Wednesday, August 06, 2014

A Thought on Parshas Va'eschanan

"...Va'eschanan..." "...and I prayed..." (3:23) Moshe Rabbeinu shares with us how he prayed to HaShem, longing to be given a reprieve and to be granted entry into the Promised Land. This word "eschanan" is an atypical term for referring to prayer. It has as its root the word "chen" which means grace or favor. It is as if Moshe said "I sought favor from G-d." Our sages have offered some homiletic interpretations of the word. So does the Panae'ach Raza. He notes that the word equals, in gematria value, 515. This is, he says, the identical value of the word "tefila" itself, which is the generic term for "prayer." Thus, while the word used is an a typical synonym for praying, the hidden meaning via gematria reminds us that it is still intended as a type of praying. Moreover, writes the Panae'ach Raza, the word "shira" (song) also adds up to 515. This means that there is an aspect of praying which can be captured through song as well as through uttering words alone. The Panae'ach Raza reminds us that when Shlomo HaMelech instructs us in Mishlei 3:9 to "show honor to HaShem through hon'echa" (which means "through your wealth"), our Talmudic sages want us to understand that this word "hon" can be understood as "chen", which then means "honor HaShem through what He has favored you with." So, this means that if a person can employ his voice in singing praise to HaShem (which is something that he has been favored with, in that not everyone has the gift of a melodic and a sweet singing voice), then the person must employ his song in showing honor i.e. praying, to HaShem. So, va'eschanan equals the word prayer, prayer equals song, song is an example of hon/chen, and the root of our word eschanan is in fact chen. Thus, Moshe Rabbeinu tells us that he was given the gift of song, which is what he offered to HaShem in his unsolicited prayer to Him. The Panae'ach Raza then notes that the word yeshara - straight and unwavering - is also in the gematria of 515, which then becomes a remez for how Moshe, and all of us, are supposed to posture ourselves when we stand and pray. We pray with our legs and feet together, which is the posture of the angels themselves. Moshe was standing in that posture as he sung his prayer to HaShem, much as we stand in the Shmoneh Esrae Amida. Now, his final observation is that our word "va'eschanan" is made up of "sixes". It begins with the letter vav which equals 6. It has six letters in it, which is another 6. The verse itself contains six words, which is a third 6. The total of three sixes is 18. This is the number of blessings in our Shmoneh Esrae (which means "18") which signifies that the prayer of Moshe comprised the form of prayer which we are bidden to offer daily. We offer it with our feet in angelic poise, our words directed above, and our intonation cloaked in whatever gifts and uniqueness that HaShem has granted us. May the rest of Chodesh Menachem Av and the months ahead be filled with chen and may all that we do find favor Above. Good Shabbos. D Fox

A Thought on Tisha B'av

For the past many years, a few of my rabbinical colleagues and I have convened an annual Tisha B'Av service intended to make the Kinos meaningful. We select a number of the Kinos and take turns explaining them with an inspirational preface. This approach is actually introduced in the opening section of Shulchan Aruch (Orech Chaim 1:4) where Rabbeinu Yosef Karo rules that "a few tachanunim said with mindful focus are better than saying many without mindful focus." So, we have a Kinos service which actually lasts as long as those in most shuls yet we recommend that each person praying with us take the time to allow us to guide their focus through some understanding of what each selected lamentation is about, what is its history and scope, and what we are meant to be processing within our minds and hearts as we make our way through its verses. One of the Kinos which my colleagues asked me to cover this year is #24 (Artscroll page 264; #26 in Rosenfeld edition, page 130) which is entitled Al Churban Beis HaMikdash. This Kina, written by the greatest of the paytanim Rabbeinu Elazar HaKalir, describes the degradation of the Great Temple and all that befell it as our foes pillaged its riches and carted them far away. It is fascinating to me that the focus here is not on the deaths and martyrdom of those who dwelt in Jerusalem or in Israel, but on the edifice and its contents, and their fate. This is hard for us to relate to. Our fears are about annihilation. Our pleading is for life, mortal Jewish life, and we do not easily occupy our minds with feelings about places and objects. I think of the tragedy a number of years ago in the town of Shechem or 'Nablus' when the Kever of Yosef was ransacked and reduced to rubble. We were shocked and we were angry yet for many it was more about what that Arab victory symbolized than about the demolished property. Most of us don't have feelings about tangible or impermanent things. How should we relate to Kina #24, and how do we achieve a sense that we have succeeded in mourning for Bais HaMikdash? Remember - the Shulchan Aruch (ibid 1:3) declares that "it is proper for anyone who has fear of Heaven to agitate and worry over the destruction of the Temple." How do we "agitate and worry"? During the Second World War, my father - may HaShem grant him a refuah sheleima - was drafted into the American Army. He was still in his late teens and after basic training, he and his friends, all Jewish boys from Boston, were shipped off to war. My father was stationed in North Africa and he used his occasional free time to make contact with the local Jews wherever he was stationed. Morocco, Libya, Senegal, Egypt - he arranged to meet the Jews of those exotic places, spending Pesach with this or that family and observing their practices and lifestyle. When he was sent to Alexandria, his plane crash-landed on a British base and nearly blew up. Later on, when his group was given a brief leave to rest and relax, a number of the soldiers made their way to Eilat and the "Riviera of Palestine." My father, however, persuaded a couple of his buddies to come with him on the rickety train through the desert that went from Egypt to Jerusalem. You see, Rosh HaShanna was coming and my father determined to pray at the "Wailing Wall" as the Kosel was then known. It was in the hands of the Jordanians who prohibited Jews from approaching their traditional holy place. The area which we now refer to as the "Kotel plaza" was a garbage dump, and the area adjacent to the wall was a thin strip of stone floor. My father, clad in the uniform of an American soldier, was undeterred by the Arabs who patrolled the area. No one questioned him or obstructed him from walking past the shacks and refuse and he made it, on Rosh HaShannah, to the Kotel. I do not know of anyone else, personally, who can claim such an adventuresome accomplishment. My father prayed on Rosh HaShannah at the Kosel haMaaravi when it was in Arab hands. There was no "Israel." This was "Palestine." Some 70 years later, I flew to Israel for my one of my frequent trips. This was three weeks ago. I landed on a Thursday in order to attend the Thursday night yartzeit seuda of my rebbe the Admor of Savraann zy'a, with whom I spent much time over many years obtaining shimush as a dayan on his Bais Din. Our plan was to wake up early Friday morning and go to his kever on Har HaZeisim, the famed and sacred Mount of Olives which overlooks the Temple Mount. Very late that Thursday night, the police contacted the rebbe's family stating that they had to call off the pilgrimage to Har HaZeisim. There were 250,000 Moslems converging on the Old City, packing East Jerusalem and declaring that they were planning a pogrom against any Jew who was seen in East Jerusalem, Har HaZeisim, the area between the Rova and their turf, and even on the Kotel grounds. The police stated that this throng of a quarter of a million Arabs posed a true danger and no Jews were to venture forth in those locales. Heartbroken, I went into Geula. Even there, the streets were relatively empty. The bus lines were virtually deserted as there was no one heading towards the Kotel area. Jerusalem was quiet and somber. Eruv Shabbos had a subdued feeling. The next week I was able to get to the Kosel although there were no crowds. I had no trouble finding a place at the wall to pray. Every day, I spoke to the Savranna gabbai and chassidim. No access to Har HaZeisim. In fact, my entire prolonged stay (I was in Israel longer than planned because of the war and the cessation of flights) we could not get to the rebbe's Ohel. I did not get a chance to pray there despite that having been one of my major goals that trip. I did get to Har HaMennuchos where I prayed at the Kever of my great Rosh Yeshiva Rav Simcha Wasserman z'l. I also went to Kever Rachel and prayed. But - our Mount of Olives? The area just past those somber yet beckoning stones of the Kosel - Har HaBayis? Not in our hands. Not within reach. Not accessible. We can't go there still. This clarified for me the lamenting of Rabbeinu Elazar HaKalir. We try to grasp, to conceptualize, that the Bais HaMikdash and its environs and its contents were ours. They belonged to us. The Mikdash was there for us, and we could travel there at will, at whim. It was our house. It was the embodiment of all that is Kadosh, and with each destructed implement, each damaged wall, each shattered object --- a limb was being torn off our collective spiritual body. The home and the homeland that millions longed for, died for, struggled to get to, whether Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi, the Ramban, the Rambam, or my father in a corporal's uniform - they meant everything to us in times long past and yet we can only get in tune with our deepest sorrow over their loss to us when.......we realize that they are still being taken away from us and we cannot have them. Those of us who know about loss, who work with loss and help others deal with losses, can begin to relate to this collective tragic loss of our Mikdash. The Kina by the Kalir helps us capture this sense of loss by giving us vivid descriptions of how one limb after another was pried off of the sanctified shrine and taken from us. It is true - this was stone and wood and metal and not human life. However, it was the life of the soul. It was the blood and tissue of the spirit. It was ours. And as long as we remain in golus, estranged from our land and from HaShem's ways - we do not get any of it back. We still mourn for our loss and we must mourn for ourselves. This is how we can come to that level depicted in Shulchan Aruch of being among "those who fear Heaven for whom it is proper to fret and worry about the destruction of the Mikdash." The destruction of the Mikdash is also the destruction of our fullest spiritual selves. We want them back. We need them back. May HaShem hear the sincerity in our yearnings this year. May He bring an end to injustice and treachery. May we merit the redemption rapidly and completely. May we make our way back to the sacred places and beyond, reclaiming the Har HaKodesh. May this be the final Fast of Tisha B'Av for our people. Dovid Fox

A Thought on Parshas Devarim

"...eleh ha'devarim..." "...these are the pronouncements..." (1:1) This week, the Panae'ach Raza offers some remazim, some insights derived from the linguistic subtleties of various words, which open up some deeper dimensions of understanding as we go through the verses. We know that Sefer Devarim, the fifth book of the Chumash, is known as the Mishnah Torah which means the review of the Torah. It comprises the lessons and teachings which Moshe gave over to the nation during the final days of his life. Our mystical tradition relates that the term "Mishna Torah" also alludes to the Torah sh'ba'al Peh - the Oral Torah, which are the further elucidations and developments of the Written Word. The Panae'ach Raza addresses some of these matters through the medium of remez. He begins by observing that this parsha is one of six which begin with the letter "alef." Eleh ha'devarim begins with an alef. So do "Eleh toldos Noach", "Eleh haPekudim", "Im bechukosai", "Eleh Maasei" and "Atem Nitzavim." The letter "alef" stems from the word "aluf" which means "teaching." Thus, the six "aluf"s hint at the six orders of the Mishnah, which is the corpus of the Oral Torah itself. By the way, the word Mishnah also means "teaching", so the remez is not spurious but is actually a powerful reference to "the six orders of Teaching" which both comprise the Oral Torah and which open up the breadth of the Written Torah. Furthermore, he notes that of the six alef-verses, four of them begin with the word "eleh." This translates as "these are." This corresponds, he suggests, to the four Orders upon which there is gemara expounding on the Mishnaic text. Of the six Orders, there is virtually no gemara associated with Seder Zeraim and Seder Taharos. However, there is a great deal of Talmud or gemara elaborating on Moed, Nashim, Nezikin and Kodashim. The four "elehs" hint at these four Orders. Now, going deeper, the word "eleh" is spelled with an alef, a lamed, and a heh. Those letters correspond in gematria equivalency to the number 36. If you count the tractates which comprise the gemara or Talmud, you will find 36 individual volumes. Another remez! Many of us recite the passages which follow the Musaf service which include an excerpt from the gemara Megilla 28b which looks at a verse in Chabakuk 3:6 which says "halichos olam lo" - the ways of the world are His. The Talmud prompts us to consider the word "halichos" as cognate to "halachos" which means "the Talmudic laws." The Panae'ach Raza suggests that this word "lo" which also equals 36 is a remez to the word "eleh" which our parsha begins with. This means that the Torah is hinting to us that when Moshe reviewed the Torah with us a second time, he was also presenting us with the Talmudic laws, which are the Oral Torah, as alluded to in the 36. He goes further still. If we look at the Talmud, we discover that there are five tractates which begin with the letter alef. They are Peah, Pesachim Rosh HaShanna, Bava Kamma, and Keilim. He sees this as a remez to how the Five Books of the Chumash are paralleled by an auspicious 5 which occurs in the Oral Torah. This is to remind us that the Torah is unified. It is one Torah, given by One G-d through one leader (Moshe). He adds that eleh equaling 36 hints not only to 36 tractates but to 36 instances where the Torah regards specific prohibitions as having the gravity of "kares" severity, 36 cubits of the Two Tablets of Sinai, 36 blessings which are said during the obligatory prayers of Morning and Afternoon amida, and 36 hidden pious persons living in every generation who promote spirituality in the world. Finally, the Panae'ach Raza looks at verses 1, 3 and 5 which tell us that Moshe spoke these words, then that Moshe spoke the words to the Jewish people, then that Moshe explained the words of the Torah. In the name of Rabbi Yehuda the Pious (haChasid) he says that this is one more allusion, this time to the Talmudic law of studying the Torah each week "Shnayim Mikra v'Echad Targum" - twice with the Written Word and once with the Targum or explanation. By wording Moshe's instructions as "saying", "saying" and "explaining", the Torah is alluding to this important halacha, which is actually codified in Shulchan Aruch. Wishing you a Shabbos abundant with deep mysteries and profound discoveries. D Fox

A Thought on Parshas Maasei

"...ad mos HaKohen HaGadol..." "...until the death of the Kohen Gadol..." (35:25) In Biblical times, a person guilty of manslaughter was exiled into one of the Cities of Refuge. He remained there until his death or until the death of the ranking Kohen Gadol who had been serving in the Bais HaMikdash at the time of the killing. Many interpretations have been offered as to the connection between this murderer (albeit inadvertently so) and that Kohen Gadol. How is it that the murderer must remain exiled until that Kohen Gadol passes away? Rashi offers two thoughts, one being that the role of the High Priest is to bring a sense of the Divine down to the nation so that they lead long lives of holiness, whereas this murderer has done the opposite by adding to the disharmony and agony of HaShem's people. Thus, the murderer does not deserve to live among the rest of the nation who adhere to the sacred mission of that Kohen Gadol. He is released and given a fresh start once that Kohen Gadol passes on. Rashi's second thought puts the focus not on the murderer but on the Kohen Gadol himself. He should have prayed that nothing so unfortunate - such as this killing - occur during his tenure. Therefore.......unfortunately Rashi ends his comment there, which in turn has led to many interpretations as to what Rashi's second thought was. The Panae'ach Raza suggests that the concept here is that there is a symbiosis between these two figures and the events which occur. On the one hand, the Kohen Gadol sought to bring about a nation at peace in its interpersonal and its spiritual dealings. This killer tarnished that mission and this had an effect on Jewish society. There might be murmurings, once the exiled killer was released back into society, that this Kohen Gadol might seek revenge and somehow attempt to mete out additional punishment to the man who made his mission of peace imperfect. However, the Torah blocks such thinking by keeping the killer in exile until the Kohen Gadol dies. Once he is replaced by his successor, people will not gossip about a revenge conspiracy since the incoming Kohen Gadol had nothing to do with the events which occurred during his predecessor's reign. In contrast, this Kohen Gadol still needed to reflect - there is a premise in Rabbinic lore that whatever cases, questions or difficulties occur during the tenure of a Torah leader (including a Kohen Gadol), they are a reflection on him and on his own personal and spiritual issues. Thus, there is a reason why HaShem will see to it that a particular crisis, or tragedy or complication arises in the course of a particular person being in charge. Since the manslaughter happened during the tenure of this particular Kohen Gadol, he needed to contemplate wherein he may have been lacking in his own spiritual stature. Why did a tragedy occur in Israel during the time when he was the ranking spiritual force of the nation? One should not say that this was all the "karma" of the killer or of his unintended victim. It also had something to do with the Kohen Gadol at some spiritual level (not insofar as responsibility, guilt or blame but with regards to the synchronicity involved). It was not for naught that HaShem intended this tragedy to cloud the otherwise peaceful and sanctified existence that this Kohen Gadol strived for. The nation itself likely fretted over the tragedy and pondered whether there was something amiss among their spiritual leadership. Thus, the Kohen Gadol lived out his own days in a form of spiritual shackles, introspective about what role he may have had, not in the killing, but in HaShem wanted him to see that his years of devoted service to G-d and nation were not entirely perfect. With the death of the Kohen Gadol, his ultimate personal atonement was achieved, and this meant that life could resume its normal course, even for the man convicted of involuntary manslaughter. This week, when missiles flew over Bnei B'rak, the Gaon Rav Chaim Kanievsky shlit'a made a statement. People were expecting him somehow to implicate the modern city of Tel Aviv next door and how their more relaxed level of Judaism was "the cause" for that attack. However, he declared that the residents of Bnei B'rak were the ones who needed to do repentant introspection: if the event was happening to them, HaShem had it happen for purposes which pertained to each resident. Nothing is for naught. No thing is coincidental. If I strive to have a good life and something distressing interferes with my plans, there is a purpose in that. HaShem wanted me to experience that inconvenience and to grow from it. Good Shabbos. D Fox

A Thought on Parshas Matos

"...va'yedaber Moshe el roshei ha'matos l'Benei Yisroel..." "...and Moshe spoke to the heads of the Matos to the Children of Israel..." (30:2) This week's parsha begins with the laws regarding vows, and how they are to be managed. The Torah tells us that when a person vows to do something, there is a mechanism whereby he or she can be absolved of having to maintain the restrictive nature of that vow. For example, a woman might ask her husband to annul her vow. The difficulty with our opening verse is the word "Matos." Now, sometimes that word can mean "tribes", although a more common term for tribe is shevet. Also - why would the Torah speak here about Moshe addressing the heads of the tribes when we are really talking about a law that is a more individual one, not one which pertains to a collective tribe or its leaders? Rashi addresses this question by saying that the Torah is referencing the sequence in which Moshe taught this law to the nation. The tribal heads were given instruction prior to the rest of the nation. Rashi suggests that the reason for this is that when it comes to dealing with the laws of vows, a person may turn to a wise man, a Torah sage, who has the authority to annul or remove the restrictions of some vows. The Torah is hinting at that procedure by Moshe addressing the "heads of the tribes" which serves almost as a euphemism for "those who are ahead of other individuals by being Torah scholars." The Panae'ach Raza appreciates this approach, for in fact Rashi extracted his lesson from the Talmud itself, which makes it an un-disputable approach. The Talmud indeed teaches that a Torah scholar has the authority to release one from a vow. What concerns the Panae'ach Raza, however, is the use of the term "matos". If we mean " heads of tribes", then the Torah could have written the standard "shevet." If we mean "Torah scholar", the verse might have just said "Torah scholars can annul vows." What is the actual meaning of the actual words here? What or who exactly are these "Matos heads"? The Panae'ach Raza suggests that the word "matos" does not mean tribe in the context of our verse. It comes from the word "le'hatos" which means to alter, adjust or redirect. One who can redirect or change something is "mateh" in a particular direction (as in "acharei rabim le'hatos"). Hence, our verse's phrase "roshei ha'matos" means, in context, "those in charge of redirecting", which is a reference to the ability of a wise Torah scholar to work with someone and to redirect his thinking and help him reconsider and resolve whatever drove him to make an unjustifiable vow in the first place. The "roshei matos" are the experts who understand what drives people, how people form perceptions, judgments and make decisions, and who can apply their insightful expertise, if needed, to help one release himself or herself from what may have been a mistaken decision. A Torah scholar who has demonstrated this capacity to be insightful, empathic and aware of the scope of the laws involved in nedarim, vows, is the one who we turn to when needing to rethink and reconsider the binds that we get ourselves into. Wishing you a good Shabbos from the Heavenly City of Jerusalem. May we soon rejoice with a release from all that binds us. D Fox