Forum Replies Created
b’rshus is chayav unless someone else is poshea; then b’rshus is o’nes.
When both the mazik and nizik are b’rshus its like both are poshea and the mazik is chayav if he is mazik him with a mayseh.
But if he is mazik him in a bor way, then by both b’rshus the mazik is patur, since if both were poshea the ba’al habor is patur.
So it turns out that bor b’rshus is chayav only if the other is o’nes gamur. If the nizik is poshea every bor is patur, but if the nizik is b’rshus then a regular bor is chayav but a bor b’rshus is patur.
A different tosphos argues on this. This approach holds that two b’rshus shows favor to the nizik, allowing him the o’nes, and the mazik is always chayav by shneyhem b’rshus. This tosphos holds that the reason the guy in front stopping needs to be poshea (to be michayev him as a bor) is only because if he wasn’t poshea, then the guy in back would have been poshea and then the first guy b’rshus would have been patur. The R”I can’t hold this, however, because he holds that the second guy is b’rshus about not watching where he is going regardless of what the first guy does.
The concept of bor breshus is as follows.
Sometimes society allows people to have boros and they need not watch it, but they are still chayav when they are mazik. The reason for this is as follows. The reason why you need not watch the bor is because people are not usual to watch such boros (that are usual to make). Your not a complete o’nes, because you are capable of watching it. What you have, though, is a half baked o’nes (similar to when your kid tells you “but everyone does it!”). This half o’nes allows you not to watch it, because people generally do not do so, but it is not enough of an o’nes to patur you if it is mazik.
Sometimes, however, you are patur with such an o’nes. The gemarah says if it is not usual for people to watch were they are going on the road, they need not pay for damaging the things they step on. We will shortly see why this is different.
Lets first go to the concept of shneyhem brshus, which is also chayav. It is considered shneyhem breshus if two people bump head on into each other, because people generally don’t always look out so much for such things. The basic idea is that the mazik is chayav, but there is a seperate ptur for the mazik which sometimes applies which I won’t go into now.
According to the RI’s pshat in Tosphos, if someone is ahead of you walking in the same direction, you only are careful about him in the begining, to better choose a not direct path behind him, but if this is not possible, you don’t watch him all the time, and if he stops and you bump into him, you are not poshea and are patur from being mazik him. Tosphos asks why is this different from shneyhem bershus that is chayav?
Tosphos answers, because the guy who stopped was poshea. We now have the answer for before as well. The person who placed the kad was also poshea. Even though, as explained before, the pshea of the nizik does not at all patur the mazik (because the nizik is gramah), here the heter for the mazik is because he is o’nes. We only don’t consider his o’nes an o’nes when nobody else was poshea, but when someone else is poshea, we do consider his o’nes an o’nes. The other party does not need to be completely free from responsibility for the other to be chayav. Even when both are b’rhus, both have a half o’nes, and the mazik is chayav. Since both have a half o’nes, we say that both are considered poshea, and when both are poshea, the mazik is chayav.
However, the mishnah says that if the guy in front stops and the second guy gets damaged he is chayav, and the same tosphos says because the first was poshea. Why does the first have to be poshea in this case? Didn’t we just say that both can be b’rshus and the mazik is chayav? Both can have the half o’nes and still the mazik is chayav!
If you go back to the rules of two posh’im you should be able to figure out the answer.
By shneyhem b’rshus they both have a half o’nes. Such an o’nes is considered poshea, unless we can pin another who is poshea; then we consider the half o’nes an o’nes. When both are b’rshus, we can’t pin anyone more than the other, so we consider both to be posh’im.
When the guy in back is mazik the guy in front (who stopped), if both are posh’im the mazik is chayav. Thats why tosphos had to say that the guy who stopped is poshea, so the back guy gets the heter of b’rshus.
But when the second guy gets damaged, the first guy who stopped damaged him in a bor type of way. Everyone agrees here that two posh’im make the mazik patur. As such, shneyhem b’rshus is not enough here, because they will be like two posh’im and the mazik is patur. As such, tosphos had to say that the first is poshea in this case too. Since he is poshea, now the second guy is not considered poshea, because he gets the o’nes of his half o’nes since the other was poshea. Now the bor guy in front is chayav.
One last point about why the person going into the bor is a mayse nizik, while the the owner of the chararah was mazik himself. In both cases there is another person who was also poshea. By bor, the person who built the bor is poshea, and by the chararah the person who didn’t watch his dog is poshea.
But the person who owns the chararah is responsible for an object that is mazik, namely, the chararah. When you are responsible for such an object, you are mazik yourself. By the bor, the object that is mazik is the bor, and the person who falls in is not responsible for it. He may be doing the mayse that causes the bor to be mazik him, but he is not the responsible party for the thing that causes the hezek. As such, he can only be nizik himself and not mazik himself.
Short summary of two posh’im
1) two posh’im (owners of dog and chararah) cause hezek, both chayav. If the damage is to the gdish of one of them, the other guy pays his half.
2) nizik is poshea first causing the mazik to smash his thing, the mazik is fully chayav, because the nizik is gramah. However, the inyan of kol hamishaneh etc. may sometimes apply.
3)nizik is poshea second and stupidly causes the mazik’s peshia to be mazik him. According to rashba’m the mazik is always patur. According to others this is only true for bor, because you (or the animal) are doing the action of going into it.
The machlokes is when a person was poshea with a fire and an animal did not run away. But if a person did not remove a coal placed on him by another, all agree that the mazik is patur, because adam bikavanah paters the mazik. However, the gemarah says that a person is only poshea for not removing a hurt to himself, but he is not poshea by not removing a coal placed on his clothes, because he just wants the other guy to pay for it.
It is exactly because I know whats out there that I wrote what I did. I know that people don’t fight the yetzer and can’t find it within themselves to be deprived. But why should this stop you from the truth that all our earthly desires are hevel havalim (emptiness of emptiness).
Even if a person does not change his behavior at all, but merely recognizes that what he does is the total stupidity of the yetzer hara, such a person has reached a much higher level and has done himself great good.
There is great beauty and relaxation and no deprivation when we realize the truth of the stupidity of worldly desires.
asdfghjkl: Great vort.
We can add that this message is great for bashalach also because the yidden were worried about the Egyptians chasing them into the sea, but their salvation came in the blink of an eye.
Moreover, Moshe basicly told them to shut up. The gemarah ta’anis compares people to trees. Imagine if trees would complain like people. They would go on and on. On every leaf they would wail,”Oy vey my leaf fell off.” The lesson is that we need to shut up like trees and let things work themselves out.February 9, 2009 6:19 am at 6:19 am in reply to: The Cunningness Of Hashem So Apparent In The Creation #637429
In addition to my previous post.
God created us with an intense desire to seek Him. Why did He do that? He did so because He wants us to.
The best thing anyone can do is to speak to your innermost self. Let down all your barriers and stupidities and talk honestly with your soul. Your soul is a part of God, so you will speaking with Him as well. Search out what is just and pure. See the world and yourself without your attitude and baseball cap. Cry a little. And come home.February 9, 2009 6:08 am at 6:08 am in reply to: The Cunningness Of Hashem So Apparent In The Creation #637428
I’m not sure where all this thread is holding, and I’m not about to read it all, but here are some points.
1) A God that can make the world is far out awesome. He can do a hell of a lot.
2) Our world that God made logically reflects upon him.
Do we not love our children dearly? God is no less; He loves us. Since He loves us, He cares and guides us in a way that is most beneficial.
***Dvar Torah for Sunday***
For Parshas Bashalach (by me)
Now the Midrash will give us a great insight. The Midrash says that had Aharon known that the Torah would say about him that he would greet Moshe and be happy in his heart, he would have greeted Moshe with tupim and mecholos.
I’ll do sunday again
If someone already made this joke forgive me. If not here goes.
I thought parshas Haman is said on Purim!
Jmatt: my vort for next week is also about the womens greater song, but it involves other diyukim.
Imagine what it would be like if your food was directly connected to your religiosity. You would then see that your relationship with Hashem was the same as your food. You would see that your life and sustenance was dependent upon your relationship with Him.
This was the lesson of the manna.
The manna was their food and it was directly connected to their observance of the ratzon HaShem.
Next week I’ll post a femenist vort on Bashalach.
BTW does qwertyuiop work one floor up from you?
****Dvar Torah for Sunday****
The Privilege of Mitzvos (by me)
The meat, at night, would show them that HaShem took them out of Egypt. The bread, in the morning, on the other hand, would show them the honor of HaShem.
How are we to understand this?
mw13: Thanks for sticking up for me. I hope this means you’ll be looking forward for my Dvar Torah, which will be a good one.
i’ll do sunday again
Jmatt: Concerning Yehoshua and Calev, the ba’al Haturim also explains the event of Yoseph calling the brothers spies in a similar way.
Yoseph called the brothers (miraglim) spies told them that they would produce the bad miraglim, while he would produce Yehoshua. Yehuda answered that they are not spies was his way of saying that he would produce Calev.
Dvar Torah for vaera (please verify for yourself any factual statement that I make, by looking it up.)
Question 1: What was special about the separation of the Yidden by Arov and Dever that the Torah mentions this point by them. Were not the Yidden separate by the first three plagues also?
Question 2: For the first three plagues, Pharaoh did not listen to them. For Arov and Dever it states that he (just) did not send them. Why then by Shechin does it go back to say that he did not listen to them. What caused his reversal?
Question 3: The magicians are mentioned by the first three plagues but not by Arov and Dever. Why are they again mentioned by Shechin?
Question 4: Why did HaShem by Shechin tell Moshe to specifically throw the ashes up in front of Pharaoh’s eyes?
Believe it or not, I will answer all these questions (and more).
The reason why the seperation of the first three plagues is not important is because Aharon used the stick to bring them about. It seemed to Mitzrayim that HaShem did not care about the Yidden, but that Moshe and Aharon were channeling the power of HaShem, through the stick, for their own purposes. The first three plagues thus proved the first lesson “that I am HaShem,” but they did not prove the second lesson (stated by Arov) “that I am HaShem in the land,” namely, that HaShem Himself was controling the situation on the ground and separating between them.
Arov and Dever, on the other hand, came to prove the second lesson (that HaShem was in control). This is why there is no mention of the stick or any intermediary being used by them.
HaShem wanted to harden Pharaoh’s heart by Shechin and get him to go in reverse, so he therefore told Moshe to throw the ashes up in front of Pharaoh’s eyes. This use of an intermediary made Pharaoh reject the second lesson, which was based on not using an intermediary. This is why Pharaoh went back to not listen to them, as by the first three plagues. This is also why the magicians were called back again, just like the first three plagues.
The reason HaShem wanted Pharaoh to reverse (by Shechin) was to make the next lesson (by Barad) more powerful. Pharaoh thought he could analyze and understand how the makos should continue, such that when he “caught” a flaw, he thus rejected the second lesson. Pharaoh similarly questioned why HaShem needed his permission to let the Yidden go. The next lesson by Barad “that there is none like me in all the land” came to prove that HaShem is beyond prediction and understanding. Moreover, HaShem (by the warning for Barad)specifically answered why He “needed” Pharaoh’s permission. HaShem said that He really didn’t need it, but that he wanted to show His streangth through the makos, which would come about through Pharaoh’s refusal.
Did you like that?
Shkoyach: The Divrei Torah that I have posted are my own, which I have developed over the years.
Dvar Torah for Sunday.
Pharaoh had been told that they would leave on a three day journey. After darkness, he was willing to send them, if they left collateral. Since they would not do so, he was convinced that they were planning to flee. As such, Pharaoh gave his final offer and would do no more under any circumstances. This is why Pharaoh said that Moshe could no longer see him, and that if he did, he would die. Pharaoh was clearly ready to fight to the death and not let them go as they pleased.
The question then is: why did he let them go after the next plague?
Why was this lesson different than the lesson by arov, where HaShem said that He would separate between the Yidden and Egypt?
I hope you enjoyed this.
I will do Sunday.
asdfghjkl: great pshat.
When the wife works and the guy (really) learns, it is a positive thing in all directions. What have women been fighting for, for who knows how long: the equal right to work. They make money, and gain great respect and status. This might infringe on a marriage, because the husband may feel like a loser. But if the husband is really shtieging away and the husband and wife appreciate each other, it’s a beautiful thing.
This does not mean that the wife has to do it. It just means that it is a valid approach.
There is another issue besides kidush/chilul HaShem, namely, darchei shalom. For this reason, we give tzedacka to poor goyim.
Moreover, the gemarah berachos (17a) states that one should increase Shalom even with a nochri in the shuk. The gemarah continues about R’Yochanan Ben Zakai that nobody ever preceded to give him shalom, even a nochri in the shuk.
Querty: The psaht I heard is that it doesn’t matter whether or not you are able to accomplish something. If something is meaningful to you, your emotions make you reach out for it.
Two more mekoros for wives supporting.
Noda bashiarim ba’alah bshivto im ziknei aretz. The husband sits and learns. Sadin asita vatimkor vichagor natina lakina’ani. The wife works.
Another mekor for wives supporting is from the king of beasts, the lion. The female lioness hunts, gathers, and what not. And the male lion, well you know…
Thus, when a man learns Torah, he is a king, like the lion, and the wife supports them.
asdfghjkl: shkoyach!!! (and what about the one before on mi anochi; did you see it?)
S.Y.: Chazack Ve’ematz!!
Dvar Torah for Sunday
By hail, locust, and darkness, HaShem told Moshe to stretch forth his hand. If so, why by hail and locust did Moshe stretch forth his staff, and by darkness he did not? (Look it up!)
The servants were able to do so by locust because it was then within the letter of the law to do so, because the plague of hail on the fearing servants as well (on their field produce) and the warning for locust already showed the need to do more. But hail came upon them without indication or further warning. And after the warning for locust, Pharaoh and the servants did what they needed to do, but the plague still came on them without indication or further warning. The plague showed that one is held responsible for not doing more. This message was for the yidden.
Darkness was not a sign because locust already showed them that they have to do more, and they did not.)
asdfghjkl: Why do you say that? Is it because I did not say: I know we need a mechitza?
asdfghjkl: As they say, e’ven ma’asu habonim…
Chofetz: that was a great vort.
Mod: sign me up for whenever.
I just realized I have a written up already piece for Shemos. In my unhumble oppinion, its really good.
You have Sunday – thanks! YW Moderator-72
Great pshat: pashut. I have nothing to add to this one.
If you look for it, the yad HaShem is clear. And if you don’t look for it, you’re asking for trouble.
I think we need a mechitza.
At the end of the parsha, things get worse for the yidden, and Moshe complained to HaShem about it. HaShem said to him, atah tir’eh, now you will see, but not in eretz Yisrael (Rashi).
The first idea here is that it is always darkest before the dawn. It was easy for them to believe in HaShem and Moshe as long as things went well. HaShem gave them a nisayon to test their emunah.
It says (and by now we know the song) that Moshiach does not come unless there is hesech hada’as. The song asks, how can we lose focus for Moshiach? I beleive the answer is based on what I wrote above. When Moshiach comes, it will be like in Mitzrayim. Things will seem great, but then turn for the worse, to test our emunah. This turn for the worse is the hesech hada’as, because it will not be on a silver platter to hope for him.
A second idea here is a limud zechus for Moshe Rabeinu. Think about it. Things were getting worse, and who knows exactly what would be. It seems to me that it may be worth it to so to speak “provoke” HaShem into getting agry at you for your lack of emunah, to thereby get an assurance from Him that all will suddenly become good. Atah tir’eh has two opposite meanings. One is that now you will see, but not later. On the other hand, now you will see (the miricles) is an assurance that all would now be well. Everything has a price. That assurance came with a price for Moshe. Perhaps it was worth it.
Squeak. You really shouldn’t take issue with the main idea that yashrus said, just with the way he presented it. The main idea why woman say keritzono. One might suffice themselves with the simple pshat that it was His will to create them that way. Yashrus presented the pshat, which I’ve heard before, that a stam Woman is more refined (in many ways) and like HaShem. I gave a pshat that tends to the kabbalistic side of things. But the reason for men saying shelo asani isha is as you have said, as the gemarah so states.
asdfghjkl: Thanks for the compliment. You have fine middos like Aharon, because your comments, on all the Divrei Torah, probably keep this thing going.
Pashuteh Yid: great pshat!
I will add to it. Now that we have the Rashba’s teretz for the issur of ba’al tigra, why is the other heter used for the mitzva of blowing shofar, namely, that the chachamin are oker bshev v’al ta’aseh. Lichaora, you can only use the extra streangth of takanos chazal in regard to ba’al tigra becacause it is kollel all the mitzvos and chazal similarly make takanos for all the mitzvos. But on each particular mitzvah, you must use the stam heter of shev va’l ta’aseh.
Dvar Torah for Wednesday January 14
Aharon had exemplary character traits (????), as we know that he sought and pursued peace. The pasuk thus states that the oil flowed upon Aharon to be the Cohen Gadol, ?? ?? ??????, because of his (fine) ???? (Maharsha Horius 12b).
Since the end of the chapter speaks about Aharon, the brothers of pasuk (133:1) are Moshe and Aharon, who dwelled together in unity. Aharon helped Moshe take Bnei Yisrael out of Egypt. He also joined Moshe at Sinai, and Moshe inaugurated the mishkan for which Aharon was the Cohen Gadol.
(This is not for my wednesday vort).
The ratzon of HaShem in the creation was the creation of man. The pasuk says Elokim said to make man in his image of Elokim. In Kabbalah, Elokim is in the gevurah realm, which is female.
The other ratzon of HaShem was His resting on Shabbos on the seventh day. The seventh day in kabbalah is malchus, which is female. Shabbos is therefore a queen, and it contains the word bas (daughter). Moreover, in the beracha for Naftali (in Devarim) it states Naftali ??? ????. This is a remez for the connection between ???, the seventh day, and ratzon.
To make a long story short, the ratzon of HaShem is female. This is why females say sheasani keritzono, that they were made like his ratzon.
??????? spelled backwards is ??? ????, peace and frienship.
In my Dvar Torah about Dovid and hands I made a typo. This is how it should end.
Memeilah, Zerach stook out his hand. He wanted Dovid to come from him! But his hand was pulled back and Peretz broke forth! So Dovid descended from him!
I will add another Dvar Torah that expands on the theme of areivus.
I mentioned how Yehuda’s areivus for Binyamin was a wonderful thing to repair the hatred between the sons of Leah and Rachel, and that klal Yisrael are areivim ze la ze. In areivus we don’t overide each other, but work together in peace and friendship.
In halacha there are three eiruvs, and they are also about promoting peace and frienship. An eiruv techumin allows you to go to someones kidush or bris (that live far away) and promotes peace and friendship among people. The eiruv chateiros allows you to carry in your neighborhood and promotes peace and friendship among neighbors. The eiruv tavshilin lets you cook on Yom Tov for Shabbos and promotes peace and frienship between husband and wife.
Here is the amazing part. ??????? is the mesechta in shas that discusses eiruv techumin and eiruv chateiros. ??????? spelled backwards is ??? ???, which alludes to peace and friendship. ??? alludes to the pasuk ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ????? ??????. So ??? is peace, and a ?? (Raya) is a friend. So ??? ??? is peace and friendship.
I can: Thanks for the compliment.
About edits: YWN can moderate (approve) the edit posts just like the other ones.
Thank you anon. I also hate my typos and other mistakes. Its great to be able to edit your own posts as I have done on other forums.
There are some people who might have an underlying motive to be mekarev you.
There are others, however, that don’t have such a motive. They allow you to make your own choices, but they want you to make an informed decision. Learning with them will allow you to gain the information you need to make an informed choice. I say you should do it, but be very careful about who the person is. Being pushed into something is horrible. Being accepted and cared for is great.
Why worry about your friends. Your friends don’t have to know that you learn with someone for say an hour a week.
I can do wednesday or thursday
Wednesday it is. Thanks. YW Moderator-72
The gemara about yilbash shechorim is in three places, Kidushin 40a, Moed Katan 17a, and Chagiga 16a.
Tosphos in chagiga and kidushin bring a pshat from R’ Chananel that doing those various things will break his yetzer and he won’t end up sinning, but Tosphos in chagiga argues that the gemara implies otherwise. Tosphos in eiruvin 41b also shares this view. The gemara there is about the three things that force a person to sin, and tosphos adds the fourth one based on the gemara above.
Perhaps what R’ Chananel meant is that its not a free heter to do some trick and live it up as you please. To this R’ Chananel says that the objective is to break the yetzer (by mourning ones sorry state) so that he will eventually get the sin out of his system.
Thank you moderator.
The truth is that I have very strong feelings about these things.
From time to time I come across people who just don’t get it. They seem to have no understanding of the matzav we find ourselves in. To them it’s very simple, just don’t sin, and if you did, do teshuva and don’t sin again.
Evidently they didn’t see the gemara that one may not have control or may have lost control. And these very people don’t seem to realize their own peckel of sins that they do all the time. Loshon Hara, kedushas beis hakeneses, etc. etc.
I just want people to know that they should not lose hope. Even with lost control there is so much that can be done. And the best benefit is humility and reliance upon HaShem.
Hopefully, soon, we’ll be out of this mess, and the gevaldiga nation of ours will shine forth with its true colors. Just like in mitzrayim, halalu ovdei avodah zara vehalalu ovdei avodah zara. ***edited*** Yidden want to be good. period.
It seems the moderator nixed a post of mine. Perhaps it was a bit too heavy. I will therefore keep it light.
A person should never sin and think its o.k. because he will do teshuva for it.
But even this sin has teshuva. First you have to do teshuva for thinking it’s o.k. to sin thinking you will do teshuva. Then you can do teshuva for the sin.
My words before are based on the gemara. I was talking about aino yochol lichvos yitzro.
The gemara says three things force a person to sin, goyim, poverty, and depression etc.
Tosphos says their is a fourth, but it is something that the person himself is at fault for. The fourth is if you sin enough times that you can no longer control yourself.
Either way, lemaysah your no longer in control, and the gemarah tells you what to do.
The gemara says yilbash shechorim (be sad and mourn over your lowly state) and do the sin privately. It’s not a trick in order to live it up. It is a way to act when you can’t do anything else.
The sad fact is that we sin and continue to sin and have lost control over many things.
The above gemarah gives us the way for teshuva on these things. Be sad, be humbled, and don’t flaunt it. And be happy when HaShem purifies you with yesurin. This will put you on HaShem’s team, velo yidach memenu nidach.
Don’t lose this great opportunity to gain humility and rely on HaShem’s mercy. This may even be the reason we are in such a state.
When moshiach comes and places us in an environment of kedusha, we, like in mitzrayim, will go from the 49th level of tuma, to the greatest tahara, because we were humbled and unhappy with our previous state, and we will jump at the opportunity to be the best we can, in a world of kedusha.
None of of what I said is a heter to sin, but it is a way of dealing with the fact that we already do.
Note from YW Moderator-72. The other post was a very long post and as you say “heavy” – it was a good post, however, sometimes I like to read it over a few times before and think through it before I press the approve button. Sometimes, I give the other Moderators a chance to see it. The current and how you presented it is better than the original. </strong)
Major disclaimer for everything I said! (even though some people won’t get it).
None of of what I said is a heter to sin, but it is a way of dealing with the fact that we already do.
Here is a dvar Torah that explains more about Yehuda fixing up the sin with Yoseph, and it also continues on the theme of miyadi tivakshenu, from my hand you will ask of him.
Reuvain also wanted to accept responsability for Binyamin, but Yaakov did not listen to him. Let’s look at the difference between Reuvain and Yehuda. Reuvain placed the bad result (my two sons shall die if I dont bring him back) before taking responsability (give him into my hand and I will return him). Yehuda, on the other hand, said the responsability (I will guarantee him from my hand you will ask him) before the result (that he would lose his olam habba). This shows that Yehuda was more interested in the responsability, while reuvain was more interested in avoiding the bad result. Who would you trust more?
Secondly, the gemarah says that Reuvain’s words of responsability are kablanus. A kablan must pay up even if the lender has money. This means that he does not work with the lender to see if he has money or not. This means that Reuvain was detached from Binyamin. He would protect Binyamin only because he would protect himself from losing his children. This did not fix the sin of hating Yoseph, so Yaakov did not trust him.
Yehuda on the other hand said areivus, and Yisrael are similarly areivim ze laze. An areiv pays only if the lender does not have money. Yehuda would work with Binyamin. If Binyamin could protect himself, Yehuda would allow it. If not, Yehuda would protect him. By working with Binyamin, this showed that he loved him, not only himself. Who would you trust?
Now here is the amazing part.(tell me if you flip out)
Yaakov said to lavan, a trayfa I did not bring you, I would make up its loss (anochi achatena) miyadi tivakshena. The trayfa is Yoseph, as it states, tarof taraf Yoseph. Yaakov (propheticly) said that he would make sure that the loss of Yoseph would be fixed up (anochi achatena), and that he would be responsible for it (miyadi tivakshena).
Now Yaakov simply had to wait for the son who said the same thing. Yehuda copied his theme and his words. Yaakov said anochi achatena miyadi tivakshena, and Yehuda said anochi e’ervenu miyadi tivakshenu. When Yehuda said anochi e’ervenu this is the same as anochi achatena, because the areivus (of loving Binyamin) fixed up the sin of hating Yoseph. And the responsability of miyadi tivakshenu is the same as Yehuda’s miyadi tivakshena. Because Yehuda said the same thing, Yaakov trusted him.
Moreover, the one that would fix the sin of Yoseph (anochi achatena) would thereby be worthy of Dovid Hamelech and moshiach. Yadi (my hand) is Dovid (see before)and tivakshena is moshiach that we are mevakesh. Yehuda said anochi e’ervenu and fixed the sin of Yoseph so he merited miyadi tivakshebnu, Dovid and Moshiach.
Moreover, as I stated before, Dovid, yadi, would also be asked (tivakshenu) of Binyamin in regard to shimi ben gera and Mordechai. And ?????? alludes to ?? ???, and Mordechai is called ben yair, ben shimi (ben gera), ben kish, ish yimini.
Moish, what about olam habba?
Ignorance may be bliss, but don’t be sad about what you now know. You now know that HaShem, the real HaShem, loves you. Don’t worry so much about the pressure or the guilt. HaShem knows the matzav (no plug intended). Some people never sinned, but the Avos were greater than them even though they did sin, because they accomplished much more. Focus on the many things that you do good. Dovid Hamelech blazed us a path of tikkun with sin.
Everyone should know that HaShem made two ways to shleimus. Either by being a tzadick, or by tikkun with sin. Even though sinning is not lechatchila, the path of tikkun with sin is not bedieved, because HaShem knew good and well that most people would use it. Moreover, teshuva turns the sins into merits! I know that most people nowadays (including myself) are hardly capable of proper teshuva. But listen to this insight on the age old question of why we do teshuva on Yom Kippur even though we know we will go back and sin. The answer is that it is teshuva to be regretful and unhappy about our sins even though we are addicted to doing them. This is the main thing: don’t be happy about your sins and don’t flaunt them, and accept with love any yisurin HaShem gives to cleanse you. Kabalas mitzvos is not neccesarily that you will always do them. Kabalas mitzvos means that you accept responsability for them, to either do them or accept the yisurin for not doing them.
HaShem wants you to be on his team. He would like you to be a good player, but as long as your on his team your o.k. Goyim, sonei Yisrael, are not on HaShem’s team. People who flaunt their sins publicly are not on HaShem’s team. People who are addicted to sin, but are ashamed of it and keep it private, are on HaShem’s team. If your on HaShem’s team, more than you have to worry about reaching shleimus, HaShem has to worry about it, because lo yidach mimenu nidach.
Trust me, a person who is addicted to sin, but is humble because he is ashamed of it and hopes that HaShem will purify him, is better off than someone who is not humble. Even if they do dikduk hamitzvos, HaShem will tell them here is your penny, it’s not worth any more, because you were not humble. The best side affect of sin is that it can make you humble!
None of this is a heter to sin, but it is a way of dealing with the fact that we already do.