Internet parsha sheet

BS"D

To: [e-mail]

From: [e-mail]

INTERNET PARSHA SHEET

ON SHMOS - 5775
In our 20th year! To receive this parsha sheet, go to http://www.parsha.net and click Subscribe or send a blank e-mail to [e-mail] Please also copy me at [e-mail] A complete archive of previous issues is now available at http://www.parsha.net It is also fully searchable.

________________________________________________

Sponsored by

Heshie & Nechie Schulhof

l'zecher nishmas Reb Dovid b'Reb Ya'akov z”l

(Heshie’s father)
________________________________________________

Sponsored in memory of

Chaim Yissachar z”l ben Yechiel Zaydel Dov

________________________________________________

To sponsor a parsha sheet (proceeds to tzedaka) contact [e-mail]

________________________________________________

From: Torah Musings [e-mail] date: Mon, Jan 5, 2015

Freebie: Rav Soloveitchik on Parashas Shemos

by Dr. Arnold Lustiger

Many friends have been asking me about the availability of the Chumash Mesoras Harav on Sefer Shemos. Here is an update. The Chumash left the bindery in Israel on Tuesday, and is presently available in Israel (Pomeranz on Be’eri in downtown Jerusalem) . Most of the Chumashim are arriving in the US by ship, and the Chumash should be widely available in U.S. bookstores and online at OUPress.org between January 18-23.

Vieileh Shemos- And these are the names. The appellations given to the books of the Torah generally reflect the themes within. For example, Bamidbar is not merely the first word of the fourth book; it alludes to the thirty-eight years the children of Israel sojourned in the desert. Every event recounted in the book of Bamidbar took place in the desert, so this choice of name is not merely semantic. Similarly, Devarim is a repetition of “items” (i.e., mitzvos and events) previously discussed in the Torah. Vayikra refers to the appointment between God and Moses in the Ohel Moed.

What is the significance of the name Shemos? A name indicates individuality. The Torah wishes to emphasize that God concluded the covenant not with a nation but with an individual. The covenant was initially made with Abraham alone. Although the community through its sins may lose its right to exist, God is willing to deal with but one person. A name signifies uniqueness. The Ten Commandments were addressed not in the plural but in the singular, to emphasize that God relates not only to the collective but to the individual as well. That is why in Shemos, the names of Jacob’s children are repeated and emphasized.

When I visited the Land of Israel, I was taken to a secular kibbutz, where the tour guide introduced me to a cow he called Rachel. Upon hearing this, I instinctively recoiled. When the guide saw my reaction, he asked sarcastically if giving a cow a name was yet another prohibition imposed by the rabbis.

Giving an animal a human name is in fact wrong because the individuality denoted by a name belongs exclusively to humans. Every human death is a loss which cannot be replaced: Reuven is not like Shimon. The Torah introduced the laws of mourning because even if someone of lowly character dies, his death is still a loss, for every individual has been endowed with the divine image.

The preservation of life is a supreme value, even if it necessitates the breaking of the Sabbath. The Torah therefore emphasizes the importance of bikur cholim (visiting the sick) and hachnosas orchim (welcoming guests).

A dog may exhibit great friendship for his master, but a different dog can be substituted which could display an identical friendship. A dog fundamentally has no name; it is merely part of a species. As devoted as a dog may be, there can be no aveilus for it.

That is why halachah is so insistent that the names recorded in a marriage document be written with precision. Abraham was elevated to spiritual greatness by changing his name. Maimonides says that the name Jacob reflected a certain destiny, while Israel reflected a different destiny. The appellation of the book of Shemos signifies that the Exodus would have taken place even if only one individual had been in Egypt.
Rashi cites the phrase, He brings out and counts His heavenly Hosts (Is. 40:26). This phrase refers to the position of the stars within each constellation. Each star is but part of a universe, yet each star is numbered, named and accounted for individually by God. Each has its individual function. Similarly, Knesses Yisrael is one system which is composed of individuals. (Boston, 1980)
Habaim Mitzraima - who came to Egypt. The Torah should more properly have used the past tense, Asher Bau, who came, and not the word Habaim , which more literally would be translated as who are coming. The Children of Jacob were long gone. This phrase refers to events that transpired two hundred and ten years before the Shemos narrative.

The Midrash noted this anomaly and interpreted the intent of the phrase, Habaim Mitzraima, ke’ilu ba’u hayom, as if Bnei Yisrael had come that very day. The term Habaim suggests that the people of Egypt did not consider the Israelite nation as part of their state, society and culture; they looked upon them as if they had just entered Egypt.

How long must one remain in a country to be considered a citizen? The words of Pharaoh to his advisors suggest that he considered Bnei Yisrael as having just arrived. Indeed, the name for the Israelites, Ivri, means completely separated—being on one bank of the river while everyone else is on the other. Even though Bnei Yisrael came many years earlier, Egypt still viewed them as strangers.

This belief in the otherness of the Jew repeats itself through history. Jews lived in Germany even before the Dark Ages. During the Middle Ages, the Jews supported Germany from within; they were an integral part of society. Yet, many centuries after they arrived, these Jews were wiped out in the Holocaust. They were charged with being strangers, not counted among society.

The essence of anti-Semitic doctrine throughout history always depicted the Jew as a stranger. They charge that we are strangers, ivrim. We never assimilate ourselves into any community; we are outsiders.

There is another implication to the use of the present tense. Chazal say: Because of four qualities, Bnei Yisrael were redeemed from Egypt: they did not change their names, they did not change their language, they did not change their clothing, and they did not change their God (Shemos Rabbah 1). The Midrash states beautifully: Reuben descended [to Egypt], Reuben came up [from Egypt] (Tanchuma Balak 25). The Jew was conscious of his identity. When the Jews left, they spoke Lashon HaKodesh as fluently as they had when they came to Egypt.

There are certain ideals to which a Jew is committed that can never be forfeited. There is a special relationship between God and Jew as well as a relationship between God and mankind in general. In certain areas of human endeavor, such as healing and helping each other, the Jew is part of the relationship between God and man, and we participate and are part of society. But whenever society tries to terminate our individual identity, to tell us how to live and to be like the rest of society, we are very stubborn.

Pharaoh charged that the Jew was uninterested in the welfare of the land. Pharaoh was wrong, for Habaim Mitraima has two meanings: we have a special, eternal identity, but nevertheless, we participate in society. When he said that Jews must abandon their identity and join a society whose ideals differ from those that Jacob brought with him to Egypt, the Jews removed themselves from society, as if they had just entered Egypt.

The Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni 176) tells us that many Jews in Egypt had scrolls (probably consisting of Genesis), and every Shabbos, they would read these scrolls. The redemption did not start with Moses. The Jewish belief in the promise of redemption was nurtured by their reading of these scrolls. These scrolls helped maintain their unique identity—the Israelites considered themselves as if they had just entered Egypt. (Aton Holzer Summary)

_______________________________________________________

from: Chanan Morrison reply-to: [e-mail] to: Rav Kook List date: Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 3:54 AM

subject: [Rav Kook List] Shemot: The Leadership of Moses

When God informed Moses that he was to bring the Jewish people out of Egypt, Moses did not accept the assignment happily. "Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh?" (Ex. 3:11)

What was Moses' objection? The Midrash explains with the following parable:

"A king once married off his daughter, and he promised to employ a lady to wait on her. However, the king only provided the daughter with a lowly maidservant. His son-in-law complained, 'Did you not promise to hire a lady to serve her?'" "This is what Moses said to God. 'Master of the universe! When Jacob went down to Egypt, did You not say to him, "I will go down with you to Egypt and I will surely take you out"? But now You say, "I am sending you to Pharaoh"!" (Shemot Rabbah 3:4) According to the Midrash, Moses objected to leading the Israelites because he felt that God had promised to do the job Himself. Did Moses really think that God would lead them out of Egypt without a human emissary?

Also, we need to examine God's response to Moses:

"I will be with you. This will be your sign that I have sent you: when you bring the people out of Egypt, you will serve God on this mountain." (Ex. 3:12) How does serving God on Mount Sinai prove that God Himself will lead the people? How did it allay Moses' fears about his mission?

Two Types of Leaders

In general, we may distinguish between two types of successful leaders. The first category are leaders who excel in organizational skills. The leader himself does not contribute or add to the nation's accomplishments, but he knows how to bring together the various abilities and talents dispersed amongst the people. By marshalling together their diverse strengths, such a leader gently steers the people to their destiny.

The second type of leader is more than just an efficient organizer. He uses his own special gifts to inspire the people to greater aspirations. Such a leader is not merely an instrument of heaven to rule the people; he is a dynamic individual, blessed with extraordinary wisdom and holiness, capable of uplifting the people to a level that they could not reach on the basis of their own merits.

These two types of leaders induce change in different ways. The competent leader gradually leads his people to their national goals, step-by-step. The charismatic leader, on the other hand, inspires the people to attain new heights in a sudden and dramatic fashion.

Moses' Complaint

This distinction allows us to understand Moses' objection. Moses probably recognized that he was destined to lead the Jewish people. His miraculous rescue as a baby and his extraordinary childhood growing up in Pharaoh's palace indicated that Moses was meant to lead his people.

In his humility, however, Moses placed himself in the first category of leaders - those without any special qualities of their own, just the willingness to organize and govern the people. God, however, had promised a dramatic redemption, a quantum leap in the people's spiritual elevation, when He said "I will surely raise up" (Gen. 46:4). Clearly, God had intended that a charismatic leader would inspire and ennoble the people.

Like the son-in-law in the parable, Moses objected to God's choice of leader. The King had promised a lady of high caliber - a great and inspiring leader. But He had only provided a lowly maid-servant - Moses, a competent but unremarkable public servant.

Therefore, God explained to Moses, "I will be with you." With the sublime powers that I bestow upon you, you will be able to uplift the people to a level beyond their current reach. In this way, I will fulfill My promise to them.

And God continued: the proof that you will be the catalyst for profound change is that the people will stand on Mount Sinai. In order to merit receiving the Torah, the Jewish people will need to be on the highest spiritual level. If that was not the case, the Torah could have been revealed to an earlier generation.

The fact that the Jewish people would stand at Mount Sinai was proof that Moses would in fact be the second type of leader, dramatically readying them for this historic moment.

Ready for the Priesthood and the Kingship

This explanation helps us understand a difficult Midrash. When God first revealed Himself to Moses in the burning bush, Moses responded, 'Hineini' - "Here I am," or perhaps, "I am ready."

The Midrash explains that Moses was saying, "I am ready for the priesthood and the kingship." These aspirations, however, were not to be. The priesthood had already been designated to Aaron, and the kingship to David. Nevertheless, Moses temporarily merited both of these high positions. He served as High Priest during the seven days of installment of the priests, and ruled as king during his lifetime (Shemot Rabbah 2:6).

How can we resolve this Midrash - practically a demand for prestige and power - with the self-effacing humility so apparent in the Torah's depiction of Moses?

Furthermore, the Sages taught that "When God bestows greatness on an individual, He gives it to him and his descendants for all generations" (Megilah 13b). Why did Moses only merit these positions temporarily, for himself and not for his descendants?

As we explained earlier, Moses considered himself a suitable candidate to govern the Jewish people. His refusal to bring the Israelites out of Egypt stemmed from his assessment that he was not the great leader who could fulfill God's promise to uplift the nation. As a competent leader, however, Moses felt that he was a suitable candidate to initiate a dynasty of kings or high priests, and thus gradually elevate the people over the generations.

In fact, Moses was the revolutionary leader who wrought radical change on the Jewish people. Accordingly, his dynamic leadership was short and dramatic, lasting only during his lifetime.

(Adapted from Midbar Shur, pp. 281-289)

RavKookTorah.org This Dvar Torah: SHMOT_65.htm ________________________________________________

from: TorahWeb to: [e-mail] date: Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 10:01 PM

Rabbi Mayer Twersky

Inspiration and Redemption

Ramban famously defines Sefer Shemos as the Book of Exile and Redemption. Ma'amad Har Sinai and the construction of the mishkan are included in the Sefer because

the exile did not end until the day [the people] returned to their place and returned to the stature of their forefathers ... when they arrived at Mount Sinai and built the Tabernacle, and the Holy One, Blessed is He, once again caused His Shechinah to dwell among them at that point they returned to the eminence of their forefathers of whom, "the Counsel of God was over their tents" and, they themselves were the Divine chariot. Then [the people] were considered redeemed. [Introduction to Shemos, Artscroll Translation] Redemption is a spiritual category; it is measured by connection and spiritual proximity to HKB"H. Thus Bnei Yisroel were first considered redeemed when HKB"H caused His Shechinah to dwell amongst them.

This is clearly Ramban's point. So why does he twice emphasize that redemption entails returning to the stature / eminence of their ancestors?

Ramban is preemptively addressing the following issue. Granted redemption is to be defined spiritually, not politically or geographically. [Political redemption is instrumentally - not ultimately - significant because subjugation interferes with avodas Hashem. (See Berachos 17a; Rambam Hilchos Teshuva 9:2.) Eretz Yisroel is of paramount spiritual significance because it is "the land of Hashem." (See Ramban Vayikra 18:25)] But the definition of hashro'as haShechinah seems unrealistically high. Ramban's response: what was achieved once can be achieved again. Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov were titans whom we revere; but they are also our forefathers. Our genetic material and spiritual capacities derive from them and thus while their example inspires reverence, it also obligates and inspires us. "A person is obligated to say, 'when will my actions match those of my forefathers'" (Tana D'vei Eliyahu.)

A word of reflection and introspection. Spiritual achievement depends on spiritual aspiration. If we shortchange ourselves in our aspirations, willy nilly we will come up short in realizing our potential. The mediocrity of our spiritual aspirations is one of the Achilles' heels of our generation. To transcend the numbing materialism of our times and attainkirvas Elokim we must first aspire to such transcendence. To focus on olam haboh values and eschew olam hazeh values we must first aspire to attaining and maintaining such focus.

Redemption awaits, but inspired aspiration must precede.

Copyright © 2015 by The TorahWeb Foundation. All rights reserved.

______________________________________________

from: Rabbi Yissocher Frand reply-to: [e-mail] to: [e-mail] date: Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:05 PM subject: Rabbi Frand on Parshas Shemos

The Symbolism of the Thorn Bush

Parshas Shmos can be considered a historic parsha. A seminal event in Jewish history occurred in this week's parsha that has effects until today: This is the parsha in which the Almighty chooses Moshe to lead the Jewish people and it is the first parsha in which the Almighty speaks to the Jewish people through Moshe Rabbeinu.

We are all familiar with the famous incident that inaugurates Moshe's status as a prophet: "An angel of G-d appeared to him in a flame of fire from within a thorn bush. He saw and behold! The bush was burning in the fire but the bush was not consumed." [Shmos 3:2] G-d appeared to Moshe in the guise of a burning bush. We often judge based on first impressions. This is G-d's introduction to the Jewish people. Of all possible symbolisms in which to introduce Himself, the Almighty chooses the symbolism of a burning bush. Why not a fir tree? Why not a mighty oak? Why not a cedar tree?

Rashi explains: As a bush -– and not as any other tree -- to indicate, "I am with them in their time of trouble" (Imo Anochi b'Tzarah). The Almighty is making a statement here. He appears as a lowly bush to emphasize that He is with us in our travails. G-d's appearing as a bush on fire was a metaphor that the Jewish people could identify with in their times of tribulation in Egypt. This idea of "Imo Anochi b'Tzarah" is very much akin to another expression often used to indicate sharing the burden with a fellow Jew: "nosei b'ol im chaveiro" (literally – carrying the yoke with his friend).

But even more pronounced is Moshe's reaction: Moshe thought, "Let me turn aside now and see this great sight – why will the bush not be burned?" [Shmos 3:3]. The pasuk says that G-d saw that Moshe's intent was to check out the phenomenon and immediately thereafter it says that G-d called to Moshe from the midst of the bush and Moshe responded, "Here I am!"

Let us pose the following question: Who would not be interested in checking out a bush that was burning without being consumed? People stop to check up on what is happening even if they witness nothing stranger than a house on fire. The fire is consuming the house, but it still draws a crowd of people who are "checking it out". No normal person in his right mind would ignore a miraculous phenomenon such as a flaming bush which is NOT being consumed.

The way the pasukim are presented, they seem to indicate that somehow the very fact that Moshe came closer to check out the phenomenon of the burning bush was what prompted G-d to decide, as it were, "Aha! He's my man!" This is very curious, because anyone would do this.

The Medrash asks this question and answers that the Almighty was not impressed that Moshe checked out the bush. According to the Medrash "And G-d saw that he turned aside to see..." [Shmos 3:4] is not referring to the burning bush at all. It refers rather to Moshe's turning aside to see (when he was still in Egypt) the aff liction of the Jewish people. Moshe was in the lap of luxury, a prince in the house of Pharaoh and nevertheless he went out to check up on the welfare of his brethren and he saw their suffering (Va'yare b'sivlosam) [Shmos 2:11]. This is the event referred to by "And Hashem saw that he (Moshe) turned aside to see" ("Va'yare Hashem ki sar lir'os").

This is actually an attribute of the Almighty – He descends from His Mighty Abode to check up on the needs and welfare of His nation. This is the metaphor of the Divine Fire in the lowly bush. My "Shalom Aleichem" (personal introduction) to the Jewish people, the Almighty states, is the message that I descend to be amongst them in their time of need. I will pick a leader for them who also carries this same attribute of "Imo anochi b'tzarah" – when you are in pain I am in pain as well!

There is a marvelous comment of the Baal HaTurim in Parshas Miketz on the pasuk "And to Yosef were born two sons before the years of fam ine came." [Bereshis 41:50]. The Talmud teaches the significance of the fact that Yosef's children were born before the years of famine and derives from here the Halacha that a person is forbidden to engage in marital relations with his wife during a time of famine [Taanis 11a]. The principle is that when people are suffering one should abstain from acts of pleasure. Even though abstaining from pleasurable activities will not in and of itself relieve the suffering of others it demonstrates that one wishes to associate with those who suffer: "Imo anochi b'tzarah" [I am with him together in his time of travail]. Yosef thus, like Moshe, was also one who suffered together with his fellow man.

Listen now to the comment of the Baal HaTurim: Only twice in the Torah do we find the word "u'l'Yosef" [and to Yosef] – one is the above quoted pasuk in Parshas Miketz and the other is in Zos Habracha "And to Yosef it was said: Blessed by Hashem is his land..." [Devorim 33:13]. The B aal HaTurim expounds this homiletically as a type of "Gezeirah Shavah" [linguistic linkage from which lessons may be derived]: Since Yosef abstained from personal pleasure because people were suffering, he merited that G-d blessed his land. Indeed the portion of Yosef was the most abundant and fertile region in the entire Land of Israel. Rashi says this explicitly in Chumash on the above-cited pasuk from Zos HaBracha. This was a "measure for measure" reward. One who is a "Nos'ai b'ol im chaveiro" [bears the burden of his fellow's suffering] is deserving of a bonanza.

Rav Matisyahu Solomon has a beautiful insight along these same lines. In the blessing of Yosef in Zos HaBracha it is written "and with the delicacies of the land and its fullness; and by the goodwill of He who rests in the thorn bush..." [Devarim 33:16]. This is the only place in the Chumash in which the Almighty is referred to by the title "He who rests in the thorn bush"! Rashi there makes the point tha t Moshe is blessing Yosef with the thought "May his land be blessed out of the goodwill and contentment of the Holy One, Blessed is He, Who was first revealed to me in the thorn bush."

The Almighty's "Shalom Aleichem" to Klal Yisrael was through the thorn bush to demonstrate that He empathized and associated with their troubles. He picked Moshe, who was another individual who empathized with the troubles of the people. Finally, Moshe blessed Yosef who empathized with the troubles of the people and invoked in his blessing "the One who rests in the thorn bush" because Yosef (like Moshe) demonstrated the attribute that the Almighty appreciates": Nos'ai b'ol im chaveiro."

This write-up was adapted from the hashkafa portion of Rabbi Yissocher Frand's Commuter Chavrusah Torah Tape series on the weekly Torah portion. Tapes, CDs, MP3s or a complete catalogue can be ordered from the Yad Yechiel Institute, PO Box 511, Owings Mills MD 21117-0511. Call [phone] or e-mail [e-mail] or visit http://www.yadyechiel.org/ for further information. To Support Project Genesis- Torah.org Transcribed by David Twersky Seattle, WA; Technical Assistance by Dovid Hoffman, Baltimore, MD RavFrand, Copyright © 2007 by Rabbi Yissocher Frand and Torah.org. Join the Jewish Learning Revolution! Torah.org: The Judaism Site brings this and a host of other classes to you every week. Visit http://torah.org or email [e-mail] to get your own free copy of this mailing. Need to change or stop your subscription? Please visit our subscription center, http://torah.org/subscribe/ -- see the links on that page. Permission is granted to redistribute, but please give proper attribution and copyright to the author and Torah.org. Both the author and Torah.org reserve certain rights. Email [e-mail] for full information. Torah.org: The Judaism Site Project Genesis, Inc. 122 Slade Avenue, Suite 250 Baltimore, MD 21208 http://www.torah.org/ [e-mail] [phone]

_______________________________________

from: Torah Musings reply-to: Torah Musings date: Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:19 AM subject: Torah Musings Daily Digest for 1/5/2015: 3 new posts

Halachically Speaking Volume 10 Issue 12 Authored by Moishe Dovid Lebovits Reviewed by Rabbi Ben-zion Schiffenbauer Shlit"a Piskei Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlit"a Reviewed by Harav Yisroel Belsky Shlit"a