The Weekly Shtikle - Ki Savo

    The bulk of this week's parsha is taken up by the "tochacha," literally the rebuke, in which we are warned of the terrible consequences of not heeding HaShem's word. The tochacha is preceded by a shorter, yet significant list of blessings that are bestowed upon us when we do perform the will of HaShem. There is a phraseology that is expressed almost identically in both the blessings and the curses. With regards to the blessings, it is written (28:2), "Uva'u alecha kol haberachos ha'eileh vehisigucha," and these blessings will come upon you and overtake you. Regarding the curses, it is written (28:45), "Uva'u alecha kol hakelalos ha'eileh urdafucha vehisigucha," and these curses will come upon you and chase you, and overtake you.

    Although these pesukim seem extremely similar, R' Chayim Kanievsky, in Ta'ama D'kra, notes that when speaking of the blessings, "vehisigucha" is written without a vuv. However, when speaking of the curses, it is written with a vuv. He offers a fascinating interpretation of this discrepancy.

    In Parshas Naso (Bemidbar 6:23) the Kohanim are instructed as to how to bless the nation. The Torah commands "amor lahem," say unto them. Rashi points out that although the word "amor" could conceivably have been written without a "vuv," aleph-mem-reish, here it is specifically written with a vuv. The Midrash (Bemidbar Rabbah 11:4) learns from this that the Kohanim must not bless the nation hurriedly but rather carefully, intently and wholeheartedly. R' Chayim extrapolates from here that in general, a word written in its shortened form denotes hurry, whereas if it is written completely, it denotes a lack thereof. The meaning here is that the blessings will come swiftly and rapidly. The curses, however, if they must come, will come slowly and gradually. An example of this is the slow progression with which tzora'as inflicts a person, rather than inflicting his body, clothes and house all at once. The purpose of this is to give a person the opportunity to react early and repent before the punishments grow and overtake him.

    As one reader pointed out, this idea is found even more explicitly in the tochacha of Bechukosai where there is a clearly delineated progression associated with the curses whereas the blessings come all at once.

    This theme may also explain the appearance of the word "urdafucha," and they shall chase you, regarding the curses but not regarding the blessings. This refers to the "chasing" period when the retribution is only starting out gradually. At this point, the person is being chased to repent. It is only when he does not answer this call that the curses will overtake him.

    This theme is quite pertinent to the month of Elul, in which this parsha always falls out. We are always given a window of opportunity, even an encouraging push, to repent for our sins before being punished fully. The month of Elul is prescribed for repentance and mending of ways so that we may achieve a favourable judgement for the coming year.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Al Pi Cheshbon: Balancing the Shevatim at Har Gerizim and Har Eival
AstroTorah: Ancient Roots for Oxen by R' Ari Storch

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle - Ki Seitzei

Regarding last week's discussion of the different rules for a newly married man, I received the following interesting feedback:

The Chazon Ish was once asked by an IDF commander if he has a choice to send either a bachelor or a married man with kids on a life-threatening mission, whom should he send. The Chazon Ish said to send the married man with kids. Why? Because the married man has kids to continue his genealogical line whereas the bachelor has nobody. Likewise, a married man with kids, though he worries about those he leaves behind, nevertheless, is leaving behind someone to continue on after him. But the newlywed has nobody. Therefore, he worries more.

I found this psak rather interesting. As many throughout the world are engaged in much speculation over what, if anything, Israel will do about Iran's nuclear sites, I was recalling the blatantly miraculous events of June 7, 1981, when the Israeli Air Force destroyed Iraq's Tammuz nuclear reactor. As the story goes, Ilan Ramon, a"h, was the youngest pilot on the mission. He was also the only bachelor. He volunteered himself to fly the lead position because all the other pilots had families. 

**********

Please see the following discussion concerning whether there is a need to fulfill the mitzvah of Zechiras Amaleik this shabbos.

**********

If you have a few extra minutes, this cute game was developed a couple of years ago to demonstrate the mitzvah of "Shiluach HaKein." The site which hosted it is not up anymore but I was able to rescue the file and host it: http://weeklyshtikle.com/shaleach.html

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Shva vs. Kamatz by R' Ari Storch

Dikdukian: Shiluach Ha..

AstroTorah: A Month of Everything Idolatrous by R' Ari Storch

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle - Shofetim

Considering the tardiness of this week's shtikle, I am including a question/thought which extends to next week's parsha as well. Perhaps by next week I will have more to offer on this point:

In this week's parsha (20:5-8), we are told of the various announcements that are made by the officers before going to war. Anyone who recently built a house,planted a vineyard or betrothed a woman was told to return to their homes and not to proceed to battle. In next week's parsha (24:5), we are also told of the laws pertaining to a newly married man. There we are told that he should not go out the army whatsoever for his first year of marriage for he shall remain home to make his wife happy. It seems clear that the exemption for the newly married man is different than the exemptions mentioned in Shofetim. The newlywed is not to leave his house at all. However, it seems the other exempt individuals are expected to go out with the army, only to be sent back when the officers make their announcement. Perhaps, by doing so, they are made available for other non-combat tasks whereas the newlywed is not even allowed to participate in those simpler tasks.

Another nuance that bothered me about the laws mentioned in Shofetim: We are told, for example, that someone who has recently built a house should not engage in combat, lest he die and someone else will then take possession of his new home. My question: So what? That's just the way it goes? Why would we be worried about someone else taking ownership of his house any more than someone else? It occurred to me, although I did not find any source for this, that perhaps the Torah is not stating our communal worry regarding his house but rather, explaining the worry that might be in the mind of the soldier. In other words, we do not want someone in that position to go out to war because he will be worried about his new house and thus will not be able to focus his attention sufficiently on the battle being waged. While this does make these exemptions slightly easier to understand, it still is difficult to understand why the man who recently betrothed a woman would have more on his mind than a married man with five kids.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Weekly Shtikle: Additional Symbolism of the Shofar

Dikdukian: Two of a Kind

AstroTorah: Elul, the Hollow Tube by R' Ari Storch

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle - Re'eih

    In this week's parsha, we are taught about the meisis, the sinner who tries to seduce another to commit idolatry. We are instructed to deal with the meisis more stringently than with other transgressors. For example, his guilty verdict may not be overturned and we may use entrapment to catch him in the act. 

    The pasuk (13:9) says concerning the meisis, "Lo soveh‚ lo." Rashi interprets soveh‚ as derived from the same root as ahavah, love. He writes that although we are taught "ve'ahavta le'reiacha kamocha," You shall give love to your neighbour as you do yourself, to this man, it does not apply. 

    The gemara in Sanhedrin 45a discusses the place where those who were to be stoned met their ultimate doom. The first step was to push them off a two-story cliff. The gemara asks why the cliff was not simply 10 tefachim high (less than two stories). We learn elsewhere (Bava Kamma 50b) that this depth is enough to cause death. But the gemara answers that this would result in a more painful death and the Torah says "ve'ahavta le'reiacha kamocha," therefore, we must give him a more proper death. However, according to Rashi here, "ve'ahavta le'reiacha kamocha" does not apply to a meisis. Why, then, do we not kill a meisis by pushing him off a ledge only 10 tefachim high? 

    I asked this question of a friend of mine who happened to have had the same question. He told me a friend of his answered from the gemara on 43b which states that he who is to be stoned does viduy, confession, before receiving the death penalty. It seems that even the meisis does this as well. Therefore, after he has confessed his sins, he may now be included in the mitzvah of "ve'ahavta le'reiacha kamocha" and is deserving of a more proper death. Rashi in the parsha is referring to the processes carried out beforehand and thus, he is still excluded from the mitzvah of "ve'ahavta le'reiacha kamocha." (It should be mentioned, however, as one reader pointed out, that the Minchas Chinuch writes that teshuvah is not effective regarding a meisis; if so vidui also won't be operative this is not a valid answer.)

    Perhaps another answer may be offered. Rambam (Hilchos Avodas Kochavim 5:4), in explaining the practical prohibitions connected with this pasuk, writes, "It is forbidden for the seducer's target to show love towards the seducer." It appears from the Rambam's careful wording that the prohibitions discussed in this pasuk are directed specifically at the seducer's target and not the general public. Beis Din, who are responsible for carrying out and overseeing the execution, are thus never absolved of their obligation of "ve'ahavta le'reiacha kamocha" toward the meisis. 

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
AstroTorah: Season's Greetings by R' Ari Storch

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com