ATONEMENT FOR THE SALE OF YOSEF - PARSHAS SHEKALIM

"This shall they give - everyone who passes through the census - a half shekel of the sacred shekel, the shekel is twenty geras, half a shekel as a portion to Hashem."

In Parshas Ki Sisa, the Torah instructs every man to give half a shekel (known as machsis hashekel) towards the communal offering given in the Mishkan (Tabernacle). Since the destruction of the Beis HaMikdosh, we no longer merit to have this Mitzvo, however, we remember it every year when we read Parshas Shekalim. Accordingly, there still remain valuable lessons that can be derived from the machsis hashekel.

The Medrash Rabbah offers a surprising reason for the mitzvo, and in particular, why the specific value of half a shekel, must be given. The Medrash explains that the giving of the half shekel is an atonement for the sale of Yosef Hatzaddik by his brothers. The brothers sold Yosef for twenty pieces of silver. This is equivalent to five shekel. Ten of the brothers sold Yosef, each one receiving one tenth of this value, making a half shekel each. Accordingly, since each brother gained half a shekel in the sale, their descendants were instructed to give half a shekel as an atonement. The obvious question to be asked is what is the connection between the giving of half a shekel and the sale of Yosef?

In order to answer this, we need to deepen our understanding of the sale of Yosef. The brothers knew that twelve tribes were destined to come from Yaakov Avinu. Each tribe would have its own unique qualities and they would all join together to combine to make up the Jewish people as a whole, with tribe complementing the others. The brothers decided that Yosef had lost his right to be part of this group, because of what they perceived to be his dangerous attitude and behavior. Therefore, they believed that they could remove Yosef from the destined 12 tribes, and be left with only eleven. The chiddush (novelty) of this approach was that they planned to remove one of the twelve pieces to the puzzle that would constitute the Jewish people. They felt that they could do without Yosef's potential contribution to the Jewish people, and the Jewish people could continue without him.

With this understanding we can now explain how the mitzvo of Shekalim atones for the sale of Yosef. The commentaries note the significance of the fact that one must give half a shekel as opposed to a full shekel. Many explain that it comes to teach us about the importance of unity amongst the Jewish people by showing that each person is only 'half a person' without combining with the strengths of his fellow man. One should not think that he can separate from his fellow Jews and be unaffected. A person who ha this attitude he will be incomplete. In this way, the mitzvo of giving half a shekel can act as an atonement for the sale of Yosef. Yosef's brothers thought that they could get along fine without Yosef's contribution to the Jewish people. Their mistake was that even if they believed him to be erring, he was still an essential part of the Jewish people. By giving half a shekel we remind ourselves that this is not the correct attitude - all Jews are part of a unified whole, and everyone needs to combine with their fellow.

This idea even extends itself to people who are not behaving in the most optimal fashion. Shortly after the mitzvo of giving half a shekel, HaShem commands us to combine a number of spices to make the incense. One of these is the chelbanah, which Chazal tell us has a foul smelling odor. Why then is it included in the ingredients for the incense? The Gemara explains that any communal fast that does not include sinners is not considered a proper fast. Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt"l explains that when the Jewish people are not united, then they are not considered one unit, and therefore the power of the community is drastically weakened.

The Bostoner Rebbe zt"l epitomized the attitude that every Jew should be treated with respect regardless of his religious affiliation. His funeral testified to this by the fact that there were numerous people attending who would not be classified as regular Bostoner Chassidim. He expressed his attitude in this area in a couple of brief sentences: "The trouble with our generation is we only love our fellow man if he's like us - if he davens in my shtiebel , if he has the same Rebbe, if he goes to the same yeshiva - then [he says] 've'ahavta lereyecha'. If he's not 'camocha', then I have no business with him." In a similar vein, he said, "When people try to disassociate one group from another, that's part of the 'torah' of sinas Yisrael (hatred of Jews). Every person can improve. Every group can improve. But it doesn't mean that these people have to be blackballed because some people think that they're not exactly the way they are..."

We have seen how the Medrash connecting the episode of the sale of Yosef to the mitzvo of giving half a shekel, teaches us that we should realize that we should never 'blackball' other Jews, regardless of who they are. May we all merit to learn from the words of the Bostoner Rebbe zt"l and emulate his actions, in striving to unite all Jews.

HISHTADLUS IN RUCHNIUS - PEKUDEI

After the Avodas Hamishkan was completed the workmen could not erect the Mishkan because of its massive weight. Since Moshe Rabbeinu had not had a share in the actual work of the Mishkan, Hashem wanted him to have the honor of erecting it. Hashem told him to make the attempt and the Mishkan would stand on its own, and it would appear to the onlookers as if he put it up himself .

This incident poses a difficulty - it seems clear that just as all the builders of the Mishkan were rewarded for their work, so too Moshe Rabbeinu was surely rewarded for the actual hakamas Hamishkan - why is this the case, he did not actually do anything, Hashem performed the erecting Himself?! In reality we are only able to perform any mitzvo because Hashem enables us to do so - Hashem is constantly sustaining the world and every human being in it - without this siata dishmaya we would not be able to do anything. The only difference in the case of the erecting of the Mishkan is that it was an open miracle whereas every mitzvo that we perform is a hidden miracle. The reward that we receive is not because of the result but because of the effort that we make. Moshe Rabbein made the effort to erect the Mishkan, therefore he was rewarded as if he performed it himself.

Sifsei Chaim develops this theme further; he writes that we all realize that we do not have the ability to achieve anything in gashmius without Hashem. If that is so, then why do we do so much activity? After chet Adam haRishon, Hashem decreed that man must exert physical effort in order to survive - however “we must realise that, in reality we do not achieve anything, all of our actions are only the exertion of the necessary effort which is a fulfillment of the passuk “you will eat bread by the sweat of your brow.” All of our work in earning our parnasa and other worldly activities are a result of this ‘gezeiras hishtadlus‘, we are required to expend such effort but we must recognize that ultimately it does not really achieve anything. However, we are less aware that the same is true even in the realm of ruchnius. We do have free will, which is the ability to decide whether we will choose good or bad, however, the final result is not in our control at all. For example, a person may expend great effort in buying a beautiful esrog, but when he comes to use it on Yom Tov he may drop the esrog and the pitom could break. We can make the decision to do the mitzva but only Hashem can actually enable us to completely fulfill it.

Based on the yesod that the gezeiras hishtadlus applies equally to gashmius and ruchnius, one may want to equate the two realms in another way: It is well known that bitachon is more important than hishtadlus in gashmius, and the more bitachon we have the more we will receive regardless of the hishtadlus that we put in. So too one may approach ruchnius with the same attitude - that the ikar avoda in ruchnius is bitachon and that hishtadlus is merely a secondary factor. However, Sifsei Chaim stresses that it is incorrect to totally equate ruchnius and gashmius in this regard - there is a crucial difference between the two: “In matters of gashmius, the required hishtadlus is a penalty that one must pay and it is not good to add to payment of the penalty [ie. one should minimize his hishtadlus as much as possible]. In contrast, in avodas Hashem he must do as much histhadlus as possible and strive with all his strength..”

This is a very important lesson; we generally recognize that bitachon is an essential aspect of avodas Hashem and that our own hishtadlus should be minimized as much as possible, however one may also have the same attitude in spiritual matters; he may limit his hishtadlus in ruchnius with the mistaken assumption that he can trust in Hashem to do the work for him - this is a serious mistake for, as Sifsei Chaim explains, in ruchnius there is no limit to how much effort one should expend. This idea is illustrated by the following story involving Rav Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz zt”l. “As a teenager, Hertzl Shechter was invariably a few minutes late for Reb Shraga Feivel’s 9.00am Tanach shiur, and one day he received a notice that ‘the Boss’ wanted to speak to him. Shechter entered the room trembling. “Nu, Hertzl, when are you going to start coming on time?” Reb Shraga Feivel asked. Shifting uncomfortably in his seat, Shechter could manage nothing more than, “Im yirtzeh Hashem.” But Reb Shraga Feivel was not to be put off so easily. “Nein,” he began shaking his head, “not im yirtzeh Hashem, Im yirtzeh Hertzl - no, not if Hashem wants; rather if Hertzl wants.” There are times when a person should not comfort himself with the fact that Hashem will ensure that everything runs smoothly, rather he must take the intiative himself.

If there is a misconception about the role of hishtadlus in one’s own personal avodas Hashem, then this is certainly the case with regard to the state of Klal Yisroel. One may easily be tempted to think that, no matter how bad the situation is, Hashem will not let it deteriorate indefinitely and that we can trust that eventually things will improve ‘mimayla’. Chazal teach us that this is a grave error; if people do not take action to resolve the problems of Klal Yisrael then they will only persist - Hashem requires us to bring about an improvement through our own efforts. This idea is expressed in the Mishna in Pirkei Avos: “In a place where there are no men hishtadel [strive] to be a man.” Many commentaries explain this to mean that when there is a lack of people serving the needs of the Klal, one must stand up and fill the gap. Rav Hirsch zt”l writes that in normal circumstances one should be humble and avoid publicity, however when people are needed to serve the klal then humility and tsnius are totally inappropriate, rather one should do whatever is necessary to improve the situation even if it involves receiving unwanted publicity. It is noteworthy that the Mishna chose to use the word, ‘histhadel’ when it could have simply said ‘in a place where there are no men be a man.” The reason for this is that the word, ‘hishtadel’ implies great effort; the Mishna is teaching us that it is not enough to merely ‘try’ to help the community, rather, one must exert great effort into the task at hand.

The Alter of Novardok stressed the need for such exertion in the battle to uphold the Torah. “When a person becomes aware of as grievous a failing within society as its present educational structure, which has taken such a tremendous toll on our youth - how much must he summon up all of his powers to guard the breach, remove the impediment and raise up the standard of truth…. there is no alternative but to rouse ourselves from our slumber, consider the dangers which confront us and go out with energy and drive, and use all our talents and sensitivities to do all that we are able.” One may argue that there is a great limit to what a single person can achieve even if he expends much effort: The Alter seems to have thought differently: He once said that, “if a person works as hard for the benefit of the public as he works for the benefit of a single member of his family, he could found a hundred yeshivas!”

A common question that non-observant Jews ask is ‘why did G-d let the Holocaust happen’? Of course, this is an issue that cannot be explained easily. However, there is another question that can help answer it; ‘Why did man let the Holocaust happen?’ Hashem created the world and He constantly oversees it, and yet he has given man control of the world - man has the capability to build it or destroy it, it is the action of man that leads to pain and suffering, not G-d.

Throughout his life, Moshe Rabbeinu was willing to extend great effort to fulfill the Ratson Hashem - as a result Hashem gave him the ability to achieve superhuman results such as lifting the beams of the Mishkan. We can learn from this that all Hashem requires is that we extend the effort, the results are in Hashem’s hands.

THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE WOMEN - VAYAKHEL

The Torah describes how the people eagerly came to donate their prized possessions towards the building of the Mishkan (Tabernacle). “The men came with the women; everyone whose heart motivated him brought bracelets, nose-rings, body ornaments – all sorts of gold ornaments – every man who raised up an offering of gold to HaShem.” The commentaries discuss the meaning of the phrase, “the men came with the women”. Rabbeinu Bechaye explains that the women in fact came first to donate their jewelry, and the men only came after them. This, he explains, demonstrates their righteousness in and of itself but it also reflects positively on an earlier incident involving jewelry – that of the Golden Calf. When the men demanded that Aaron make for them a statue, he told them to remove the women’s jewelry. However, the women refused to give over their jewelry so the men took their own gold and gave that towards the building of the Calf. From the incident of the Golden Calf alone, it is unclear why the women refused to give their jewelry. It was possible that their main motivation was their natural attachment to their jewelry, as opposed to the pure motivation of refusal to be involved with the sin of the Golden Calf. However, in Parshas Vayakhel we see that the women were very willing to donate their jewelry towards the elevated purpose of the building of the Mishkan. This retroactively teaches us about the reason that they did not give their jewelry at the Golden Calf. It was not because of their attachment to gold and silver, because that did not prevent the women from parting with them for the sake of the Mishkan. Rather, their refusal to give towards the Golden Calf emanated from leshem Shamayim (pure) motives - they wanted no part in that terrible sin.

Rav Avraham Pam zt”l derives a very important concept from this explanation. It is known in Hebrew as ‘Maasim shel adam mochichim zeh es zeh’. This means that the actions of a person in one area can reveal something about his actions in another area. In this case, the women’s willingness to part with their jewelry for the Mishka, revealed their pure intentions when refusing to do so for the Golden Calf.

We see another example of this concept with regards to one of the names given to the Third meal that is eaten on Shabbos: Shalosh Seudas – this literally means, ‘three meals’. This is a very strange name to give the third meal, it would be more appropriate to only use its other name – seudah shelishis. Why is this meal also known as ‘three meals’? The answer is that the way a person conducts himself at the third meal reflects retroactively on his intentions during the first two Shabbos meals. There are two possible reasons as to why a person would eat well at the first two Shabbos meals: It could be because of his pure desire to honor the Shabbos by eating delicious food, or it could emanate from his hunger and desire to eat well, because both those meals come at a time when a person is normally hungry and ready to eat well. However, the third meal comes quite soon after Shabbos lunch, therefore a person’s natural hunger will not be high. If he refrains from eating at the third meal despite the fact that it is a Mitzvo to eat then, he retroactively shows that his main kavannah for the first two meals was to fill his stomach more than honor the Shabbos! If, however, he does partake in a delicious meal he demonstrates that his intentions are for the honor of Shabbos, for if it were not Shabbos he would otherwise eat far less or nothing at all. Accordingly, by eating the third meal he retroactively demonstrates his intent for the first two, and at this point it is clear that he ate ALL THREE MEALS with pure intentions. Therefore, the third meal merits the name, ‘three meals’ because, for one who eats the third meal, it is considered as if he ate all three meals with pure intent.

This concept of ‘Maasim shel adam mochichim zeh es zeh’ is of great importance because it is a very effective mechanism in judging the consistency of people’s actions. This idea is brought out by the Beis HaLevi on Parshas Vayigash. When Yosef revealed himself to his brothers he asked them the question; “is my father still alive? ” When the brothers heard this, they were completely speechless and disconcerted. The Medrash compares Yosef’s revelation to his brothers to that of the Day of Judgment. It says that if the brothers could not answer Yosef who was younger than them, then all the more so when HaShem (so to speak) comes and rebukes us, we will be left speechless. The commentaries ask; what exactly is the comparison between Yosef’s revelation to the brothers and the Day of Judgment.

The Beis HaLevi answers by first explaining Yosef’s question about whether his father was alive – it was very clear from the events up to this time that Yaakov Avinu was still alive! He answers that Yosef was in truth giving them a veiled rebuke. Yehuda had just spent a great deal of time arguing that Yosef should not take Binyomin as a slave because it would destroy Yaakov. By bringing up the well-being of Yaakov, Yosef was alluding to them that their purported concern for their father did not seem to be consistent with their actions in selling Yosef so many years earlier. At that time, they had shown no concern for the pain that their father would feel al the loss of his beloved son. In this way, the brothers had contradicted their own arguments through their very actions! The Beis HaLevi then explains the similarity of Yosef’s ‘rebuke’ to that of the Day of Judgment. On that awesome day each person will be asked about his various actions, including his sins and failure to keep Mitzvos properly. He may have excuses, however, these excuses will then be scrutinized by his other actions in that same area. For example, a person might justify his failure to give sufficient money to charity on the basis that he was lacking in his own livelihood. However, his spending in other areas will then be examined – if it becomes clear that in other areas he was all too willing and able to spend large amounts of money, then he himself has ruined his own justification for failing to give charity! In this vein, his actions in spending money for his own enjoyment reflects badly on his spending of money for the Mitzvo of giving charity.

In this vein, the Choftez Chaim once berated a wealthy man for giving insufficient funds to charity. The man answered that he did indeed give away a significant amount. The Chofetz Chaim then worked out the amount of money he gave to charity and compared it to his expenses on his own luxuries. It came out that the man spent more money on his drapery alone than on all the charity that he gave!

We have discussed the concept of ‘Maasim shel adam mochichim zeh es zeh’ and seen its great significance in the process of judgment. The obvious lesson to be derived from this concept, is that it is essential that a person analyze the consistency of his actions. For example, a person who claims that he does not have enough time to learn will have to justify his failure to learn on the Day of Judgment. If it becomes clear that he did have enough time for many other types of activities then his claim that he did not have enough time to learn will be put in serious jeopardy. His actions in other areas show that in truth it wasn’t because he did not have enough time to learn, rather that it was a very low priority in his list of importance. It would be much less disconcerting if we can make our own self-analysis of such inconsistencies and fix them before the Day of Judgment. May we all merit to achieve consistency in all our actions.

REACHING OUR POTENTIAL - VAYAKHEL

In the midst of its account of the building of the Mishkan that Torah states that, “Every man whose heart inspired him came.. ” The Ramban writes that this refers to those who came to do the work of weaving, sewing and building. Where did these people learn how to perform such skilled crafts? The Ramban answers that they found deep within their teva the ability to do them. These formerly hidden powers came about as a result of their deep desire to fulfill the ratson Hashem by helping to build the Mishkan. As a result of their burning desire, Hashem gave them the ability to do things that they had never been taught!

There is a well-known principle that Hashem grants us a unique set of talents with which they can fulfill their potential in life. Whilst this is certainly true it seems that it can be somewhat misapplied: As we grow up we naturally become aware of our strengths and weaknesses - there is the tendency that we can limit our activities to areas in which our strengths lie and ignore those fields in which we fell less able. For example, a person may feel that he is adept at speaking in front of small groups but that he cannot speak in front of large audiences. Thus, even when there is a necessity for someone to speak in such a setting, he will shy away from the responsibility because he has ‘pigeon-holed’ himself as being unable to speak in front of many people. We learn from the Ramban that this is an erroneous attitude - the people who stepped forward to work in the Mishkan had no awareness that they were able to perform such skilled crafts - however, as a result of their devotion to Hashem they found hitherto untapped talents that could be used to fulfill ratson Hashem. So too, in our own lives there may be times when there is a need for a certain task to be performed and we may feel that we are unable to perform it - however, the Mishna in Avos tells us that, “in a place where there are no men, be a man.” The Mishna does not qualify its exhortation by saying that you should only stand up where there is no man in an area where you feel highly capable. Rather, the only criteria that we should examine is whether there is anyone else who can perform the required task as well as we can. And if there is not, then if we dedicate ourselves to doing ratson Hashem then surely Hashem will bring out in us hidden talents.

There are many examples of people who were inspired to bring out hidden talents and consequently achieved great things; one of the most remarkable is that of the Netsiv zt”l. When he completed his commentary on the Sheiltos, he made a seuda, partly because that is the custom when one completes a sefer, but there was another, more personal reason as well. He related that when he was a boy he was not particularly serious about his Torah studies. His parents made every effort to help him change his attitude but to no avail. One day he overheard them discussing his lack of success in Torah learning - they decided that he had no prospect of becoming a Talmid Chacham and therefore he should learn to become a cobbler. They hoped that at least he would be a yirei shamayim who would go about his work with honesty and dedication. When he heard this, it greatly shocked him and he decided to take his Torah studies seriously - this incident has such an impact on him that it led to a complete change in his attitude and he became a Gadol. How did he achieve so much? Because he developed a desire to be great in learning - it was through this desire that he found in his teva hitherto undiscovered ability to learn Torah to a very high level.

One may respond to this story by arguing that not everybody can become such a great Talmid Chacham, however Jewish history shows that we need not necessarily be a Gadol to achieve great things - sometimes there are other areas of expertise which are required in order to bring about a fulfillment of ratson Hashem. Reb Dovid Dryan zt”l provides us with an excellent example of such a case. He was a pious shochet known for his adherence to shemiras halashon. However, there is one more thing that makes him stand out - he was directly responsible for the founding and running of the Gateshead Yeshiva and played a significant role in the formation of the Gateshead Kollel and Seminary. To a significant degree, his dedication is responsible for the fact that Gateshead is known as the greatest Torah center in Europe through which thousands of boys and girls have received a high level Torah education. How did Reb Dovid Dryan achieve this? When he came to live in Gateshead he found that there was no Yeshiva there. He said to himself, “how can I live in a place where there is no Yeshiva?!” This may be a question that many of us would ask in a similar situation. However, he did not suffice with just asking the question - he took action; he devoted much time and effort to achieve a seemingly impossible task in the face of considerable opposition. He took on many tasks which were not necessarily within the areas of his expertise, including fundraising and administration. He could have easily felt that he was a shochet and that was where his responsibilities to the community ended. Instead he motivated himself to do what was needed and Hashem granted him the ability to succeed .

Despite these inspiring stories one could still argue that he has in the past made an effort in certain fields and not been successful - consequently he feels that he is exempt from taking responsibility in these areas. The Chofetz Chaim addresses this claim; he points out how much effort we invest into our own interests. For example, if a business venture is not going well, a person will not simply give up, rather he will constantly think how he can improve the situation - he will seek advice from other businessmen and eventually he will often succeed. So too, he writes, “If Ratson Hashem was of equal value to a person as are his own personal affairs, he would seek advice and strategies how to build up Torah so that it does not weaken, and surely Hashem will help him find ways to succeed… however we do not do so in heavenly matters. When one sees that there is no way to improve the situation he immediately gives up and exempts himself from having to do anything. ” If we were willing to apply the same effort in Avodas Hashem as in our financial interests then we could surely rise above our accepted limits.

There is a remarkable present day example of a person who lives these words of the Chofetz Chaim. Rav Meir Shuster Shlita is naturally a shy person who is most happy in the Beis Medrash learning or davenning. However, many years ago, he recognized a need in Klal Yisroel - every day dozens of secular Jews would visit the Kotel and return back to their lives empty of Torah. He saw the necessity to approach these people and offer them accommodation in a hostel that could serve as the base with which to encourage the visitors to go to Yeshiva or Seminary. Consequently, he took it upon himself to go against his teva and walk up to these strangers and engage them in conversation. After doing this for many years, it is impossible to know how many hundreds of lives have been changed by his bold decision to do something against his teva because he felt it was Ratson Hashem. But it is clear that had he limited himself to his natural areas of strength then the world would have greatly suffered for it.

The people who raised up their hearts to fulfill Ratson Hashem found powers that they could never imagine they possessed. We too have the ability to break beyond our limits and achieve the seemingly impossible.

SHABBOS - VAYAKHEL

The Parsha begins with an exhortation to observe Shabbos: "For six days work will be done and the seventh day shall be holy for you, a day of complete rest for Hashem, whoever does work on it shall be put to death. " The commentaries ask that the wording of the Torah in this passuk needs explanation; it should have said, "for six days you will do work" in the active sense, rather than saying that work will be done in the passive form .

They explain that the Torah is teaching us about the attitude a person should have that will enable him to have the fortitude to refrain from doing melacha (prohibited activity) on Shabbos: Throughout the week a person is required to work in order to earn his livelihood, he cannot sit back and expect G-d to provide for him if he puts in no effort. He is required to put in hishtadlus because of the decree that Hashem placed upon mankind after the sin of Adam HaRishon. However, in truth , all his hishtadlus (effort) is not the reason for his success, rather Hashem is its sole Source. On Shabbos, Hashem commands us to refrain from creative activity to acknowledge this and that all the work we do in the week is only part of the gezeiras hishtadlus (decree to work). However, if one comes to believe that his physical efforts are in fact the cause of his livelihood then he will find it very difficult to refrain from working on Shabbos; he thinks that the more he works the more he will earn and therefore it is logical for him to work on Shabbos as well as the rest of the week. In response to this erroneous attitude, the Torah tells us that one should view the work that he does in a passive sense - that in truth he does not do the work, rather that it is done for him. Hashem, so-to-speak, does the work and provides for each person's livelihood. If one recognizes this then he will find it far easier to refrain from working on Shabbos because he realizes that in truth his work is not the cause of his livelihood .

It seems that this lesson is not limited to avoiding the 39 melachas that are forbidden by the Torah. There is a Rabbinical prohibition of speaking about melacha that one plans to do in the rest of the week . Doing so also shows a level of lack of appreciation of the lesson of Shabbos that Hashem provides one's livelihood. Moreover, whilst it is technically permissible to think about melacha on Shabbos, it is nonetheless praiseworthy to avoid such thoughts completely . Such a level reflects a true appreciation of how Shabbos is a reflection on the fact that Hashem runs the world, and that one's own thoughts of melacha are of no benefit.

This idea is brought out in the Gemara in Shabbos: The Gemara tells of a righteous man who saw that there was a hole in the fence of his field on Shabbos. He thought about fixing it after Shabbos, and then remembered that it was Shabbos and felt guilty about thinking about melacho on Shabbos. As a show of regret he then decided never to fix that fence and as a reward a miracle occurred and a tzlaf tree grew from which he was able to support himself and his family . There are two difficulties with this Gemara: Firstly, why did he refrain from ever fixing the fence - what was the benefit of doing so and how could it rectify his initial mistake? Secondly, what was the significance of the reward he received, how was that a measure for measure response to his decision never to build the fence?

It seems that we can answer these problems through the principle we are discussing. When this righteous man saw the fence, he thought about fixing it, momentarily forgetting the lesson of Shabbos, that Hashem is the Source of one's livelihood and that man's efforts are worthless without Hashem's help. In order to rectify this 'error' he decided to never fix the fence to demonstrate that he did indeed recognize that his own efforts were not the cause of his livelihood. As a reward for this attitude, Hashem showed him measure for measure that he was correct, and provided him with a new source of income, the tzlaf tree without any input from the man himself! This proved that Hashem can provide a person with his livelihood regardless of his hishtadlus.

Throughout the week it is very difficult to see through the illusion that man's hishtadlus is not the true cause of his livelihood, and that Hashem is the sole Provider. Shabbos provides man with the opportunity to see clearly that all his hishtadlus is ultimately unnecessary . On Shabbos whilst the rest of the world continues striving to earn their living through effort, observant Jews rest from such activity, recognizing that Hashem runs the world without needing man's input. As we have seen, this attitude does not only express itself through avoidance of melacha, it even extends to refraining from speaking about melacha. The highest level is to even avoid thinking about melacha that needs to be done. All these prohibitions are supposed to instill in us the realization that all our accomplishments throughout the week only come about because Hashem so desires. May we all merit to observe Shabbos free of action, speech and thought about melacha.

CLEARING THE CONFUSION - KI SISA

The sin of the Golden Calf is one of the most difficult to comprehend episodes in the Torah. The commentaries discuss at length how the Jewish people could stumble in such a severe sin just forty days after the Revelation at Sinai. The events that led up to the sin are similarly clothed in mystery. In particular, the account of how the people came to believe that Moshe Rabbeinu had died Is very difficult to understand: The Torah tells us that the people miscalculated when Moshe would return, believing he should come back one day earlier than was in fact the case. The Gemara elaborates on the details of this mistake. It tells us that the Satan showed them an image of Moshe no longer alive. When they saw this they panicked and demanded that Aaron create for them a new medium through whom they could relate to G-d. One of the difficulties in this passage is the method in which the Satan caused them to sin by showing them an image. Nowhere do see we such a tactic used in other incidents in the Torah. Normally a person sins because he would rationalize that what he was doing was correct. What is the nature of this form of persuasion and why was it necessary for the Satan to show them such an image instead of using the normal methods of persuasion?

Rav Chaim of Volozhin in his classic work, Nefesh HaChaim answers these questions in the course of his discussion on the nature of the yetser hara (evil inclination). In order to do this, he first explains the sin of Adam and Chava, and ends by showing how the events of Mattan Torah (the Giving of the Torah) and the Golden Calf paralleled the state of Adam and Chava before the sin and after the sin: He begins with an analysis of Adam and Chava’s state before the sin: Chazal tell us that before the sin, mankind did not have a yetser hara, yet this does not mean that he did not have free will. He related to evil - in his situation in the form of the nachash (snake) - as something that was totally outside of himself. Its goal was to somehow persuade him to perform an act that was clearly abhorrent to him. The Nefesh HaChaim compares it to a person deciding whether he should step into a fire. However, somehow, the nachash was able to seduce Chava into eating from the fruit of the knowledge of Good and Evil. By eating from this tree, Adam and Chava brought the yetser hara into themselves. This means that they now constituted of a combination of the good that emanated from their pure soul, and the evil that came from the yetser hara.

The result of this was that they were now subject to the main weapon of the yetser hara; confusion. When a person knows that something is clearly wrong he will not do it. The yetser hara’s tactic is to convince him that this sin is actually not a sin at all, in fact it is the correct thing to do. In this vein, Chazal tell us that a person only sins when a ruach shtus overtakes him – this means that he loses touch with his sense of right and wrong and therefore does the wrong thing, whilst convincing himself that it is actually the right thing to do.

The Nefesh HaChaim continues that this state of being continued until Mattan Torah. The Gemara states that the ‘poison’ that Chava ingested when she sinned (ie. the yetser hara) was completely negated when the Jewish people stood at Har Sinai. In this way, the Jewish people returned to the level of Adam before the sin. At this point in time, the people would be able to live eternally as was the case with Adam before he ate from the tree. With this understanding of the state of the people after Mattan Torah, the Nefesh HaChaim explains why the Satan showed an image to the people. They were on such a high level that there was no yetser hara inside them. Accordingly, the yetser hara could not trick them with its regular weapon of internal confusion. Rather, it had to persuade them externally, in the same way that the nachash did with Chava. When the people succumbed to the Satan’s persuasion, the ‘poison’ from the sin returned to them and the yetser hara once again dwelled within them.

We have seen how the Satan was forced to revert to unorthodox methods of persuasion in order to cause the Jewish people to sin with the Golden Calf. However, after they sinned, the Satan re-entered the very being of each person, leaving us with the difficult task of trying to discern the good inside of us from the evil. The yetser hara’s main tool now is to convince us that what we are doing is actually permitted or even a Mitzvo. For example, the Chofetz Chaim zt”l pointed out that many people were speaking lashon hara with the justification that this particular thing they were saying was permissible; or that it was permitted to speak lashon hara about that particular person. The lashon hara speaker did not think he was speaking lashon hara, rather he rationalized that what he was saying did not constitute forbidden speech. In this vein, the Baal HaTania points out that if one were to offer an observant person a large amount of money to speak lashon hara, he will refuse. This is because he intellectually recognizes that no amount of money is worth transgressing a Mitzvo. Yet the same person will, on another occasion, speak lashon hara for no monetary gain! This is because he convinces himself that he is not speaking lashon hara at all.

How can a person begin the long journey in discerning between the yetser tov and the yetser hara that is inside of him? One vital tool is Torah learning. If a person learns the laws of lashon hara, for example he will find it much harder to rationalize that what he is saying is permissible. Likewise, learning Mussar helps a person understand how his yetser hara works, and act accordingly. The other essential tool is that of Cheshbon HaNefesh (accounting of the soul). This involves a regular analysis of one’s actions and can enable a person to look back and rationally analyze the true nature of his actions. It is highly recommended to seek assistance in how to do Cheshbon HaNefesh in the proper way. With a concerted and long-term effort at learning Torah and self-analysis a person can begin the long journey back to gaining true clarity as to good and evil.

CARRYING SINNERS - KI SISA

After the terrible sin of Chet Haegel (the Golden Calf) Moshe Rabbeinu pleads greatly for Hashem to forgive the Jewish people. After granting His forgiveness, Hashem then informs Moshe of His 13 Middos of Rachamim (the 13 traits of mercy). He tells Moshe that whenever the Jewish people are in need of mercy they should cry out this prayer.

One of these Middos is that Hashem is "noseh avon v'pesha v'chataas"; this is normally translated as meaning that Hashem forgives iniquity, willful sin and error. However, the literal translation of the word 'noseh' does not mean 'forgive', rather it means, 'carries'. What does it mean that Hashem 'carries' sin? Rav Noach Weinberg zt"l explained with an analogy of how a bank may act with a person who has a mortgage with it . He regularly pays his mortgage on time, but at some point he may hit hard times and struggle to pay for a couple of months. The bank could react in two possible ways: it could come down hard on him, demanding that he pay immediately. Alternatively, it could act with tolerance and patience, recognizing that the borrower is generally a reliable person who is enduring temporary difficulties, and will soon be able to resume payment of the mortgage. Accordingly, the bank will 'carry' the borrower, supporting him patiently, until he is able to recover. Rav Weinberg explained in this vein, that when a person sins, Hashem does not punish him immediately, rather He 'carries' him, enabling him to continue unaffected, giving him a chance to do teshuva .

One of the most fundamental aspects of a person's Avodas Hashem is to emulate Hashem's Middos, because by being 'like' G-d, so to speak we become closer to him. How can a person emulate G-d's trait of 'carrying sinners'? There are many occasions in a person's life when he will encounter people who suddenly experience a significant yerida (worsening) in their behavior This may manifest itself when a child or student starts behaving in an undesirable way. The parent or teacher's natural inclination may be to treat them in a strict fashion in the hope that such treatment will force them to improve themselves. Experience proves that this approach is often unhelpful and on many occasions can be harmful. The root of the mistake in this heavy-handed approach is that it fails to take into account the reason for this person's sudden deterioration. A more constructive approach may be to accept that there is some mitigating circumstance which has caused the change in behavior and to treat him with patience and understanding until the cause has been discovered. One can then address this factor and strive to reduce its harmful effect. In this way, one can emulate Hashem's trait of 'carrying sinners' by avoiding immediate punishment and facilitating an improvement.

The following story illustrates the importance of using this Midda; A bachur in Yeshiva had suddenly began breaking Shabbos in the view of his fellow bachurim. His Roshei Yeshiva decided that there was no other option but to expel him from the Yeshiva. They traveled to Rav Shach zt"l to attain confirmation of the correctness of this approach. Rav Shach asked them what was the financial situation in the boy's home and if there was Shalom Bayis (matrimonial harmony) in the home? The Roshei Yeshiva were surprised by these questions and said, "how should we know what is happening in his home?" Rav Shach suddenly stood up and shouted at them with tears in his eyes, "Rodfim !" Leave my house! I do not want to speak with you, you don't know the situation in his home, you are not thinking about his personal situation, all that you know is to throw him out onto the street!" After investigations it was revealed that the parents of this bachur were divorced a week earlier because of severe financial difficulties ! This incident teaches us of the importance of the Midda of 'carrying sinners'; failure to use this Midda properly could have easily resulted in driving away a boy permanently away from Torah. In truth, all that was needed was an effort to understand the root of his sudden negative behavior.

When a child or student begins consistently acting in a destructive fashion the parent or teacher may instinctively resort to harsh discipline, however the trait of 'carrying' teaches us that it may be more constructive to try to discern the cause of this change in behavior. Similarly a student may experience a downturn in his conduct, but as the Rav Shach story teaches us, it is advisable for the educators involved to seek out the reason for this downturn before punishing him. It seems that the importance of using this Midda is not limited to teachers and parents. Through the course of a person's life he inevitably encounters friends or colleagues who experience a sudden yerida in their behavior. By emulating Hashem's trait of 'carrying sinners' a person can avoid a damaging response to such behavior and instead help the person stem the decline. May we all merit to help each other in times of difficulty.

THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE GOLDEN CALF - KI SISA

Chet haegel is one of the most difficult episodes in the Torah. There is much discussion about how the Dor Deah could commit such a terrible sin so soon after Matan Torah. One less commonly discussed aspect of this terrible incident is the way in which Hashem punished the Jewish people for the chet: Right after it, Hashem says to Moshe Rabbeinu, “..Behold, My angel shall go before you.. ” Rashi explains that this is a punishment; up to this time, Hashem Himself would guide the Jewish people in the desert, but from now on, only an angel would guide them. Chazal teach us that Hashem punishes mida keneged mida, which means that the nature of the punishment can help us understand the nature of the sin. What was the mida keneged mida in this punishment for chet haegel?

In order to understand this we must first briefly discuss how the Jewish people could commit a sin that seems to be avoda zara. The commentaries explain that they did not intend to worship an idol, rather they wanted the egel to be an intermediary between themselves and Hashem: When they thought that Moshe had died they panicked - they believed that they could not have a direct relationship with Hashem, rather they needed an intermediary to communicate with Him on their behalf. This was not a denial of Hashem, rather it was an erroneous belief that some kind of being was needed to represent them before Him and convey His teachings and beneficence to them.

With this explanation we can now understand the root cause of chet haegel. The Jewish people came to this belief that they needed an intermediary because on a subtle level they did not desire a direct relationship with Hashem. This was not the first time in which this failing was apparent; at Matan Torah, after Hashem spoke directly to the people for the first two mitzvos, they asked that Hashem no longer communicate directly with them. Rather, He should tell Moshe and Moshe should pass on what Hashem said to them. In Parshas Va’eschanan, Moshe rebuked them for this seemingly innocuous request: Rashi tells us that Moshe said to them, “I was pained and disappointed by you. Would it not have been better for you to learn directly from Hashem’s mouth than to learn from me?! ” It was this underlying fear of a direct relationship with Hashem that was responsible for the terrible course of events that culminated in chet haegel. The mida keneged mida punishment for this was that there would now be an intermediary Malach guiding them instead of their being under direct guidance from Hashem Himself.

Later in the parsha we see a stark contrast to this in the attitude of Moshe Rabbeinu himself. Having successfully pleaded for Hashem to spare the Jewish people, Moshe saw that it was an ‘eis ratson’ a time when his words were being received. At this moment, he had the opportunity to make any request of Hashem - what did he choose to ask for? “Please show me Your Glory .” He asked for the ability to perceive Hashem on a greater level than even he had ever experienced: Moshe’s primary goal was to gain more awareness of, and closeness to, Hashem.

The incidents in the Torah are not merely there to offer interesting reading - both the positive and negative actions of the people in the Torah provide us with lessons about our own life: On a subtle level, the great Dor Deah were lacking in their desire for a direct relationship with Hashem and as a consequence they became overly reliant upon intermediaries. How does this flaw effect us? The story is told of a Rebbe who once asked one of his chassidim how often he thinks about G-d. The talmid answered, “Rebbe, I wake up every day at 3.00am to learn before davenning Neitz, I then learn uninterrupted till mincha, and after a very brief lunch I continue learning for several hours more. Finally I sleep late at night and wake up at 3.00am the next day to learn - Rebbe, when do I have time to think about G-d?! ”

Sometimes we can be so involved with our Avodas Hashem that we can forget about Hashem Himself. Just like the Dor Deah overly focused on intermediaries we can sometimes ‘miss the forest for the trees’ and be so focused on the means with which we should get close to G-d but we forget that they are just means and not an end in itself. This can even be the case with regard to Talmud Torah. Talmud Torah is so central our lives that we can sometimes forget that it is primarily a means of developing a closer relationship to Hashem. Knowledge of a great deal of Torah is not an end in itself, Torah is supposed to bring us to greater Emuna and Yiras Hashem and if it does not then, there is something amiss.

The Baaley Mussar spoke at length on this inyan and the need to set aside time to focus on developing Yiras Hashem. Even the Nefesh HaChaim, who argued against excessive mussar study, stressed the necessity of spending a short amount of time before learning to contemplate Hashem so that the learning would be infused with the correct attitude. He even wrote that a person can stop in the middle of his learning and reflect on Hashem, “before the yiras Hashem in his heart will be extinguished. ”

Moreover, the Rosh Yeshiva of Novardok, Rav Ben-Tzion Brook zt”l said that it is important to be aware of the context in which Nefesh HaChaim was written in order not to misunderstand his message as a call to focus exclusively on Talmud Torah to the expense of mussar. The Nefesh HaChaim was written as a response to people who were devoting most of their time to mussar sefarim at the expense of Talmud Torah. Consequently, he stressed that it is correct to devote most of one’s time to learning Torah and that this will bring a person to a relationship with Hashem. However, Rav Brook argued, nowadays, the nisayon for most people is very different; a person who has little awareness or understanding of emuna may read Nefesh HaChaim and see it as a heter to avoid working directly on getting closer to Hashem. The Nefesh HaChaim was not talking to this kind of person at all, and whilst it is accepted to spend most of one’s time in regular Talmud Torah, nonetheless it is essential that we realize that the ikar is indeed to increase our emuna .

It is also possible to place performance of mitzvos as the ikar in place of closeness to Hashem. A person can perform a mitzvo with little or no thought of Hashem and think that he has fulfilled the mitzvo to a satisfactory level. With regard to this it is pertinent to remember the words of the Ramban in parshas Bo: “The purpose of all the mitzvos is that we believe in our G-d and that we acknowledge that He is our G-d, and that is the purpose of creation, because there is no other reason for creation, and the only thing that Hashem wants from us is that we know and acknowledge that He created us. ”

There are a number of simple ways through which we can avoid the pitfall of forgetting that the tachlis of all our Avoda is to develop our relationship with Hashem. The most obvious is to learn sefarim that discuss such topics as emuna, bitachon or tefilla. On a more practical level, Rav Dov Brezak Shlita writes that he asked one of the Gedolim how one could work on becoming more aware of Hashem. His simple answer was that we should pray for anything that we want - even for mundane matters, things that may be of no spiritual significance. For example, if we are waiting for a bus and want it to come sooner we should ask Hashem to make it happen. This exercise can help us develop a constant awareness that Hashem is with us. If we possess such an awareness then we are far more likely to remember Hashem during spiritual pursuits such as learning Torah .

It is also very important to note that the degree to which we develop our relationship with Hashem has a tremendous bearing on how our children will develop in their own relationship with Him. If they grow up seeing their parents having a genuine relationship with Hashem then they are far more likely to do the same. We should not underestimate the significance of this in our chinch: Rav Brezak quotes Rav Wolbe zt”l as saying that the reason there are so many rebellious children nowadays is that thy were not taught to have a sensory awareness of Hashem and His deeds .

There are numerous lessons to be learnt from chet haegel. One of the most important is to remember that we do have the ability to have a direct relationship with Hashem and that everything else is secondary to this goal. May we all be zocheh to constantly develop our relationship with Hashem.

PURE BEGINNINGS - TETZAVEH

The Parsha begins with HaShem’s instructions to Moshe Rabbeinu with regard to the people who would make the vestments that Aaron, the Kohen Gadol, would wear during his service. “And you shall speak to all the wise-hearted people whom I have invested with a spirit of wisdom, and they shall make the vestments of Aaron, to sanctify him to minister to me.” It is evident from this instruction that it was of the utmost importance that the people making Aaron’s clothing be on a high spiritual level. The Netsiv zt”l discusses why this was so significant; he introduces a principle that the kavannos (intentions) that are present at the beginning of any spiritual endeavor will have a long-lasting influence on the spiritual capacity of that endeavor. In this vein, he explains that the kavannos with which the clothing was made would have a permanent effect on the holiness inherent in it. This would in turn enable Aaron to utilize the maximum possible holiness inherent in the clothing, during his Holy service in the Mishkan (Tabernacle).

The Netsiv in another place in his commentary on the Torah , elaborates on this principle in explanation of a fascinating Gemara . Two great Tanaic sages, Rebbe Chanina and Rebbe Chiya were arguing in Torah. They then proceeded to point out their respective merits . Rebbe Chanina pointed out that if the Torah would be forgotten, he would be able to retrieve it through his great deductive abilities. Rebbe Chiya replied that he had already ensured that Torah would not be forgotten. He proceeded to explain how he went through a lengthy and difficult process; it began by creating nets for trapping animals. He would then use those nets to trap deer. He would slaughter the deer and give its meat to orphans. He would use the skin as parchment for scrolls; he would write each of the five books of the Torah on one scroll each, and teach five children one scroll each. He would then do the same with the six orders of the Mishna. He would then have each child teach the others the section that they had learnt. In this way, he ensured that it was impossible that Torah be forgotten. The section ends with Rebbe Yehuda HaNasi’s praise of Rebbe Chiya – ‘how great are the deeds of Rebbe Chiya!’

The Netsiv asks why it was necessary for Rebbe Chiya to go through so much effort in order to make the scrolls upon which the Torah and Mishna would be written? Why could he not have simply bought the parchment from a merchant and then written on that? He explains with the principle that we mentioned above – that the kavannos present at the beginning of a spiritual undertaking have a great effect on the future ability of that undertaking to succeed. Rebbe Chiya desired that the scrolls would be created with the purest of intentions – in this way they could have a greater effect in entering into the hearts of the children who would learn from them. This is a further example of how the intentions that a person has at the very beginning of his endeavor have a great effect on its future success.

We see another example of this principle, but this time, in the negative sense, where impure kavannos have a detrimental effect. The Gemara in Chagiga discusses the sad story of a great sage by the name of Elisha Ben Avuyah who became a heretic. The Gemara tells us of reasons as to why he finally abandoned Torah. Tosefos on that Gemara brings a Talmud Yerushalmi that informs us that the defining event in Elisha’s abandonment of Torah actually took place when he was a baby. It describes the festive meal in celebration of the bris mila of the young Elisha. His father, Avuyah, invited all the greatest Sages of the time to the meal. During the meal, two of the sages were in another room learning Torah on a very high level. Their learning was so great that a fire came down from Heaven and surrounded them. Avuyah entered into the room and saw that his house was on fire. He expressed his concern that his house would burn down, but they explained that there was no danger. Their learning was on such a level that it was comparable to the day that the Torah was given on Sinai when fire came down from Heaven. Avuyah was so impressed by the power of Torah that he said that if the power of Torah was so great then he would strive to dedicate his son to the learning of Torah. The Yerushalmi explains that since Avuyah’s intentions for his son were not purely lishma (for the sake of Heaven), his son eventually left the Torah path. We see from here that just as pure intentions facilitate future holiness, so too impure intentions can result in subsequent impurity.

We have seen the importance of the purity of intentions at the beginning of spiritual endeavors. However, there is another important Torah principle that brings into question the above idea, in particular the account of the negative impact of Avuyah’s intentions for his son: The Gemara in a number of places, tells us; “one should always toil in Torah and Mitzvos, even loh lishma (not for the sake of Heaven), because from the loh lishma will come the lishma.” This means that even if a person is not at the level of performing Mitzvos and learning Torah purely lishma, nonetheless, he should continue in his performance of the Mitzvos with impure intentions. And as a result of doing the Mitzvos for the wrong reasons, he will inevitably come to do the Mitzvos for the right reasons. If this is the case, then why did the impure intentions of Avuyah have such a detrimental effect on the future of his son?

It seems that the key to answer this question is found in the words of Rav Chaim Volozhin zt”l in his commentary to Pirkei Avos: He argues that there is a very important limitation to the Gemara’s assertion of the inevitability that Avodas HaShem that is loh lishma will lead to lishma performance. He stipulates that this is only the case if the person who performs the Mitzvos loh lishma, also has the active intentions that he will eventually come to do the Mitzvos lishma. This means that even though he recognizes that he is currently at the level where his Avodas HaShem is not totally pure, he realizes intellectually that the ultimate goal is to serve HaShem lishma. As Rabbi Akiva Tatz expresses it, the person ‘wants to want to do the Mitzvo for the right reasons’. In this way, his impure Avodas HaShem is acceptable in that it will surely bring him to pure service at a later date. However, if he does the Mitzvos loh lishma with no future goal of being lishma then there is no inevitability at all that he will ever come to perform Mitzvos lishma. Based on Rav Chaim of Volozhin’s explanation, we can now understand why Avuyah’s intentions had such damaging consequences. It seems clear from the Yerushalmi that Avuyah’s intentions were totally loh lishma, without any hope of attaining the level of lishma in the future.

We have seen how powerful the kavannas that are present at the beginning of spiritual endeavors (which include marriage, having children, starting learning, and many other undertakings) are in determining the future outcome of those endeavors. Therefore, it is very important that a person strive to have the purest possible intentions. However, it is clear that attaining such high levels of purity is very difficult and takes a great deal of time and effort. Rav Chaim Volozhin teaches us that even if we are not yet on the level of lishma we can realistically strive to have the attitude that we want to get to lishma – in this way we can inject our actions with a significant level of purity.

Moreover, it is important to note that even if a person has already began his endeavor without the highest levels of purity, he can always achieve a ‘new start’ through the miraculous process of teshuva (repentance). Accordingly, a person who, for example, is already married or already has children can restart the process through teshuva and thereby create a greater capacity for future holiness. May we all merit to have pure intentions in everything that we do.

THE ROOT OF LASHON HARA - TETZAVEH

Chazal tell us that the various items of clothing of the Kohen Gadol served as atonements for the sins of Klal Yisroel. The meil atoned for lashon hara. One of the striking features of the meil was that it was fully techeiles, the color that resembles the Kisay HaKavod. What is the connection between the techeiles of the meil with atonement for lashon hara? The Chofetz Chaim zt”l explains by quoting a Tana d’bey Eliyahu that says that lashon hara rises up to the Kisay HaKavod. This means that a person who speaks lashon hara will have to face judgement in front of the Kisay HaKavod. The techeiles on the meil of the Kohen Gadol would serve as a reminder that our words have great spiritual power .

Thanks to the drive against lashon hara there is far more awareness as to the halachos and hashkafo of shemiras halashon. Nonetheless, lashon hara remains as being one of the most difficult aveiros to avoid - there are a number of reasons for this, including the fact that we speak so much and that there is strong social pressure that makes it very hard to avoid negative speech.

However, perhaps there is a deeper cause to lashon hara that lies at the root of much of the lashon hara spoken. Halacho acknowledges that we derive pleasure from speaking negatively about others - we see this in the laws of constructive speech: There are times when it is permissible and even required to speak lashon hara in order to prevent damage, however even this is forbidden if the speaker is pleased in his heart to cast the perpetrator in a bad light. This is difficult to understand - there are many aveiros for which there is an obvious taiva, such as arayos, however there is no obvious physical pleasure derived by speaking lashon hara. Why is there such a drive to speak negatively about other people?

It seems that the root cause of the pleasure of speaking lashon hara is that it provides an artificial boost to our self-worth: If we feel a lack of self-worth there are two ways in which we can boost it - one is to get involved in constructive activities and improve our character. In this way we feel more fulfilled and positive about ourselves. However, there is another, easier option; We often tend to value ourselves in relation to others, consequently our self-image is often dependent upon how we compare to those around us. By criticizing them we knock them down, thereby we now see ourselves in a more favorable light in comparison. For example, if we feel lacking in a mida such as intelligence, by criticizing someone else in that exact same area can help us feel better about our own level of intelligence.

This would seem to the explanation of Chazal’s statement that a person only criticizes others about a flaw that they themselves possess. Chazal understood the psychological needs of people to feel good about themselves and that a prime way of trying to do so is by knocking down others in their very own areas of weakness.

Of course the rise in self-worth derived from speaking lashon hara is artificial and very short-lived. After a short while the speaker’s true sense of inadequacy returns and he feels the need to criticize more in order to boost himself. Any person who has tried to refrain from lashon hara can testify that on the occasions when they held themselves they did not feel any lacking - on the contrary they felt better about themselves for doing the right thing.

There are two important lessons that can be dreived from this understanding of lashon hara. Firstly we must be highly vigilant of our intentions when we speak negatively for a constructive purpose. This is especially true in the delicate area of criticizing other groups or ideologies within Judaism. Indeed the Manchester Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Segal zt”l said that only great tzaddikim can speak critically of other groups. One reason for this may be that tzaddikim are secure in themselves and have no psychological need to criticize people. However, everyone else is prone to feelings of lack of self-worth and we may express righteous condemnation of those that we disapprove of for reasons that are not leshem shamayim. This constitutes lashon hara midoraysa and it is surely wise to heed the words of Rav Segal and to never risk transgressing such a serious aveiro.

The second lesson is that if we see in ourselves the desire to disparage others then we must do a cheshbon hanefesh to discover its source. Very often, it may arise because of a lack of self-worth. But instead of putting down others, we can feel better about ourselves by improving our midos and striving to be active and productive members of society. May we all be zocheh to purify our speech and learn the lesson of the meil.

THE ROBE AND THE INCENSE - TETZAVEH

"You shall make the Robe of the Ephod entirely of turquoise wool.... You shall make on its hem pomegranates of turquoise, purple, and scarlet wool, on its hem all around, and gold bells between them, all around; a gold bell and a pomegranate, a gold bell and a pomegranate on the hem of the robe, all around. "

One of the Vestements of the Kohen Gadol was the Meil, a robe that was adorned with bells and rang whenever the Kohen Gadol walked. The Gemara in Arachin discusses how all of the Kohen Gadol's Vestements atoned for a particular aveiro; the meil atoned for the sin of lashon hara. The Gemara explains that the meil, which made a loud kol (sound) should atone for lashon hara which makes a loud kol. However, the Gemara brings a seemingly contradictory braissa that says that the ketores (incense) that was used in the Mishkan atones for lashon hara. It answers that there are two different types of lashon hara; the ketores atones for a more 'quiet' form lashon hara, when the speaker hides his true feelings from the subject of his criticism and therefore the 'victim' of the lashon hara has no awareness that someone is criticizing him. In contrast, the lashon hara that is atoned for by the meil is characterized by the speaker making no secret of his true feelings about the victim to the extent that the victim is very likely to be aware of what is being said about him .

However, this explanation of the Gemara seems to pose a new difficulty; why is it necessary for there to be two separate functions of the Mishkan to atone for the single sin of lashon hara; why can't either the meil or the ketores atone for both 'loud' and 'quiet' lashon hara? Moreover, it would seem that loud lashon hara is significantly more damaging than 'quiet' lashon hara. Therefore, if the meil has the power to atone for the more severe form of lashon hara, then it should surely be able to atone for the seemingly less damaging 'quiet' lashon hara?

In order to answer this question it is necessary to understand more specifically the negative aspects of these two forms of lashon hara: Loud lashon hara is very damaging in that the victim is aware of the evil speech that is directed towards him and this naturally causes him great pain. In this aspect, loud lashon hara is considered more destructive than its quieter counterpart. However, there is a certain way in which 'quiet' lashon hara is more pernicious than loud lashon hara. Quiet lashon hara is characterized by the perpetrator of this grave sin behaving in a two-faced manner towards his victim; in front of him he is very friendly, but behind his back he slanders him mercilessly and instructs the listeners not to reveal his true feelings to his unfortunate fellow. Since the victim is totally unaware that he is being vilified, he makes no efforts to protect himself from these attacks and they may continue unabated. In contrast, the victim of 'loud' lashon hara is far more likely to find out about the lashon hara spoken about him, consequently he will be able to protect himself.

With this understanding we can now explain why it is necessary for there to be two separate functions of the Mishkan to atone for lashon hara. Each form of lashon hara is more detrimental in some way than the other. Consequently, whilst the meil has the capacity to atone for the damaging aspect of 'loud' lashon hara it cannot atone for the harm caused by quiet lashon hara. Similarly, the ketores can atone for the pernicious features of 'quiet' lashon hara but it cannot do so for the areas in which 'loud' lashon hara is more damaging.

What is particularly striking about this explanation is that in some ways speaking lashon hara in a hidden fashion is worse than doing so in a blatant manner. The Chofetz Chaim zt"l discusses how speaking lashon hara of the 'quiet' kind can also involve a transgression of the Mitzvo, "do not hate your brother in your heart (loh sisna es achicha bilvavecha) ." The simple understanding of this Mitzvo is that one only transgresses it when he keeps his hatred in his heart and does not reveal it to anyone, including the subject of his hatred. However, if he expresses his hatred even in a negative way, he does not transgress 'loh sisna' because he did not keep the hatred in his heart .

The Chofetz Chaim argues that this is not necessarily the case; a person may hate his fellow and tells others of his hatred, but act towards him in a friendly manner. This, the Chofetz Chaim writes, is also a transgression of keeping hatred in one's heart. He explains that the root of the sin of keeping hatred in one's heart is that the subject of the hatred is unable to protect himself from the person who despises him. Consequently, if the 'hater' hides his true feelings to his fellow he is guilty of loh sisna even if he tells others about his hatred. We learn from the Chofetz Chaim the above concept that 'quiet' lashon hara has a particularly insidious aspect to it, in that its victim is totally unable to protect himself from the silent bombardments that he is subjected to.

There may be occasions in a person's life where he develops a dislike for someone. It is self-evident that this loathing does not justify speaking lashon hara. We learn further from the Gemara in Arachin that acting towards him in a two-faced manner makes the lashon hara even more destructive. Chazal tell us that Yosef's brothers were wrong in hating him, but to their credit they did not act in a hypocritical manner towards him. The lesson we derive from the brothers' behavior towards Yosef is that whilst it is wrong to hate someone, it is far worse to hide that hatred of him and speak badly about him behind his back. This hanhago only succeeds in causing enmity and machlokes. The ideal course of action is to try to resolve the situation by speaking to the subject of his hatred in a calm and reasonable manner and strive to resolve the issue in a mature fashion. By acting in an honest and candid manner, one can greatly improve his relationships with those around him.

PURE INTENTIONS - TERUMAH

Parsha Terumah describes the Mishkan (Tabernacle) and the various keilim (vessels) that were to serve in it, such as the Aron HaKodesh (Ark), the Menorah and the Shulchan. The Rabbis teach that there is great symbolism in each vessel in that they represent various aspects of the spiritual world. Accordingly, the commentaries closely analyze the descriptions of the Mishkan in order to derive important lessons.

In this vein, the Kli Yakar notes a difficulty with a verse in the description of the Aron HaKodesh. The Torah states: “And you shall cover it [the Aron] with pure gold from the inside; and on the outside you shall cover it…” The Kli Yakar points out that HaShem twice instructs Moshe to cover the Ark; once on the inside, and once on the outside. This teaches us that the Ark had both an inner and outer layer of gold. However, with regard to the inner layer, the Torah says that the gold must be pure, whereas when mentioning the outer layer, there is no mention that the gold need be pure. The Kli Yakar argues that it was certainly required for the outer layer of gold to also be pure, therefore he asks why the Torah davke stressed the pure nature of the gold with regard to the inner layer.
He answers that the Torah is teaching us an important lesson in Avodas HaShem. He explains that the inner gold covering alludes to performance of Mitzvos done in a private fashion where no one else sees, whilst the outer gold covering alludes to public performance of Mitzvos. With regard to private observance, it is quite conceivable that one have completely pure intentions when performing the Mitzvo seeing that that nobody else will be aware of the Mitzvo. Therefore, when describing the inner gold, the Torah can attach the description of pure. However, when a person does a Mitzvo in public, there is always a very strong possibility that his intentions are not totally pure, as there may be an element of a desire that other people witness his righteous act. Accordingly, when discussing the outer gold It cannot say that it was pure.

The Kli Yakar’s explanation illuminates us as to the great power of the yetser hara (negative inclination) involved in doing Mitzvos in public. The following story involving the Kotsker Rebbe demonstrates even further the full power of this yetser hara. The Kotsker Rebbe was on his deathbed surrounded by many people. The time came when it seemed certain that he was about to pass away. At that moment, he said Shema Yisroel with great fervor. Yet, to everyone’s surprise he did not die at that time. His students asked him what he was thinking whilst he was saying the Shema. He answered, that he was thinking that everyone would say about him that the final words he uttered were ‘Shema Yisroel’! If, at the powerful moment before death, the great Kotsker Rebbe acknowledged that he had some level of interest in what people would say about him, then all the more so, ‘ordinary’ people would be highly subject to this yetser hara throughout their lives.

Because it is so difficult to maintain completely pure motives when doing Mitzvos in public, it is often praiseworthy to strive to do Mitzvos in private. Likewise, it is commendable to hide one’s spiritual achievements from others when there is no benefit in publicizing them. The Baalei Mussar in particular went to great lengths to hide their true spiritual level. One of the leading Baalei Mussar was Rav Yitzchak Blazer zt”l; on one occasion he joined a gathering of great Torah scholars led by the Beis HaLevi, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik zt”l. The Beis HaLevi had heard that Rav Blazer was a tremendous Torah scholar as well as being a great Mussar personality, and wanted to see how Rav Blazer would contribute to a Torah discussion. The Beis HaLevi asked a very difficult question which resulted in heated debate amongst the scholars. Eventually, the Beis HaLevi offered two brilliant solutions to the problem, one of his own, and one from his renowned son, Rav Chaim zt”l. However, during the whole discussion, Rav Blazer remained quiet. Surprised at Rav Blazer’s apparent inability to answer the question, the Beis HaLevi perused Rav Blazer’s commentary on the Gemara, known as, Pri Yitzchak, to see what he wrote with regard to the topic that they had debated. The Beis HaLevi was shocked to see that not only did Rav Blazer ask the same question as the one that the Beis HaLevi posed, but also gave both answers that the Beis HaLevi had suggested! He recognized Rav Blazer’s humility in remaining quiet and hiding his Torah greatness. Of course, on many occasions it is important for one to contribute to Torah discussions, however, evidently Rav Blazer felt there would be no benefit in adding his opinion to the distinguished group. In a similar vein, the great Alter of Slobodka, Rav Nosson Zvi Finkel zt:l, was rarely seen with a Gemara, however, late at night in his room, he would learn from the gemara in a hidden fashion, and if anyone came in he would pretend to be asleep.

We learn from the above sources, that it is extremely difficult to perform Mitzvos in public without having some focus on the honor or praise that one would receive. One lesson to be derived from this is that one should strive to perform at least some Mitzvos in private, where there is no chance that the purity of his intentions is tainted by desire for recognition . This includes giving charity , learning Torah, and other Mitzvos. May we all merit to serve HaShem with the purest intentions.