A Thought on Parshas Va'era

"...v'lo shom'u...mi'kotzer ruach u'mae'avoda kasha..." "...the Jews did not listen to Moshe because of their hard labor..." (5:9) "...hen Benei Yisroel lo shomu v'eich yishma'eini Pharaoh?..." (5:12) "...if the Jews didn't listen to me why would Pharaoh listen to me?..." Rashi cites the words of our sages that Moshe's statement here represents one of the ten times we see "kal v'chomer" deductive reasoning used in the Torah. Moshe's point makes great sense, at first glance: if the Jews had refused to accept his offer to pick up and leave, certainly Pharaoh would have no interest in granting Moshe's request! That seems obvious, until we go back to the first verse above. The Torah seems to offer a reason why the Jews were not keen on the plan. The Torah spells out that they were out of breath and overworked, and this may have dulled their interest in putting forth effort to change their circumstances. They lacked the spirit. That factor, though, had nothing to do with Pharaoh. Maybe Pharaoh would indeed be inspired by Moshe's plan, or maybe not. Regardless, whatever stance he took cannot be deduced from the Jewish people's disinterest, which was a product of their misery and slavery. Rashi's interpretation makes it hard to see what "kal v'chomer" our sages attribute to Moshe's assertion. The commentaries struggle to understand Rashi, in view of this point. The Panae'ach Raza challenges Rashi's approach, questioning if this is indeed a true "Kal v'Chomer", as explained. He then offers a different angle. Our first verse, which describes how the Jews lacked motivation and energy, is not a reference to their slavery and bondage in Egypt. It is a reference to their feeling unready to go and embrace a new religious lifestyle fraught with hard ritual avoda. They felt that the requirements and burdens involved in serving HaShem in so many ways would be exhausting. They believed that they lacked the energy and the stamina to take on "avoda kasha" - demanding religious service. The hard work referred to in the verse is not the bondage in Egypt, but the religious commitments upon leaving Egypt. They felt helpless and weak, and were not inspired to take this on. The Torah is explaining, in this verse, the reason the Jews turned down the offer to leave Egypt. This then was the actual kal v'chomer: if the Jews evinced no interest or enthusiasm about serving HaShem, how would Moshe be able to argue that Pharaoh should let them do it, given that they didn't want to go anyway?! The reasoning was "if the people do not want to go, I certainly cannot convince Pharaoh that he should agree to let them go." At this low point in the enslaved lives of our nation, the lure of replacing one form of servitude with another, even when our "task Master" was the Divine, did not appeal to the broken spirit of the people. The verse should be understand as stating "the Children of Israel were broken in spirit and were not enticed by the offer of leaving exile in order to undertake the demands and challenges of a religious life." Another spin on two verses, and a Chazal, which many have read, over and again, without stopping to ponder it. Maybe some of us continue to resist "avoda kasha." The Panae'ach Raza revives our spirit, and makes the work a bit easier for us! Good Shabbos. D Fox

A thought on Parshas Shmos

"...va'tir'aehu es ha'yeled v'hinei naar bocheh..." "...and she saw the child and behold, the youth was crying..." (2:6) Pharaoh's daughter found a cradle floating in the river and upon having it opened, our verse seems to say that she saw inside a yeled, a male child. The verse then switches to the term naar, which usually refers to a youth, or an older male child. This is not actually a redundancy but rather an inconsistency. A child is not a youth. The first term seems to refer to the infant boy whereas the second implies a much older boy. Rashi, of course, cites a now well-known midrash that both words refer to baby Moshe. He was a child, but his voice was like that of an older youth. Why that was the case is not explained by Rashi, and is the subject of various interpretations. The Panae'ach Raza offers a different midrashic view. We know that Miriam, the older sister of little Moshe, was standing nearby, watching over her baby brother as he lay in the cradle amidst the river's reeds. The Torah spells this out clearly. Pharaoh's daughter somehow deduces that the little one is a Jew, then she actually speaks to Miriam about taking care of the baby. However, there is one sibling missing. Miriam and Moshe had an older brother, Aharon. Where was Aharon during this tense time? The Panae'ach Raza notes that the gematria - the numeric value - of naar bocheh - the youth was crying, equals that of the three words "v'da Aharon haKohen" - "and this was Aharon the Kohen." The Torah is hinting to us, he writes, that while Miriam hovered nearby to watch over the baby, Aharon was crying over his baby brother, fearing for his fate and the risks he faced alone in the river. And - it was those tears, the crying of Aharon, which indicated to Pharaoh's daughter that this little child must be a Jew, for his obviously Jewish brother Aharon was weeping over him. Those tears are what triggered in her not only a correct identification of the baby's Jewish race, but also her compassion to comfort the crying youth by rescuing his brother. ************** "...Shlach na b'yad Tishlach..." "...please send in the hand of the one you will send..." (4:13) Moshe resists the mission which HaShem has assigned him, pleading that HaShem select a different agent, a different messenger, to go rescue the Jews from Egypt. This seems a bit difficult, given that Moshe trusts in HaShem and has been Divinely chosen by Him. The Panae'ach Raza offers an idea from Sefer HaChefetz (I did a little research to discover what this was and who wrote it; the popular scholarly assumption - there is some dispute - is that this was written by the tenth century Rabbeinu Chananel ben Chushiel). This source notes that our verse follows Moshe's earlier reluctance, owing to his having impaired speech. Our verse is not Moshe's new objection, but rather his suggestion to HaShem. Moshe Rabbenu was saying "I will go but don't expect me to communicate verbally. Give me the words in writing, and I will carry them to Egypt and appoint someone else to say them on my and on Your behalf." The words "send in the hand of the one you will send" thus means, "I am the one whom You are sending, so send along with me the script You want said, which I will carry by hand." Two novel views from our perceptive master Rabbeinu Yitzchak ben Yehuda haLevi, the Panae'ach Raza. Good Shabbos.

A Thought on Parshas Vayechi

"...va'yidgu le'rov b'kerev ha'aretz..." "...and may they thrive within the land..." (48:16) Yakov bestows a loving blessing to his grandsons. It is such a wonderful blessing that Jews all over the world still recite this bracha, offering it to their own children, to all of the children in their communities each Simchas Torah, and little children often say it at bedtime, or sing its words to a nice tune. The wording is a bit challenging, however. I have translated it literally above, although many would alter the translation to fit English grammar and say "may they thrive upon the land." The Hebrew word "b'kerev" seems a little atypical, in that it means inside of or in the middle of. People generally walk on or live on, the surface of the earth. What is the meaning, then, of Yakov blessing us that we would thrive within the earth? The Panae'ach Raza notices this slight shift in the expected grammar. He offers a thought. He says that Yakov, ever vigilant about the eventual saga of how his descendants would wrestle with the nations of the world, foresaw times to come when the Jewish nation would hide in the fields and in the forests, fleeing from their foe and concealing themselves within the land, rather than remain out upon the land. His bracha is that we will still thrive, survive. I think of images of Jews during the Holocaust, going into hiding, underground, or in the forests of Europe, wrestling to survive and also wrestling to maintain their Jewish identity within even when having to hide it from without. I think of the stories my father told me of the Troglodyte Jews of North Africa, whom he visited while stationed there during the War. These were Jews who lived in caves, underground, deep within the earth, in order to keep out of sight of their Arab neighbors, yet they maintained solid religious identities. I think of the Jews who fled the Inquisition, going into hiding, yet their genetic fire was kept silently aflame despite the challenges of time and assimilation threats, some of them living within the American Southwest and only now emerging, reclaiming their ancestral faith. This was all possible because of the bracha of Yakov. He blessed his grandsons, promising them that they would continue to thrive, even when having to go underground 'b'kerev ha'aretz'. Wishing you a good Shabbos, as we close Sefer Bereishis with the help of HaShem. D Fox