The Weekly Shtikle - Bo

This week's parsha begins with the plague of locusts which entailed a swarm of insects so great that it caused a darkness to fall over the land. Additionally, whatever was not previously destroyed by the hail was consumed by the locusts. However, there are a number of aspects of Paroah's frantic reaction that are somewhat anomalous. First, the pasuk recounts (10:16) that Paroah hurried to call Moshe and Aharon which we don't find with the other plagues. 

Second, Paroah pleads for Moshe to remove "this death" from him. This particular plague did not seem to be of a life-threatening nature, certainly when compared to some of the others. Why is it referred to as a death? Additionally, the pasuk already recounted the locusts' activities and the destruction of the remaining crops. As devastating as this plague was, the damage was already done.

Last night, I heard a novel approach from R' Zalman Sorotzkin in Aznayim LaTorah, one that will surely resonate with those in the Baltimore area and others that recently endured a significant cicada invasion. Paroah understood very well the biological nature of these particular locusts. If they were to stick around any longer they would lay eggs in the ground and the offspring would emerge years later. True, there was no way to mitigate the damage caused by the current generation of locusts. But if they were not immediately purged from the land, they would begin a cycle which would repeatedly destroy the vegetation in Egypt and bring the entire nation to its knees with a recurring famine. This explains Paroah's urgency under the circumstances.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: Talented Locusts

Dikdukian: Better not Butcher This One

AstroTorah: Korban Pesach in the Sky by R' Ari Storch

AstroTorah: The Death Star (Ra'ah) the classic 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

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

The Weekly Shtikle - Va'eira

After being rejected by B'nei Yisrael "out of anguish of spirit and hard work," Moshe Rabbeinu is instructed to appear once again before Paroah. Moshe responds with a logical argument, (6:12) "behold, B'nei Yisrael have not listened to me. How then will Paroah listen to me for I am of uncircumcised lips?" Rashi comments that this is one of the 10 instances of the use of á fortiori argument, better known to most as kal vachomer, in the Torah. The full listing is discussed in the midrash (Bereishis Rabba 92). However, many ask that this kal vachomer does not follow logically. The Torah tells us exactly why B'nei Yisrael did not listen Moshe. If this reason did not apply to Paroah, then Moshe's logic appears faulty.

Sefas Emes takes a very practical approach to this difficulty, one with which Rabbeinu Tam preceded him by many hundreds of years. The Torah may tell us why B'nei Yisrael did not listen to Moshe, but Moshe, at the time, was not necessarily aware of that reason. Without the knowledge of B'nei Yisrael's inner feelings, Moshe's kal vachomer did, in fact, follow logically.

R' Yaakov Weinberg, zt"l, offers a deeper insight into Moshe's logic. When Moshe Rabbeinu came before B'nei Yisrael to lead them out of bondage, they should have come to a realization of their importance and sanctity for which they merit such a great deliverance. They chose, instead, to spurn this opportunity and reject Moshe. If B'nei Yisrael could not come to realize their own sanctity and merit, argued Moshe, how could Paroah possibly come to this discovery?

(It occurred to me recently that it is rather strange that we are able to stop at the end of this pasuk (8) when Va'eira is read during the week and at Mincha. This is indeed one of the more depressing moments in the saga of our subjugation in Mitzrayim, especially for those who don't know the ending. Moshe is supposed to be leading a great deliverance and even his own people won't listen to him. How is it permitted to end an aliyah on that note?)

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Plurals and Singulars

Dikdukian: Netziv and the Missing Yud

Dikdukian: The Strange thing about Frogs

Dikdukian: Dikdukei Va'eira by Eliyahu Levin

Dikdukian: Leshon Yachid veRabbim by Eliayhu 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 - Shemos

After hiding Moshe for three months, Yocheved is forced to send her away for she can no longer hide him from the Egyptians. Rashi (2:3) writes that Moshe was born after six months of pregnancy and that is what gave Yocheved the three-month period in which she was able to hide him. This is the traditional understanding we seem to all learn as children.

 

What bothered me about this Rashi is that throughout the entire parsha, Rashi quotes from the gemara in Sotah that deals with this parsha. The gemara (12a) writes that Yocheved actually became pregnant before Amram divorced her and then he took her back three months later. The Egyptians made a mistake and counted from when Amram took her back. It seems quite clear from the gemara that Moshe was born after a nine-month pregnancy but it was the three-month error that the Egyptians made at the beginning of the pregnancy that gave her the time. For some reason, Rashi chose to neglect the gemara and instead quote the Midrash HaGadol on this pasuk. Why?

 

The Da'as Zekeinim MiBa'alei Tosafos acknowledge the discrepancy and attempt to reconcile the two midrashim. Moshe's conception was indeed before the divorce. The Egyptians did err in counting from when Amram remarried Yocheved but they were also aware that a baby could be born at six months and so they checked six months after the second marriage. And of course, this was already three months too late.

 

This question is also dealt with in the sefer Rashi HaShaleim. They answer there that in the order of the pesukim, the conception of Moshe is recorded after Amram takes Yocheved. Therefore, it is in greater accordance with peshat to explain the chronology of events as chronicled Midrash HaGadol. The gemara's interpretation, conversely, requires reading the pesukim out of order.  

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikduian: Bas Paroah
Dikduian: From the Children of the Hebrews
Dikduian: The Strange Thing about Straw
Dikduian: Affliction
Dikduian: Raamseis

Dikduian: Dikduk Observations on Shemos by 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 - Vayechi

Yesterday, 12 Teves, was the 15^th yahrtzeit of Rabbi Joseph Schechter of Ner Yisroel. This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Yoseif ben Eliezer Z'ev.

 

The following is a story told to me by a friend that directly pertains to this week's parsha. He heard it in a schmooze from R' Aharon Kahn in YU. R' Kahn tells that one day his rebbe approached him, grabbed him by the lapels and exclaimed, "It's refraction!" (For an explanation of refraction, see below.*)

"What is? What is?" he answered.

"Refraction," he repeated.

"What? What's refraction?"

 

The following was his explanation: Rashi explains (48:16) that the word veyidgu comes from the same root as the word dag, meaning fish. The blessing given to Efrayim and Menasheh is that they should multiply like the fish in the sea over which ayin hara, the evil eye, has no power. Why does the evil eye have no power over fish? The gemara (Sotah 36b) explains that the ayin hara has no power over fish because they are covered by water. The simple understanding could be that the water acts as a physical barrier to prevent the ayin hara. However, this rebbe explained that since fish are always in the water, when you look at them you are really not looking directly at the fish but rather, due to refraction, you are seeing some sort of distorted image of the fish and the image is somewhat shifted. Therefore, the evil eye has no power over them. Unbelievable!

 

*Refraction is the phenomenon that occurs when light passes through media of different densities. If the light passes through at an angle, the angle is slightly altered as it passes from one medium to the next, depending on their densities. This phenomenon is responsible for a pencil appearing bent when half of it is inserted into water and is also the concept behind eye glasses. 

 

Chazak, chazak, venischazeik!

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: You Make the Call: Aveil Mitzrayim

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.