abukspan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 83 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Dvar Torah Shoftim โ€” Learning From the Ant #1999720
    abukspan
    Participant

    thanx for the info!!

    in reply to: Short & Sweet #1997592
    abukspan
    Participant

    Yasher.Koach. I saw this today in the sefer and really like your write up.

    in reply to: Eikev โ€“ The Tactics of the Yetzer Hara: #1995938
    abukspan
    Participant

    Sechel.Hayashar, I should have you write a blurb for the back of my next iy”H next book.

    in reply to: Eikev โ€“ The Tactics of the Yetzer Hara: #1995934
    abukspan
    Participant

    Gadolhadorah, I agree that the paths to gehennom are scary ones. If I recall correctly Rav Shach was telling the buchurim that they should not think they are in the clear, safely ensconced in the ivory towers of yeshiva. Even in Jerusalem, or bnei.brak the danger lurks..

    I’ll try to 07 Sr a more user friendly one next week ๐Ÿ˜‰

    abukspan
    Participant

    I actually do have a bottle of JW Black in the house, a gift from someone who stayed in my house – of all times, over pesach. I dont drink and if your in town Id be happy to give it to you. Im serious. My offer re the sefer still stands. Dont know what CR stands for but I like the ring of The Coffee Rooms Magid.

    I heard Rav Gifter (of Telz fame) say a rolling over and laugh inducing line about Jim Bean and Johnny Walker, but can only share it in another venue. find my email

    in reply to: Shabbos Chazon: A Love/Hate Relationship -The Dubna Maggid #1992522
    abukspan
    Participant

    ๐Ÿ™‚ if you do like a good English sefer on the Parsha my offer stands. kol tuv

    in reply to: Shabbos Chazon: A Love/Hate Relationship -The Dubna Maggid #1992443
    abukspan
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer, you are correct. ๐Ÿ™‚

    commonsaychel, reach out to me, I have a sefer to send you ๐Ÿ™‚

    in reply to: Shabbos Chazon: A Love/Hate Relationship -The Dubna Maggid #1992135
    abukspan
    Participant

    Dear Jake,
    You get no argument from me about judging groups, this is not the place nor my style. This is however a Navi talking, so to whomever it was addressed -it is being said and is No doubt true. I will not discuss now-a-days as I myself certainly do not live a moed or rosh chodesh the way I should. But the navi was addressing people for whom such sentiments hold water and they were to be blamed. hope that makes sense.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Masei โ€” The Value of Life #1989637
    abukspan
    Participant

    very nice Gra

    abukspan
    Participant

    very nice

    in reply to: 4 Divrei Torah Related to Krias Yam Suf and Last Days of Pesach #1962358
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you again for adding to the discussion

    in reply to: Meaningful Hesber on an alternative reason for the 4 Cups #1961405
    abukspan
    Participant

    You are correct, it is the same Rav Klatzkin https://hebrewbooks.org/10213

    Had you known of that Ibn Ezra? There was a time when I only knew that one and one in Mishpatim (21:35) where he also makes fun of another ben – ben zuta, saying that his only friend is an ox.

    Not related. I am Avraham Bukspan/Bukshpan with peh, he is Buksboim with beis.
    if you can get me your email or address I would be happy to send you a copy of my safer. kol tuv

    in reply to: Meaningful Hesber on an alternative reason for the 4 Cups #1961120
    abukspan
    Participant

    Dear Reb BenEphraim,
    Thank you for the kind words. Did a little Googling and have no idea. He was a Rav in Tel Aviv who was niftar 20-30 years ago. Seeing your ID Benephraim, I (am tempted to)(can`t not) send you to look at the Ibn Ezra in Vayeitzei (29:17) ืจื›ื•ืช โ€“ ื›ืžืฉืžืขื•. ื•ื™ืฉ ืฉื•ืืœ: ืœืžื” ื”ื™ื• ื›ืŸ, ื‘ืขื‘ื•ืจ ืฉื—ืฉื‘ื• ืฉืžื—ืฉื‘ื•ืช ื”ืฉื ื›ืžื—ืฉื‘ื•ืชื™ื”ื, ื•ื›ืœ ื”ื ื‘ืจืื™ื ืจืื•ื™ื•ืช ืฆื•ืจืชื ืœื”ื™ื•ืช ืฉื•ื”.
    ื•ื‘ืŸ ืืคืจื™ื ืืžืจ: ืฉื”ื•ื ื—ืกืจ ืืœืดืฃ, ื•ื˜ืขืžื•: ืืจื•ื›ื•ืช, ื•ื”ื•ื ื”ื™ื” ื—ืกืจ ืื™ืœื•ืฃ.
    where he cites Ben Ephraim who reads the passuk discribing Leah`s eyes – Racos- as if it is missing an Alef. It is therefore saying that her eyes were Aruchos – long and shapely?
    To show his displeasure with this added Alef he concludes that Ben Ephraim should be missing an Alef. IOW Ben Porim, a Son of a Cow…..
    No offense intended, just one of the more famous Ibn Ezra`s.

    If you liked that vort, I recommend you somehow contact me a bukspan or perhaps go to a website that is famous for having scores of parshasheets to download and find my posting from my sefer Classics and Beyond – a Feldheim book. I would be happy to email a copy to you as the verter are usually not bad. kol tuv

    abukspan
    Participant

    To Use176: I have a nice sefer in a pdf which I would be happy to send to you. Many more nice verter, although this one was really cute. you just have to figure out how to contact abukspan. Hatzlacha and thanks for the kind word.

    abukspan
    Participant

    Thank you for this beautiful and informative dโ€™var Torah. Thank you for your kind words

    in reply to: Shmos Dvar Torah, With You in Plight #1935426
    abukspan
    Participant

    very nice, thank you

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Vayigash โ€” Power Should Not Always Corrupt : #1932011
    abukspan
    Participant

    keep answering questions also – good shabbos

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Vayigash โ€” Power Should Not Always Corrupt : #1931912
    abukspan
    Participant

    Thank you as always for adding to the discussion. I had never seen the Dubna Maggid, is it in his sefer ?

    While he may have said that Yosef sent big wagons I think the truth is that Yakov saw the second set of wagons that Yosef sent -not the wagons sent by Paraoh.

    See this vort from Rav Zev Leff (and iy`H in my upcoming published sefer) It is very clear and is masbir many diyukim

    Vayigash 3 โ€” Location/Association
    ื•ื™ื’ื“ื• ืœื• ืœืืžืจ ืขื•ื“ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ื—ื™ ื•ื›ื™ ื”ื•ื ืžืฉืœ ื‘ื›ืœ ืืจืฅ ืžืฆืจื™ื ื•ื™ืคื’ ืœื‘ื• ื›ื™ ืœืึพื”ืืžื™ืŸ ืœื”ื:ื•ื™ื“ื‘ืจื• ืืœื™ื• ืืช ื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืืฉืจ ื“ื‘ืจ ืืœื”ื ื•ื™ืจื ืืช ื”ืขื’ืœื•ืช ืืฉืจ ืฉืœื— ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืœืฉืืช ืืชื• ื•ืชื—ื™ ืจื•ื— ื™ืขืงื‘ ืื‘ื™ื”ื
    And they told him, saying, “Yosef is still alive,” and that he is ruler over the entire Land of Egypt; but he had a turn of heart, for he did not believe them. And they related to him all the words of Yosef that he had spoken to them, and he saw the wagons that Yosef had sent to transport him, and the spirit of their father Yaakov was revived (Bereishis 45:26-27).
    Citing a famous Midrash (Bereishis Rabbah 94:3), Rashi writes that Yaakovโ€™s spirit was revived when he heard the message Yosef had sent through the shevatim, along with the wagons. The word ืขื’ืœื•ืช (wagons) is connected to the word ืขื’ืœื” (calf), alluding to the ืขื’ืœื” ืขืจื•ืคื” ritual described in Parashas Shoftim (Devarim 21:1-9). Yosef reminded his father that this halachah was the last topic they had studied together before Yosef left home years earlier. (See Daas Zekeinim on 45:27.) This reminder convinced Yaakov that Yosef was indeed alive, and that it was he who had summoned Yaakov to Egypt. Even more, it demonstrated that this viceroy was the same Yosef with whom Yaakov had studied Torah twenty-two years earlier.
    Two questions present themselves. First, when you want to transport something or someone from point A to point B, you send moving vans. Agalos are the early equivalent of our moving vans. If Yosef wanted Yaakov to move from Eretz Yisrael to Mitzrayim, what was so special about him sending wagons that Yaakov intuited a coded message upon seeing them?
    Additionally, if we read the pesukim before and after our verses carefully (45:19,21; 46:5), we see that the sending of the wagons was not at Yosefโ€™s behest but at the behest of Pharaoh. So how can we say that Yaakov saw the wagons that Yosef sent and thereby understood his message? The wagons were not a message from Yosef; they were not even sent by him.
    Rav Zev Leff provides an explanation. Pharaoh wanted Yaakov to move to Mitzrayim as soon as possible. He saw the prosperity that Yosef had brought his country and rightly assumed that his father Yaakov could have an even greater positive effect. Rashi (47:10), in fact, tells us that the hunger abated with the appearance of Yaakov in Egypt. Pharaoh therefore sent a message to Yaakov to come down and not worry about a thing: โ€œLeave your stuff behind, and I will furnish and provide all the best that Egypt has to offer. And most important, donโ€™t even worry about your business or means of livelihood, i.e., the shepherding. You come here and I will set you up with everythingโ€ (based on 45:18, 20).
    While this may have served Pharaohโ€™s needs, Yosef was aware that it would be a non-starter as far as Yaakov was concerned. Though the Egyptian monarch was prepared to give us royal treatment, being afforded the opportunity to make ourselves at home in a foreign nation and culture is an invitation to cultural suicide. Moving to a new land without lock, stock, and barrel, where everything from der alter heim (the old home) is left behind, and we are promised swift and easy integration into the new culture, can bring us on a short path to assimilation.
    Yosef knew that Yaakov would never accept moving to Egypt under those conditions. Rather, he planned to bring down his father and his whole family, but with all their possessions and all the accoutrements of the old country. He went about this by sending two sets of agalos, one for the people and one for the belongings. Whatโ€™s more, after their arrival in Egypt, Yosef instructed his brothers to tell Pharaoh that they were shepherds who earned their livelihood with livestock, something anathema to the Egyptians who worshiped sheep. The intention was to be allowed to live in Goshen, far from normal Egyptian society. To this end, it was vital for them to bring their livestock, as well, as the Torah (46:6) points out. This way, they would be able to continue their Canaan life even in Egypt.
    Now we can answer our questions. Itโ€™s true that Pharaoh commanded to send agalos, to transport the people, but Yosef sent an additional set, to transport their possessions: their livestock as well as their personal belongings, which would ensure continuity of their lifestyle. That was the hook for Yaakov Avinu, who wanted to be sure that the descent to Mitzrayim was not a trip down a one-way street toward integration and eventual assimilation.
    When Yaakov saw duplicate sets of agalos, two sets of moving vans, he realized what it was: Pharaohโ€™s invitation for the people to come down to Egypt, combined with Yosefโ€™s realization that in order for Yaakov to come happily, he needed to bring his original surroundings along with him. That was when Yaakov said, โ€œAh, Yosef understood the message of the eglah arufah!โ€
    What is the eglah arufah? If a corpse is found between two cities and it is not known who killed the person, the elders of the city closest to the body break the neck of a calf and declare that they were not responsible for the manโ€™s death. The Gemara (Sotah 45b) asks: Do you think the ziknei haโ€™ir, the elders of the city, would murder someone? The Gemara then answers that while they certainly cannot be accused of actually murdering the fellow, they may have not accompanied the person as he took leave of their city, hence not fulfilling the mitzvah of levayah, escorting someone embarking on a journey.
    One can ask: And walking him four amos (about eight feet), the requisite distance of levayah, would have saved him? He may have been murdered ten miles outside the city limit, so how would those first eight feet have made a difference?
    We can answer based on the Maharal (Chiddushei Aggados Sotah 45b, 46b), who explains that when you are melaveh, escort, someone, you show that he, as an individual, is connected to the group. He is part of something greater, part of the Klal, even though he has physically left your company and is no longer with you. This creates a spiritual connection, which gives the one accompanied a shared merit and an effective protection against harm.
    Eglah arufah and the need for levayah teach us that a person is not defined by location as much as he is defined by association. Where you are does not define you; who you are identified with defines you!
    When Yaakov Avinu saw that Yosef had sent an additional set of agalos, he understood Yosefโ€™s intentions. It was as if he said to himself, โ€œNot only does he want us to come to Mitzrayim, but he wants us to keep our lifestyle, our associations. We will not be defined as people living in Egypt, but by what we regard as holy and important. Just as Yosef was able to maintain his kedushah, his sanctity, even in the unholy Land of Egypt, we, as well, will be able to maintain our association and attachment to the kedushah of der alter heim, of Eretz Yisrael, even while living geographically in the Land of Egypt.โ€ Seeing the extra set of agalos that Yosef sent, and understanding the message that came along with them, revived Yaakovโ€™s spirit and allowed for him to go to Egypt in a contented state of mind.
    As Yidden, we can survive wherever we are, as long as the proper groundwork is laid to maintain an atmosphere of kedushah.
    Rav Leff has other sources to bolster his point. First, he cites the pesukim later on in this parashah (46:5-6): โ€œVayakam Yaakov miโ€™Beer Sheva vayisu bnei Yisrael es Yaakov avihem veโ€™es tapam veโ€™es nesheihem baโ€™agalos asher shalach Pharaoh laโ€™seis oso. Vayikchu es mikneihem veโ€™es rechusham asher rachshu beโ€™Eretz Canaan vayavoโ€™u Mitzrayimah Yaakov veโ€™chol zaro ito โ€” And Yaakov arose from Beer Sheva; the sons of Israel carried Yaakov their father, and their young children and their wives, in the wagons which Pharaoh had sent to transport him. They took their livestock and their possessions which they had amassed in the Land of Canaan, and they came to Egypt โ€” Yaakov and all his offspring with him.โ€
    Though the first pasuk makes it clear that they made use of the wagons from Pharaoh to transport the people, why does it not say the same for the possessions in the second pasuk? According to what we just said, Pharaoh only sent wagons for the people, not the possessions, and the additional wagons were only sent by Yosef. These extra wagons brought a special sense of revival to Yaakov; he knew that he and his family were not moving to another land, but transplanting one holy land into the area of another.
    Rav Leff brings out this point from another source, as well. Yosef told his brothers that he was going to tell Pharaoh (46:31), โ€œAchai uโ€™veis avi asher beโ€™Eretz Canaan baโ€™u eilai โ€” My brothers and my fatherโ€™s household who are in the Land of Canaan have come to me.โ€ If by that point Yaakov and the shevatim had already come down to Mitzrayim, why did Yosef say, โ€œasher beโ€™Eretz Canaan โ€” who are in the Land of Canaanโ€?
    These three words were what Yosef was working toward and what enabled Yaakov to come down happily. Yosef was in effect saying, โ€œMy father and brothers came here because they will be able to maintain and transplant the kosher life they had in Canaan to Mitzrayim.โ€ While geographically they were in Mitzrayim, they were, at the same time, back at home in Canaan.
    This was why, before Yaakov went down to Mitzrayim, he could fully appreciate Hashemโ€™s reassurance (46:4), โ€œAnochi aalcha gam aloh โ€” And I shall also surely bring you up.โ€ He and his children would later ascend; they were not going to fall prey to what Mitzrayim had to offer, but would survive and flourish, as they became the am hanivchar, Hashemโ€™s chosen nation.

    in reply to: to tip or not to tip that is the question #1929461
    abukspan
    Participant

    perhaps keep in mind the issue of giving tips too close to a goyashe holyday

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Vayeira โ€” Sense and Sensitivity: #1917400
    abukspan
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer thank you

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Bereishis โ€” Not Without Its Limits. #1909876
    abukspan
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer, I`ll take it as a compliment that you acknowledge the dvar Torah as one that should be subject to the pela yoetz. Thank you! Is it too long for you or are you concerned about other readers? Regarding the size: I just, other than the last paragraph, wrote over what the Kli Yakar says. Thank you

    in reply to: Nitzavim โ€” Not in Heaven: Discussing how Adams Judgement was favorable #1900140
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you -yetzt is klor

    abukspan
    Participant

    Ksiva v`Chasima Tova

    “this refers tbe adam harishan who sacrifice himself as a karbon on Rash Hashanah ”

    Blame it on my ignorance, but this is kind of scary. Are we saying that he did an Aveira Lishma and sacrificed himself on our behalf by sinning? I have, to my displeasure, read of certain types of alleged “tzadikim” who were “so holy” they needed to sin to have the opportunity to be mekayeim the mitzvah of teshuva.

    I would love to see a source for this. Thank you

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Re`eh: The Need To Be Free #1891766
    abukspan
    Participant

    Wow, great question (gotta look that up) and a nice and meaningful answer. Thank you for both and may Her neshama truly be elevated.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Devarim โ€“ Viewing the Whole Picture: #1885810
    abukspan
    Participant

    This pshat from the Telza Rosh Yeshiva will answer your question. .

    ืค ื”ืจื‘ ื™ืฉืฉื›ืจ ืคืจื ื“)

    ืคืจืฉืช ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ืžืชื—ื™ืœื” ื‘ืกืงื™ืจืช ืžืฉื” ืจื‘ื ื• ืฉืœ ื”ืื™ืจื•ืขื™ื ื”ืขื™ืงืจื™ื™ื ืฉื”ืชืจื—ืฉื• ื‘ืฉืœื•ืฉื™ื ื•ืชืฉืขื” ื”ืฉื ื™ื, ืžืื– ืขื–ื‘ื• ื‘ื ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืืช ื”ืจ ืกื™ื ื™. ื›ืฉืžืฉื” ืžื–ื›ื™ืจ ืืช ื“ืจื™ืฉืชื ืœืฉืœื•ื— ืžืจื’ืœื™ื ืœืกื™ื™ืจ ื‘ืืจืฅ ื™ืฉืจืืœ, ื˜ืจื ื›ื ื™ืกืชื ืืœื™ื”, ื”ื•ื ืžื’ื ื” ืื•ืชื ืขืœ ื”ืฆื•ืจื” ื”ืคืจื•ืขื” ื‘ื” ื”ื ื”ื’ื™ืฉื• ืืช ื‘ืงืฉืชื, ืืš ื”ื•ื ืžื•ื“ื”: “ื•ึทื™ึผึดื™ื˜ึทื‘ ื‘ึผึฐืขึตื™ื ึทื™ ื”ึทื“ึผึธื‘ึธืจ” (ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ื, ื›ื’).

    ื”ื’ืžืจื ื‘ืžืกื›ืช ืกื•ื˜ื”, ื“ืฃ ืœื“: ืžื‘ื™ื ื” ืžื“ื‘ืจื™ ืžืฉื”: “ื•ื™ื™ื˜ื‘ ื‘ืขื™ื ื™ ื”ื“ื‘ืจ: ืืžืจ ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ, ื‘ืขื™ื ื™, ื•ืœื ื‘ืขื™ื ื™ื• ืฉืœ ืžืงื•ื (ื”ืงื‘”ื”)”. ื”ืงื‘”ื” ื”ื™ื” ืžื•ื“ืข, ืฉืฉืœื™ื—ืช ื”ืžืจื’ืœื™ื ืชืกืชื™ื™ื ื‘ืืกื•ืŸ, ื•ื”ื•ื ืœื ืจืฆื” ืฉื™ืœื›ื•.

    ื”ื“ื‘ืจ ืงืฉื” ืœื”ื‘ื ื”. ืื ื”ืงื‘”ื” ื™ื“ืข ืฉื‘ืกื•ืคื• ืฉืœ ื“ื‘ืจ, ื”ืžืจื’ืœื™ื ื™ืจืขื™ืœื• ืืช ื“ืขืชื” ืฉืœ ื”ืื•ืžื”, ื ื’ื“ ืืจืฅ ื™ืฉืจืืœ, ืžื“ื•ืข ื”ื•ื ื”ืกื›ื™ื ืฉื™ืœื›ื•. ื”ืงื‘”ื” ื”ื™ื” ืฆืจื™ืš ืœื•ืžืจ ืœืžืฉื”, “ืืžื•ืจ ืœื”ื ืฉืื ื™ ืืœื•ืงื™ื, ืื ื™ ืงื•ื‘ืข ืืช ื”ื”ื—ืœื˜ื•ืช, ื•ืืžืจืชื™ “ืœื!”

    ืจืืฉ ื™ืฉื™ื‘ื” ืžืคื•ืจืกื ื‘ืฉื ื”ืจื‘ ืžื•ื˜ืœ ื›ืฅ ืžืกื™ืง ืœืงื— ื—ืฉื•ื‘ ื‘ื—ื™ื ื•ืš ืžื”ืื™ืจื•ืข ื”ื–ื”.

    ืœืคืขืžื™ื, ื™ืœื“ื™ื ืจื•ืฆื™ื ืœืขืฉื•ืช ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉื”ื•ืจื™ื”ื ื—ื•ืฉื‘ื™ื ืœื‘ืœืชื™ ื”ื•ืœื. ื”ืื™ื ืกื˜ื™ื ืงื˜ ื”ื”ื•ืจื™ ืฉืœื ื• ืื•ืžืจ ืœื ื• ืœืงื‘ื•ืข ืืช ื”ืจืฆื•ื™, ื•ืœืืกื•ืจ ืขืœื™ื”ื ืœืขืฉื•ืช ืืช ืžื” ืฉื”ื ืจื•ืฆื™ื. ืื ื• ืžื ืžืงื™ื ืœืขืฆืžื ื• ืืช ื”ื—ืœื˜ืชื ื•, ื‘ื–ื” ืฉืื ื• ื ื“ืจืฉื™ื ืœื—ื ืš ืืช ื™ืœื“ื™ื ื•, ื•ืœื›ืŸ ืื ื• ืœืขื™ืชื™ื ื ืืœืฆื™ื ืœื•ืžืจ “ืœื!”.

    ืื‘ืœ, ื”ืื ืชืžื™ื“ ืจืื•ื™ ืœื•ืžืจ “ืœื!”?

    ืื•ืžืจ ื”ืจื‘ ื›ืฅ, ืฉืื ื• ืœื•ืžื“ื™ื ืžื”ืžืจื’ืœื™ื, ืฉืงื•ืจื” ืœืขื™ืชื™ื ืฉืขืœื™ื ื• ืœื•ื•ืชืจ, ื’ื ืื ืื ื• ื™ื•ื“ืขื™ื ืฉื”ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉื™ืœื“ื™ื ื• ืžื‘ืงืฉื™ื ืœืขืฉื•ืช ื”ื•ื ื˜ืขื•ืช!

    ื”ืงื‘”ื” ื”ื‘ื™ืŸ ืฉื”ืขื ืคืฉื•ื˜ ืœื ื”ื™ื” ืžื•ื›ืŸ ืœืงื‘ืœ ืืช ืกื™ืจื•ื‘ื• ืœื‘ืงืฉืชื. ืื™ืœื• ืžืฉื” ื”ื™ื” ื—ื•ื–ืจ ืžืืช ื”ืงื‘”ื” ืขื ืžืขื ื” ืฉืœื™ืœื™, ื”ื ื”ื™ื• ื—ื•ืฉื‘ื™ื ืœืขืฆืžื “ืื™ืš ืื ื• ืืžื•ืจื™ื ืœืœื›ืช ื•ืœื”ื™ืœื—ื ื ื’ื“ ืžื“ื™ื ื”, ืžื‘ืœื™ ืœืฉืœื•ื— ืžืจื’ืœื™ื. ื›ื•ืœื ื™ื•ื“ืขื™ื ืฉืื™ ืืคืฉืจ ืœืœื—ื•ื ืœืœื ืื™ื ืคื•ืจืžืฆื™ื” ืžื•ื“ื™ืขื™ื ื™ืช. ืื™ืœื• ื›ืœืœ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื”ื™ื” ืขื•ืžื“ ืขืœ ืจืžื” ืจื•ื—ื ื™ืช ืžืกืคืงืช, ื›ื“ื™ ืœืงื‘ืœ ืืช ืกื™ืจื•ื‘ื• ืฉืœ ื”ืงื‘”ื”, ื”ื•ื ื”ื™ื” ืื•ืžืจ “ืœื!”. ืืš ื”ืงื‘”ื” ื”ื‘ื™ืŸ ืฉื”ื ืœื ื”ื™ื• ืžื•ื›ื ื™ื ืœืงื‘ืœ ืืช ื”ื—ืœื˜ืชื• ื‘ืœื‘ ืฉืœื, ื•ืœื›ืŸ ื”ื•ื ืœื ืกื™ืจื‘ ืœื‘ืงืฉืชื.

    ืœืคืขืžื™ื, ืžืขื™ืจ ื”ืจื‘ ื›ืฅ, ืœื‘ ื”ื—ื™ื ื•ืš ื”ื•ื ืœื•ื•ืชืจ. ืื ื• ื—ื™ื™ื‘ื™ื ืœื“ืขืช ืžืชื™ ื”ื™ืœื“ื™ื ืฉืœื ื• ืžืกื•ื’ืœื™ื ืœืงื‘ืœ ืืช ื””ืœื!”, ื•ืžืชื™ ื”ื ื™ื•ืชืจ ืžื“ื™ ืžืžื•ืงื“ื™ื ืขืœ ื”ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉื”ื ืžืชื›ื•ื•ื ื™ื ืœืขืฉื•ืช, ื›ื“ื™ ืœืงื‘ืœ ืืช ื”ืกื™ืจื•ื‘ ืฉืœื ื•.

    ื”ืžื•ืฉื’ ื”ื–ื” ื’ื ืžื•ื–ื›ืจ ื‘ืื•ืคืŸ ื‘ืจื•ืจ ื‘ื’ืžืจื ื™ื‘ืžื•ืช, ื“ืฃ ืกื”: “ื•ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืื™ืœืขื ืžืฉื•ื [ื‘ืฉื] ืจ’ ืืœืขื–ืจ ื‘ืจ’ ืฉืžืขื•ืŸ: ื›ืฉื ืฉืžืฆื•ื•ื” ืขืœ ืื“ื ืœื•ืžืจ ื“ื‘ืจ ื”ื ืฉืžืข, ื›ืš ืžืฆื•ื” ืขืœ ืื“ื ืฉืœื ืœื•ืžืจ ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉืื™ื ื• ื ืฉืžืข”.

    ื”ืจื‘ ืžื•ื˜ืœ ื›ืฅ ืžื•ืกื™ืฃ ืื ืงื“ื•ื˜ื” ืื™ืฉื™ืช, ืฉืงืจืชื” ืœื• ืœืคื ื™ ื”ืจื‘ื” ื–ืžืŸ.

    “ื™ื•ื ืื—ื“ ื”ื™ื’ื™ืขื• ืืœื™ ื‘ื—ื•ืจื™ ื”ื™ืฉื™ื‘ื”, ื•ื‘ืงืฉื• ืžืžื ื™ ืœืฉื ื•ืช ืืช ืœื•ื— ื”ื–ืžื ื™ื ืฉืœ ื”ื™ืฉื™ื‘ื”, ืœืขืจื‘ ืื—ื“. ื”ื ืจืฆื• ืœื”ืชืคืœืœ ืชืคื™ืœืช ืขืจื‘ื™ืช ืžื•ืงื“ื ืžื”ืจื’ื™ืœ.

    “ื›ืฉืฉืืœืชื™ ืื•ืชื, ืžื“ื•ืข ื”ื ืจืฆื• ืœื”ืชืคืœืœ ืžื•ืงื“ื, ื”ื ื”ืกื‘ื™ืจื• ืœื™ ืฉื‘ืื•ืชื• ืขืจื‘ ืžืชืงื™ื™ื ืงืจื‘ ืืœื™ืคื•ืช ื‘ืžืฉืงืœ ื›ื‘ื“, ื•ื”ื ืจืฆื• ืœื”ืื–ื™ืŸ ืœืžืฉื—ืง ื‘ืจื“ื™ื•. ืื™ืœื• ื”ื™ื• ืžืชืคืœืœื™ื ื‘ื–ืžืŸ ื”ืจื’ื™ืœ, ื”ื ื”ื™ื• ‘ืžืคืกืคืกื™ื’ ืืช ื”ืงืจื‘.

    “ืžื•ื‘ืŸ ืžืืœื™ื•, ืฉืขืฆื ื”ื‘ืงืฉื” ื”ื™ื™ืชื” ื‘ืœืชื™ ื”ื•ืœืžืช, ืฉืœื ืœื“ื‘ืจ ืขืœ ื”ื”ืชืขื ื™ื ื•ืช ื”ืžืคื•ืงืคืงืช ืฉืœ ื‘ื—ื•ืจื™ ื™ืฉื™ื‘ื” ื”ืžืงืฉื™ื‘ื™ื ืœืงืจื‘ ื‘ื™ืŸ ืฉื ื™ ืื ืฉื™ื ืฉื”ื•ื›ืฉืจื• ืœื”ื›ื•ืช ื–ื” ื‘ื–ื”, ืขื“ ืฉืื—ื“ ืžื”ื ื›ื‘ืจ ืœื ื™ื•ื›ืœ ืœืขืžื•ื“ ืขืœ ืจื’ืœื™ื•.

    “ื”ื‘ื ืชื™ ืฉืื ืืกืจื‘, ื”ื‘ื ื™ื ืคืฉื•ื˜ ืœื ื™ื‘ื™ื ื• ืžื“ื•ืข ืกื™ืจื‘ืชื™. ื‘ืกื‘ื™ื‘ื” ืฉื‘ื” ื’ื“ืœื•, ื”ื ื”ื™ื• ืจื’ื™ืœื™ื ืœืจืื•ืช ืื–ืจื—ื™ื ื˜ื•ื‘ื™ื ื•ืžื›ื•ื‘ื“ื™ื ืฉืœื ื—ืกื›ื• ื›ืœ ืžืืžืฅ ื›ื“ื™ ืœื”ื™ื•ืช ื ื•ื›ื—ื™ื ื‘ืžืฉื—ืงื™ื ื›ืืœื”. ื”ื ืจืื• ื‘ืฆืคื™ื™ื” ื•ื‘ื”ืื–ื ื” ืœืฉื™ื“ื•ืจื™ ืจื“ื™ื• ืฉืœ ืฉื ื™ ืžื‘ื•ื’ืจื™ื ื”ื—ื•ื‘ื˜ื™ื ื–ื” ื‘ื–ื”, ื›ืืžืฆืขื™ ื‘ื™ืœื•ื™ ื ื•ืจืžืœื™ ืœื—ืœื•ื˜ื™ืŸ.

    “ื”ื—ืœื˜ืชื™” ืกื™ื™ื ื”ืจื‘ ื›ืฅ, “ืฉืžื›ื™ื•ื•ืŸ ืฉื”ื‘ื—ื•ืจื™ื ื”ืืœื” ืืคื™ืœื• ืœื ื™ืชื—ื™ืœื• ืœื”ื‘ื™ืŸ ืžื“ื•ืข ืื ื™ ืžืกืจื‘ ืœื‘ืงืฉืชื, ืขื“ื™ืฃ ื™ื”ื™ื” ืœืืคืฉืจ ืœื”ื ืœื”ืชืคืœืœ ืžื•ืงื“ื ื•ืœื”ืื–ื™ืŸ ืœืžืฉื—ืง.

    ื‘ื˜ื•ื—ื ื™, ืฉื–ืืช ื”ื™ื™ืชื” ืื—ืช ื‘ื™ืŸ ื”ื“ื™ืœืžื•ืช ื”ืงืฉื•ืช ื”ืจื‘ื•ืช ืฉื”ืจื‘ ื›ืฅ ื”ื™ื” ืฆืจื™ืš ืœื”ืชืžื•ื“ื“ ืื™ืชืŸ. ื”ื•ื ืขืฆืžื• ืœืžื“ ื‘ื‘ื—ืจื•ืชื• ืœืคื ื™ ืžืœื—ืžืช ื”ืขื•ืœื ื”ืฉื ื™ื™ื”, ื‘ื™ืฉื™ื‘ืช ื˜ืœื–’ ื‘ืื™ืจื•ืคื”. ืžื” ื”ื™ื• ื—ื•ืฉื‘ื™ื ืจืืฉื™ ื”ื™ืฉื™ื‘ื” ื“ืื– ืขืœ ื‘ืงืฉื” ื›ื–ื•?

    ื”ืจื‘ ืžืจื“ื›ื™ ื’ื™ืคื˜ืจ ืกื™ืคืจ ืœืขื™ืชื™ื ืงืจื•ื‘ื•ืช ืขืœ ื–ื™ื›ืจื•ื ื•ืช ื”ื’ืขืชื• ืœื˜ืœื–’, ื‘ื• ื’ื™ืœื” ืฉื”ื“ื‘ืจ ื”ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืฉื”ื™ื” ืงื™ื™ื ืฉื ื”ื™ื™ืชื” ื”ืชื•ืจื”. ื›ืžื” ืงืฉื” ื”ื™ื” ืฆืจื™ืš ืœื”ื™ื•ืช ืœืื“ื ืฉื’ื“ืœ ื‘ืžืกื™ืจื•ืช ื ืขืœื” ื›ื–ืืช ืœืชื•ืจื”, ืœื”ืจืฉื•ืช ืœืชืœืžื™ื“ื™ื• ืœืกื™ื™ื ืืช ื”ืœื™ืžื•ื“ื™ื ื‘ืฉืขื” ืžื•ืงื“ืžืช, ื›ื“ื™ ืœืฆืคื•ืช ื‘ืžืฉื—ืง ื’ืžืจ ืฉืœ ืื’ืจื•ืฃ ื‘ืžืฉืงืœ ื›ื‘ื“?

    ืื‘ืœ ื–ื” ื”ื™ื” ืขื•ืœื ื—ื“ืฉ. ืชืœืžื™ื“ื™ ื”ื™ืฉื™ื‘ื” ื”ื™ื’ื™ืขื• ืžืงื”ื™ืœื•ืช ืงื˜ื ื•ืช ืฉื•ื ื•ืช ืžืจื—ื‘ื™ ื”ืžื“ื™ื ื”. ืจื‘ื™ื ืžื”ื ื—ื•ื ื›ื• ื‘ื‘ืชื™ ืกืคืจ ืฆื™ื‘ื•ืจื™ื™ื ื‘ืฆืขื™ืจื•ืชื. ืœื ื”ื™ื” ื ื™ืชืŸ ืœืฆืคื•ืช ืžื”ื, ืœื”ืขืจื™ืš ืœื’ืžืจื™ ืืช ืขืจืš ื”ืชื•ืจื”.

    ื›ืžื•ื‘ืŸ, ื™ืฉื ื ื”ืจื‘ื” ืžืงืจื™ื, ื‘ื”ื ื”ื•ืจื™ื ื•ืžื—ื ื›ื™ื ื—ื™ื™ื‘ื™ื ืœื•ืžืจ ืœื. ื‘ืžืงืจื” ืฉืœื ื•, ื”ืจื‘ ืžื•ื˜ืœ ืœืžื“ ืžื”ืžื•ืจื” ื”ื˜ื•ื‘ ื‘ื™ื•ืชืจ. ืื ื”ืงื‘”ื” ืืคืฉืจ ืœื›ืœืœ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืœืขืฉื•ืช ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉื”ื•ื ื™ื“ืข ืฉืื™ื ื• ืจืื•ื™, ื›ืืฉืจ ื”ื•ื ื”ื‘ื™ืŸ ืฉืื™ืŸ ื‘ื™ื›ื•ืœืชื ืœืงื‘ืœ ืืช ืกื™ืจื•ื‘ื•, ื”ืจื™ ืฉืจืืฉ ื”ื™ืฉื™ื‘ื” ื”ื™ื” ื—ื™ื™ื‘ ืœืžืฆื•ื ื‘ืชื•ืš ืขืฆืžื• ืืช ื”ืื•ืžืฅ ืœืขืฉื•ืช ืื•ืชื• ื”ื“ื‘ืจ.

    ื•ืื›ืŸ ื›ืŸ, ื”ื•ืจื™ื ื™ืงืจื™ื, ื’ื ืื ื• ื—ื™ื™ื‘ื™ื!

    ื‘ืœื™ ื•ื™ืจื•ืกื™ื. http://www.avast.com

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Devarim โ€“ Viewing the Whole Picture: #1885258
    abukspan
    Participant

    Well according to the Medresh Rabbah that bnei Yisroel had davened to Hashem by Yam Suf (see Shemos Rabbah on MaTitzak Eilai) i do not see the question. But I always like a good answer to a compelling question. Do you think this one is?

    in reply to: Short & Sweet #1883124
    abukspan
    Participant

    Very sweet.

    in reply to: Masei โ€” The Value of Life #1882158
    abukspan
    Participant

    yes, a famous and somewhat controversial Or HaChaim

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Pinchas: Love Peace and Chase Peace #1882000
    abukspan
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer, Thank you for the address and the comments

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Pinchas: Love Peace and Chase Peace #1882002
    abukspan
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer, thank you for the address of the Ksav Sofer and the comments

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Pinchas: Love Peace and Chase Peace #1880804
    abukspan
    Participant

    Happy to join the Toi fan club.
    I looked today but could not find the ksav sofer in emor. Many websites mention that it is there but i saw it not. do you know where it is?

    thank you

    in reply to: Chukas โ€” Yisraelโ€™s Potential #1878659
    abukspan
    Participant

    yes, i thought that would have been appearent from the totalaty of what I cited from the Rizhiner

    in reply to: Chukas โ€” Yisraelโ€™s Potential #1878550
    abukspan
    Participant

    I always likes The Rizhiner who said that when yaakov bought the Bechora, he said Michra ChaYom…
    He bought a day.
    Yaakov is 182, taking the Bechora -Pi Shenayim, he becomes 364.
    The day he bought from Esav is the 365th day, the day of Yom Kippur. The day that Saro shel esav has no shelita…..

    in reply to: Chukas โ€” Yisraelโ€™s Potential #1878477
    abukspan
    Participant

    very good

    in reply to: Chukas โ€” Yisraelโ€™s Potential #1878162
    abukspan
    Participant

    I was unaware of the chazal ื›ื™ ื™ืขืงื‘ ื”ื™ื” ืžื—ื–ื™ืง ื‘ืื–ื ื™ ื›ืœื‘ ืขื•ื‘ืจ. I see the Tzror HaMor citing a Zohar and giving answers as to why Yaakov did this.

    To paraphrase you: I thought the simplest explanation is that Esav headed towards Yaโ€™akov after being informed of his presence. He had no way of silently going in.

    I always assumed that Esav was the one who started things, as the passuk saysื•ึฐื’ึทืึ™ ื”ึนืœึตึฃืšึฐ ืœึดืงึฐืจึธึฝืืชึฐืšึธึ”…” I took it to mean that Esav had heard about Yaakovs return and came out after him. Chicken or Egg.

    I saw this Bechor Shor and thought he was klor like you, that Esav did not come until after the malachim came to him
    ื•ื™ืฉืœื— ื™ืขืงื‘ ืžืœืื›ื™ื โ€“ ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ืฉืงืจื‘ ืืฆืœ ืขืฉื• ื“ืื’ ืžืŸ ื”ืฉื˜ื™ืžื” ืฉื”ื™ื™ืชื” ืœืขืฉื• ืขืœื™ื•, ื•ืฉืœื— ืžืœืื›ื™ื ืœื—ืคื•ืจ ื•ืœืจื’ืœ ื•ืœื”ื›ื™ืจ ื“ืขืชื• ืฉืœ ืขืฉื•. ื•ืœื ืจืฆื” ืœื”ื–ื›ื™ืจ ืฉื•ื ื“ืจืš ืฉื ืื”, ืืœื ื›ืื“ื ืฉืฉื•ืœื— ืœืื—ื™ื• ื•ืœืื•ื”ื‘ื• ืœื‘ืฉืจื• ื˜ื•ื‘ ืขื ื™ื™ื ื•
    but I still am not clear. While on the way to him, Esav could have heard that Yaakov was coming – so he and his men went out towards them.

    That is mashma from the Radak: ื•ื’ื ื”ื•ืœืš ืœืงืจืืชืš โ€“ ืฉืฉืžืข ืฉืืชื” ื‘ื, ื•ืื™ื ื• ื”ื•ืœืš ืœืงืจืืชืš ืœืฉืœื•ื ืืœื ืœืžืœื—ืžื”, ื›ื™ ื”ื•ื ื‘ื ื‘ืืจื‘ืข ืžืื•ืช ืื™ืฉ, ื ืจืื” ื›ื™ ืœื”ืœื—ื ืขืžืš ื‘ื.

    This Rashbam klor says like you, that Esav only came after meeting with the malachim. Its just amazing that they were coming to be mechabed Yaakov, See also Chizkuni.
    ื‘ืื ื• ืืœ ืื—ื™ืš ืืœ ืขืฉื• โ€“ ื•ืžืฆืืช ื—ืŸ ื‘ืขื™ื ื™ื• ื›ืืฉืจ ืืžืจืช,
    ื•ื’ื ื”ื ื” ื”ื•ื ืžืชื•ืš ืฉืฉืžื— ื‘ื‘ื™ืืชืš ื•ื‘ืื”ื‘ืชื• ืื•ืชืš, ื”ื•ืœืš ืœืงืจืืชืš ื•ืืจื‘ืข ืžืื•ืช ืื™ืฉ ืขืžื• โ€“ ืœื›ื‘ื•ื“ืš, ื–ื”ื• ืขื™ืงืจ ืคืฉื•ื˜ื•. ื•ื›ืŸ: ื’ื ื”ื ื” ื”ื•ื ื™ื•ืฆื ืœืงืจืืชืš ื•ืจืืš ื•ืฉืžื— ื‘ืœื‘ื• (ืฉืžื•ืช ื“ืณ:ื™ืดื“).

    thank you for your questions and good points.

    in reply to: Chukas โ€” Yisraelโ€™s Potential #1878047
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you for your comment.
    While I have seen or thought about Yaakovs possibility of returning “quitely” or un-noticed, it seems from the pessukim that Esav was already on his way, with the 400 men, even before the malachim came to him.

    in reply to: Shelach โ€” Climbing the Ladder #1874093
    abukspan
    Participant

    nice

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Nasso โ€” Talking to Yourself #1867187
    abukspan
    Participant

    shein

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Bamidbar: Ruling Over Nature: #1862443
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you

    in reply to: Emor and Mother`s Day Dvar Torah #1858371
    abukspan
    Participant

    Thank you. if you figure out how to contact me by email i can send you a pdf of a pretty nice sefer with many nice verter. and im not at gmail.

    abukspan

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Emor โ€“ Balancing Act: #1857921
    abukspan
    Participant

    yes, you must be referring to the chazal -Niskatzru HaDoros

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Kedoshim โ€“ Proof for Reproof #1855593
    abukspan
    Participant

    wow, your right. i only posted it because on the other one that had to do with another aspect of lo sisna and justified hatred, you started mishing in meforshim about tochacha and sina. i just wanted to show you that those unrelated things were something that i was BH well aware of. My mistake for not realizing that i had even put it up. Hope the Mods do not get upset. thank you

    abukspan
    Participant

    please see my upcoming post which will address several of the points you brought up

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Acharei Mos fascinating Chasam Sofer #1855044
    abukspan
    Participant

    “Maybe because of lack of time, Moshe Rabbenu overestimated his children and expected more from them.”

    I would be wary of saying such about Moshe Rabbeinu. It is treating him like you or me. Regarding his sons: it is far from true to say that they were “bad” or not accomplished. Do not have it handy, but Yalkut Lekach Tov (Rav Byfus) in pinchus brings a chusheva pshat based on medroshim that his sons were gedoilei yisroel but they did not accomplish as much as they could. I think the lashon was that they were Chachomim but “were not miyageia”. Far from being failed children do to C’v Moshe’s neglect (as per a favorite sefer of mine, the Ksav Sofer) it was their not working as hard as they could, in contrast to Yehoshua who was Lo Yamush, that led to not being selected for leadership.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Acharei Mos fascinating Chasam Sofer #1855042
    abukspan
    Participant

    Vort is complete. Toras Moshe does not say. His point was that that first fact, and loss of its attending lesson, was the goirem of the next two things for which these Kedoshim are faulted.

    in reply to: Dvar Torah: Acharei Mos fascinating Chasam Sofer #1854967
    abukspan
    Participant

    I be honest. I should not have posted the Chasam Sofer because it puts The two Kedoshim in a bad light. Are they like us, they did not have pusheta derech eretz? It is a nice chasam sofer but I hope not true. The Ksav Sofer you mention again sounds nice but is also so uncomplementory. I know the vort very well, I have discussed it with big people. Are we ready really to believe that there must be a trade off. You are either a good father (Aharon) with good kids, or a good Manhig (Moshe) with not great kids? That is clearly the yesod the Ksav Sofer presents and therefore the dilemma that Nadav and Avihu faced. They were to be the next Manhigim (that is his up teich of the gemora in Sanhedrin) so they were stuck about what to do, and ended up choosing to serve as great manhigim f or the Klal and not have children. As a bochur I liked the vort but have been explained and agree that it is hard to believe. Do we not have gedolim who can be machanech their children? Are we saying it is either or? Are we saying Chas VeShalal that Moshe Rabbeinu was a lousy father?

    Reb Eliezer, I am not writing this to criticize you. It’s just that I posted a vort that does go over well, but may truly be insulating and therefore wrong and wrong to say, and you go a cite the one vort that is so much more insulting or disrespectful to Moshe. This has nothing to do with you. It has been what I was mekabel from my rebbeim and which has now been naase.delee

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos โ€“ Preaching Without Practicing #1854510
    abukspan
    Participant

    ME
    “what is the point?”
    “I accept that you do not like what was written.”
    ” It would be great if we could shmooze on a phone if you so desire but i cannot keep this up. If you think i am wrong, so be it.”
    “We can disagree. good night”

    YOU
    “thanks for contribution, but we are going in circles.”

    Boruch Shekivanta

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos โ€“ Preaching Without Practicing #1854452
    abukspan
    Participant

    ” A similar situation could have occurred over here. ”

    what is the point? Do you need me to agree with you and remove my post? Need I say that the words of chazal -in their entirety are wrong because Rav E. Feigu says a pshat in a gemora in Yoma?

    I accept that you do not like what was written. Bigger people than me have written this pshat and said over
    this pshat.
    Its fine if you dont but perhaps have one more patient go at what was written.

    This point can be proven from a pasuk in Rus and the explanation of the Midrash based on that pasuk: โ€œVayehi biโ€™mei shefot hashoftim โ€“ And it happened in the days when the judges judgedโ€ (Rus 1:1). The Midrash (Rus Rabbah 1:1) explains that in those days, the judges were judged by the population. And the Midrash laments, โ€œWoe to the generation that judges its judges.โ€ The Gemara explains that when the judge would say, โ€œRemove a splinter from between your teeth,โ€ the accused would say, โ€œFirst remove the beam from between your eyesโ€ (Bava Basra 15b).
    The judges themselves were more corrupt than the people they were judging. The judge would accuse a man of stealing a splinter and demand that he return it, while the accused would respond that the judge himself was guilty of much more than petty theft, since he had in his possession something as large as a stolen beam.
    Thus, the people discounted the reproof the judges gave because the judges were greater sinners. Although the people could claim, โ€œWhy listen to him? He doesnโ€™t practice what he preaches,โ€ they were still criticized for judging their judges and discounting their reproof and authority.
    The truth is still the truth, whether from the mouth of a saint or a sinner. It may be a bitter pill to swallow, but if the message being preached is correct, I have no right not to accept it. The Rambam, in his preface to Shemonah Perakim, says, โ€œShema haโ€™emes miโ€™mi sheโ€™amrah โ€“Listen to and accept the truth from the one who says it.โ€

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos โ€“ Preaching Without Practicing #1854427
    abukspan
    Participant

    ” A similar situation COULD have occurred over here”

    This point can be proven from a pasuk in Rus and the explanation of the Midrash based on that pasuk: โ€œVayehi biโ€™mei shefot hashoftim โ€“ And it happened in the days when the judges judgedโ€ (Rus 1:1). The Midrash (Rus Rabbah 1:1) explains that in those days, the judges were judged by the population. And the Midrash laments, โ€œWoe to the generation that judges its judges.โ€ The Gemara explains that when the judge would say, โ€œRemove a splinter from between your teeth,โ€ the accused would say, โ€œFirst remove the beam from between your eyesโ€ (Bava Basra 15b).
    The judges themselves were more corrupt than the people they were judging. The judge would accuse a man of stealing a splinter and demand that he return it, while the accused would respond that the judge himself was guilty of much more than petty theft, since he had in his possession something as large as a stolen beam.
    Thus, the people discounted the reproof the judges gave because the judges were greater sinners. Although the people could claim, โ€œWhy listen to him? He doesnโ€™t practice what he preaches,โ€ they were still criticized for judging their judges and discounting their reproof and authority.
    The truth is still the truth, whether from the mouth of a saint or a sinner. It may be a bitter pill to swallow, but if the message being preached is correct, I have no right not to accept it. The Rambam, in his preface to Shemonah Perakim, says, โ€œShema haโ€™emes miโ€™mi sheโ€™amrah โ€“Listen to and accept the truth from the one who says it.โ€

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Acharei Mos โ€“ Preaching Without Practicing #1854321
    abukspan
    Participant

    I do not know what to say. The pshat pashut in shfot hashoftim is the the people were judging the judges. However bad they were, and they were, chazal are criticizing -certainly – those who are judging the judges. It would be great if we could shmooze on a phone if you so desire but i cannot keep this up. If you think i am wrong, so be it. I can cite near countless seforim that the people were being criticized for their criticism of the shoftim. is that not correct. Forgive me if I have to now go to class

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 83 total)