The Weekly Shtikle - Tetzaveh

In the listing of the stones on the choshen (28:17-20) there is a difference between the last row and the other three. The last row is Tarshish ve'shoham ve'yashfeh. There is a vuv before the second stone as well as the third. In the other three rows, the vuv appears only before the last stone. Meshech Chachma points out that the reason for this is, as we find in the laws of kriyas shema, that certain groups of words where the first word ends with the same letter as the second word begins, such as "al levavchem" and therefore must be very carefully differentiated. So, too, here tarshish and shoham have the same problem. Therefore, in order to differentiate between the two, HaShem told Moshe "Tarshish ve'Shoham" so he would not get mixed up. The difficulty is, however, that in parshas Pekudei (39:13) the list does not contain a vuv before shoham. Although Meshech Chachma does make mention of this fact he does not clearly indicate why that is. R' Baruch Epstein, in Baruch She'amar, provides an answer. In Tetzaveh, HaShem is talking to Moshe. Therefore, it was important to differentiate between the two so that there is no confusion. In Pekudei, however, the Torah is merely giving its own recount of events so it was not imperative to place a vuv in the middle.

 

However, I heard the following challenge to Baruch She'amar's understanding. At the beginning of Shemos we seem to find a similar phenomenon. When listing the sons of Yaakov a vuv is only used for the last name in each pasuk. Except for pasuk 1:4, where there is a vuv before Naftali. It would seem that this is to differentiate between the nun at the end of Dan and the nun at the beginning of Naftali. However, here it seems only to be giving a recount and there is no dialog between two parties. By the above reasoning, there should be no reason to separate the names with a vuv. See the comments on this Dikdukian post for further discussion.

 

Have a good Shabbos and a Happy Purim Katan!

Mishenichnas Adar Marbim beSimchah!

 

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Dikdukian Posts on Megillas Esther

Dikdukian: Ner Tamid

Dikdukian: Of Plurals and Singulars

Dikdukian: The Lord and the Rings

Dikdukian: Tarshsih veShoham

Dikdukian: Sham and Shamah

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 - Terumah

A number of years ago, I posed the following question and received back a number of nice suggestions which I would like to share.

 

At the beginning of the parsha (25:3-7) Moshe is told to collect numerous different materials for the purpose of building the mishkan. He is told to collect gold, silver, copper and various other materials without any indication as to what they will be used for. Then he is told to collect oil for lighting, spices for the anointing oil and the ketores and stones for the eifod and choshen. Why is the specific purpose listed for these materials but not for the others?

 1.            The relative value of the metals and fabrics was known to be greater and thus their importance was easily understood. It was more difficult for the people to understand the importance of the oil and the spices. They therefore needed to be informed right away of the important tasks for which these items were needed. (This answer would not suffice for the stones, however.)

2.            This week's parsha deals at length with the construction of the mishkan using the wood, the metals, and the skins. The oil, spices and stones are not dealt with more thoroughly until the next parsha. Since their purpose isn't discussed until later, it is mentioned briefly at the outset.

3.       The other materials were more readily available to B'nei Yisrael. The oil, spices and stones took greater toil to seek out. As in answer 1, they needed to be informed of the special purpose they would serve in order to motivate them to find the materials and bring them in.

 

Gur Aryeh, elaborating on Rashi's words, explains that the first materials which are not qualified are simple and specific enough not to need any further elaboration. After all, gold is gold. The oil and spices, however, had to be of a specific type and quality in order to be suitable for the anointing oil and incense. The stones, as well, had to be a specific type. This is why the pasuk is more specific as to their purpose, in order to clarify exactly what was needed.

 

Have a good Shabbos.

 

Eliezer Bulka

WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Al Pi Cheshbon: Amudei HeChatzeir

Dikdukian: Venahapoch hu

Dikdukian: Watch out for that kamatz

Dikdukian: Kikar Zahav

Dikdukian: The Lord and the Rings 

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 - Mishpatim

Last Friday, 23 Shevat, marked the 3^rd yahrtzeit of my Oma Jakobovits. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Chayah Sarah bas Zechariah Chaim, z"l.

 

This past Wednesday, 28 Shevat, marked the 11^th yahrtzeit of my wife's grandfather, R' Yitzchak Yeres. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Yitzchak Chaim ben Moshe Yosef HaLevi, z"l.

 

This coming Sunday, 2 Adar, marks the 18^th yahrtzeit of my Zadie, Rabbi Yaakov Bulka. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Chaim Yaakov ben Yitzchak, z"l.

 

Given the ongoing situation in Eretz Yisrael, with so many kidnapped hostages still in captivity, I felt it would be appropriate to examine the mentioning of kidnapping in this week's parsha. At the beginning of this week's parsha, we are taught a number of different offences for which the punishment is death. Among them are the striking of one's parents, as well as cursing them. One would certainly have expected to find the two pesukim next to each other. However, surprisingly, after the pasuk dealing with the hitting of a parent (21:15) we are taught that one who kidnaps an individual and sells him is also subject to the death penalty. Only after that are we taught the punishment for cursing a parent.

Ramban explains in the name of R' Sadia Gaon that the placement of the pasuk dealing with kidnapping gives us an insight into the gravity of the crime and why it is punishable by death. Kidnapping victims are often younger children. When a young child is kidnapped, he is taken from his family and forced to grow up away from the warmth of a loving family. He grows up not knowing his parents and thus is more likely to hit or curse them when he is older. This would have been a truly unfathomable act coming from a child who was the beneficiary of a full life of parental love and nurture. Since the kidnapper is responsible for robbing him of that upbringing, his act is punishable by death as well.

Another approach offered by the Rishonim is that the pesukim are actually following a logical progression of increasing novelty, commonly referred to as "lo zu af zu." First, we are taught (21:14) that someone who plans and premeditates the murder of his fellow Jew is to be put to death. This is understandable. The next pasuk, dealing with hitting a parent, teaches us that it is not only murder that warrants the death penalty. One may even be liable for capital punishment for merely hitting. The death penalty for kidnapping then teaches us that one can be guilty of a capital offence without causing any physical harm whatsoever. Finally, we are taught that one can even be put to death for the improper use of his words in the form of a curse.

Bechor Shor offers a fascinating approach. When the kidnapper stands before the court and is accused of his crime, he is likely to curse his parents and blame them in order to vindicate himself. That is why the pasuk dealing with kidnapping is inserted here to be juxtaposed to the pasuk dealing with cursing. (As to why a kidnapper would be more prone such action than any other criminal, perhaps it takes someone who does not appreciate the value of a nurturing home and loving parents to have the audacity to take that away from another.)

This idea teaches a very poignant lesson which is most applicable in our time. We live in a society where crimes are very often justified by outside causes. When a heinous crime is committed, too often we get wrapped up in the perpetrator's background, his upbringing, what kind of music he listened to, what he watched on TV or even what flag is flown in his state capital. Worse still, some might even go so far as to suggest that the perpetrator was in fact the real victim. What made him do this? The Torah teaches us - HE made him do this. Regardless of what influences might have played a part, one is always responsible for his own actions and must face the consequences thereof.

**********

It has been a while (16 years, to be exact) since I sent out this classic trivia question which R' Yaakov Moshe Kulefsky, zt"l, used to love to ask: The law of eidim zomemin states that a witness who attempted to make his friend pay a certain amount of money and is found to be lying and goes through the necessary process of hazama must pay the money himself. It is generally assumed that he pays the original defendant. But what is the source for this? Maybe it is a tax that he is required to pay Beis Din. [For a real challenge stop reading here.] Said R' Yisroel Salanter, the answer is in Rashi in this week's parsha. But you could go through the entire parsha and miss it. Happy hunting!

 

Have a good Shabbos and chodesh tov.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup

Dikdukian: Tricky Vowels

Dikdukian: Answer vs. Torture
Dikdukian: Give it to me
Dikdukian: Ha'isha viladeha

Dikdukian: Jewish Milk

Dikdukian: Three Strikes and you're out

Dikdukian: The Ox and his Friend

Al Pi Cheshbon: 10,000 Kikars

 

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 - Yisro

In this week's parsha, Yisro advises Moshe that he could not possibly handle the entire nation's legal issues on his own. Rather, he should "discern from among the entire people, anshei chayil, God-fearing people, men of truth, people who despise money..."(18:21) However, when Moshe actually goes about choosing the men to take care of the lower-level cases, he chooses anshei chayil from among all Israel (18:25) The obvious question is, what happened to all those other traits that Yisro advised him to seek out?

 

When translating the pasuk above, I specifically left anshei chayil untranslated. There are varying opinions on the actual meaning of this term and they govern the various approaches to this question. First is the somewhat disheartening opinions of Rashi, Chizkuni and Siforno. Rashi in Devarim (1:15) writes that Yisro instructed Moshe to seek out seven traits and he was only able to find three. Chizkuni interprets anshei chayil as wealthy men. Of the traits recommended by Yisro, only the trait of wealth was one that could be recognized by one's peers. The other three were "traits of the heart" which one could not discern on the surface and therefore, Moshe was only able to be choosy about the anshei chayil. Siforno writes that Moshe could not find men who possessed all the characteristics recommended by Yisro. Therefore, he decided that the most important one was anshei chayil, well versed, deep, sharp men who are determined to get to the bottom of things and willing to fight for the truth. He reasoned that a God-fearing individual who does not possess this attribute is of inferior quality to a less God-fearing individual who does.

 

Ramban and Malbim offer more optimistic views. On pasuk 21, Ramban writes, and Malbim likewise, that anshei chayil simply means men who are fit to lead a large nation, for the word chayil is used to refer to large assembly. The term anshei chayil was used as a general term. The next three attributes were only a description of the three components of anshei chayil. Since anshei chayil was the general and the others the specific, pasuk 25 only refers to the general and we understand from that that all the necessary characteristics were included.

 

Netziv in Ha'amek Davar makes a very astute observation. Yisro's original suggestion was to find these traits among people from kol ha'am, the entire nation. The term, explains Netziv, refers to the masses and includes all. He was worried that because of the sheer number of judges that were necessary, Moshe wouldn't be able to choose only from the upper echelon of Torah scholars. So if he were considering everyone, he would have to be more discerning in who was chosen. However, the pasuk recounts that Moshe indeed chose all the men from B'nei Yisrael, a term that refers to the Torah scholars. Therefore, he could take for granted that these great men would be God-fearing men of truth who despise money for this is the way of the Torah. However, the trait of anshei chayil, which Netziv interprets as leaders who can guide the nation (like Ramban) is not necessarily found in all. Therefore, among the scholars, it was only this trait that he had to seek out but the rest were assumed.

 

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka

WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Many Who Fear God

Dikdukian: Letzais

Dikdukian: On top of Old Smokey

Dikdukian: Ram veNisa 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.