A Thought on Parshas Nasso

"V'korbano ka'aras kesef..." "...and his offering will include silver..." (7:13) The wording of our verse, regarding the offering made on behalf of the tribe of Judah, differs from those verses describing the other tribes' offerings. For some reason, the verse begins with the word "and" which is written in Hebrew with the prefix letter "vov." Every nuance, every change in the Torah text, is noteworthy and requires interpretation. What does the word "and" or the letter "vov" add to the message here about this tribe, in that its offerings were no different than the others'? The Gan offers a midrashic treasure. The Prince of Yehuda was Nachshon ben Aminadav. The "vov" prefix has the numeric equivalent of six. It is the sixth letter of the alef-bais. There is something significant about six, then, in our understanding of this Nachson. The Gan brings us the tradition that six great and pious men were descended from Nachson. If we look into later Biblical history, we see that from Nachson of the tribe of Yehuda came Dovid, Doniel, Chanania, Mishael, Azaria, and there will also arise Melech HaMoshiach - the messianic king who will be from the tribe of Yehuda and a direct link to the Davidic dynasty. Moshiach ben Dovid. Moreover, each of these great men will be blessed with six blessings. If you examine the descriptions which TaNaCH offers us on each of these six descendants, we find that each one is portrayed with six unique attributes. Of Dovid, it is written (Shmuel I 16:18) that he was a skilled musician, of mighty valor, a warrior, of integrity, of favor, and pious. Of Doniel (5:12), we are told that he had an ascendant spirit, knowledge, wisdom, insight, analytic and problem solving skills. Chanania, Mishael and Azariah (Doniel 1:4) are depicted as unblemished, handsome, skillful with both wisdom and knowledge, discerning, and confident. Of the Moshiach it has been foretold (Yeshayahu 11:2) that Ruach HaKodesh will be upon him, as will the spirit of wisdom, understanding, counsel, might and fear of HaShem. Some of us at times tend to downplay these "midrashic drashos" as rather light and "cute" toying with the words of the Torah to bring out some barely related idea. Chas v'Shalom. The wisdom of drash is also a part of Torah, and particularly when introduced by the Gan, who so often addresses the overt meaning of our Torah passages, this foray into the realm of drash accounts for the appearance of a letter which we would either consider superfluous or of no actual function in interpreting the verse. The Gan shows us that every letter, every nuance, also adds to the "pshat" - the intended meaning of the Torah. By singling out the tribe of Yehuda and its prince, the Torah alludes to the princely and ascendant qualities of all of the great ones who would follow him, each blessed with the skills which mark one as a wise, stable, G-d fearing leader. These are the types of people whom we need to lead our nation during times of plenty, times of need, times of strife in exile, and to lead us out of exile b'me'haira b'yameinu. Good Shabbos. D Fox

A Thought on Parshas Bamidbar

“…nesunim nesunim hae’ma lo mae’es Benei Yisroel…” “…given are to Aharon from the Children of Israel…” (3:9) The Torah commands us to present the Levites to the Kohanim, whom they will serve and assist in assuring that there can be the priestly service in the Mishkan. Our verse makes clear that this task of “giving” the Levites over to the Kohanim is the obligation of the Jewish people. The Gan explains: We know that the Leviim worked in and around the Mishkan, which involved labor, organization and portage. The Torah in turn awards the tithes of food and beverage to those Leviim. In fact, a verse later on (18:21) stipulates that those tithes were given “chaelef avodasam” – in exchange for the work which they did. The tithes – maaser – were portions that the Jewish people took from their own produce and gave over to the Leviim, as that same verse declares “kol maaser b’Yisroel”. What is the relationship between the Leviim, the Benei Yisroel, and the maaser? What does our verse mean here when it says that it is not only the tithes which we give to Leviim but it is the Leviim whom we “give” to the Kohanim? The Gan offers this thought: The original plan was, as we know, that the first born from each family would perform the ritual and sacrificial services. We lost that right, and this avoda was taken from our first born and given (by HaShem) to the Kohanim. They are doing the service which at one time was meant for us to do ourselves. Some of that work is undertaken by the broader tribe of Levi, of which the Kohanim are but one faction. The Torah wants those Leviim cared for, and this task of Benei Yisrael sustaining them with food-as-wages is ordained by the Torah. By telling us that the Leviim are to be given by the Benei Yisroel to the Kohanim, the Torah is emphasizing to us that we are in effect “hiring” the Leviim to serve the Kohanim. Since we are hiring them, they in effect become our agents or our employees but since we are not the ones doing work in the Mishkan, there is nothing that these Levites do for us. Rather, we send them to serve the Kohanim, who are doing our work. We pay them and hire them to lend support to the Kohanim, who are doing the avoda which at one time had been the sacred service which was to have been the task of the Jewish people. Wishing you a Good Shabbos and a Yom Tov Shel Matan Torah Sameach! D Fox

A Thought on Parshios Behar and Bechukosaid

"...be'Har Sinai..." "...at Mt. Sinai..." (25:1) The following lines are the Gan's introduction to Parshas Behar: "All of the parshios, from the beginning of Sefer VaYikra, were given in the Ohel Moed because all of them apply in the Ohel Moed. The sacrifices, purity and impurity laws, eating the offerings, rules for those with tzaras, ziva, keri, child-birthing, the Mishkan inauguration...the whole range of subjects. All of these pertained to the Ohel Moed. However, these next two parshios are not relevant to the Ohel Moed. They are not relevant to the Kohanim. The verses which discuss Yovel and Arachin here do have a slight connection to the Kohanim in that the Shofar was blown on Yovel by the Kohanim, and the Kohanim were involved in the assessments done for Arachin. Nonetheless, the subject matter of these two parshios is really unrelated to the Ohel Moed, and you should not err in thinking otherwise. So, even though the entire Torah was given at Sinai, and most of VaYikra was then re-presented in the Ohel Moed where its laws and rules were relevant, the content of Behar and Bechukosai is unrelated to the Ohel Moed and their information was not in fact re-presented in that place during that interval in our history. The only time that the information in our two parshios was introduced was in the original giving of the Torah at Sinai. It is for this reason, then, that the parsha begins with "this is what HaShem told Moshe at Har Sinai." The intention of that preface is to clarify that what follows is unrelated to the Ohel Moed and is information which was presented to us one time only, earlier on, at Sinai." This, explains the Gan, is perhaps a simpler "pshat" level answer to the question posed by Rashi (in the name of the Sifra) "what does Shmita and Yovel have to do with Sinai?" Whereas Rashi offers a midrashic explanation in his answer, the Gan allows his historical perspective to clarify very lucidly the context wherein HaShem told Moshe these parshios specifically and exclusively at Sinai. Our parsha begins with the introduction "these were told at Mt. Sinai" because they are exceptions to the general theme of all prior passages in Sefer VaYikra. The other parshios were repeated in the Ohel Moed but Behar and Bechukosai were said at Sinai, period. This is the Gan's alternative approach to the question "mah inyan shmita etzel Har Sinai" - what does shmita have to do with Sinai? His answer is that shmita ONLY has to do with Har Sinai. The Gan was written by 13th century Rabbeinu Aharon ben Yosi haCohen, Baal Tosfos More pirushim presented by Rabbi Dr. Dovid Fox at http://thoughtonparsha.blogspot.com/

A Thought on Parshas Emor

"...emor el haKohanim..." "...say to the Kohanim..." (21:1) There are many places in the Torah where Moshe is instructed to teach the Kohanim about their responsibilities and tasks. Our verse is somewhat unique in that it gives this preface, "say to the Kohanim" rather than just launching into the more familiar instructional formats found in most other verses. The Gan notices this, and ponders whether the casual phrase "say to them" implies that Moshe was already in a dialogue with HaShem. It would seem that way, in that there is no formality to the verse, such as the use of words like "you shall command them" might imply. The Gan finds a midrash which addresses this, noting that the prior verse at the close of last week's parsha (20:27) contains the prohibition of seeking out "spirits" in order to guide oneself. Meanwhile, our parsha which begins "say to the Kohanim" focuses on how a Kohen must avoid contact with a dead person. Is there a link between those two thoughts? Are prohibitions about seeking spirits, and Kohanim avoiding the dead, somehow connected? The midrash proposes a link, indeed. It writes that the deeper background of these passages is that HaShem provided Moshe Rabbeinu with a panoramic vision of all of the scholars and rulers who would eventually lead the Jewish nation throughout the centuries to come. As Moshe scanned the saga of unfolding history as it would develop in each generation, he stopped at the image of King Shaul. Shaul haMelech was seen, as the Navi depicts the tragic scene (Shmuel I 31:4), impaled on his sword, dead. Moshe called out to HaShem, "Master of the Universe, the very first king who will lead Your children will die by sword?". HaShem, says the midrash, answered Moshe, "are you telling Me? Say this to the Kohanim as you prepare them to avoid contact with dead people. Look closer into that future event. Shaul sought counsel from someone who claimed to conjure spirits (Shmuel I 28:7 ) which is forbidden (as our prior verse relates, as cited above). Shaul also had the Kohanim of Nov executed (Shmuel I 22:17-18). For these actions, it was decreed from Above that Shaul would in fact be punished by that tragic death. The Torah links the two topics in adjoining verses with a soft statement to the Kohanim. With this midrashic linking of the contiguous parshios, and an atypical wording of how Moshe should address the Kohanim, the Gan reveals another of the deeper themes which can be found when one studies the Torah with the tools handed to us by our Sages. The Gan offers a glimpse into how later events which befall the Jewish nation, and individuals, are alluded to in the Torah itself. Hofuch bah d'kula bah - les mila d'lo ramiza b'Oraisa. Good Shabbos. D Fox The Gan was written by 13th century Rabbeinu Aharon ben Yosi haCohen, Baal Tosfos More pirushim presented by Rabbi Dr. Dovid Fox at http://thoughtonparsha.blogspot.com/