Parshat Mishpatim 27 Shevat 5779 / February 2, 2019 Daf Yomi: Chulin 67, Nach Yomi: Tehillim 22 Weekly Dvar Torah A project of the NATIONAL COUNCIL OF YOUNG ISRAEL SPONSORED BY THE HENRY, BERTHA AND EDWARD ROTHMAN FOUNDATION ROCHESTER, NY,CLEVELAND, OHIO, CIRCLEVILLE, OHIO

Becoming a Chasid Chagai Rubin Associate Member, Young Israel Council of

The posuk begins: "And these are the judgments." Quoting the Mechilta, writes "Wherever the Torah says: ‘And these’ it adds on to that which has been stated previously. Just as that which has been stated previously, the Ten Commandments are from Sinai, so too these commandments the Torah is about to state are from Sinai."

The obvious question is: What would make us think the civil law that follows is not from Sinai? Why is the “and” necessary to make the connection clear and to remind us of the divine origin of what follows?

The Gemara in Baba Kama [30a] makes the following statement: “Rav Yehuda says ‘One who wishes to become a Chosid (translated as pious or devout) should fulfill the words of Tractate Nizikin’ (i.e.Tractates Bava Kama, Bava Metzia and Bava Basra, which contain everything pertaining to civil and tort laws).” Rava says “He should fulfill the words of Tractate Avos’ and others say ‘He should fulfill the words of Tractate Brochos.”

Since Avos teaches us how to be pious in our relationships with others, and Brochos teaches us to elevate the mundane by making Brachos which connect us with HaShem and bring true dveikus (adherence), we can see how they relate to being a Chasid. But what about Nizikin?

In chapter 24 verse 1, the posuk says: “To Moses He said ‘Go up to HaShem – you, Aaron, Nadav and Avihu, and seventy elders of Israel.’” Rashi points out that this took place before Bnai Yisrael heard the Aseres Hadibros (Ten Commandments), despite the fact that it occurs in the Torah after them. While Rashi reminds us in his commentary that there is no chronological order to the Torah, there must be some message in the order being changed. Why are the laws of Mishpatim embedded inside the narrative of revelation?

Rav Yaakov Kamenetzky (Emes LeYaakov) quotes Pirkei Avos: "Beloved is Man for he is created in His image.” He then asks : Why weren't the non-Jews commanded to keep the Mishpatim as well?

Rav Yaakov answers that, while Mishpatim seem to be civil laws which are developed and applied based on human understanding, they are in fact much more than that. An example, continues Rav Yaakov, is the law of freeing the Hebrew servant after six years. Why six years? This is to remind us of creation, the freedom from work at the seventh stage of a cycle. In this example as one of many, what is apparently a Mishpat incorporates a lesson of emunah into the mitzvah.

We can expand this idea even further. In chapter 23 verse 5 we read: “When you see the donkey of someone you hate lying under its burden, will you refrain from helping him? You shall surely help him.” The Gemarah in Bava Metzia [32a] informs us that this includes the following scenario: If a friend requires unloading and an enemy requires loading, one’s first obligation is towards his enemy. Why? Continues the : “In order to subdue one’s evil inclination.”

Think about it. My friend’s donkey is withering in pain and needs my assistance to relieve the animal’s burden. And yet I am commanded to ignore this and assist my enemy to LOAD his donkey to force me to override my natural instinct. The lesson we learn from this is that perfecting one’s character is itself a mitzvah.

We can now understand Rav Yehuda’s statement that the study of Nezikin will lead to becoming a Chasid. Rashi’s comment, emphasizing the Divine origin of these civil laws, is hinting to us that these laws are not of the same kind we are familiar with in secular society.

With regard to the question of why revelation is taken out of chronological order, we see that in addition to providing rulings for practical application, the Mishpatim carry fundamental lessons of the Aserres Hadibros – hence, the placement of these laws within that context.

Before publishing Horeb, Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch, in a letter to his cousin Tzvi May, writes: "One could write a whole treatise on the damage that has been done, and is still being done, by the fact that the Shulchan Aruch did not appear in one volume. That is how it came about that many a person has thought (and still thinks) that he is a perfect Jew if he merely observes the laws of Orach Chaim. A good deal of Yoreh Deah and even more of Choshen Mishpat and Even Haezer was neglected." Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l has said this is why we introduce the study of Elu Metziot in grades 5-6 in the yeshiva ketanot.

With guidance from these two great luminaries, and by becoming more familiar with the halochos of Seder Nezikin, we will be able to incorporate them into our lives, and thereby strive to be true Chasidim.

Shabbat Shalom

The Weekly Sidra Rabbi Moshe Greebel Z"L Associate Member, Young Israel Council of Rabbis

At certain points, our Rabbanim of blessed memory, were in the habit of affording us a rare peek into the elucidation of more difficult to comprehend aspects of the Torah. While no one has the ability to fully comprehend any feature of the Torah, these subtle glances do clarify certain perspectives heretofore unrealized.

There is within the repository of Torah a category of recompense for damage which is termed ‘K’nas,’ or fine, where the remuneration is much more than what would seem is actually owed by the defendant. A Ganav (burglar) who is apprehended with a burgled animal in hand is given a K’nas by the Torah:

“If the theft be at all found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep; he shall restore double.” (Sh’mos 22:3)

T’rumah, an offering of grain, wine, and oil, may only be eaten by Kohanim (priestly family). If T’rumah is eaten by non Kohanim, in addition to remuneration for the principle, the Torah adds a K’nas:

“And if a man (non Kohain) eats of the holy thing (T’rumah) unwittingly, then he shall put its fifth part, and shall give it to the Kohain with the holy thing.” (Vayikra 22:14)

As can be seen, these forms of K’nas are not mechanisms of our Rabbanim of blessed memory, but rather, straight out of the Torah itself. Now, while there are of course, quite a few other categories of K’nas in the Torah, this week’s Sidra features the following one:

“If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.” (Sh’mos 21:37)

As opposed to our first case of the burglar being apprehended with the live animal in hand, this Passuk (verse) speaks of livestock which was first burgled, then slaughtered or sold. For large livestock such as an ox, the value of five oxen must be paid. For smaller livestock such as a sheep, the value of four sheep is paid.

In the text Damesek Eliezer by Rav Eliezer Hager of Vishnitz (1890- 1945) of blessed memory, some rather interesting observations are offered in conjunction with this K’nas of Arba V’Chamisha (four and five times), as can be seen from the following.

The Midrash P’liya learns:

“He shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep….. Because we burgled the ox, and constructed the Aigel (calf), we are obligated to remunerate five times for the ox.”

Obviously, the Midrash P’liya is speaking of the sin of the Aigel HaZahav, the golden calf, which has remained throughout the years a stigma against the Jewish nation. But, what has this to do with the K’nas of ‘five oxen’? What is the significance of five in the Midrash P’liya?

In order to resolve this question, the author of the text K’neses Y’chezkel, Rav Y’chezkel Katznellboigen (1668- 1749) of blessed memory, quoted a specific Midrash, without supplying a Makor (source) for it, on the following Passuk uttered by Shlomo HaMelech (King Solomon):

“Which yet my soul seeks, but I find not; one man among a thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found.” (Koheles 7:28)

The gist of this anonymous Midrash, paraphrased by Rav Y’chezkel, works in the following manner. When it came to the Aigel HaZahav, those who were responsible for it stated:

“…..These are your gods, Yisroel, which have brought you out of the land of Egypt.” (Sh’mos 32:8)

In LaShon HaKodesh (holy tongue) the term for ‘these’ is ‘Aileh.’ In the above Passuk of Shlomo HaMelech, we read:

“….. One man among a thousand have I found; but a woman among all these (Aileh) have I not found. (Koheles 7:28)

Thus, not one woman was found involved in the ‘Aileh,’ which denotes the Aigel HaZahav.

Now then, if the latter part of the Passuk is speaking of the Aigel HaZahav, learned Rav Y’chezkel, the beginning of the Passuk must be doing the same:

“….. One man among a thousand have I found…..” (Koheles 7:28)

That is, expounded Rav Y’chezkel, while not one woman was involved in the Aigel HaZahav, one man in every thousand was found to have been involved. Since the male population of the B’nai Yisroel at that time was 600,000, it means that all in all, 600 males were involved in the Aigel HaZahav. Yet, the Torah tells us that many more than 600 were punished:

“And the L’vi’im did according to the word of Moshe; and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.” (Sh’mos 32:28)

Hence, concluded Rav Y’chezkel, 3,000 is actually five times the 600 who were involved with the Aigel HaZahav, which gives us the K’nas of Arba V’Chamisha for having burgled, and slaughtered or sold an ox. And, so end the words of the K’neses Y’chezkel.

Of course, as stated prior, while no one really can fully understand the true essence for this or any other K’nas, we are most fortunate that our Rabbanim of blessed memory were in the habit of offering us these small insights, affording us a slender and quick glimpse into the endless complexity and beauty of Torah.

May we soon see the G’ulah Sh’laimah in its complete resplendence- speedily, and in our times.

Own Your Emotions Rabbi Dov Shapiro Associate Member, Young Israel Council of Rabbis

Before the advent of AAA, Gieco Roadside Assistance, and Chaverim, it was common to see one driver stop and help another stranded motorist change a flat tire or add water to a smoking radiator. In biblical times, that would be equivalent to helping a struggling donkey driver unload a heavy load from his fallen animal’s back, or helping him reload some unbalanced cargo. Both of these mitzvos, loading and unloading, are discussed in this week’s parsha.

In studying these halachos we find that the Torah is concerned not only with the needs of the rider but also with the well being and the comfort of the struggling animal. Hence, the gemara tells us that when faced with both mitzvos simultaneously, i.e. you come upon two travelers, one requires assistance in unloading his donkey, and the other requires assistance in reloading, precedence is given to the unloading since it provides relief not only to the man, but to the donkey as well.

This prioritization seems reasonable – give precedence to the mitzvah that provides the maximum relief. What may surprise us though is the gemara in Bava Metzia (32b) which adds an interesting caveat to the above halacha, and delineates an exception to the rule that unloading precedes reloading. If the animal which needs to be loaded is owned by an individual to whom you feel animosity, that mitzvah takes precedence over unloading your friend’s donkey. You should first help load the donkey of your enemy before unloading the donkey of your friend. Although this may seem counter-intuitive, the gemara explains that in this case the additional consideration of your midos – your own character development - overrides the needs of your friend’s animal. In the gemara’s words, “lakuf yitzro adif”, subduing your yetzer hora (evil inclination) is a more important goal that needs to be addressed. One’s decisions should not be motivated by hatred that he feels to another Jew, and the most effective way to subdue that impulse is by displaying love and concern. Although this choice will cause your friend’s animal to suffer a bit longer, that is the proper course of action. The Minchas Chinuch (#80) explains that just as it is permitted to cause an animal discomfort in order to derive a specific benefit, (such as using an animal to carry a heavy load) it is permissible to delay alleviating an animal’s suffering if it provides a direct benefit such as improving one’s midos.

One lesson we can learn from the emphasis the Torah places on improving our midos, is to be cognizant of opportunities in our daily lives that provides opportunities for such development. If we probe a bit deeper into this mitzvah, we find another even more universal lesson.

In explaining the context of the mitzvah of helping your “enemy”, the Targum Yonasan Ben Uziel understands that the animosity being referred is not a frivolous, personal acrimony, but a justified disdain based on your having personal witnessed that individual commit a serious sin. As a single witness to his indiscretion, you are unable to implement any punishment in beis din, but you are permitted to feel repulsed by his behavior. Nevertheless, when faced with the mitzvah of helping him, Yonasan Ben Uziel has the following to say: “You should eliminate the hatred you feel towards that person temporarily in order to perform the chesed properly”. Once you have completed the act of chesed, you can allow the disdain you correctly feel for this person’s behavior to resume.

Yonasan Ben Uziel is addressing an apparent conflict. When the Torah wants us to do chesed, it isn’t merely a hollow action that the Torah is mandating, but also an attitude of love and friendship. An act of chesed, when done properly, reflects a sincere, heartfelt desire to help another person. So this person is faced with the responsibility to feel love towards an individual whom he legitimately resents. The only solution is to take control of his emotions. He needs to eliminate the hatred for the time he is doing the chesed so that the act of chesed can be infused with the feelings that make it pure. Once the act of chesed is complete he can allow his justified antipathy return. In other words, love when you are supposed to love, and hate when you are supposed to hate.

We sometimes consider our emotions to be outside of our control. We think that our feelings are the uncontrollable result of our experiences, personalities, and the kind of day we are having. When things are going well I will be in a good mood, I will be nice, and I will speak pleasantly to people. If I am having a bad day, my frustration and disappointment will inevitably be reflected in the way I interact with other people and the way I speak to them.

We see here that just as our actions are within our control, so too we have control over our emotions. Although it requires extra, conscious effort, we have the ability to generate optimism, happiness, and love when they are required, and to dislike evil when that is required of us.

Many of our interactions with other people are driven by how we are feeling at the time. There will always be experiences and disappointments in our lives that we are unable to control, but we can control how we react towards them, and how they affect our emotional attitude. As we take ownership of our emotional state and realize that we have a significant amount of control over whether we feel happy, sad, disappointed or content, we will acquire a powerful tool that can help us not only achieve the happiness we desire, but also empower us to control the way we act towards others. Good Shabbos.

Truth Be Told... Rabbi David Sochet Associate Member, Young Israel Council of Rabbis

Distance yourself from any false word!” [1]. The Torah’s choice of“ - קחרת רקש רבדמ:The Torah commands words here seems somewhat challenging. The Sefer Hachinuch, [2] [3] when discussing the importance of being truthful, emphasizes that the Torah does not caution us to distance ourselves from any other negative activity as it does here. Which begs the question: Why indeed does not the Torah use a more direct way of expressing this ?”and do not lie“ - ורקשת אלו[directive as it does in another pasuk [4

The Sefer Tzeidah Laderech [5] answers that the words used concerning prevarication are unique, because “sheker”, falsehood, is so pernicious that its effect is so virulent and contagious, such that it spreads to anyone who comes in contact with it. Therefore we are commanded to completely distance ourselves from this sin with words not found in the Torah in reference to any other sin. These words are meant to impress upon us how harmful it is to speak falsely. We must stay very far away from a lie.

This can be better understood when prefaced with the thematically celebrated thought associated primarily with the ethical works of the Rambam [6]. The Rambam outlines his approach to understanding the Torah commandments and their role in shaping our behavior. He asserts that each person is created with certain desires that are in conflict with the desire to obtain spirituality. The Torah’s commandments provide a guide for finding what he refers to as the ‘derech hamimutza’, the “middle of the road,” which is the ideal balance- to pursue moderation in every human activity. Regarding diet, for example, we must equally avoid gluttony as well as asceticism. Regarding personal financial consumption, it is necessary to spend money conservatively without being miserly or a spendthrift. Concerning temperament, one should exercise constraint without becoming ineffectually passive. The laws of the Torah, according to the Rambam, are meant to direct humanity toward the ideal median in every human endeavor.

He continues: although extremism in any form is not healthy behavior, at times, just as a doctor will order a patient to undertake an extreme regimen in order to correct a chemical imbalance in his health (for example, to completely eliminate salt from one’s diet, for someone suffering from high blood pressure) similarly Hashem, through the Torah’s commandments, regulates our behavior to enable us to reach this spiritual “middle road.” Just as the physician may order an aggressive diet or regimen for a period of time until the patient’s health is restored, likewise, the many commandments of the Torah are meant to restore and promote spiritual balance in our life. Sometimes the commandments can seem to be quite demanding especially if one’s spiritual nature is largely out of balance. However, to one whose life is in perfect balance, the Torah is likewise perceived to be perfect.

There are times when everyone should engage in activities that would in ordinary circumstances be considered extreme and ill-advised. If for instance, one has either an innate or habitual predilection for unsavory behavior, or if one possesses an undesirable character trait, one must engage in behavior that is in practice the extreme opposite of the undesirable tendency. This immoderate path should be followed only until such time that one has gained mastery over his unfavorable nature. At that point, he should discontinue his intemperate activity and proceed on the ideal moderate median path.

After the Rambam stated that the person under discussion should go to an extreme, he clearly emphasizes that he should return to the middle path afterwards. He takes great pains to accentuate that this middle path is the proper one: "Such people may then return to the middle path which is the proper one, and continue in it for the rest of their lives." [7]

The Rambam already taught us that the middle path is the ideal one. Why the need for repetition? Further, why insist that this repentant, who was required to resort temporarily to the extreme, must find the median path and he continue in it for the rest of his life?

A suggested elucidation here is that there is a strong tendency for the recovered extremist after he went to the opposite extreme to establish a new comfort zone and to want to remain there. The Rambam must remind him that this behavior is not desired, rather his place ought to be back in the center; it is best for him and he should remain there for the rest of his life. Consequently the Rambam found the need to stress once more the importance of adhering to the "ordinary" middle path. Conquering your extreme adverse behavior is only half the battle. You must also make a conscious effort to rid yourself of extremism altogether.

This can shed light on our Pasuk ‘from a false word you shall distance yourself‘, and in a later place the Torah uses the wording ‘and do not lie’. At first, the inclination to lie is so compelling that one must completely distance oneself from any such behavior and go to the opposite extreme. However, once he has become completely purged from this bad trait, it is now incumbent upon him to behave in a fashion that is routinely regarded as being truthful.

[How can one described as being truthful to the extreme? One example might be the case when one enters a house sporting a sopping wet raincoat and a dripping umbrella and when asked if it is raining now, responds, “I don’t know if it’s raining right now, but it was raining when I was outside a moment ago.”] Another way to interpret the pasuk homiletically is that the virtue of being truthful is well known to all. Yet there are two approaches among the great Chasidic Rebbes as to how one must be truthful: Some were of the opinion that you shouldn’t tell a lie but you don’t have to tell the whole truth either (if it might cause someone to be hurt). Others held that it is required of us to be completely truthful at all times no matter the circumstances. One must never even tell a white lie.

There is a noteworthy story that Reb Yehudah Hachosid [8] relates in his Sefer Chasidim [9] that suggests to the latter of these two approaches. A sinner once came to a wise man and said, “If you tell me how to do teshuva- repent- by doing one single act no matter how difficult, I will do it.” The wise man answered him, “Be extra careful never to tell a lie. Through this you will achieve complete penitence.” The wicked man said he would do it even though it will be very difficult.

When next presented with the opportunity to steal, he thought to himself, ”If I get caught I will not be able to deny the theft I committed. I will be punished if I admit to the crime, and I cannot lie to save myself.” Thus he refrained from stealing. Similar thoughts repeated themselves in his mind for each sin he craved and his commitment to the truth at all cost kept him from carrying out any misdeeds. After a time he became a completely righteous man.

When describing the difference between truth and falsehood, the Gemarah [10] notes the differences between the words of true and false. The three letters that spell the Hebrew word for truth, "emes", are “Aleph”, “Mem”, and “Tof”, the first, middle, and last of the Hebrew alphabet. The letters are far apart from each other because the truth is not easily found in this world. The three letters for "sheker" - falsehood –“Shin”, Koof”, “Reish” in contrast, are close to each other [11]. Falsehood is very common and easily encountered.

The pasuk is perhaps lending support to one of these two approaches; that it is incumbent upon us to always say the literal truth. The words “m’Dvar sheker tirchak” – from a false word you shall distance yourself’ is not only saying do not speak words of falsehood, they must also be “tirchak” –distant- which is an allusion to “emes” whose letters are rachok - distant one from another (tirchak is from the root word rachok). The desired way to serve Hashem is through being truthful in the utmost. ______[1] Shemos / Exodus 23:7 [2] The Sefer ha-Chinuch (Book of Education), often simply "the Chinuch" is a work which systematically discusses the of the Torah. It was published anonymously in 13th century . Some scholars attribute the authorship of the Sefer ha-Chinuch to Rabbi Aharon HaLevi of Barcelona (1235-c. 1290), but others disagree, as the views of the Chinuch often contradict opinions held by Rabbi Aharon HaLevi in other works. This has led to the conclusion of many that the true author to Sefer HaChinuch was a different Reb Aharon Halevi, a student of the Rashba, rather than his colleague. [3] Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzva 74. [4] Vayikra / Leviticus 19:11 [5] Rabbi Yissochor Ber Eylinberg (1550-1623), the Tzeidah LaDerech is a super-commentary on Rashi, [6] Shemoneh Perakim (The Eight Chapters), which is his introduction to Pirkei Avos (Ethics of our Fathers), also see Rambam Hilchos Deios 1:4 [7] Rambam in Shemoneh Perakim. [8] Rabeinu Yehudah Hachosid of Regensburg 1150-1217, was one of the great Rabbis of Ashkenaz

Meafar Kumi Rabbi Ronen Shaharabany Graduate, Young Israel Rabbinic Training Program

נכלל טהורה בהמה מיני שכל לומדים מנין ,(קיג חולין) הגמרא שואלת - כתיב "גדי" .(יט ,כג שמות) "אמו בחלב גדי תבשל לא" ,בפרשתנו כתוב לפרש הכתוב שהוצרך מזה .(טז ,כז בראשית) "צואריו חלקת ועל ידיו על הלבישה העזים גדיי עורות ואת" כתיב ,הגמרא עונה ?בחלב בשר באיסור .ש"ע ,טהורה בהמה מין כל כולל ובהכת בלשון סתם "גדי"ש מוכח ,"העזים גדיי"

מין בכל בחלב בשר שאיסור ללמדנו בחרה התורה מדוע ,(תולדות פרשת ב"ח ,חכמים עיני מאיר) מאוסטראווצא הלוי יחיאל מאיר רבי הגאון שואל ?"צואריו חלקת ועל ידיו על הלבישה העזים גדיי עורות ואת" מהפסוק דווקא ,"גדי"ב רק ולא ,טהורה בהמה

יעקב את ואהרגה אבי אבל ימי יקרבו בלבו עשיו ויאמר אביו ברכו אשר הברכה על יעקב את עשיו וישטום" כתיב ,מעשיו הברכות את לקח שיעקב רלאח שלמה הרב כתב .ש"ע ,בלבו מהרהר שעשיו מה לה הוגד הקודש ברוח ,י"רש פירש .(מב-מא ,כז בראשית) "'וכו עשיו דברי את לרבקה ויוגד .אחי ,יעקב את לשלוח אחרת סיבה אמרה אלא ,הקודש ברוח לה שנאמר מה את ליצחק ספרה לא רבקה ,כן פי על אף ,(רלא 'עמ ,חומש שיעורי) הוולב שזה כאילו ,(מו ,שם) "חיים לי למה הארץ מבנות כאלה חת מבנות אשה יעקב לוקח אם חת בנות מפני בחיי קצתי יצחק אל רבקה ותאמר" כדכתיב ?מדוע .לארץ לחוץ יעקב את לשלוח היחיד נימוקה

מרבקה .צניעות מהלכות קטן חלק רק הינו שלבוש היא האמת אבל ,בלבוש רק היא שצניעות חושבים אנו .צניעות זוהי :הלשון בזה וולבה הרב מבאר בצניעות אלא – לה שנתגלה ממה כלל מספרת ולא ,רוחה קור על היא שומרת ,הקודש ברוח גלויים אליה שמתגלים בשעה .צניעות מהי לומדים אנו את לשלוח ורוצה – נשית בתמימות אליו ניגשת היא ,ליצחק מספרת אינה היא לארץ לחוץ יעקב את לשלוח טעמה את .הענין כל את הופכת ובפשטות .בצניעות להתנהג יש רוחניות בעניני שאפילו ,רואים .ל"עכ ,"חת בנות מפני בחיי קצתי"ש משום יעקב

לברכות הראוי הוא שיעקב ידעה רבקה אבל .יעקב את ולא לברכו ובחר ,עשיו את אהב יצחק .אמנו רבקה של תמוהה התנהגות עוד הסבירל ניתן עתה בראשית) "צעיר יעבוד ורב יאמץ מלאום ולאום יפרדו ממעיך לאומים ושני בבטנך גויים שני לה 'ה ויאמר" דכתיב ,מנבואה אלא ,אישיים משיקולים לא – ניתן וולבה הרב דברי פי על ?שעשתה בצורה מעשיו הברכות את לקחת והעדיפה ,מיצחק זאת הסתירה רבקה מדוע ,השאלה נשאלת ,כן אם .(גכ ,כה יעקב את הלבישה רבקה ,נמצא .עליה ידע לא והוא לה שנאמרה הנבואה על ליצחק לספר רצתה שלא ,צניעותה מרוב זאת עשתה שרבקה ,לפרש .רוחניות בעניני צנעותה מחמת ,מעשיו הברכות את שיקח כדי העזים גדיי בעורות

קטרגו ,שניות לוחות לקבל למרום משה כשעלה (ח ,טוב שוחר מדרש ועיין ,:קז דף ,הברכה וזאת פרשת ,"שלמה דברי" בספר הובא) ל"חז אמרו ירדתם אתמול ואתם ,ה"הקב להם השיב .התורה להם ןנות אתה ועכשיו ,(העגל בחטא) "לך יהיה לא" על ישראל עברו אתמול ,ואמרו השרת מלאכי .ש"ע ,מענה מצאו ולא ,בחלב בשר ואכלתם אברהם לבית אמר (השניות בלוחות) וכאן .ונשתברו הרע עין בהם שלטה ,בפומבי שנתנו על הראשונות הלוחות ,(לא תשא כי ,תנחומא מדרש) ל"חז אמרו עוד – רוחניות בעניני אף – בצניעות להתנהג איך ללמוד עלינו ,השניות הלוחות של קיומם את לבטח ,נמצא .ש"ע ,הצניעות מן יפה לך אין ,למשה ה"הקב ועל ידיו על הלבישה העזים גדיי עורות ואת" מהפסוק לומדים גופא הצניעות ומידת .ברוחניות צניעות חוסר מחמת נשתברו הראשונות הלוחות שהרי הנבואה לגלות רצתה שלא ,רוחניות בעניני צניעותה מרוב ,מעשיו הברכות את לקחת כדי העזים גדיי בעורות יעקב את הלבישה שרבקה ,"צואריו חלקת .ליצחק

מהפסוק דווקא ,"גדי"ב רק ולא ,טהורה בהמה מין בכל שייך בחלב בשר שאיסור ללמדנו בחר 'ה מדוע ,מאוסטראווצא ר"האדמו קושיית את נתרץ עתה ויקח" כדכתיב ,בחלב בקר אלא ,אברהם אצל בחלב גדי אכלו לא המלאכים ,למעשה ."צואריו חלקת ועל ידיו על ישההלב העזים גדיי עורות ואת" צריכים ,שניות לוחות בקבלת אותנו ולזכות המלאכים את לחייב כדי ,נמצא .(ח ,יח בראשית) "ויאכלו ...לפניהם ויתן עשה אשר הבקר ובן וחלב חמאה זה מפסוק שהרי ,זה מפסוק דווקא זאת ללמדנו 'ה בחר מדוע היטב ומובן .בשר מיני כל כולל שגדי המלמד ,"העזים גדיי עורות ואת" מהפסוק ללמוד .שניות לוחות של לקיומם התנאי ,רוחניות בעניני בצניעות להתנהג איך לומדים גופא

החכם מאמר .פּוטּורֶ רֶרֶ ג חומות כל את להרוס שבכוחו חבלה מלאך ל צה ו הׅר יוכל פרוטות שתי מגזל אך ,ערך אין פרוטות לשתי אמנם חיים החפץ

NCYI Divrei Torah Bulletin - a Project of the Young Israel Council of Rabbis