 |
Parshat
Vaera |
 |
|
|
Parshat
Vaera |
|
A Student Publication of the Torah Academy of Bergen County
Parshat Vaera Rosh
Chodesh Shevat 5763
January 4, 2002
Vol.12 No.13
In This Issue:
Rabbi Moshe Stavsky
Jerry Karp
Aaron Koolyk
Moshe Schechter
Halacha of the Week
Rabbi
Howard Jachter
Hope for the Future
by Rabbi Moshe Stavsky
Parshat Vaera begins with Hakadosh Baruch Hu instructing Moshe to tell Bnai
Yisrael that he will take them out of the slavery of Mitzrayim and bring them to
Eretz Yisrael. Immediately following this we are told “Velo Shamu El Moshe
Mikotzer Ruach Umayavoda Kasha,” meaning, “they did not listen to Moshe due to
shortness of breath and hard work.”
Although the Torah tells us explicitly why Bnai Yisrael didn’t listen to Moshe’s
message, the commentators explore whether this constituted a lack of Bitachon on
the part of the nation or not. Some are of the opinion that it merely reflects
a difficult situation, which made it almost impossible for Bnai Yisrael to
believe what Moshe was telling him.
Rav Meir Simcha of Dvinsk, in his commentary Meshech Chochma, makes an
interesting comment on the reaction of Bnai Yisrael. Moshe makes two points in
his statement to the Nation. Firstly, Hashem will redeem Bnai Yisrael and
rescue them from slavery. Secondly, they are told that Hashem will bring them
to the land promised to their forefathers, Eretz Yisrael. The Meshech Chochma
explains that while the first point made by Moshe resonated with Bnai Yisrael,
the second Havtacha was beyond what they could deal with at the time. As slaves
in Mitzrayim, the most basic need of the Nation was attaining freedom. To speak
to them about becoming a great Nation in a land flowing with milk and honey was
beyond their immediate aspirations and therefore seen as unattainable. In fact,
the Meshech Chochma suggests somewhat tongue in cheek, that immediately
following this exchange Moshe is instructed by Hashem to speak only of leaving
Egypt and not mention the next part of the plan. Given the situation of the
moment, it was not an idea that Bnai Yisrael could relate to.
Certainly we can understand the logic of this point of view. It would be
foolish to speak with a high school student about taking honors courses and
receiving enrichment if that same student is coming to school hungry or not
having his other basic needs met. To do so would be unhelpful and depressing.
We must then ask why Hakadosh Baruch Hu instructed Moshe to relate this to Bnai
Yisrael in the first place. Why was it important for them to hear the full plan
at a time whne they had more pressing needs facing them?
Perhaps we can suggest that although a goal seems unattainable and even
irrelevant at the time, it’s essential that we recognize that goal seems
unattainable and even irrelevant at the time, its essential that we recognize
that goal and realize its importance. This informs and gives added meaning to
the more basic steps which can now be seen as part of a greater picture. In
this was it is certainly not irrelevant.
Unfortunately, the
situation facing Medinat Yisrael in the past two years can give way to
diminishing aspirations. Instead of dreaming of Am Yisrael, building Eretz
Yisrael Al Pi Torat Yisrael, we dream of being able to walk the streets of
Yerushalayim and travel on buses safely. Instead of dreaming about spiritual
growth for our children when they go off to study in Israel, we hope and pray
that they stay safe and out of harms way. Although we clearly must deal with
the basic needs threatening by our present situation, it is imperative that we
don’t loose sight of the lofty dreams and aspirations of Tzion and a Geula
Sheleima.
TITLE ME
by Jerry Karp
In Parshat Vaera, 6:6, Hashem says that He will redeem
Bnai Yisrael “Bizroa Netuya,” – “with an outstretched arm.” This phrase is
usually used in conjunction with the phrase, “Biyad Chazaka,” “with a strong
hand.” However, in this Pasuk, the latter phrase is missing.
The Haaymek Davar explains that each phrase has a specific connotation. He
quotes the passage found in the Haggada which says that “Bizroa Netuya”
signifies “Cherev,” the sword, while “Biyad Chazaka” signifies “Dever,” the
plague. By the Maka of Dever, it says that the “hand of Hashem” will strike the
cattle of Egypt. From this, the Haggada derives that “Biyad Chazaka” signifies
Dever. The Haaymek Davar explains that this “Yad Chazaka,” which implemented
the Dever, was an instrument of force. However, the redemption of Bnai Yisrael
from Egypt did not require force, since all of Bnai Yisrael were willing to
leave. Therefore, the “Yad Chazaka” is not mentioned by the final redemption.
However, the “Ziroa Netuya” had to be mentioned. The Haaymek Davar explains
that if Pharo had been able to discuss the matter with his advisors, he would
ultimately have decided to kill all of Bnai Yisrael. After all, Hashem was
plaguing his people because he would not let Bnai Yisrael go. If Pharo killed
all of Bnai Yisrael however, there would no longer be a reason to plague all of
Egypt. To prevent Pharo from considering this option, while Hashem was
constantly sending Makot against the people of Egypt, He was also killing
Pharo’s advisors, in between the actual Makot. In this way, Pharo never
actually contemplated this solution that would have had dire consequences for
Bnai Yisrael. The phrase “Bizroa Netuya,” representing the sword, denotes this
strategy.
In addition, the Haaymek Davar may also be answering the famous philisophical
question regarding the story of Yetziat Mitzrayim. Many ask, “How is it
possible that Hashem could have coerced Pharo into doing His will by ‘hardening
his heart?’ Is this not a violation of Bechirat Chofshit?” However, the
Haaymek Davar seems to explain that this “hardening of heart” does not mean
that Hashem did not allow Pharo to think about letting Bnai Yisrael out of
Egypt. Rather, it means that Hashem did not allow for Pharo’s contemplation of
the matter, which would have led him to kill all of Bnai Yisrael. Had Hashem
not implemented this plan, Bnai Yisrael would never have been allowed to leave.
Hashem’s “Ziroa Netuya” caused the redemption of Bnai Yisrael.
TITLE ME
by Aaron Koolyk
The opening Pesukim of the Parsha speak about the Brit between Hashem and
the Avot. It seems that after four hundred years of being in Egypt, Bnai
Yisrael will automatically be saved without having to do anything to initiate
the Geula. However, maybe it is not so simple, and perhaps really Bnai Yisrael
have to start the process.
Parshat Shemot ends with Moshe receiving two commandments from Hashem. The
first was to notify Bnai Yisrael that Hashem will bring them to Eretz Yisrael,
while the second was and to demand that Pharo let Bnai Yisrael go to the Midbar
for three days to worship Hashem. Bnai Yisrael were very happy about this until
Pharo added to their work, which made them complain to Moshe that he just made
things worse for them. In the beginning of Vaera Hashem responds to this
complaint by reminding Moshe of the Brit and giving him a third commandment of
telling Bnai Yisrael “I am Hashem and I will take them out…”(6:6). This third
commandment, can not simply be for reassurance, as Bnai Yisrael “did not listen
to Moshe” (6:9) so it must have some greater significance.
To understand the extra significance the Pesukim must be analyzed. Bnai
Yisrael’s rejection (of Moshe’s third commandment) is stated as “Velo Shamu El
Moshe” (6:9). “Velo Shamu” can be translated in a number of ways. It can mean
they did not hear (physically), they didn’t understand, they didn’t believe or
they didn’t obey. The first two (hear and understand) don’t make sense in
context, while the third (belief) could fit. However, then the Torah probably
would have written “Velo Heeminu” as it did in 4:31. To obey (listen to
it) also seems difficult because there doesn’t seem to be anything to obey. All
Moshe told them is that Hashem will save them. A recurrence of this word a few
Pesukim later can help explain its meaning. Pasuk 12 says that even Bnai
Yisrael “Lo Shamu Eilai Veich Yishmaeini Pharo,” “they didn’t obey me, so how
will Pharo?” Clearly “Shamu” in reference to Pharo means to obey (obey Hashem’s
command to let Bnai Yisrael go). So for the Kal Vechomer of the Pasuk to make
sense the “Shamu” in reference to Bnai Yisrael must also mean to obey. (The
Pasuk only makes sense when it is interpreted as: why will Pharo obey (listen
to) me if even Bnai Yisrael don’t obey me). Thus the previous difficulty with
the translation of “Shamu” meaning “to obey” must be reconsidered; there must
really be something which requires adherence (something to obey).
The words “Ani Hashem” recurs many times in Pesukim 6:2,6,7,8. The Torah must
be implying that there is indeed a commandment not just to intellectually
recognize Hashem, but to internalize His status of “Ani Hashem Elokeichem.” The
first of the Aseret Hadibrot can be understood as this commandment to
internalize Hashem’s per and to obey any of His laws. Thus the third
commandment to Moshe was to teach Bnai Yisrael to accept Hashem in order for
them to do Teshuva and bring the Geula. This explanation is proven from
Yechezkel 20:5-8, where Yechezkel is telling some Zekeinim that Bnai Yisrael
weren’t always good before Yetziat Mitzrayim. Hashem told Bnai Yisrael that
“Ani Hashem Elokeichem” but they rebelled and said, “Lo Shamu Eilai” (there was
rebellion involved in that they did not accept Hashem internally). Finally,
Pasuk 13, Hashem’s response to Moshe can be explained. Moshe must tell both
Pharo and Bnai Yisrael to let Bnai Yisrael leave Mitzrayim. Pharo was asked to
permit Bnai Yisrael to leave, and Bnai Yisrael were told to initiate the Geula
by internalizing Hashem and doing Teshuva.
-Adapted from a shiur given by Menachem Leibtag
What's His Name?
by Moshe Schechter
Chazal point out that Hashem is described differently to Moshe than He is to
the Avot. To the Avot He is described as “Kel Shakai,” while to Moshe He is
described as “Hashem.” However, there are some places where Hashem is described
as “Hashem” to the Avot. Hashem first says in Bereishit 15:7, “I am Hashem who
took you out of Ur Kasdim to give you this land as an inheritance.” Then,
Hashem speaks to Yaakov in Bereishit 28:13 saying, “ I am Hashem, God of Avraham
your father, God of Yitzchak. I will give you and your descendants the land
upon which you lie.” Rashi explains these Pesukim by referring to a Pasuk in
Shemot 6:3, where it is written, “I was not known to you my name Hashem.” Hashem
does not say “I did not make known,” rather, He says “I was not known,” for His
true nature was unknown to them. Hashem did say His name to the Avot, but they
did not know its true meaning. According to Rashi, the meaning of “Hashem” is
to fulfill promises, and when Hashem spoke to the Avot, He had not yet fulfilled
His promises to them.
This poses another question. Why, during the time of the Avot, does Hashem not
fully demonstrate His attributes to them? Was Moshe greater than the Avot?
According to Chazal in Midrash Rabba of Shemot 6:4, not only was Moshe not
greater than the Avot, but he was even rebuked for his lack of faith. According
to the Kuzari (2:2), the fact that Moshe received greater revelation from Hashem
had nothing to do with the greatness of Moshe’s generation, rather, it was
because there were a great number of people who were doubtful of Hashem at the
time. Therefore, a greater revelation was required. The Avot, though, were a
small group of people with unbendable faith in Hashem, even throughout all the
suffering during their lives. Therefore, such a great revelation was not
necessary.
Halacha of the Week
One who is called for an Aliyah to the Torah should hold the
Torah when he recites the Bracha (Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 139:11).
Staff at time of publication:
Editor-in-Chief Emeritus: Josh Dubin
Editors-in-Chief: Shuky Gross, Effie Richmond
Publication Editors: Willie Roth, Jerry Karp
Publishing Manager: Ely Winkler
Distribution Managers: Uriel Schechter, Simcha Haber
Business Manager: Andy Feuerstein Rudin
Staff: Orin Ben-Jacob, Yehuda Goldin, Moshe Rapps, Danny Shulman, Sam Wiseman
Webmaster: Yisroel Ellman
Faculty Advisor: Rabbi Chaim Jachter
This publication contains Torah matter
and should be treated accordingly.