PARSHAS NOACH - SHEM AND EVER – THE MASTERS OF INSULATION

At the end of Parshas Bereishis, the Torah writes that Noach found favor in the eyes of HaShem. In the beginning of the next Parsha, the Torah tells us of the offspring of Noach. The Medrash notes the juxtaposition between Noach’s finding favor with HaShem and the mention of his children. It explains that Noach’s special favor was in the merit of his sons. Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky zt”l notes that this Medrash is difficult to understand; in all its discussion of Noach’s special treatment by HaShem, the Torah makes no emphasis of this being due to his sons’ greatness, rather Noach, through his own merit, was deserving of being saved from the Flood and of being the progenitor of mankind. Accordingly, why does the Medrash attribute Noach’s special favor to his sons? Rav Kamenetsky answers this by quoting another Medrash. That Medrash discusses Noach’s ability to protect himself and his family from the evil people that surrounded him. It gives an analogy of a flask of perfume that is sealed tight, which is placed in a cemetery yet despite its unpleasant surroundings it maintains its pleasant aroma. Rav Kamenetsky explains that Noach’s greatest accomplishment was his ability to protect himself and his family from the evil influences that encircled them on all sides in the same way that a sealed flask of perfume can maintain its pleasantness despite the great powers of impurity surrounding it. Therefore, when the Medrash says that Noach was saved in his sons’ merit it means that he was saved because he brought up his children in such a way that they were protected from the negative influences surrounding them. This idea is further brought out by a drush interpretation of a Gemara in Brachos. The Gemara states that even if a person has said the krias Shema in shul, he must say it again before he goes to sleep. The Shema epitomizes the acceptance of the yoke of Heaven (ol Malchus Shamayim). This Gemara alludes to the fact that even if a person accepted the yoke of Heaven in shul with the community he must do it again when he is at home without the spiritual support of the community. The Gemara is teaching us that it is insufficient for a person to maintain his spiritual level when he is surrounded by likeminded people who can help him. He must be strong enough to maintain this level even when he is alone, with no external support. Noach epitomized this exalted level, whereby he was able to maintain his righteousness even though he had no assistance from those around him. Noach’s son Shem, and his great-grandson, Ever, emulated Noach in this area, and taught it over to the individuals who came to study in their Yeshivas. With this understanding, a number of difficulties can be resolved. Firstly, when Yaakov Avinu leaves Eretz Yisroel to go to Lavan, he goes to the Yeshiva of Ever (Shem had already passed away by that time ) and learns there for fourteen years. Yaakov was sixty three years old at the time, and had spent his whole life learning from his great father, Yitzchak Avinu. Why was the Torah that he learnt from Yitzchak insufficient to prepare him for his time with Lavan? The answer is that up to this time in his life, Yaakov had grown up surrounded by tzaddikim and now that he was facing the challenge of living with people like Lavan he needed to learn other sugyas (topics), those related to dealing with tricksters, liars and enemies. The Torah of Yitzchak Avinu was not geared to such nisyonos (tests) because he too was protected from negative influences by his parents. Indeed, when Yishmael threatened to negatively influence him, Sarah threw him out of the home. In contrast Shem and Ever had grown up surrounded by evil; Shem, in the time of the Mabul (great flood), and Ever, in the time of the Tower of Bavel. Accordingly, the Torah of Shem and Ever addressed the kinds of challenges that Yaakov knew he would face during his time with Lavan. The teachings of Shem and Ever are also mentioned with regard to the Torah that Yaakov taught his son, Yosef. Rashi, based on the Medrash, says that one of the ways in which Yaakov seemed to give preferential treatment to Yosef was that, “everything he [Yaakov] learnt from Shem and Ever, he passed on to him [Yosef].” Why does the Medrash stress in particular that the Torah that Yaakov learnt from Shem and Ever; what about the Torah he learnt from Yitzchak? The answer is that Yaakov subconsciously knew that Yosef, of all the sons, was destined to live in exile away from G-d fearing people, and surrounded by negative influences. Therefore, he taught Yosef in particular amongst all the sons the Torah of Shem and Ever because he was in the greatest need of that Torah. The others brothers misread Yaakov’s intentions and believed that he was teaching Yosef more Torah than them, because only he would continue the line of transmission. However, in truth, Yaakov was only equipping Yosef with the tools that he needed to survive his own galus (exile). Indeed, when Yaakov is finally reunited with Yosef he exclaims, “Rav, od Yosef chai” – “it is great, Yosef is still alive”. The Medrash elaborates on what Yaakov meant by this – he was extolling Yosef’s great strength in withstanding many challenges and tests in Mitzrayim, and yet remaining steadfast in his righteousness. The reason Yosef was so successful in this area was because of the Torah of Shem and Ever that Yaakov taught him in his youth. We have seen Rav Kamenetky’s theme which teaches us that Noach’s great strength was his ability to protect himself and his family from external influences and how Shem and Ever passed on his teachings through the Torah that they taught in their Yeshivas. The only remaining question is what does it mean that they taught a different type of Torah? In what way was it different? There are two areas of Torah in which it seems that Shem and Ever taught a different type of Torah; halacha (Jewish law) and hashkafa (Jewish thought). In terms of halacha Rav Kamenetsky notes that The Chofetz Chaim wrote a separate work on the Jewish laws specifically geared for Jews who were serving in non-Jewish armies. Such people obviously faced many unusual and difficult challenges and needed guidance as to when they could apply various leniencies and to what extent. In a similar vein, nowadays, people can be exposed to environments that pose new questions; people who work in non-Jewish environments, or people who have secular families, face complicated questions that are not necessarily addressed in the standard halacha works. Obviously such delicate questions cannot be answered alone, rather one must ask a Rav who is familiar with these unusual situations. With regard to hashkafa, there are clearly different challenges that face people in varying situations. A person who finds himself surrounded by others who espouse very distinct lifestyles will need to study works of mussar and hashkafa that focus on staying strong in such circumstances. He may need a more constant strengthening in basics of Jewish thought in order to maintain the correct outlook when those around him may pressure him to act differently. We have seen the importance of the Torah of Shem and Ever to the development of our forefathers, and how it can apply to our lives.

El desarrollo de la civilización (The development of civilization)

Por Rav Yehonasan Gefen Después de que Caín asesinó a su hermano Abel, Dios decretó que Caín vagaría por la tierra y nunca tendría un lugar permanente de residencia. Una regla básica de la Torá es que cualquier “castigo” que Dios decreta sobre una persona no es arbitrario, sino que tiene el propósito de rectificar el error que dicha persona cometió. Al aceptar las condiciones del “castigo”, la persona puede rectificar su error inicial; el vivir en dicha situación de exilio tenía por objetivo rectificar el pecado de Caín. Sin embargo, Caín no aceptó la forma de rectificación que Dios había decretado para él, sino que trató de evitarla. Inmediatamente después de la mención del decreto, la Torá nos cuenta que "Caín fue un constructor de ciudades" . El Rambán nota que de las palabras utilizadas por la Torá se desprende que Caín construía ciudades constantemente, pero éstas colapsaban de inmediato por causa de la maldición . Sin embargo, en lugar de aprender la lección y aceptar su estatus de peregrino, Caín continuó construyendo ciudades durante toda su vida. Las acciones de Caín generaron en sus descendientes una tendencia a evitar la fórmula que Dios había prescrito para que la humanidad rectificara el pecado de Adam. Después del pecado, Dios le dijo a Adam que su forma de arrepentimiento sería trabajar la tierra con sus propias manos para ganar su sustento . Sin embargo, los descendientes de Caín prefirieron evitar trabajar la tierra y se volcaron hacia otras actividades, como nos relata la Torá: "Y Ada engendró a Iaval; él fue el primero en vivir en tiendas y criar ganado. El nombre de su hermano fue Iuval; él fue el primero en tocar el arpa y la flauta. Y Zila también; ella engendró a Tuval-Caín, quien afilaba todos los implementos de cobre y hierro" . Rashi explica que estos versículos, que a primera vista parecen irrelevantes, tienen realmente una gran importancia ya que representan el desarrollo de algunos de los aspectos más básicos de la civilización. Iaval eligió ser un pastor, evitando las instrucciones de Dios de trabajar la tierra. También es posible que el "morar en tiendas" del versículo represente el desarrollo de actividades comerciales, lo cual tampoco sería consistente con la forma de rectificación que Dios había asignado para la humanidad. Iuval fue el primero en desarrollar el arte de la música, lo que representa la forma en que la humanidad intentó evitar el dolor por trabajar la tierra, que era mediante el distraerse con formas de entretenimiento. Y Tuval-Caín fue el primero en desarrollar armas, las cuales permitieron que el hombre sobreviviera avasallando a otros y de esta manera evitara la maldición de trabajar la tierra. Podemos ver por lo tanto que el desarrollo de la humanidad se basó en el deseo de evitar el método que Dios había prescrito para que el hombre rectificara el pecado de Adam, en favor de un estilo de vida más fácil que no rectificaría dicho pecado. Consecuentemente, la humanidad desarrolló una postura de ignorar la voluntad de Dios, la cual culminó con la subsecuente degeneración moral y destrucción en el Gran Diluvio. Pero hubo una persona que sí decidió obedecer la directiva de Dios de trabajar la tierra: "Lémej… engendró un hijo. Y llamó su nombre Nóaj, diciendo: 'Este nos traerá descanso de nuestro trabajo y del esfuerzo de nuestras manos, del suelo que Dios ha maldecido’" . Rashi nos dice que Nóaj inventó las herramientas agrícolas, con las cuales causó que el trabajo de la tierra fuera más exitoso. Nóaj fue la primera persona que no trató de evitar la maldición de Adam, sino que la enfrentó directamente. De esta forma podemos entender por qué Nóaj fue la única persona a la que Dios le perdonó la vida; a diferencia del resto del mundo, su vida estuvo dedicada a cumplir con la voluntad de Dios, por lo que no estuvo sujeto a la degeneración moral que afectó al resto de la humanidad. De esto podemos aprender una lección muy importante: muchas veces Dios nos pone en una situación para que crezcamos, pero generalmente desaprovechamos la oportunidad. Nuestros sabios nos enseñan que Dios se comunica con nosotros por medio de ‘desafíos’, lo cual no sólo significa terribles tragedias, sino que también se refiere a las dificultades generales que enfrentamos en la vida. Por ejemplo, una persona puede saber en qué área de crecimiento debe enfocarse en su matrimonio mediante el darse cuenta en qué área existen las mayores fricciones en su matrimonio y cómo sus errores contribuyen a ese problema. Claramente, Dios le está mandando esas dificultades como una forma de decirle que debería trabajar en esta área de su personalidad. Sin embargo, uno suele preferir enfocarse en los aspectos de crecimiento que le resultan más naturales. Por ejemplo, una persona que tiene una inclinación hacia la amabilidad probablemente dedicará una parte importante de su tiempo y energía para ayudar a otros, pero terminará descuidando sus obligaciones con su esposa e hijos. La parashá de esta semana es mucho más que una mera descripción histórica de las primeras generaciones de la historia; es un relato de cómo Dios le comunicó a la humanidad cuál era la forma en que debían rectificar sus errores y de cómo la gran mayoría se rehusó a escuchar Sus instrucciones. Está en nuestras manos entender cuál fue su error y aprender directamente de la Providencia Divina cómo podemos cumplir con Su voluntad.

Nóaj y Abraham (Noach and Avraham)

The Guiding Light - Nóaj (Génesis 6:9-11:32) Por Yehonasan Gefen "Estas son las crónicas de Nóaj; Nóaj era un hombre recto, perfecto entre los de su generación. Nóaj caminó con Dios" . Nóaj era la persona más grandiosa de su época, la única que merecía ser salvada del diluvio. Sin embargo, nuestros sabios comparan desfavorablemente a Nóaj con Abraham Avinu en muchos lugares . ¿Cuál es la diferencia entre estos dos grandiosos hombres? Rashi trae un Midrash que contrasta a Abraham con Nóaj. Respecto a Nóaj, la Torá dice: "Nóaj caminó con Dios", lo cual significa que él necesitaba ayuda en su servicio divino. Pero respecto a Abraham, Dios dijo: "Camina ante Mí", lo cual significa que Abraham podía fortalecerse a sí mismo mediante sus propios medios. Los comentaristas explican que Abraham era proactivo y que tenía motivación propia; no necesitaba cosas externas que lo estimulasen a servir a Dios o a ser bondadoso. Nóaj necesitaba circunstancias externas que lo empujasen hacia adelante en su rectitud . Rav Eliahu Dessler zt"l se explaya en esta idea. Escribe que Nóaj es llamado "ish tzadik" (hombre recto), mientras que Abraham es "ish jésed" (hombre de bondad). Nóaj realizó increíbles actos de bondad en el arca, como por ejemplo el alimentar a cientos de animales durante muchos meses. Sin embargo, Rav Dessler dice que eso sólo era tzédek, era lo correcto de hacer; es decir, él había cumplido con su obligación; su actitud no provenía de un incontenible deseo de dar, sino que había sido una reacción ante las necesidades de otros. Su bondad era reactiva en el sentido que sólo ayudaba a las personas cuando acudían a él o cuando sentía la obligación de hacerlo. Abraham, por otro lado, no realizaba sus actos de bondad por obligación, sino que los hacía porque sentía un incontenible deseo de dar . Su bondad era proactiva. Esta diferencia entre Abraham y Nóaj no se restringe sólo a la bondad en el ámbito físico, sino que también se extiende al ámbito espiritual. Sforno escribe que Nóaj criticó a la gente de su generación, pero no hizo nada al respecto. "No les enseñó a otros a conocer a Dios ni a conducirse en sus caminos". Consecuentemente, no tuvo suficiente mérito como para salvar a toda la generación . Abraham, por otro lado, fue mucho más allá del llamado del deber y le enseñó al mundo a conocer a Hashem . La bondad de Nóaj era reactiva. ¿Cómo una persona que llega al nivel de bondad reactiva no es capaz de avanzar para alcanzar el nivel superior de dar proactivamente? La respuesta a esto se encuentra en el nombre de Nóaj. Sabemos que el nombre de una persona nos enseña sobre su esencia; la palabra “Nóaj” significa “cómodo”. No es fácil tomar responsabilidad por algo sin que te hayan llamado a hacerlo. La inclinación negativa encontrará muchas excusas para impedir que asumas una misión desafiante, pese a que la verdadera razón para evitarlo es el deseo de comodidad. Rabeinu Behaye, el grandioso autor de Jovot Halevavot (Los deberes del corazón) , cuenta que él se vio enfrentado al mismo desafío. En la introducción, dice que después de planear escribir dicha obra cambió de opinión, citando una gran cantidad de razones: "Pensé que mis poderes eran demasiado limitados para entender correctamente las ideas. Además, yo no poseo un estilo elegante en árabe, que es el idioma en que sería escrito el libro… Temí estar embarcándome en una tarea en la que sólo lograría el éxito exponiendo mis defectos… Por lo tanto, decidí abandonar mis planes y revertir mi decisión". Sin embargo, reconoció que quizás sus motivos no eran absolutamente puros: "Comencé a sospechar que había elegido la opción cómoda, buscando paz y tranquilidad. Temí que quizás lo que había motivado la cancelación del proyecto había sido realmente el deseo de la auto gratificación, el cual me había llevado a buscar reposo y tranquilidad, a optar por la inactividad y a quedarme de brazos cruzados". Para el eterno beneficio del pueblo judío, finalmente decidió escribir el libro. Las razones que citó en un principio para justificar su decisión de no escribir el libro parecen ser justas y lógicas. Pero él fue capaz de reconocer que, en su nivel, estaban manchadas por un deseo de comodidad. Nosotros también tenemos buenas razones por las que elegimos ignorar oportunidades para ayudar al pueblo judío, pero debemos ser extremadamente cuidadosos para asegurarnos que no estamos siendo perezosos. Imagina cuántos excelentes trabajos o grandes iniciativas nunca se materializaron debido a la pereza. Otra cosa que obstaculiza nuestra proactividad es una equivocada confianza en Dios. Muchas veces uno espera que Dios le entregue en bandeja el propósito de su vida; sin embargo, la historia nos demuestra que los grandes pilares del mundo de la Torá no tuvieron esta actitud, sino que vieron los problemas que había en el mundo y decidieron moverse para rectificarlos sin esperar que les comandaran hacerlo. Gente como Rav Aharon Kotler , el Ponevitcher Rav y la Rebetzin Sarah Shenirer emularon a Abraham Avinu y tomaron la iniciativa de construir instituciones de Torá. Estas instituciones reforzaron la Torá y le permitieron al pueblo judío sobrevivir la embestida espiritual del Iluminismo y la embestida física del Holocausto. En nuestra generación, no hace falta buscar muy lejos para encontrar oportunidades para mejorar el mundo de alguna manera. Pero no debemos esperar que nos pidan hacerlo; si esperamos, es posible que la oportunidad nunca se materialice. Dios quiere que abramos los ojos y que actuemos antes de que nos pidan. Nóaj fue un gran hombre, pero no se transformó en el progenitor del pueblo elegido. Fue bondadoso, pero sólo después de que le pidieron que lo fuera. Criticó al pueblo, pero sólo después de que Hashem le dijo que lo hiciera. Se comportó como una persona reactiva, quien necesita que las circunstancias externas lo empujen hacia la acción. Abraham Avinu en cambio, no necesitaba que lo motivaran para servir a Hashem. No esperó que las personas acudieran a él para enseñarles Torá. Alcanzó el nivel de bondad verdadera gracias a un gran esfuerzo. Por lo tanto, nos corresponde a nosotros, sus descendientes, emularlo y buscar oportunidades para hacer una diferencia para el pueblo judío.

נח – בריחה מהמציאות או בניה מחודשת?

"ויחל נח איש האדמה ויטע כרם וישת מן היין וישכר ויתגל בתוך אהלו" לאחר המבול, כאשר חזר נח לאדמתו, היה עליו להתמודד עם משימה קשה ביותר – שיקום העולם ובנייתו מחדש. מעשהו הראשון בתחום זה היה נטיעת כרם – מעשה אשר הסתכם בתוצאות חמורות. חז"ל רואים בהחלטתו של נח להתחיל בנטיעת כרם כהחלטה שגויה; אמנם בכוחו של יין לגרום לאדם לשמחה גדולה, ואף לסיע לו להרגיש קרוב יותר לבוראו, אולם היה עליו להתחיל בנטיעות אחרות, נחוצות ודחופות יותר לבנייתו ויישובו של העולם מחדש. הקושי בהבנת מקרה חמור זה, נעוץ בעובדה שנוח היה צדיק גדול, ואי אפשר ללמוד מעשה זה בהבנה שטחית. מפרשים רבים מנסים להסביר מה היה המניע של נח בנטיעת הכרם . הילקוט שמעוני אומר שכאשר נח שתה מהיין הוא חש שמחה עצומה . על בסיס דברים אלה, מסביר ר' מאיר רובמן זצ"ל, בספרו זכרון מאיר, שכאשר חזר נח אל הקרקע, הוא עמד מול הרס וחורבן שאין כדוגמתו. כל העולם בו הוא היה חי נהרס לחלוטין, וכל יצור חי שהיה – איננו. באופן טבעי תחושתו הייתה תחושת חורבן קשה, המראות הנוראים גרמו לו לרפיון ידיים וחוסר אונים. הוא ידע שתחושות כאלה אינן תורמות בכהוא זה להשפעת רוחניות על העולם הנבנה מחדש, באשר אין השכינה שרויה – אלא מתוך שמחה של קיום רצון ה'. לכן, הוא החליט להשתמש ביין, אשר בכוחו להשפיע שמחה בלב האדם, ובכך לגרום להשראת השכינה בעולם. הסבר זה מעמיד שאלה חדשה: אם אכן כוונתו הייתה טהורה - כיצד נבע מכך כזה קלקול? ר' שמחה וסרמן זצ"ל מסביר שהיו גם כוונות אחרות, טהורות פחות, אשר השפיעו על החלטתו של נח במה להתחיל בבנייתו את העולם. בעומדו מול ההרס העצום, חש נוח צורך לברוח מהמציאות הקשה אליה נקלע, לכן הוא נטע כרם, אשר יינו מאפשר בריחה מהכאב והקושי העצום אותו חש . בחירה זו נחשבת כישלון לאדם בשיעור קומתו של נח, ולכן היא הובילה לתוצאות מזיקות ביותר. חז"ל מעבירים ביקורת על נח, ואומרים כי כאשר אדם עומד מול עולם חרב והרוס – תפקידו הוא להתמקד ראשית בבנייה ושיקום, ולא בבריחה מהמציאות. הר' וסרמן מציין שחז"ל לא מציגים את מעשהו של נח כחטא חמור, אלא אומרים שהוא עסק ב"חול" (מלשון "ויחל"), ובכך חיסר בענייני קדושה. לפני שישים שנה בערך, עמדו רבים בפני ניסיון קשה ביותר. השואה זרעה הרס וחורבן, מליונים נהרגו, קהילות נעקרו, משפחות שלמות נכחדו, ואנשים נותרו ללא מכר ומודע. למול מצב נורא ואיום זה, ללא ספק הייתה קיימת נטיה בלב הניצולים לבריחה מהמציאות. אולם, היו גם היו כאלה אשר דווקא בנקודה זו מצאו בעצמם את הכוחות והיוזמה לבנייה מחודשת ושיקומו של העולם היהודי. אנשים גדולים, דוגמת הרב מפוניבז' זצ"ל והאדמו"ר מקלויזנבורג זצ"ל, איבדו את כל משפחתם בשואה, ועם כל זאת קמו הם, מתוך ההפכה והתגייסו למשימה האדירה של בנייה מחדש. ר' יששכר פרנד שליט"א מספר על ר' יוסף רוזנברג זצ"ל, אשר אף הוא הצליח ועמד בגבורה בפני הפיתוי לברוח מהמציאות וחלף זאת – פנה לבנייה מחודשת. הוא מצא את עצמו אז בארצות הברית, לאחר השואה. הוא הבחין כי ישנה מצוה אחת המוזנחת מאד – שעטנז. במו ידיו הוא הקים מעבדה לבניית שעטנז, ובמשך כמה עשורים הוא בדק משעטנז עשרות אלפי בגדים. לגביו היו שני חורבנות: חורבן אחד – השואה – חורבן פיזי, והשני – חורבן רוחני – אובדנה של מצוה אחת. ברוך ה' בדורנו איננו מתמודדים מול חורבן ברמה זו של המבול, או השואה. אולם, בכל זאת גם בדורנו אנו נאלצים לעמוד מול חורבנות במישורים שונים. ראשית, כולנו יודעים כי כלל ישראל בימים אלה הינו במצב של חורבן רוחני שלא היה כדוגמתו בכל ההיסטוריה של העם, אינספור נישואי תערובת נערכים מידי יום. ישנן הערכות כי בשישים השנים האחרונות אבדו ליהדות יותר יהודים מאשר אבדו בששת שנות השואה! חורבן זה הינו פחות גלוי לעין, ופחות מזעזע את האנושות ואת כלל ישראל מאשר השואה, אולם תוצאותיו – מי ישורנו. כל יהודי שומר תורה ומצוות אף אם אינו רוצה בכך, נאלץ בהזדמנות זו או אחרת להתרחק מעט מהאזור בו הוא גר, ולהגיע למקומות בהם נראים יהודים חילוניים. אז הוא מוכרח לעמוד פנים מול פנים מול המציאות הקשה כמות שהיא. ישנן אפשרויות רבות ומגוונות כיצד יכול כל אדם לעזור ולסייע ליהודים אלה לשוב אל בוראם, אולם החשוב ביותר הוא להחליט בכל לב לא להתעלם ממציאות קשה זו ולומר "שלום עליך נפשי". ובמישור הפרטי יותר, כל אחד מאיתנו מכיר אנשים המתמודדים בעצמם עם חורבנם הפרטי. ישנם אנשים שאינם יכולים להביא פרנסה למשפחתם, אנשים שסובלים מבעיות רפואיות מסובכות, בחורים ובחורות צעירים שאינם מצליחים למצוא את השידוך הראוי להם, גרושים וגרושות, אלמנים ואלמנות, החשים בדידות וחוסר אונים יום יום, שעה שעה. ולצערנו הרשימה יכולה להתארך ולהתארך. כאשר אנו פוגשים באנשים הנתונים במצבים אלה, אנו שוב עומדים מול השאלה – להתעלם, לברוח, או לבנות? הרב פריינד טוען, כי אין זה מספיק כלל ועיקר רק לרחם עליהם ולומר – 'נעבאך, מסכנים'. אנו מוכרחים לשאוף לעזור להם בכל דרך אפשרית. לדוגמא, אם נודע לנו שאדם איבד את מקור פרנסתו, ניתן להשתמש בקשרינו, ולנסות ולראות האם אפשר למצוא לאדם זה תעסוקה חלופית. או אם אנו מכירים אחד שעדיין לא מצא את השידוך שלו, אנו יכולים להשקיע מעט מזמננו וכוחנו ולחשוב האם אנו מכירים מישהו שיוכל להתאים. במשך החיים, רוב בני האדם נאלצים לעמוד בפני טרגדיות ואסונות קשים מכל סוג שהוא. מאורעות קשים אלה מעמידים כל אחד ואחד בפני משימת חיים ואתגר משמעותי, כמובן ישנה נטייה טבעית לרצות לברוח מהמציאות הקשה ו'לעצום עיניים' מול הכאב. אולם, הגדלות הינה להשקיע בזמנים אלה כל מאמץ על מנת לשקם, לבנות מחדש, להמשיך הלאה, ולהתקדם עוד ועוד. באחד משיעוריו המעוררים לפני יום כיפור, הציע הרב פריינד לתלמידים לשאול את עצמם ארבע שאלות יסודיות בקשר למצבם הרוחני. אחת מהן היתה השאלה אותה שאל רב החובל את יונה. כאשר התרגשה הסערה הגדולה ואיימה להטביע את האנייה על כל נוסעיה, מצא רב החובל את יונה בחדרו – ישן, והוא קרא אליו "למה תישן? קום, קרא לאלוקיך " רב החובל טען – כיצד יכול אתה לישון בכזה מצב? תעשה משהו! כך בדיוק, אומר הרב פריינד, עלינו לשאול את עצמנו, כיצד אנו מסוגלים לישון בזמן שמתרגשות עלינו צרות ומאורעות קשים כל כך? הלואי ונזכה להשקיע ולבנות עוד ועוד ולא חלילה להתעלם ולברוח מהמציאות גם כאשר היא כואבת ומעמידה את האדם בפני אתגרים ומשימות קשות.

INSIGHTS IN RASHI - NOACH - NOACH AND AVRAHAM

Bereishis, 6:9: These are the offspring of Noach – Noach was a righteous man, perfect in his generations; Noach walked with G-d. Rashi, Bereishis: 6:9, dh: In his generations: There are those among our Rabbis who expound [this wording] as praise; ‘all the more so if he had been in a generation of righteous people, he would have been more righteous’. And there are those who expound it negatively; had he been in the generation of Avraham, he would have been considered as nothing. Rashi brings two conflicting interpretations of the Torah’s wording in the opening verse of Parshas Noach: “in his generations”. One views it in a positive way, and one in a negative way. Yet there are a number of problems with this Rashi: One is that in the positive interpretation Rashi writes that Noach would have been more righteous had he lived with other righteous people. Accordingly, the opposing, negative view should say that had Noach lived in the generation of Avraham he would have less of a righteous person, or not so righteous, why then does Rashi use the harsh wording that he would have been considered as nothing. The key to answering this question is to understand that it is incorrect to think that Avraham was simply ‘more’ righteous than Noach, rather he was on a completely different level of righteousness – his righteousness was qualitatively different to that of Noach. Accordingly, when Rashi writes that Noach would have been nothing compared to Avraham, he means that even though Noach may well have been more righteous had he lived in the time of Avraham, nonetheless he still would have been nothing in comparison because Avraham was on a whole different level of righteousness. When compared to that level Noach would have been considered as nothing. In what way was Avraham on such a different level than Noach? This is revealed in Rashi’s next comment on the words; “Noach walked with G-d”. Rashi writes: ‘And regarding Avraham it says “walk before Me”’: Noach needed support to bear him up, but Avraham would strengthen himself and walk in his righteousness on his own.” . The commentaries explain that Rashi is telling us that Avraham was pro-active, he did not need external events to stimulate him to serve HaShem and perform acts of kindness, rather he was able to motivate himself. Noach needed external circumstances to push him forward in his righteousness . Rav Dessler develops this idea; he writes that Noach is called, ‘ish tzaddik’ whilst Avraham is the ‘ish chessed’. Noach performed incredible acts of kindness in the ark, feeding hundreds of animals for several months, however, “this was only tzedek - he fulfilled his obligation.” It did not stem from an overflowing desire to give, but was rather a reaction to the needs of others. Avraham, in contrast, did not perform chessed out of obligation, but because of a burning desire to give. This divergence between Noach and Avraham was not restricted to chessed in gashmius (the physical realm) but also extends into the realm of ruchnius (the spiritual realm). The Seforno writes that Noach did rebuke the people in his generation but he did not go any further - “he did not teach them to know G-d and how to go in his ways,” consequently he did not possess enough merit to save the generation . In contrast Avraham went far beyond the call of duty to teach the world to know HaShem . Thus we see that although Noach was a ‘tzaddik’ he did not attain Avraham’s level of ‘chassid’; in this way he would have been nothing in comparison to Avraham. Every Jew’s job is to at least aspire to the level of Avraham by being proactive in our avodas HaShem and chessed.

INSIGHTS IN RASHI - NOACH - THE IMPORTANCE OF GRATITUDE

Bereishis, 11:5-6: “HaShem descended to see the city and tower which the sons of Adam built; and HaShem said, Behold, one people, and there is one language for all of them, and this they begin to do!” Rashi: Bereshis, 11:5 dh: The sons of Adam: But then, the sons of whom – perhaps the sons of donkeys and camels?! Rather, they [showed that they were] the sons of Adam Harishon, who was ungrateful and said, ‘the woman whom You gave to be with me’. So too, these were ungrateful but rebelling against He who bestowed good upon them and rescued them from the Flood.” In the midst of the account of the Tower of Bavel, the Torah alludes to an additional flaw that the nations expressed in their efforts to build a Tower in order to fight G-d. Rashi, quoting the Midrash, tells us that HaShem compared them to their ancestor, Adam who was ungrateful; when he sinned by eating from the fruit, he blamed HaShem for creating the woman who caused him to sin. In truth, HaShem had bestowed a great kindness on him by providing him with a partner. So too, HaShem saved Noach from the Flood and instead of appreciating His kindness in saving them, Noach’s descendants attempted to fight Him. One may ask that this point about ingratitude seems quite trivial compared to the seemingly far greater sin in and of itself of kefira and attempting to somehow wage war with the Almighty – why then, does the Torah allude to this seemingly insignificant flaw? The answer to this question can be found in the Torah prohibition to marry male converts from the nations of Ammon and Moav or their descendants. One of the reasons the Torah offers as to why it is forbidden to marry them is that they did not offer bread and water to the Jewish nation when they were in the desert. The commentaries ask that whilst their inaction shows that they were not kind-hearted, why is it so severe that their descendants can never marry into the Jewish people. They explain that their sin was greatly magnified by the fact that they owed a great debt to the Jewish people; Avraham Avinu saved Lot, the Patriarch of Ammon and Moav, when he rescued him from the four Kings. The ingratitude that his descendants expressed by refusing to help the Jewish people, reflected such a great character flaw that it meant that they could never marry into the Jewish people. So too, the ingratitude that the people demonstrated by not only not thanking G-d for saving Noach, but by actually having the audacity to ‘fight’ Him, significantly magnified the severity of their actions. We learn from here the fundamental importance of the trait of hakaras hatov (gratitude) and the contemptible nature of it’s opposite; ingratitude. It seems that the reason why ingratitude is such a serious flaw is that it contradicts the very foundations of Emuna and Torah observance – that HaShem bestowed upon us an unparalleled kindness by giving us life and the opportunity to connect with Him. This alone is a highly compelling reason to observe the Mitzvos; to demonstrate our appreciation for what HaShem did and constantly does for us by trying to fulfill His will .

SHEMINI ATZERES AND SIMCHAS TORAH

The chagim of Tishei culminate with Shemini Atseres. Chazal enacted that we also celebrate Simchas Torah on this day by completing the annual cycle of reading the Torah. The commentaries ask why Chazal chose to coincide the completion of the Torah with Shemini Atseres in particular, as opposed to the other chagim. In order to explain this, it is first necessary to understand the essence of Shemini Atseres. Chazal bring an analogy to explain the difference between Sukkos and Shemini Atseres. They compare Sukkos to a large feast, in which all the King's servants are invited. After the feast ends, the King invites his closest friend to join him for a small meal one last time. Similarly, on Sukkos we offer up 70 paros to Hashem on behalf of the 70 nations, whereas on Shemini Atseres we only bring one, on behalf of the Jewish nation to demonstrate our unique relationship with Hashem.. In giving these instructions, Hashem tells the Jewish people, "it is difficult for Me that you are separating from me, stay one more day." Shemini Atseres is that extra day dedicated purely to the relationship between Hashem and the Jewish people. Rav Chaim Friedlander zt"l asks a very strong question on this Chazal: The reason that Hashem makes this extra day of Shemini Atseres is because it is difficult for Him to separate from the Jewish people. How does this allay the pain of separation, all it achieves is to prolong the festivities for one more day, and then the separation will take place. Indeed this the extra day will likely make the ultimate parting even more painful. In order to explain this, the Sifsei Chaim outlines the difference between Sukkos and Shemini Atseres. He brings the Sefer HaChinuch who tells us that Sukkos is a time of natural joy because it is when we gather in the produce and bring it into our homes. Hashem wants us to direct that joy to spirituality by providing us with numerous mitzvos, such as holding the arba minim (four species), and dwelling in a Sukkah. By engaging in physical actions dedicated to Hashem, we are supposed to direct our natural physical joy to connection to Him. However, on Shemini Atseres there is no mitzvo of arba minim or sukkah, because there is no need for all these 'tools' for bringing us close to Hashem, the connection is intrinsic. After the holy days of Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur, and then the 7 days of Sukkos, a person is supposed to have brought himself so close to Hashem that there is no necessity for external tools in developing that connection. Accordingly, there is no need for extra mitzvos on Shemini Atseres. This helps understand how the extra day of Shemini Atseres allays the pain of Hashem's separation from the Jewish people. The Sifsei Chaim explains that the extra day without any external tools teaches us that there is in fact no separation at all. By spending that extra day alone with the Jewish people, Hashem shows us that we don't need the mitzvos of arba minim and sukkah on a permanent basis in order to have a relationship with Him, He is constantly involved in our lives and desires that we come close to Him. There is one 'tool' that we do need to maintain that connection with Him - that of the Torah. Without the Torah it is impossible to build a relationship with Hashem. This is because the Torah is Hashem's means of communicating with us. Without the Torah, one can have no understanding of what Hashem wants from us, or how He views the world. We can now understand why Chazal saw fit to celebrate the completion of the Torah on Shemini Atseres. Shemini Atseres is the day that teaches us that there is never any separation from Hashem. We can permanently be connected to Him, but only through the means of the Torah. Accordingly, we express our joy at the Torah on this day, to remind us that by continuing to study it, we can maintain our closeness to Him through the long winter days. We now understand the relevance of Torah to Shemini Atseres. However, one may ask why there is such an emphasis on expressing our joy through dancing with the Torah. Would it not make more sense to spend the entire day engrossed in the actual study of Torah? It seems that the emphasis on expressing our joy at the Torah teaches us a fundamental lesson about our relationship to Torah. It is of course, essential that a person learn Torah as much as possible, however it is also essential that he develop a sense of joy through his learning Torah. There would seem to be a lacking for a person who spends all his time learning Torah and never appreciating the actual Torah that he is learning. There are a number of reasons for this: One is that if a person doesn't truly enjoy his learning as a spiritually uplifting experience, then there is always the risk that other, more temporal pleasures may draw him away from his learning. It is well-known that young men who truly love learning Torah, are far less likely to be lured by the temptations of the secular world. A second reason for the importance of feeling joy at learning Torah is that a person's learning will be far more effective when he enjoys it. A third, key reason for feeling the joy of learning Torah is demonstrated by the following story involving two Gedolim, Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzensky zt"l and Rav Elazar Shach zt"l. Rav Shach tragically lost his eldest daughter to illness when she was only 14 year of age. Soon after her death, Rav Shach went to visit Rav Chaim Ozer. Rav Chaim Ozer quoted to him a passuk from Tehillim, "Were your Torah not my delight, I would have perished in my affliction." Rav Chaim Ozer then told Rav Shach, "without Torah, there would be no meaning to my life." From that time on, Rav Chaim Ozer would repeat that verse every time he saw Rav Shach. Many years later, Rav Shach offered an explanation of what Rav Chaim Ozer had said: He gave an analogy of two prisoners both sitting in jail in a state of utter humiliation, their heads shaved, wearing prison uniforms. However, despite their identical appearance, their is a difference between them. One smiles and says a friendly word to someone now and then, whereas the other is always grim and silent. The difference between the two prisoners is that one knows that his present situation is temporary, soon he'll be released and allowed to go home. The other has been sentenced to life imprisonment and so there is nothing for him to look forward to. In a similar way, two people can endure tragic situations and react in very different ways. One who has no Torah has nothing to hold on to, nothing to comfort him. Accordingly, he may well be unable to recover from such a blow. Rav Shach pointed out that this was, in fact the case with many people who were not connected to Torah and suffered tragedies. In contrast, one who has love of Torah, can cling to the realization that he can continue to learn and grow closer to Hashem through the Torah. This attachment to Torah, Rav Chaim Ozer was telling Rav Shach, can keep a person sane whilst enduring terrible pain. Thus, the joy of learning Torah enables a person has the vital benefit that it enables a person to withstand great suffering. We have seen how Shemini Atseres is a day of great connection to Hashem, and that the Torah is the means to achieving this connection. It is essential that we bring this lesson with us into the long winter. One possible way of developing one's love of Torah is discovering which areas of Torah and styles of learning most appeal to him. Three Gedolim were once asked what was the correct way of learning. They all answered that there is no single 'correct' way', rather a person must find what his heart desires and learn in that way. This is because a person will not be able to thrive if he derives no enjoyment from his style of learning. It is instructive, with the advice of one's Rav, to find areas of Torah that he relates to. Simchas Torah is a time of great joy at the gift of Torah. May we take this joy and apply it throughout the year.

VEZOS HABRACHA - SIMCHAS TORAH

The Torah concludes with a stirring eulogy for Moshe Rabbeinu, ending with praise for, “the strong hand and awesome power that Moshe performed before the eyes of all Israel .” The Medrash, cited by Rashi explains that the phrase, “before the eyes of all Israel” refers to Moshe’s decision to break the luchos that he had just received, in front of all the Jewish people. Why, of all Moshe Rabbeinu’s great maasim, does the Torah choose to single this one out at its finale as perhaps the greatest of them all? The Ateres Mordechai offers a profound insight to explain this . Moshe had invested great effort over many years in bringing the Jewish people out of slavery in Mitzrayim to the point of Matan Torah, and now he had just spent forty days without food or drink fending off the angels and securing the Luchos for the Jewish people. When he returned from the mountain and saw the people worshipping the Golden Calf he realized that they were not on the madreiga to receive the Luchos and that he must destroy them. However, imagine what a nisayon it must have been to forsake all that effort and energy that he had invested to get to this moment. He surely could have rationalized that although they did not deserve the Luchos now, perhaps things would change soon and it wasn’t necessary to destroy them right away. But Moshe did not do so, he showed great integrity and intellectual honesty to break the luchos purely because that was the correct course of action. Very often in life we are placed in similar situations to that of Moshe Rabbeinu - we invest time or energy into something and then we are faced with the possibility that we have made a mistake and need to start again or that there has been a new turn of events that makes our original stand obsolete. There is a great temptation in such instances to dig our heels in and stand by our initial plan against our better judgment. It is very hard to admit that we are wrong or need to start again after putting in so much effort into something. And perhaps the most difficult aspect of knocking down what we have already built is that we are showing that we have made a mistake - it is extremely difficult for people to admit that their opinions, lifestyle or attitude is wrong. One of the main factors that prevents non-religious people from changing their lifestyle is that to do so would mean admitting that all of their life up till this point was based on a mistake. Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l brings an example from Tanach of how a person can become so set in his ways that he cannot change even when placed under the greatest pressure . After the destruction of Yericho, Yehoshua placed a curse on anyone who would rebuild it. In the time of Achav, a man named Chiel decided to defy the curse and rebuild Yericho . When he laid the first brick, his first-born died, and as he continued building his sons continued dying one by one until when he completed the city his youngest son also passed away. How can a person be so foolish to continue in a path that causes him such misery?! Rav Shmuelevitz answers that he was so convinced in the rightness of his actions that he could not admit that he had seriously erred and he preferred to bury all his sons over admitting that he was wrong! In contrast the Gemara shows an example of the greatness involved in admitting one’s mistakes. The Tanna Shimon HaAmsoni used to explain every word ‘es’ in the Torah as providing an secondary meaning to the object mentioned . For example, in the mitzvo of honoring parents, there is an ‘es’ from which he derived the inclusion of older siblings, and consequently a person must honour his elder sibling as well as his parents. However, when he came to the passuk, “Es Hashem Elokecha tira” he was unable to find a secondary recipient of the fear that we must feel for Hashem. His talmidim asked him, “what will come of all the instances where you have explained the word ’es’”? He replied, “just as I have been rewarded for expounding them, so shall I rewarded now for abandoning them.” Then Rabbi Akiva came and taught that the ’es’ in the passuk teaches us that a person must feat G-d and also talmidei chachamim. The Alter of Kelm notes the greatness of the tanna Shimon who did not hesitate to abandon the theory that he had held and developed throughout his life when he felt that he could no longer justify it. Moreover, he taught his talmidim a priceless lesson - that his abandoning of his theory which was done in a moment was as great as all the investigating and explaining he had done all his life ! This lesson is strongly connected to the day of Simchas Torah with which Vezos Habracha always coincides. We end the Torah and then immediately restart it again, reading the opening passukm of Bereishis. This alludes to us that even though we have completed the whole Torah, we should not feel that we do not need to repeat it again. We can relearn it and develop new insights, sometimes even contradicting our present understanding and we should not feel embarrassed to acknowledge that we were wrong. This does not only apply to pshatim on the Chumash or Gemara but also to our outlook on life - if we see that a part of our outlook on life seems to not fully fit with Torah hashkafa than must be willing to honestly assess how we can change it. Rav Frand suggests that this idea is also alluded to in the marriage ceremony . The custom is that the chassan breaks a glass, and most commentators explain that this is a remembrance of the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. However, he notes that one commentator connects this custom to the breaking of the Luchos. Why do we need to be reminded of that event during a wedding? He answers that perhaps it is to teach the new couple that in order for their marriage to work, they must strive to emulate Moshe Rabbeinu’s actions in breaking the luchos. In order for a marriage to work, both husband and wife must be willing to act with great honesty and admit their mistakes rather than stand on their pride. Both need to be prepared to let go of their preconceived notions and prejudices and strive for truth. These are not easy demands, but if we see that Moshe was ready to break the most valuable thing in the world because it was the right thing to do, then we too can surely be prepared to make changes when it is clearly the ratson Hashem.

Parachat Vezoth HaBerakha et Sim’hat Thora

La dernière paracha de la Thora contient le passouk que nous enseignons en premier à nos enfants : « Thora tsiva lanou Moché moracha kehilat Yaacov » . C’est de ce passouk que nous déduisons qu’il existe 613 mitsvot (commandements) ; la guemara note que le mot « Thora » a pour guematria (valeur numérique) 611. Cela nous apprend que Moché Rabbénou enseigna aux Bné Israël 611 mitsvot et Hachem, Lui-même, leur ordonna les deux autres, à savoir l’obligation de croire en D. et l’interdiction de suivre d’autres divinités. Au total, 613 mitsvot. Les commentateurs peinent à déterminer quels commandements de la Thora sont inclus dans les 613 mitsvot. Le frère du Gaon de Vina zatsal soulève ce problème dans « Maalot HaThora ». Il cite le Gaon qui explique que la Thora est comparée à un arbre ; un arbre a des racines et plusieurs branches qui poussent de ces racines. Ainsi, dans la Thora figurent 613 racines, les « taryag mitsvot », desquelles poussent de nombreuses branches, qui sont toutes des obligations de la Thora. Il poursuit et écrit que toutes les histoires racontées dans la Thora sont pleines de lois qui nous enjoignent de faire différentes choses. Chaque enseignement tiré des actions accomplies par les personnages de la Thora est une prescription de la Thora. Le nombre de « mitsvot » présentes dans la Thora est donc considérable. Le Gaon explique que cela correspond à l’explication de ‘Hazal qui affirment qu'Hachem voulut gratifier le peuple juif en lui donnant de nombreuses mitsvot – cela ne se réfère pas seulement aux 613 mitsvot, mais aux milliers de commandements qui émanent de toutes les histoires de la Thora . Ainsi, nous pouvons aborder l’étude de la Thora sous un autre angle. Lorsque la Thora nous relate un événement, elle ne nous raconte pas simplement un incident historique intéressant, mais elle nous enseigne des leçons importantes sur la façon dont nous devons mener nos vies. Le rav Noa’h Weinberg chlita explique que la Thora n’est pas un simple « livre d’histoire », mais elle s’appelle « Thorat ‘Haïm », c’est-à-dire un « mode de vie ». Cet enseignement est particulièrement opportun au moment où nous terminons le cycle annuel de la lecture de la Thora et nous célébrons la réception de ce magnifique cadeau. La Thora n’est pas simplement un livre intéressant et profondément intelligent, il s’agit des instructions détaillées d’Hachem sur la manière de se comporter. Cela s’applique à tous les domaines de la Thora, y compris la guemara (le Talmud) et la halakha (la loi juive). Cette leçon est néanmoins à prendre plus au sérieux en ce qui concerne le ‘Houmach. Un talmid ‘hakham remarqua que l’on peut passer à côté de ce point essentiel et considérer le ‘Houmach (la Bible) comme un « vort (exposé) sympathique » sur la paracha à présenter à table, le Chabbat ! Il n’y a rien de mal à faire un joli discours, mais il est tout de même important de se souvenir que le ‘Houmach est l’instruction d’Hachem sur la façon dont nous devons nous conduire. Le rav Tsvi Kushelevsky chlita met cette idée en avant dans une approbation à un livre qui souligne l’importance de la Thora dans nos vies. Il cite le Ramban dans sa Iguéret (lettre écrite à son fils) : « Après avoir étudié dans un livre, réfléchis bien à ce que tu as appris afin d’y trouver ce que tu peux mettre en pratique. » Le rav Kushelevsky commente : « Ces mots, rédigés par le Ramban qui sont extraits d’une lettre célèbre qu’il écrivit à son fils, nous enjoignent de chercher l’application pratique de chaque leçon apprise dans la Thora. Cet objectif a beau être noble et essentiel, il nous échappe souvent. Nous pouvons avoir tendance à considérer notre étude de la Thora comme une activité intellectuelle, détachée de la réalité pratique de nos vies. Sim’hat Thora est le jour où nous célébrons la réception du cadeau extraordinaire qu’est la Thora. Puissions-nous mériter d’utiliser au mieux ce joyau.

SUKKOS AND KOHELES

On many holidays, it is customary to read one of the five megillos. There is always a connection between the festival and its megillah. On Sukkos we read Koheles. This megillah was written by Shlomo HaMelech and focuses on how he experienced every pleasure in this world (within the parameters of Jewish law) but discovered that it was all hevel havalim, the ultimate emptiness. The commentaries observe that the message of Koheles seems to contradict the very essence of Sukkos. This holiday is described as zman simchaseinu, even more joyous than the other festivals. Koheles, in contrast, seems anything but joyous in its stress on the meaningless of this world. What connects Sukkos and Koheles? In Darchei Mussar, Rav Yaakov Neiman, ztz”l, notes that a primary feature of Sukkos is the command to leave our permanent abode and live in a temporary dwelling. He points out that this move hardly seems conducive to joy. Leaving one’s secure, comfortable home for a flimsy, sparse sukkah sounds downright depressing. Rav Neiman explains, however, that a person can reach true happiness only when he recognizes that the pleasures of this world are illusory and provide no genuine joy or fulfillment. Exchanging the comforts of home for a sukkah facilitates this recognition. Yet why can one never attain true happiness through this-worldly pleasures? A fundamental tenet of Judaism is that a human being is composed of body and soul. Both demand satisfaction: The body seeks the physical delights of this world, whereas the soul aspires to connect to Hashem, which is possible mainly in the next world. The soul can elevate the body to the point that the body becomes subservient to the soul and facilitates its connection to Hashem. For example, if one says a blessing when he eats, he elevates this mundane, physical act to a spiritual one. However, if a person focuses on this-worldly pleasures, his soul receives no satisfaction, since its aspirations are being ignored. It follows that over- attachment to the physical world excludes the soul and therefore precludes true joy. We can now understand the connection between the joy of Sukkos and the apparent pessimism of Koheles. Shlomo HaMelech is saying that life is meaningless only when aimed at this-worldly pleasures. We see this idea in the Gemara’s discussion of a contradiction within Koheles. In the second chapter, Shlomo writes, “Joy, what does it do?” suggesting the futility of happiness. However, in the eighth chapter, he tells us, “I praised joy.” The Gemara explains that joy is praiseworthy when it involves a mitzvah and futile when it does not. In other words, happiness rooted in this world is meaningless, but the joy of spirituality is to be praised. Accordingly, Sukkos and Koheles go hand in hand. Both teach us that the only way to attain true happiness is by recognizing that this-worldly pleasures will never satisfy the soul’s yearning for Hashem. May we apply these lessons to our lives and experience the joy of Sukkos.

SUKKOS AND YAAKOV AVINU

The Tur tells us that each of the shalosh regalim corresponds to one of the three Avos: Pesach corresponds to Avraham Avinu, Shavuos to Yitzchak Avinu, and Sukkos to Yaakov Avinu. His source of this idea is parashas Vayishlach, which tells us that after encountering Esav, Yaakov went to a place called Sukkos, where he made sukkos for his animals. This suggests some kind of connection between Yaakov and the festival of Sukkos. What links the two? One interesting feature of Sukkos is that on this holiday, even the most mundane activities, such as eating and sleeping, become mitzvos. Ordinarily, these activities are neutral, i.e., neither mitzvos nor aveiros. The mere act of sitting in the sukkah, however, turns them into mitzvos and enables one to say the blessing of “leisheiv basukkah.” Thus, Sukkos has the power to elevate daily activities to acts of great holiness. This aspect of Sukkos can help us understand some differences between it and the other holidays: The Kol Bo notes that one says a berachah whenever he fulfills the mitzvah of being in the sukkah. In contrast, there is a mitzvah to eat matzo throughout Pesach, yet we say a berachah only on the first night. Why not every day? The Kol Bo answers that when a person eats matzo during the rest of Pesach, it is not apparent that he is doing so because it is a mitzvah. He may be eating matzo simply because he is hungry and forbidden to eat bread. On Sukkos, however, there is no practical reason to be in the sukkah; one can easily be at home. The fact that he stays in the sukkah therefore indicates that he is doing so purely for the sake of the mitzvah. Thus, he may say a berachah throughout Sukkos, for he demonstrates that he is performing the normally mundane acts of sleeping and eating because it is a mitzvah to do so in the sukkah. The Ben Ish Chai applies the concept that merely living in the sukkah is a mitzvah to answer a different question about Sukkos. Unlike Pesach and Shavuos, Sukkos is described as zman simchaseinu. The other holidays are also times of great happiness, so why is only Sukkos considered “the time of our joy”? He answers that Sukkos is extra-joyous, because the mitzvah of sitting in the sukkah applies throughout the festival. This constant ability to perform mitzvos in honor of the holiday arouses great joy. He writes that on the other festivals there is no essential difference in a person’s daily life. Accordingly, one may not have the constant awareness of the festival that he has on Sukkos, so his joy is less. This is the reason Sukkos in particular evokes simchah. Thus, we see that Sukkos is unique in that it transforms non-holy activities into mitzvos and grants us constant awareness of the festival and its joy. How is this aspect of Sukkos connected to Yaakov Avinu? Of all the Avos, Yaakov was most deeply involved in the daily vicissitudes of life, such as dealing with dishonest people, working long hours, and bringing up a large family. For many years he had to cope with the neutral realms of work and home, unable to devote all his time to learning and prayer. One aspect of Yaakov’s greatness is that he nonetheless elevated his daily activities to acts of holiness. Upon returning from his long years in exile, he declares to his brother, Esav, “I lived (garti) with Lavan.” Chazal tell us that the letters of the word garti also spell taryag, which represents the 613 mitzvos. Yaakov was alluding to the fact that he had remained steadfast in his service of Hashem despite living in adverse conditions. It seems that many aspects of Yaakov Avinu relate to his ability to sanctify the mundane. Chazal tell us that the Avos described the Beis HaMikdash (and, by extension, avodas Hashem) in different ways. Avraham called it a mountain; Yitzchak, a field; and Yaakov, a house. Why does Yaakov refer to it as a house? A house is where a person performs all the mundane activities of his daily life, including eating, sleeping, and forms of work. Yaakov elevated all such activities, because he saw them all as opportunities for holiness. Accordingly, he viewed a house as a vehicle of Divine service. In a similar vein, the Avos represent the three daily prayers. Avraham corresponds to Shacharis, Yitzchak to Minchah, and Yaakov to Ma’ariv. Unlike Shacharis and Minchah, Ma’ariv is non-obligatory. Why is Yaakov in particular associated with an optional prayer? Because of his ability to turn non-obligatory activities into mitzvos. He represents a person’s desire to connect to Hashem even when he is not obligated to do so. Yaakov also corresponds to the third blessing in the Shemoneh Esrei, that of kedushah. For holiness means not merely avoiding the physical world, but sanctifying it, so it too can be used to serve Hashem. With this understanding of Yaakov and Sukkos, their connection is obvious. Both take optional activities and make them holy. It is easy to feel pious when involved in obviously spiritual activities, such as learning and praying. It is far more difficult to connect to Hashem while eating, sleeping, and working. Only on Sukkos do such actions become mitzvos merely by one’s doing them in the sukkah. Of course, this does not mean we are allowed to overeat and oversleep in the sukkah. Rather, we must focus on the fact that dwelling in the sukkah is a great opportunity to develop awareness of Hashem in our daily lives. If we seize this opportunity, we can continue sanctifying our mundane acts even after the festival has ended.

קוהלת וסוכות

במועדים רבים נהוג לקרוא אחת מחמש המגילות . תמיד קיים קשר בין החג ובין המגילה הנקראת בו. בחג הסוכות קוראים את מגילת קוהלת. מגילה זו נכתבה על ידי שלמה המלך, ובה הוא מתאר כיצד הוא חווה את כל הנאות העולם הזה (בהתאם לגדר ההלכה) ומסקנתו לאחר כל זאת היתה שהכל הבל הבלים ורעות רוח. המפרשים מבחינים בסתירה הקיימת לכאורה בין המסר של קוהלת ובין מהות חג הסוכות. החג נקרא "זמן שמחתנו", ויש בו עניין של שמחה יותר מכל חג אחר. לעומת זאת, מגילת קוהלת, רואה את הכל, ובמיוחד את השמחה, כהבל העולם הזה. מה הקשר בין סוכות ובין קוהלת? ב"דרכי מוסר" ר' יעקב ניימן זצ"ל מציין כי מאפיין עיקרי בחג הסוכות הוא עזיבת דירת הקבע, ועקירה לדירת עראי. הוא כותב שקשה לומר שמעבר כזה גורם לשמחה. אדם עוזב את ביתו המוגן והנוח לטובת סוכה שברירית ברשות הרבים, מצב מדכא למדי. הר' ניימן מסביר, שאדם מסוגל להגיע לשמחה אמיתית רק כאשר הוא מכיר בכך שההנאות הגשמיות מתעתעות בו ובאמת אינן מספקות כל שמחה וסיפוק אמיתי. החלפת הנוחות שבבית לטובת הסוכה מסייעת לאדם להכיר בכך . עדיין קשה להבין, מדוע לא יכול האדם להגיע לשמחה אמיתית על ידי הנאות העולם הזה? אחד מיסודות האמונה הוא שאדם מורכב מגוף ומנשמה. שניהם דורשים לבוא על סיפוקם: הגוף מחפש את תענוגות העולם הזה, בעוד הנשמה שואפת באופן תמידי לקשר עם הקב"ה, קשר שמקומו האמיתי והתכליתי הוא בעולם הבא. בכוח הנשמה לרומם את הגוף עד שיהפוך להיות משועבד לה, ויסיע לה בהתקשרותה עם בורא עולם. לדוגמא, אדם המברך לפני האכילה, מרומם את הפעולה הגשמית והיומיומית של אכילה, לפעולה רוחנית. אולם, אם אדם מתרכז רק בהנאות העולם הזה, נשמתו לא באה על סיפוקה, כיוון שהוא מתעלם מצרכיה ושאיפותיה. וכך, חיבור יתר להנאות העולם הזה דוחה את הנשמה וכולא את צרכיה. כתוצאה מכך נמנעת בהכרח שמחה אמיתית. כעת ניתן להבין את הקשר בין שמחת חג הסוכות ובין שלילת השמחה הנראית לכאורה בקוהלת. שלמה המלך אומר שהחיים הינם הבל הבלים רק כאשר מטרתם היחידה היא הנאות גשמיות. ניתן לראות רעיון זה בדברי הגמרא על סתירה הקיימת לכאורה בתוך קוהלת: בפרק ב' כותב שלמה "לשמחה מה זו עושה" - כלומר, השמחה היא חסרת משמעות ולא מועילה כלום. לעומת זאת, בפרק ח' הוא כותב: "ושבחתי אני את השמחה" הגמרא מסבירה ששמחה היא משובחת כאשר הוא שמחה של מצווה, וחסרת ערך כאשר אינה שמחה של מצווה . במילים אחרות, שמחה שמקורה בהנאות העולם הזה היא הבל ורעות רוח, אולם שמחה רוחנית אכן משובחת היא. בהתאם לכך, סוכות וקוהלת מתאימים מאד זה לזה. שניהם מלמדים אותנו שהדרך היחידה להגיע לשמחה אמיתית היא ההכרה במהותם של הנאות העולם הזה, וההבנה שהם לעולם לא יספקו את שאיפתה וכמיהתה של הנשמה לבורא העולם. מי יתן ונזכה ליישם לימוד זה בחיינו ולהתרומם בשמחה האמיתית של חג הסוכות.

YOM KIPPUR - FULFILLING OUR POTENTIAL

As we approach Yom Kippur we recognise that there is a great necessity to contemplate our shemiras hamitzvos - where we have erred and where we need to do teshuva. However there is another vital aspect of Avodas Hashem that we are less aware of, that we also need to analyse: In the tefillas for the Yamim Noraim we state that man is judged, ‘maaseh ish u’pekudaso’. ‘Maaseh ish’ refers to one’s shemiras hamitzvos but what does ‘pekudaso’ mean? Rav Shraga Feivel Mendlovitz zt”l explains that ‘pekudaso’ refers to man’s tafkid, his purpose in this world. Every individual is placed in this world with a specific job to accomplish and he is judged according to whether he devoted enough effort into reaching this goal. Even if a person has kept all the mitzvos, he may still be taken to task if he did not fulfil his potential. It seems that this Avoda is even more difficult than that of shemiras hamitzvos as is seen by the following examples. When the Netziv completed his commentary on the Sheiltos, ‘Emek Sheila’ he made a seuda, partly because that is the custom when one completes a sefer but he had another, more personal reason. He related that when he was a boy he was not particularly serious about his Torah studies. His parents made every effort to help him change his attitude but to no avail. One day he overheard his parents discussing his lack of success in Torah learning - they decided that he had no prospect of becoming a Talmid Chacham and therefore he should learn to become a cobbler. They hoped that at least he would be a yirei shamayim who would go about his work with honesty and dedication. When he heard this, it shocked him greatly and he decided to take his Torah studies seriously - this event had such an impact on him that it led to a complete change in his attitude and he became a Gadol, he was Rosh Yeshiva of Volozhin and wrote a number of classic sefarim. Imagine if he had never had this change of attitude and he would have become a simple cobbler who observed Torah and Mitzvos with genuine yiras shamayim. He would have gone up to shamayim confident that he had led a Torah true lifestyle, keeping the mitzvos, and being kovaya ittim l‘Torah. Instead they would have shown him the Emek Sheila, he would look at it and have no understanding of its content. They would ask him, where’s your Emek Sheila, where are all the sefarim that you could have written? He would have lived his life with no idea of what he could have become. It was only through a dramatic change in his attitude that he was able to reach his true potential - to be a Gadol b’Yisroel. There are other allusions to this concept in the Yom Kippur davenning. At Mincha we read Maftir Yonah - what is the significance of the story of Yonah for Yom Kippur? Of course it teaches us about teshuva but the Mishna Berurah brings another connection. Yonah shows us that “one cannot escape from Hashem.” He elaborates in the Shaar Hatzion; sometimes a person gives up in life, feeling that he cannot achieve what he is meant to, “however, this is a mistake, for eventually, everything that Hashem wants this soul to fix, he must fix, and return many times to Olam Hazeh [in order to do so]… if that is the case, why should he go through the pain of death and ‘Chibut hakever’ and other difficulties and return yet again?” We learn a vital lesson from Yonah. He tried to escape G-d’s plan but could not: We too are all assigned a task to fulfil, but we have a tendency to try to avoid it; Why? It may be because it seems too difficult, or because we don’t feel we can achieve it or we do not want to take the responsibility. But whatever the reason is, we learn from Yonah that we must not escape our tachlis. After Mincha we enter into the Neila prayers - the climax of Yom Kippur, the day of teshuva. But strangely, we do not say the vidui in the Neila Shemoneh Esrei; where do we express our feelings of teshuva in Neila? The Chiddushei HaRim zt”l answers that our teshuva is found in the words, “so that we can withdraw our hands from stealing.” Why do we davke mention the sin of stealing ahead of all others in Neila? He explains that this does not just refer to regular stealing, but to the fact that Hashem gives us so many gifts, money, food, housing, talents, opportunities, all in order to help us fulfil our role in life. But what do we do? We misuse those gifts for different goals - that is considered stealing, using gifts that are given for a certain purpose and using them for something else . As we approach the final moments of Yom Kippur we have, hopefully, already cleansed ourselves of our aveiros, but now, at the climax of the holiest day of the year, we also repent for failing to use our G-d given talents for the right reasons, and we express our intentions that, this year, we will do our utmost to use them to fulfil our potential. But we must really mean it: Everyone, at some point in their life is given an opportunity to do something significant for Klal Yisroel. Often, we refuse the opportunity, finding many excuses to avoid it. What is frightening about this is that a person may go through life having missed his golden chance to fulfil his potential and he will never realise it - he won’t necessarily feel that his life was missing anything. However, when he goes up to shamayim he may be faced with the same question that Avraham Avinu, the Netsiv and Reb Dovid Dryan could answer - where is the heavenly you, where is your true potential? This idea is indeed something that should be a cause of concern for people - a person should often ask himself, ‘am I fulfilling my potential? Am I achieving what Hashem wants me to? How could I do more?’ However, this should also be an exciting idea - each of us has the ability to achieve true greatness, each one in his own specific way. How much can one person achieve? On a visit to Aish Hatorah, Rav Shach zt”l was astounded to see so many baalei teshuva - people who came from nothing but whom, through the efforts of a few dedicated and idealistic people, had returned to Torah. This was at a time when the baal teshuva movement had barely begun and it was not believed possible that it could ever take off. In his astonishment at what beheld his eyes he stood up and spoke: He quoted the passuk that we read in the haftara of Shabbos Shuva: “Return, Israel, to Hashem, your G-d, because you have stumbled in your iniquity .” He asked, that the passuk implies that the fact that we have sinned so badly is a reason why we should be able to return to Hashem - why is this so? He answered by bringing the concept that however much evil can do, good can achieve at least as much. Therefore, if a person can turn away from Hashem so much, then surely he can return to Him to an even greater extent. Similarly, if history has shown us that one man can destroy six million lives, then surely one man can save six million lives! With siata dishmaya, we cannot imagine what we can achieve, but it is surely beyond our wildest imaginations - but if we only try to make the effort and take the opportunities that come our way or even better, create our own opportunities, the we can begin to transform our imagination into reality. We should all be zocheh to fulfill our true potential.

יום הכפורים - מימוש הפוטנציאל הגלום בנו

ם התקרב יום הכפורים, כל אדם מגיע למסקנה שעליו לפשפש במעשיו, ולבדוק אחר שמירת מצוותיו – היכן שגה, היכן טעה, מה עשה שלא כשורה, ועל מה עליו לעשות תשובה. אולם, מלבד החיוב לקיים את המצוות, ישנו פן נוסף לעבודת ה', אשר אליו אנו מודעים פחות, אך גם הוא הכרחי ביותר, ועלינו להתייחס גם אליו: בתפילות הימים הנוראים אנו מכריזים שהקב"ה בימים אלה דן את כל בני האדם, "מעשה איש ופקודתו" – "מעשה איש" – הכוונה שכל אדם נידון על שמירת המצוות שלו, אבל מה פירוש התוספת "ופקודתו"? הרב שרגא פייבל מנדלוביץ זצ"ל הסביר זאת כך: "פקודתו" – מתייחס לתפקידו של כל אדם ואדם, כל אדם נידון, האם הוא השקיע מספיק מאמצים על מנת להגיע למטרה זו – של מילוי תפקידו בעולם. אפילו אם אדם שמר את כל מצוות התורה, הוא עלול לבוא בדין על כך שהוא לא מימש את כל כוחותיו ויכולותיו להשלים את תפקידו. נראה שעבודה זו קשה ודורשת מאמץ והשקעה, אפילו יותר מהחיוב לקיים את כל תרי"ג המצוות, כפי שנראה מהדוגמאות הבאות. כאשר אברהם אבינו התכונן לעקוד את יצחק בנו, קרא אליו המלאך: "אברהם, אברהם" מדוע קרא המלאך בשמו פעמיים? הרב יששכר פרנד שליט"א מסביר מתוך ה"ילקוט", שכל אדם מורכב משתי דמויות – דמותו הגשמית, ודמותו הרוחנית. הדמות הגשמית נוצרת ממה שהאדם עושה ומתקדם בזה העולם, ואילו הדמות הרוחנית מבטאת את מה שהוא היה יכול להיות אילו מימש את כל הפוטנציאל שלו. אברהם אבינו, לאחר שעבר את האחרון בעשרת הנסיונות, הגיע למצב בו הוא מימש את כל הפוטנציאל הגלום בו, וכתוצאה מכך, שתי הדמויות שלו נעשו זהות – המלאך לא הפריד בין "אברהם" – הגשמי של העולם הזה, ובין "אברהם" הרוחני, של העולם הבא. כלומר – לא היה שום הבדל בין יכולותיו של אברהם בכוח, לבין מה שהוא עשה בפועל בעולם הזה – כעת לאחר העמידה בנסיון העקידה, נעשו שתי הדמויות שוות זו לזו. מדהים לחשוב על כך, שאילו לא היה אברהם אבינו עומד בנסיון זה, לא היה מגיע למימוש כל הפוטנציאל שלו, השגיו והצלחותיו של אברהם אבינו, עד לעמידתו בנסיון העקידה הרי היו לשם דבר בכל העולם, הוא גדל בחברת עובדי אלילים, ובכוחות עצמו גילה את הקדוש ברוך הוא, הוא פרסם בכל העולם את שמו של ה', ועמד עד כה בגבורה בתשעה נסיונות קשים ובוחנים מאד. ועדיין, אילו לא עמד בנסיון האחרון של העקידה, הוא לא היה מגיע לעולם לשלמות האמיתית שלו! מכך אנו רק יכולים ללמוד, עד כמה גדול הוא התפקיד הנדרש מכל אדם ואדם. אדם עדיין עלול להרגיש, שהפוטנציאל האישי שלו מוגבל מאד, ותפקידו בעולם הוא רק לממש את הפוטנציאל הנמוך הזה. אולם, אם נתבונן בהצלחותיהם והשגיהם של אנשים מסוימים, נווכח לראות, מעל לכל ספק, כי כל האדם מסוגל להגיע רחוק הרבה יותר ממה שהוא חושב ומדמיין. כאשר הנצי"ב השלים את פירושו "העמק שאלה" על השאילתות, הוא הכין סעודה, כנהוג כאשר אדם מסיים לכתוב ספר, אולם מלבד סיבה פשוטה זו, היתה לנצי"ב גם סיבה אישית נוספת, ובמעמד הסעודה קם וסיפר לנוכחים את סיפורו: בילדותו התייחס בזלזול רב ללימודים ב"חדר", הוריו עשו כל מאמץ לעזור לו לשנות את יחסו ללימודים, אך ללא הועיל. יום אחד, הוא הקשיב להוריו ששוחחו אודותיו, ואודות כשלונו בלימודיו – והגיעו להחלטה שאין לו שום סיכוי להיות בעתיד תלמיד חכם, ועל כן מוטב שילמד להיות סנדלר. אם תלמיד חכם כשאיפתם – לא יהיה, לפחות יהודי טוב יהיה, ירא שמים, שיעשה את עבודתו בהגינות ובאמונה. כך החליטו. החלטה זו, של הוריו זעזעה את נפתלי צבי הקטן עד עמקי נשמתו, והוא החליט לשנס מותניו ולהתחיל ללמוד ברצינות. מאורע זה השפיע בעצמה כה חזקה על חייו, עד שמיום זה והלאה חל שינוי מוחלט בכל הנהגתו ויחסו לתורה, ולאט לאט הפך לגדול בישראל, כתב מספר ספרים חשובים לעולם היהודי, ואף נתמנה לראש ישיבת וואלוז'ין. חשבו לעצמכם, אילו לא היה עושה את השינוי הזה, הוא היה נעשה סנדלר פשוט, בעל יראת שמיים אמיתית, המקיים את כל מצוות התורה, הוא היה מגיע לאחר מאה ועשרים לשמים, סמוך ובטוח כי הוא יובל למקומו הראוי לו, לאחר שקיים אורח חיים תורני, שמר את כל המצוות, וקבע עיתים לתורה. אבל, כאשר הוא יגיע לשם, יראו לו את הספר "העמק שאלה", הוא יסתכל על הספר, ולא יכיר אותו – ואז יאמרו לו: "איפה הספר העמק שאלה שלך? איפה כל הספרים שיכולת להביא לעולם?" הוא עלול היה לחיות את כל חייו בלי לדעת אפילו מה הוא צריך היה להיות, רק שנוי חד כזה שנעשה בחייו, שינה את התמונה מהקצה אל הקצה, וגרם לו לממש את הכוחות האמיתיים שלו, ויכולתו הגדולה – להיות גדול בישראל. גם לאחר סיפור כזה, אדם עדיין עלול לטעון שלא כל אחד נולד עם הכוחות והיכולת להיות גדול בישראל. אולם, ההיסטוריה היהודית מוכיחה, שאדם אכן לא מוכרח להיות גדול בישראל על מנת לתרום תרומות חשובות עבור כלל ישראל. ר' דוד דריאן זצ"ל היה שוחט צדיק, אשר היה ידוע בשמירת הלשון המיוחדת שלו, אך הסיבה העיקרית לכך שהוא היה דמות בולטת בהסטוריה של יהדות אנגליה, היתה פעילותו הנרחבת ליסוד וניהול מוסדות "גיטסהד". הוא שימש בתפקיד משמעותי ביותר בכל המערכת של כולל גיטסהד וסמינר גיטסהד. בזכות עבודתו המסורה "גיטסהד" ידועה היום כמרכז התורה הגדול ביותר באירופה, בו מתחנכים אלפי בחורים ובחורות, לתורה ויראת שמים ברמה גבוהה. ויתירה מכך, בין כתליו של "כולל גיטסהד" גדלו רבים מגדולי תלמידי החכמים באנגליה. כיצד זכה ר' דוד דריאן בכזו זכות? כאשר הוא הגיע לגור בגיטסהד, הוא ראה שאין במקום שום ישיבה – הוא אמר לעצמו – איך אוכל לגור במקום כזה, אשר אין בו אף ישיבה אחת? בעצם, רבים מאיתנו היו שואלים גם הם שאלה כזו לו היו עומדים במצב דומה, ההבדל היחיד הוא שר' דוד לא רק שאל, אלא גם עשה. משימה זו היתה נראית אז כבלתי אפשרית בעליל, אולם ר' דוד, למול קשיים רבים והתנגדויות רבות, עבד ללא לאות, השקיע זמן רב, ומאמצים רבים ואכן, חפץ ה' הצליח בידו. כאשר ר' שניאור קוטלר זצ"ל היה מספר את הסיפור הזה, הוא היה מתאר תיאור דומה לתיאורו של הנצי"ב שנים קודם לכן – תארו לעצמכם אילו ר' דוד דריאן לא היה עושה ופועל כפי שעשה, הוא היה מגיע לשמים לאחר מאה ועשרים שנה, ומצפה לשכר רב על יראת השמים שלו, על הקפדתו בשחיטה, ועל דקדוקו בהלכות שמירת הלשון. במקום כל זאת, יראו לו את כל מוסדות גיטסהד, אשר לא נוסדו מעולם, את כל התוצאות המשובחות של כולל גיטסהד, שלא הגיעו לדרגות בתורה ויראת שמים אליהם יכלו להגיע לו היו גדלים ומתפתחים בכולל גיטסהד. ואז היו שואלים אותו "ר' דוד, היכן הישיבה? היכן הכולל?" אם אדם רגיל מסוגל להגיע לכזו גדולה, רק על ידי דבקות מוחלטת במטרה שהציב לעצמו, איך אפשר לומר שאין לנו את הכוח והפוטנציאל לזכות להצלחות והישגים כאלה? רעיון זה מוזכר פעמים נוספות בתפילת יום הכפורים: אנו קוראים במנחה את "מפטיר יונה" – מה הקשר בין ספר יונה ליום הכפורים? – ודאי נושא התשובה שנלמד מספר זה, אולם המשנה ברורה מביא קשר נוסף בין ספר יונה ליום כפור: יונה מלמד אותנו "שאין יכולין לברוח מהשי"ת" המשנה ברורה מרחיב על כך ב"שער הציון" – לפעמים אדם מתייאש בחייו, וחש שהוא אינו מסוגל להגיע למה שהוא אמור להגיע. אבל, זוהי טעות, בסופו של דבר, כל מה שהקב"ה רצה שנשמתו תתקן הוא חייב לתקן, ואם לא יעשה זאת עכשיו, הרי שיצטרך לשוב עוד פעמים לעולם הזה על מנת לתקן את נשמתו, ואם כך הוא, למה יגרום לנשמתו את כאב המיתה, 'חיבוט הקבר' וצרות נוספות? "האדם חושב כמה פעמים ליאש את עצמו שאין יכול לתקן בשום אופן וע"כ יתנהג תמיד באופן אחד, ואם יגזור עליו הקב"ה למות – ימות, אבל טעות הוא, שבסוף דבר יהיה כל מה שהקב"ה רוצה מנפשו שיתקן מוכרח הוא לתקן, ויבוא עוד פעם ופעמיים לעוה"ז ובעל כורחו יוכרח לתקן ואם כן למה לו כל העמל למות ולסבול חיבוט הקבר ושאר צרות ולחזור עוד הפעם?" מיונה אנו לומדים שיעור חשוב. יונה ניסה לברוח מרצון ה', ניסה להתחמק מהתפקיד שיעד לו בוראו, אך לא הצליח. גם לכל אחד מאיתנו יש תפקיד למלאת, אבל אנו נוטים לנסות להתחמק ממנו, מדוע? התפקיד נראה לנו מסובך מדי, וגדול על מידותינו, או אנו חושבים שלא נצליח להגיע לזה, או שמא קשה לנו לקחת על עצמנו אחריות. תהא הסיבה אשר תהא, מספר יונה אנו לומדים שאסור, וגם אין אפשרות לברוח ממטרתנו ותכליתנו. לאחר תפילת מנחה – אנו מגיעים לתפילת נעילה – שיאו של יום הכיפורים, שיאו של יום הכפרה. אולם, בשונה משאר תפילות היום, רק בתפילת נעילה – איננו אומרים וידוי בתפילת שמונה עשרה של נעילה. היכן בכל זאת אנו מתוודים בתפילת נעילה? היכן מבטאים רגשי חרטה בתפילה זו? החידושי הרי"ם זצ"ל מבאר שהמילים "למען נחדל מעושק ידינו" הן מילות תשובה וחרטה. מדוע מזכירים רק חטא זה של גניבה בתפילת נעילה ולא מזכירים שום חטא אחר? החידושי הרי"ם מסביר שאין הכוונה דווקא רק לגניבה במשמעותה הפשוטה, אלא אנו מתוודים על עצם העובדה שהקב"ה נותן לנו במשך חיינו כל כך הרבה מתנות – כסף, אוכל, מגורים, כשרונות והזדמנויות רבות לממשם, הכל במטרה לסיע לנו למלאת את תפקידנו בעולם. ומה אנו עושים? אנו לוקחים את כל המתנות האלה, ומבזבזים אותן למטרות אחרות – זה נקרא גניבה, "עושק ידינו"! לוקחים מתנות שניתנו למטרה ברורה ומסוימת, ומשתמשים בהן לעניינים אחרים. כאשר אנו מגיעים לדקות האחרונות של יום הכיפורים, לאחר עבודת היום, אנו מקווים שאכן ניקינו כבר את עצמנו מחטאינו, אבל ברגעים אלה, בשיאו של היום הקדוש בשנה, אנו גם מתחרטים על כך שלא השתמשנו בצורה נכונה במתנות שנתן לנו הקדוש ברוך הוא, ואנו מחליטים שבשנה הבאה נעשה בעז"ה את כל המאמצים להשתמש בכוחות שניתנו לנו על מנת למלאות את תפקידנו, אולם אנחנו צריכים באמת להתכוון לכך: לכל אחד בנקודה מסוימת בחייו ניתנת ההזדמנות לעשות מעשה משמעותי וחשוב עבור כלל ישראל. בדרך כלל אנחנו מפספסים את ההזדמנות, ומוצאים אלפי תירוצים מדוע איננו יכולים לעשות זאת. מפחיד לחשוב שאדם עלול לעבור את חייו תוך שהוא מפספס את הזדמנות הפז שלו להשלים את תפקידו, הוא עלול לא להבחין בכך בכלל, ולא לחוש בעובדה שחייו חסרים משהו. רק כאשר הוא יגיע למעלה, לאחר מאה ועשרים, הוא יעמוד מול אותה שאלה שאברהם אבינו, הנצי"ב ור' דוד דריאן יכלו לענות עליה: היכן אתה – אתה הרוחני, האמיתי? היכן הכוחות האמיתיים שניתנו לך? רעיון זה באמת אמור להעסיק את האדם. אדם חייב לדאוג על עצמו ולשאול את עצמו מידי פעם – "האם אני ממלא את תפקידי? האם אני מצליח להגיע ולהשיג את המטרה אותה רוצה הקב"ה ממני? כיצד אוכל לעשות זאת? במה עלי להשתפר?" מצד שני, אדם שיאמין שאכן בידו האפשרות להגיע לגדלות אמיתית, כל אחד בדרכו המיוחדת שלו – הרי שאין ידיעה מדרבנת ונותנת כוחות להמשך עבודתו מידיעה זו. עד איזו דרגה יכול אדם להגיע? כאשר הגיע הרב שך זצ"ל לביקור בישיבת "אש התורה" הוא נדהם למראה מספר גדול כל כך של בעלי תשובה – אנשים שהגיעו מרִיק, מעולם של תוהו, ובזכות עבודת קודש מסורה של כמה אנשים – נכנסו ובאו לחיים של תורה ויר"ש. היה זה עדיין כשתנועת התשובה הייתה ממש בתחילת דרכה, וקשה היה להאמין ולחזות שיגיעו ימים בהם תנועת התשובה תפרח ותשגשג. מתוך הרושם העמוק שהשפיע עליו מראה עיניו, הוא קם ונעמד לדבר: הוא ציטט את הפסוק אותו אנו קוראים בהפטרת שבת שובה: "שובה ישראל עד ה' אלקיך כי כשלת בעווניך" , ושאל - מהפסוק נשמע שהעובדה שחטאנו ונכשלנו כה הרבה בעוונות, היא בעצם הסיבה לכך שנוכל לשוב עד ה' אלוקינו, כיצד זה? מדוע זה כך? על מנת לענות על קושייתו הוא הסביר, שעד כמה שהרוע מסוגל לקלקל, הטוב יכול לתקן לפחות באותה רמה, אם לא יותר. לפי זה, אם אדם מסוגל להתרחק מהקדוש ברוך הוא כל כך, אז אין ספק בעובדה שהוא מסוגל גם לחזור אליו, ואף להגיע לרמה יותר גבוהה! בדומה לכך, אם ההסטוריה מוכיחה שבכוחו של בן אנוש להרוס את חייהם של ששה מליון בני אדם, הרי שבכוחו של בן אנוש גם להציל את חייהם של ששה מליון בני אדם! אי אפשר לדמיין לאן אנו מסוגלים להגיע בסייעתא דשמיא עם כוחותנו שניתנו לנו, אולם ברור שזה מעבר לדמיון הפרוע ביותר – אם רק ננסה להשקיע את המאמצים, ולנצל את ההזדמנויות שמזדמנות לנו בחיינו – או אפילו ליצור לעצמנו הזדמנויות כאלה, אזי נוכל להפוך כל דמיון למציאות!

YOM KIPPUR – BEING HONEST WITH OURSELVES

One of the most well-known aspects of Yom Kippur is the moving service 'Kol Nidrei', with which we begin the Holy day. The commentaries point out that, in truth, 'Kol Nidrei' is not a prayer at all, rather it is an annulment of vows. This annulment could have been enacted at any point in time. What is the reason that we annul our vows davke at the beginning of Yom Kippur? It seems that Chazal are alluding to us a very significant lesson. Yom Kippur is the day when one is supposed to undergo an intense process of self-analysis. He admits his mistakes, and undertakes to rectify them in the future. In order to do this effectively, a person must strive to be brutally honest with himself, and avoid the standard self-deceit that often cause people to stray from what they know to be the truth. In Kol Nidrei, a person stresses his concern with avoiding dishonesty through careless vows. In doing so, he implicitly acknowledges the importance of honesty and the detrimental nature of self-deceit. Accordingly, it is very appropriate to begin the day of teshuva by reminding oneself of the importance of being honest with Hashem and with oneself. There are numerous sources in Chazal that demonstrate that being dishonest with oneself is the cause of aveiros and terrible life decisions. A striking example of this phenomena is that of Lot. He made a decision to leave Avraham Avinu to live in the evil city of Sodom. Why did he decide to go there? The Torah states that it was based on financial factors - he saw that the land of Sodom was a fitting place for his crops. However, Rashi brings Chazal who say that the real reason why he went was because Sodom was an immoral place, and he wanted to satisfy his desire for znus (immorality) there. The question arises that if Chazal say that his real reason was znus, then why did the Torah say that he came for financial reasons?! The answer is that, on the surface, Lot went for the sake of his livelihood, however, the deeper, and decisive reason was znus. The Torah gives us the external reason, therefore it is revealed in the Torah. Chazal reveal the hidden reason, which is accordingly hidden in Torah shebaal peh (the oral Torah). My Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits shlita points out that even Lot himself believed that he was going to Sodom for the money. He even tricked himself as to the ultimate cause in this disastrous move. This is a prime example of how the yetser hara can deceive a person as to his motivations, thereby causing him to sin. Another example of this is that of Shaul HaMelech. Shmuel Hanavi informs Shaul that Hashem wants him to wipe out the whole nation of Amalek. After defeating them in battle, Shaul inexplicably leaves the Amaleki King Agag and some animals alive. This seems to be an obvious deviation from the word of Hashem, and yet when Shaul meets Shmuel he proudly tells him that he has fulfilled the word of Hashem. He did not even realize that he had clearly transgressed the word of Hashem and committed a terrible sin. He tricked himself into believing that he had in fact done what Hashem asked of him. These incidents demonstrate the power of the yetser hara to cause us to lie to ourselves. Indeed, it seems that all the major sins recorded in the Torah came about as a result of people deceiving themselves as to the true reason for their motivations . This is the case with regard the very first sin, that of Adam HaRishon. The sefarim write that he reasoned that he would attain a higher level of free will by eating from the fruit. However, deep down, his motivation was to gain some independence from Hashem. Self-deceit can cause us to think that we don't need to do teshuva in certain areas. There was a man who lived in the time of the Rambam. He told the Rambam that he was certain that he never committed these sins, and therefore saying the vidui constituted a lie. The Rambam answered him that there are many levels of transgression of each sin and that on a certain level he in fact committed all the sins in the vidui. Moreover, the Rambam told him that his very claim that he had not transgressed anything in the vidui was a sin in and of itself. It seems ironic that this man had worried that he was lying by saying the vidui, whereas, in truth he was deceiving himself by believing that he did not need to say it! It is quite conceivable that a person live his life oblivious of his shortcomings. He may blame all his problems on other people or circumstances, anything but his own flaws. The experience of Yom Kippur forces him to face the truth. May we all merit to genuinely return to Hashem.

Yom Kippour – Être honnête avec soi-même

L’un des passages clés de Yom Kippour est le texte émouvant de « Kol Nidré », par lequel nous entamons cette sainte journée. Les commentateurs notent qu’en réalité, « Kol Nidré » n’est pas du tout une prière, mais l’annulation de nos vœux. Celle-ci aurait pu se faire à tout autre moment. Pourquoi supprime-t-on nos vœux précisément au début de Yom Kippour ? ‘Hazal nous enseignent par là une leçon très importante. Yom Kippour est le jour où l’on est supposé procéder à une analyse approfondie de notre situation. Nous reconnaissons nos erreurs et nous nous engageons à les rectifier et à ne plus les répéter à l’avenir. Pour que cela soit efficace, l’individu doit s’efforcer d’être parfaitement honnête avec lui-même et éviter de se voiler la face (artifice répandu qui permet aux gens de s’éloigner de ce qu’ils savent être la vérité). Dans Kol Nidré, la personne met l’accent sur sa volonté de fuir la malhonnêteté des vœux irréfléchis. En ce faisant, elle reconnaît l’importance de l’intégrité et la nature préjudiciable de ce refus d’affronter la réalité. Ainsi, il est approprié de commencer le jour de la techouva en se remémorant l’importance d’être honnête avec Hachem et avec soi-même. Dans plusieurs cas, ‘Hazal démontrent que la mauvaise foi fut à l’origine d’avérot et de regrettables décisions à des carrefours pourtant capitaux. L’exemple de Loth est frappant. Il prit la décision de quitter Avraham Avinou pour vivre dans l’horrible ville de Sodom. Pourquoi choisit-il d’y aller ? La Thora nous informe que c’était pour des raisons financières – il vit que la terre de Sodom était adaptée à ses troupeaux. Cependant, Rachi cite ‘Hazal qui affirment que la réelle raison de son départ était l’immoralité de Sodom, et il voulait y assouvir son désir pour le zenout (la débauche). Si ‘Hazal disent que sa réelle motivation était le zenout, pourquoi la Thora nous affirme-t-elle qu’il y est allé pour des raisons financières ?! En apparence, Loth partit pour son gagne-pain, mais la raison sous-jacente et décisive était le zenout. La Thora nous fait part de l’aspect extérieur tandis que ‘Hazal nous révèlent la raison cachée, qui est ainsi cachée dans la Thora chébéal pé (la Thora orale). Mon rav, le rav Its’hak Berkovits chlita souligne que Loth lui-même pensait qu’il allait à Sodom pour l’argent. Il se mentit quant à la cause première de ce départ désastreux. C’est l’exemple type de la façon dont le yétser hara peut tromper quelqu’un concernant ses motivations, l’entraînant ainsi à fauter. Autre exemple, Chaoul HaMelekh. Chmouel Hanavi informa Chaoul du fait qu’Hachem voulait qu’il anéantisse tout le peuple d’Amalek. Inexplicablement, après sa bataille victorieuse, Chaoul laissa en vie le roi d’Amalek – Agag — ainsi que quelques animaux. C’est une déviation manifeste à la parole d’Hachem, et pourtant, quand Chaoul rencontra Chmouel, il lui annonça fièrement qu’il avait accompli la volonté d’Hachem. Il ne réalisa même pas qu’il avait clairement transgressé la parole d’Hachem et qu’il avait commis une faute terrible. Il se leurra à croire qu’il avait fait ce qu’Hachem lui avait demandé. Ces incidents nous montrent la force du yétser hara qui cherche à ce que l’on se mente à soi-même. En effet, toutes les fautes rapportées dans la Thora furent apparemment commises à cause des illusions que les gens se faisaient quant à leurs réelles motivations. C’est également le cas de la toute première faute, celle d’Adam Harichon. Les sefarim nous expliquent son raisonnement : en mangeant du fruit, il pourrait atteindre un plus haut niveau de libre arbitre. Mais, en son for intérieur, son but était de s’éloigner un peu d’Hachem et d’en être plus indépendant. Ce leurre risque de nous faire penser que nous n’avons pas besoin de faire techouva dans certains domaines. Un homme, à l’époque du Rambam, dit à ce dernier qu’il était certain de n’avoir pas commis les fautes rapportées dans le vidouï et que la récitation de ce texte serait alors un mensonge. Le Rambam lui répondit qu’il existe plusieurs degrés de transgression dans chaque avéra, et qu’à un certain niveau, il avait en réalité transgressé toutes les fautes énoncées dans le vidouï. De plus, le Rambam lui dit que le simple fait de prétendre n’avoir commis aucun péché présent dans le vidouï était en soi une faute. Ironiquement, cet homme se souciait du mensonge que constituerait la récitation du vidouï, mais en réalité, il se berçait d’illusions en pensant qu’il n’avait pas besoin de le dire ! Souvent, l’individu est inconscient de ses défauts. Il peut accuser les autres personnes ou légitimer ses failles par les circonstances extérieures, sans jamais blâmer sa propre conduite. Le jour de Kippour nous force à affronter la réalité. Puissions-nous mériter de revenir vers Hachem en toute sincérité.

HAAZINU - OUR APPROACH TO LEARNING TORAH

“When I call out the Name of Hashem, ascribe greatness to our G-d. ” Chazal learn out from this passuk the obligation of Birchas HaTorah . The Gemara in Nedarim makes a startling point about the severity of being lax in this mitzvo: It tells us that after the destruction of the first Beis HaMikdosh and the galus that followed, the Chachamim and Neviim did not know what was the cause of such a terrible punishment, until Hashem himself told them that it was because “they left My Torah. ” Rav explains that this does not mean that they were not learning Torah, rather that they did not make Birchas HaTorah before they would start learning . The commentaries find a number of difficulties with this Gemara . How can the Gemara attribute such severe punishments to the relatively minor sin of not saying Birchas HaTorah? Moreover, this Gemara seems to contradict the Gemara in Yoma, which states that the first Beis HaMikdosh was destroyed because of murder, idol worship, and immorality . The Maharal answers these problems in his explanation of this Gemara . He writes that it is impossible to understand the Gemara literally that they were not saying Birchas HaTorah, rather the Gemara means that they did not say the bracha with the proper intentions. He explains that when a person says Birchas HaTorah, he should focus on his great love and gratitude towards Hashem for giving him the tremendous gift of the Torah. The chachamim of the generation did say the bracha and moreover, did not merely say it out of rote, however they did not focus sufficiently on their love of Hashem when saying the bracha. He continues to explain how this subtle failing was the root cause of the terrible sins that led to the destruction of the Beis HaMikdosh. If a person focuses sufficiently on Hashem in the process of his learning then he merits to have tremendous siyata dishmaya that makes it much easier for him to avoid sin and even if he does falter, it enables him to do teshuva without great difficulty. Rav Hutner zt”l writes that this is what Chazal mean when they say that ‘the light of Torah returns a person to good’. However, if he does not connect to Hashem through his learning then he loses that special siyata dishmaya and if he falters he is far more likely to become trapped in a downward spiral of sin . Based on this explanation we can resolve the contradiction between the Gemaras in Nedarim and Yoma. The Beis HaMikdosh was destroyed because of the terrible sins enumerated in Yoma .However the failure to say Birchas HaTorah with the proper attitude was the root cause that enabled the deterioration of the Jewish people to the point where they were sinning so greatly. Because they did not connect to Hashem properly they lost siyata dishmaya and consequently fell prey to the powerful temptations of the yetser hara. The Maharal offers a fascinating and somewhat surprising explanation of the reasons why a person may fail to show the proper love of Hashem in his Birchas HaTorah. He argues that it is impossible to love two entities at the same time, and consequently focusing on love of one thing will reduce the focus of the love for something else. Based on this, he writes that there are two possible ‘loves’ that one can express when saying Birchas HaTorah, love of Hashem or love of the Torah, and that it is not possible to feel love for both at the same time! When a person says this bracha he is more likely to express his love for the Torah more than his love for Hashem! He warns that, “one must be very careful that he make the blessing on the Torah with all his heart and soul. ” This explanation of the Maharal may seem to contradict the approach of Rav Chaim Volovzhin zt”l in Nefesh HaChaim. He emphasized that when one learns Torah they should not be thinking lofty thoughts about Hashem, rather they should delve as deeply as possible into the Torah that they are learning. He argued that this approach is the optimal way through which a person can become close to G-d. The Maharal’s distinction between love of Hashem and love of Torah seems to clash with the Nefesh HaChaim’s emphasis on Torah as opposed to thoughts of Hashem. However, on deeper analysis it seems that there is no disagreement; the Maharal did not say that a person should focus on his love of G-d during his learning. Rather before he begins to learn and says Birchas HaTorah, then he should be careful not to lose focus of G-d. The Nefesh HaChaim himself makes a very similar point with regard to one’s attitude before learning. He writes, “whenever one prepared himself to learn, it is proper for him to spend, at least, a small amount of time, contemplating a pure fear of G-d with a pure heart .” He even argues that at times one should take a small break during his learning in order to rekindle his yiras Hashem . Thus, it seems that there is agreement amongst these two Gedolim that before a person learns, he must be very careful not to lose sight of whose Torah he is learning. Whist with regard to the actual time of learning, there is no reason to say that the Maharal will not agree with the Nefesh HaChaim’s approach that one should not be thinking lofty thoughts about Hashem. Perhaps, this lesson, that one should not lose focus of Hashem as he begins to learn, is also alluded to in the course of the Chagim that we are presently in. Soon after spending the month of Elul, Rosh HaShana, and Yom Kippur, on intense self-growth, aimed largely at reconnecting to Hashem, we complete the cycle of the Torah and celebrate the beauty and wonder of Torah on Simchas HaTorah. The preparation leading up to Simchas HaTorah can help us adapt the correct focus in our learning - to increase our love and fear of Hashem.

ROSH HASHANA - WHAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO US?

We all know that the main Avoda of Rosh Hashana is to mamlich Hashem - to accept Him as King over us. But what does this mean? On one level it means to recognise that He is all-powerful and has total control over the world. But there is another very important aspect to being Mamlich Hashem. The Gra notes that with reference to non-Jews Hashem is called a Moshel, whereas with regard to Jews He is called a Melech. A Moshel is a dictator who has complete power but is not loved by his subjects because they perceive that he is not the source of good for them. The goyim see Hashem as a ruler who may be powerful but they would prefer that He not interfere with their lives. In contrast, a Melech is a ruler who we accept with love over us because we recognise that He is the source of all goodness - the Jewish people are supposed to have this attitude to Hashem’s kingship. In order to properly mamlich Hashem we must recognise that He and He alone is the ONLY source of meaning and happiness. The antithesis of this is the negative mitzvo of not following after other gods. This is not limited to not worshipping idols, it also requires that we acknowledge that there is no other source of our well-being other than Hashem. If a person believes that there is any other factor in his life that is independently significant to his happiness then he transgresses the mitzvo of not following other gods. There are numerous possible ‘alternative’ sources to attributing our well-being, including money, physical pleasure, material attainment, honour, or even ourselves . A person can say he believes in G-d but if he acts as though any of these factors provide him with any happiness to the exclusion of Hashem, then he cannot properly make Hashem King . The extent to which we recognise that doing ratson Hashem is the only key to success has a great effect on our shemiras hamitzvos, both avoidance of lavim and performance of positive mitzvos. With regards to lavim, my Rebbe, Rav Yitzchak Berkovits Shlita suggests that the shoresh of many aveiros is a belief that there are other ways of succeeding in life apart from keeping the Torah. For example, a person may be faced with the opportunity to gain financially by doing something which is halachically highly questionable; The outcome of his decision whether to do the issur or not may well be based on his emuna - if he really believes that Hashem is the only key to goodness then he will refrain from doing something that Hashem tells him not to do. But, if, deep down, he feels that there is another way, apart from shemiras hamitzvos, in which a person can succeed, such as cheating in financial areas, then he will likely succumb to the temptation. Another example is when a person is put in a situation where he could speak lashon hara, if he has a clear realisation that doing so, will, ultimately cause him only pain, then he will not do so. But if, b’shaas maaseh he feels that telling over this piece of gossip will give him pleasure, then he will do so. Of course, a person may not be consciously making such cheshbonos, but deep down they are probably the shoresh of the rationalisations that a person makes when he sins. The more a person can mamlich Hashem, that is, to recognise that He is the ONLY source of happiness, then he will be more successful in his avoidance of doing aveiros because he will recognise that doing them would ultimately not provide him with any real happiness. The same concept applies for performance of positive mitzvos: it is discussed by Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l . He asks; the Gemara states that there is no reward for mitzvos in Olam Hazeh - this means that a spiritual act such as a mitzvo cannot be sufficiently rewarded by anything in Olam Hazeh. Yet, Chazal also teach us that reshaim receive the reward for their mitzvos in Olam Hazeh - how can they be satisfactorily rewarded by this-worldly pleasures? He answers that the reward a person receives for a mitzvo is no more than the value he himself attributes to that mitzvo. Therefore, a rasha, who sees physical pleasures as the source of his fulfillment will be rewarded with just that for his mitzvos. When the Gemara says that there is no reward in this world, it means that a mitzvo done by a person who has an appreciation of the spiritual pleasures cannot be rewarded with the transitory pleasures of this world. Based on this, we can gain a greater understanding of the importance on Rosh Hashana of recognising that Hashem is the only source of true happiness: We are judged on this day according to how many mitzvos we have fulfilled against the number of aveiros that we have committed. However, the Rambam in Hilchos Teshuva writes that each mitzvo has a different potency based on a number of factors, one of the most important being the intentions behind the mitzvo. If a person’s sheifos are largely for this-worldly pleasures then this will surely effect his shemiras hamitzvos; There will be occassions where he will refrain from performing a mitzvo in order to satisfy his desires. Rav Shmuelevitz gives the example of a ben Torah stopping learning in order to earn some money. He is demonstrating that the mitzvo of Talmud Torah is worth less than the amount of money he could gain. Thus, even when he does perform the mitzvo, it is tainted by his underlying attitude that it is worth less than other forms of pleasure such as gaining money. The alarming consequence of this is that the reward he will receive for his mitzvos will only be equal to the value that he himself ascribed to the mitzvo. Thus, it is also apparent in our performance of positive mitzvos, that the extent to which we acknowledge that only Hashem is the source of goodness and that doing His ratson is the only way to succeed in life, bears a great effect on how we emerge from the din of Rosh Hashana. Rav Yissochor Frand Shlita tells a frightening story that adds another dimension to the idea that a the reward a person receives is directly related to what is important to him. The Chiddushei Harim zt”l once travelled with a man on his carriage that was pulled by two horses. After a few miles, one of the horses died, causing great distress to its owner. A few miles later, the other horse also died. The owner was so distressed at the loss of his horses that meant so much to him that he sat crying for a long time until he cried so much that he died. That night, the Chiddushei Harim had a dream; in that dream he saw that the man who had died, received Olam Haba. But what was his Olam Haba? A lovely carriage with two beautiful horses. This story teaches us that our Olam Haba is created by what we value in Olam Hazeh - for this man, the most important thing in his life was his horses and carriage, so that was what he got for eternity. One may ask, it does not seem to be so bad for a person to receive in Olam Haba that which a person cherishes so much in Olam Hazeh. Rav Frand answers this question. He says that when he was a young child he always wanted a slingshot with which to play with but his parents refused. Imagine if, at the time of his wedding, his parents would come to him and say, “here is the slingshot that you always wanted!” As a child, the slingshot was valuable to him, but now he has grown out of it. So too, we may strive to acquire various pleasures in Olam hazeh, such as money or kavod, believing that they will provide us with contentment. But when we arrive in Olam Haba we will see the truth of the words of Mesillas Yesharim: “everything else [apart from closeness to Hashem] that people believe are good is nothing but emptiness. ” In the Olam Haemes, we will see with perfect clarity, how meaningless are those things that we put so much energy into acquiring in this world. We spend much of Rosh Hashana in tefilla - those tefillas repeatedly emphasise how Hashem is our King. When we say these words again and again on the day, let us remember what they mean: that Hashem is a loving King who is the source of all good, if we can internalise that then we can emerge from Rosh Hashana triumphant. Kesiva v’chasima tova.