The Weekly Shtikle Blog: December 2022

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayigash

Yesterday, 5 Teves, was the 45^th yahrtzeit of my wife's grandfather, Rabbi Dr. Israel Frankel, a"h. This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Yisroel Aryeh ben Asher Yeshayahu.

After Yoseif finally reveals his identity to his brothers the atmosphere appears to be rather tense. The tension is apparently broken when Yoseif engages in a tearful embrace with Binyamin, followed by a similar gesture with each of the other brothers (45:14-15). As the pasuk clearly states, only then did the brothers begin to talk with Yoseif. Rashi explains that they were so ashamed that they were left literally speechless. It was only after they saw Yoseif crying and they knew his intentions were peaceful that they were able to speak with him.

What is puzzling about this comment of Rashi was that Yoseif's revelation was clearly preceded by a very genuine, whole-hearted cry which was heard throughout the land of Egypt. Yoseif was not one to hide his emotions and there did not seem to be a hint of anger in the dialog that followed. Nevertheless, the brothers were still nervous. What seems to have put the brothers at ease was not necessarily Yoseif's crying alone. It was the equal treatment of all his brothers. Surely, they expected Yoseif to deal kindly with Reuvein, who sincerely attempted to save him, or the other brothers who were less involved. But what about Yehudah, the mastermind behind the sale of Yoseif, or Shimon, who is "credited" with throwing him into the pit? However, the pasuk clearly equates all brothers when recounting Yoseif's tearful embraces. Not only was he crying and full of loving, brotherly emotion, it was clear to the brothers that his feelings were equal for all the brothers, regardless of their involvement in his sale. Only then did they feel comfortable conversing with Yoseif. (Perhaps this interpretation can be read into Rashi's comment as well.)

Another approach is offered by David Farkas in HaDoresh ViHamivakesh (new edition forthcoming):

The words "after this" seem extra. To me this seems to be the precise culmination of the events that occurred so long ago. Before, in 35:5, the brothers were described as "not being able to speak with [Joseph] in peace". Now, after they had seen the Hand of God in all its awesome clarity, only "after this" were they finally able to speak with their brother!

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Al Pi Cheshbon / Dikdukian: Can you count to 70?

Dikdukian: Pain in the Neck

Dikdukian: Just Do It!

Dikdukian: Shepherd(s)

Dikdukian: Ram'seis

Dikdukian: Dikdukei Vayigash by R' Eliyahu Levin

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

--
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Mikeitz / Chanukah

After Paroah awakes from his two dreams, he is unable to get a satisfactory interpretation from the chartumim. We are told (41:8) "v'ein poser osam l'Pharoah." Rashi interprets "l'Pharoah" as for Paroah's benefit. The chartumim did offer possible meanings of the dream but they were not to Paroah's liking. They suggested, for example, that he would have seven daughters and then bury those seven doors as they would die in his lifetime. When Paroah tells Yoseif (24) "va'omar el hachartumim, v'ein magid li," it seems he relates these feelings to Yoseif as well. Nevertheless, Yoseif proceeds to interpret the dream in a similar fashion, foreshadowing seven-fold good fortune followed by seven-fold misery which erases that good fortune. Why was Yoseif's interpretation more acceptable to Paroah?

There is some discussion in the commentaries regarding Yoseif's advice to Paroah following his interpretation. Some even suggest that it was improper and out of place for Yoseif to be putting in his two cents. After all, that's not what Paroah asked him for. However, considering the above question, it seems quite clear why Yoseif had to do this. If Paroah has seven daughters and buries them all he is left with nothing. If he has seven years of plenty followed by seven years of unbearable famine, he is left with worse than nothing. Had Yoseif simply interpreted the dream, his offering would have been no more acceptable than that of the chartumim. With Yoseif's intelligent solution to the problem, his interpretation became much more favourable. Indeed, Paroah declares (39) "now that God has revealed all of this to you, there is no one as understanding and wise as you." Understanding would seem to refer to his interpretation of the dream. Wisdom refers to his solution.

In the past, we have discussed different nuances of Chanukah as they pertain to the miracle of the war and the miracle of the oil. I would like to explore the actual significance of the two miracles. Specifically, why was it necessary to have these two miracles?

To begin, let us backtrack and approach the issue based on our understanding of our reactions to the miracles. At the end of Al HaNisim, we recount that the eight days of Chanukah were instituted lehodos ulhalel. There are two distinct purposes for Chanukah. Lehodos is simply understood as giving of thanks. As we have discussed in past years, the Al HaNisim text mentions nothing of the miracle of the oil. As R' Chaim Kanievsky explains, it was not a miracle of eternal significance as it pertains to our existence. We would still be standing here today with or without the miracle of the oil. Thus, we are not expected to give thanks for it. The same cannot be said about the great miracle of the defeat of the mighty Syrian Greeks by our tiny army. That is why the thanks is focused exclusively on that event. (I have heard a number of people, speaking about Chanukah, commenting that we "do not celebrate military victories." Based on the above, that approach seems questionable at best.)

Hallel is usually understood as praise. This is clearly different than thanks. Hallel, in our context, is the expression of recognition of HaShem's greatness. Whereas the miracle of the war, as unbelievable as it was, was more discrete, the miracle of the oil was a blatant miracle. As we have mentioned in the name of P'nei Yehoshua, the miracle of the oil was not "necessary," per se. Nevertheless, it was a clear stamp of approval on the entire episode of Chanukah and, at the same time, a clear display of HaShem's greatness. At the same time, the overt miracle of the oil allows us to appreciate God's Hand in the less obvious miracle of the war.

In truth, this is very much the way the world is run in a general sense. There is a natural course which we surely understand was put in place by the Almighty. But if everything was governed only by nature, it would be exceedingly difficult – perhaps too much so – for us mere mortals to recognize God's Hand. But even in our day, we observe miracles large and small ensuring that the attentive eye can realize the Divine governance of not only the miracles but even the simplest natural events.

The two miracles of Chanukah represent the two aspects of HaShem's deliverance. Our commemoration of this holiday is meant to give thanks and to give praise - to thank HaShem for our defeat of the Greeks and to give praise and recognize His ultimate greatness.

Have a Chaunkah Samei'ach, a good Shabbos and Chodesh Tov!

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: Clear the Halls (Chanukah)

Dikdukian: Na'asah Nes

Dikdukian: Who's agitating my dots?

Dikdukian: Be Strong

Dikdukian: Just Do It!

Dikdukian: You Make the Call: Ukra'ahu

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

--
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayeishev

This week's parsha recounts Yoseif's infamous encounter with the wife of Potifar. As we know, she made repeated efforts to seduce Yoseif but he ultimately rejected her time after time until she fabricated a false claim of assault. I believe it is widely assumed, perhaps based on midrashim, that she had a true desire for Yoseif and leveled her false accusations only after she realized she would never succeed.

But I have begun to question that assertion. It is noteworthy that the Torah tells us (39:7) only that she "cast her eyes upon Yoseif" and demanded, "shichvah imi." There is no mention of any genuine feelings for Yoseif in the way they are expressed in the incident involving Shechem (perek 34.) Perhaps it can be suggested that the casting of her eyes was not a matter of desire but rather a feeling of jealousy at the success of Yoseif and the level of trust he had earned in such a short time. And indeed, the framing of Yoseif was always part of the plan.

This episode therefore fits perfectly into the framework of Sefer Bereishis as a harbinger of challenges the Jewish Nation will face throughout the generations. This is a repetitive script we have seen played out over and over, perhaps mostly in our day when the Jews hold a position of power. We are repeatedly baited into confrontations which, no matter what the circumstance, will always have us looked upon in a negative light.

The case made by Potifar's wife against Yoseif was not very strong. If he was the true aggressor, a logical mind would have expected her to flee with him holding her clothes as opposed to inverse. Also, if her claims were truly believed, Yoseif would surely have been put to death and not simply thrown in jail. Nevertheless, he had to be punished for the house of Potifar to avoid being shamed. Perhaps there is a comfort in knowing that it is simply our destiny to always be judged unfavourably in the eyes of the world. We can therefore never become comfortable wotj their perception of us and must always be mindful not to further tarnish our public image.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Clear the Halls (Chanukah)

Dikdukian: Naaseh Neis (Chanukah)

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

--
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayishlach

Before his confrontation with Eisav, Yaakov prays to HaShem (32:12) to save him miyad achi, miyad Eisav, from my brother, from Eisav. Ohr HaChayim addresses the seemingly superfluous reference to Eisav as a brother. Although Yaakov was primarily afraid for his life, he was aware that Eisav posed a threat to his existence in two manifestations. The obvious threat was a physical one, with Eisav acting with his traditional enmity. However, Yaakov was also afraid of Eisav acting like a brother toward him, befriending him and influencing him spiritually. He therefore asked of HaShem to save him both from the physical perils of an encounter with a hostile Eisav and the spiritual dangers of a loving brother.

Later in the parsha, before Yaakov encounters Eisav, he does battle with an angel through the night until the morning. The Torah describes the battle, (32:25) vayei'aveik ish imo. Rashi quotes one interpretation of the word vayei'aveik as coming from the root avak, dirt, as the clash caused much dirt to be kicked up in the process. Rashi then offers his own interpretation of the word as being of Aramaic origin connoting fastening or intertwining, referring to the nature of their hand-to-hand combat. Ramban, asserting that a ches may be interchanged with an alef, suggests the true root of the word is chavak, meaning to hug.

The angel is traditionally considered the sar, (angelic manifestation) of Eisav. The battle is a paradigm of the eternal battle between Yaakov and Eisav. The battle's conclusion at alos hashachar, dawn, symbolizes the days of mashiach when the eternal battle will come to an end and Yaakov will emerge victorious. Perhaps we may understand that the different interpretations of vayei'aveik are not in conflict. Rather, they are in concurrence with the methods by which Eisav wages war with Yaakov. The angel kicked up dust in his attempt to destroy Yaakov. But the angel also hugged Yaakov in fraternal affection in an attempt to destroy him as a brother as well.

Indeed, we must be constantly aware of the dangers posed by Eisav's evil hatred. At the same time, however, we must be cautious not to be deceived and misguided by our apparent acceptance and comfort in his midst.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: The Great Dishon Confusion

Dikdukian: Appearances

Dikdukian: Efrasah, What is your Real Name?

Al Pi Cheshbon: Goats and Amicable Numbers by Dr. Ari Brodsky

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

--
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayeitzei

The Torah recounts (29:32) that Leah named her first child Reuvein because HaShem saw (ra'ah) her affliction, for now her husband will love her. However, the gemara (Berachos 7b), quoted by Rashi, suggests and alternate explanation of Reuvein's name: "See (re'u) the difference between (bein, or maybe it's bein as in son, not sure) my son and my father-in-law's son (Eisav) who sold the rights of the firstborn to his brother (yet hated him for it later) whereas my son (Reuvein) had his firstborn rights given to Yoseif against his will and still made no objection. Not only did he make no objection, but he tried to save him from the pit." The gemara does not suggest an alternate rationale for the names of any of the other sons of Yaakov. This puzzling comment regarding Reuvein's name is therefore the subject of much discussion.

The GR"A and Maharsh"a suggest possible motivations behind the gemara's contention that the pasuk was not sufficient in explaining Reuvein's name. The GR"A writes that with all the other sons, the reason for the name is stated before the actual name. For instance (29:35) "This time I shall give thanks to HaShem. Therefore, she called his name Yehudah." Reuvein is the only child for whom the reason is given after the name. Therefore, Chazal felt that there must be an additional, unmentioned reason why he was given that name.

Maharsh"a writes that the rationale recorded in the pasuk accounts for the re'u part of the name but not for bein. Due to this inadequacy, Chazal felt that there must be an additional reason behind Reuvein's name which justified both parts of his name. He explains further that the explanation given by the gemara was not a conscious thought in Leah's mind but rather a Divine inspiration based on future events of which she was unaware. The explanation she expressed consciously was that which was recorded in the Torah.

Although these explanations justify the need for an additional reasoning behind Reuvein's name, they fail to reconcile the two. It still remains to be seen why there were two reasons and how they fit together, if at all. P'nei Yehoshua offers a novel interpretation which brings the pasuk and the gemara together. According to the gemara (Bava Basra 123a) Leah, being Lavan's eldest daughter, was destined to marry Yitzchak's eldest son, Eisav. When she learned of Eisav's wicked nature, she cried until her eyelashes fell out. The explication of Reuvein's name in the gemara was used by Leah to show Yaakov that since her son was the diametric opposite of Eisav, it is clear that she was destined to marry him and not Eisav. When Leah said, as chronicled in the pasuk, that now she will be loved by her husband, she was not referring merely to the fact that she gave birth. The future was still unclear. Rachel might have gone on to give birth to many more children than Leah. Rather, Leah was referring to the thoughts expressed by the gemara. Because of Reuvein's name and the symbolism behind it indicating Leah's worthiness as Yaakov's mate, her husband would now surely love her. The pasuk and the gemara together form a compound explanation of Reuvein's name and the reason given in the gemara is not an alternative to that of the pasuk but rather an elucidation thereof.