond myself and connects me to G-d.

When we build the Mishkan we are creating a space for G-d to become present in this world and this is the greatest human accomplishment imaginable. Why then are we commanded to refrain on Shabbat from the greatest act of human creativity and accomplishment? To ensure that we are truly doing it for G-d’s sake. Otherwise it could be just another ego trip.

I remember when my wife was pregnant with our first child she kept saying that she hopes that she will give birth on Shabbat. I actually hoped not because that would mean that I would have to break Shabbat to get us to the hospital. I would have to use the phone and get into a car, which is traditionally not done on Shabbat. Of course it is permissible since it could be a matter of life and death, which overrides the laws of Shabbat. Nonetheless for me breaking Shabbat was unthinkable. My wife, however, insisted, “I have a feeling it will be on Shabbat.” I said, “Well, have another feeling.” During the ninth month, I would get more and more nervous as we approached Shabbat. Sure enough as soon as my wife lights the Shabbat candles she sits down and says, “I’m in labor.” Okay so now I am hoping for a long labor. “How about a 24-hour deal, honey? You just sit and relax until Saturday night.” That is not quite what happened. Although my wife never likes to rush, for some reason the baby did and the contractions started getting intense quite quickly. I had been celebrating Shabbat for 15 years and now I am going to break Shabbat, use the phone to call a cab and ride in a car on the holy Shabbat. As we were driving to the hospital I suddenly realized what a fake I am. If my Shabbat were truly a service of G-d then this is not breaking Shabbat rather this is the way G-d wants me to celebrate Shabbat this week. Driving in a car on Shabbat to take my wife to give birth is the way I serve G-d this Shabbat. I then realized that my religious life could simply be a self-serving spiritual habit rather that a sacred service to G-d. Rather than my religious life expresses my desire to infuse the here and now with the presence of G-d it could be just another way to fulfill my ego and gain approval from others in my religious community. The sages tell us that when we do something to gain public approval it is worse than idol worship. When you worship idols at least you know you are an idolater but when you do commandments to gain public approval you still think you are serving G-d. Riding in that car on that Shabbat was one of the most meaningful Shabbat experiences I ever had. I had first thought I was breaking Shabbat but it was ok. But I then finally understood that I was truly fulfilling Shabbat in the most sacred way.

Now imagine it is Friday afternoon, it’s the dawn of the sixth millennium, six thousand years we have been waiting for the Messiah and finally he has come and we are building the tabernacle. Within minutes we complete the ultimate accomplishment we have been dreaming of but Shabbat is coming soon. We need just ten more minutes to complete the temple and infuse this world with the complete presence of G-d — but Shabbat is starting in five minutes. Would we stop? Could we stop? Are we willing to let go of the greatest service to G-d, the ultimate accomplishment humanly possible? Are we going to blow the rectification of the universe for five minutes of Shabbat and wait 25 hours to resume?

But this is exactly the message of Shabbat and the blessing it bears.

If we are really building the Temple for G-d than if the Boss says stop, we stop. The goal is not to finish the temple rather the goal is to infuse very moment with the presence of G-d through service. If you cannot stop then you were building the temple for yourself.

This is the amazing lesson we can learn from the story of Abraham and Isaac. Abraham dedicated his life in service to the one G-d and invested all his energies to make the presence of G-d known on earth. He wanted a son to be the heir to his spiritual mission and continue his service spreading the truth of the G-d of love. Miraculously at a very old age Sarah conceives and they have a son Isaac. But G-d then asks Abraham to sacrifice his long awaited son. Imagine what must have gone through Abraham’s head. G-d, do You know what that will do to everything I have done for You all these years? My whole mission will be destroyed. Your name that I have worked so hard to promote and sanctify on earth will be desecrated. Think of the headline on the front page of the Canaanite Times. Abraham Phony! Embraces Idolatrous Practice and Sacrifices His Son.

This story reveals the true meaning of service. G-d is asking Abraham to serve Him by giving up his life long service. In this case Abraham’s service to G-d is to sacrifice his service to G-d. This is the ultimate test of true service. If you are really concerned about doing the will of G-d then simply do what He asks. G-d is saying to Abraham, “I know you’re a big Rabbi and you are spreading My name on earth and I know this is going to destroy everything, but that is what I want.” So this is the greatest test. Did Abraham truly dedicate his life to the service of G-d or was his mission really just an ego trip in disguise? If Abraham truly worked for G-d than he accepted that whatever the boss says goes. Abraham understands: I do not own this world and I am not the Master of history. I just work here serving to infuse this world with G-d’s presence according to His will.

This is the subtle challenge of the religious life. Am I really serving G-d? If a religious organization steals money to support their activities to spread the word of G-d then they have missed the point and are not truly serving G-d.

In summary: What is Shabbat all about? Shabbat is a time to stop. And when we stop that retroactively affirms that everything we have done until now is truly in service to G-d. If the boss closes shop and doesn’t want us to work why would we even want to do work? Otherwise we are confused and think we are self-employed. Shabbat reminds us that we just work here in this moment, in this moment, in this moment. Shabbat teaches us that the future that we are looking forward is not any more important than this moment right now in our service to G-d. Only the now is real and only now is the time to bring G-d’s presence into the world. Shabbat empowers us to stop, chill out, beat the rush and be at peace now.

Shabbat is a challenge to the modern man caught in the rat race chasing rainbows. When I host people at my home for Shabbat or conduct a Shabbat experience at Isralight I find most newcomers are very stressed out about trying to relax.

A lot of people simply can’t let go and let G-d. They get fidgety. They sit there at the Shabbat dinner table nervously bouncing their leg up and down. They simply can’t be present. They are afraid to immerse themselves into the moment and impatiently want to get on with life. Shabbat is truly an accomplishment. The accomplishment is not to accomplish and just be. Shabbat restores your soul and makes you whole. If you are single, then the best place to find your soul mate is over a Shabbat meal. And if you are married that best to renew your love is over a Shabbat meal because that is when we are most soul. Shabbat is holy. It is time to become whole with yourself, with your loved ones and with G-d.