The Weekly Shtikle Blog: July 2021

The Weekly Shtikle - Eikev

The Weekly Shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmas my father, Reuven Pinchas ben Chaim Yaakov, a"h.

The Weekly Shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmas my Oma, Chaya Sara bas Zecharia Chaim, a"h.

In parshas Kedoshim, we are taught for the first time that we must go out of our way to show love towards a convert. The pasuk says (19:34) regarding the convert, "ve'ahavta lo kamocha," you shall love him as yourself. The authorities on the specification of each of the 613 mitzvos, such as Sefer HaChinuch and Rambam, do count this as a mitzvah unto itself. However, their source is not from Kedoshim. Rather, this mitzvah is not discussed until this week's parsha where it is said (10:18) "ve'ahavtem es hageir," and you shall love the convert. Asks R' Yaakov Moshe Kulefsky, zt"l, why is the source for this mitzvah not its first mention in the Torah?

In Kedoshim, we also find the famous commandment to "love thy neighbour as thyself." The Torah's wording (Vayikra 19:18) is "ve'ahavta lerei'acha kamocha." As Ramban explains, the prefix "le" usually means toward. With regard to the love of HaShem, it is written (Devarim 6:5) "ve'ahavta es HaShem Elokecha." Accordingly, one would have expected the Torah to write "ve'ahavta es rei'acha kamocha." However, this pasuk uses a deliberately alternative wording. Our love of HaShem is expected to be absolute. Indeed, we are commanded to devote all our heart, soul and possessions toward that cause. But the Torah realizes that we cannot be expected to show such unequivocal love toward each and every one of our fellow Jews. Thus, the commandment to love your neighbour is not worded to imply that you must love him as yourself. Rather, we are simply commanded to act towards him in a manner that we would expect from others. As Hillel explained it simply to a convert, ironically, in the gemara (Shabbos 31a), that which you would not want done to yourself, do not do to others.

This, suggests R' Kulefsky, is the key to our original quandary. The pasuk in Kedoshim merely commands us "ve'ahavta lo." The command is in the same form as our requirement to love every Jew and thus, does not single the convert out for a higher level of love. However, the pasuk in Eikev says "veahavtem es hageir." The use of the word es teaches us that we are required to show a special love towards converts, over and above that which we show towards every other Jew. This is what compelled the Sefer HaChinuch to derive this mitzvah from parshas Eikev, rather than parshas Kedoshim.

This past week, we commemorated the sheloshim for my father, a"h, with a siyum of shas mishnayos, a siyum on Talmud Bavli by my brother and a worldwide memorial event (which you can view here, if you missed it.) Although, as mentioned above, the general expectation for loving our neighbours is not too lofty so as to remain attainable to all, one of my father's recognizable traits was his ability to show love and respect to every single person he met. He certainly excelled at "ve'ahavta lerei'acha kamocha" beyond the letter of the law but not just for himself. He inspired and charged others to raise their level of observance of this special mitzvah as well. Yehi zichro baruch.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: To Afflict the Corrector

Dikdukian: To Make a misnaged Cringe

Dikdukian: Those Bad Egyptians

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 - Va'eschanan

Tomorrow, the 15th of Av, is the 12^th yahrtzeit of my Opa, Mr. George Jakobovits.

This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Tovia Yehudah ben Yoel, a"h.

The Weekly Shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmas my father, Reuven Pinchas ben Chaim Yaakov, a"h.

The Weekly Shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmas my Oma, Chaya Sara bas Zecharia Chaim, a"h.

This year we have the unique occurrence of Tu B'Av falling directly on Shabbas Nachamu. The gemara (Bava Basra 121a) tells us that there have not been celebrative days in Yisrael like Tu B'Av and Yom Kippur. On the 15th of Av, the gemara explains, the punishment for the sin of the meragelim ended. Every Tish'ah B'Av, another phase of the men who were aged 20-60 at the time of the meragelim died out. On the last year, it was known by the 15th of Av that all the dying had stopped. The simple question is, what is the big celebration? If all the males from 20-60 were supposed to die, once they all died it was obvious that the dying was over. What did they find out on the 15th of Av that they did not know before? Who was it that expected to die and was now overjoyed that they remained alive?

The commentaries deal at length with this problem. The Brisker Rav, R' Yitzchok Ze'ev haLevi Soloveichik, offers the following answer. In parshas Shelach, when HaShem declares the decree that all males from 20-60 die within the next 40 years, we find an interesting phrase. HaShem declares that none of them will merit to see the land and then adds (Bemidb ar 14:23) "and all who angered Me will not see it." What is the meaning of this phrase? The Brisker Rav quotes a passage from Midrash Rabbah stating that although it was only the 20-60-year-olds who were categorically doomed to die in the midbar, regardless of their level of participation in the sin, the 13-20-year-olds who were involved in the sin were also doomed to die. This is the meaning of the pasuk. In addition to all of the 20-60-year-olds who will not see the land, those who angered HaShem from age 13-20 will also not see it.

The midrash comments on the pasuk in Tehillim 95:11, referring to those who perished in the desert, "Therefore I swore in my anger that they shall not come into my resting place." HaShem swore in His anger, but when His anger subsides, the decree will be lifted and they will be allowed to enter. The Raava"d asks the obvious question. Everyone who was supposed to die in the desert did, in fact, die. No one entered Eretz Yisrael from that generation! Rather, it is referring to those in the 13-20 category. They are referred to in the pasuk in Shelach as "mena'atzai," those who angered Me. So long as they remain in this category of "angerers, " they will not enter the land. If they do teshuvah, HaShem will no longer be angry at them and they will be allowed to enter.

This, says the Brisker Rav, is the group that rejoiced on Tu B'Av. They were not certain whether they would survive and enter the land or whether they would die that year. Their status was indeed uncertain. Once Tu B'Av came along and they were still alive, they knew that they had fallen out of the category of "mena'atzai" and would be allowed to enter the land.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: You were shown

Dikdukian: Raise the Valleys

Al Pi Cheshbon: Moshe's Pleas

Al Pi Cheshbon: Gemtrias off by 1

Daily Leaf: .ח Easy as Pi

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 - Devarim

The Weekly Shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmas my father, Reuven Pinchas ben Chaim Yaakov, a"h.

The Weekly Shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmas my Oma, Chaya Sara bas Zecharia Chaim, a"h.

A number of years ago I observed an interesting nuance in the targum of two words in this week's parsha. When Moshe is in the midst of recounting the sin of the spies (1:29), he recounts having addressed the nation's concerns with the giants they would face in an attempt to enter Eretz Yisroel. He told them, "lo sa'artzun v'lo sir'un meihem," do not dread them and do not be afraid of them. The targum on "lo sa'artzun" is "lo sitab'run." Only thirteen pesukim later, we read about HaShem's having told Moshe to warn the "ma'pilim" not to try to conquer the land prematurely as HaShem would not support such an initiative. They are told not to go up and not to wage war "velo tinagfu lifnei oyeveichem," lest you be smitten before your enemies. The targum of "velo tinagfu" is "velo sitab'run," the exact same targum as that of "lo sa'artzun." There must be some significance to this.

B'nei Yisrael were living in a time of unprecedented and unmatched Divine Providence. Their success or failure in all on national and personal levels were dependent directly upon their level of emunah. The words "lo sitab'run," literally translated back from Aramaic, means "you shall not be broken." When the dor dei'ah were given a promise that they would defeat their enemy, it was demanded of them to have absolute faith and belief in that promise. Even the slightest doubt, the slightest fear of the enemy, was indicative of a breakdown of that belief. This breaking of the spirit, the lack of "lo sa'artzun," bore automatic consequences of "tinagfu," military breakdown. Fear and defeat were a cause and effect so tightly bound that the targum deemed them synonymous.

As parshas Devarim is always read on the Shabbos before Tish'ah B'Av, and indeed this year on the eve of the Ninth of Av itself, I was searching for a possible connection between this idea and the themes of Tish'ah B'Av. I was reading "Tear Drenched Nights," a book by R' Moshe Eisemann of Ner Yisroel which explores the profound and tragic effect that the sin of the spies had on our history, particularly the destruction of the two temples. In Chapter 7 he discusses one of the roots of the sin, that the spies lacked a belief in themselves. The moment they began to doubt the absolute promise that they would enter the land and conquer it no matter what the circumstances, everything came undone. This, the root of the tragic sin of the spies and thus, the root of generations upon generations of suffering in exile, is directly connected to the above idea.

As we all strive to correct the sin of the spies in full faith in the "geulah ha'asidah," may we merit to see this month turned "miyagon lesimchah umei'eivel leyom tov!"

Have a good Shabbos and a meaningful fast.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: To Correct, or not to Correct

Dikdukian: Don't you worry!

Dikdukian: Past and Future

Dikdukian: Yahtzah, what is your name?

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 - Matos / Mas'ei

As many of you may know, I was unable to send out a shtikle last week as I was sitting shivah following the passing of my dear father, a"h. In lieu of writing up my hespedim in NY and at the kevurah in Israel, I will provide links to the videos below. As I have done in the past I will be dedicating a year of weekly shtikles le'iluy nishmaso, Reuven Pinchas ben Chaim Yaakov, a"h.

The Weekly Shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmas my Oma, Chaya Sara bas Zecharia Chaim, a"h.

This past Wednesday, 27 Tammuz, was the third yahrtzeit of my cousin, Mrs. Michelle Jakobovits. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Rochel Mirel bas Shmuel HaLevi.

The end of parshas Matos details the conquering and settling of the east side of the Jordan River by the tribes of Reuvein, Gad and half of Menasheh. The very last pasuk recounts Novach's capture of a series of cities and subsequently naming them after himself, Novach. Rashi dwells on the words "vayikra lah Novach" which, by the rules of dikduk, should have featured a mapik heh in the word lah to indicate the possessive. He explains that the word is without a mapik heh, therefore rendering it "softer," because the name of that city did not endure.

Rav Hirsch writes that if Novach's naming of this city did not last, surely there must be a reason, some deficiency in his actions. He explains that while it is the way of the nations to have cities named after oneself, this is not typical practice among B'nei Yisrael. It puts undue importance on one's possessions as his true accomplishments when in truth, it is one's deeds that are his true legacy. (Indeed, the only city name in Eretz Yisrael that comes to mind as possibly being named after a person is Shechem – not a Jew.) It was Novach's naming the city after himself that was the reason why the name did not last.

Rav Shimon Schwab, in Ma'ayan Beis HaShoeiva, points out that the previous pasuk recounts Yair's naming his captured land Chavos Yair, the villages of Yair. How come Novach's city did not retain its name but we find no such fate for that of Yair's? He explains that there is an important nuance which differentiates the two names. Novach gave the city his exact name. This was an indication that from Novach's perspective, this city was the very embodiment of himself. Yair, conversely, named the city "The Villages of Yair." The simple addition of that extra word made clear that there was a separation between the man and his possessions. These were his villages but it wasn't him.

This is indeed a poignant lesson (I'll try to include as many as I can over the next year) as we continue to contemplate the life my father lived and the legacy he left behind. Indeed, it's all about the deeds. (I guess maybe some puns, too.) My father, a"h, has certainly left some big shoes to fill with regards to the care and love he gave each and every person he met and the great lengths to which he would go to help just about anyone. As it pertains directly to the above, the park adjacent to the shul which is named in his honour is not named so much for my father as it is for the kindness which he spread throughout the world through his actions as well as encouraging everyone around him to follow his lead.

Yehi zichro Baruch.

Chazak, Chazak, veNischazeik!

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Levaya videos:

Full Funeral-New York

Full Funeral-Israel (my hesped begins at 1:06:00)

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: The Cold has Passed

Dikdukian: Watch out for those Mapiks!

Dikdukian: To Afflict or to Answer

Dikdukian: The Interrogative

Dikdukian: The first aliyah in Mas'ei