Pesach - Matzah
The Matzah and Chametz are really very similar. In fact they have almost the exact same ingredients. It is basically flour and water.
Yet, one is a mitzvah to eat on Pesach, and one is assur to eat on Pesach. One is the symbol of freedom from the slavery of Egypt and one is not. One is the bread of the poor man and one is the bread of the wealthy. One costs 6 NIS in the store to buy and one costs upwards of 160NIS per kilo.
The difference between these two items that are really so similar is striking.
This teaches us a lesson that it is all a matter of what you do with it. You can have a character trait, for example, that can go either way. It can be used for good or for bad. It is a matter of your attitude and your direction.
You can take the flour and water and make it into chametz, you can take the flour and water and make it into matzah. You can take any character trait within you, any behavioral custom, and use it for good, or use it for bad.
Matzah is not good or bad and chametz is not good or bad. But the same item can be used to make one or the other. The lesson of the matzah is that just like we have to purge the chametz from within us, so too do we have to learn to use our behaviors and traits for good and not for bad.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Tu B'Av: wanting to be in Eretz Yisrael
Tu B'Av
This Monday is a very important day in the calendar. This Monday is Tu B’Av. The 15th of Av. On the 15th of Av we commemorate a number of events that took place in our history, and it is closely related to marriage and love.
In Israel Tu B’Av is celebrated by many Israelis as a form of Valentine’s Day. People will be giving their loved ones gifts and chocolates.
But there is another aspect to the significance of Tu B’Av. This Monday, Tu B’Av, is the first marker of the upcoming shemitta year. Tu B’Av is the first time one has to be concerned with shemitta. It is the cutoff date for planting new fruit trees. After Monday, in Israel, one can no longer plant fruit trees, until after the shemitta year is over.
In this week’s parsha, we read about how Moshe pleaded and prayed to Hashem to have his punishment rescinded. We know he was not allowed into Eretz Yisrael due to his having struck the rock rather than speaking to it. This was a terrible punishment for Moshe. He so desired to get into Eretz Yisrael that he tried everything he could to get Hashem to change his mind.
So he davens to Hashem. He says, “אֶעְבְּרָה-נָּא, וְאֶרְאֶה אֶת-הָאָרֶץ הַטּוֹבָה, אֲשֶׁר, בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן: הָהָר הַטּוֹב הַזֶּה, וְהַלְּבָנֹן.” Let me cross the Jordan and see the good land, the mountains and the Levanon, referring to the Beis Hamikdash… But Hashem said “No. and I have had enough of this. I do not want to hear anymore”
Many of the meforshim say that Moshe did not just want to go into Eretz Yisrael. He desired to go in because of the Mitzvos Ha’Tluyos Ba’Aretz. The special mitzvos that only apply in the Land of Israel. Moshe knew he would never have an opportunity to fulfill these, as he would not be going in. He pleaded with Hashem to let him in so he could have such an opportunity. These mitzvos are a nice chunk of the 613, and he did not want to be deprived of the opportunity of keeping shemitta, and giving trumah and maser, leaving peah and the rest of them…
That is a wonderful explanation of the passuk. But I think there is also something to the simple reading of the passuk. The passuk tells us how Moshe wanted to go in and see the Land. He wanted to see yerushalayim, see the Mikdash, see its goodness. He wanted to tour Israel. He just spent 40 years in the desert leading the Jews to Israel, constantly telling them how good the Land is. He desired to actually see it. This was his goal for the past 40 years.
Moshe wanted to sign up for a Birthright trip, or join a Nefesh B’Nefesh flight, or even just to go in and go touring for a few days. He wanted to live in Eretz Yisrael, and of he could not then at least he should be able to see Eretz Yisrael.
A Jew might have great reasons for living in Chutz La’Aretz. But he should at least desire to live in eretz Yisrael, and if that is not feasible, then he should at least try to visit Eretz Yisrael. Even if he cannot, as Moshe could not, he should still make it his goal and objective. It should be at the forefront of his thoughts. He should do everything in his power to make it happen.
Tu B’Av is a good day to begin thinking about Eretz Yisrael, whether moving there or even just to come and visit. Tu B’Av is the first marker of shemitta. Think on Tu B’Av about all the mitzvos you cannot keep while living outside of Israel and how you really should be in Eretz Yisael. Think about how you should come for a visit and plan your aliya, even if right now you cannot do it. Make it a goal, or at least a consideration.
This Monday is a very important day in the calendar. This Monday is Tu B’Av. The 15th of Av. On the 15th of Av we commemorate a number of events that took place in our history, and it is closely related to marriage and love.
In Israel Tu B’Av is celebrated by many Israelis as a form of Valentine’s Day. People will be giving their loved ones gifts and chocolates.
But there is another aspect to the significance of Tu B’Av. This Monday, Tu B’Av, is the first marker of the upcoming shemitta year. Tu B’Av is the first time one has to be concerned with shemitta. It is the cutoff date for planting new fruit trees. After Monday, in Israel, one can no longer plant fruit trees, until after the shemitta year is over.
In this week’s parsha, we read about how Moshe pleaded and prayed to Hashem to have his punishment rescinded. We know he was not allowed into Eretz Yisrael due to his having struck the rock rather than speaking to it. This was a terrible punishment for Moshe. He so desired to get into Eretz Yisrael that he tried everything he could to get Hashem to change his mind.
So he davens to Hashem. He says, “אֶעְבְּרָה-נָּא, וְאֶרְאֶה אֶת-הָאָרֶץ הַטּוֹבָה, אֲשֶׁר, בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן: הָהָר הַטּוֹב הַזֶּה, וְהַלְּבָנֹן.” Let me cross the Jordan and see the good land, the mountains and the Levanon, referring to the Beis Hamikdash… But Hashem said “No. and I have had enough of this. I do not want to hear anymore”
Many of the meforshim say that Moshe did not just want to go into Eretz Yisrael. He desired to go in because of the Mitzvos Ha’Tluyos Ba’Aretz. The special mitzvos that only apply in the Land of Israel. Moshe knew he would never have an opportunity to fulfill these, as he would not be going in. He pleaded with Hashem to let him in so he could have such an opportunity. These mitzvos are a nice chunk of the 613, and he did not want to be deprived of the opportunity of keeping shemitta, and giving trumah and maser, leaving peah and the rest of them…
That is a wonderful explanation of the passuk. But I think there is also something to the simple reading of the passuk. The passuk tells us how Moshe wanted to go in and see the Land. He wanted to see yerushalayim, see the Mikdash, see its goodness. He wanted to tour Israel. He just spent 40 years in the desert leading the Jews to Israel, constantly telling them how good the Land is. He desired to actually see it. This was his goal for the past 40 years.
Moshe wanted to sign up for a Birthright trip, or join a Nefesh B’Nefesh flight, or even just to go in and go touring for a few days. He wanted to live in Eretz Yisrael, and of he could not then at least he should be able to see Eretz Yisrael.
A Jew might have great reasons for living in Chutz La’Aretz. But he should at least desire to live in eretz Yisrael, and if that is not feasible, then he should at least try to visit Eretz Yisrael. Even if he cannot, as Moshe could not, he should still make it his goal and objective. It should be at the forefront of his thoughts. He should do everything in his power to make it happen.
Tu B’Av is a good day to begin thinking about Eretz Yisrael, whether moving there or even just to come and visit. Tu B’Av is the first marker of shemitta. Think on Tu B’Av about all the mitzvos you cannot keep while living outside of Israel and how you really should be in Eretz Yisael. Think about how you should come for a visit and plan your aliya, even if right now you cannot do it. Make it a goal, or at least a consideration.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Ruth: Strength of Charachter
Shvuos: Ruth
I always thought of Ruth as a mousy woman, with little personality. She kind of just got through everything quietly, albeit with great determination. She sort of sneaks through the story of the megilla, as a secondary charachter, which is funny considering the megilla goes by her name. But that was always my impression when reading Megillat Ruth.
Thinking about it though, I realize that impression is completely wrong. Ruth is a paradigm of strength of charachter. She is the central figure of the story, but succeeds in making herself sort of blend into the background at the same time.
Ruth, we must remember, is the daughter of the king of Moab. She is a princess of one of the greatest nations of the time! By no way could she possibly be timid, mousey, or non-descript. Not coming from where she came from.
With her whole future open before her as a princess of Moab, she changed directions. She felt she had found the truth. "Your God is my God, your nation is my nation."
She did not waver, but stayed the course. She found the truth and decided she had to live her life by it, no matter what the hardships would be. It is not easy to be a convert. I am sure she knew she would be up for hard times, especially after her husband died. It is not easy to be a convert to any nation, not just Judaism, so she knew what she was getting into. And she went ahead with it anyway.
Ruth persisted and found her way to Boaz and the leader of the nation. And she did everything in a tzanua fashion. She was not loud and boisterous. She did not stick out. So much so that she comes off as a secondary charachter in her own book!
Ruth was worthy of being the grandmother of Kind David, King Solomon and the future Mashiach.
I always thought of Ruth as a mousy woman, with little personality. She kind of just got through everything quietly, albeit with great determination. She sort of sneaks through the story of the megilla, as a secondary charachter, which is funny considering the megilla goes by her name. But that was always my impression when reading Megillat Ruth.
Thinking about it though, I realize that impression is completely wrong. Ruth is a paradigm of strength of charachter. She is the central figure of the story, but succeeds in making herself sort of blend into the background at the same time.
Ruth, we must remember, is the daughter of the king of Moab. She is a princess of one of the greatest nations of the time! By no way could she possibly be timid, mousey, or non-descript. Not coming from where she came from.
With her whole future open before her as a princess of Moab, she changed directions. She felt she had found the truth. "Your God is my God, your nation is my nation."
She did not waver, but stayed the course. She found the truth and decided she had to live her life by it, no matter what the hardships would be. It is not easy to be a convert. I am sure she knew she would be up for hard times, especially after her husband died. It is not easy to be a convert to any nation, not just Judaism, so she knew what she was getting into. And she went ahead with it anyway.
Ruth persisted and found her way to Boaz and the leader of the nation. And she did everything in a tzanua fashion. She was not loud and boisterous. She did not stick out. So much so that she comes off as a secondary charachter in her own book!
Ruth was worthy of being the grandmother of Kind David, King Solomon and the future Mashiach.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
from rag to riches
Shavuos - Omer
The Torah is going through various details of the various holidays. It discusses the Omer offerings and upon arriving at the end of the Omer count (i.e. Shavuos), one has to bring a sacrifice called "shtei ha'lechem" - the two loaves. In 23:17 the Torah tells us, "מִמּוֹשְׁבֹתֵיכֶם תָּבִיאּוּ לֶחֶם תְּנוּפָה, שְׁתַּיִם שְׁנֵי עֶשְׂרֹנִים--סֹלֶת תִּהְיֶינָה, חָמֵץ תֵּאָפֶינָה: בִּכּוּרִים, לַיהוָה" or in English, "Ye shall bring out of your dwellings two wave-loaves of two tenth parts of an ephah; they shall be of fine flour, they shall be baked with leaven, for first-fruits unto the LORD."
This korban had a very unusual detail that makes it practically unique. It was made from chametz - leaven. It is one of two korbanos that contain leaven (the second is the korban Toda). All other sacrifices, including all the various mincha offerings, including the lechem ha'panim, including all other dough that would be offered in avrious forms in the mikdash, were leaven free. Kosher for Passover. Matza, albeit it thick and soft usually.
What is the significance of this sacrifice, the "Two Loaves" being made from chametz, unlike almost every other korban?
This offering, the שתי הלחם, is brought at the conclusion of the omer. The Omer count began on Pesach and concludes on Shavuos. In a sense, the Omer is the bridge between Pesach and Shavuos.
Pesach is יציאת מצרים - the Exodus from Egypt. Shavuos is מתן תורה - the giving of the Torah. Omer, the bridge between them, is the process of leaving Egypt and working towards מתן תורה. It is the time to prepare for the receiving of the Torah.
On Pesach we ate לחם עוני - poor man's bread, a.k.a. the Bread of Affliction. We eat the matza to remember the days of slavery and oppression. By doing so we recall the process of leaving Egypt and leaving that oppression behind. Shavuos is when we finally hit the target and got the Torah. That is when we ultimately became free and a nation.
To symbolize this we offer the rare sacrifice with חמץ - the opposite of poor man's bread. This is the bread of the free and the wealthy. The un-oppressed. Rich man's bread, if you must. When we get to Shavuos we can finally say the עוני of מצרים is behind us.
We start with poor man's bread, we work towards our freedom and we end with rich man's bread.
The Torah is going through various details of the various holidays. It discusses the Omer offerings and upon arriving at the end of the Omer count (i.e. Shavuos), one has to bring a sacrifice called "shtei ha'lechem" - the two loaves. In 23:17 the Torah tells us, "מִמּוֹשְׁבֹתֵיכֶם תָּבִיאּוּ לֶחֶם תְּנוּפָה, שְׁתַּיִם שְׁנֵי עֶשְׂרֹנִים--סֹלֶת תִּהְיֶינָה, חָמֵץ תֵּאָפֶינָה: בִּכּוּרִים, לַיהוָה" or in English, "Ye shall bring out of your dwellings two wave-loaves of two tenth parts of an ephah; they shall be of fine flour, they shall be baked with leaven, for first-fruits unto the LORD."
This korban had a very unusual detail that makes it practically unique. It was made from chametz - leaven. It is one of two korbanos that contain leaven (the second is the korban Toda). All other sacrifices, including all the various mincha offerings, including the lechem ha'panim, including all other dough that would be offered in avrious forms in the mikdash, were leaven free. Kosher for Passover. Matza, albeit it thick and soft usually.
What is the significance of this sacrifice, the "Two Loaves" being made from chametz, unlike almost every other korban?
This offering, the שתי הלחם, is brought at the conclusion of the omer. The Omer count began on Pesach and concludes on Shavuos. In a sense, the Omer is the bridge between Pesach and Shavuos.
Pesach is יציאת מצרים - the Exodus from Egypt. Shavuos is מתן תורה - the giving of the Torah. Omer, the bridge between them, is the process of leaving Egypt and working towards מתן תורה. It is the time to prepare for the receiving of the Torah.
On Pesach we ate לחם עוני - poor man's bread, a.k.a. the Bread of Affliction. We eat the matza to remember the days of slavery and oppression. By doing so we recall the process of leaving Egypt and leaving that oppression behind. Shavuos is when we finally hit the target and got the Torah. That is when we ultimately became free and a nation.
To symbolize this we offer the rare sacrifice with חמץ - the opposite of poor man's bread. This is the bread of the free and the wealthy. The un-oppressed. Rich man's bread, if you must. When we get to Shavuos we can finally say the עוני of מצרים is behind us.
We start with poor man's bread, we work towards our freedom and we end with rich man's bread.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
what you say and how you say it
Pesah - Haggada
seder - maggid - 4 sons
Torah reading - Bo
The Rasha, the wicked son, asks what is this service to you? The answer we respond to him is by striking him on the teeth and telling him that had he been in Egypt he would not have gone out with the rest of the Jews.
In Parshat Bo, in 12:26-27, the passuk says, "when your children say to you what is this service for you? You will say it is the Pesah sacrifice for Hashem who skipped over the houses of the Jews...etc.
Why is it that in the haggada when the Rasha asks this questions he is punched in the face but in the Torah we give the child an answer. What is the difference? And why in the haggada do we say the Rasha will ask this question when in the Humash it does not differentiate and it seems that it is a valid question?
I think the difference is in the attitude and the setting. In the Humash, the question is being asked out of interest and curiosity. In the haggada the question is being asked out of rejection and scoffing.
When the children ask because they really don't know but want to, the answer is about the Pesah sacrifice. Whenthe children ask and it is clear they are asking in a scoffing and rejecting manner, the answer has to be sharper.
As "they" say, it is not just what you say, but how you say it.
seder - maggid - 4 sons
Torah reading - Bo
The Rasha, the wicked son, asks what is this service to you? The answer we respond to him is by striking him on the teeth and telling him that had he been in Egypt he would not have gone out with the rest of the Jews.
In Parshat Bo, in 12:26-27, the passuk says, "when your children say to you what is this service for you? You will say it is the Pesah sacrifice for Hashem who skipped over the houses of the Jews...etc.
Why is it that in the haggada when the Rasha asks this questions he is punched in the face but in the Torah we give the child an answer. What is the difference? And why in the haggada do we say the Rasha will ask this question when in the Humash it does not differentiate and it seems that it is a valid question?
I think the difference is in the attitude and the setting. In the Humash, the question is being asked out of interest and curiosity. In the haggada the question is being asked out of rejection and scoffing.
When the children ask because they really don't know but want to, the answer is about the Pesah sacrifice. Whenthe children ask and it is clear they are asking in a scoffing and rejecting manner, the answer has to be sharper.
As "they" say, it is not just what you say, but how you say it.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
difference between wise and wicked son
Pesah - Haggada
Maggid - 4 sons
What is the difference between our reponse to the wise son relative to the response to the wicked son? The wise son asked what are these rules for you and the wicked son asked what is the service for you. Why do we react so harshly to the wicked son when his question was not so different form that of the wise son?
The wise son, while maybe not being perfect, is still interested. He is searchign for answers. he is looking for the truth, in his own way.
The wicked son is a scoffer. He is a rejectionist. he is looking for ways to reject Judaism and show us that he is rejecting it. he is not lookign for answers. he is motivated and fueled by personal interests.
That is someone who you cannot give an answer to. It is wasting your breath to try. Nothing you say will be heard. So the wicked son requires a harsh response.
Maggid - 4 sons
What is the difference between our reponse to the wise son relative to the response to the wicked son? The wise son asked what are these rules for you and the wicked son asked what is the service for you. Why do we react so harshly to the wicked son when his question was not so different form that of the wise son?
The wise son, while maybe not being perfect, is still interested. He is searchign for answers. he is looking for the truth, in his own way.
The wicked son is a scoffer. He is a rejectionist. he is looking for ways to reject Judaism and show us that he is rejecting it. he is not lookign for answers. he is motivated and fueled by personal interests.
That is someone who you cannot give an answer to. It is wasting your breath to try. Nothing you say will be heard. So the wicked son requires a harsh response.
What happened to the tzaddik?
Pesah - Haggada
Maggid - 4 sons
We list 4 sons, each with his style of discussion about Pesah. The wise son, the wicked son, the simple son and the son who can't even ask a question.
Out of all these kids, one style seems to be missing. The righteous son. The tzaddik.
The wise son and the wicked son are not opposites. The wise son is an intellectual. Nothing to do with his level of piety.
We even see further that the wise son is not necessarily a tzaddik, as he asks, "What are these rules that Hashem commanded you" - similar to the wicked son, he asks about you rather than including himself. There is some sense of dissociation. It is more of an intellectual pursuit for him.
I have heard from rebbeim a number of times that a person can learn Torah all day long and not think once about Hashem. We do things by rote. We learn because we are supposed to, or even because we love to, but we do not necessrily relate to Hashem on a daily basis.
The opposite of the wicked son would be the tzaddik son, the righteous son. Why is such a child not listed among the other sons? Where is the "אחד צדיק"?
A Tzaddik is not bothered by the questions, even if he has any. He lives by his faith. We know the passuk tells us צדיק באמונתו יחיה - a tzaddik lives by his faith. He has emuna, faith, in Hashem and that he is doing the right thing. the rest does not matter.
That is why we answer the wise son with a very technical answer. he asked about the rules and we explain the rules to him. An answer based on emuna would not move him. He is technical and intellectual in nature and he is looking for that type of answer.
חנוך לנער על פי דרכו - educate each child in the way that is fitting for him.
The wise son asks detailed questions, give him detailed answers. The tzaddik son has no questions, or is not looking for answers. So he does not need to be mentioned.
Maggid - 4 sons
We list 4 sons, each with his style of discussion about Pesah. The wise son, the wicked son, the simple son and the son who can't even ask a question.
Out of all these kids, one style seems to be missing. The righteous son. The tzaddik.
The wise son and the wicked son are not opposites. The wise son is an intellectual. Nothing to do with his level of piety.
We even see further that the wise son is not necessarily a tzaddik, as he asks, "What are these rules that Hashem commanded you" - similar to the wicked son, he asks about you rather than including himself. There is some sense of dissociation. It is more of an intellectual pursuit for him.
I have heard from rebbeim a number of times that a person can learn Torah all day long and not think once about Hashem. We do things by rote. We learn because we are supposed to, or even because we love to, but we do not necessrily relate to Hashem on a daily basis.
The opposite of the wicked son would be the tzaddik son, the righteous son. Why is such a child not listed among the other sons? Where is the "אחד צדיק"?
A Tzaddik is not bothered by the questions, even if he has any. He lives by his faith. We know the passuk tells us צדיק באמונתו יחיה - a tzaddik lives by his faith. He has emuna, faith, in Hashem and that he is doing the right thing. the rest does not matter.
That is why we answer the wise son with a very technical answer. he asked about the rules and we explain the rules to him. An answer based on emuna would not move him. He is technical and intellectual in nature and he is looking for that type of answer.
חנוך לנער על פי דרכו - educate each child in the way that is fitting for him.
The wise son asks detailed questions, give him detailed answers. The tzaddik son has no questions, or is not looking for answers. So he does not need to be mentioned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
