THE ULTIMATE MITZVO - VAeschanan

VAESCHANAN - THE ULTIMATE MITZVO By Yehonasan Gefen “And you shall teach them thoroughly to your children and speak of them while you sit in your home, while you walk on your way, when you retire and when you rise. ” This passuk is the source of the mitzvo of Talmud Torah, the mitzvo that is described as being equal in value to all the others combined. It is surprising that the source for Talmud Torah does not say ‘you shall learn’, rather ‘you shall teach.’ - why is this the case? The Ksav Sofer notes that the passuk does actually instruct us to learn (vedibarta bam) but only after telling us to teach first (veshinantam). The order should be reversed - a person learns before he teaches?! He answers that that the Torah is alluding to us that one’s own learning must be done with the ultimate goal of teaching others . This also explains why the ikar source for the mitzvo of Talmud Torah is teaching - because the ultimate tachlis of learning is to be able to give it over through teaching. Of course learning Torah is not merely a means to be able to teach, a person needs Torah to be able to develop a relationship with Hashem, and without learning this is impossible. Nonetheless, it is clear from the commentaries that learning without teaching is a great lacking in the fulfillment of the mitzvo of Talmud Torah. This is why Chazal teach us that ‘lilmod al menas lelamed’ is an essential requirement of our focus in our learning. Moreover, the Meiri and Maharal both write that a person who learns but does not teach cannot reach shleimus . We now understand why the Torah stresses teaching ahead of learning. However, the choice of word it used needs understanding; usually ‘you will teach’ is translated as ‘limadtem’, but here the Torah says, ‘veshinantam’. Rashi explains that this usage has an added meaning; it implies a high level of clarity so that one if someone asks a question, you can answer it without stumbling. From here we learn that a person can gain more clarity in his learning if it is in preparation to teach. A person who learns a Gemara knowing that people will challenge him on his understanding and explanations of it has a great incentive to learn with greater diligence. According to some commentators, this is the explanation of the Gemara: “Rebbi says, ‘I learnt a great deal of Torah from my teachers, more from by friends, and the most from my talmidim .” Students force a teacher to attain a higher level of understanding This idea was stressed by Gedolim: An avreich was not succeeding in his learning so he asked the Steipler Gaon zt”l if he should continue in kollel or begin teaching. The Steipler answered that in the past everybody wanted to teach, and a person who did not find a position in teaching continued to learn in kollel. He then said, “That every Gadol Hador of the past grew greatly from giving shiurim. ” Teaching is also a great tool in helping one remember his learning. The Steipler once advised another avreich to teach a shiur in Yeshiva katana, and explained that when one teaches others a piece of learning it is equivalent to learning it twenty times. He said further, “I know from my own experience that that which I learnt myself I have forgotten, but that which I taught to others I remember it to this very day. ” Thus far we have seen how teaching on a high level can greatly help one’s own learning. However, it would seem that teaching people on a lower level would not have the same effect. However, a number of commentaries understand the Gemara that ‘I learnt the most from my talmidim’ in a different way. The Chasam Sofer makes an extraordinary point in his hakdama to his Teshuvas on Yoreh Deah in an essay entitled ‘Pisuchey Chosam’. He speaks at length about the importance of giving over of one’s self for the sake of helping the spirituality of his fellow. He focuses on how Avraham Avinu devoted his time and effort to teaching the uneducated masses about Emuna rather than focus on his own growth. He then exhorts us to emulate Avraham and teach people even if they are on a low level of understanding. He addresses an argument against this approach. “If the Eved Hashem would say, ‘my soul craves closeness to Hashem and I want to get close to him. How can I do this and reduce my own learning and self-perfection in order to perfect my fellow’s soul?!’ The answer to this is found in Chazal; ‘… I learnt the most from my students’. Is it beyond Hashem to make up to you the growth that you forsook for the sake of His Kavod?! You should do what Hashem commanded you - to teach the people - and He will fulfil His role…. He will make it possible for you to attain the shleimus in a small time and you will be able to attain lofty heights beyond your own sechel. ” One who teaches people that are on a low level of learning will receive a great deal of siata dishmaya which will enable him to attain greater heights than humanly possible . There is another benefit for teaching those on a lower level, particularly in areas of emuna and hashkafa. Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l greatly encouraged yungerleit who were considering careers in Jewish education. He once spoke to them for a three hour question-and-answer session on this subject. One expressed his concern about the bitul Torah involved in teaching. Rav Yaakov pointed out that teaching often forces one to obtain greater clarity in one’s own learning. He then added, “And if you have to learn a little Chumash and Nach, it won’t be such a terrible thing. ” When a person teaches those who lack a basic understanding in such vital areas of Torah as Chumash and Nach he is forced to delve into them on a far deeper level than ever before. The great educator, Rav Yitzchak Kirzner zt”l elaborated on this point in discussing the benefits of teaching people lacking the basic tenets of Yiddishkeit. He said that in order to be able to present the Torah outlook on life a teacher needs familiarity with such works as Derech Hashem and Mesillas Yeshvarim. Unfortunately such works are often neglected amidst the pressure to devote all one’s time to Gemara, but by teaching over basic Torah hashkafa an observant Jew can develop his own understanding of Judaism and relationship to Hashem. We have thus far seen how teaching Torah is a fundamental aspect of the mitzvo of Talmud Torah and that it reaps untold benefits. However, there may still be a temptation to treat it differently from other chiyuvim and look at it more as a ‘mitzvo kiyumis’ than as an obligation. This would seem to be an incorrect attitude: On one occasion the Chazon Ish zt”l saw that in Ponevezh there were a number of younger bochrim who were struggling in their learning. He ordered the older bochrim to spend some time each day learning with the younger bochrim. He was told that they could not find the time in which to teach their struggling contemporaries because of their busy learning schdules. To this he instructed that the following message should be relayed to the older boys: “Do you put on tefillin?! How can you do so, there is no time, you need to learn! Rather, you find the time to put on tefillin because it is a positive mitzvo - there is another mitzvo that is of no lesser value than tefillin - to set apart time to help the younger bochrim. ” The Chazon Ish taught that teaching Torah should be viewed as a chiyuv just like any other mitzvo and that the argument that ‘there is no time to teach’ is baseless. So how can a person know how much time he must spend teaching? Obviously this is not a simple issue and it varies according to the many factors in the life of each person. However, the Gedolim seem to universally agree that bnei Torah must give some of their time to teaching others, especially those who are lacking in their Torah observance . Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l sums up the approach very well. In a talk to yeshiva students he argued that just like we are required to give over at least 10% of our time to tzedaka, so too, a ben Torah “must spend one tenth of his time working on behalf of others, bringing them close to Torah.” He further stated that, “if one is endowed with greater resources he must correspondingly spend more of his time with others. ” We have discussed much about the maalos of teaching Torah. Why exactly is it considered so great to the extent that the Eglei Tal writes that it is on an even higher level than learning Torah ? There are a number of reasons for this but one can be found in the passuk we have discussed. The Torah says, “you will teach it to your children.” Chazal learn out this does not only refer to one’s genetic children, but also to one’s students. Why doesn’t the Torah just tell us to teach students? The answer is that the Torah is showing us that teaching Torah is similar in a certain aspect to having children. When a person brings a child to the world he is giving him the tremendous gift of life. When a person teaches someone Torah he is giving him the opportunity to gain eternal life. Thus by teaching Torah you are acquiring the quality of parenting - giving life. This is why students are referred to as children. Indeed teaching Torah to a child is considered an even greater chesed than giving birth to him as the Mishna in Bava Metsia states; “If a person sees the lost objects of his father and his teacher, the teacher takes precedence.” Why? “Because his father brought him to Olam Hazeh but his teacher who taught him wisdom, brings him to Olam Haba. ” Teaching Torah is the ultimate chesed that one can do - may we all be zocheh to fulfil it.

לפנים משורת הדין - ואתחנן

בס"ד ואתחנן – לפנים משורת הדין יהונתן גפן "ועשית הישר והטוב בעיני ה' למען ייטב לך ובאת וירשת את הארץ הטובה אשר נשבע ה' לאבותיך" . המפרשים אומרים על פסוק זה, המופיע לקראת סופה של הפרשה, שהוא המקור לעניין של "לפנים משורת הדין" . הוא מלמדנו לא לדקדק עם הזולת על פי חומרת הדין אלא לוותר במצבים מסוימים גם על מה שמגיע לנו על פי דין. ונביא לכך דוגמאות מספר; כאשר אדם מוצא אבידה אשר על פי ההלכה מותר לו לקחתה לעצמו, אולם הוא יודע את זהותו של הבעלים האמיתיים – חז"ל אומרים על כך שאמנם יש לו היתר לקחת את החפץ, ולמרות זאת עליו להשיבו לבעליו . דוגמא נוספת לכך היא כאשר דירה עומדת למכירה, אדם שמעוניין לקנותה צריך לוותר על רצונו לטובת אדם שגר בסמיכות ומעוניין אף הוא בדירה, כיוון שקניית הדירה תגרום לו רווח קטן יותר מהרווח אותו ינחל השכן דווקא מדירה זו ולא אחרת . ישנן עוד דוגמאות רבות אחרות בהן על האדם לנהוג לפנים משורת הדין - הרמב"ן כותב שהתורה לא פרטה את כולם בפירוש, אלא עלינו ללמוד ולהבין מפסוק זה את החיוב להשתדל בכל עניין לנהוג עם הזולת בדרך "הטוב והישר", להתאמץ להגיע לידי פשרה ולא לנהוג בחומרת הדין . הגמרא אומרת ש"לא חרבה ירושלים אלא על שדנו בה דין תורה.... שהעמידו דיניהם על דין תורה ולא עבדו (נהגו) לפנים משורת הדין" . לכאורה קשה מאד להבין זאת: הנהגת לפנים משורת הדין נראית כחומרה כלשהי או הנהגה שראוי לנהוג בה, לא היינו חושבים שכאשר לא עושים זאת נענשים בעונש כה קשה. מדוע נענש עם ישראל בחומרה כה רבה על כך שדיקדקו זה עם זה? נראה אם כן, שיחס לזולת באופן שאינו לפנים משורת הדין משקף פגם עמוק בהתייחסות האדם לעבודת ה'. מורי ורבי ר' יצחק ברקוביץ מסביר (בהתבססו על הרמב"ן בפסוק זה) שהמילים "ועשית הישר והטוב" הן הציווי על בין אדם לחברו המקביל לציווי "קדושים תהיו": הרמב"ן בפרשת קדושים מסביר שייתכן מצב בו אדם מקיים את כל המצוות ועדיין נחשב נבל – 'נבל ברשות התורה'. - הוא נזהר מאוד לא לעבור על שום מצווה אולם למרות זאת אין לו כל עניין להתרומם ולהתקדש בשטחים שנחשבים רשות – לקדש את עצמו במותר לו – כגון אכילה ושינה. המניע שעל פיו מונחית דרך חייו היא אמונתו שהתורה היא תורת אמת ולכן הוא חייב לשמרה, אולם הוא אינו מונחה על פי השקפת התורה – אין לו שום עניין בהתרוממות רוחנית, אלא מטרותיו ושאיפותיו שקועות עמוק בחיי בעולם הזה, והן מסתכמות במילוי יצריו ורצונותיו הגשמיים והשגת הון רב ועושר. כיוון שהוא מכיר ומאמין בתורת אמת הוא לא יעבור עבירה במזיד, אולם עם זאת הוא לעולם לא יוכיח כל רצון ושאיפה להתקדמות והתקדשות בנושאים אותם הוא אינו ממש מחויב לקיים. בדומה לכך, גם בתחום של בין אדם לחבירו, אדם יכול להבין את חשיבות הציות להלכות והדינים, אולם אין לו כל שאיפה להפנים את ההשקפות העומדות בבסיס אותן הלכות. אותו אדם יקיים בדביקות את הדין כפי שמורה התורה, אולם אם ימצא הזדמנות בה יוכל להרויח רוח כספי מזולתו בדרך מותרת לכאורה על פי התורה, הוא לא יהסס לעשות זאת. התורה מלמדת אדם זה שהוא טועה בכך טעות השקפתית קשה, ומדריכה אותו לעשות "הטוב והישר", לנהוג "לפנים משורת הדין", להתייחס לזולתו באופן רחום וחנון, ולא לדקדק עימו על כל עניין. התורה מלמדת אותנו שעלינו לפתח בעצמנו רגש אמיתי וחי של אהבת ישראל, ולהתייחס לזולתנו באותה צורה בה היינו רוצים שיתייחסו הם אלינו – בדרך של ויתור, פשרה ורחמנות. וכך לדוגמא, כאשר אדם איבד חפץ בעל ערך, אל יהסס אחיו היהודי וישיבנו לו, אף על פי שאין הוא מחויב בכך, או כאשר נוצר מצב בו אדם עני חייב למישהו סכום גדול מאד של כסף – עליו לנהוג עימו ברגישות רבה וברחמים. כעת ניתן להבין יותר מדוע נענשו בעונש כה חמור כאשר יהודים נהגו זה עם זה באופן מחמיר וקפדן – הם החטיאו את העניין של "הישר והטוב", על פיו אין לנהוג עם הזולת בחומרה וללא ויתור על קוצו של יו"ד – לא כך דבקים ברוח התורה, לא כך מפנימים את הרעיון העומד בבסיס המצוות שבין אדם לחבירו עליהן צוותה התורה. המפרשים מצביעים על קושי נוסף בדברי הגמרא האומרת שהסיבה לחורבן הייתה דקדוק יתר זה עם זה. במקום אחר בגמרא מובאים חטאים אחרים שגרמו לחורבן הבית, חטאים חמורים כגון עבודה זרה, גילוי עריות, שפיכות דמים ושנאת חינם . ר' יצחק מוולוז'ין השיב על שאלה זו כאשר היה עד למקרה הבא: אדם אחד הוציא לעז על חברו והכפיש את שמו. בערב יום הכיפורים הוא הגיע אליו לבקש את סליחתו. הנפגע סירב לסלוח לו, בציינו את ההלכה שאדם לא חייב למחול על הוצאת שם רע. ר' יצחק שאלו על הסתירה בין הגמרות הנזכרות, והשיב שבתי המקדש נחרבו בגלל החטאים החמורים שמנתה הגמרא השניה. אולם, חז"ל אומרים שכאשר בני אדם נוהגים זה עם זה לפנים משורת הדין, ולא מקפידים ומדקדקים ביותר אחד עם השני, אזי נוהג הקב"ה מידה כנגד מידה עם בניו ומוחל גם על החטאים הקשים והחמורים ביותר. אבל, כאשר ראה הקב"ה את יחסם של היהודים זה לזה, בכל חומר הדין, הוא נהג בהתאם ולא מחל להם על חטאיהם. כך גם, המשיך ר' יצחק מוולוז'ין והסביר, אם אתה נוהג עם חברך בדקדוק שכזה, כיצד הינך מצפה שהקב"ה ינהג עמך אחרת? כאשר שמע זאת אותו אדם החליט למחול לחברו בלב שלם על חטאיו הקשים כלפיו. יעזרנו ה' לזכות לנהוג זה עם זה בדרך בה היינו רוצים שינהגו בנו אחרים, ושבדרך כזו גם נזכה לאור פניו של הקב"ה, לרחמים ולחמלה.

THE TWO LUCHOS - VA'ESCHANAN

VA’ESCHANAN – THE TWO LUCHOS By Yehonasan Gefen Parshas Va’eschanan contains a repetition of the Ten Commandments, with a few minor changes. The Mabit makes a remarkable observation about the two luchos on which the Commandments were inscribed. Chazal explain that the two luchos were focusing on different areas of the Mitzvos: The first luach consisted of Mitzvos that relate to the realm of bein adam leMakom (between man and G-d), such as belief in G-d, and observing Shabbos. The second luach consisted of Mitvos that relate to bein adam lechaveiro (between man and his fellow), such as the prohibitions not to kill, and loh sachmod (not to covet). The Mabit points out that there were far more words on the first luach than on the second. Accordingly, there was much less space to fit all the words on the first luach than on the second. Therefore, it must be that the words in the first luach were written far smaller than those in the second. This, the Mabit argues, was done deliberately by HaShem so that the side that discussed the bein adam lechaveiro Mitzvos would be more noticeable than the side that focused on bein adam leMakom. The Mabit continues that this is because the yetser hara is strongest in the area of bein adam lechaveiro. HaShem wanted people to focus more on the Mitzvos that relate to bein adam lechaveiro, because extra effort is required to overcome the yetser hara in this area. It would seem that a Gemara in Bava Basra provides evidence supporting the Mabit’s argument. The Gemara discusses various sins in which people stumble. It tells us that a minority of people stumble in arayos (forbidden relationships), a majority stumble in gezel , and everyone stumbles in avak lashon hara. Forbidden relationships generally fall in the area of bein adam leMakom , whereas stealing and lashon hara both clearly fall within the realm of bein adam lechaveiro. Thus, the Gemara is telling us that people are more prone to sin in certain Mitzvos that pertain to bein adam lechaveiro. The following story also supports this point: Rav Chaim Soloveitchik zt”l was asked to rule on the kashrus of an animal to ascertain whether it was treif. He ruled that it was indeed treif, causing the butcher involved a significant loss. The butcher accepted the ruling with equanimity. A few months later, the same butcher was involved in a monetary dispute with someone else, over a far smaller amount of money. Rav Chaim ruled against him. On this occasion, however, the butcher was furious, and insulted Rav Chaim for his ruling. Rav Simcha Zelig Reeger, zt”l asked Rav Chaim why the butcher was calm when he lost a far larger amount of money and so angry about the smaller sum. Rav Chaim explained that on this occasion, he ‘lost’ to someone else – it was the fact that another person ‘beat’ him that angered him so much. The question remains, what is the reason (or reasons) as to why people are more prone to stumbling in bein adam lechaveiro. It is possible to suggest the following: The Vilna Gaon zt”l writes that every Mitzvo stems from a particular good character trait (midda), and every aveiro stems from a bad trait. Nonetheless, it seems that it is possible for a person to have certain bad middos and yet observe many Mitzvos. For example, a person who has a tendency to lose his temper, will not necessarily be hindered by this bad trait, in his observance of Shabbos, kashrus, and many other Mitzvos in the realm of bein adam LeMakom. However, he will be tremendously hindered in the area of bein adam lechaveiro. Every time he raises his voice in an inappropriate fashion, he will very likely transgress the prohibition of onaas devarim (hurtful words) and if he shouts at someone in front of others, he will transgress the extremely serious sin of embarrassing someone in public. Similarly, a person who has an ayin ra (he focuses on the bad in people), will still be able to pray three times a day, and learn Torah, however he will very likely stumble in lashon hara and judging others favorably. There are obviously certain middos, which also make it very difficult to observe Mitzvos in bein adam Makom, such as laziness. However, it is important to note, that such traits will also greatly harm one’s observance of bein adam lechaveiro related Mitzvos. For example, a lazy person will not be willing to help his/her spouse in the work that needs to be done around the home, causing problems in the relationship. Even the trait of taiva (lust) can be the cause of great failings in bein adam lechaveiro. For example, a person who is overly attached to his/her food, will very likely react in an inappropriate fashion to his/her spouse if they serve food that he does not appreciate, again resulting in a transgression of onaas devarim. The obvious lesson to derive from the Mabit is that extra effort is required in bein adam lechaveiro. Moreover based on the explanation that the root cause of the failing in this area is bad middos, it is essential to work on traits such as anger, jealousy, and ayin ra. Indeed, the Maharsha points out that when the Gemara said that everyone stumbles in avak lashon hara, it was only referring to people who do not make an effort to improve in this area. However, one who makes an effort to improve his speech by learning the laws relating to it and improving his traits, is not destined to speak avak lashon hara. This surely applies to all the Mitzvos bein adam lechaveiro; if one makes a strong and consistent effort to improve then he will overcome the yetser hara’s attempts to make his stumble.

GOING BEYOND THE LETTER OF THE LAW - VA’ESCHANAN

VA’ESCHANAN - GOING BEYOND THE LETTER OF THE LAW By Yehonasan Gefen “And you will do that which is right and good in the eyes of Hashem so that He will do good to you and you will come and inherit the land which Hashem promised to give to your forefathers .” The commentaries write that this passuk, that appears towards the end of the Parsha, is the source for the principle of ‘going beyond the letter of the law. ” This teaches us of the necessity to avoid being medakdek (exacting) in matters of law and to be mevater (forgiving) what is rightfully ours in certain situations. Examples of this are; when a person finds a lost object that halachically he is allowed to keep, but he knows the identity of the original owner - Chazal tell us that even though it is technically permitted to keep the object, he should nonetheless give it back . Another example is when a piece of property is for sale - the prospective buyers should give precedence to the person who lives next to that property because he stands to gain the most by buying this particular property . In truth, however, there are numerous instances when one should go beyond the letter of the law - the Ramban writes that the Torah did not want to explicitly state them all, rather we should learn from this passuk that we must constantly strive to treat people in an understanding fashion and avoid always treating them according to the strict letter of the law . The Gemara tells us that the Beis HaMikdash was destroyed because people were makpid on each other and treated them according to the strict letter of the law . This seems very difficult to understand - it would have seemed that the whole concept of going beyond the letter of the law is something of a stringency and that failing to follow it would not deserve such a strict punishment. Why were the Jewish people treated so harshly for being medakdek on each other? It seems that failure to treat people ‘beyond the letter of the law’ reflects a deep flaw in a person’s attitude to Avodas Hashem. My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita explains, (based on the Ramban on this passuk) that ‘v’asisa hayashar vehatov’ is the bein adam lechaveiro equivalent of ‘kedoshim tehyu’: The Ramban in Parshas Kedoshim explains that a person can keep all of the mitzvos and yet be a menuval b’reshus HaTorah.’ - this means that he is careful not to transgress any mitzvos but at the same time he has no interest in elevating himself in areas of reshus such as eating and sleeping. The underlying reason behind his lifestyle is that he believes that the Torah is true and therefore must be observed, but he does not subscribe to the true Torah outlook - he has no interest in elevating himself spiritually, rather his goals are very much ’this-worldly’, involving such aims as fulfilling his physical desires and attaining wealth. Because of his recognition of the truth of Torah, he will never deliberately commit aveiros, nevertheless he will show no interest in elevating himself in areas that he is not technically obligated to do so . Similarly in the realm of bein adam lechaveiro, a person may recognize the necessity of following the laws of the Torah, however he has no desire to integrate into himself the hashkafos behind them. Thus he will always adhere to the strict letter of the law but whenever he has the opportunity to make a financial gain in a technically permissible fashion he will not hesitate to do so. The Torah tells this person that he is making a serious hashkafic error by instructing him to “do what is right and good”, to act ‘beyond the letter of the law’, to treat people in a merciful fashion, and not be medakdek on every case. The Torah is instructing us that we should develop a genuine sense of ahavas Yisroel and thereby treat our fellow Jew in the same way that we would want them to treat us - to be forgiving and compassionate. Thus, for example, when someone has lost a valuable object a Jew should not hesitate to return it even if he is not obligated to do so or when a poor person finds himself owing you a large amount of money, a person should act with a degree of flexibility and compassion. This helps understand why there was such a strict punishment when the Jews treated each other in a strict fashion - they missed the lesson of ‘hayashar b’hatov’ , that it is not right to treat one’s fellow Jew in a harsh and unforgiving manner this does not adhere to the spirit of bein adam lechaverio that theTorah espouses. The commentaries find another difficulty with the Gemara saying that the Beis HaMikdash was destroyed because the people were strict with each other. Other Gemaras give different reasons for the destructions, such as murder, idol worship, immorality and baseless hatred . Rav Yitzchak of Volozhin answered this question when he was witness to the following incident. Someone had slandered his fellow and now came on Erev Yom Kippur to ask for forgiveness. The victim refused to forgive him, pointing to the halacho that one does not have to forgive slander. Rav Yitzchak asked him about the aforementioned contradiction in Gemaras. He explained that the Batei HaMikdash was destroyed because of the terrible sins enumerated in the other Gemaras. However, he pointed out that Chazal tell us that when people treat each other beyond the letter of the law and are not makpid on every nekuda, Hashem acts measure for measure and is forgiving for even the most serious sins. However, when |Hashem saw that the people were treating each other in a strict fashion, He acted accordingly and chose not to be forgiving for their other sins. So too, Rav Yitzchak said to the unforgiving person, if you treat your fellow in such a medakdek way then you should expect that Hashem will treat you in the same way. The man heard the lesson and forgave the slanderer. May we all be zocheh to treat each other how we would like to be treated ourselves and that Hashem should react in a similar fashion.

GIVING REBUKE

DEVARIM - GIVING REBUKE By Yehonasan Gefen Parshas Devarim consists largely of Moshe Rabbeinu’s tochacha to the Jewish people. The Parsha begins with Moshe mentioning a number of place names that do not appear anywhere else in the Torah . Chazal tell us that these names were in fact allusions to places where the Jews had sinned; Moshe did not explicitly state that the Jews had sinned here, rather he chose to hint to their transgressions. Rashi explains that he did so “because of the honor of Israel ” - even though the Jewish people needed to be rebuked, to explicitly mention their sins would have been too much of a pgam on their kavod. Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l derives a vital lesson about tochacha from Rashi’s explanation he writes, “we learn from here how incumbent it is upon the rebuker to worry about and be fearful for, the honor of the person being rebuked. ” This teaches us that the key factor that determines whether a rebuke will have a positive or negative effect is one’s motivation for rebuking. Moshe maintained his love and concern for the Jewish people in the midst of speaking to them very harshly. Indeed, it seems clear that this love was the very reason that he was rebuking them - it was purely an act of kindness. In doing so he was able to maintain a sensitivity to their honor whilst simultaneously criticizing them. The Gemara tells us that it is exceedingly difficult to rebuke someone in an effective way . Nonetheless, this does not mean that we are exempt from the mitzvo, and there are times when one can do a great kindness by clarifying the correct hanhago to someone who is likely to listen. We learn from Moshe that the rebuker must care about the other person, and empathize with him, trying to understand where he is coming from and how is the best way to influence him for the good. Conversely, rebuke can be extremely damaging when it emanates from anger and a lack of concern for the spiritual well being of the other person. In such instances the rebuker will make no effort to try to understand why the other person is acting in such a way and may therefore have unreasonable expectations of him. The following story, told over by Rav Dovid Kaplan Shlita, demonstrates his point: “Raised modern Orthodox, Devoras’s parents instilled in her a respect for rabbis but a critical eye toward chareidim. When she got older, she decided to check it out for herself and davened at the Ponevezh Yeshiva during the Yamim Nora’im. She went back for Simchas Torah. Everything was fine until one of the girls present said to her in a loud voice in front of a crowd of girls, “you don’t come to daven here without wearing stockings!” Devora stormed out. If this was how chareidim behaved she was not interested. However, due to her respect for rabbis, she decided to go speak to Rav Shach zt“l. When she arrived at his door, there was a long line of men waiting to go in. When the door opened and the person inside left, they called here in, explaining that women had higher priority. Pleasantly surprised, she related the shocking story to the gadol hador. “They did a big aveirah.” Rav Shach told her. “Maybe it was unintentional, but they are still obligated to ask your forgiveness.” He spoke to her for a long time about how careful we must be to be sensitive to others. She decided during this talk to become more religious. Today she is married to a Rosh Yeshiva and her sons and son-in-laws are talmidei chachamim. ” This story teaches us how much damage one wrong statement can do it and how much good can be achieved with caring words. How did the girl who spoke harshly to Devora come to commit such a serious sin when she surely meant to defend shemiras hamitzvos? The answer is that she made no effort to understand Devora’s background and level. Consequently, her rebuke did not only fail to change Devora for the good but it very nearly alienated this girl from chareidi Jewry and prevented her from becoming more observant. In contrast, tochacha that is motivated out of concern for one’s fellow will lead us to measure our words carefully before correcting someone else’s behavior. Rav Yehonasan Eibeschitz zt”l says that the greatest way of fulfilling the mitzvo of ‘love thy neighbor’ is by caring about the spiritual well being of one‘s fellow Jew - this attitude manifests itself in the right form of tochacha . This lesson is very pertinent to Tisha B’Av; Chazal tell us that the Second Temple was destroyed because of sinas chinam (baseless hatred). Rav Eibetschitz continues that the sinas chinam was the fact that the people refrained from rebuking each other. As a consequence, the numerous groups of apikorsim were allowed to grow and adversely influence the Jewish people. According to this explanation, hatred is not limited to active adversity, it also includes apathy . Such apathy indicated a severe lacking in the bein adam lechaveiro of the people at the time of the Second Beis HaMedrash. Chazal tell us that any generation in which the Beis HaMikdash is not rebuilt, is considered as if they destroyed it. This means that the present generation is still effected by sinas chinam, defined by Rav Eibetschitz as not caring enough about one’s fellow to want to help him improve his Avodas Hashem. Whilst we have seen that rebuke can be very damaging when done in the wrong way, nonetheless, if it emanates from a true feeling of ahava then it can surely be used to greatly help our fellow Jew.

THE CONNECTION BETWEEN CALMNESS AND BITACHON

DEVARIM – THE CONNECTION BETWEEN CALMNESS AND BITACHON By Yehonasan Gefen Parashas Devarim begins with Moshe Rabbeinu rebuking the Jewish people for the various sins that they committed in the desert. One of the first sins that he addresses is that of the spies. Moshe recalls the events that led to this tragic occurrence. “And you all approached me and said, ‘let us send men ahead of us who will spy out the land for us, and they will tell us the way which we should go in it, and which cities we should come to’.” Given that all of Moshe’s words involve some kind of rebuke, the question arises, what exactly is the criticism found in these words? Rashi explains that the way in which they approached Moshe was inappropriate. “You all approached me in an irbuvia, the children pushing ahead of the elderly, and the elderly pushing ahead of the leaders.” The simple understanding of this criticism is that Moshe was rebuking them for a lack in derech eretz (respect) and kavod HaTorah (respect for Torah). Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l writes that it is difficult to say that this was the focus of Moshe’s reproof. It is clear from the account of the spies in Parashas Shelach, that the main failing of the spies was a lack of bitachon (trust in HaShem). This caused them to be fearful of the mighty people living in Eretz Yisroel, and to mourn their perceived inability to conquer the land. Accordingly, what is the connection between the fact that the people approached Moshe in an inappropriate manner, with the lack of bitachon that was the true cause of the sin? Rav Kamenetsky explains that indeed, the lack of bitachon was the cause of the sin of the spies; the lack of derech eretz displayed was merely a symptom of that lacking. Had they had the appropriate level of trust, then they would have calmly approached Moshe, in the correct order. However, since they felt a great deal of anxiety about entering the land, they acted with behala (ie. in an agitated fashion), and broke the conventions of who should approach Moshe first. In this way, their lack of bitachon was the cause of their agitated behavior. Rav Kamenetsky uses this idea to answer a pressing question in the story of the spies. In Parashas Shelach, the order of the spies is not in the same order as anywhere else in the Torah. Normally, they are written according to their age, but here they are not. The commentaries offer various suggestions as to the reasoning behind the order. Rav Kamenetsky suggests that there is no reasoning to the order of the spies in this instance; the spies, with the exception of Yehoshua and Calev, felt the same anxiety as the people, therefore they also approached their entry to Eretz Yisroel in a state of behala. Behala results in a lack of order, accordingly, it is appropriate that the spies are mentioned in no specific order as a reflection of their agitated attitude. We have learnt from the principle of Rav Kamenetsky,that when a person acts in an agitated, or hurried fashion, there is a strong possibility that his behavior stems from a lack of trust in HaShem. A person who has such trust, will feel no sense of panic when he needs to do something, and will have no sense of impatience when events do not take place as quickly as he would like them to. Rather, he recognizes that HaShem is constantly guiding him, and any tests that he undergoes are HaShem’s way of giving him opportunities to grow. However, when a person does not have the security that bitachon provides, he feels no sense of calmness (menucha), and may feel eager to make events happen quicker than they should. The first lesson that one can take from this idea is to be aware of situations when he may have a tendency to be impatient or agitated. When he is aware that he is in this state, he should make every effort to refrain from any action that he may later regret. Rather, he should try to step back and take a measured view of the situation at hand. Secondly, he should understand that his behavior may well stem from a lack of bitachon, and he should try to internalize that which intellectually he knows to be true – that HaShem is with Him and therefore, there is no need to get agitated. May we all merit to develop the bitachon that will enable us to live with menucha.

HONESTY IN MONEY MATTERS - DEVARIM

PARSHAS DEVARIM – HONESTY IN MONEY MATTERS “Do not be afraid of any man because the judgement is to Hashem. ” The Torah instructs judges that they should not be intimidated by powerful people when they are deciding a Din Torah, the reason being that ‘the judgement is to Hashem’ - what does this mean? Rashi explains that when a person unjustly takes money from his fellow there is an injustice that needs to be fixed. Therefore Hashem must direct the hashgacha in such a way that the money will be returned to its true owner. In this way the judgement has been ‘placed’ in Hashem’s hands, forcing Him to correct the injustice done. Why is this so serious? Hashem deliberately limits Himself from too much obvious intervention in our lives so as not to interfere with our free will. If His presence was so obvious it would be much more difficult to sin and the balance of bechira would be effected. By causing Hashem to intervene to reimburse the victim of an injustice a person is indeed effecting this delicate balance. There is another interesting point that we can learn out from this Rashi: When a person commits an aveira in diney mamonos he is not only transgressing in the realm of Bein Adam LeChaveiro but also in that of Bein Adam LeMakom. This point is of significance because there seems to be a tendency to approach Bein Adam LeMakom mitzvos with a different attitude from Bein Adam Lechaveiro mitzvos: When an observant Jew is offered a plate of food he would normally inquire as to the hechsher of the food before he eats it. If he is unclear as to the standards of the hechsher he will ask a shilo. In contrast, it is quite common that when a person is faced with a question as to paying taxes, for example, he is more likely to proceed without looking into the halachic validity of his actions. Perhaps the realisation that mamonos issues also involve Bein Adam LeMakom can motivate us to be more careful in them. The Gemara supports the idea that mamonos is an area of natural human weakness; “Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav says, most people sin in the area of gezel.. ” This Gemara seems hard to understand - do most Jews go around stealing from others?! The Rashbam explains that the Gemara is not referring to outright stealing such as pick-pocketing or shoplifting. Rather it is referring to much more subtle and insidious forms of stealing in which people justify that what they are doing is mutar. The Gemara may also include forms of ‘gezel’ that come as a result of sheer carelessness. For the remainder of this article we will discuss some of those areas of halacha in monetary matters that are often neglected and observe how our Gedolim conducted themselves in these areas. A classic example of carelessness is not returning borrowed items. It seems to be an all-too-common occurrence that people lend sefarim out and never see them again! Unless the lender intends to forgive failure to return the sefer, this constitutes a form of gezel. Of course people do not purposely intend to steal, but such negligence surely stems from a lack of respect for other people’s property. Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l was a living example of how to act in this area. On one occasion he was filling in a kesubah and used the chassan’s pen and forgot to return it to him amidst the hectic nature of the wedding. TWO YEARS later he met again with the pen owner and handed him the pen . Another area in which there is a great yetser hara to be moreh heter is using other people’s items without express permission. There are many instances in which it is forbidden to assume that the owner will be mochel for someone to use his item without asking first. The ease at which one can be nichshal in this area is demonstrated in the following story. Rav Leib Chassid was the famous tzaddik of Kelm. In his later years he went out for a walk on the road between Kelm and Tavrig. One day a teenage boy driving a wagon passed by and offered him a ride. Reb Leib asked him if the wagon was his, and the by replied that it belonged to his father. “Did he give you permission to take passengers?” Reb Leib asked. The boy admitted that he had never discussed it with his father, adding, “Do I really need his permission for that?” “Yes”, said Reb Leib, “since you have not asked permission you would be a thief if you took any passengers into the wagon. ” It is such sensitivity that is required in order to avoid erring in these halachos. Avoiding paying taxes to non-Jewish governments is something which one can easily find justification for, however, this is often a violation of Dina d’Malchusa dina . A woman once asked Rav Kamenetsky why her family should not lie about their income in order to obtain food stamps when there was widespread cheating among other ethnic and racial groups to establish eligibility. “Simple” said Reb Yaakov, “they did not stand at Har Sinai, you did.” This answer is the first and most important step in beginning to be more zahir in areas of mamonos. A person can find numerous reasons to justify various hanhagos in monetary areas but he must remember that ultimately everything a Jew does should be based on what Hashem taught us on Har Sinai. Rav Yisroel Reisman Shlita devotes an entire shiur to conveying the message that whenever one is faced with an opportunity to make or save money he must first and foremost look to the words of Shulchan Aruch to determine whether or not this form of behaviour is allowed . This often means asking a shilo and not presuming that it is okay to cheat the taxes or go back on a monetery agreement. And even if it is common practise among ‘observant’ Jews to act in a certain questionable manner this is not an iron-clad proof that it is mutar to act in such a way. A second step to avoid aveiros in mamonos is to be aware of the tremendous yetser hara of chemdas hamamon. The Gemara in Chagiga states that gezel is something that people have great taiva for . Because of this great yetser we must be extra careful and place fences that protect us from faltering. We learn just how far one must go to do this from Rav Yisroel Salanter zt”l. He once visited a wealthy man and was alone with him in a room. The man was called out for a few minutes but when he returned he was shocked to see that Rav Yisroel was not in the room. He looked everywhere for him and, to his great surprise was Rav Yisroel standing outside the house. Rav Yisroel explained that Chazal teach us that a minority of people sin in arayos whilst a majority sin in gezel : We know that it is forbidden to be alone in a room with an erva lest our yester hara overcome us. If the yester hara for gezel is stronger than that for arayos then we must learn out a kal v’chomer that it is assur to be alone with someone elses’ uncounted money ! Rav Yisroel was of course the last person that one would expect would be nichshal in gezel, yet he made fences to protect him from its snares, surely we should emulate him. We currently find ourselves in the nine days - a time of intense mourning for the Churban and the hester panim that accompanies it. Rav Mattisyahu Salomon Shlita suggests that carelessness in mamonos is a direct cause of hester panim: The Torah commands us to use accurate and honest weights and measures . Directly following this parsha comes the parsha of Amalek ? What is the connection between these seemingly disparate inyanim? The Netsiv explains that cheating in business undermines the basic tenets of Emuna and Bitachon. One who trusts that Hashem will provide for his parnosa will have no desire to break the Torah laws in order to acquire money. However, a person who is willing to cheat and be moreh heter in order to support himself demonstrates that he is not living with a belief that G-d is looking over him. Mida ceneged mida, Hashem says, ‘if you are acting as if I am not around then I will no longer be in your midst and protect you.’ Without heavenly protection we are open prey to our enemies. Thus we have seen how negligence in diney mamonos is not just a transgression of our relationships with others, but also shows a severe lacking in one’s relationship with Hashem - one who feels the need to ‘bend the rules’ in order to gain or save money is ignoring the basic tenets of bitachon in Hashem. Let us learn from our Gedolim and try to be more zahir in at least one of the areas discussed here - whether it be, being more careful in returning borrowed items or not using other people’s items without permission, or being honest in business. But the most important aitsa is that which Rav Reisman stressed so much - every area of our lives is decided by Shulchan Aruch and we must always verify that our actions accord with its instructions. What is the reward for zehirus in mamonos? The Yerushalmi in Makkos states that since the yetser hara to steal is so great, the reward to overcome this desire is proportionally great. “One who separates from [stealing] he and his descendants will benefit for every generation till the end of days. ” May we all be zocheh to end the hester panim and bring Hashem back into our lives.

מטות מסעי – ערך החיים יהונתן גפן

בס"ד מטות מסעי – ערך החיים יהונתן גפן "ואת בלעם בן בעור הרגו בחרב" נראה לכאורה שמותו של בלעם הרשע היה עונש על המאמצים והפעולות שעשה נגד עם ישראל במדבר. אולם הגמרא כותבת על חטא קודם שעשה בלעם המהווה סיבה למותו בטרם עת. "שלשה היו באותה עצה: [ששאלם פרעה כיצד לפגוע בעם ישראל] בלעם ואיוב ויתרו. בלעם שיעץ [לפגוע בהם] – נהרג. איוב ששתק – נידון ביסורין. יתרו שברח זכו מבני בניו שישבו בלשכת הגזית" . בלעם נענש במוות בידי עם ישראל בשל עצתו המרושעת לפרעה שנים קודם לכן. ר' חיים שמואלביץ זצ"ל מצביע על קושי גדול בדברי הגמרא: ברור שבלעם ראוי לעונש חמור הרבה יותר מאיוב, כיוון שאיוב לא עשה שום פעולה רעה, אלא ישב ושתק. למרות זאת עונשו של איוב קשה לכאורה הרבה יותר מזה של בלעם. בעוד בלעם מת במיתה מהירה, איוב היה צריך לשאת סבל מתמשך שמעולם לא סבל כמוהו שום אדם. כיצד ניתן להבין זאת? ר' חיים עונה שמתנת החיים היא המתנה הגדולה ביותר שניתן לתת לאדם, יהיו אלה חיי סבל קשים ונוראים ככל שיהיו – עדיין החיים עצמם שווים לאין ערוך מהמוות. ולכן עונשו של בלעם היה חמור הרבה יותר מעונשו של איוב – כיוון שלאיוב נשארה מתנת החיים, ובלעם איבד אותה לנצח. ר' לייב חסמן זצ"ל מביא משל שמסייע להבין רעיון זה היטב; דמיינו לעצמכם אדם שזוכה בפרס עצום בלוטו, ובדיוק באותו רגע נשבר לו כלי מסוים. האם תקלה פעוטה זו תצליח להעיב על שמחתו הגדולה?! האושר אותו הוא חש בעקבות הזכייה מגמד ואף מבטל לחלוטין כל תחושת כאב על עניינים יומיומיים אחרים. כך גם צריכה להיות גישתו של האדם לחיים – השמחה על עצם העובדה שהוא חי צריכה להיות כה גדולה עד שבכוחה להפוך כל קושי לחסר משמעות, גם סבל וייסורים קשים כמו אלה של איוב. באשר הם כאין וכאפס לעומת המתנה הגדולה- מתנת החיים . מדוע כה גדול הוא ערכה של מתנת החיים? מדברי המשנה בפרקי אבות ניתן להבין את התשובה לכך: "יפה שעה אחת בתשובה ומעשים טובים בעולם הזה מכל חיי העולם הבא ויפה שעה אחת של קורת רוח בעולם הבא מכל חיי העולם הזה" לכאורה המשנה סותרת את דברי עצמה – בתחילה קובעת שהעולם הזה חשוב לאין שיעור מהעולם הבא, אולם בסיום כותבת המשנה את ההיפך! המפרשים מסבירים ששני חלקי המשנה מתייחסים לשני היבטים שונים. החלק השני של המשנה משווה בין ההנאה בה יכול אדם לזכות בשתי העולמות. במובן הזה, העולם הבא גדול לאין ערוך מהעולם הזה - אין שום הנאה ארצית שניתן לנסות להשוותה עם רגע אחד של קורת רוח בעולם הבא. ההנאה שם היא הנאה של קשר עם הקדוש ברוך הוא, מקור כל הטוב בעולמות כולם – כל ההנאות האחרות אינן משמעותיות ביחס להנאה זו. לעומת זאת, החלק הראשון של המשנה מתייחס ליכולתו של האדם להוסיף ולהתקדם בקשר עם הקב"ה. במובן זה העולם הזה הוא גדול לאין שיעור, כיון שהוא המקום בו יש לאדם בחירה חופשית בעזרתה יכול הוא לבחור בטוב ולהתקרב להקב"ה על ידי קיום המצוות. בעולם הבא לא תהיה עוד הזדמנות להתעלות ולהתקשר יותר אל הקב"ה. וכעת יכולים אנו להבין מדוע כה חשובים חיי האדם – כל שנייה מהווה הזדמנות פז לזכות בקרבה נוספת להקב"ה – שזו בעצם ההנאה הנצחית שתהיה מנת חלקנו בעולם הבא. הגאון מוילנא בהיותו על ערש דווי לימד שיעור מאלף על ערך חיי האדם בעולם הזה, הוא תפס בציציותיו, בכה ואמר "כמה חשוב הוא העולם הזה, בכמה פרוטות בודדות ניתן לזכות במצות ציצית ולחזות בפני השכינה, ובעולם הבא אין כל אפשרות להשיג דבר כזה" . רעיון זה משתמע גם מדברי הגמרא בעבודה זרה : הגמרא מספרת על אלעזר בן דורדיא, שהיה רשע וחוטא. פעם אחת, בעת שעמד לפני עשיית חטא נורא, נאמר לו שגם אם יתחרט וינסה לעשות תשובה – לא תתקבל תשובתו. אמירה זו זעזעה אותו כל כך עד שהוא התחרט על מעשיו ונפטר מתוך תשובה שלמה. כאשר עזבה אותו נשמתו, יצאה בת קול ואמרה ר' אלעזר בן דורדיה מזומן לחיי העולם הבא. הגמרא שם אומרת שכאשר שמע זאת ר' יהודה הנשיא הוא בכה ואמר "יש קונה עולמו בכמה שנים ויש קונה עולמו בשעה אחת" המפרשים מעלים תמיהה, מדוע מעשה זה גרם לרבי לכזה צער - הוא, שבמשך שנים התאמץ ועבד את עבודת ה' לשמה, ודאי גדול חלקו בעולם הבא יותר משכרו של אדם שזכה בעולם הבא שלו ברגע אחד של התעוררות לתשובה?! ר' נח ויינברג שליט"א עונה בשם אביו, שרבי בכה כיוון שראה מהו כוחו של רגע אחד בעולם הזה; ברגע אחד אדם יכול לזכות באושר ובשכר אינסופיים, והוא בכה על כל אותם רגעים שלא צלחו את תפקידם ולא הופקה מהם התועלת המירבית לפי כוחם. כל שנייה הינה הזדמנות יוצאת דופן לאדם לבנות לעצמו עוד עולם הבא. החפץ חיים מביא רעיון זה לידי ביטוי מעשי בהלכה . הוא מביא את ספר החינוך שכותב שישנן שש מצוות תמידיות – מצוות שחיובן חל על כל אדם בכל רגע ורגע - הוא יכול לקיימן מידי שנייה על ידי מחשבה עליהם בלבד, לכן אין גבול לשכר על קיום מצוות אלה. ניתן גם לראות בכך הסבר מדוע ההלכה היהודית כל כך מתנגדת לשים קץ לחיי אדם בטרם עת גם אם הוא לא כשיר כלל לחיים כאחד האדם. ר' זאב לף שליט"א מצביע על העובדה שאפילו אדם החולה ל"ע בקומה מסוגל לקיים מצוות רבות מאד רק על ידי מחשבה. הוא יכול לקיים בשלמות את המצוות המצריכות רק מחשבה, ויותר מכך, חז"ל אומרים שאם לאדם היה רצון לקיים מצווה אבל הוא לא הצליח לעשות זאת בפועל, הוא מקבל שכר כאילו באמת קיים את המצווה. וכך, כל שנייה של חיים בזה העולם הינה הזדמנות גדולה לקנות עוד חלק בעולם הבא . ראינו מה עצום ערכו של כל רגע בחיים. לפעמים בכל זאת אנו חושבים שרק מעט ניתן להשיג בכמה דקות פשוטות. אולם, המציאות הוכיחה אחרת. החתם סופר נשאל פעם כיצד הוא נהיה גדול בישראל, הוא ענה שהוא הפך לגדול בחמש דקות. כוונתו הייתה שעל ידי שניצל כל רגע פנוי לתורה נוספו לו שעות רבות מאוד של לימוד. פעם אחת נראה ר' משה פיינשטיין מחייך חיוך גדול – הוא הסביר זאת ואמר שהוא סיים עכשיו את הש"ס. לא היה זה הישג נדיר מאוד מבחינתו, ידוע שהוא סיים את הש"ס עשרות פעמים, אולם סיום זה היה שונה. הוא נוצר מלימודו בזמנים פנויים בחתונות; על ידי לימוד עקבי וקבוע בפרקי זמן קצרים ביותר, בסופו של דבר הוא סיים את כל הש"ס. גם אנו יכולים להשתמש בזמן מועט כדי להשיג הישגים מפתיעים בלימוד. ישנם הלומדים משנה אחת ליום, זה נשמע קטן ופשוט, אולם לאחר שנים של התמדה בכך מסיימים את ששה סדרי המשנה. תועלת חשובה נוספת לסדרי לימוד קטנים היא שעל ידם יכול אדם להגיע ללימוד תורה בתחומים שבדרך כלל לא זוכים ליחס מספק. ישנו תלמיד חכם אחד בארץ ישראל שידוע בבקיאותו בכל שטחי התורה, כולל נביא, השקפה ומוסר, כל זאת מלבד ידיעותיו המקיפות בש"ס ובפוסקים. כאשר נשאל כיצד הצליח ללמוד קשת כה רחבה של נושאים, הוא הסביר שהיו לו הרבה סדרים קטנים - מתוך לימוד מהר"ל או נביא במשך עשר דקות ביום, בסופו של דבר הוא השיג ידע רחב ומקיף בהם. בדומה לכך ר' ישראל ריזמן שליט"א מדגיש פעמים רבות שכדי לדעת נביא אין צורך להקדיש שעות רבות ביום. את בקיאותו בהם הוא קנה על ידי לימוד משך דקות מספר כל ערב. בימינו ישנו הצע גדול בו ניתן להשתמש לניצול סדרים קטנים – ישנם ספרים שנכתבו כך שניתן ללמוד מהם קטע קצר אבל בעל משמעות בנושאים חשובים, מידי יום ביומו. ראינו עד כמה חשובה מתנת החיים, וערכו הגדול של כל רגע. החיים מלאים ניסיונות ואתגרים, פעמים ואדם מתייאש למולם – אולם עליו לזכור שהחיים עצמם הינם סיבה מספקת לשמוח, כך יוכל להתגבר על כל מחשבה שלילית: כאשר הסבא מנובהרדוק התחיל להקים ישיבות, הוא לא נחל הצלחה. הוא הקים ישיבות והן התפרקו, ארגן קבוצות והן התפוררו. ובנוסף לכך, הוא ומקורביו נתקלו במתנגדים רבים. בעת שכזו הוא הגיע לקלם, ורבו, הסבא מקלם, הבחין במראהו העגום, וידע את הסיבה לכך. באותו מוצאי שבת, כאשר התאספה קבוצה לשמוע את דברי מוסרו, הוא נעמד על הבימה ונשאר דומם למשך זמן ארוך ביותר. ואז הוא דפק בעצמה על הסטנדר וקרא "מספיק לבן אנוש שהוא חי" שוב ושוב הוא חזר על מילותיו עד שבסוף הוא הורה לתלמידים להתפלל מעריב. "אסיפה זו" אמר הסבא מנובהרדוק "סילקה את צערי, וטיהרה את מחשבתי" . הסבא מקלם לימד את הסבא מנובהרדוק לימוד שערכו לא יסולא בפז - כל עוד אדם חי, אין שום סיבה שראוי להתלונן בגללה. ייתן ה' ונזכה כולנו להעריך נכונה את מתנת החיים אותה קיבלנו ולהשתמש בה בדרך הטובה ביותר.

מסעי – חסד על פי השקפת התורה יהונתו גפן

בס"ד מסעי – חסד על פי השקפת התורה יהונתו גפן לקראת סופה של הפרשה דנה התורה בארוכה בעניין ערי המקלט. ערים אלה הוקצו במיוחד עבור רוצחים בשגגה. אם אדם גרם למותו של רעהו שלא בכוונה, הוא נתון בסכנת חיים – גואלי הדם, קרובי הנפטר רודפים אותו ורוצים להורגו. לכן מנחה אותו התורה ללכת אל עיר המקלט, בה יהיה מוגן מסכנה, ובו בעת יעבור תהליך של תשובה. הוא יכול לצאת החוצה אך ורק כאשר הכהן הגדול שכיהן באותם ימים נפטר לעולמו. המשנה אומרת שכיוון שגורלו של הרוצח תלוי במותו של הכהן הגדול, קיימת סבירות גבוהה שהוא יתפלל למותו, שיאפשר את יציאתו לחופשי . לכן, אמו של הכהן הגדול הייתה נוהגת לתת לרוצח מתנות, מתוך תקווה שהן תגרומנה שלא יתפלל על מות בנה. הגמרא שואלת על כך, מדוע קיים סיכוי כלשהו שתפילה זו תתקבל בכלל? הרי הכהן הגדול לא חטא כל חטא ואין שום סיבה שתצדיק את מותו. תשובת הגמרא היא שאכן היה בו פגם כלשהו, כיוון שכמנהיג הרוחני של העם, היה עליו להתפלל שלא יקרה כזה אסון בעם ישראל. וכיוון שברור שלא עשה כן, תלויה האשמה גם בו, והוא נתון בסכנה שמא תתקבלנה התפילות על מותו. בעל ה"בן איש חי" זצ"ל שואל על כך – גם אם תלויה בו אשמה, עדיין מה משמעות יש לתפילה על מותו, הוא ודאי ייענש על אשמתו ללא קשר לתפילת הרוצח. הוא משיב שאכן הכהן ייענש בייסורים בעולם הזה, אבל כוח התפילה עלול לגרום לו למות . ישנם נושאים רבים ושאלות רבות הטעונות הסבר בעניין זה . אחת השאלות היא, שנראה שהכהן הגדול לא חטא בחטא כל כך חמור, הוא לא גרם בפועל נזק לאף אחד, הוא רק אשם בכך שנמנע מלהתפלל כפי שהיה מצופה ממנו - עונש של ייסורים או מוות נראה חמור הרבה יותר על המידה עבור משגה קטן לכאורה. על מנת להשיב על כך, עלינו להעמיק ולהבין מה דורשת התורה מהיהודי בנושא החסד. ישנן שלוש מדרגות כלליות ביחסים עם בני אדם: גרימת נזק; עזרה וסיוע; וחוסר יחס – מטוב ועד רע. על פי השקפה חילונית, גרימת נזק לאדם ללא כל סיבה מוצדקת ודאי נחשבת שלילית, בעוד סיוע ועזרה לזולת נחשבים חיוביים. חוסר יחס נראה בעיניהם כהתנהגות ניטראלית לא חיובית ולא שלילית. גם השקפת התורה רואה בעזרה וסיוע לזולת עניין חיובי ובגרימת נזק – מעשה שלילי, אולם מה אומרת התורה על הימנעות מיחס כלשהו, לא של חסד וגם לא של נזק? הגמרא ב"בבא מציעא" דנה באיסור "צער בעלי חיים" . הגמרא שואלת מהו מקור האיסור, ומסקנתה היא שהעניין נלמד מחיוב "עזוב תעזוב עמו" – החיוב לפרק את משאו של חמור שרובץ תחת משאו ואינו מסוגל לזוז. אם אדם אינו מתייחס בהתאם לבהמה כאשר היא במצב כזה הוא עובר על "צער בעלי חיים". מקור זה נראה מעט מפתיע - אם היינו שואלים אדם מה נראית לו דוגמא טובה ל"צער בעלי חיים" הוא ודאי היה משיב – הכאת בהמה, או חיתוך רגליו של עכביש אומלל. לעומת זאת הימנעות מסיוע לבהמה בכאבה לא נשמע כמו "צער בעלי חיים" – זוהי נקיטת עמדה ניטראלית לחלוטין, ייתכן שהיא קרירה וחסרת רגש, אולם לא נראה שמשתייכת היא לקטרוגיה של גרימת כאב וצער. למרות זאת, הגמרא רואה אחרת את פני הדברים; ברור על פי מבט הגמרא שהימנעות מסיוע לבהמה הנתונה במצוקה נחשב למעשה מובהק של "צער בעלי חיים" - אין כל הבדל בין מעשה זה לבין גרימה אקטיבית של צער לבהמה. מובן מכך שהשקפת התורה על אדם שלא מתייחס כלל לזולת – לא לטוב ולא לרע שונה בהחלט מהגישה החילונית לכך. התורה מגדירה את חוסר היחס כמעשה חסר רחמים, הנתון בכפיפה אחת יחד עם גרימה בפועל של צער ונזק לזולת. דוגמא נוספת לעניין זה היא הגמרא אודות פרעה שנמלח בשלושה אנשים כיצד להתייחס ליהודים במצרים. בלעם הציע לפגוע בהם באכזריות. יתרו רצה להציע לפרעה להעניק ליהודים יחס טוב, אולם הוא ידע שאם יאמר כך יהרג על עצתו זו, ולכן ברח. איוב, לעומת זאת שתק. בלעם כמובן נענש על עצתו המרושעת ונהרג בחרב. לכאורה איוב לא עשה כל דבר רע – הוא רק שתק ולא אמר דבר, למרות זאת הוא נענש בייסורים נוראים המובאים בספר "איוב", ייסורים כמוהם לא סבל אף אדם. גם מכאן ברור שהימנעות מעשייה נחשבת למעשה חמור על פי השקפת התורה. הבנה זו אינה נשארת אך ורק בתחום ההשקפה, אלא משתקפת באופן משמעותי גם בהלכה. התורה מצווה אותנו "לא תעמוד על דם רעך" . אם יהודי רואה את רעהו נתון בסכנה הוא מחויב לנסות להצילו. הפוסקים מסבירים שמצווה זו מתייחסת גם למצב בו אדם נתון במצוקה כלכלית . יתירה מזאת, התורה מחייבת אותנו גם לדאוג לאובדן חפציהם ורכושם של אחרים, ולהתאמץ להחזיר את האבידות לבעליהם, בקיום מצוות "השבת אבידה". נאמר על מצווה זו "לא תוכל להתעלם" – אדם אינו רשאי להתעלם מסבלם שלא אחרים, מעשה כזה נחשב רשלנות ונוגד לחלוטין את דרישות התורה. רבנו יונה מדגיש את חשיבות מצווה זו ואומר "'לא תוכל להתעלם'... כי תאמר הן לא ידענו זה, הלא תֹכן לבות הוא יבין, ונוצר נפשך הוא ידע, והשיב לאדם כפעלו. הנה המניעה מן ההצלה ושית עצות על העזר, הקדוש ברוך הוא יחשבה לו כפעלו" כלומר, אם אדם מתעצל ולא עושה את המוטל עליו לדאוג למציאת בעלי האבידה – הקב"ה, מחשיב לו זאת כאילו הוא האחראי לנזק שנגרם לאותו אדם. עתה ניתן להבין מדוע התורה מקפידה כל כך על הכהן הגדול שנמנע מתפילה על אחיו היהודים שלא יקרה ביניהם אסון. הוא לא השקיע מאמצים מספיקים למניעת מקרה כה חמור בעם, והימנעות זו ממעשה שהיה נדרש ממנו נחשבת לחטא. לימוד זה לא משתייך אך ורק לכהן הגדול, אלא מתאים לכל אחד בדרגתו הוא. החיים מזמנים הזדמנויות רבות מאד לעזור בפועל לאנשים שזקוקים לכך; דוגמא שכיחה היא אדם שלא חש בטוב והדרך הפשוטה לעזור לו היא להתפלל עבורו שיחלים. זהו אופן קל שלא לעמוד מנגד כאשר הזולת נתון במצוקה. מצב אחר, שאף הוא מזדמן הרבה הוא כאשר אנו רואים אדם מתאמץ וסוחב מספר לא קטן של שקיות מלאות קניות בדרכו הביתה – זהו חסד בלתי ישוער להציע לו עזרה ולסחוב עבורו חלק מהשקיות . אולם האמת היא, שהעבודה שאדם צריך לעשות על מנת להיות בעל חסד אמיתי דורשת, על פי השקפת התורה, שימת לב בלתי פוסקת ומאמצים תמידיים. אם בכוחנו להפנים את הלימוד של הכהן הגדול, אזי חיינו וחיי הסובבים אותנו ישתנו לטובה לבלי הכר!

REDEFINING SINAS CHINAM

TISHAV B’AV - REDEFINING SINAS CHINAM As we approach Tishah b’Av, we strive to find ways of improving ourselves, so we can ensure that this will be the last year without the Beis HaMikdash. The famous gemara in Gittin about Kamtza and Bar Kamtza teaches us a great deal about the cause of the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash and what we need to rectify in order to bring about its rebuilding. The gemara tells us that Yerushalayim was destroyed as a result of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza. An unnamed man was a sworn enemy of Bar Kamtza but friendly with Kamtza. He sent his servant to invite Kamtza to a banquet, but the servant mistakenly invited Bar Kamtza. When Bar Kamtza came to the affair, the furious host demanded that he leave. Embarrassed, he offered to pay for his own meal in order to be allowed to stay. After that offer was refused, he volunteered to pay half the cost of the whole banquet, but instead he was thrown out. There were a number of rabbis in attendance, who remained silent throughout this unpleasant incident. Indignant at their passivity, Bar Kamtza proceeded to slander the Jewish people to the Roman authorities, which began the course of events that ended with the destruction. The Iyyun Yaakov, ztz”l, asks why Kamtza is apportioned some of the blame for these events, since he did nothing throughout the whole story. The Ben Ish Chai, ztz”l, answers by suggesting that Kamtza was actually present at the banquet and witnessed how Bar Kamtza was treated. He could have prevented what happened by explaining the misunderstanding with the invitations. There is a principle that if someone can protest a wrongdoing but does not, it is considered as if he himself committed it. The Ben Ish Chai continues that this answer is even more compelling according to the Maharsha, who writes that Bar Kamtza was the son of Kamtza. Accordingly, Kamtza was surely aware of the feud between his son and friend, yet he did nothing to make peace between them. Because of his passivity, Kamtza is held partly responsible for the destruction. Furthermore, the rabbis also seem to be held partially responsible for the course of events, because they did nothing to prevent Bar Kamtza’s humiliation. Thus, there seems to be a common theme running through this story: Inaction and apathy allowed such terrible consequences to take place. Had any of the people involved strived to prevent the injustices that took place, the Beis HaMikdash may not have been destroyed. Their indifference to the surrounding tragedies resulted in their passivity. This lesson, that apathy destroyed the second Beis HaMikdash, seems somewhat contradictory to the Gemara in Yoma, which states that sinas chinam (baseless hatred) was the ultimate cause of the destruction. However, on deeper analysis it seems that sinas chinam is not limited to active hatred; it can also include apathy. We see this from the first time the root of the word sinah (hatred) appears in the Torah: In parashas Vayetzei, after Yaakov Avinu marries Rachel and Leah, the Torah tells us, “Hashem saw that Leah was senuah (literally, “hated”).” The commentaries have great difficulty in understanding that Yaakov really hated Leah. Accordingly, Ramban explains that when one has two wives, the one he loves less is called senuah—he does not hate her, but he loves her less than his favorite. Therefore, says Ramban, Yaakov did not hate Leah; rather, his love for her was lacking. And therefore we can understand that the word sinah does not necessarily imply an active hatred; rather, it can indicate a lack of sufficient care and love. Thus, the sinas chinam described in Yoma need not have been a virulent hatred; it could also have included apathy and lack of concern for one’s fellow. In a similar vein, Rav Yehonasan Eibschutz, ztz”l, writes that the sinas chinam described in the gemara refers not to active hatred, but to disinterest in preventing others from slipping into heretical views. He notes that many heretical sects had grown in that period, because people were not willing to rebuke them. He exclaims, “Do you have a greater hater than this: one who sees his friend drowning in a river [of sin] and does not protest?!” Based on this redefinition of sinah, it is clear that there is no contradiction between the story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza and the gemara in Yoma. The sinas chinam referred to in Yoma involves not only active hatred; it also includes apathy toward the pain of one’s fellow, and a refusal to help him grow spiritually. The fact that the Beis HaMikdash has not been rebuilt means that these flaws are still very prevalent today, and they apply to many areas of our lives, whether it be in the realm of sharing another’s pain, trying to help those less fortunate than ourselves, or reaching out to the many people who are distant from Torah. This is a time of serious soul searching to assess our performance in these areas and strive to improve in some way. May this be the last Tishah b’Av or mourning that we endure.

THE TORAH'S DEFINITION OF CHESED - MASSEI

MASSEI - THE TORAH’S DEFINITION OF CHESED By Yehonasan Gefen Towards the end of the Parsha, the Torah speaks at length about the cities of refuge; areas that are set aside for unintentional murderers. If a person carelessly causes the death of a fellow Jew then he is in severe danger of being killed by relatives of the victim. The Torah therefore instructs him to go to a city of refuge where he is protected from danger and must simultaneously undergo a process of teshuva. He can only go free when the present Kohen Gadol passes away. The Mishna tells us that since the sentence of the murderer is dependent upon the death of the Kohen Gadol, there is the distinct likelihood that he will pray for the Kohen Gadol to die so that he can go free . Consequently it was customary for the mother of the Kohen Gadol to give gifts to the murderer with the hope that he would not daven for her son to die. The Gemara asks why there should be any fear of the prayers being actualized - the Kohen Gadol did not commit any sin and therefore does not deserve to die. The Gemara answers that he was in fact at fault because he should have prayed that no such disaster should occur to the Jewish people. Since he evidently did not do so he is considered guilty ad susceptible to prayers that he die. The Ben Ish Chai zt”l asks, that if he was guilty then what is the significance of prayers that he die, he will surely be punished regardless. He explains that he would indeed be punished with suffering but that the prayers could cause him to actually die . There are many interesting issues and questions that arise from this inyan , one of them is that it would seem that the Kohen Gadol did not commit any terrible aveiro. He did not actively cause damage to anyone, he was merely guilty of neglecting to pray as much as required - a punishment of suffering or death seems to be very severe for such a seemingly mild transgression! In order to answer this, it is instructive to analyze the Torah’s expectations of a Jew in the realm of chesed. There are three general levels of interaction with other people: Harming them; helping them; and doing nothing to them, neither good nor bad. In the secular view, harming someone without a valid reason is looked on negatively, whilst helping someone is viewed positively. Doing nothing is seen as neutral; it is neither good nor bad. The Torah view also holds that helping someone is good and harming someone is bad, but what does the Torah say about doing nothing - neither helping nor harming? The Gemara in Bava Metsia discusses the prohibition of ‘tzaar baalei chaim’, causing pain to animals. It questions the source of this issur, and its conclusion is that it is learnt from the obligation to help unload a donkey that is suffering because of the heavy load on its back. Leaving an animal in this state of discomfort is considered ‘tzaar baalei chaim. This source is somewhat surprising - if one was asked what he thought to be an example of ‘tzaar baalei chaim’ he would answer; hitting an animal or pulling off the legs of a spider. But merely refraining from helping an animal in pain would not seem to be tzaar baalei chaim - that is a neutral act, perhaps cold, but not in the category of actively causing pain. However, the Gemara sees things somewhat differently; it is clear in the Gemara’s eyes that refraining from helping an animal in distress is a clear case of ‘tzaar baalei chaim’ - it is no different from actively causing pain to an animal. Thus, it is apparent that the Torah view of ‘doing nothing’ is decidedly different from the secular attitude. The Torah considers ‘doing nothing’ as an act of cruelty which belongs in the same category as doing active harm. Another example of this is the Gemara that Pharoah consulted three people as how to treat the Jewish people in Egypt. Bilaam advised that he treat the Jews very harshly, Yisro wanted to advise Pharaoh to be kind to the Jews but he knew he would be killed for saying that so he escaped. Iyov, however, remained silent. Bilaam was understandably punished by being killed by the sword for his evil advice. Iyov seemingly did nothing wrong - he merely remained silent. However he was punished by suffering incredible yissurim, worse than anyone else has ever suffered - those that are mentioned in Sefer Iyov. It is thus clear that doing nothing is considered as doing evil in the Torah’s eyes. This concept is not confined to the realm of hashkafa, it also features significantly in halacha. The Torah commands us, “Do not stand by the blood of your fellow“ . If one sees a fellow Jew in danger one is obligated to try to save him. The poskim explain that this mitzva also applies to helping someone in financial need. The Torah further obligates us to care about the lost property of others and strive to return it to its rightful owner through the mitzva of hashavas aveida. It states that, “you cannot hide yourself.” - one cannot simply ignore the suffering of others, to do so is considered negligent and totally contradicts the Torah requirements. Rabbeinu Yonah stresses the seriousness of this mitzva: “’You shall not be able to look away… Should you say, ‘I don’t know about this’ [G-d] recognizes the contents of the heart and knows the hidden thoughts, and He repays each person according to his deeds. If he fails to come to the rescue of another or seek ways to help him, The Holy Blessed One considers him to have caused the damage himself.” If one looks away from a Jew in need, any damage that results is considered his responsibility. We can now understand why the Torah is so strict on the Kohen Gadol for refraining from actively praying that a tragedy not occur to the Jewish people. He did not invest sufficient effort to prevent a disaster from occurring and his failure to actively daven is considered a serious sin. This lesson is not limited to the Kohen Gadol, it applies to everyone on their own level. Life is replete with opportunities to actively help people in need; A common situation is when someone is unwell and the main way to help is to pray for their health to improve. This is an easy way to avoid the takala of standing by idly whilst one’s friend is in need. Another common occurrence is that we see our fellow Jew struggling to carry a number of shopping bags on the way home - it is a great act of chesed to help unload his burden . But in truth the Avoda of being a true Baal Chesed in the Torah’s eyes requires constant attention and effort. If we can internalize the lesson of the Kohen Gadol then our own lives and those of those around us will be greatly enhanced. Below is something I wrote in the past that related to the above topic of the need to actively help others, however it focuses on how this principle applies in the realm of ruchnius. APPLICATIONS OF LOH SAAMOD AND HASHAVAS AVEIDA IN RUCHNIUS Are there any similar requirements with regard to helping our fellow who is suffering in his ruchnius? The Shelah answers this question on his explanation of the mitzva of ‘loh saamod’: “The reason for this mitzva is because all Jews are intrinsically connected to each other and if we are obligated in saving one’s body then all the more so we are obligated to save one’s soul - if we see one committing an aveira and thereby losing his olam haba we must save him.” The Chofetz Chaim agrees to this psak of the Shlah: He writes: “So too, when we see people whom, because of their lack of knowledge… have forgotten Torah and the importance of keeping mitzvas, and because of this, they commit sins that incur the cutting off of their souls, it is certainly forbidden to be lax in encouraging them to keep the word of Hashem.” The Minchas Chinuch and Maharshdam also explain that the mitzva of ’loh saamod’ includes helping someone who is suffering in ruchnius. Similarly many commentators argue that the mitzva of hashava aveida obligates us to help people who are ‘lost’ in the spiritual sense. However this mitzva seems to require an even greater effort than that of ‘loh saamod’. The Chofetz Chaim writes: If the Torah was so concerned about the property of a Jew, even his donkey or sheep that strayed from the path and required great exertion [to return it], all the more so how much should one take pity on the Jewish soul that is straying from the path, even if it will require great exertion to return him to the correct path, indeed it is written ‘hashev tashiveim’ even 100 times. From here we learn that also in this area, one must strive, even 100 times to return them to Hashem’s path. In a similar vein, the Shelah notes, “the Torah expresses the phrase ’you shall surely return them’ as hashev tashiveim rather than the more appropriate hachzor hachzireim, because hashava intimates that we must stand guard and toil and struggle until our friend does teshuva. Our responsibility does not allow us to look away.” It is clear that this lesson is not limited to the Kohen Gadol - everyone on their level cannot refrain from helping those in need. This lesson can be applied in many ways but it seems that actively helping those in spiritual need is of particular importance. It is clear that the obligation to be a baal chesed requires that we overcome the natural inclination to ’hide our heads in the sand’, and force us to face the situation Klal Yisroel finds itself in today. Millions of Jews are lost sheep, living in a world devoid of meaning - experience has proven that they are willing to return to Torah if only given the opportunity. Outreach workers find people thirsty for meaning, they want to come back. Unfortunately, the number of frum Jews that have taken the responsibility for returning these neshamas to Hashem is gravely insufficient to rectify the current situation. Only if every frum Jew opens his eyes to the churban and strives in some way to help, can the tide be turned. And, as the Shelah and Chofetz Chaim stressed, everyone must put great effort into this mitzva - if one has regular contact with a secular Jew or has a relative who is far from Torah he must strive to develop a connection with him and be willing to spend time and money if necessary in trying to save his spiritual life. Moreover, he must keep trying and never give up, just as the Torah requires in the mitzva of hashavas aveida. It is appropriate to end with the thought-provoking words of Rav Mattisyahu Salomom Shlita: “If we truly feel that all Jews are our brothers, if we truly feel connected to all the Jewish people with bonds of love, compassion and brotherhood, then how can we stand by and watch them slip away into spiritual oblivion? How can we stand by without drawing them closed to G-d and His Holy Torah, without inspiring them to teshuva? If they are our brothers, how are we able to look away? These are questions that we all must ask ourselves.

THE VALUE OF LIFE - MATTOS

MATOS-MASSEI - THE VALUE OF LIFE “And Bilaam the son of Beor they killed with the sword. ” It would seem that the death of Bilaam Harasha was a punishment for his efforts to harm Klal Yisroel in the desert. The Gemara, however, cites a far earlier crime that he committed as the reason for his untimely death. “Three were in that aitsa [of how Pharaoh should treat the Jewish people], Bilaam, Iyov and Yisro: Bilaam advised [to harm them] and was killed; Iyov was silent and was judged with yissurim; Yisro escaped and was zocheh that his descendants should sit in the lishkas hagazis. ” Bilaam was punished with death at the hands of Klal Yisroel because of his evil advice to Pharaoh many years earlier. Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l points out that this Gemara poses a great difficulty: It is clear that Bilaam deserved a far greater punishment than Iyov, because Iyov didn’t commit an active crime, rather he remained silent. Yet, it would seem that Iyov’s onesh was far greater than that of Bilaam. Whilst Bilaam suffered a quick death, Iyov had to endure suffering that no other man has ever experienced. How can this be understood? Rav Shmuelevitz answers that life itself is the greatest gift possible and that any pain, no matter how bad, is infinitely greater than death. Consequently, Bilaam’s onesh was far more severe than Iyov’s - Iyov still had the gift of life, Bilaam lost it forever. Rav Leib Chasman zt”l gives an excellent mashal to help understand this concept; imagine a man wins a huge prize on the lottery, and at that every moment, one of his jugs breaks. Would this minor inconvenience bother him at all at this time of great joy?! The happiness that he experiences due to the lottery prize nullifies any feelings of pain that come in everyday life. So too, a person should have the same attitude in life - his joy at the mere fact of his existence should be so great that it should render any difficulties as meaningless, even sufferings as great as those that Iyov endured. For they are nothing in comparison with the wonderful gift of life . Why is the gift of life so precious? The Mishna in Pirkei Avos can help answer this question: “One moment of repentance and good deeds in Olam Hazeh is greater than all of Chayei Olam Haba, and one moment of peripheral pleasure in Olam Habah is greater than all of Chayei Olam Hazeh. ” This Mishna seems to contradict itself - it begins by stating that Olam Hazeh is incomparably greater than Olam Haba and ends by saying the opposite! The commentaries explain that the two parts of the Mishna are focussing on different aspects. The second part of the Mishna is comparing the pleasure that one can attain in the two ‘worlds‘. In that sense, Olam Haba is infinitely greater than Olam Hazeh - there is no earthly pleasure that can begin to compare with one moment of pleasure in Olam Haba. The pleasure there is that of connecting to Hashem, the Source of all creation - all other pleasures are meaningless and transitory in comparison. However, the first part of the Mishna is focussing on the ability to create more of a connection to Hashem. In that aspect Olam Hazeh is infinitely greater because it is the place of free will in which we have the ability to choose to become closer to Hashem by performing mitzvos. In Olam Haba there is no more opportunity to increase the connection to Him. We can now understand why life is so precious - each moment is a priceless opportunity to attain more closeness to Hashem, the ultimate pleasure that will accompany us for eternity in Olam Haba. The Gra expressed the value of Olam Hazeh on his deathbed. He held his Tsitsit and cried, saying, “how precious is Olam Hazeh that for a few prutot it is possible to gain merit for the mitzvo of Tsitsit and to see the ‘pney hashechina’, whereas in Olam Haba it is impossible to gain anything.” This idea is also demonstrated by the Gemara in Avoda Zara . The Gemara tells of Elazar Ben Durdaya, an inveterate sinner. On one occasion, when he was about to commit a terrible sin, he was told that even if he repented his teshuva will never be accepted. This ‘sentence’ effected him so deeply that he did repent and he died in a state of perfect teshuva. As his soul left him, a Bas Kol came out and said that Rabbi Elazar Ben Durdaya is ready to go into Olam Haba. The Gemara then says that when Rebbi Yehuda HaNasi heard this maaseh he cried out, “there are those that earn Olam Haba in many years and there are those that earn it in one moment.” The commentaries wonder why Rebbi was so upset by this maaseh - he, a person who had struggled for many years in Avodas Hashem, was surely destined for a far greater portion in Olam Haba than someone who earned Olam Haba for one moment of inspired teshuva!? Rav Noach Weinberg Shlita answers in the name of his father, that Rebbi was crying because he saw the power of one moment in Olam Hazeh; in one moment a person can earn infinite bliss, therefore he was crying at any failure to utilise each moment in the best possible way. Each moment is an incredible opportunity at creating more Olam Haba. The Chofetz Chaim applies this concept to halacha . He brings the Sefer Hachinuch who writes that there are six mitzvos that are constantly incumbent upon man and that every second throughout a person’s life a person can fulfil them by merely thinking about them, and consequently there is no limit to the reward for performing these mitvzos. This can also help explain why Jewish law is so against ending a person’s life prematurely, even if he is unable to live a normal life. Rav Zev Leff Shlita points out that even a person in a coma may well be able to perform numerous mitzvos by his thought. He can fulfil the Mitzvos that only require thought and moreover, Chazal tell us that if a person has a desire to perform a mitzvo but is prevented from doing so, he nevertheless receives reward as if he did indeed fulfil the mitzvo. Therefore, every second more of life is a great opportunity to create more Olam Haba. We have seen how every second of life is infinitely precious. Yet we often think that little can be achieved in a few minutes here or there. However, experience has proven differently. The Chasam Sofer was once asked how he became a Gadol, he answered that he became a Gadol in five minutes. He meant that by utilising every available moment he was able to learn so much more. Rav Moshe Feinstein once had a very large smile on his face - he explained that he had just completed Shas. This was not a novel achievement for him, he was known to have finished Shas dozens of times, but this siyum was different. It comprised of his learning in the gaps at Chasunas; by consistently learning small amounts he eventually learnt all of Shas this way. We too can use small amounts of time to attain surprisingly great achievements in learning. There are people who learn one Mishna a day, this seems a somewhat trivial amount, but after years of consistently doing this they have completed whole Sedarim of Mishnayos. Another important benefit of small sedarim is that one can use them to learn areas of Torah that are not normally given sufficient attention. One Talmid Chacham in Eretz Yisroel is well-known for his expertise in all areas of Torah, including Navi, Hashkafa, and Mussar, as well as his all encompassing grasp of Shas and poskim. When asked how he managed to learn such a wide array of subjects he explained that he had many small sedarim - by learning Maharal or Navi for ten minutes a day, he gradually attained a wide knowledge in them. Similarly, Rav Yisroel Reisman Shlita often emphasises that in order to know Navi, one need not devote hours each day to it. He attained his expertise in it by learning it for a few minutes each night. Nowadays there are many ways in which one can utilise small sedarim - there are books such as ’A Lesson a Day’ and ’Praying with Fire’ which enable people to learn small but significant amounts of highly important subjects each day. We have seen how precious the gift of life is and the great value of every moment of life. Life is full of challenges and there are times when a person can feel despondent - but if he remembers that life itself is cause for joy then he can overcome any negative feelings: When the Alter of Novardok first started to build yeshivas, he was unsuccessful. He built yeshivas and they collapsed, he organised groups and they disintegrated. In addition, he and his approach were attacked by opponents. At that time he came to Kelm and his Rebbi, The Alter of Kelm noticed he looked sad and understood why. That Motsei Shabbos when a group had gathered to hear his shmuese, he stood at the podium and remained silent for a very, very long time. Then he banged his hand on the shtender and thundered, “It is enough for a living being that he is alive.” Over and over he repeated his words until finally he told the group to doven Maariv. “That session” said the Alter of Novardok “dispelled my gloom and cleared my thoughts. ” The Alter of Kelm taught the Alter of Novardok a priceless lesson - as long as one is alive, there is nothing to complain about. May we all be zocheh to appreciate the gift of life and use it to its fullest.

ACCEPTING REBUKE - MATTOS

When the Gerrer Rebbe, the Sfat Emet was a boy, he was looked after by his grandfather, the great Chiddushei Harim, the first Gerrer Rebbe. On one occasion, the Sfat Emet stayed awake for most of the night learning Torah until he fell asleep in the early morning. He awoke after a short time to find himself a few minutes late for the class that the Chiddushei Harim taught. When the Chiddushei Harim saw that he arrived late he was unaware that his grandson had been awake for most of the night, and strongly rebuked him, presuming that his tardiness was the result of an element of laziness. Instead of defending himself, the Sfat Emet listened quietly to the scolding he received. His friend later asked him why he did not respond to the Chiddushei Harim’s criticism, and thereby spare himself of the rebuke . The Sfat Emet replied, saying, “would I waste the opportunity of being rebuked by my grandfather!” He based this line of thinking on an incident in the Torah Portion of Mattot . The tribes of Gad and Reuben approached Moses, asking that he allow them to remain on the other side of the Jordan where there was sufficient land for them to farm their animals. Moses replied with a strong rebuke - his main point of criticism was that by not entering the land of Israel they would be abandoning their brethren in the upcoming conquest. In a lengthy passage, Moses ominously reminds them of the incident of the spies and its terrible consequences. In reply to Moshe’s criticisms, they said that they would join the rest of the nation in conquering the land. The Sfat Emet pointed out that in truth, they had intended to join the conquest right from the beginning but Moses did not understand this from their request and consequently rebuked them for being unwilling to join their brethren in conquering the land. If so, why did they not interrupt him right at the beginning of his condemnation instead of having to endure such a strong rebuke? The Sfat Emet explained that they wanted to hear the word of rebuke from a great man, and were therefore happy to listen to his criticisms even though they could easily refute them early on. So too, although he could have stemmed the rebuke of his grandfather by justifying his tardiness, he preferred to hear the rebuke of a tzaddik (righteous man) . What was the great quality of being rebuked by a great man that caused the tribes of Gad and Reuben to bear such stinging rebuke? The Gemara in Taanit tells us that the curses with which the Prophet, Achiya HaShiloni cursed the Jewish people are greater than the blessings with which Bilaam blessed them . The Gemara bases this idea on a verse in Proverbs: “The blows of a beloved one are trustworthy, and the kisses of an enemy are damaging. ” The commentaries explain that the ‘blows’ delivered by one’s beloved here refer to words of rebuke. The rebuke of someone who genuinely cares about his friend is of great benefit because it is aimed at helping him improve himself. This is a great kindness because it helps one improve his spiritual standing. When the tribes of Gad and Reuben heard Moses rebuke them, they knew that he was doing so from the purest of motives and only had their best interests in mind. Thus, even though they could defend themselves, it was more worthwhile to listen to his words and try to somehow grow from them. Thus far, we have seen how the rebuke of a tzaddik is of great value, however it seems that even the rebuke of a less righteous person can be of considerable benefit. Moreover, even rebuke that is given in the wrong way, can still nonetheless help someone tremendously. The Sefer HaChinuch writes that the prohibition to take revenge is based on the concept that whatever happens to a person is directed by God. Even if someone acted towards a person in a negative fashion, it is nevertheless fruitless to bear a grudge or take revenge because the pain caused would not have occurred had God so desired . Thus, when a person is rebuked in what he perceives to be a hurtful way, it is highly commendable that he ignore the failings of the rebuker and focus on what he actually said and accept the rebuke. There is often an element of truth in the rebuke proving that this rebuke was sent from God as a means of communicating that he should strive to change his ways. King Solomon makes a similar point in Proverbs: “Hear advice and accept rebuke so that you will become wise in your latter days .” It is interesting to note that with regard to advice, we are told to ’hear’, whereas in relation to rebuke we should ’accept it’. Hearing implies an element of contemplation and thought - when a person is given advice he should think about it before he acts upon it. In contrast when one is rebuked he should accept it without analyzing the validity of the rebuke - rather he should view it as a message from God to improve himself and act accordingly. Rav Moshe Feinstein excelled in his reaction towards incorrect rebuke. On one occasion, he answered the phone only to be met with a barrage of criticism from someone who was incensed at one of his rulings. He patiently listened to the tirade until it ended and did not even try to defend himself. A shocked student asked him why he did not respond to such an inappropriate rebuke. He answered that he so rarely receives any rebuke that he was grateful for the opportunity to hear such strong words - and even though in this specific area the rebuke was unfounded, there must be some other area where he could improve himself and he should use the rebuke to improve in that area ! On another occasion Rav Feinstein was rebuked for a perceived transgression. He answered the rebuke in a ruling that is found in Igrot Moshe . He begins saying: I was very happy that your honor was so zealous in fulfilling the Mitzva of rebuke according to his understanding, and chas v’shalom that I should be upset at this… bli neder I will no longer travel in a car during the time of candle lighting even though there is absolutely no prohibition in it, and there is not even maarit ayiin .” After completely refuting the arguments of the rebuker he ends, saying, “from his beloved who blesses him with the merit of the Mitzva of rebuke that he did for the honor of Hashem Yitbarach and for the honor of the Holy Shabbat..” It is understandable that most people are not on the level of Rav Feinstein and do not enjoy being rebuked - it is unpleasant be told that one has a character flaw or acted in an improper fashion. However, if a person can move past the feelings of pain he experiences and tries to learn from the rebuke then he can transform it into a tremendous tool for growth and can use it to be a better Eved Hashem.

STRIPPING AWAY THE ILLUSION - TISHA B'AV

Chazal say that since Churban Bayis Sheini we should really be in a permanent state of mourning. However, we could not permanently live that way so for most of the year we conduct our lives as if everything is normal and how it should be. For three weeks of the year, culminating with Tisha b’Av we face the reality of our situation and adopt the customs of aveilim. We recognize that things are not as they should be - there is no Beis Hamikdash, we are in galus and we live in a time of hester panim when Hashem’s hashgacha over us is not evident to the eye. On Tisha b’Av in particular we focus on the events in Jewish history that reflect this hester panim as a way of internalizing the terrible state of affairs. It seems that in different eras the hester panim manifests itself in different ways. For generations its main expression was through anti-Semitism. Jews steadfastly kept to the traditions of their ancestors and often had to give up their lives for it. More recently with the Holocaust, Jews were murdered merely for being Jews. The untold suffering that we have endured is something that people rightfully focus on a great deal on Tisha B’Av - by reading about such events we feel more aware of the terrible consequences of heseter panim. Whilst this hanhaga is certainly commendable, it seems that the ikar manifestation of hester panim in the present era is not anti-Semitism. Take out five seconds and think yourself what it is…….. I imagine that most of you answered that today the main manifestation of hester panim is the desperate state of Torah observance in Klal Yisroel today. We all have a vague, intellectual awareness that things are not as they should be but how bad is it? The intermarriage rate in USA in 1950 was 6%, by 1990 it was 52% and rising. 2 million Jews of Jewish origin do not identify themselves as Jews. 2 million self-identified Jews have no Jewish connection whatsoever. For every wedding between two Jews, two intermarriages take place. 625,000 US Jews are now practicing other religions. 11% of US Jews go to shul . Every day dozens of intermarriages take place which means that in the time it took you to read this, some Jews were lost forever. These statistics make the situation a little more real to us but it is still far from our hearts. A couple of years ago I had to go to a plastic surgeon in Mevasseret on Tisha B’Av when my son got a bad cut on his mouth. I found myself in a Kanyon and was met by a scene of what chillonim do on Tisha B’Av; they go about their lives as normal. I saw Jews eating in a Macdonalds, acting as if everything was normal. What’s more, is that the exact same scene would great you on Shabbos. We all know that chillonim don’t keep Shabbos but to actually experience it! Baruch Hashem we have no idea of what it means to have no Torah, no Shabbos, no relationship with Hashem, no direction in life … but this is the lot of our brothers and sisters - and what’s the difference between us and them? Simply that we were born into a Torah-observant family and they were not - that’s it. So back to the initial point - This is the time of year that we strip away the illusion that everything is okay - EVERYTHING IS NOT OKAY. We have to face the truth - and what’s more is that we have to accept the responsibility for the way things are, and, on Tisha B’av in particular, we must feel the pain, we can’t hide from it. Chillul Shabbos is EVERYWHERE, inter-marriage is EVERYWHERE. And the most important thing to remember is how Hashem ‘feels’ about it. Just to make that idea more real - Imagine that you had 10 children and you brought them all up to be fully Torah-observant Jews. Nine of them follow the path that you hoped they would but one is slightly lax in this observance. How would you feel? Ask any person who has experienced such a thing and he will tell you that it caused him considerable distress. What if that one child was not just slightly lax but had abandoned Torah completely? Of course that would cause the parents untold grief. Imagine if not one but two children went astray, how much additional pain that would cause. If over half the children totally abandoned Yiddishkeit and of the remaining few only one was fully observant, you would feel unbearable anguish. All Jews are banim l’Makom - Hashem is their father, and this is the state of Hashem’s ‘family’ - let us take this one day and face the reality - this is what the galus is about today and to end the galus this is what must be dealt with. Hashem is hidden, his children don’t see him, they barely even know he exists - there is certainly plenty to mourn. May this be the last Tisha B’Av of sadness and may it be transformed into a day of rejoicing when ALL Jews know what it means to be Banim l’Makom.

WHY HASHEM CHOSE YEHOSHUA - PINCHAS

Towards the end of the Parsha, there is the account of Moshe Rabbeinu ‘s request that Hashem appoint an able successor to lead the Jewish people into Eretz Yisrael. Hashem answered him that his faithful student, Yehoshua, is the appropriate choice. Chazal elaborate on the dialogue that took place between Hashem and Moshe. They tell us that Moshe asked that his own sons succeed him as leader, however Hashem refused this request, because “your sons sat and were not osek beTorah” , whereas, Yehoshua was the rightful successor because “he would come early to, and leave late from, your beis medrash, and would arrange the benches and cover the tables .” There are two difficulties with this Medrash; Firstly, if Moshe’s sons were not osek b’Torah then how could Moshe Rabbeinu have had any expectation that they could lead the Jewish people ? Secondly, it would seem that Hashem was comparing Moshe’s sons to Yehoshua in the same area of hanhago - that of being osek b’Torah. However, when Hashem praised Yehoshua he stressed the fact that he set up the Beis Medrash - this does not seem to have any relevance to being osek beTorah. What exactly was the nature of the comparison of Moshe’s sons to Yehoshua? Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv Shlita explains that Moshe’s sons were talmidei chachamim and they were learned enough to lead the Jewish people - that is why Moshe believed that they were fitting candidates for succeeding him. However, Hashem replied that this was not sufficient; when He said that they “sat and were not ’osek b’Torah’” He meant that they sat and learned for themselves and were not osek with others in Torah. In contrast to their lack of being involved in helping other people’s Torah, Yehoshua would set up the Beis Medrash and thereby enable others to learn Torah - that is considered being ‘osek b’Torah’ . There are a number of important lessons that can be derived from Rav Elyashiv’s explanation , however, there seems to be one specific difficulty with it - it would have seemed that being osek b’Torah only implies learning Torah for oneself, where is the allusion to enabling others to learn Torah? In order to answer this it is necessary to understand the basic definition to the mitzva of Talmud Torah. The Rambam writes that there are two sources for the mitzva; “You shall teach them to your children” and “you shall teach them sharply to your children.”. From these commands to teach children the Rambam derives that a person must learn Torah - the fundamental reason given for learning Torah is so that one can teach it to his children. We see from here that the mitzva of ‘Talmud Torah’ refers to teaching as much as to learning. Moreover, the Rambam brings the Chazal that ‘children’ also refers to students, and that a fundamental part of the mitzva is to teach people even if they are not one’s own children . Thus, it is quite understandable that Rav Elyashiv can translate, being ‘osek b’Torah’ as meaning ‘causing others to learn’ Torah. Another source for the concept that ’Torah’ intrinsically involves enabling others to learn Torah is found in the Gemara in Avoda Zara . The Gemara says that world history is split into three periods of two thousand years: The first is called the ‘two thousand years of nothingness’, The second period is known as the ‘two thousand years of Torah.’ The commentaries explain that the years of nothingness are so called because of the lack of Torah in the world during that time, whereas the years of Torah mark the beginning of Torah’s presence in the world. The Gemara says that the years of Torah began with time that Avraham began teaching Torah to the world, as represented by the ‘souls that they made in Charan’. However, there is a difficulty with saying that the years of Torah began only at this point in time. There are many maamarei Chazal which clearly state that there were great people who lived before Avraham and learned Torah, and yet they lived in a time that is described as being absent of Torah, moreover Avraham Avinu himself learnt Torah long before he began teaching others - the era of ‘Torah’ only began with the ‘souls that they made in Charan ’. - why is this the case? Rav Zev Leff Shlita explains that Avraham Avinu did something more than his illustrious predecessors - he taught Torah. The era of ’Torah” only begins when Torah is taught as well as learnt . The Maharsha makes a comment that develops this theme further by showing that, in addition to regular ’learning’ of Torah even the concept of ‘Ameilus b’Torah’ is intrinsically bound up with teaching Torah. The Gemara derives the importance of ‘ameilus b’Torah’ from various passukim in Tanach that mention the word, “l’amal’ ’ (to toil). The Maharsha writes that the letters of ‘l’amal’ (lamed, ayin, mem and lamed) make an acronym of ‘lilmod al menas lelamed.’ We have seen many sources that show that learning and teaching Torah are in the same category. It still needs to be explained why teaching Torah is so fundamental in Jewish thought. The Ben Ish Chai zt’l provides us with a deeper understanding of this inyan. He brings the Gemara in Sanhedrin that quotes the passuk in Shelach saying that person who serves other gods has “degraded the word of Hashem .” The Gemara then describes other modes of behavior that deserve this devastating indictment . Surprisingly, the Gemara adds that the passuk includes “one who learns and does not teach.” The Ben Ish Chai asks why the Gemara speaks so harshly about one who learns but does not teach. He explains that the Torah is eternal and it’s eternal nature is preserved by passing on its teachings to the next generation. However, he writes that “a person who learns but does not burden himself to teach his fellow damages the eternal nature of the Torah because the Torah that he learns cannot move on to the next generation…therefore it is understood why Chazal describe this man in such a severe manner - because he prevents the chain of the passing down of Torah from generation to generation and nullifies the Torah’s eternal quality.. ” This also helps us understand why it was important that the leader of the Jewish people be one who causes others to learn Torah - his role was to preserve and continue the mesora and thereby preserve the eternal nature of the Torah. We have seen how intrinsic teaching Torah is to the mitzva of learning Torah. Moroever, whilst teaching Torah is a great chesed to other people, it is also clear that there is a very significant element of bein adam le’utsmo in teaching Torah - it helps develop our appreciation of the eternal nature of Torah and to play a role in passing it on to the next generation.