B'nos Moav. Arayos and Avoda Zara

Bilam advised the king of Midian to do something that would bring Hashem's anger upon Klal Yisrael.  It worked, and it brought about a disaster.  A plague broke out among the Jews, and the judges were told to take up their swords and slay those that had sinned.  According to Rashi, they actually went and killed people, and the numbers are beyond belief (two each for every judge,so Rashi says they killed something like one hundred sixty thousand men, out of six hundred thousand- more than one quarter of the Jewish men.  The Ramban finds the numbers so extreme that he says that because of Pinchas' intervention, the gzeira for the judges to kill was nullified.)  As terrible as it was, it would have been far worse if not for Pinchas' intervention.

וישב ישראל בשטים ויחל העם לזנות אל בנות מואב.  ותקראן לעם לזבחי אלהיהן ויאכל העם וישתחוו לאלהיהן.  ויצמד ישראל לבעל פעור ויחר אף ה בישראל.  ויאמר ה אל משה קח את כל ראשי העם והוקע אותם לה נגד השמש וישב חרון אף ה מישראל.  ויאמר משה אל שפטי ישראל  הרגו איש אנשיו הנצמדים לבעל פעור.   והנה איש מבני ישראל בא ויקרב אל אחיו את המדינית לעיני משה ולעיני כל עדת בני ישראל והמה בכים פתח אהל מועד.  וירא פינחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן הכהן ויקם מתוך העדה ויקח רמח בידו.   ויבא אחר אישישראל אל הקבה וידקר את שניהם את איש ישראל ואת האשה אל קבתה ותעצר המגפה מעל בני ישראל.   ויהיו המתים במגפה ארבעה ועשרים אלף

Pesukim and maamarei Chazal spread over the three parshios seem to give  inconsistent explanations for exactly what sin it was that precipitated the terrible punishment.  Some indicate that it was the Avoda Zara (ויצמדו לבעל פעור), while others talk of the z'nus (אמר להם אלקיהם של אלו שונא זימה הוא).

The achronim bring an interesting mesora.  They say that they have a mesora in the name of the gaon איש מפי איש עד משה רבנו- an amazing expression that we find almost nowhere outside of הלכה למשה מסיני, and certainly never where it involves something found nowhere in Chazal.  The mesora is that every avoda zara has arayos, and arayos is a necessary ingredient in every avoda zara.  According to this, Rav Steinman (Ayeles HaShachar al HaTorah) says, the kashe is not shver.  It is a false dichotomy.  Avoda Zara is Arayos, and Arayos can be Avoda Zara.

הרמ"מ משקלאוו (בס' מים אדירים על האידרא זוטא) כתב שמעתי מהגר"א ז'ל קבלה בידינו מן הגאונים איש מפי איש עד משה רבינו ע'ה שכל עבודה זרה הי' צריך דבר ערוה ולכן כתיב אצל כל ע'ז ויזנו אחרי הבעלים וקם העם הזה וזנה עכ'ל

In the Hebrewbooks copy the sefer is not called Mayim Adirim, it's called מנחם ציון.  (For those of you that never heard of the Idra Zuta, or even the Idra Rabba, it is from the Zohar in Haazinu, describing the passing of Rav Shimon bar Yochai.  Wiki articles in Hebrew and English.  For an explanation of why it has two different names, Mayim Adirim and Menachem Tzion, I direct your attention to the handwritten note on page two of the Menachem Tzion at hebrewbooks.org)

The language of the Gaon's talmid Reb Menachem Mendel in his sefer is even more clear- that arayos is not only a tool of avoda zara, but a part of its essential character.  I don't understand the discussion that leads up to this point, but he says that the reason arayos is not mentioned among the things that are makchish famaliah shel maalah is because arayos is included in Avoda Zara:

...........
והמדבר זה הוא קוצץ בנטיעוח שמפריד בין נגל׳ לנעלם והמה מהפכין ממטה לנחש ואם נותנין אות ומופת לדבריהם אזי גם האות והמופת מן המכחישים פמליא ש״מ והן עע״ז וש"ד וג׳׳ע ממש ומה דלא חשיב ג״ע נמי שא״צ כי שמעתי מאדמו״ר הגאון ז״ל שכך קבלה בידינו מהגאונים איש מפי איש עד מרע״ה שכל ע״ז צריך עבודת דבר ערוה ולכן כ' אצל ויזנו אחרי הבעלי׳ וקם העם הזה וזנה

We don't need historical support for this, but when I said it over on Shabbos, our professor of classics, Rabbi Dr. Yitzchak Resnik, said that this is well known to be the case in the classic era.  There were temples where the priestesses were mukdash to have relations with supplicants, through which a state of "holy" ecstasy would be attained.  We all are familiar with the erotic carvings associated with Hinduism as well.

Rav Schwab (in his Maayan Beis HaShoeiva) says something that relates to this.  He asks, how can it be that such a great man as Zimri could do such a disgusting thing.  Besides the fact that he was quite elderly, if you're reading this you know what a great man he must have been to be a nasi of a Shevet in Klal Yisrael, and he did something that even a prosteh person would not do, and davka with a shiksa, knowing full well what consequences he was risking.  Rav Schwab answers that the Gemara (San 63b) says

אמר רב יהודה אמר רב יודעין היו ישראל בעבודת כוכבים שאין בה ממש ולא עבדו עבודה זרה אלא להתיר להם עריות בפרהסיא

Rav Schwab says that Zimri saw that many Jews were inflamed with lust for the Moaviyos and it was that lust that drove them to do Avoda Zara, because their consciences would not let them sin.  The idea of this kind of hefkeirus of arayos was so horrible, it was so shameful, that they simply could not do the aveira.  It was only by saying to themselves that they now are worshippers of Pe'or, and zenus is the right and "holy" thing to do, that their conscience stopped bothering them!  It's not shameful, it's not horrible, it's not hefkeirus, it's our way of worshipping our god!.  They used the excuse of becoming ovdei avoda zara to kasher their irresistible taiva for zenus.  So Zimri decided that the best eitza is to remove the extreme stigma of ze'nus; to show people that even a holy and great man can give in to his desires.  Once the people would see this, then they would be willing to consort with the Moavi and Midani women without having to drop Yiddishkeit entirely.  Thus, although they would be punished for zenus with goyim, it would be a far smaller sin than Avoda Zara.  Rav Schwab says that Zimri was wrong because the sin of publicly consorting with Moaviyos and Midianos was terrible as well, and you don't solve the worse problem of avoda zara by being mattir a lesser but also terrible sin of arayos.

With the Gaon, we can enhance Rav Schwab's teretz.  Zimri's error was thinking that Arayos and Avoda Zara can be separated. But that is not true.  Arayos is a av melacha in the parsha of avoda zara; and lav davka avoda zara,- it can be minus or kefira, too, which are also in the parsha of avoda zara.  Zenus and arayos are inseparable from avoda zara.  Zimri thought it was worth it to cut off the leg to save the body.   If they don't feel so guilty about zenus, at least they won't need to throw away Yiddishkeit and adopt avoda zara to rationalize their zenus.  What he didn't realize was that he was inflaming the disease, not eliminating it.  Allowing zenus is not only a sin because of the inherent aveira of zenus, but also because it ultimately brings a person to avoda zara.

Update: Thank  you Reb Chaim B for bolstering the point with the Gemara in Sanhedrin 81b and with slight changes the Rambam 12 I'B 6:

הבועל ארמית קנאין פוגעין בו, בעא מיניה רב כהנא מרב, לא פגעו בו קנאין מהו, אינשיה רב לגמריה, אקריוהו לרב כהנא בחלמיה בגדה יהודה ותועבה נעשתה בישראל ובירושלים, כי חלל יהודה קדש ה' אשר אהב ובעל בת אל נכר, אתא אמר ליה הכי אקריון, אדכריה לרב לגמריה, בגדה יהודה זו עבודת כוכבים, וכן הוא אומר בגדתם בי בית ישראל נאום ה', ותועבה נעשתה בישראל ובירושלים זה משכב זכור... כי חלל יהודה קדש ה' זו זונה, וכן הוא אומר לא יהיה קדש, ובעל בת אל נכר זה הבא על הכותית, וכתיב בתריה יכרת ה' לאיש אשר יעשנה ער ועונה מאלקי יעקב ומגיש מנחה לה' צב-אות, אם תלמיד חכם הוא, לא יהיה לו ער בחכמים ועונה בתלמידים, אם כהן הוא לא יהיה לו בן מגיש מנחה לה' צב-אות. אמר רבי חייא בר אבויה כל הבא על הכותית כאילו מתחתן בעבודת כוכבים, כדכתיב ובעל בת אל נכר, וכי בת יש לו לאל נכר, אלא זה הבא על הכותית

The only comment I would make is that כאילו מתחתן בעבודת כוכבים is talking about specifically a kusis, in that the passuk being interpreted uses the words בת אל נכר, while the Gaon, I think, is talking about Arayos in general- צריך עבודת דבר ערוה.

But there is a Chazal brought in two places by Rabbeinu Bachaye that does relate all to Avoda Zara:  It is in his peirush on Chumash towards the beginning of Kedoshim and in his Kad Hakemach.  It says

 כל המסתכל באשה (בפני אשה) עובר משום אל תפנו אל האלילים

Still, it's not exactly what the Gaon says.  With a Chazal or not, the Gaon stands on its own merits- it's a mesora from the Geonim all the way to Moshe Rabbeinu.

Balak, Bamidbar 23:9. Not Counted Among the Nations; Am Yisrael's Exceptionalism

The Gemara (Taanis 21b) says there was a plague in the city of Sura, but Rav's neighborhood was spared. People thought it was Rav's zechus that protected them, but in a dream, they were told that they were spared in the merit of another man, a lesser tzadik.  For Rav, who was far greater, this would be insignificant.

בסורא הוות דברתא בשיבבותיה דרב לא הוות דברתא סברו מיניה משום זכותיה דרב דנפיש איתחזי להו בחילמא רב דנפישא זכותיה טובא הא מילתא זוטרא ליה לרב אלא משום ההוא גברא דשייל מרא וזבילא לקבורה

Rashi-

הא זוטר ליה לרב. נס זה קטן הוא לפי גדולת רב:

The Maharsha understands the Gemara to mean that while the zechus of the other person saved them, certainly Rav's zechus would have been doubly effective.  But the Maharsha is bothered by the Gemara, because under the circumstances, why wouldn't it have been Rava's zechus?  What mistake did the message from Shamayim need to correct?  If there's the zechus of a great tzadik and the zechus of a regular tzadik, and a neis happens, isn't it logical that they both contributed, and that, in fact, the smaller zechus was not even necessary?  It's as if you protect a city by surrounding it with a wall.  Rav's contribution to the wall was ten feet thick, and the other tzadik's one foot thick.  True, to stop this danger, you only needed the one foot, but lemaaseh, the wall was built by both of them.  So the Maharsha says that it was because when a zechus brings a neis, something is deducted from the Zechus, as Rav Adda bar Ahava had taught on the previous daf (20b) based on Yaakov Avinu's words קטנתי מכל החסדים.  In reward for Rav's great zechus, his zechus wasn't used, so that nothing would be deducted from his account.

So according to the Maharsha, of course Rav's zechus would have worked, but it wasn't necessary to tap his zechus in this case, for whatever reason.

But other mefarshim understand the Gemara to be saying that Rav's greater zechus would not have worked.  It would not have protected his neighbors.  This, of course, is thoroughly counter intuitive.  Several mefarshim step up to the plate, and I think that the best way to describe their explanations is "clever" and enjoyable.  Whether their answers are a good pshat in the Gemara or in Hashkafa is a different question.

The connection to our parsha is from the Yismach Moshe in Parshas Balak:  He brings from the Targum that the passuk הן עם לבדד ישכן ובגוים לא יתחשב means that Klal Yisrael will inherit the world- that it is eternal- and that they will not be destroyed with the wicked nations at the final judgment.  Here are the words of the Targum:

הא עמא בלחודיהון עתידין דיחסנון עלמא ובעממיא לא ייתדנון גמירא

He asks, the two seem to be redundant; if it's eternal, then we know they won't be destroyed.  He answers that the passuk is teaching the causality- because of the first, therefore the second.  In other words, if all the nations of the world were judged together, then Klal Yisrael's zechusim would save everyone, because our zechusim outweigh whatever aveiros they have.  But since we're guaranteed eternity, and can't ever be destroyed, we will not be judged together with the others.  Only those that might possibly be destroyed will be judged, and we're exempted.  So the passuk is saying that davka because we're eternal, we won't be brought up for judgment together with them, and so our zechusim won't mitigate their sins.  As a result, they will be destroyed.

He brings a lomdishe tzushtell from the Rashba brought in the Beis Yosef at the end of YD 111.  If  a basket of teruma  fell into one of two baskets of chulin, one containing 100 times as much as the Teruma which is enough to be mevatel and the other has less than 100 times, which is enough for bitul miderabanan but not mid'oraysa, we say שאני אומר- since it would be battel midoraysa either way, and it's a safek derabanan, Chazal give us the right to halachically assume that the teruma fell into the bigger basket and was battel. The Rishonim ask, but who needs שאני אומר?  There's a ליטרא קציעות rule by issurim derabanan that allows you to combine the total volume of the two baskets of chulin even though it fell into one, so it's as if it fell into one basket holding 199 measures!  The Rashba answers that since the bigger basket would be mevatel the teruma, it can't count together with the other basket.  You only can combine them if neither alone would be mevatel, so they're both relevant to the problem.  Since if it fell into the larger one the Teruma would be irrelevant, it can't be counted together with the smaller basket.  Here too: since Klal Yisrael is not subject to the same potential din, we are not relevant to the judicial issue, and won't be judged all together.

Back to the Gemara in Taanis: Since Rava was a tzadik gamur, the plague was bichlal not relevant to him.  Therefore, his zechus could not save anyone.  Only a tzadik that's not a tzadik gamur, who Might be threatened by the plague, but would ultimately be saved by his zechus, can save his neighbors.  But Rav was so great, that the plague was totally irrelevant to him, so he couldn't save his neighbors.  It's like the opposite of grading on a curve.

The Yismach Moshe is hard to find, so here it is inside.

The Sfas Emes offers two answers.
Answer One:
The people in the area did not accord Rav the honor due such a great tzadik and talmid chacham, or perhaps they were lax in heeding his words.  As a result, they did not deserve to be saved in his merit- in a sense, they had thrown away the protection of Rav's zechusim through their insufficient kavod.

Answer Two from the Sfas Emes, based on a yesod from the Chidushei HaRim in Vayeira; this answer is also found in the Malbim in Vayeira 18:24 and also in the Anaf Yosef in the Ein Yaakov from Rav Yonasan Eibschutz:  AND, our anonymous commenter tells us, the Maharil in Va'eira, presumably regarding Makkas Bechoros, though it ought to be in Bo.
Chazal say (Shabbos 33b) כיון שניתנה רשות למשחית שוב אינו מבחין בין צדיק לרשע.  But this does not apply to a Tzadik Gamur, as we see in Gittin perek Cheilek.  So, if a tzadik less than gamur is in the neighborhood, and he would be threatened by כיון שניתנה רשות למשחית שוב אינו מבחין בין צדיק לרשע, Hashem holds back the mashchis in order to save the tzadik.  But if a tzadik gamur is there, then he is not endangered by כיון שניתנה רשות.  So Hashem can send the משחית in to do his work and not have to worry about the tzadik.  Here, Hashem kept the משחית out in order to spare the local tzadik.  If Rav were the only tzadik there, though, Hashem would have spared Rav even though the others would die.  So it was only because of the lesser tzadik that the neighborhood was spared.

This is not too far from the Yismach Moshe's answer, without the tzushtell to the Rashba in Toras HaBayis.

I say with all sincerity עפר אני תחת כפות רגליהם, but לעניות דעתי הקלושה the hashkafa seems twisted.  But the lomdus is nice.

Massei, A Guest Post on the Forty Two Journeys of Bnei Yisrael

Two weeks ago, when we read Parshas Balak, I mentioned the Gemara (Sanhedrin 105b) that one should seek to do mitzvos even if he is lacking the requisite intentions, as we see from Balak.  Because Balak offered up forty two sacrifices, he merited that Rus, the mother of the monarchy of Klal Yisrael, descended from him.

לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ובמצווה אפילו שלא לשמה שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה שבשכר ארבעים ושתים קרבנות שהקריב בלק זכה ויצאה ממנו רות

I brought this up in order to lead into a conversation about the Gemara that says that a mitzva done with imperfect intentions, שלא לשמה, is also a great thing and will lead to perfected mitzvos.   What sort of imperfection is included in the term שלא לשמה?  (This is widely discussed, e.g., Brachos 17a and Tosfos there, Pesachim 50b, etc.)  Reb Chaim Volozhiner in the Ruach Chaim says that it only means that he does it for some other reason but in his heart he wishes to some day do it with a purity of intent.  This seems to contradict the Gemara that includes Balak's sacrifices under the rubric of שלא לשמה, Shelo Lishma.  One answer might be that the expression שלא לשמה as applied to Balak and Bilaam means something different than that expression as applied to anyone else, because of the unique quality of Bilaam's extraordinary but equally deviant spirituality.  But the answer we said was that Balak sincerely wanted to serve God, but he wanted to do so by supplanting the Jews.  He said that he could serve God better than the Jews could, considering their failure at the sin of the Egel.

After that discussion, Harry F asked about the significance of the number forty two, and I didn't know the answer.  He said that he seems to remember that there is a name of God that has forty two letters, and perhaps Balak's sacrifices were intended to propitiate that name of God.  Of course he is right, and it just highlights my unfortunate weakness of learning and immediately forgetting anything of that sort.  One would think that I would at least remember something so important that it explains life, the universe, and everything.  As penance, I am posting a translation of Rabbi Pinchas Friedman's dvar torah on this week's parsha (Shvilei Pinchas.)  The translation is done, as always, by my dear friend, Dr. Barry Fox.

The Holy Baal Shem Tov’s Amazing Revelation

From the Day of One’s Birth to the Day of One’s Passing Every Person
Makes All Forty-Two Journeys Made by Yisrael in the Midbar

On the upcoming Shabbat kodesh, we will read from the Torah the double portion of Matot-Masei.  This week, we would like to focus, b’ezrat Hashem, on parshat Masei.  Every year, without exception, we read parshat Masei on the middle Shabbat of the three weeks of “bein hametzarim.”  

The Gemara (Megillah 31b) teaches us that Ezra HaSofer methodically arranged the Torah readings for the entire year.  It stands to reason, therefore, that the institution to read parshat Masei on the second Shabbat of “bein hametzarim” serves a distinct purpose.  In this parsha, the Torah enumerates the forty-two journeys that Yisrael travelled in the midbar.  This teaches us that there is an intimate connection between the journeys travelled by Yisrael in the midbar and the difficult journeys we travel during all of the various exiles.  

Twenty-one Days and Twenty-one Nights Corresponding to Forty-two Journeys

Amazingly, the Maggid of Kozhnitz, zy”a, in Avodat Yisrael, states that the twenty-one days and twenty-one nights of the three weeks of “bein hametzarim” correspond to the forty-two journeys.  Here is what he writes: 

"והנה פרשה הזאת נקראת תמיד בין המצרים, שהם נחשבים כ"א יום כמו שפירש רש"י, וכ"א יום וכ"א לילות הם מ"ב, כנגד מ"ב מסעות שצריך לעבור בין המצרים בכמה מסעות לתקן הכל ולעבוד את ה', הגם שהזמן גרמא להיות עצב ונאנח על חורבן בית ה', עם כל זאת יש לחזק את עצמו ולטהר לבבו ולעבוד ה' בתורה ותפלה בשמחה, בפרט בשעת אמירת שירות ותשבחות".

This parsha is always read “bein hametzarim”—which are considered to be twenty-one days, as Rashi explains.  Twenty-one days and twenty-one nights adds up to forty-two—corresponding to the forty-two journeys that one must make “bein hametzarim,” to rectify everything and serve Hashem.  Although it is a time of sadness, during which we bemoan the churban of Hashem’s house, nevertheless one must encourage oneself and purify one’s heart to serve Hashem through Torah and tefilah with happiness—especially while reciting songs and praises.  

The Rashi he refers to concerns the words of the prophet Yirmiyahu (1, 11):  "ויהי דבר ה' אלי לאמר, מה אתה רואה ירמיהו, ואומר מקל שקד אני רואה"—the word of Hashem then came to me, saying, “What do you see Yirmiyahu?”  And I said, “I see a staff made of almond wood.”  Rashi comments in the name of a Midrash Aggadah that an almond grows and completes its development during a twenty-one day period—corresponding to the number of days between the seventeenth of Tamuz, on which the city was breached and divided, and the ninth of Av, on which the House was burnt down.  In Sha’ar HaKavanot, the Arizal also states that the period of “bein hametzarim” consists of twenty-one days.  

It seems that Tishah B’Av is not included in this count of twenty-one days, because it is referred to as a “moed”—a festival.  It states in the Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 552, 12) that tachanun is not recited on erev Tishah B’Av, because it is called a “moed.” Additionally, it states (ibid. 559, 4) that tachanun is not recited on Tishah B’Av itself, because it is referred to as a “moed.”  We find this to be so in the following passuk (Eichah 1, 15):  "קרא עלי מועד"—related to Tishah B’Av.  

In Imrei Pinchas (Tishah B’Av 388), the great Rabbi Pinchas of Koritz, zy”a, explains why Tishah B’Av is referred to as a “moed” based on the statement in the Yerushalmi (Berachot 2, 4) that Tishah B’Av is the birthday of Mashiach ben David.  Additionally, our holy sources explain, based on the Midrash (Eichah 4, 14), that in the process of the churban of the Beit HaMikdash, HKB”H took out His wrath on the wood and stones of the physical structure, sparing Yisrael from extermination.  

Therefore, the period of “bein hametzarim” is considered to be only twenty-one days, since the “moed” of Tishah B’Av is not included in the calculation.  So, now, it is incumbent upon us to explore the association between the forty-two journeys Yisrael travelled in the Midbar and the twenty-one days and twenty-one nights of “bein hametzarim”—which also constitute an entity of forty-two.  As we learned above from the Avodat Yisrael:  "כנגד מ"ב מסעות שצריך לעבור בין המצרים בכמה מסעות לתקן הכל ולעבוד את ה'"--corresponding to the forty-two journeys that one must make “bein hametzarim,” to rectify everything and serve Hashem.  

Forty-two Journeys Corresponding to the Name of Forty-two in  

 "אנא בכח"

Let us begin our path to enlightenment by examining the passuk at the beginning of the parsha (Bamidbar 33, 1):  "אלה מסעי בני ישראל אשר יצאו מארץ מצרים לצבאותם ביד משה ואהרן, ויכתוב משה את מוצאיהם למסעיהם על פי ה' ואלה מסעיהם למוצאיהם"—these are the journeys of Bnei Yisrael, who departed the land of Mitzrayim according to their legions, under the hand of Moshe and Aharon.  Moshe wrote their goings forth according to their journeys at the bidding of Hashem, and these were their journeys according to their goings forth.  The Ohr HaChaim hakadosh notes that at first the passuk states:  "מוצאיהם למסעיהם"--their goings forth according to their journeys—whereas it concludes:  "מסעיהם למוצאיהם"--their journeys according to their goings forth—reversing the order.  

At this point, it is worthwhile introducing the following from the Magen Avraham (O.C. 428, 8):  The Tzror HaMor writes that we should not stop in the middle of the reading of the forty-two journeys listed in parshat Masei; for they correspond to the “name of forty-two”—“shem mem-beit.”  The source for this association is found in the Arizal’s Likutei Torah:  "הנה נזכר בכאן מ"ב מסעות, והוא שישראל יצאו ממצרים בכח שם מ"ב"—forty-two journeys are mentioned here, indicating that Yisrael left Mitzrayim by means of the “shem mem-beit.”  

They are referring to the holy name of forty-two letters, which we mention on a daily basis in the Shacharit service, during the korbanot, in the tefilah of "אנא בכח".  This entire prayer is founded on forty-two letters, divided into seven separate names—each containing six letters.  These names are:  אבגית"ץ, קר"ע-שט"ן, נג"ד-יכ"ש, בט"ר-צת"ג, חק"ב-טנ"ע, יג"ל-פז"ק, שק"ו-צי"ת.  The Tanna Rabbi Nechuniah ben HaKanah formulated a tefilah based on these names.  Each word in the tefilah corresponds to one letter of one of these names, as follows: 

א'נא ב'כח ג'דולת י'מינך ת'תיר צ'רורה: [אב"ג-ית"ץ]

ק'בל ר'ינת ע'מך ש'גבנו ט'הרנו נ'ורא: [קר"ע-שט"ן]

נ'א ג'בור ד'ורשי י'חודך כ'בבת ש'מרם: [נג"ד-יכ"ש]

ב'רכם, ט'הרם, ר'חמם, צ'דקתך ת'מיד ג'מלם: [בט"ר-צת"ג]

ח'סין ק'דוש ב'רוב ט'ובך נ'הל ע'דתך: [חק"ב-טנ"ע]

י'חיד ג'אה ל'עמך פ'נה ז'וכרי ק'דשתך: [יג"ל-פז"ק]

ש'ועתנו ק'בל ו'שמע צ'עקתנו י'ודע ת'עלומות: [שק"ו-צי"ת]

ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד:

We can now understand the rationale for the Magen Avraham’s statement in the name of the Tzror HaMor—that it is improper to stop in the middle of the reading of the forty-two journeys.  For, we do not want to disrupt the “shem mem-beit” corresponding to these journeys.  Hence, we should ask:  What is the connection between the “shem mem-beit” and the forty-two journeys travelled in the midbar?  Furthermore, what is the significance of these names that we recite every day in "אנא בכח"?  

Every Jew in the Course of His Life Completes These Forty-two Journeys

Let us proceed by introducing an illuminating principle presented by the Degel Machaneh Efraim in the name of his elder, the esteemed Baal Shem Tov, zy”a.  He teaches us that every Jew in the course of his lifetime, from the day of his birth until the day of his death, passes through the desolate wilderness of “olam hazeh”—this world.  He completes the very same forty-two journeys that Yisrael travelled in the midbar.  Ultimately, he merits entering the land of the living in the world of the neshamot.  

He writes that the day a person is born and exits his mother’s womb is analogous to the exodus from Mitzrayim.  Then a person travels one journey after another until he reaches the upper “eretz hachaim.”  Certainly, these journeys were recorded in the Torah to guide a Jew along the proper path—so that he will know which path to choose as he moves from journey to journey throughout his life.  

Each and every journey is sacred and exalted; nevertheless, the nature of a journey and location can change due to people’s actions.  Unfortunately, a place of kedushah can be transformed into the exact opposite.  Yet, if people journey and arrive at these destinations without altering them with their actions, each destination will surely illuminate their lives with its concealed light.  

This is the significance of the opening pesukim of our parsha.  Moshe recorded these journeys in the Torah as they were intended from above.  They are designed to guide a person along the path that Hashem would have him choose.  

Now, let us combine these two essential principles.  Firstly, we learned from the Baal Shem Tov hakadosh that every person experiences all forty-two journeys during his lifetime.  Secondly, we learned from the Arizal and other kabbalists that the forty-two journeys correspond to the name containing forty-two letters.  Combining these two ideas, we can conclude that every one of us—from the day of our birth until the day of our passing, when a person returns his neshamah to the Creator—lives and breathes the forty-two letters of "אנא בכח"—which represent the forty-two journeys comprising a person’s entire life.  

The Forces of Kedushah Refined the Nitzotzot in the Midbar

It appears that we can expand on this notion based on the commentary of the Ohr HaChaim hakadosh.  He focuses on the words:  "אלה מסעי בני ישראל"—these are the journeys of Bnei Yisrael.  Why does the passuk emphasize their journeys--"מסעי"—without mentioning their encampments?  He answers that the purpose of the journeys in the Midbar was to elevate the “nitzotzei kedushah.”  This purpose was fulfilled primarily as they journeyed from place to place together with the nitzotzei kedushah in hand that they clarified in each location.  

He emphasizes that Yisrael journeyed through the midbar, because that is the domain of the “samech-mem.”  It established its residence in the desolate wilderness inhabited by (Devarim 8, 15):  נחש שרף ועקרב—snake, fiery serpent and scorpion.  Hashem’s holy people traversed that wilderness to extract the nitzotzei kedushah the forces of tumah had captured and to refine them.  As a consequence, Yisrael camped in one location for an entire year, while they only remained in another location for a mere twelve hours.  Their sojourn in each location was determined by the time required to clarify the nitzotzot present in that location. 

The Ohr HaChaim adds an essential detail to this explanation.  This refinement process required the participation of the total complement of kedushah—the holy Shechinah, the congregation of Yisrael and the Torah, coordinated by Moshe Rabeinu.  Such an incredible coalition of the elements of kedushah never existed before—since the time of creation until Yisrael left Mitzrayim and received the Torah.  By means of this joining together of the forces of kedushah, they successfully extracted the nitzotzei kedushah from the forces of tumah in the desolate wilderness.  

The Generation of the Midbar Prepared the Way for Future Generations

Now, let us add an important principle from the Sefat Emet (Bamidbar 5655).  He states that it was the generation of the midbar’s task to prepare the way for all future generations.  Here is what he writes:

"והנה דור המדבר הוציאו מכח אל הפועל, והיו הכנה לכל דורות בני ישראל, ויצאו ללמד על הכלל כולו, וזהו שכתוב שאו את ראש כל עדת בני ישראל, שהם היו ראש לכל עדת בני ישראל וכל הדורות נמשכו אחריהם, ועל זה נאמר (קהלת ז-ח) טוב אחרית דבר מראשיתו". וכן כתב עוד (פרשת פנחס שנת תרנ"ב): "והנה דור המדבר היו הכנה לתקן כל הקומה לכל הדורות, וניתן להם ברית הלשון בקבלת התורה בהר סיני במדבר".

The generation of the midbar represented the epitome of Bnei Yisrael throughout the generations.  It was their job to pave the way for all future generations and provide the means for tikun.  At Har Sinai, in the midbar, they received the Torah and were given “brit halashon.”  

This sheds some light for us on the teaching of the holy Baal Shem Tov, zy”a.  The generation of the midbar experienced forty-two journeys in the midbar in order to subjugate all the forces of tumah and clarify all the nitzotzei kedushah by means of the “shem mem-beit.”  This name elevates all of the nitzotzei kedushah back to their heavenly origins.  In similar fashion, every Jew must make these forty-two journeys during his lifetime—in order to subdue all of the forces opposing his service of Hashem.  In the process, he effectively refines the nitzotzei kedushah by means of the “shem mem-beit.”  The generation of the midbar, however, established the precedent; their actions paved the way for all future generations to follow.  

This illuminates for us the meaning of the passuk:  "אלה מסעי בני ישראל אשר יצאו מארץ מצרים לצבאותם ביד משה ואהרן, ויכתוב משה את מוצאיהם למסעיהם על פי ה'"—these are the journeys of Bnei Yisrael, who departed the land of Mitzrayim according to their legions, under the hand of Moshe and Aharon.  Moshe wrote their goings forth according to their journeys at the bidding of Hashem.  In other words, they departed Mitzrayim in order to complete the forty-two journeys, which were:  “their goings forth according to their journeys”—they were guided by Hashem, according to the name of forty-two letters, to clarify the nitzotzei kedushah lost in the terrible wilderness.  

Then the passuk concludes with a  reference to the generations to come:  "ואלה מסעיהם למוצאיהם"-- and these were their journeys according to their goings forth.  This conveys the message that these same forty-two journeys travelled by Yisrael in the midbar, must be travelled by all of their future generations.  Thus, the passuk emphasizes:  "ואלה מסעיהם"—in other words, these forty-two journeys travelled by the generation of the midbar, were, in effect, a preparation:  "למוצאיהם"—for all of the future generations that would come forth from them.  This preparation would enable every future Jew to successfully pass through the midbar that is “olam hazeh”—with all of its hardships and obstacles.  The generation of the midbar already paved the way for all of us.  [Note that the numerical value of the word ואל"ה equals forty-two.]

Accordingly, we can appreciate the sacred words of the Avodat Yisrael.  The twenty-one days and twenty-one nights of the period of “bein hametzarim” correspond to the forty-two journeys travelled by Yisrael in the midbar.  Their main purpose was to encourage us and strengthen our resolve.  For, we now know that every journey we take during this bitter galut is in some form a repetition of one of the forty-two journeys travelled by Yisrael in the midbar.  The knowledge that they already paved the way for us allows us to endure and successfully withstand all of the trials and tribulations of galut.  Upon completing all forty-two journeys in galut, we will achieve the complete tikun and will thus merit the complete geulah shortly.  

The Name of “Mem-beit” of "אנא בכח" Elevates All of the Mitzvot

So, we now know that HKB”H sent each and every one of us down from the world of the neshamot to the desolate wilderness of this world to endure all forty-two journeys corresponding to the “shem mem-beit.”  Surely, every one of us desires, according to the best of our limited abilities, to comprehend the significance of this name of forty-two letters, upon which the tefilah of "אנא בכח" is founded--a tefilah our blessed sages instituted to be recited daily in the morning service.  

Hence, with the help of Hashem, Who teaches His people Yisrael Torah, we will endeavor to explain the matter in a manner that is beneficial to all.  We will examine the immaculate teachings of our holy Rabbis, with the Arizal first and foremost.  The Midrash explains that HKB”H is named according to His actions.  For example, here is how HKB”H responds to Moshe in the beginning of sefer Shemot (3, 13):  "ויאמר משה אל האלקים הנה אנכי בא אל בני ישראל ואמרתי להם אלקי אבותיכם שלחני אליכם ואמרו לי מה שמו מה אומר אליהם, ויאמר אלקים אל משה אהיה אשר אהיה"—Moshe said to G-d, “Behold, when I come to Bnei Yisrael and say to them, ‘The G-d of your forefathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is His name?’ what shall I say to them?”  Hashem answered Moshe, “I Shall Be What I Shall Be.”  The Midrash addresses HKB”H’s response: 

"ויאמר אלקים אל משה. אמר רבי אבא בר ממל, אמר ליה הקב"ה למשה, שמי אתה מבקש לידע, לפי מעשי אני נקרא, פעמים שאני נקרא באל שדי, בצבאות, באלקים, בה'. כשאני דן את הבריות אני נקרא אלקים, וכשאני עושה מלחמה ברשעים אני נקרא צבאות, וכשאני תולה על חטאיו של אדם אני נקרא אל שדי, וכשאני מרחם על עולמי אני נקרא ה', שאין ה' אלא מדת רחמים שנאמר (שמות לד-ו) ה' ה' אל רחום וחנון, הוי אהיה אשר אהיה, אני נקרא לפי מעשי".

HKB”H tells Moshe that each particular name of G-d relates to a specific function.  When He judges creation, He is referred to as “Elokim”; when He battles the wicked, He is referred to as “Tzevakot”; when He suspends judgment regarding a person’s transgressions, He is referred to as “Kel Shakai”; and when He shows His world mercy, He is known as Hashem.  So, the answer “I Shall Be What I Shall Be” indicates that the name He is called depends on the particular divine action being displayed.  

Based on this notion, the kabbalists teach us that the name containing forty-two letters is designed to elevate all matters of kedushah a person performs in this world to its heavenly source—until it reaches HKB”H.  This applies to a person’s Torah study, tefilot, fulfillment of mitzvot, and a Jew’s clarification of nitzotzei kedushah.  This name is even at play when a person’s neshamah goes up to heaven every night when he goes to sleep.  All of them ascend to present themselves before HKB”H by means of the “shem mem-beit”; its forty-two letters act like wings carrying our mitzvot and good deeds up to HKB”H.  

As we saw, this name divides into seven shorter names—each containing six letters.  It is important to realize that these shorter names correspond to the seven days of the week.  אב"ג-ית"ץ corresponds to Sunday; קר"ע-שט"ןcorresponds to Monday; נג"ד-יכ"ש corresponds to Tuesday; בט"ר-צת"גcorresponds to Wednesday; חק"ב-טנ"ע corresponds to Thursday; יג"ל-פז"קcorresponds to Friday; שק"ו-צי"ת corresponds to Shabbat kodesh.  

In essence, each name is designed to elevate the Torah and mitzvot of its corresponding day.  For example, the name אב"ג-ית"ץ elevates the Torah learned and the mitzvot performed on the first day of the week, Sunday—while the other six names assist in the process.  Each name performs this same function on its corresponding day of the week.  Finally, when Shabbat arrives, one should focus on the name שק"ו-צי"ת; for this is the main name acting to elevate our tefilot and mitzvot, with the assistance of the other names.  

Six Letters Corresponding to the Six Wings of a Malach

Continuing on along this exalted path, let us proceed to explain why each of these seven names is composed of precisely six letters.  We shall refer to the words of the prophet (Yeshayah 6, 1): 

"בשנת מות המלך עוזיהו ואראה את אדני יושב על כסא רם ונשא ושוליו מלאים את ההיכל, שרפים עומדים ממעל לו שש כנפים שש כנפים לאחד, בשתים יכסה פניו, ובשתים יכסה רגליו, ובשתים יעופף"—in the year of King Uzziyahu’s death, I saw the Lord sitting upon a high and lofty throne, and its legs filled the Heichal.  Seraphim were standing above, at His service.  Each one had six wings:  with two it would cover its face, with two it would cover its legs, and with two it would fly.”  Rashi comments:  the Seraph uses two wings to cover its face so as not to gaze upon the Shechinah; it covers its legs with two wings for the sake of “tzniut”—modesty—so as not to expose its body in the presence of its Creator; with its remaining two wings it carries out Hashem’s will.  

With this scheme and structure in mind, the divine Tanna Rashb”y discusses the “shem mem-beit” in the Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 69 103b).  He explains that the six letters which compose each of the seven names are divided up functionally just like the six wings of the Seraphim.  For instance, let us examine the first name, אב"ג-ית"ץ:  the first two letters, א"ב, act to cover up the face of a person’s neshamah, which ascends nightly along with all of the mitzvot performed on that corresponding day; the function of the middle two letters, ג"י, is to cover up its feet—protecting them from the harmful effects and influence of the angels of destruction; finally, the last two letters, ת"ץ, serve as the wings—transporting the neshamah up to HKB”H.  

Here is what Rabbi Chaim Vital writes in Sha’ar HaKavanot according to the Arizal concerning this subject: 

"אנא בכח גדולת ימינך כו', ויאמר כל שני תיבות ביחד, אנא בכח ויפסיק, גדולת ימינך ויפסיק, תתיר צרורה ויפסיק. ונראה לפי עניות דעתי שהטעם הוא לכוין אל מה שנתבאר אצלינו, כי כל שם מאלו הז' שמות של מ"ב יש בו ששה אותיות, ומתחלקים לג' בחינות, בשתים אותיות יכסה פניו, ובשתים יכסה רגליו, ובשתים יעופף, ולכן צריך לחבר כל שני אותיות ביחד".  Each two words should be uttered together as separate units.  One should say “אנא בכח” and pause; then “גדולת ימינך” and pause; then “תתיר צרורה” and pause.  In my humble opinion, this is done so that we have in mind that each of these seven names comprising the “shem mem-beit” is composed of six letters; they are divided up into three functional units; two cover its face; two cover its legs; with two it flies.  Therefore, each set of two should be uttered together.  

In summary, every Jew should find strength as he completes the journeys that comprise his life.  He should realize and believe wholeheartedly that every step he takes is guided by Hashem—aimed at accomplishing a particular tikun.  As the passuk states (Tehillim 37, 23):  "מה' מצעדי גבר כוננו ודרכו יחפץ"—Guided by Hashem, the footsteps of a righteous man are firm; his way shall He approve.  Let us always remember the valuable lesson learned from the holy Baal Shem Tov, zy”a.  Each and every one of us—from the day of one’s birth to the day of one’s passing—experiences the forty-two journeys corresponding to the forty-two letters of "אנא בכח".  This will insure that we utter this magnificent tefilah with greater focus and intent—allowing us to complete our sacred task with ease and understanding.  Amen. 

Little Observations in Parshas Balak

1.  Apropos the new wearable computer, Google Glass, please note that in the Zohar of this week's parsha, the words "and Bilaam saw" are interpreted to mean that he had special glasses that gave him a super-normal ability to see things that no other man could see.  They are called משקופי דחכמתא, smart glasses.  It goes without saying that the terms מכשף  (magician) and מחשב (computer) are homonyms.  As Arthur C. Clarke posits in his third law, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

2.  In Bamidbar 22:20, the Netziv points out that Bilaam was warned not to go עמם , meaning with them, but later he was allowed to go אתם, with them.  Similarly, in Bamidbar 11:17, where Hashem was speaking to Moshe Rabbeinu, in one place  it says ודברתי עמך instead of the usual ודברתי אתך.
The Netziv explains that imam means intending to do what they wanted him to do, with a unity of vision and intent.  Itam, on the other hand, just means traveling together because your interests happen to overlap.    This, Hashem allowed, because although they wanted him to curse, he ended up giving a bracha.

What changed?  What characterized the Itam and the Imam?

Rav Schwab in the Maayon Beis Hashoeiva explains that the first time, there Bilam would have gone because he wanted to protect Moav and Midian, and his klala would be ‘lishma.’  When a person does something lishma, with sincerity, his effort will bear fruit.  Even though the Ribbono Shel Olam was defending Klal Yisroel, if Bilaam would have gone lishma, there was a chance he could have managed to say a klala, and a klala from Bilaam that would be lishma would have been destructive, and so Hashem told him not to go.  But once Bilaam revealed that his motivation was the honor and the reward he would receive, as he said in passuk 20, then Hashem told him to go, because then it was not lishma, and he didn’t pose a danger to Klal Yisroel.
We see from here that a person that works lishma can turn over the world, and can even subvert the retzon Hashem in this world at least for a time.  To a great degree, historic events stem from the will of charismatic individuals.  Every effort that is lishma will bear fruit— bichol etzev yehai mosar.
This is what the Chofetz Chaim meant.  He was asked, why is it that the communists were so successful, and seemed to be taking over the world.  He answered, Because there are among them a few that mean what they're doing sincerely:  “וייל עס איז דא צוווישען זיי א פאר וואס מיינען דאס אויף אן אמת.”  Those few that really believed in the truth of communism enabled that terrible and destructive and murderous movement to be so powerful and successful for almost a century.


This explains the difference in psukim referring to marriages.  Koheles 9:7- לך אכל בשמחה לחמך, ושתה בלב טוב יינך:  כי כבר רצה האלהים את מעשיך.   בכל-עת יהיו בגדיך לבנים ושמן על ראשך אל יחסר.  ראה חיים עם אשה אשר אהבת כל ימי חיי הבלך.  But in Koheles 7:26, מוצא אני מר ממות את האשה אשר היא מצודים וחרמים לבה.  
And this is why we make two brachos in the Sheva Brachos on the simchah: the first is chasan v’kallah, and the second is chasan im hakalla.

3.  22:18.  Bilaam was considered to be avaricious.  He said that even if he were offered a houseful of gold, he couldn't go against Hashem's will, and Rashi brings that this was evidence of his avarice, that he desired, and felt he deserved, a palace full of gold.
22:18:

 ויען בלעם ויאמר אל עבדי בלק אם יתן לי בלק מלא ביתו כסף וזהב לא אוכל לעבר את פי ה' אלקי לעשות קטנה או גדולה

Rashi:

מלא ביתו כסף וזהב: למדנו שנפשו רחבה ומחמד ממון אחרים. אמר, ראוי לו ליתן לי כל כסף וזהב שלו, שהרי צריך לשכור חיילות רבות, ספק נוצח ספק אינו נוצח, ואני ודאי נוצח:

In an interesting coincidence, that at least will remind us of the name, see Pirkei Avos 6:9, where Rebbi Yosi ben Kisma said

אמר רבי יוסי בן קסמא, פעם אחת הייתי מהלך בדרך ופגע בי אדם אחד, ונתן לי שלום, והחזרתי לו שלום, אמר לי, רבי, מאיזה מקום אתה, אמרתי לו, מעיר גדולה של חכמים ושל סופרים אני, אמר לי, רבי רצונך שתדור עמנו במקומנו ואני אתן לך אלף אלפים דנרי זהב ואבנים טובות ומרגליות, אמרתי לו אם אתה נותן לי כל כסף וזהב ואבנים טובות ומרגליות שבעולם, איני דר אלא במקום תורה, וכן כתוב בספר תהלים על ידי דוד מלך ישראל, טוב לי תורת פיך מאלפי זהב וכסף.

The question is, of course, where is the diametric difference between the greed of Bilaam and, lehavdil, the indifference to material things of Rebbi Yosi ben Kisma, evident in their almost identical statements.

But what I wanted to point out is that the name Kisma echoes the story of Bilaam who, the passuk says, was visited by the elders of Midian who came with magical items in their hands- Kisamim b'yadam.  (22:7)

וילכו זקני מואב וזקני מדיין וקסמים בידם ויבואו אל בלעם

Eli sent a comment that I want to put in here.  I've expanded his references where I was able to.  His words are indented.

Re: עם vs. את -- I was bothered by these rules once, it is hard to apply them consistently. The Netziv you mentioned and הכתב והקבלה here in Balak say that עם is a stronger bond, unity of intent. This is along the path of Sefer Chasidim dictum on בחורים וגם בתולות זקנים עם נערים. 

From the Sefer Chasidim:
`אל תערב בנים ובנות פן יחטאו. אז תשמח בתולה במחול לבדם אבל בחורים וזקנים יחדיו (ירמיהו לא יב), וכן ילדים וילדות משחקים ברחובותיה (זכריה ח ה) ילדים לבד וילדות לבד. וכן בסוף תהלים (קמח יב) בחורים וגם בתולות ולא אמר בחורים עם בתולות כמו זקנים עם נערים גם לרבות נשים לב

Maharal (Derech Avos on the Mishna of R. Yossi ben Kisma, see bottom right) goes in somewhat opposite direction, saying that 'א' עם 'ב' means that 'א' טפל ל'ב' (and that's why Rav Yosi ben Kisma did not accept the offer שתגור עמנו במקומנו).

 ואז אמד רבי  רצונך שתדור עמנו במקומנו ואני אתן לך אלף  אלפים וכוי, והוצרך לומר עמנו במקומנו כלומר  בשביל שאנו צריכין לרב לעצתו וכדאמרינן למעלה  שנהנין ממנו עצה ותושיה, ולפיכך הוסיף עמגו.  ובודאי אם היו רוצים בו שילמד להם תורה היה בוחר  בישיבתם ביניהם, אבל לא היו רוצים רק שהם  צריכים לו׳ ולכך אמר עמנו לעשות אותם עיקר. ואם לא כן רק שהיו באים ללמוד ממנו, היה לו לומר רצונך שתדור אצלינו כי לשון עמנו שהם עיקר  והוא טפל עמהם׳ ולכך השיב לו כך. וכבר אמרנו כי  כל זה הגיע לו מצד שהיה מהלך בדרך והיה מחשבתו  בתורה לגמרי׳ ולפיכך באהבתו אשר נפשו היתה קשורה בתורה השיב כן. 

However, this echoes Rabbeinu Tam (but not Rabbeinu Elchanan) in Tosfos Yeshanim Yoma 85b, and how the Maharsha explains וחי אחיך עמך - חייך קודמין

Trying to avoid typing the whole thing out, I found a very fine sefer (despite what some people said about it) that brings down and expands the Tosfos Yeshanim there, and who brings in the machlokes rishonim to explain Ben Petura and Reb Akiva on 62 :

הנה התוספות ישנים (יומא פה) מביאים דיעות רבינו תם ורבינו אלחנן בביאור מדוייק של תיבת ״עם״. שם שנינו במשנת מיתה ויום הכיפורים מכפרים עם התשובה. שאלו שם בגמרא עם התשובה אין בפני עצמן לא (אין יום הכפורים מכפר) נימא דלא כרבי, דתניא רבי אומר על כל עבירות שבתורה בין עשה תשובה בין לא עשה תשובה יום הכיפורים מכפר  ומתרצו שם בגמרא תשובה בעיא יום כפור, יום כפור לא בעיא תשובה. וכתבו התוספות, ואם תאמר הכא משמע דיום הכפורים עיקר ואפילו הכי קאמר עם תשובה, וקשה מכאן על רבינו יעקב שרגיל לומר  דתלמוד תורה טפל לגבי דרר ארץ מדקתני־ (אבות ב' ב') יפה תלמוד תורה עם דרך ארץ, אלמא דרך ארץ עיקר, כדדייקינן (יבמות לח) גבי שומרת יבם שנפלו לח נכסים דיורשי האב עיקר ומיירי בנכסי מלוג מדקתני יחלוקו יורשי בעל עם יורשי האב אלמא יורשי האב עיקר, ואילו הכא קאמר עם התשובה אף על פי שאינה עיקר עיי״ש מה שתירצו, והביאו עוד קושיא על רבינו־ תם מדכתיב ראה חיים עם אשה אשר אהבת. וגו׳ וחיים עיקר, ותירצו דחיים דקרא דרשו׳ (בקדושין ל) על אומנות. ושוב הביאו את דעת רבינו אלחנן כי תורה עיקר, ומה שכתוב עם הוא איננו עיקר, ודחה שם את הראיה מיבמות, דשם: הדיוק הוא לא מדקתני עם יורשי האב, אלא מיתורא דמתניתין שלא אמר בםתמא יחלוקו. וכך הביא את שתי הדיעות האלו בהגהות מיימוניות. (ה׳ תלמוד תורה פ״ג) והאריך בהן עיי״ש.

ולפי זה נבין במה פליגי בן פטורא ורביי עקיבא, דבן פטורא סובר כרבינו אלחנן דתיבת ״עם״ אין פירושו עיקר או עדיפות, ולכן במה דכתיב וחי אחיך עמך, אין לו לעצמו עדיפות בכלל על אתיו, ואם בקיתון מים אין כדי להציל שניהם ממיתה, אז ימותו שניהם ולא יראה אתר במיתתו של תבירו, אבל רבי עקיבא סובר כרבינו תם דתיבת ״עם״ פירושו עיקר, וכיון דכתיב ותי אחיך עמך, דרשינן מזח חייך קודמין לחיי חבירה דעמך פירושו עיקר, ולכן חוא חעיקר וחבירו טפל, לכן חייך קודמין לחיי חבירך.

In a letter, Eli also pointed out that you can get a great, but somewhat strange, Sheva Brachos drasha out of this.  According to Rabbeinu Tam, that in phrases of "A im B" B is more important, then  יפה תלמוד תורה עם דרך ארץ shows that derech eretz is more important, but then we have to interpret  ראה חיים עם אשה אשר אהבת to mean that Chaim is the career, and a wife is more important than the career.  So according to Rabbeinu Tam, the ascending order is Torah, Career, and Wife.  So if a person decides to earn a living instead of sitting and learning, he must hold like Rabbeinu Tam, and so he is obligated to be more dedicated to his wife than to his career.

 (According to Rabbinu Elchanan, that in phrases of "A im B" A is more important, then  יפה תלמוד תורה עם דרך ארץ shows that Torah is more important than a career, and ראה חיים עם אשה אשר אהבת refers to life, not the career, so it only means that life is more important than one's wife.  According to Rabbeinu Elchanan, all we know is that Torah is more important than career, and life is more important than one's wife.)

ויקח משה את עצמות יוסף עמו or אם גנב יגנב מעמו - isn't אתו more appropriate according to the Netziv? Yosef indeed said והעליתם את עצמותי מזה אתכם.

Moreover, the Meraglim are called והאנשים אשר עמו (referring to Kalev). In Yehoshua, Kalev again refers to them as ואחי אשר עלו עמי These examples work better with the Maharal.

By Eliezer (when he went to find a wife for Yitzchak) we find first ורגלי האנשים אשר אתו and then on their way back והאנשים אשר עמו (here the Netziv approach might say that on the way there, Eliezer wanted to accomplish his mission, while the accompanying people just wanted to get home asap. On the way back, they all just wanted to get home)

 However, (i) we find that when Yaakov is going to Lavan - וישבת עמו and then later וישב עמו and ויעבד עמו. This seems a problem to both approaches. (ii) Avraham and Lot - וילך אתו לוט and then ולוט עמו הנגבה. Then again וגם ללוט ההולך את אברם and once more - אחרי הפרד לוט מעמו. (iii) In shoftim it says by Avimelech ויעל הוא וכל העם אשר אתו and in the next pasuk ויאמר אל העם אשר עמו, and there are many more such examples. It may be possible to find a local explanation to all of these, but the exceptions seem to overwhelm the rule. 

Balak: Invisible to Some, Obvious to Others. Reb Chaim Stein

I was in Cleveland this week to be menachem aveil the family of Reb Chaim Stein.  He was very close to my family.  Besides the time in Samarkahnd when he was with my parents, he and his Rebbitzen were the Unterfirers for my parents when they got married, and Reb Chaim was one of the Eidim on my parents' Kesuva.  When my parents first came to America, they first went to Cleveland, and my father learned with Reb Chaim be'chavrusa, until my father decided that Cleveland was not the place to be unless you were related to the family of the founders of the yeshiva.  My father and Reb Chaim remained very close until their last years, with my father calling Reb Chaim on the telephone whenever he had a good he'ara on the Gemara.  I remember many times, hearing my father and his chavrusa arguing, until finally I heard the "Ich gei callen Reb Chaim!  Erleidikt!"  (Finished!  I'm going to call Reb Chaim.")

While I was there, I heard two interesting things.  They were said by Rabbi Shmuel Kaufman, who personally witnessed the first event, and heard the second from an individual that was present.

1. The Satmerer Rov once came to Cleveland.  When he was at the train station, and the yeshiva came to see him, he said he was not going to leave Cleveland before he got a bracha from Reb Chaim Stein.

2. The Rimnitzer Rebbe, a man who was sought out for brachos from the four corners of the world, also once said that he wanted to get a bracha from Reb Chaim.

The odd thing is that these people were not close to Reb Chaim.  If they ever saw him, it was at a wedding, or at a meeting.  But their eyes were not like my eyes or your eyes.  When most people would see Reb Chaim, they saw a refined and scholarly gentleman, a man with kind eyes and a dignified but approachable mein, a man with the energy and curiosity of youth even in his old age.  When the Satmerer Rov and the Rimnitzer Rebbe looked at Reb Chaim, they saw a Malach, a man of purity and towering spiritual grandeur.  As the Satmerer is quoted as having said, Reb Chaim never tasted the flavor of sin, lo to'am ta'am chet.

When Bilam's donkey shuddered and turned away, Bilam was angry.  What are you doing?  What's wrong with you?  Finally the donkey told Bilam that if he weren't so stupid, if he saw what the donkey saw, he would have run away screaming.    When Avraham and Yitzchak saw the Shechina atop the mountain, he asked Eliezer and Yishmael, what do  you see?  They said, we see a mountain, but nothing else.  Avraham said, now you stay here with the donkey, שבו לכם פה עם החמור, from which we derive the expression  עם הדומה לחמור.   You have spent all of these years in my house, and all you see is a mountain?  Then as far as spiritual sensitivity, you're like donkeys.  Not only like a chamor, but not even like Bilam's chamor.  At least Bilam's chamor could see!  Unfortunately, our physical eyes are blind to much that is in front of us, and our objective empirical conclusions are worthless without siyata dishmaya.  אמר רבי בנימין הכל בחזקת סומין עד שהקדוש ברוך הוא מאיר את עיניהם.  (Breishis Rabba 53:14)

Balak: Miracles of Speech

I heard this today in the name of my Rebbi, Rav Rudderman.

On the passuk that says that Hashem opened the mouth of the donkey and it was able to speak- ויפתח השם את פי האתון- the Sforno here says that this is similar to  השם שפתי תפתח, the request we make before Shmoneh Esrai that Hashem open our mouths so we can pray to Him.

Rav Rudderman said that it is not correct to think of the human power of speech as adequate for the level of tefilla required to stand before the Ribono shel Olam and praise Him.  Shmoneh Esrai requires a nes nigleh.  Our ability to directly address the Ribono shel Olam is no less of a miracle than that of a donkey being given the means to communicate with a human being.

We all know Reb Chaim's idea of Omeid Lifnei Hamelech.  Rav Rudderman's pshat in the Sforno should also give us a moment's pause as we begin Shmoneh Esrei.

Balak, Bamidbar 25:6. V’heima bochim pesach ohel moed. The Spear of Pinchas

(The following is based on something said by the Gerrer Rebbe and Rav Gedaliah Schorr, and combines verious nuances in its presentation by Harav Avraham Chaim Levin, Chairman of Moetzes Gedolei Hatoah, and the Divrei Yehudah, of the Gerrer family. And, of course, Me.)

Targum Yonasan interprets ‘bochim’ as ‘kor’in k’rias shma.’ When Zimri challenged Moshe Rabbeinu and the entire Torah morality, the Eidah, the Sanhedrin, responded by going to the Ohel Moed and saying Kri’as Shema with great kavanah. Krias shma has 248 words, and represents complete dedication of the 248 limbs of the human body to Hashem. The Gematria of the 248 limbs is Ramach, the Ramach Eivarim. But while all the tzadikim were saying krias shma and demonstrating their absolute and total dedication to Hashem, "Vayar Pinchos ben Elozor ben Aharon Hakohen vayakam mitoch ho’eida vayikach romach beyado." Pinchas was in that eida that was saying krias shma, and he, too, dedicated his ramach eivorim to Hashem through his tefilla. But then he took the next step— Pinchos took the ‘romach be’yado’– and of course, romach is also gematria ramach— he not only dedicated himself to Hashem, but he took that dedication of his ramach eivarim ‘be’yado’, he acted on his convictions and didn’t just sit saying krias shma. They both dedicated ramach to Hashem, but he took it beyodo and did something with it, he acted on it.

There is a time for Titz’ak Eilai, and there is a time for Mah Titz’ak Eilai. In Devorim 15:18, it says Yevarechicho Hashem bechol asher ta’aseh, may Hashem bless you in all that you do. In the sefer Peh Kadosh, Reb Itzaleh Volozhiner (R’ Chaim Volozhiner’s son), says that he was at a rabbinical conference in 1843, where the gedolim discussed the pressing issues the community faced. One of the gedolim got up and said that there is no good solution; we have to place our trust in Hashem and see what happens. Reb Itzaleh said that he learned from that speech that when in says in the Mishneh, that in the time before Mashiach, people will say "ein lonu lehisho’ein elo al avinu shebashomayim," this is one of the klolos of ikvesa de’meshicha, not a sign of faith. There has to be a Bechol asher ta'aseh in order for Yevarechecha Hashem. We're not on Earth to stand and daven. We're here to make ourselves worthy to be a conduit for Retzon Hashem, and to execute that Ratzon through our actions.

This doesn’t have to be seen as a criticism of ivory-tower tefilla. You can say (and this is, in fact, the Divrei Yehuda’s perspective,) that Pinchas’s ko’ach to take the ‘romach’ stemmed from the ‘bochin pesach ho’ohel,’ from the yichud leiv of the ramach eivorim of the people who were saying krias shma. He needed the yichud ramach eivorim of the people, it contributed to, informed and enabled the concrete action of the doer. Pinchas had the wisdom and the strength to convert that potential into action; but his action was empowered and enabled by the tefila of the Eidah-- he was the answer to their prayers. The simple words of the passuk may be seen as supporting this approach, because it says that the ‘eidah’ was bochim, and that Pinchos arose ‘mitoch ho’eidoh.’ He didn’t just jump out of nowhere; he was a member of the Eidah, he was saying Kri’as Shema with them, and it was their yichud leiv that created the possibility, and it was his yichud leiv that was the catalyst for the heroic act.

When you close the tehillim, if you are not changed by it, then you didn’t say the tehillim the right way. And not only do you have to be changed, but you have to walk out of there aware that Hashem will provide you with an opportunity to do something for other people, for the community, for your family. Tehillim and Tefilla is not the ‘job’, it is the introduction to other jobs. And when opportunity presents itself, many people who see the opening say to themselves that they are "not worthy, who am I, what can I do..." And, deep inside, maybe the person tells himself that such a reaction is anivus. Well, you should know that it is not anivus you are feeling, it is atzlus. It’s the Ramach without the Romach. We all have to make a conscious decision to not leave the davenning in shul or the tehillim in the book, because the most important effect of yichud leiv is the empowerment of siyata dishmaya– finding out what needs doing, and getting the job done.

Parshas Balak. At Least Try to Not Be Like Bilaam.

Just so that a week shouldn't go by without a dvar Torah, I will quote something my dear wife said in her Parsha Drasha, and I think it is a very nice mussar haskeil.

We are told that we should try to emulate the Ovos Ho’Olom, like Avrohom, Yitzchok, Yakkov, Moshe, Dovid. But -- they were so great! They were beyond our most wishful dreams of gadlus. It is futile for us to even attempt to comprehend who they were, to say nothing of trying to imitate their middos and acts.

But we also know that Bilam and Moshe were opposites. As it says in Pirkei Avos 5:23– differences between talmidim of Bilaam and talmidim of Avrohom Ovinu, which, of course, are also the differences between Moshe, a talmid of Avrohom Avinu,and Bilaam.

Unfortunately, while we cannot even try to understand Moshe Rabbeinu, we are able to understand Bilaam. Isn't that sad? We cannot even comprehend the greatness of Moshe, it is inconceivably beyond our life experience. But we look at Bilaam's rotten behavior and, because of our own base daily lives and the contemptible people we are exposed to, we recognize and understand his motivations and actions.

So if we wouldn't even know where to begin in an attempt to imitate Moshe, at least we can try to not be like Bilaam, and by doing so, we can come closer to being like Moshe Rabbeinu. You may not be able to aspire to be like Moshe Rabbeinu, but at least try to be as little as possible like Bilaam. (Negating the Negative may be a pathetic way of achieving the positive, but it might be the best we can do.)