BO - LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES

BO - LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES Parshas Bo sees the culmination of the ten plagues which devestated Mitzrayim. However, Chazal tell us that during the Plague of Darkness, the Jewish people suffered terrible losses; Rashi cites the opinion that four fifths died and only one fifth remained . The Mechilta that Rashi quotes actually brings two other opinions as to what proportion of the Jews were killed; one holds that only one fiftieth survived, and another holds that only one five hundredth were left. Rav Shimon Shwab zt”l cites a number of problems with the literal understanding of this Medrash . Firstly, according to the two later opinions, there were 30 million or 300 million Jews in Mitzrayim before the plagues. It is very hard to fathom that there were this many Jews there. Secondly, according to all the shitas, millions of Jews were killed and consequently this single disaster was far greater than all the plagues that the Mitzrim suffered, Rav Shwab also finds this very difficult to accept. Thirdly, he quotes Rashi that they died and were buried during the darkness so that the Mitzrim would not see that so many Jews died. He argues that if we accept this Medrash literally that millions died, then surely the Mitzrim would have noticed such significant loss. Because of these problems Rav Shwab says that the Medrash should not be understood literally - rather only a relatively small number died, but had they lived they would have given birth to millions of people over several generations. The three opinions are arguing about how many descendants would have come from those that died. He suggests that perhaps all they disagree about is how to make an accounting of the survivors - one holds that we measure up to a certain point in time such as the building of the Beis HaMikdash, and another measures to a later point and consequently there are more descendants over that longer period. He compares this interpretation to the Gemara which discusses the aftermath of the murder of Hevel. Hashem tells Kayin that, “the bloods of your brother are crying out to Me from the ground. ” The Gemara says that not only Hevel’s blood was crying out - so too were all his potential descendants who would now never attain life. Kayin did not just murder one man, he destroyed millions of lives through his single heinous act. Rav Shwab cites the recent tragic example of this concept in the Holocaust. He says that the Nazis did not kill six million people, rather they murdered untold millions in the form of their descendants who will never live. So too, the tragedy of the death of the Jews in Mitzrayim was to be its long-term effect - only a small number may have died then, but over the generations, millions were lost. Rav Shwab’s pshat provides a whole new perspective to this death of the Jews in Mitzrayim. We know that the reason they died is because they were not on the level to leave Mitzrayim and become part of the Am Hashem. Rav Shwab argues that these people must have been complete reshaim to have to meet such an end. Based on the fact that they were relatively small in number and were so evil, it seems surprising that the Medrash gives so much emphasis to the long-term consequence of their death. We see from here that the loss of any Jew is cause for unlimited pain, no matter how far he is from Yiddishkeit. Moreover it is very likely that righteous people would descend from him and they are lost forever. The Torah tells us that Moshe Rabbeinu demonstrated his awareness of this concept; when he saw a Mitzri striking a Jew, the passuk says that, “he looked this way and that way but saw no man. ” Rashi explains that Moshe looked into the future to see if any convert would descend from this Mitzri. Moshe knew that killing him would have long-term consequences and acted accordingly. More recently, Rav Shlomo Heimann zt”l recognized this to a very high degree; he gave a shiur to dozens of talmidim which was characterized by his energetic style.. One day there was heavy snow and only four talmidim attended the shiur, yet Rav Heimann gave the shiur with the same energy as always. His talmidim asked him why he was putting so much effort into teaching such a small number of people. He answered that he was not merely teaching four students, rather all their future descendants and talmidim. If Chazal see such a tragedy in the deaths of a few reshaim how must we feel when we look at the situation in Klal Yisroel today? We live in a world where there are very few genuinely ‘evil’ Jews - people who purposely turn their back on Torah. There are millions of Jews who, through no fault of their own, were brought up with no knowledge of Torah and very little sense of the importance of being Jewish. Every day, dozens of Jews intermarry, and their Jewish descendants are lost forever . Some people argue that despite the intermarriage rates, we know that the Jews will never be wiped out and Mashiach will come, consequently there is no need to be so alarmed at the current trend. This attitude is severely mistaken - the reason that we should mekarev secular Jews is not to prevent the destruction of Klal Yisroel - there is no fear of that happening. But we want to give every Jew and his potential descendants the chance to remain part of Klal Yisroel so that they too can be present at the geulah. Rav Shimshon Pinchus zt"l writes that more Jews have assimilated since the Second World War than were lost in the Holocaust . six million Jews. In effect that means that untold millions who would have been theri descendants have been lost to Yiddishkeit A person who is mekarev one Jew is in fact saving dozens of souls, giving them the chance to live a Torah life. May we all be merit to recognize the true value of every Jew and his potential offspring.

BO - THINKING

BO - THINKING One of the most distinctive aspects of the Ten Plagues was the persistent refusal of Pharaoh to recognize the error of his ways and accept that the G-d of the Jews was indeed all-powerful. Miracle after miracle failed to persuade him of the veracity of Moshe Rabbeinu''s claims of being Hashem's shliach (messenger) and not merely an expert sorcerer. During the first five plagues he refused to release the Jews whilst in full control of his free will. In the second five plagues he would have sent the Jews out of Mitzrayim had Hashem not hardened his heart. The Seforno explains, however, that this does not mean that the plagues caused Pharaoh to do teshuva from a recognition of the greatness of Hashem, rather his inability to bear any more plagues would have been the cause of permitting the Jews to leave. Accordingly, Hashem's hardening of his heart gave him to strength to overcome his natural fear and make a 'reasoned' free will decision to continue to refuse Moshe's requests . Pharaoh's seemingly superhuman stubbornness aroused great wonderment in Rav Aaron Bakst, zt"l, Rosh Yeshiva of Lomza. He used to give a mussar shmueze in his home every leil Shabbos. On one occasion his talmidim entered his house and were surprised to see him walking back and forth in his room, speaking to himself, "what was Pharaoh thinking when he saw these great miracles in front of his very eyes?!" Suddenly, he stopped walking, turned to the talmidim and explained, "he did not think at all! Only through lack of thinking can a person come to ignore such great miracles without allowing them to influence him in the slightest !" This explanation of Pharaoh's illogical behavior sheds great light on why people fail to change when they experience great events. They may even recognize that miracles have occurred but they do not think about their consequences. An example of this was people's reaction to the open miracles of the Gulf War in which 39 scud missiles succeeded in killing just one person . Yitzchak Rabin acknowledged that the nation had clearly witnessed then hand of G-d. Yet, Rav Dovid Orlofsky Shlita points out, Rabin did not change his lifestyle one iota, he did not start wearing tefillin, or keeping Mitzvos. One may ask, what was he thinking?! He has clearly seen G-d's hand in protecting the Jewish people and yet he didn't change! The answer is found in Rav Bakst's explanation - he did not think! Had he sincerely reflected on the remarkable events he would have surely changed in some way. Another striking illustration of this phenomenon is told over by Rav Dovid Kaplan Shlita. Rav Chatzkel Levenstein zt"l was traveling in a taxi with a chilloni driver. The driver turned to Rav Chatzkel and told him the following remarkable story: Several years earlier, he had been traveling in the jungles of Africa with some friends. Suddenly, a snake attacked one of them, wrapping it's large body around him, causing him to suffocate. After concerted efforts to save him, they realized that there was no hope, so they told him to say the Shema before he left the world. He quickly said it and immediately the snake uncurled itself and left. This man, his life saved, was profoundly effected by this event, and gradually returned to Judaism and he was now a fully observant Jew. After hearing how this even so drastically changed the friend's life, Rav Chatzkel turned to the driver and asked him why he had not changed as a result of this miracle. The driver explained, "oh no, it didn't happen to me, it happened to him ." The driver saw a potentially life-changing event but did not change; why? because he did not think, he did not let the obvious consequences of this miracle cause him to reflect on his life direction. It is also instructive to note that his friend, the subject of the miracle, did change - sometimes an event can be so powerful that a person cannot help but think about it and allow it to influence his life. However, often, we ourselves are not the subject of the miracle and therefore it requires far more conscious effort to force ourselves to 'think' about the ramifications of events that we see and hear about. In recent history, we have been experienced events such as the war in Gaza that constitute open displays of HaShem's hands. During and soon after the war, Rabbanim told numerous stories of miracles that occurred there. Moreover, many have noted that the numerous missiles fired into Israel have had a miraculously minimal effect. Our avoda is to let such events cause us to think about our lives - to reassess our awareness of G-d in the world and in our lives; to think about what G-d is communicating to us; and to see how we can change and grow. The first stage of changing as a result of the world around us is to learn the lesson of Pharaoh and to 'think' - to let events that happen in the world at large, and that occur in our own private lives, cause us to reflect on our lives, and make necessary changes. May we all merit to 'think' about that which happens around us.

BO – THE THIRD STAGE OF REDEMPTION

BO – THE THIRD STAGE OF REDEMPTION By Yehonasan Gefen Parshas Bo describes the final three Plagues and the events that led up to the Jewish people finally leaving Egypt. Chazal tell us that there were four stages of the Redemption from Egypt. This is based on the verse in Va’eira, where HaShem tells Moshe Rabbeinu, “I will take you out (hotseisi) from the suffering of Egypt; and I will save you (hitsalti) from your slavery; and I will redeem you (goalti) with a strong arm and with great judgments. And I will take you to me (lakachti) as a nation and I will be a G-d to you…” The commentaries explain that the first two stages represented the stages of freedom from the actual slavery, whereas the third signified the actual leaving Egypt. It was at the fourth stage, that of lakachti, that the Jewish people became the ‘Am HaShem’ (the nation of HaShem). The fourth stage culminated in the Giving of the Torah , however it seems that the process of becoming the Am HaShem began whilst the Jewish people were still in Egypt. We see this from the fact that the first Mitzvos commanded to the people as a nation were given in Parshas Bo. Furthermore, the Mitzvo of the Korban Pesach (pascal lamb) that is found in this week’s Parsha, symbolized the Jewish people’s acceptance of the covenant between them as a Nation with HaShem. There is a very interesting aspect of the transition between the third and fourth stages of Redemption. This is brought out by a law that is found with regard to the Four Cups of Wine that we have on Seder night, which correspond the four stages of Redemption. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one may not drink between the third and fourth cups of wine. This implies that there is a necessity for these two cups to be connected to each other, without having anything separating between them. There are halachic (legal) reasons given for this law, however, perhaps one can suggest a hashkafic (philosophical) explanation. It is possible to say that it was essential that the fourth stage of the Redemption take place immediately after the third stage, without any hefsek (interruption) in between. Why is this the case? The third stage of goalti, saw the Jewish people completely freeing themselves from being slaves to Pharaoh. However, once they were free of this avdus (service), there was the risk that they would be left in a vacuum without having anyone to serve. This would have been a very dangerous situation, because it seems to be inherent in human nature that man needs to serve and look up to some kind of being or entity. Therefore, it was essential that the Jewish people immediately replace Pharaoh as their focus of service, with, lehavdil, HaShem. That is why HaShem gave them Mitzvos that initiated their relationship with Him even before they left Egypt. As soon as they physically left, they had already begun the process of becoming HaShem’s nation. Accordingly, the law that there can be no gap between the third and fourth cups of wine is symbolic of the fact that there could be no gap between the third and fourth stages of redemption which they correspond to. The stage of leaving the service of Pharaoh had to be immediately followed by the beginning of the service of HaShem. An important concept that can be derived from this explanation is that the desire to serve something is inherent in human nature. This has certainly been evident in the vast majority of world history. Until a few hundred years ago, the idea of atheism was virtually unheard of - everyone worshipped one, or more often, many, entities. It was self-understood that there were powers in the world who people had to serve. We see from the necessity of the immediate transition from slaves of Pharaoh to servants of HaShem, that an absence of a figure of service was very dangerous to a person’s psyche. Based on all this, it is instructive to analyze how, in more recent times, it seems that people have gladly released themselves of the yoke of service to anything. Where do we see a manifestation of this desire to not serve anyone discussed in Torah sources? The answer to this can be found in the words of Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz zt”l with regard to one particularly abhorrent form of idol worship – that of Baal Peor. There are a number of strange aspects of Baal Peor. One is its form of worship – its worshippers would perform disgusting acts in front of the idol, and the more disgusting the act, the more praiseworthy was the form of worship. Moreover, this form of worship was one that the Jewish people seemed particularly prone to, as was seen in the tragic incident at the end of Parshas Balak where thousands of Jew worshipped Baal Peor. What is the nature of this idol? Rav Shmuelevitz explains that the very essence of Baal Peor was the desire to not be subjugated to any being or power, and as a consequence of this ‘freedom’ to be able to break all boundaries that come with subjugation to a higher source. All other worshippers recognized the need to respect and honor the focus of worship, however worshippers of Baal Peor strived to uproot the human impulse of genuine service and replace it with degradation of authority. Accordingly, the more disrespectful the act, the greater the form of ‘worship’! Based on Rav Shmuelevitz’ explanation it seems that worshippers of Baal Peor were trying to uproot the natural human impulse of worship and direct it to ‘worship’ of the idea that one can do whatever they want. With this understanding we can explain an enigmatic Gemara about Baal Peor. The Gemara in Sanhedrin tells us about a non-Jewish woman who was very sick. She made an oath that if she recovered she would worship every idol in the world. She did indeed recover and kept to her oath. When she came to Baal Peor she was told how to worship it. When she heard about this, she said, in disdain, that it would have been better to become sick again rather than worship an idol in such a disgusting fashion. It is understandable that she found the form of worship abhorrent, but why was her reaction so strong? It seems that she had the desire of most people to serve a higher force. Therefore, she was willing to serve every ‘force’ in the world. However, when she heard about Baal Peor, she recognized the whole foundation of Baal Peor was in complete contradistinction to the concept of service. Its whole essence was the idea that one need not serve anyone, and one can do whatever he likes. She found this attitude so abhorrent that she preferred to be sick than involve herself in such worship. It seems that the atheism of recent centuries is also ultimately rooted in the same attitude of Baal Peor. Whilst its adherents may claim that their views are based on philosophy, there are times when they admit that the true reason for their atheism is to permit themselves to live lifestyles that were unhindered by religion. Whilst Idol worship is obviously completely wrong and greatly criticized by the Torah, a number of Torah thinkers have noted that atheism is both more disdainful and more dangerous than idol worship. One reason for this is that someone who worships idols at least recognizes the need to serve something. Therefore, it is not a big leap for him to shift from service of false gods to that of the true G-d. However, one who believes in nothing is much further away from accepting the yoke of service to anything. We noted before, that the Jewish people were particularly susceptible to Baal Peor. It seems that it was this type of worship that proved most enticing to the Jewish people – the reason for this is that the yetser hara would strive to make them feel hindered by the yoke of service of HaShem and tempt them with a belief system that allowed them to break all boundaries. We all face this test in our lives – there are numerous temptations that give us the opportunity to feel ‘free’ of the ‘burden’, however we must realize that the only source of true fulfillment is pure service of HaShem. As Chazal teach us, the only true freedom is that which comes from following the Torah.

וארא – לימוד מהצפרדעים

בס"ד וארא – לימוד מהצפרדעים יהונתן גפן לאחר מכת דם מזהיר משה רבינו את פרעה, שאם הוא עדיין מסרב להוציא את בני ישראל ממצרים, תבוא מכה נוספת: "ושרץ היאור צפרדעים, ועלו ובאו בביתך ובחדר משכבך ועל מטתך ובבית עבדיך ובעמך ובתנוריך ובמשארותיך" , פרעה הקשה את ליבו, ואכן הגיעו נחילים נחילים של צפרדעים ומילאו כל פינה בארץ מצריים, ואף נכנסו בתוך תנורי המצרים. הגמרא מספרת שמאות שנים לאחר מכן היו שלושה אנשים גדולים מאד שלמדו מהצפרדעים שנכנסו לתנורי המצרים; חנניה, מישאל ועזריא שחיו בבבל תחת שלטונו של נבוכדנצאר. נבוכדנצאר גזר שכל יהודי חייב להשתחוות לצלם בדמותו, והעובר על כך – ייכנס לתוך כבשן האש. על פי ההלכה, עבודה זרה היא אחת משלוש עבירות חמורות שאדם צריך למסור את נפשו ולא לעבור עליהן, אולם המפרשים מסבירים שם שכריעה לאותו צלם שהיה שם לא נחשבת ממש עבודה זרה . לכן, היה מותר לכאורה להשתחוות לצלם, וזה מה שאכן עשה רוב רובו של העם היהודי. אולם חנניה מישאל ועזריה למדו קל וחומר מהצפרדעים במצרים, שמסרו את נפשם ונכנסו לתוך התנורים, והחליטו שגם הם מעדיפים להיזרק לכבשן האש. הם אמרו שלצפדעים אין מצווה של קידוש ה', ואף על פי כן הן העדיפו להיכנס לתנור בוער למען קידוש שמו יתברך, קל וחומר הם, המצווים במצות קידוש ה' רוצים להישרף ולא לעבור על מצות ה'. ה"דרכי מוסר" מצביע על קושי גדול בגמרא זו. חנניה מישאל ועזריא התבססו על כך שהצפרדעים לא צוו למות על קידוש ה', לעומת זאת הם – כן מצווים בכך. אולם כאשר משה תיאר את המכה לפרעה הוא אמר בתוך דבריו בפירוש שהצפרדעים ייכנסו לתוך התנורים, ואם כך – ודאי שהצפרדעים מחויבות היו לעשות כן. הן אכן היו חייבות למסור את נפשן כדי לקדש שם שמים. כיצד אם כן הסתמכו חנניה מישאל ועזריה על הצפרדעים והתירו לעצמם להיכנס גם הם לתוך כבשן האש?! הוא מסביר שאמנם הקב"ה ציווה את הצפרדעים להיכנס לתוך התנורים, אולם לא היה חיוב להיכנס רק לתנורים, הצפרדעים יכלו לקיים את ציווי ה' גם אם היו נכנסות לחדרי השינה, למיטות, לקערות האוכל וכו'. ואם כן, כל צפרדע וצפרדע עמדה בפני הבחירה – לאן להיכנס, וכל אחת יכלה לבחור להיכנס למקום נוח יותר מתנור בוער, כמיטה נעימה, או קערה מלאה בצק. למרות זאת צפרדעים רבות כן בחרו לסכן את חייהן, למען קיום מצות ה' במלואה. מכיוון שכל צפרדע בפני עצמה לא הייתה מצווה להיכנס לאש, ובכל זאת רבות מהן עשו זאת, למדו חנניה מישאל ועזריה קל וחומר על עצמם, והחליטו להיכנס לתוך כבשן האש . ה"דרכי מוסר" ממשיך בלימוד חשוב מאד עבורינו, הנלמד מגבורת הצפרדעים במצריים. ביד כל צפרדע היה להטיל את האחריות על כל שאר חברותיה, אולם היא לא בחרה באפשרות הקלה הזאת, וכתוצאה מכך זכתה להגדיל ולהאדיר את שמו של הקב"ה בעולם. כך גם כאשר מזדמנת לאדם מצווה מסוימת לעשות, אל ינסה להתנער מהאחריות המוטלת עליו, בתקווה שיהיה מישהו אחר שיקח את התפקיד על עצמו, אלא עליו לראות ולהבין שעומדת בפניו הזדמנות פז – לקדש ולרומם את שם ה'. לצערנו, קורה הרבה שאדם רואה הזדמנויות כאלה כנטל וכעול. גישה כזו היא נוגדת לחלוטין את השקפת התורה, המעודדת מאד את האדם לקחת על עצמו אחריות כאשר נוצר צורך כלשהו. המשנה באבות כותבת: "במקום שאין אנשים, השתדל להיות איש". מילים אלה נוגעות למעשה בהתרחשויות קטנות של יום יום, כמו גם במצבים נדירים ומשמעותיים יותר. לדוגמא, מצב בו מבקשים מהציבור לסייע בעניין מסוים; אדם המחליט לקחת על עצמו מצווה זו בלי לחכות שאחרים יתנדבו – עושה בכך מעשה גדול מאד. ובמבט "גדול" יותר, רבות מאד הן הבעיות והקשיים בהן נתון העולם היהודי בימינו - במקום לחכות שיבוא מישהו וייקח את האחריות לתקן ולשפר את הטעון שיפור, אדם צריך לבדוק האם יש בידו הוא לעזור ולסיע. מספר אברכים אמריקאיים שגרו בארץ גילו יום אחד שישנם יהודים אמריקאיים רבים בארץ החיים במחסור חמור, אך מתביישים לספר למישהו על קשיהם. הם לא הסתפקו בהבעת צער ורחמים על אחיהם, אלא החליטו לקחת על עצמם את המשימה, והקימו קרן (הידועה בשם Got Chicken) המספקת צרכים בסיסיים לנזקקים. ראינו עד כמה חשוב שאדם ייקח על עצמו אחריות ולא יחכה שאחרים יעשו זאת במקומו. אם יש צורך להוסיף על כך, נעיין במה שהתרחש עם הצפרדעים במצרים. לאחר שנגמרה המכה, כותבת התורה "וימותו הצפרדעים מן הבתים, מן החצרות ומן השדות" "בעל הטורים" ו"דעת זקנים" מדגישים שלא מוזכרים הצפרדעים שהיו בתוך התנורים – עליהם לא כתוב שהם מתו. הם מסבירים שהם קיבלו שכר על כך שסיכנו את עצמם, ואכן לא מתו. רואים מכך שנטילת אחריות במטרה לקיים את רצון ה' – תוצאותיה הן אך ורק לטוב. מי יתן ואכן נדע לקחת על עצמנו אחריות למצוות, ונזכה בשכר מעשינו ובתוצאותיהם.

VA'EIRA - THE PLAGUE OF FROGS

VA'EIRA - THE PLAGUE OF FROGS By Yehonasan Gefen The second of the ten plagues was that of sefardaya, frogs. Rashi cites a Chazal that describes how this plague manifested itself; at first one single frog emerged from the river, and the Mitzrim tried to kill it by striking it. However, instead of harming it, it split into swarms of frogs each time it was struck until the frogs were so numerous that they inundated the land . The Steipler Gaon zt"l sees a very great difficulty with this Chazal; the Mitzrim surely saw that the first time they hit the frog they did not succeed in destroying it, in fact their hitting had the opposite result, causing more frogs to emerge. Yet they continued to hit the frog many times, only succeeding in filling the whole of Mitzrayim with frogs! Why did they not learn their lesson and refrain from hitting the frog after they saw its disastrous results? The Steipler answers with a principle about how the destructive midda (trait) of anger causes a person to act. When one is insulted he feels the need to avenge this treatment, therefore he responds in kind to the aggressor. The aggressor returns the insult, and he in turn feels the need to return the insult again, until both are subject to a vicious circle of fruitless retaliation and a full-blown quarrel erupts with harmful consequences for all involved. In a similar vein, when the Mitzrim were faced with this threatening frog, their instinctive reaction was to strike it, however when more frogs swarmed out of the initial frog, their anger was kindled and in response they wanted to avenge the frog by striking it again. When this failed again, they continued in their aggressive manner, continually striking the frog until their anger caused the whole of Mitzrayim to be engulfed with these pests. We learn from this explanation about the damaging nature of anger, and how it causes a person to act in a highly self-destructive manner . It is instructive to delve deeper into why a person can act in such a seemingly foolish fashion. When a person is first insulted he feels considerable immediate pleasure by reacting in kind to the person who dared speak to him in such a rude way. However, after that immediate satisfaction, he endures a longer-term backlash which results in the negative feelings that are normally generated by arguments. Logically, it would seem that he should learn his lesson, recognize the long-term damage of reacting strongly, and control himself in a similar future scenario However, this does not normally occur, rather he continually falls into the same trap. His problem is that he has habituated himself to focus on the short-term results of his actions rather than its long-term consequences. It requires great effort and self-growth to break out of this damaging mode of behavior. It seems that this problem of focusing on the immediate results occurs in many areas of Avodas Hashem with damaging results. The Medrash Tanchuma tells us a dramatic example of this phenomenon. There was a righteous man whose father was a hopeless alcoholic. On one occasion, the son saw a different drunkard lying in a sewer on the street. Youngsters around him were hitting him with stones and treating him in a highly degrading manner. When the son saw this pitiful site, he decided to bring his father to the scene in the hope that it would show the father the degradation that alcoholism causes. He brought his father to see the drunkard. What did his father do? He went to the drunkard and asked him which wine house did he drink the wine! The shocked son told his father that he brought him here to see the humiliation that this man was enduring so that his father would see how he appears when he himself was drunk, in the hope that it would cause him to stop drinking. His father replied that his greatest pleasure in life was drinking . It is very likely that the father was intellectually aware of the harm that his drinking caused him, however he was so preoccupied with the immediate pleasure it gave him, that he was blind to its overall damage. The yetser hara's strategy of blinding a person to the long-term damage of his behavior is a very significant factor in hindering one's Avodas Hashem. Whether it be in the area of destructive responses or addictions, or any number of other areas, it is essential for a person to address this issue if he hopes to fulfill his potential. It seems that the first stage of this process is to develop an intellectual recognition that the mode of action or reaction that he has habituated himself to, is ultimately detrimental. Using the example of anger, a person must recognize that the short-term pleasure he feels after shouting at his wife, child or friend, is an illusionary pleasure created by the yetser hara and in the long-term it only harms his relationships. The second stage is to anticipate situations of nisyonos (tests) before they occur so that he can intellectually prepare his response without being swept away with emotion b'shaas maaseh (at the time of the occurrence). Thus when he is insulted he can hopefully offset his natural reaction of anger with a calm countenance, based on his recognition that shouting in response will only aggravate the situation. This is no easy task, but in time one can hopefully internalize this intellectual awareness and react in a calm and measured fashion. The plague of the frogs gives us a vital insight into the destructive nature of anger and focusing on short-term results. May we learn the Steipler's lessons and control our reactions for the good.

וארא – מכת צפרדע

בס"ד וארא – מכת צפרדע יהונתן גפן השניה ממכות מצרים הייתה מכת צפרדע. רש"י מביא את דברי חז"ל המתארים כיצד החלה מכה זו; בתחילה צפרדע בודדה עלתה מן היאור, והמצרים ניסו להכות בה על מנת שתמות. אולם, במקום לפגוע בצפרדע, גרמו ההכאות הרבות לנחילי צפרדעים שיצאו מן הצפרדע הגדולה. כל הכאה נוספת הוסיפה עוד ועוד צפרדעים עד אשר התמלאה ארץ מצרים בצפרדעים. הגאון הסטייפלר זצ"ל מעלה קושיה חזקה על דברי חז"ל אלה; הרי ודאי ראו המצרים שהם לא מצליחים להרוג את הצפרדע, ולמעשה גורמים לתוצאה הפוכה, ועוד ועוד צפרדעים צצות ועולות. למרות זאת הם ממשיכים בהכאותיהם פעמים רבות, וממלאים את כל ארצם צפרדעים! מדוע לא למדו את הלקח מהפעם הראשונה ושוב ושוב המשיכו להכות בצפרדע, גם לאחר שראו את התוצאות ההרסניות של מעשיהם? הסטייפלר משיב על שאלה זו ומסביר עיקרון חשוב בדבר ההרס העצום שגורמת מידת הכעס לאדם. כאשר אדם נפגע ממישהו, הוא חש צורך לנקום בו, ולהשיב לו את כבודו האבוד – אשר על כן, הוא מגיב בצורה פוגענית אף הוא. הפוגע הראשון – משיב בעלבון נוסף, ושוב חש האדם צורך לנקום בפוגעו, כך נוצר מצב בו שניהם נתונים במעגל חסר תכלית של נסיונות נקמה זה בזה, מעגל המוביל בסופו של דבר למחלוקת קשה אשר תוצאותיה קשות ומזיקות לכל הנוגעים והקשורים בה. באופן דומה, כאשר עמדו המצרים מול האיום בדמות צפרדע העולה מן היאור, תגובתם הטבעית הייתה להכות בה, אולם, כאשר נחילים של צפרדעים יצאו ממנה, חמתם בערה בהם עוד יותר, הם נתמלאו בתחושת נקם כלפי הצפרדע, והגיבו בהכאות נוספות. גם לאחר שניסיונות נוספים אלה נדונו לכישלון, הם לא הפסיקו להכות בצפרדע, עד שכעסם וחמתם, הם אלה שגרמו לארץ מצרים להתמלא בבעל החיים הקטן והמטריד הלזה. הסבר זה מראה עד כמה מזיקה היא מידת הכעס, וכיצד גורמת היא לאדם להרוס כל חלקה טובה, ואף להזיק לעצמו. מאלף ביותר יהיה להעמיק חקור ולבדוק מה גורם לאדם לנהוג בצורה הנראית כל כך טפשית וחסרת תועלת. כאשר אדם נפגע מזולתו, הוא חש הנאה רגעית חזקה ביותר להגיב בפגיעה חוזרת כלפי האדם שהעז ודיבר אליו באופן כל כך לא מכובד. אולם, לאחר שחולפת אותה תחושה מתקתקה בת רגע של נקם, בטווח ארוך יותר הוא חש תחושה שלילית מאד המאפיינת בדרך כלל ויכוחים ומחלוקות. על פי ההיגיון הצרוף, היינו חושבים שממקרה ומתוצאותיו, ילמד האדם להבא ויכלכל את מעשיו בתבונה רבה יותר. יזכור הוא את אותה תחושה קשה ואת הנזק לטווח ארוך שהגיע כתוצאה מתגובתו לחברו, ויבכר לותר על אותו רגע מתוק של נקם, ובכך למנוע מעצמו אי נעימות נוספת שכזו. אולם, על פי רוב לא כך המצב, הוא יחזור על טעותו שוב ושוב. בעייתו של אדם זה היא שהוא הרגיל את עצמו להתמקד בתוצאות מעשיו אך ורק לטווח קצר מאד, ולא להתבונן במה שנגרם מהם לטווח ארוך יותר. נדרש מהאדם להתאמץ רבות ולהשקיע בעבודה עצמית על מנת להשתחרר מדפוס התנהגות כזה. בשטחים רבים בעבודת ה' קורה והאדם טועה ומתמקד אך ורק בתוצאות העכשוויות של מעשיו, והתוצאות קשות ומזיקות. המדרש תנחומא מביא דוגמא מאלפת לתופעה זו. היה אדם צדיק אחד אשר אביו היה מכור לשתיית יין. בהזדמנות מסוימת, ראה הבן שיכור אחר שוכב ומתגולל בתעלת ביוב ברחוב. סביבו התגודדו כמה צעירים היכו אותו באבנים, ופגעו בו באופן משפיל ומבייש ביותר. אל מול מראה מעורר חמלה זה, החליט הבן לקרוא לאביו ולהראות לו מחזה זה, בתקוה שיראה מכך האב עד כמה מושפל ובזוי מצבו של אדם שתוי. ומה עשה האב? ניגש אל השיכור, ושאל אותו באיזה בית מרזח שתה את היין! הבן הנדהם, פנה לאביו ואמר לו שהוא הביא אותו לכאן על מנת שיחזה בעומק השפלות בה עומד אדם זה, ומתוך כך יבין כיצד הוא בעצמו נראה כאשר הוא שתוי, בתקווה שכתוצאה מכך יחליט האב להפסיק לשתות. מסתבר, שהאב היה מודע בשכלו לנזק העצום שגורמת לו השתייה, אולם ההנאה הרגעית שהסבה לו השתייה שוב ושוב, היא זו שהעבירה אותו על דעתו, וסימאה את עיניו מראות בנזק הרב שבה. פעמים רבות פועל היצר הרע בדרך זו, מסמא הוא את עיניו של האדם, ולא נותן לו להבחין בתוצאות ארוכות הטווח של מעשיו. תחבולה זו של היצר מהווה גורם משמעותי ביותר המונע מהאדם לעבוד את בוראו כפי שצריך. יהיה זה בשטח של תגובה פוגעת לזולת, התמכרות לכל עניין ממכר שהוא, או בכל שטח אחר, האדם מוכרח לפעול לשינוי באישיותו על מנת שיוכל למלא כראוי את תפקידו בעולמו. השלב הראשון בתהליך זה הוא לפתח בדעתו את ההכרה בכך שהדרך בה היה רגיל לנהוג עד כה, גורמת בסופו של דבר לנזק רב. ועל פי הדוגמא של מידת הכעס, אדם צריך לקנות בנפשו את ההכרה בכך שההנאה הרגעית אותה חש לאחר שהוא מגיב בכעס כלפי אשתו, ילדיו או ידידיו, הינה הנאה דמיונית לחלוטין, תוצרתו של היצר הרע, ובטווח הארוך מעשהו רק יזיק לכל מערכת יחסים שהיא. השלב השני הינו לצפות לקראת הניסיון הבא, ולהיות מוכן טרם המקרה. כך הוא יכול לתכנן במחשבתו את הדרך בה יגיב, ולא ייסחף לאמירות ותגובות של כעס הנובעות מלהט הרגשות בשעת מעשה. כך, כאשר הוא נפגע על ידי מישהו, הוא יכול לשלוט בטבעו הרגיל ובכעס הטבעי שבדרך כלל פורץ מתוכו, וחלף זאת להגיב בארשת רגועה ושלווה, ביודעו אל נכון שתגובה של כעס רק תחמיר עוד יותר את המצב. אין זו משימה קלה כלל ועיקר, אולם עם הזמן, יכול האדם להפנים מודעות והבנה זו ולהגיב באופן רגוע, מדוד ושקול. ממכת צפרדע לומדים לימוד חשוב ביותר בדבר אופיה הקשה של מידת הכעס, וההרס הרב הנגרם מהתמקדות בתוצאות קצרות טווח. מי ייתן ונזכה להפנים את דברי הסטייפלר, ולקנות בנפשנו את היכולת למשול ברוחנו ולשלט על תגובותינו תמיד.

VA’EIRA - LEARNING FROM THE FROGS

VA’EIRA - LEARNING FROM THE FROGS By Yehonasan Gefen After the first plague of blood, Moshe Rabbeinu warned Pharaoh that if he continue to refuse Moshe’s request to let the Jewish people leave Egypt, then there would be a new plague: ”And the river will swarm with frogs; they will rise up and go into your homes, your bedrooms; onto your beds; and in the homes of your servants and your people; and into your ovens and your kneading bowls.” After Pharaoh’s refusal, the frogs did indeed swarm all over Egypt, including into the ovens of the Egyptians. The Gemara tells us that several hundred years later, the actions of the frogs who entered the ovens served as a lesson to three great men; Chanania, Mishael and Azariah. They lived in Babylon under the rule of Nebuchadnezzar. He made a decree that everyone must bow to a statue in his image, and the punishment for not doing so was to be thrown into a fire. The law states that one must give up his life rather than worship idols, however, the commentaries explain that bowing to this image did not constitute actual idol worship. Therefore, technically speaking, it was permissible to bow to the image, and most of the Jewish people did so. However, Chanania, Mishael and Azariah learnt from the example of the frogs who went into the ovens in Egypt, that they too should be prepared to be thrown into a fire. They reasoned that the frogs who were not commanded in the Mitzvo of Kiddush HaShem (sanctification of G-d’s name), nonetheless were willing to go into a burning oven for the sake of sanctifying G-d’s name. All the more so (kal v’chomer), they, who, as human beings, were commanded in the Mitzvo of Kiddush HaShem, should be willing to be thrown into the fire. The Darchei Mussar points out a great difficulty with this Gemara. The three men’s reasoning was based on the fact that the frogs were not commanded to die for the sake of Kiddush HaShem, whilst they were commanded to do so. However, Moshe’s informing of Pharaoh that the frogs would enter their ovens constituted a command for the frogs; accordingly the frogs were commanded to go into the ovens. That being the case, how could Chanania, Mishael and Azariah learn from the frogs that they should allow themselves to be thrown into a fire?! He explains that whilst HaShem did command the frogs to go into the ovens, He did not restrict the command to ovens – the bedrooms, beds, and kneading bowls were included in the list of the places where the frogs could go to. Therefore, each frog had the choice as to where they would go – he could conceivably decide that he would choose the more comfortable option of going to the bed or kneading bowl. Nonetheless, many frogs did indeed choose to risk their lives in order to ensure that HaShem’s command was fulfilled. Since each individual frog was not commanded to go into the fire and yet many of them still did so, Chanania, Mishael and Azariah learnt that all the more so they should be prepared to be thrown into a fire. The Darchei Mussar continues that we learn a fundamental lesson from the actions of the brave frogs who went into the ovens. It was possible for them to shift the responsibility onto other frogs, however they declined the comfortable option and as a result, contributed to the enhanced sanctification of G-d’s name. So too, he writes, that when a person is given the opportunity to perform a certain Mitzvo he should not seek to shirk the responsibility placed upon him by hoping that someone else will undertake the Mitzvo. Rather, he should view this as a golden chance to sanctify G-d’s name. Sadly, it is not uncommon for a person to tend to view such opportunities as burdens. This attitude seems to be fundamentally against the Torah outlook. The Torah strongly espouses taking responsibility when things need to be done. The Mishna in Avos states: “In a place where there are no men, strive to be a man.” This applies in both minor daily occurrences and less common but more significant occasions. For example, there may be a general request for people to help in a certain endeavor, it is praiseworthy to assume the responsibility without waiting for others to do so. On a larger scale, there are numerous major problems facing the Jewish world today – instead of waiting for others to take responsibility to rectify these problems, a person should see if there is anything he can do himself. On one occasion, some American Torah students living in Israel discovered that a significant amount of Americans living in Israel were living in extreme poverty but were too ashamed to tell anyone. Rather than merely expressing sympathy for these people, a few men undertook to create a new charity (known as Got Chicken) aimed at providing basic necessities for people in dire need. We have seen how praiseworthy it is to take responsibility and avoid waiting for others to do so. If any more incentive is needed, the continuation of the story of the frogs shows what happened to the frogs who went into the ovens. After the plague stopped, the Torah states: “... the frogs died from the houses, from the courtyards and from the fields.” The Baal HaTurim and Daas Zekeinim point out that there is no mention of the deaths of the frogs who were in the ovens. They explain that they were spared as a reward for their self-sacrifice. We see from here that taking responsibility to do G-d’s will brings only good. May we all merit to take responsibility and reap the rewards.