The Weekly Shtikle - Vayikra

Today, 2 Nissan, marks the 20^th yahrtzeit of my Bubbie. This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Yehudis bas Reuven Pinchas.

This coming Sunday, 4 Nissan, marks the 8^th yahrtzeit of my wife's grandmother, Rebbetzin Faigie Frankel. This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Leah Feiga bas Aharon Tzvi.

This week's parsha deals with a number of different versions of the korban chatas, the sin offering. The sin offering of the nasi is introduced in a slightly different way than the others. The other versions of the chatas offering are introduced with the word (ve)'im, and if... The nasi's chatas, however, is introduced (4:22) with the word asher, when the nasi sins.

 

Rabbeinu Bachya approaches this linguistic discrepancy in the simplest manner. He writes that it is the nature of a man in a position of power to be consumed by haughtiness and hubris which is most likely to lead to sin. So, while the sin of others is introduced more indefinitely, "if it would happen to be that a person were to sin," the sin of the nasi is introduced almost as a certainty.

 

Rashi provides a more homiletic interpretation of the word asher from the midrash. Asher is like ashrei, praised. The pasuk is actually giving praise to the nasi, not for committing the sin, God forbid, but for having the integrity to come forth and admit it. After all, without the admission there would be no sacrifice. The high public position makes it all the more embarrassing to admit guilt. Praised is the generation whose nasi swallows that embarrassment and has the gumption to do what is required of him.

 

Malbim offers another positive approach related to that of Rashi's. The words asher and im are actually interchangeable (see Rashi Rosh HaShanah 3a). There is one slight difference between the word im and the word asher, used to mean im. The word asher is used to denote a possibility which we would like to occur while im simply implies a possibility. The best example of this is in parshas Re'eih. The parsha begins by explaining what will trigger the blessings and the curses. The pasuk states (Devarim 11:27) "Es haberachah asher tishme'u... (pasuk 28) vehakelalah im lo sishme'u." The translation is the same for both, if you will listen or if you will not listen. However, since listening is what we want to happen, the word asher is used whereas the word im is used for not listening. Here, too, we want the nasi to be one who will come forth and admit his sins. It is his position of power and influence that makes it most important for him to possess this quality. Therefore, the Torah introduces his sin offering with the word asher.

 

Have a good Shabbos and chodesh tov.
Mishenichnas Adar Marbim beSimchah (see Rashi, bottom of Taanis 29a)

 

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: Keves vs. Kesev

Dikdukian: Birkas HaIlanos

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 - Vayakheil / Pekudei

In this week's parsha, (35:30-35) Moshe Rabbeinu informs B'nei Yisrael that Betzalel will be in charge of overseeing the construction of the mishkan. He states that HaShem has instilled in him a special spirit of wisdom and understanding. After explaining this wisdom in more detail, Moshe adds (35:34) "ulhoros nasan belibo," and He has placed in his heart the ability or desire to teach. It was not sufficient for Betzalel to be familiar with all the crafts necessary for the construction of the mishkan. He needed to be able to teach it to others so that they may participate as well.

In examining this pasuk more thoroughly, there are two very important lessons that are taught in this seemingly simple phrase. The first is that no wealth of knowledge ever guarantees the ability to teach. Betzalel was brought to the highest levels of knowledge and understanding but that was not enough. In addition to the wisdom vested in him by HaShem he also required a separate Divine inspiration for the ability to give over that wisdom to others. The art of teaching is a necessary wisdom unto itself. This point is made by Ohr HaChayim and R' Moshe Shternbuch on this pasuk.

This pasuk also teaches us that while one might attribute other areas of wisdom to the brain or mind, the essence of teaching is in the heart. It is not even enough for one to spend day and night studying and learning how to teach. No matter how much knowledge one is able to place in his brain, without a teaching heart it just does not work. Therefore, in addition to enriching Betzalel's intellect with the wisdom and knowledge to perform all the necessary tasks, HaShem instilled in him all the necessary components to make the training process as smooth as possible. (In truth, it has been noted that throughout Tana"ch, we don't find a separate word used to refer to the brain. So lev would also cover matters of pure intellect and this second inference is not so strong.)

Chazak, chazak, venishchazeik!

Have a good Shabbos.

Mishenichnas Adar Marbim beSimchah!

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: A Wise Correction

Dikdukian: Ve'asa Vetzalel

Dikdukian: Kikar Zahav

Dikdukian: The Lord and the Rings

Dikdukian: Tarshish Shoham

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 - Ki Sisa

I heard the following recently from a shiur by R' Asher Weiss. There is a famous approach attributed to Ramba"n (20:12) regarding the aseres hadibros. With the obvious exception of the commandment to respect one's father and mother, the first half of the dibros are very distinctly confined to matters bein adam laMakom – between Man and his Maker. The second half quite conversely deals with matters between Man and his neighbour.

In our parsha, when the luchos are given to Moshe (31:18) the word luchos is written without a vuv, as if it is singular – luchas. Rashi comments that this nuance is meant to indicate that they were equivalent. Rashi, however, does not elaborate as to what the nature of this equivalence is. R' Asher Weiss suggests these two ideas may be fused together. The dibros could have been delivered on one slab of stone. Why was it necessary to split them into two? It is never sufficient to be especially diligent regarding mitzvos bein adam laMakom while being lax in matters with other people. Nor is the inverse acceptable. Both realms of Torah observance are absolutely necessary to achieve any level of completeness in the service of HaShem. This idea is expressed further in the events that followed the giving of the luchos.

When Moshe comes down from the mountain and observes the devastating situation that had unfolded (32:19) he throws down both luchos in anger. The pasuk, as we read it, states that he threw them from his hands. However, the word yadav is written without a second vuv, as if it is to be read to miyado, from his one hand. R' Yisroel Salanter explains that when Moshe observed the golden calf, it was abundantly clear that the nation had failed in their observance of the first tablet. They directly disobeyed the commandment not to have other gods. But Moshe had a notion that perhaps they could still maintain their connection to the second half of the dibros. But HaShem made it such that both were thrown down and destroyed to bring home this notion – that there is no such thing as observing one half of the covenant with HaShem while ignoring the other. If one part goes down, it all comes down.

Have a good Shabbos.

Mishenichnas Adar Marbim beSimchah!

 

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Kol Annnos

Dikdukian: Yeiaseh vs.Taaseh by Ephraim Stulberg

Dikdukian: No More Drinking

Dikdukian: Minimizing Sin

Dikdukian: Whys and Wherefores

Dikdukian: Need to Bring this Up

Dikdukian: Oops (Parah)

Dikdukian: Let Your Heart Not be Desolate (Parah)

 

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 - Purim

By now I'm sure most of you have seen or read all sorts of inspiring thoughts making the obvious connection between the events of the day and the story of the megillah. (One clever observation I saw from Noam Jacobson highlighted the fact that the Iranian regime was the epitome of a Haman, more so than any of the numerous individuals and nations who sought to obliterate us over the generations. They all had elaborate schemes which would certainly take years to carry out.  Only the Iranians, with their nuclear ambitions, sought to carry out an instantaneous genocide – beyom echad – as Haman did.)

This morning, I noticed a much different historical context in the story of Purim. As is well-known and much discussed, there is a deep connection, albeit ironic, between Purim and Yom HaKippurim. It begins with the similarity of the name and goes off in many different directions. On Yom Kippur, we read the story of Yonah who was commanded to inform the great city of Nineveh that they were to be destroyed for their wicked deeds. One of the common understandings of Yonah's reluctance to deliver this prophecy is that he was afraid that if the gentile city of Nineveh were to repent – as they, in fact, did – it would reflect drastically upon the Jews of the time who seemed resistant to the many rebukes from the prophets.

Perhaps Yonah's reasoning was virtuous and even justified, if looked at merely in the context of the present day. But a line in the selichos for Taanis Esther reveals what the flaw in his approach might have been in the greater context of Jewish history. In the first selichah, as we poetically retell the story of Purim, we recount that they learned the lesson from Nineveh that through teshuvah and tefillah, we can annul a most devastating decree.

Even if the teshuvah of Nineveh had negative consequences for the Jews of the time, it served as a blueprint for future generations to inspire them to never lose hope to achieve salvation through prayer and repentance. And the inclusion in the selichos is surely a call to all further generations – including our own – to never lose hope in the most trying times and to always have faith in the power of our deeds and our words to bring deliverance to our nation.

Have a  Purim sameiach!
Mishenichnas Adar marbim be'simchah

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Please see my Purim archives for some more insightful (hopefully not inciteful) thoughts on Purim. 

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Dikdukian Posts on Megillas Esther                                                                                                                                              

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.