abukspan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 106 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Cherem on sefer “Pshuto Shel Mikra” #2144202
    abukspan
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer, we are not discussing the two volume set from Rav Kuperman. Kol.Tuv

    in reply to: Short & Sweet #2131686
    abukspan
    Participant

    I believe the following would be a good tzu-shtel and the flip side of what Reb Moshe wrote.

    1rst Half Idea – We Learn From Tohu Vavohu To Hard Work And Meet Potential

    The second verse of Bereishi famously describes the state of the earth pre-creation as tohu va-vohu. This term is generally translated as “chaos,” but Rashi interprets it to mean “astonishingly void.” In his view, bohu denotes emptiness or nothingness, while tohu stems from the root t.h.h., which means wonderment or astonishment. Rashi thus explains, “…that a person is bewildered and astonished over its [the world’s] bohu.” The sheer nothingness of the universe causes – in retrospect – bewilderment and shock.

    Rav Moshe Feinstein ( Kol Ram, vol. 3) raised the question as to whether the earth’s primordial state of nothingness is indeed cause for astonishment. One could argue that to the contrary, creation far surpasses pre-creation in terms of the marvel and wonder it evokes. The more a person probes and examines the intricate workings of nature, the more he marvels at the brilliance of the Creator. Why, then, does Rashi speak of the pre-creation nothingness as a source of astonishment? Shouldn’t we be more astonished by the wonder of creation?

    Rav Moshe suggested that Rashi’s comments work off the assumption that nothing could be more jarring and mystifying than unfulfilled potential. Once the world has come into existence, in all its majesty and splendor, one can only wonder how it once did not exist. When we consider what could be achieved, we are astonished when that achievement is not reached.

    The practical implication of this insight, as Rav Moshe discusses, is obvious: each person must strive not merely to achieve, but to achieve to very fullest of his individual potential. As Rashi’s comments suggest, there is no greater tragedy than wasted opportunities and unfulfilled potential; it thus behooves us all to work towards actualizing our individual potential to the fullest, rather than allow these valuable resources go to waste.

    2nd Half Idea – We also learn from Tohu Vavohu that Meeting Potential Is A Prosses Paved With Failures.

    tohu va’vohu is part of the process of creation

    1. The opening of Braishis is the story of creation. Why then are we treated to the introduction of “v’ha’aretz haysa tohu va’vohu,” a description of the pre-creation void? B’shlama if you interpret the pesukim like Ramban, namely, that tohu va’vohu is some kind of building block matter necessary for all else to be created, then I guess it makes sense. But according to Rashi, who understands tohu va’vohu to simply be a void and chaos, why mention it? If you were to describe an artist at work, you would talk about the brushstrokes on the canvas, not the blank canvas that was there before he started to paint. Why talk about what was there before G-d started making our world and the universe?

    Sefas Emes explains that the Torah / Hashem is teaching us about how to create, what creativity means. The artist doesn’t just sit down and produce a great work of art, a great piece of literature. There are dozens of prior sketches that are first tested and discarded, dozens of drafts that don’t make it further than the trash bin. Hashem was “birei olamos u’machrivan.” At first there was tohu va’vohu. This is not pre-creation — this gufa is part of the process of creation. Every act of creation, growth, advancement, always first starts with chaos and void.

    It’s difficult as a parent when your kids are growing up and sometimes it seems like they have no idea what direction that are going in or what direction they want to go in and you wonder why they just can’t get on with it and mature. Yet this is the Sefas Emes — you can’tget the “ye’hi ohr” without first having a little “tohu va’vohu.” And it doesn’t just apply to kids either :

    in reply to: Short & Sweet #2131685
    abukspan
    Participant

    Here is the source from
    Rav Chaim Paltiel

    Rav Chaim Paltiel (Peirushei HaTorah LeRav Chaim Paltiel, Bereishis 2:3) explains the pasuk and its switch of tense in a way that dovetails with our discussion. Hashem wants man to be a partner in the creative process, to be devoted to recreating himself into an improved and better person. The Torah writes that Hashem stopped doing all His work “asher bara,” that He had created, in order for us to be the ones “laasos,” to do and continue where He left off, making us, in a real sense, partners in creation.

    in reply to: Short & Sweet #2129966
    abukspan
    Participant

    If I understood you correctly, the last pshat from Rav Ilan ,is a good tzu-shtel to what you wrote. Piska Tuva

    We read toward the end of Parashat Vayelekh (31:28) of Moshe’s instruction to the Leviyim to assemble the nation’s leaders so he could present to them the poem of Ha’azinu. Rashi, citing the Midrash Tanchuma, raises the question of why the chatzotzerot (trumpets) were not used for this purpose. As we know from Sefer Bamidbar (10:1-10), Moshe was instructed to make two silver chatzotzerot which the kohanim would blow on certain occasions, including to announce the assembly of the entire nation or its leadership. Seemingly, if Moshe wanted to summon the nation’s elders, he should have had the kohanim sound the chatzotzerot. Rashi explains that the chatzotzerot were not used because they were buried that day. The trumpets were not left for Yehoshua, Moshe’s successor, and they buried on the day of Moshe’s death – even before he died – as an expression of the concept, “ein shilton be-yom ha-mavet” (Kohelet 8:8), meaning, that even the most powerful figures forfeit their authority in the face of death. Thus, when Moshe summoned the elders, his chatzotzerot had already been buried, and Yehoshua was not yet the nation’s leader, and so his chatzotzerotcould not be used.

    Rav David Mandelbaum, in his Pardeis Yosef He-chadash, presents three possible reasons for why Moshe’s chatzotzerot were not handed down to his successor. First, Rav Mandelbaum suggests a halakhic reason, noting that Moshe had the formal halakhic status of a king. (The issue of Moshe’s status as king is discussed at length earlier in the Pardeis Yosef He-chadash – Bamidbar, vol. 1, pp. 376-7.) The Gemara in Masekhet Sanhedrin (44a) establishes that after a king’s death, his scepter may not be used, even by his successor. And the Rambam (Hilkhot Melakhim 2:1) rules that all the king’s personal items are destroyed after his death. For this reason, perhaps, Moshe’s trumpets had to be discarded, and were not to be used, even by his successor, Yehoshua.

    In a much different vein, Rabbenu Bechayei, in his commentary to Parashat Beha’alotekha (Bamidbar 10:2), writes that the sounds blown by thechatzotzerot were actually expressions of profound wisdom, which only Moshe, through his unparalleled prophetic capabilities, could understand. The chatzotzerot made by Moshe were buried, and not used by anybody else, as an indication that only he was capable of understanding the deep messages conveyed by the sounds of the trumpets.

    Finally, Rav Mordechai Ilan, in his Mikdash Mordekhai, views the burial of the chatzotzerot as expressing the notion that each leader uses different “instruments” in proclaiming the immutable messages of the Torah. Moshe’s chatzotzerot were not used because leaders should not necessarily look to mimic the precise methods and strategies used by their predecessors. While the laws and values remain the same from one generation to the next – just as the precise same sounds were blown with every set of trumpets in every generation – the “instruments” used by leaders and educators to communicate those laws and values must be altered and modified to suit the needs of each particular age. Yehoshua was, without doubt, to transmit the same Torah as taught by Moshe; however, he was to use different “chatzotzerot,” different tools and media to convey the Torah. Moshe’s trumpets were therefore buried on the day he died, to teach that each leader must choose the means of communication that best suits him and the particular needs of his generation.

    in reply to: Yom Kippur like Purim #2129777
    abukspan
    Participant

    The sefarim (Alshich, Binah Le’Ittim) explain that Haman was only able to bring us to the brink of disaster because we were fragmented and without unity. This is alluded to in his words to the king: “Yeshno am echad mefuzar u’meforad – There is a certain people scattered abroad and dispersed” (Esther 3:8). He was invoking the truism: “United we stand, divided we fall,” and he knew the time was right to strike. In this case, the cure had to be an all-out campaign to promote unity. Esther told Mordechai, “Leich kenos es kol haYehudim – Go gather all the Jews” (ibid. 4:16). If the problem came about due to a lack of unity, the solution could only be realized when we were all gathered together and able to function and act as one.
    This explains the statement in the Gemara (Megillah 13b), “Hikdim shikleihem lishkalav.” Hashem had the Jews’ half-shekel, during the 40 years in the desert, precede and counteract the shekalim of Haman, which were offered to buy the right to destroy the Jews. What impact did the giving of the coins centuries before have against Haman’s coins in the here and now?
    The point behind the half-shekel is to convey that I am not self-sufficient and I can’t do it alone. The most I can contribute is a half, and I need the other person to complete the whole. By commanding the Yidden to give the machatzis hashekel on a yearly basis, starting with the command to Moshe, Hashem inculcated and instilled within the Yidden this facility – the ability to join as one. Whatever my station in life, I am still only a piece of the puzzle, one strand in the beautiful tapestry that is Klal Yisrael.
    That is why when Esther issued her call to have all the people gather, we were able to rise to the challenge. From being scattered and open to attack, we were able to create an impenetrable phalanx, impervious to whatever Haman brought to bear.
    Therefore, the mitzvos on Purim relate primarily to the promotion of friendship and unity among our people: mishloach manos – sending gifts to our friends; matanos la’evyonim – gifts to the poor; and mishteh ve’simchah – drinking and celebrating during a meal.
    Haman claimed we were spread out and scattered, with our defenses down; at the behest of Esther, we united and it was our enemies who fell!
    Let’s see how the same idea works for Yom HaKippurim.
    There is an old dilemma discussed in our sefarim hakedoshim. Some mitzvos are specific to a Kohen and not a Levi, others to a Levi and not a Yisrael, and still others apply to a king and no one else. So how can one individual keep all the mitzvos?
    First, learning about a mitzvah can count as fulfilling it. This is as it says in Hoshea (14:3), “U’neshalmah farim sefaseinu – Let our lips substitute for bulls.” Learning about the mitzvah of korbanos can be equivalent to keeping that mitzvah. Rashi (Yoma 36b) tells us that on Yom Kippur, when the chazzan recites the avodah, it is considered as if we have offered the sacrifices mentioned there. We can bring the same point regarding Torah study. It says in the Mishnah (Pe’ah), “ve’salmud Torah keneged kulam – and Torah study is equivalent to them all.” Perhaps this can be understood to mean that Torah study is the one mitzvah through which all others can be fulfilled.
    There is, however, another explanation. If we truly personify the full extent of “Ve’ahavta le’rei’acha kamocha – Love your fellow as yourself” (Vayikra 19:18), where my success is your success and my suffering is your suffering, then Hashem will consider us as one united people and treat us accordingly. True, no individual can keep all the mitzvos, but as a unified group, we can share the merit for the mitzvos done by others in the group. (See also Ohr HaChaim on Parashas Pekudei 39:32.)
    This was attested to by a miracle that was, according to some, unique to Yom Kippur. The neis of “omdim tzefufim u’mishtachavim revachim – the people stood crowded together, yet bowed down with ample space” (Avos 5:7), which was one of the ten miracles that happened in the Beis HaMikdash. What was the mechanism of this miracle?
    Their level of humility, which came along with achdus, was the critical factor. “Omdim” – When they stood upright, “be’komah zekufah” – with their nose in the air, “tzefufim” – they felt crowded with no tolerance for another; “u’mishtachavim” – when they bowed, lowering their stature and loving their fellow, “revachim” – there was plenty of room for all.
    Perhaps this concept can be used to answer our question regarding forgiveness on Yom Kippur. Hashem performs this miracle in the Beis HaMikdash to show us the nature of the greatest miracle, our forgiveness on Yom Kippur. Just as the phenomenon of the Temple expanding to hold us all was a result of our togetherness and humility, so, too, the kapparah on Yom Kippur is the result of the same achdus and unity. When we get off our high horse and realize that we are all one, miracles occur, including the miracle of physical expansion and the miracle of Divine forgiveness.
    We can now explain a highlight of the avodah on Yom Kippur, which is when the Kohen Gadol enters the Holy of Holies with the incense. Incense is made by grinding down spices. It is the pulverizing and grinding that releases the aroma; the finer the grind, the more potent the scent. All year long, the daily incense is finely ground. On Yom Kippur, however, it is processed even further, making it a powdery product with no identifiable parts (Rashi, Vayikra 16:12).
    Perhaps the Kohen Gadol who enters the Kodesh HaKodashim with the fine powder of the ketores is symbolic of the united Klal Yisrael, in which there are no distinguishable parts. He is representing a people who has bowed down in tolerance, just like the finely ground powder of the incense, in an indivisible group. If we stand united, viewing ourselves as one, Hashem, in His compassion, will treat us as such.
    Now we can explain the Zohar, which compares the Kohen Gadol entering the Kodesh HaKodashim to Esther, who entered the inner chamber of Achashveirosh. Just as the Kohen Gadol enters with the strength of a united Klal Yisrael behind him – as symbolized by the ketores – so did Esther enter with the strength of a united Klal Yisrael behind her. That is why Purim is named after Yom Kippurim; they both represent a victory predicated on the unity and indivisibility of Klal Yisrael.
    I heard from Rav Nachum Lansky that according to this logic, it is not surprising that the heroes of the Purim story are named Mordechai and Hadassah. Hadassah, Esther’s other name, means myrtle, suitable as a spice. The name Mordechai, writes the Gemara, is hidden in the words mar dror, pure myrrh, which is also a spice and is rendered by Targum as meira dachya, which sounds like Mordechai (Shemos 30: 23).
    Mordechai and Esther brought Klal Yisrael to a state of unity, much like the grinding of spices for the ketores.

    in reply to: Yom Kippur like Purim #2129504
    abukspan
    Participant

    its worth knowing the original source linking Purim to Yom Kippurim; it is not like you think and provides room for several strong questions to be asked. See Below. Gmar chasima Tova

    We’ve all heard talk of the relationship between Purim and Yom Kippurim; in fact, the Tikkunei Zohar (Tikkun 21:57b) writes that Purim is named after Yom HaKippurim, because in the future Yom Kippur will be enjoyed and will be changed from a day of affliction to one of pleasure.

    Furthermore, the Zohar understands that Esther’s action, when she voluntarily entered the king’s inner throne room to intercede on behalf of her people, was akin to the Kohen Gadol entering Hashem’s Holy of Holies on Yom HaKippurim with the ketores, incense, to petition and intercede on behalf of his people. Just as the Kohen Gadol puts on special clothing on Yom Kippur, Esther donned royal clothing before approaching Achashveirosh. And just as the Kohen Gadol enters the Holy of Holies wearing his special garments, Esther entered the inner sanctum of King Achashveirosh. And just as Esther found favor in the eyes of the king, so, too, we hope to find favor in the eyes of Hashem and to achieve forgiveness.
    What comparison is there between the avodah of the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur and the actions taken by Esther at that critical juncture of the story of Purim? His entering the holiest place in the world – with the ketores to effect forgiveness for Yisrael – is the holiest of actions. Her entering and offering herself to the king was arguably one of tumah and defilement.
    Is there anything in the method through which forgiveness is achieved on Yom Kippur that is similar to the forgiveness on Purim?

    in reply to: Yom Kippur like Purim #2129503
    abukspan
    Participant

    It is worth knowing the original connection between Purim and Yom Kippurim. See below and the questions that need answering. Gmar Chasima Tova

    We’ve all heard talk of the relationship between Purim and Yom Kippurim; in fact, the Tikkunei Zohar (Tikkun 21:57b) writes that Purim is named after Yom HaKippurim, because in the future Yom Kippur will be enjoyed and will be changed from a day of affliction to one of pleasure.
    Furthermore, the Zohar understands that Esther’s action, when she voluntarily entered the king’s inner throne room to intercede on behalf of her people, was akin to the Kohen Gadol entering Hashem’s Holy of Holies on Yom HaKippurim with the ketores, incense, to petition and intercede on behalf of his people. Just as the Kohen Gadol puts on special clothing on Yom Kippur, Esther donned royal clothing before approaching Achashveirosh. And just as the Kohen Gadol enters the Holy of Holies wearing his special garments, Esther entered the inner sanctum of King Achashveirosh. And just as Esther found favor in the eyes of the king, so, too, we hope to find favor in the eyes of Hashem and to achieve forgiveness.
    What comparison is there between the avodah of the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur and the actions taken by Esther at that critical juncture of the story of Purim? His entering the holiest place in the world – with the ketores to effect forgiveness for Yisrael – is the holiest of actions. Her entering and offering herself to the king was arguably one of tumah and defilement.
    Is there anything in the method through which forgiveness is achieved on Yom Kippur that is similar to the forgiveness on Purim?

    in reply to: Yomim Noraim – How Awesome: #2128598
    abukspan
    Participant

    Dear BH, I’ve gotten lots of glowing feedback to what you wrote. Thank you. Gmar.v’chasima tova

    in reply to: Yomim Noraim – How Awesome: #2128384
    abukspan
    Participant

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

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond: Ki Seitzei – The Pledge of a Lifetime #2123128
    abukspan
    Participant

    thank you good idea ksiva vchasima tova

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond Pinchas – Love Peace and Chase Peace #2108077
    abukspan
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer, thank you AS ALWAYS

    in reply to: Divrei Torah #2107764
    abukspan
    Participant

    You are correct. When the moderator posts it you should enjoy

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond Pesach: great reason we have 4 cups by Seder #2078254
    abukspan
    Participant

    🙂

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond Metzora – Like an Affliction #2076544
    abukspan
    Participant

    Yes, very good

    in reply to: Vayikra 3 – Worth Its Salt: #2068446
    abukspan
    Participant

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

    abukspan
    Participant

    I’m glad you like the pshat,I await your usual spot on comments. I guess you keep better track of when or what I post. Thanks for pointing it out to me.

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond Vayeira – Sense and Sensitivity, #2019121
    abukspan
    Participant

    AAQ, From your mouth….

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond Lech Lecha: Location, Location, Location #2017066
    abukspan
    Participant

    Dear AAQ, how about an answer for a change 🙂

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond Lech Lecha: Location, Location, Location #2016448
    abukspan
    Participant

    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

    in reply to: Kayin builds a city #2012606
    abukspan
    Participant

    I believe the Shaloh HaKodesh says that the decree on Kayin was to be a vagabond – nu vnu baretz, having no permanency of residence. To (attempt to) overcome this deficit he established a city, a place of residency.

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond Bereishis 3— The Slippery Slope of Sin #2012290
    abukspan
    Participant

    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.

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond Bereishis 3— The Slippery Slope of Sin #2011320
    abukspan
    Participant

    Thank you for all the Comments

    in reply to: Classics and Beyond Bereishis – Undiminished Sensitivity: #2010415
    abukspan
    Participant

    Cute, selfish selflessness. I like it

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Shoftim — 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 – 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 – 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 😉

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Classics and Beyond Va’eschanan — Reasons for Rest #1994012
    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

    🙂 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. 🙂

    commonsaychel, reach out to me, I have a sefer to send you 🙂

    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 — 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) רכות – כמשמעו. ויש שואל: למה היו כן, בעבור שחשבו שמחשבות השם כמחשבותיהם, וכל הנבראים ראויות צורתם להיות שוה.
    ובן אפרים אמר: שהוא חסר אל״ף, וטעמו: ארוכות, והוא היה חסר אילוף.
    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 d’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 — Power Should Not Always Corrupt : #1932011
    abukspan
    Participant

    keep answering questions also – good shabbos

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Vayigash — 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 — 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.

    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 — Sense and Sensitivity: #1917400
    abukspan
    Participant

    Reb Eliezer thank you

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Bereishis — 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 — 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 – Viewing the Whole Picture: #1885810
    abukspan
    Participant

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

    פ הרב יששכר פרנד)

    פרשת דברים מתחילה בסקירת משה רבנו של האירועים העיקריים שהתרחשו בשלושים ותשעה השנים, מאז עזבו בני ישראל את הר סיני. כשמשה מזכיר את דרישתם לשלוח מרגלים לסייר בארץ ישראל, טרם כניסתם אליה, הוא מגנה אותם על הצורה הפרועה בה הם הגישו את בקשתם, אך הוא מודה: “וַיִּיטַב בְּעֵינַי הַדָּבָר” (דברים א, כג).

    הגמרא במסכת סוטה, דף לד: מבינה מדברי משה: “וייטב בעיני הדבר: אמר ריש לקיש, בעיני, ולא בעיניו של מקום (הקב”ה)”. הקב”ה היה מודע, ששליחת המרגלים תסתיים באסון, והוא לא רצה שילכו.

    הדבר קשה להבנה. אם הקב”ה ידע שבסופו של דבר, המרגלים ירעילו את דעתה של האומה, נגד ארץ ישראל, מדוע הוא הסכים שילכו. הקב”ה היה צריך לומר למשה, “אמור להם שאני אלוקים, אני קובע את ההחלטות, ואמרתי “לא!”

    ראש ישיבה מפורסם בשם הרב מוטל כץ מסיק לקח חשוב בחינוך מהאירוע הזה.

    לפעמים, ילדים רוצים לעשות דבר שהוריהם חושבים לבלתי הולם. האינסטינקט ההורי שלנו אומר לנו לקבוע את הרצוי, ולאסור עליהם לעשות את מה שהם רוצים. אנו מנמקים לעצמנו את החלטתנו, בזה שאנו נדרשים לחנך את ילדינו, ולכן אנו לעיתים נאלצים לומר “לא!”.

    אבל, האם תמיד ראוי לומר “לא!”?

    אומר הרב כץ, שאנו לומדים מהמרגלים, שקורה לעיתים שעלינו לוותר, גם אם אנו יודעים שהדבר שילדינו מבקשים לעשות הוא טעות!

    הקב”ה הבין שהעם פשוט לא היה מוכן לקבל את סירובו לבקשתם. אילו משה היה חוזר מאת הקב”ה עם מענה שלילי, הם היו חושבים לעצמם “איך אנו אמורים ללכת ולהילחם נגד מדינה, מבלי לשלוח מרגלים. כולם יודעים שאי אפשר ללחום ללא אינפורמציה מודיעינית. אילו כלל ישראל היה עומד על רמה רוחנית מספקת, כדי לקבל את סירובו של הקב”ה, הוא היה אומר “לא!”. אך הקב”ה הבין שהם לא היו מוכנים לקבל את החלטתו בלב שלם, ולכן הוא לא סירב לבקשתם.

    לפעמים, מעיר הרב כץ, לב החינוך הוא לוותר. אנו חייבים לדעת מתי הילדים שלנו מסוגלים לקבל את ה”לא!”, ומתי הם יותר מדי ממוקדים על הדבר שהם מתכוונים לעשות, כדי לקבל את הסירוב שלנו.

    המושג הזה גם מוזכר באופן ברור בגמרא יבמות, דף סה: “ואמר רבי אילעא משום [בשם] ר’ אלעזר בר’ שמעון: כשם שמצווה על אדם לומר דבר הנשמע, כך מצוה על אדם שלא לומר דבר שאינו נשמע”.

    הרב מוטל כץ מוסיף אנקדוטה אישית, שקרתה לו לפני הרבה זמן.

    “יום אחד היגיעו אלי בחורי הישיבה, ובקשו ממני לשנות את לוח הזמנים של הישיבה, לערב אחד. הם רצו להתפלל תפילת ערבית מוקדם מהרגיל.

    “כששאלתי אותם, מדוע הם רצו להתפלל מוקדם, הם הסבירו לי שבאותו ערב מתקיים קרב אליפות במשקל כבד, והם רצו להאזין למשחק ברדיו. אילו היו מתפללים בזמן הרגיל, הם היו ‘מפספסים’ את הקרב.

    “מובן מאליו, שעצם הבקשה הייתה בלתי הולמת, שלא לדבר על ההתענינות המפוקפקת של בחורי ישיבה המקשיבים לקרב בין שני אנשים שהוכשרו להכות זה בזה, עד שאחד מהם כבר לא יוכל לעמוד על רגליו.

    “הבנתי שאם אסרב, הבנים פשוט לא יבינו מדוע סירבתי. בסביבה שבה גדלו, הם היו רגילים לראות אזרחים טובים ומכובדים שלא חסכו כל מאמץ כדי להיות נוכחים במשחקים כאלה. הם ראו בצפייה ובהאזנה לשידורי רדיו של שני מבוגרים החובטים זה בזה, כאמצעי בילוי נורמלי לחלוטין.

    “החלטתי” סיים הרב כץ, “שמכיוון שהבחורים האלה אפילו לא יתחילו להבין מדוע אני מסרב לבקשתם, עדיף יהיה לאפשר להם להתפלל מוקדם ולהאזין למשחק.

    בטוחני, שזאת הייתה אחת בין הדילמות הקשות הרבות שהרב כץ היה צריך להתמודד איתן. הוא עצמו למד בבחרותו לפני מלחמת העולם השנייה, בישיבת טלז’ באירופה. מה היו חושבים ראשי הישיבה דאז על בקשה כזו?

    הרב מרדכי גיפטר סיפר לעיתים קרובות על זיכרונות הגעתו לטלז’, בו גילה שהדבר היחיד שהיה קיים שם הייתה התורה. כמה קשה היה צריך להיות לאדם שגדל במסירות נעלה כזאת לתורה, להרשות לתלמידיו לסיים את הלימודים בשעה מוקדמת, כדי לצפות במשחק גמר של אגרוף במשקל כבד?

    אבל זה היה עולם חדש. תלמידי הישיבה היגיעו מקהילות קטנות שונות מרחבי המדינה. רבים מהם חונכו בבתי ספר ציבוריים בצעירותם. לא היה ניתן לצפות מהם, להעריך לגמרי את ערך התורה.

    כמובן, ישנם הרבה מקרים, בהם הורים ומחנכים חייבים לומר לא. במקרה שלנו, הרב מוטל למד מהמורה הטוב ביותר. אם הקב”ה אפשר לכלל ישראל לעשות דבר שהוא ידע שאינו ראוי, כאשר הוא הבין שאין ביכולתם לקבל את סירובו, הרי שראש הישיבה היה חייב למצוא בתוך עצמו את האומץ לעשות אותו הדבר.

    ואכן כן, הורים יקרים, גם אנו חייבים!

    בלי וירוסים. http://www.avast.com

    in reply to: Dvar Torah Devarim – 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.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 106 total)