1. Why is it a mitzva to use a deprecating epithet for an individual whose persona declares that he is an oved avoda zara, i.e., a sheigitz or shikseh?
2. Proof that it is a greater miracle to overcome natural disasters than to overcome enemy armies. How does this apparently contradict a tefilla we say on weekdays.
3. Two examples of the dangers of sudden success.
4. The explanation for why Americans don’t realize how blessed they are to live in this wonderful country.
5. The Ohr Hachaim says that the word Vehayah, for example in the beginning of our parsha, והיה עקב תשמעון, indicates simcha. There is a Vehayah in the parsha that seems to completely contradict this.
6. How many times did Moshe Rabbeinu go up to Har Sinai in this parsha, and how long did he spend there in total?
7. What was the name of the craftsman who made the first Aron Kodesh
8 Where do we find a hint that the breaking of the first luchos was preordained.
9. Who wrote the second Luchos?
10. Where do we see that a Gadol BaTorah is a person you should get a Bracha from?
11. Where do we find that Hashem spoke to Aharon directly, not through Moshe.
12. We are told that we should make at least one hundred brachos every day. Do women have this mitzvah?
1. Why is it a mitzva to use a deprecating epithet for an individual whose persona declares that he is an oved avoda zara, i.e., a sheigitz or shikseh?
7:9,
וְלֹא־תָבִ֤יא תֽוֹעֵבָה֙ אֶל־בֵּיתֶ֔ךָ וְהָיִ֥יתָ חֵ֖רֶם כָּמֹ֑הוּ שַׁקֵּ֧ץ תְּשַׁקְּצֶ֛נּוּ וְתַעֵ֥ב תְּֽתַעֲבֶ֖נּוּ כִּי חֵ֥רֶם הֽוּא
As explained by Rashi in Shabbos 83b, based on AZ 46a,
יכול לא לשבח ולא לגנאי ת"ל שקץ תשקצנו ותעב תתעבנו כי חרם הוא הא כיצד היו קורין אותה בית גליא קורין אותה בית כריא עין כל עין קוץ
ושקץ תשקצנו לאו לשון שרץ ממש הוא אלא עיקר קרא לכנות לה שם לגנאי אתא:
2. Proof that it is a greater miracle to overcome natural disasters than to overcome enemy armies. How does this apparently contradict a tefilla we say on weekdays.
7:22
וְנָשַׁל ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֶת הַגּוֹיִם הָאֵל מִפָּנֶיךָ מְעַט מְעָט לֹא תוּכַל כַּלֹּתָם מַהֵר פֶּן תִּרְבֶּה עָלֶיךָ חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה.
You see that while Hashem told them that they would easily overcome the armies of Canaan, it would take greater zechusim to overcome the animals that would overrun the land.
In Tachanun, Dovid Hamelech asked that he be punished not by the hand of man, but instead some natural disaster.
To explain the difference, I remember Reb Moshe emphatically telling me that in war, there is no teva. That being the case, it makes sense that a miraculous victory in battle is only a difference in degree, not in kind. I think the same can be said about plagues, that they are directly in the hands of Hashem, and there is no real "natural course of events." On the other hand, animals are part of teva, and a change in their behavior is literally shinui hateva, akin to Krias Yam Suf.
Gary Schreiber said that the enemies of Klal Yisrael were resha'im and deserved their fate. Animals are simply doing what they were created to do and can not be blamed for their behavior when there is a great change in their environment.
3. Two examples of the dangers of sudden success.
7:22
וְנָשַׁל ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֶת הַגּוֹיִם הָאֵל מִפָּנֶיךָ מְעַט מְעָט לֹא תוּכַל כַּלֹּתָם מַהֵר פֶּן תִּרְבֶּה עָלֶיךָ חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה.
6 :10-12
וְהָיָה כִּי יְבִיאֲךָ ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֶל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ לְאַבְרָהָם לְיִצְחָק וּלְיַעֲקֹב לָתֶת לָךְ עָרִים גְּדֹלֹת וְטֹבֹת אֲשֶׁר לֹא־בָנִיתָ׃
וּבָתִּים מְלֵאִים כׇּל־טוּב אֲשֶׁר לֹא־מִלֵּאתָ וּבֹרֹת חֲצוּבִים אֲשֶׁר לֹא־חָצַבְתָּ כְּרָמִים וְזֵיתִים אֲשֶׁר לֹא־נָטָעְתָּ וְאָכַלְתָּ וְשָׂבָעְתָּ׃
הִשָּׁמֶר לְךָ פֶּן־תִּשְׁכַּח אֶת ה' אֲשֶׁר הוֹצִיאֲךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם מִבֵּית עֲבָדִים׃
4. The explanation for why many Americans don’t realize how blessed they are to live in this wonderful country.
8:3
וַיְעַנְּךָ וַיַּרְעִבֶךָ וַיַּאֲכִלְךָ אֶת הַמָּן אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָדַעְתָּ וְלֹא יָדְעוּן אֲבֹתֶיךָ לְמַעַן הוֹדִעֲךָ כִּי לֹא עַל הַלֶּחֶם לְבַדּוֹ יִחְיֶה הָאָדָם כִּי עַל כָּל מוֹצָא פִי יְהוָה יִחְיֶה הָאָדָם.
When you are born lucky, you don’t appreciate how lucky you are. That is why Hashem made us so hungry before giving us the Mann- so that we would realize what a treasure Hashgacha Pratis and the Mann were.
5. The Ohr Hachaim says that the word Vehayah, for example in the beginning of our parsha, והיה עקב תשמעון, indicates simcha. There is a Vehayah in the parsha that seems to completely contradict this.
8:19
והיה אם שכוח תשכח את ה' אלוקיך והלכת אחרי אלהים אחרים
Possible answers: Rav Chaim Kanievsky: The Vehayah there is that even though the sins are so bad that Hashem will not want teshuva, they will do teshuva anyway and be brought back.
Also R Ch K: Or that the worst part of the sin is that their conscience won’t bother them- the Vehayah refers to their happiness in sinning.
Reb Tzadok: the joy of kedusha is heightened by the awareness of the existence of its opposite.
6. How many times did Moshe Rabbeinu go up to Har Sinai in this parsha, and how long did he spend there in total?
3, and 120 days. 9:18
7. What is the name of the craftsman who made the first Aron Kodesh
Moshe. 10:1
וָאַעַשׂ אֲרוֹן עֲצֵי שִׁטִּים וָאֶפְסֹל שְׁנֵי־לֻחֹת אֲבָנִים כָּרִאשֹׁנִים וָאַעַל הָהָרָה וּשְׁנֵי הַלֻּחֹת בְּיָדִי׃
Moshe made this aron before getting the second luchos. Betzalel only made his aron after Moshe came down with the second luchos. This is clear in the simple meaning of the pesukim. The Aron of Moshe was just wood. The commandment to Betzalel to make the Aron only was given after Moshe came down with the second luchos. The Aron of Moshe was without any doubt separate from what Betzalel later made.
8. Where do we find a hint that the breaking of the first luchos was pre-ordained.
From the fact that Moshe was only commanded to make a box to hold the second luchos, but not for the first. (Ramban)
9. Who wrote the second Luchos?
Hashem. Do not pay attention to any Medrashim or drashos that say not like this. 10:1-2 and 4
בָּעֵת הַהִוא אָמַר יְהֹוָה אֵלַי פְּסׇל־לְךָ שְׁנֵי־לוּחֹת אֲבָנִים כָּרִאשֹׁנִים וַעֲלֵה אֵלַי הָהָרָה וְעָשִׂיתָ לְּךָ אֲרוֹן עֵץ׃
וְאֶכְתֹּב עַל־הַלֻּחֹת אֶת־הַדְּבָרִים אֲשֶׁר הָיוּ עַל־הַלֻּחֹת הָרִאשֹׁנִים אֲשֶׁר שִׁבַּרְתָּ וְשַׂמְתָּם בָּאָרוֹן׃
וָאַעַשׂ אֲרוֹן עֲצֵי שִׁטִּים וָאֶפְסֹל שְׁנֵי־לֻחֹת אֲבָנִים כָּרִאשֹׁנִים וָאַעַל הָהָרָה וּשְׁנֵי הַלֻּחֹת בְּיָדִי׃
וַיִּכְתֹּב עַל־הַלֻּחֹת כַּמִּכְתָּב הָרִאשׁוֹן אֵת עֲשֶׂרֶת הַדְּבָרִים
10. Where do we see that a Gadol BaTorah is a person you should get a Bracha from?
10:8
בָּעֵת הַהִוא הִבְדִּיל ה' את שֵׁבֶט הַלֵּוִי לָשֵׂאת אֶת־אֲרוֹן בְּרִית ה' לַעֲמֹד לִפְנֵי ה' לְשָׁרְתוֹ וּלְבָרֵךְ בִּשְׁמוֹ עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה׃
וּלְבָרֵךְ בִּשְׁמוֹ can’t be Birkas Kohanim, because then it’s only the regular Leviim. לָשֵׂאת אֶת אֲרוֹן בְּרִית ה can’t be carrying the Aron, because then it’s not the Kohanim. It must refer to the dedication of Shevet Levi to a life of study of Torah. From here you see that if you need a bracha, go to someone whose life is dedicated to the study of Torah. (Netziv in Haamek Davar here, and Gemara BB 116a-
דרש ר' פנחס בר חמא כל שיש לו חולה בתוך ביתו ילך אצל חכם ויבקש עליו רחמים)
11. Where do we find that Hashem spoke to Aharon directly, not through Moshe.
10:9
עַל־כֵּן לֹא הָיָה לְלֵוִי חֵלֶק וְנַחֲלָה עִם אֶחָיו ה' הוּא נַחֲלָתוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר ה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ לוֹ׃
12. We are told that we should make at least one hundred brachos every day. Do women have this mitzvah?
The Gemara derives this from 10:12,
וְעַתָּה֙ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל מָ֚ה ה' אֱלֹהֶ֔יךָ שֹׁאֵ֖ל מֵעִמָּ֑ךְ כִּ֣י אִם־לְ֠יִרְאָ֠ה אֶת ה' אֱלֹהֶ֜יךָ
as if מה were really מאה. There is no reason to think that the word ישראל would refer only to men. (See Piskei Teshuvos 46:9)
However, since (even if it is an obligation instead of something to try to do) it is a din derabanan, it is impossible to know what the original takana was, and you can't prove much from the asmachta Chazal use. All but one of the poskim who talk about it assume that the takana was not intended for women for varying reasons. The only exception that I know of is Rav Ovadia Yosef in his Yabia Omer who says that the takana applies to women no less than men.
To highlight a halakhah lemaaseh point about #1: notice that it means it is assur to call a Muslim a disparaging kinui (except perhaps the son'ei Yisrael among them, for other reasons) and problematic when the person is Christian or even a literate Buddhist or Hindu. (English speaking members of those latter two religions will know enough to know they don't really have multiple gods. The less literate are worshipping multiple made-up "partzufim" as if they were distinct deities.)
ReplyDeleteBizman hazeh this din has rather limited application, as we aren't likely to encounter too many actual ovedei AZ.
You're right, it would somehow not make sense to call a Muslim a sheigitz or shiksa. There is no lack of appropriate pejoratives, but that is not one.
DeleteAs for Buddhists and Hindus, I assume the expression מנהג אבותיהם בידיהם means that they don't really believe it. I think the vast majority are serious ovdei avoda zara to the point of mesirus nefesh.
I think we can be more favorable towards Hindus and Buddhists. As you point out, the masses are just doing what their culture does, without thinking about it.
DeleteBut the educated class, anyone fluent in English, for example, are taught that there is One Divinity, and each of the gods are different perspectives, appearances and ways of relating to the One.
Pew found (as-of 2021) that 29% of self-identifying Indian Hindus believe there is one god and another 61% believed in "there is only one God with many manifestations".
So we may be in the same quagmire or "are they really polytheists?" as we have with trinitarian Christians
That's an interesting take on מנהג אבותיהם בידיהם, that the common man, who doesn't think deeply into his beliefs, doesn't count- even though they are doing exactly what their ancestors did for thousands of years. Because the educated people have taitched opp their tradition to be monotheistic, the whole enterprise loses its din avoda zara. Interesting!
DeleteFor #5 I would suggest that the fact that the הליכה אחר אלהים אחרים comes out of שכחה rather than a conscious and determined decision is itself a cause for some degree of happiness, despite its obvious horrific consequences.
ReplyDeleteI like this endeavor because first, almost every answer is correct but debatable, and that's good. Second, it helps people see things they would otherwise glide over, including me. For example: I just realized that I don't really know what it means, אם שכח תשכח את ה' אלהיך. Does it really mean a simple loss of interest in teaching and learning leading to the nation forgetting what it says? Like the difference between בחוקותי תלכו and בחוקותי תמאסו, namely, that you won't be osek batorah? So when it says עקב לא תשמעון בקול ה' אלהיכם it means because lemaiseh, you have no idea?
ReplyDeleteבאיגרת תימן כתב הרמב"ם "אחרי ישו קם המשוגע שחקה את מבשרו, שכן הוא סלל לו את הדרך. אבל הוא הוסיף את המטרה הנוספת של השגת שלטון והַכְנָעָה (טאלב אל-מולק; רדיפת ריבונות) והוא המציא את מה שהיה ידוע (האסלאם)"
ReplyDelete