abukspan

New Acharon shel Pesach verter.

8. The Art of Prayer: Tefilla Altering Lesson From Rav Yerucham Levovitz
ופרעה הקריב וישאו בני ישראל את עיניהם והנה מצרים נסע אחריהם וייראו מאד ויצעקו בני ישראל אל ה’
Pharaoh drew near, and the Children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and behold! Egypt was traveling after them. They were very frightened, and the Children of Israel cried out to Hashem (Shemos 14:10).
Based on the word “Vayitzaku – And they cried out,” Rashi explains that the Jews seized the art of their ancestors and davened to Hashem. He then brings proofs from the verses about Avraham (Bereishis 19:27), Yitzchak (ibid. 24:63), and Yaakov (ibid. 28:11) that our Patriarchs also prayed.
We are all familiar with emotions that evoke a cry of prayer. When confronted by tragedy or great need, we turn to Hashem in desperation. Sitting in a waiting room outside an intensive care unit, one sees firsthand the truth in the maxim: There is no atheist in a foxhole. The prayers said at these stressful times flow easily, from deep within the heart.
But what of the prayers on an ordinary day, with the dogs at bay and the waters still? What posture and attitude do we need to take then?
We are faced with another question. Why does Rashi need to tell us that the Jews followed the practice of their forefathers? Is something gained by this comparison?
Rav Yerucham Levovitz (Daas Torah on Beshalach) suggests that this comparison teaches us something both fundamental and critical about the nature of our tefillos.
The first pasuk (Bereishis 19:27) brought in Rashi describes the day after Avraham’s heartfelt petition on behalf of Sodom. After his petition was declined, Avraham went back the next day to pray at the same place. This is proof, writes Rashi, that Avraham had a practice to pray. But it was not for anything special.
The second pasuk (ibid. 24:63) finds Yitzchak going out in the late afternoon to pray in the field. Again, there was no special motivating event prompting his prayer; it was just his practice.
The third pasuk (ibid. 28:11) describes Yaakov praying while on the way to his uncle Lavan. Rashi tells us (V. 17) that Yaakov could not allow himself to pass the site of the future holy Temple without praying: “After all, my forebears prayed at that site.” Here, too, this was not at a time of despair.
None of their prayers were prompted by an impending crisis or threat, but tefillah comprised their daily routine. In fact, the Gemara (Berachos 26b) cites these pesukim as the source of our Patriarchs’ institution of daily prayer.
How can their prayers be compared with that of the Bnei Yisrael, who were surrounded in every direction – with a merciless desert on two sides, the sea in the front, and the point of a spear to the rear – and had no choice but to cry out to Hashem? In what sense can we say that they seized the art of their ancestors?
What we must say, writes Rav Yerucham, is that the Avos had the same desperation in their daily prayers as Bnei Yisrael had in their outcry for mercy and compassion at the edge of the Yam Suf.
At that time, we understood that our lives were on the line, and there was nowhere else to turn; that is the way the Avos lived every day. For them, prayer – with the greatest kavanah – was not just another mitzvah that had to be done; it was a lifesaving act. Even without any specific threat, we must beseech Him for our very existence.
This is the lesson of Rashi. Our challenge is to see this truth, for then we can follow in the ways of our Patriarchs.
9 . Order of Operations: Cute Pshat in Az Yashir –though with no real lesson
אמר אויב ארדף אשיג אחלק שלל תמלאמו נפשי אריק חרבי תורישמו ידי
The enemy said, “I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the booty; my desire will be filled from them; I will draw my sword, my hand will impoverish them” (Shemos 15:9).
This pasuk in Az Yashir quotes Pharaoh as he rallied his troops to chase after Bnei Yisrael. In the sefer Kehillas Yitzchak (Beshalach, p. 68), Rav Yitzchak Reitbard points out that the sequence in the pasuk does not seem to be correct.
After the enemy said, “Erdof asig – I will pursue, I will overtake,” we would not expect him to say, “Achaleik shallal – I will divide the booty.” How can the spoils of war be taken before the actual fighting?
Next, he said, “Timla’eimo nafshi – My desire will be filled from them.” How could his desire be satisfied before his soldiers drew their swords, which is only mentioned in the subsequent phrase: “Arik charbi – I will draw my sword”?
The last phrase is: “Torisheimo yadi – My hand will impoverish them.” This phrase speaks about what ensues toward the end of a battle; we subdue, overcome, and impoverish the enemy. But this is also only mentioned after the enemies have wiped out the opposition and taken the spoils. How can this be?
This is the way we would have expected Pharaoh to state his plans: “First, we will pursue and overtake (Erdof asig). Next, we will draw our swords (Arik charbi). Then, after a heated battle, our hand will impoverish them as we gain the upper hand (Torisheimo yadi). With the tide in our favor, our desire will be fulfilled through them (Timla’eimo nafshi). And only then will we divide the spoils (Achaleik shallal).”
The Kehillas Yitzchak quotes Rav Moshe Yitzchak of Ponovezh, who explains this in a clever way. In Parashas Bo, after receiving the warning regarding Makkas Arbeh, the Plague of Locusts, Pharaoh seemed to relent and asked Moshe, “Mi va’mi haholchim – Who will go?” (Shemos 10:8).
Moshe responded, “Bine’ureinu u’vi’zekeineinu neileich be’vaneinu u’vi’venoseinu be’tzoneinu u’vi’vekareinu neileich – We will go with our youth and with our old, with our sons and with our daughters, with our flocks and with our herds will we go” (ibid. V.9).
The order of those going out also seems incorrect. Why were the youth placed before the old – the bachurim before their elders, their roshei yeshivah?
The pshat is that they were going into a desert, an unpredictable and often hostile environment. Therefore, the Yidden had to be prepared for all eventualities. With this in mind, they put the youth, in the prime of their strength and the most capable in the event of hostilities, at the front. Behind them were the elders, who, although past their prime, were still able to fight. Behind them were the sons and daughters, the young children. And in the rear were the most vulnerable, the animals.
For safety’s sake, they went out from strongest to weakest. But Pharaoh planned on attacking from behind. Thus, when rallying his troops, he described what would occur based on the order that Moshe had given him.
First, the Mitzrim would catch up to the animals, which were in the back. We know from the Gemara (Bechoros 5b) that the animals carried the riches that the Jews had taken from Egypt. That’s why the first step, after chasing and overtaking them, was: “Achaleik shallal – I will divide the booty.” Pharaoh planned on reaching the spoils that were being carried by the animals, even before any real fighting began.
Then they would come up to the children, the sons and daughters, and capture them. For this reason, it says next, “Timla’eimo nafshi –My desire will be filled from them.” By taking the children captive, they would satisfy their desire, even without drawing their swords.
Then the Egyptians would come up to the elders and the youth, the frontline troops. For this part of the plan, they would have to draw their swords: “Arik charbi – I will draw my sword.”
Finally, after a heated and protracted battle, they would subdue the Yidden: “Torisheimo yadi – My hand will impoverish them.”
Pharaoh, a wise and cunning general, used Moshe’s words to develop a strategic battle plan. However, Bnei Yisrael had the ultimate Warrior on their side.
“Eileh va’rechev ve’eileh va’susim va’anachnu be’Sheim Hashem Elokeinu nazkir – Some with chariots, and some with horses; but we in the Name of Hashem, our G-d, call out” (Tehillim 20:8).
10. A Split for a Split: BEAUTIFUL LESSON Connection of Avraham Splitting the Wood for Akeida and Hashem Splitting The sea
וישכם אברהם בבקר ויחבש את חמרו ויקח את שני נעריו אתו ואת יצחק בנו ויבקע עצי עולה
And Avraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his donkey and took two of his young men with him, and Yitzchak his son, and split the wood for the burnt offering (Bereishis 22:3).
It says in the Midrash (Shemos Rabbah 21:8) that years later, when the Jews were leaving Mitzrayim, Hashem said, “Bizechus Avraham Ani bokea lahem es hayam baavur mah she’asah she’ne’emar, ‘Vayevaka atzei olah,’ ve’omer, ‘Vayibaku hamayim.” Rabbi Banya says that it was in the merit of Avraham that Hashem split the sea for the Jews. Before the Akeidah, it says that Avraham split the wood for the offering, and at Krias Yam Suf, the pasuk says that Hashem split the sea – both times with the shoresh of בקע .
What is the middah keneged middah? The magnitude of Avraham’s merit shouldn’t lie in his splitting the wood, but rather in the culmination of the Akeidah, where he tied down his son and brought the knife to bear. Chopping the wood seems incidental to the greatness of the act later on, where he showed his willingness to slaughter his own son at the request of Hashem. Is the Midrash merely using the play on the same word to reference the Akeidah of Yitzchak as a whole, or is there a correlation between splitting the wood and splitting the sea?
Rav Shmuel Vitzik of Baltimore told me the following thought, which he heard directly from Rav Yehoshua Leib Diskin. The Gemara writes that it is easier to carry ten kav (a dry measure) of gold than ten kav of straw. While both weigh the same amount, the gold – with its denser mass – is compact and manageable. That amount of straw, on the other hand, is very bulky; carrying it is both awkward and cumbersome.
If so, why did Avraham chop the wood before embarking on what was to be a three-day trip? The pasuk cited above finds Avraham preparing the wood the very morning he and his party left. Schlepping a bag of chopped wood is more unwieldy than taking an intact log. It would have been easier to take a whole log and do the chopping upon arriving at the as-of-yet unknown destination.
What’s the problem with that scenario? Avraham would take out his trusty hatchet. As Yitzchak looked on, he would carefully chop up the log and then set up the wood on the altar that he built. As willing as Yitzchak may have been to give his life for Hashem, there would still be an element reminiscent of what is known as inuy hadin – not prolonging the mental anguish.
In order to be more compassionate toward his son, Avraham chopped the wood before leaving. He was willing to take on the extra hassle of carrying the cut wood, which was bulkier, in order to alleviate the distress his son would experience were Avraham to chop it on-site.
This same compassion was in play when Hashem split the Yam Suf. Rav Tzvi Pesach brings a Midrash that says that initially Hashem intended to have the water recede as the Yidden walked in. They would walk in the water for the distance of one foot, and the water would recede one foot. They’d take another step, and the water would again back up. Says the Midrash that the compassion of Hashem overcame and He split the water from beginning to end.
Were the water to back up as they progressed, the Yidden would have still been terrified. Although they were witnessing the ongoing miracle of the water receding, they would have faced a mountain of water, and they would always worry if the miracle will continue. There would have been an element of constant dread – inuy hadin. By splitting the sea all the way through, Hashem assured them that the path would stay open.
The Midrash says: In the merit of Avraham splitting the wood before his trip, making it more difficult on himself in order to alleviate the stress of another, Hashem split the water in a way that also alleviated the stress of others. Interestingly, although one Midrash says that Avraham made two cuts of wood, others say that there were 12 cuts. Therefore, the water split into 12 separate paths for the Yidden, as a reward for the 12 pieces that Avraham made.
We see that it wasn’t just the splitting that Hashem did for Avraham’s children in the merit of his splitting, but the compassion with which He did the action; this was the reward for Avraham’s display of compassion toward his son.

11. Actions Speak Louder than Words: Why Were We Told Not To Cry To Hashem By Yam Suf
ויאמר ה’ אל משה מה תצעק אלי דבר אל בני ישראל ויסעו
Hashem said to Moshe, “Why do you cry out to Me? Speak to the Children of Israel and let them journey” (Shemos 14:15).
The Ohr HaChaim and other mefarshim ask several questions on this pasuk. First: Why did Hashem say to Moshe, “Why do you cry out to Me?” To whom should Moshe cry out in prayer if not Hashem? Certainly in times of trouble crying out to Hashem is most appropriate, as we see from Yonah (2:3), “Karasi mi’tzarah li — I called in my distress,” and from Tehillim (118:5), “Min hameitzar karasi Kah — From the straits I called upon Hashem.”
In addition, as Rashi says, Hashem told Moshe that now is not the time for a prolonged tefillah. In this regard, as long as the trouble persists and one’s prayers have not been answered, tefillah ought to remain the order of the day. In truth, it seems as if Moshe’s tefillah actually did save the day. For in the next pasuk (v.16), Hashem told Moshe to raise his staff and split the sea. Why tell him to stop his tefillos when they seem to have elicited the favorable response from Hashem?
Finally, what did Hashem mean when He instructed Moshe to tell Bnei Yisrael to travel? Where were they supposed to go? Behind them were the Egyptians, before them was an uncross-able sea; if He meant after the sea had split, Hashem should have first told Moshe to raise his staff, split the sea, and only then tell Yisrael to travel through the now-dry land.
The Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh explains that at the time that Moshe was davening for Yisrael, there was a counterargument from the middas hadin, claiming that Bnei Yisrael were unworthy of having the water split for them. The Ohr HaChaim cites the Zohar (170b), which tells of how the middas hadin came with the claim that the Jews are no better than the Egyptians, and why do they deserve to be redeemed.
The Ohr HaChaim then tells us that at such times, where middas hadin is against us, tefillos alone will not work; rather, maasim tovim, good deeds, are required to evoke middas harachamim. Hashem thus said to Moshe, “Why do you cry out to Me? As much as I want to perform a miracle, the middas haddin does not allow it. Therefore, speak to Bnei Yisrael and let them travel.”
Only after Bnei Yisrael strengthened themselves with emunah and bitachon — by going into the sea before it was split — could the middas harachamim overpower the middas hadin, enabling Moshe to raise his staff and split the sea. As the Ohr HaChaim concludes, this played itself out when Nachshon ben Aminadav entered the water until it reached his neck. Once the water was at the point of “Ki va’u mayim ad nafesh — For the waters have reached into the soul” (Tehillim 69:2), the sea finally split.
While it’s true that we need to call out to Hashem in times of need, and Moshe was correct in crying out to Hashem and davening for rescue, at that critical time Bnei Yisrael had to actively demonstrate their bitachon. For that was when they became worthy of miracles and wonders.
Perhaps this can be compared to two of the commandments found in Parashas Bo: korban Pesach and bris milah. Rashi (Shemos 12:6) teaches us that only in the merit of the blood of the korban Pesach and the blood of the bris milah were Bnei Yisrael worthy of redemption. However, as we know, Bnei Yisrael had other zechuyos in whose merit they were redeemed: They did not change their names but maintained their Jewish ones; they did not change their language, but continued to speak Lashon HaKodesh; they did not speak lashon hara; and they did not sin in regard to arayos, forbidden relationships (Vayikra Rabbah 32:5). Then why were the two mitzvos of korban Pesach and milah necessary?
Perhaps here, too, at the time in which all the Egyptian firstborn died, middas hadin could have presented the same argument as was made prior to Krias Yam Suf: Why are these better than those? Why don’t the firstborn of the Jews die, too? To offset such an indictment, Hashem had to provide Yisrael with the type of mitzvos that would elicit middas harachamim on their behalf. For this reason, He gave them two mitzvos that have at their core an element of faith and self-sacrifice: dam Pesach, where they openly slaughtered and consumed the Egyptian deity, and dam milah, where they inflicted pain upon themselves for the sake of Hashem. In the zechus of these acts, they were worthy of being saved.
***
Rav Meir Simchah of Dvinsk (Meshech Chochmah ad loc.) has a different take on the specific action required on the part of Bnei Yisrael at the time of Krias Yam Suf. Up to this point, Moshe had stood at the front and Bnei Yisrael had followed him, like sheep following a shepherd. The time had come, though, for Moshe to take a backseat with Bnei Yisrael leading the way.
This is why verse 19 in this perek reads: “Vayisa malach ha’Elokim ha’holeich lifnei machaneh Yisrael vayeilech mei’achareihem — The angel of G-d who had been going in front of the camp of Israel moved and went behind them.” According to our discussion, explains the Meshech Chochmah, the angel of G-d was none other than Moshe, for Hashem’s Prophets are called malachim (see Chagai 1:13; Vayikra Rabbah 1:1). And Moshe, the malach of Hashem, moved from the front of the camp to the back. Tefillah was not called for, but initiative and an inner reserve of faith.
And it was this test that had to be passed to enable Bnei Yisrael to be worthy of Krias Yam Suf. Up to this point, they could not do it on their own and had to be assisted. However, their debut at the time of Krias Yam Suf marked their ascension into an independent and worthy people. They entered the water with little merit but great faith; they left the water a markedly changed people, now independently worthy of the greatest of miracles.
This connects to the words of the Shem MiShmuel (Beshalach 5672), who explains that this was evident at an earlier point in time, when they turned back to Egypt as directed by Hashem (Shemos 14:2). At the time, they were unworthy of redemption. As the Shem MiShmuel explains, their willingness to turn back toward Mitzrayim and listen without question to the command of Hashem was the action that elevated them, making them worthy of redemption and Krias Yam Suf.
***
I would also like to share a Midrash (Shemos Rabbah 21:4) on the subject, with a message that flows straight from the Midrash itself. The Midrash draws a parallel between two kapitlach in Tehillim that begin with the word tefillah:
“Tefillah le’Moshe ish ha’Elokim — A prayer by Moshe, the man of G-d” (90:1), and “Tefillah le’ani chi yaatof — A prayer of the afflicted man when he swoons” (102:1). The same word, tefillah, is associated with the prayer of Moshe, the greatest person, and the prayer of an afflicted and impoverished man. The Midrash explains that to human beings, money talks. A wealthy person is usually listened to, his words heard and accepted. A pauper’s words, on the other hand, are often not even acknowledged but simply ignored. (See Ki Sisa, Moving Beyond Rank and Origin.) But Hashem is different. The tefillah of a giant in stature such as Moshe is not listened to any more than the tefillah of the simplest and poorest person. Before Him, all are equal.
This can be proven, says the Midrash, from the pasuk in Beshalach: When Moshe began to cry out and daven for Yisrael at the Yam Suf, Hashem put an end to his prayer. “Why do you stand and pray? My children have already prayed (Shemos 14:10), and their prayers were accepted.”
One should never think that his tefillah will not be accepted because of his lowly spiritual state. Hashem hears the prayers of the greatest prophet, but He also hears the prayers of the humblest slave leaving Egypt.
As long as we turn to Him, He will turn to us

Halavai

DEAR BAALHABOOZE,HOW AWESOME!
Really a nice hosufa, thank you. Gmar.v’chasima tova

Reb Eliezer, thank you AS ALWAYS

🙂

reb eliezer, it a great question, and i think the second time i mistakenly did it. thank you

AAQ, From your mouth….

rAV hIRSCH EXPLAINS WHY HE TOOK MONEY (VALUBLES) FROM pARAOH BUT NOT mELECH sEDOM.
Avraham had a policy to not accept gifts (whatever the reason was) , that was his chumra. But he cannot be machmir at the expense of others. He owed the hoteliers so he took from Paraoh to repay those creditors. Yet later, while wealthy himself, he had no reason to take a gift from Sedom- with all that it meant

AAQ, you may find this Seforno just in line with what you wrote.

In Parashas Behaaloscha, we read how Miriam spoke negatively to Aharon of Moshe’s separation from his wife. Hashem addressed Aharon and Miriam and faulted them for not appreciating that Moshe’s level of prophecy was far greater than that of any other navi, including them. The Torah then says (Bamidbar 12:9), “Vayichar af Hashem bam vayeilach – Hashem’s anger flared up against them, and He left.”
Usually, a person is first angry about a misdemeanor and then he criticizes the wrongdoer. Here, it is in the reverse. First the pasuk tells us that Hashem chastised Aharon and Miriam, and only then does it say that He was angry. The Seforno (ad loc.) explains that Hashem was angry at them after He criticized them, because they did not admit their sin immediately as David had done. We have no indication that Aharon and Miriam were contrite and humble after being rebuked. Accordingly, the anger was not for what they had done, but for what they had not done.

Cute, selfish selflessness. I like it

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 😉

🙂 if you do like a good English sefer on the Parsha my offer stands. kol tuv

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.

very nice

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

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.

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 — Location/Association
ויגדו לו לאמר עוד יוסף חי וכי הוא משל בכל ארץ מצרים ויפג לבו כי לא־האמין להם:וידברו אליו את כל דברי יוסף אשר דבר אלהם וירא את העגלות אשר שלח יוסף לשאת אתו ותחי רוח יעקב אביהם
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 Yaakov’s spirit was revived when he heard the message Yosef had sent through the shevatim, along with the wagons. The word עגלות (wagons) is connected to the word עגלה (calf), alluding to the עגלה ערופה 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 Yosef’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: “Leave your stuff behind, and I will furnish and provide all the best that Egypt has to offer. And most important, don’t even worry about your business or means of livelihood, i.e., the shepherding. You come here and I will set you up with everything” (based on 45:18, 20).
While this may have served Pharaoh’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. What’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. It’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: Pharaoh’s invitation for the people to come down to Egypt, combined with Yosef’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, “Ah, Yosef understood the message of the eglah arufah!”
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 man’s death. The Gemara (Sotah 45b) asks: Do you think the ziknei ha’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 Yosef’s intentions. It was as if he said to himself, “Not 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.” Seeing the extra set of agalos that Yosef sent, and understanding the message that came along with them, revived Yaakov’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): “Vayakam Yaakov mi’Beer Sheva vayisu bnei Yisrael es Yaakov avihem ve’es tapam ve’es nesheihem ba’agalos asher shalach Pharaoh la’seis oso. Vayikchu es mikneihem ve’es rechusham asher rachshu be’Eretz Canaan vayavo’u Mitzrayimah Yaakov ve’chol zaro ito — 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 — Yaakov and all his offspring with him.”
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), “Achai u’veis avi asher be’Eretz Canaan ba’u eilai — My brothers and my father’s household who are in the Land of Canaan have come to me.” If by that point Yaakov and the shevatim had already come down to Mitzrayim, why did Yosef say, “asher be’Eretz Canaan — who are in the Land of Canaan”?
These three words were what Yosef was working toward and what enabled Yaakov to come down happily. Yosef was in effect saying, “My father and brothers came here because they will be able to maintain and transplant the kosher life they had in Canaan to Mitzrayim.” 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 Hashem’s reassurance (46:4), “Anochi aalcha gam aloh — And I shall also surely bring you up.” 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, Hashem’s chosen nation.

Reb Eliezer thank you