The Weekly Shtikle - Toledos

This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmas my rebbe and Rosh HaYeshivah of Yeshivas Ner Yisroel, Harav Yaakov Moshe Kulefsky, zt"l (Yaakov Moshe ben Refael Nissan Shlomo) whose Yahrtzeit is this coming Tuesday.

 

    As Rivkah Imeinu endured her difficult pregnancy, she began to ask herself questions. She ponders (25:22) "Im kein, lama zeh anochi," if so, wherefore am I thus? Or, more simply, why am I doing this? Rashi explains that Rivkah was questioning why she had yearned and prayed for this pregnancy. On the surface, this certainly seems like doubt on her part. But I believe the end of the pasuk shows that not to be the case.

 

    Rivkah is teaching us a great lesson in dealing with the emotions of doubt. Inside, she was certainly feeling that this pregnancy was not "what she bargained for." Her approach, however, was not to give up and to declare her efforts a lost cause. Rather, she knew that certainly there was a purpose in all of this, a reason for her to endure and fight on. This is evidenced by her immediate visit to Sheim to seek guidance from HaShem. Rivkah teaches us that everything has a purpose. As we face trials and tribulations in our lives, whatever feelings we may have emotionally, our first course of action must always be "lidrosh es HaShem," to search for a higher purpose. It is perfectly legitimate to ask, "Why?" The challenge is to make sure that it is not a rhetorical question.

 

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: (From the) The Fats of the Land

Dikdukian: Be'er Sheva / Shava

Dikdukian: I will eat, You will eat

AstroTorah: Yaakov and Eisav's Interesting Birthdays by R' Ari Storch

AstroTorah: When is Rosh Chodesh? by R' Ari Storch

AstroTorah: Fighting in Kislev by R' Ari Storch

AstroTorah: Sweet Fifteen by R' Ari Storch

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

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

The Weekly Shtikle - Chayei Sarah

Today, the 21^st of Chesvan, is the  Yahrtzeit of my great uncle, Rabbi Lord Immanuel Jakobovits, z"l. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Yisroel be Yoel.

 

    When Avraham requests an audience with Efron HaChiti, the pasuk (23:10) recounts "And Efron was sitting in the midst of B'nei Cheis. Rashi here comments that the word "yosheiv," meaning sitting in the present tense, is written without a vav. Without vowels, it may be read "yashav," in past tense. This, suggests Rashi, implies that he only now sat amongst them. The term sitting amongst them implies a position of stature. Here, Efron had just been appointed judge.

 

    This explanation of Rashi should sound rather familiar. Just one week ago we had almost the comment fro Rashi with regards to Lot. When the angels arrived (19:1) Lot was sitting at the gates of Sedom. Rashi interprets sitting at the gates to refer to a position of judgement and again the missing "vuv" insinuates that this promotion had just taken place. Certainly, this abnormal spelling must be addressed in both instances. But why is this a necessary fact for the Torah to convey us on these two occasions?

 

    The position of judge is certainly one that involves a great deal of responsibility. Certainly in a culture such as that of Sedom, the task of a judge was quite daunting. Even though both Lot and Efron seemed to have been appointed, it still takes a great deal of courage and feeling of responsibility to accept the appointment. It also pertains directly to one of the seven mitzvos that even gentiles are required to keep.

 

    Perhaps, the Torah is conveying to us in both these instances the great reward that is allotted to those who bravely take upon themselves this responsibility for the greater good. It was this noble act that gave Lot the merit to be saved from the destruction of Sedom. Indeed, it was in Avraham's merit as well that he was saved. But had Lot truly been as wicked as the rest of the city, perhaps Avraham's merit would not have been enough. And it was Efron's accepting of his position as judge for which he merited to be a part of this historic acquisition.

 

    Moreover, when one seizes the reins of responsibility, they are realizing that they cannot simply wait for this void to be filled by someone else. Often times the position of responsibility is one that could, in theory, easily be filled by another candidate. But the man of responsibility seizes the moment and does not delegate or shirk these duties. For this reason, it is not enough that they simply be rewarded. Rather, it is on the very day, as Rashi notes, that they accepted these positions that they are instantly rewarded.

 

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: Different Forms of Yirash

AstorTorah: Sarah's 127 Years by R' Ari Storch

AstorTorah: Avraham's Non-Yisrael Stellar Descendants by R' Ari Storch

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

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayeira

This week's shtikle is dedicated le'ilui nishmas my brother Efrayim Yechezkel ben Avi Mori Reuven Pinchas, a"h, whose Yahrtzeit is this coming Tuesday, the 18^th of Cheshvan. 

    After Avimelech mistakenly takes Sarah from Avraham, HaShem comes to him in a dream at night and tells him that he will die for his sin. Avimelech then proceeds to plead his innocence after which HaShem responds and lets him off the hook. The response begins (20:6) "Elokim said to him in the dream..." From pasuk 3 we are already aware that HaShem was speaking to Avimelech "bachalom halaylah," in a dream of the night. Why is it necessary to repeat this point?

 

    We have discussed before the many differences in the conduct of Avimelech as opposed to Par'oah in just about the same circumstance. In addition to those points, Paroah was not even given the honour of a visit or warning from God, presumably because he simply was not worthy of such a revalation. Avimelech, on the contrary, did merit that visit. Instead of mere hints that something was not right, he received a message directly from HaShem, much in the way, it would seem, that any other prophet did. Yet, we do not ever see Avimelech referred to as a prophet. Wouldn't this dream constitute prophecy?

 

    I therefore suggest, although without any textual source to support this theory, that true prophecy consists not only of a message from HaShem but the ability to converse with Him in the context of that prophecy. What happened here is that Avimelech actually awoke after receiving the message from HaShem in his dream. His words, quoted in the pasuk, were exclamations uttered while awake. He then went back to sleep and HaShem  answered him in yet another dream. There was never an actual two way conversation going on within the dream itself. Contrarily, when HaShem comes to Bil'am in his dream (Bemidbar 22:9-12) there is a clear dialog, although I suppose it is not clear that that was even a dream. Nevertheless, due to this nuance, Avimelech is not considered a navi.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

AstroTorah: A Scratch on the Wall

AstroTorah: Witnesses to Sedom's Destruction

AstroTorah: The Mysterious Midrash by R' Ari Storch

AstroTorah: I Can't Believe it's not Fresh by R' Ari Storch

Dikdukian: Different Forms of Yirash

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

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

The Weekly Shtikle - Lech Lecha

    This week's parsha features the epic battle between the short-handed four kings, Amrafel, Aryoch, Kedarla'omer and Tid'al and the five kings, Bera, Birsha, Shin'av, Sem'ever and... wait, was the name of the fifth king?  When the five kings are mentioned, the last is "melech Bella, hi Tzo'ar." Rashi explains that the city of Bella was also known as Tzo'ar. The pasuk could not be naming Tzo'ar as the king of Bella because of the feminine "hi." If Tzo'ar were the name of the king of Bella, it would have read "melech Bella, hu Tzo'ar." So what was his name and why is it left out?

 

    A number of answers are suggested. Ramban states that Bella was a small city and so the name of its king was left anonymous due to his relative insignificance. Sha'arei Aharon points out that the names of the four other kings are apparently nicknames alluding to each one's wickedness as Rashi thoroughly explains. From the story of the destruction of Sedom in next week's parsha we learn that Tzo'ar was the least wicked of the five wicked cities slated for destruction. Thus the king's name is left out due to his relatively insignificant wickedness.

 

    Suprisingly, however, Chomas Anach and Sefer HaYashar actually write that the name of the king was Bella. I am not sure how the grammar of the pasuk works and why this king is differently introduced than the others but this is the only offering we have as to the actual name of the king.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

AstroTorah: Quality not Quantity by R' Ari Storch

AstroTorah: The Uncountable Stars

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

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com