Shabbat-B'Shabbato – Parshat Shelach No 1578: 26 Sivan 5775 (13 June 2015)

AS SHABBAT APPROACHES "He Told His Nation about the Power of His Deeds" - by Rabbi Mordechai Greenberg, , Kerem B'Yavne

"We cannot rise up against the nation because it is stronger than us... And the whole nation that we saw there are very big." [Bamidbar 13:32]. Rashi explains this to mean that the people were tall and large. However, the SHELAH brings a surprising interpretation: that the people had good traits. (This is also brought by the Kli Yakar.) However, why should the scouts want to praise the moral traits of the Canaanites, to tell us that they behave in a righteous and proper way? Evidently this is meant to imply that "the sin of the Emorites is not complete" [Bereishit 15:16], and it will be difficult for Bnei Yisrael to conquer them and take the land. And that is why the scouts added, "We were in our eyes like grasshoppers" [Bamidbar 13:33]. Not as Rashi explains, that the scouts felt as small as grasshoppers, rather that they felt the opposite of those "people with good traits," for they were honest and good while we were like locusts and grasshoppers which come and steal away the produce of honest owners of the fields. As is written in the , "If one steals a field which is then ravaged by locusts" [Bava Kama 116b] he can give it back to the original owner (see the Talmud and Rashi's commentary). Thus, the claim of the scouts was that the current residents were behaving in a proper way, and that Bnei Yisrael had come to steal their land (does this sound familiar to our ears?).

This claim can be countered by the words of Rabbi Yitzchak quoted by Rashi in the beginning of Bereishit. "Why did the Torah begin with Bereishit? The answer is because of the verse, 'He told the nation about the power of His deeds, to give them the heritage of the other nations' [Tehillim 111:6]. If the nations claim that you are robbers in that you conquered the lands of the Seven Nations, you can reply: The entire land belongs to the Holy One, Blessed be He, He created it and gives it to whomever He sees fit. When He wanted to He gave it to them, and when He wants to He takes it from them and gives it to us."

At first glance, this reply is hard to understand and even sounds unjust. Every robber can use this claim, to say that the Master of the World took possession of an object and gave it to him. If this is so, how can any sense of order be maintained?

The answer to the above question is that the claim of Divine intervention is only valid when it is absolutely clear that the Holy One, Blessed be He, is the one who took the land from them and gave it to us. When it can be seen that we who are small and weak, a nation which was just freed from slavery, who conquered "a great and mighty people, children of giants" [Devarim 9:2], it is clear that we are not robbers, and that the Master of the World took the land from them and gave it to us. As Rachav said to the scouts sent by Yehoshua, "We have heard that G-d dried out the waters of the Red Sea before you... And what you did to the two kings of the Emorites... And we heard this and our hearts melted... For your G-d is the G-d of heaven above and of the earth below." [Yehoshua 1:10-12].

In our generation too, it is impossible to deny that the hand of G-d has wrought all that has taken place. On one hand Jews were led to slaughter, but a magnificent nation was established right after the tragic events. Rabbi Amital wrote that if the world would have been destroyed and later on studied by historians in the distant future they would certainly have come to the conclusion that many hundreds of years passed between the two events, the Holocaust and the establishment of the State of .

A hundred years ago, when Theodor Herzl asked for help from the Pope to return to Eretz Yisrael, he replied that he could not agree to our return to the land because this was against the Christian religion. If only we could uncover the eyes of that Pope and show him that when his successor visited

1 our land a few months ago he placed a bouquet of flowers on Herzl's grave – almost as if to say: You were right and we were wrong.

POINT OF VIEW "What will the Other Nations Say?" - by Zevulun Orlev

"Oom Shmoom?"

In general, the relationship of our country with other nations is not a matter that interests us for its own sake or for purposes of our national pride. Rather, the goal of maintaining proper relationships is to protect the vital interests of our country in such realms as security, economics, and so on. There are strong disagreements between the left and the right (and some who are in between) about what our policies should be with respect to our status in the world. When our state was first established, the Prime Minister David Ben Gurion stated his position succinctly: "Our future does not depend on what the Gentiles say but rather on what the Jews do." He coined the derogatory reaction "Oom Shmoom" as a response to a fear of how the United Nations ("Umot Hame'uchadot" – the "Oom") might react to actions taken by the State of Israel. This view was opposed by the Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett: "With respect to the words you say in anger, "oom shemoom" ... If not for the decision by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1947, the State of Israel would not have been established in 1948."

What will the Other Nations Say?

In this week's Torah portion, the Holy One, Blessed be He, expresses a desire to destroy the nation, which was taken in by the enticement of the scouts. G-d says, "I will strike them with a plague" [Bamidbar 14:12]. But Moshe warns Him with political-diplomatic considerations: "The other nations will say... because G-d was not able to bring this nation to the land... he therefore slaughtered them in the desert." [14:15-16]. That is, the status of the Holy One, Blessed be He, and of Bnei Yisrael will be harmed in the world by such action. With respect to the sin of the Golden Calf, Moshe reacts with similar reasoning to G-d's request, "And now, leave me alone and My anger will attack them and I will destroy them" [Shemot 32:10]. Moshe tells G-d, "Why should Egypt be given an opportunity to say, He took them out with evil, in order to kill them on the mountains?" [32:12]. And in both cases the Holy One, Blessed be He, accepts Moshe's arguments. With respect to the sin of the scouts, He says, "I have forgiven them, according to your words" [Bamidbar 14:20], and for the Golden Calf, it is written, "And G-d reconsidered" [Shemot 32:14].

In addition, note Rashi's first commentary on the Book of Bereishit. "If the nations of the world will say to Yisrael, 'You are robbers in that you took the lands of the Seven Nations,' they will be able to reply that the entire earth belongs to the Holy One, Blessed be He... When it was His will He gave it to them, and when He wanted to he took it from them and gave it to us."

This political approach, which takes into account the question, "What will the other nations say," seems at first glance to support the position of Moshe Sharett and not that of David Ben Gurion. On the other hand, the blessing of Bilam, "Behold they are a nation which dwells alone, and which does not take the other nations into account" [Bamidbar 23:9], seems to conform to the ideas of Ben Gurion. But is this really true? Our reply is the following: Bilam's blessing is religious/spiritual, meant for internal consumption, and it does not reflect a valid political approach. As far as issues which are political in nature, such as our relationship with other nations for purposes of security, commerce, scientific and technological cooperation, sports, and so on, we will suffer great harm if we follow the rule, "we do not take the other nations into account."

As is true of every political issue, the main question we must ask ourselves is: How can we best achieve our national objectives and strategic interests? What is our best policy to guarantee our independence and our status as a legitimate nation in all walks of life? What can we do to prevent an automatic large majority against us in every international forum? It is

2 important to note that the fact that a country is under constant threat, as we are, can pose real danger for its future.

This is not an ideological or religious-halachic issue, it is something that is practical and real. Isolating a country can cause dangers in terms of security, an economic boycott, and its scientific-technological glory that can weaken its ability to fight against an enemy. What, then, is the right thing to do? Should we cancel the order for one stealth airplane and apply the savings of NIS 600 million to our advocacy budget, which is currently only NIS 60 million? I seriously doubt whether such a move alone will allow us to successfully cope with the rising trends of anti-Semitism and anti- Zionism all over the world. On the other hand, is lifting up our hands in surrender to the international pressures – that is, abandoning the area of Yehuda and the Shomron to a Palestinian State and to the organizations founded on ideals of terrorism – the only viable solution to the problem? Of course not! If we surrender it will only make matters worse!

The Need for National Unity

As far as I am concerned, what we need is as broad a consensus as possible in our external relationships so that we can stand united against the world, in particular with respect to our friends from the west. Our own internal disagreements about international politics continue unabated, but it is clear that none of the Zionist parties accepts the Palestinian approach. Ehud Barak, Ehud Olmert, and Tzipi Livni, who made far-reaching proposals, received replies in terms of Intifadas, or did not receive any response at all. Why should we continue to occupy ourselves with internal strife when the Palestinians are united in their opposition to the positions of all the Zionist parties, from the right to the left? At this point, all of our disagreements are largely rhetorical, merely for the purposes of party primaries or elections for the Knesset. Now, when all we face is a constant refusal even of the proposals, the ideas of the Israeli left are no longer relevant. We can conclude that each side can continue to maintain its own position.

If, heaven forbid, we would become involved in an all-out war against all of the various factions supported by Iran – Hamas, ISIS, Hezbollah, and Assad – I am sure that a national unity government would be formed immediately. However, our current political situation is just as dangerous for us, and possibly even more dangerous. And that is why it is imperative to establish a national unity government here in Israel. Remaining divided, maintaining our internal strife which has ramifications for the outside too, there is no way we can be victorious on the political battlefield against our enemies, who are completely unified. With unity we can win the war.

If the Holy One, Blessed be He, cares "what the other nations will say" and was convinced to forgive Yisrael by this argument, we would do well to learn from His ways.

THE ILLUSTRATED MIDRASH Reminders - by Yisrael Rosenberg

"And it will be tzitzit for you and you will see it, so that you will remember all of the mitzvot of G-d and perform them. And you shall not follow your heart and your eyes, which you tend to follow – so that you will remember and do all of My mitzvot, and you will remain holy for your G-d." [Bamidbar 15:39-40].

According to the above verses, the tzitzit should serve both as a warning against sins that are linked to vision by the eyes and evil intentions by the heart, and in addition as a general reminder to observe all the mitzvot. This would seem to conform to the principle, "turn away from evil, and do good" [Tehillim 34:15].

However, we can sometimes see with our own eyes that the reminder doesn't always do its job. Those with sharp vision have even been able to catch a glimpse of people who perform a sin while they are wearing tzitzit.

3

Here is a shortened version of an explanation for this phenomenon which appears in Mei'am Loez:

"This can be compared to the common practice that when a person wants to remember something he or she ties a string around a finger. When the person sees the string he remembers the item... However, if a person ties a string around a finger because it hurts him and then forgets something that he should have done, he cannot ask how he forgot the item even though he had a string on his finger. The answer will be that he is a fool: You didn't tie the string on your finger because of this item, you tied it because of your pain!

"And that is why it is written, 'it will be tzitzit.' Do not wonder why you do not remember the Divine mitzvot even though you are wearing tzitzit, because you are wearing them as a habit, like other people wear their clothing... However, if 'they will be tzitzit for you' - which means that you will continually look at them in order to remember the mitzvot - then 'you will see it so that you will remember all of the mitzvot of G-d.'"

Perhaps in our generation, a generation which is filled with memory aids on all sides, we can say that the opposite is true.

It may be that today reminders have become mere technical aids in the race through life. Perhaps we must learn to appreciate little things which guide us in the correct direction. Perhaps the mitzva of tzitzit has come to teach us to show our appreciation to all the people and the small items which we meet along our path, constantly reminding us who we are and why we have made an appearance on this world.

It is written, "the mitzva of tzitzit is as worthy as all the other mitzvot together."

THE LIGHT STARTS IN THE EAST How Should the Candles be Lit? – by Chezi Cohen, Yeshivat Maaleh Gilboa and Midreshet Ein Hanatziv

The "Rabbanit" Simcha Tzakda

This week we mark the date of the passing of Rabbi . In this article we will discuss his roots – specifically, his grandmother Simcha Tzadka (1878-1959).

Simcha, the "Rabbanit" (the rabbi's wife), was extremely pious. She had broad knowledge of the Torah, since she grew up in the shadow of her uncle, the Ben Ish Chai. She was married to the Chacham Shaul Tzadka, the father of Rabbi Yehuda Tzadka, and as noted she was Rabbi Eliyahu's grandmother. Simcha Tzadka was an expert in the Torah and in Kabbalah, and the wise men of would come to her to ask how her uncle the Ben Ish Chai had ruled on various halachic questions. The author of Kaf Hachaim would send women to her to ask about the laws of ritual purity and kashrut. Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu said that the book written by the Ben Ish Chai was always present on her table, and that she often consulted it.

"Every Friday night Rabbanit Tzadka would light seven candles in a special candelabrum which was suspended from the ceiling. In order to reach the candles, she would climb up on a small stool from which she climbed to a large chair. One time her young grandson Mordechai Eliyahu commented that this effort was not necessary, since these were not Chanukah candles which may not be moved from the place where they are lit. Her son, Rabbi Yehuda Tzadka, joined the conversation and supported the position of her grandson, but it made no difference. A while later Simcha asked her grandson to come to her. Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu hurried to her house, not knowing what she wanted. When he entered, she gleefully told him, 'I found where it is explicitly written by the RAMA that 'the candles should be at the place where they will be lit, they should not be lit in one place and then moved to another place.' [RAMA, Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 263:10]."

4

Simcha's roots were deeply planted in the Torah, and she was recognized as being wise among the men of wisdom. She was kind and righteous, and she held disputes with them about words of Torah and halacha without any feelings of inferiority. In the above story, she picks up a book, searches for a source for her actions, and argues with her son and her grandson, who are both recognized Torah scholars. The Rabbanit Simcha maintains her opinion stubbornly and does not give in to her son, who was the head of Yeshivat Porat Yosef at the time and to her grandson, who was known as a brilliant student (and who later became the Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel). Days later, she calls for her grandson to come see her, but he doesn't know what she wants. And she surprises him with a halachic declaration. In the writings of the RAMA (an Ashkenazi halachic expert!) she finds corroboration for her custom. In the end she does not make her own halachic decision but searches through the sources until she finds a ruling that backs up her position.

The following story shows the high level of her Torah scholarship, but first we must remember a different story. As is well known, the Talmud tells us that Rav's wife would try to upset him. When he asked for lentils to eat she would make beans, and vice versa. His son saw that his father was suffering, and he reversed his father's request every day. But since his mother prepared the other food, she really prepared the food that Rav wanted. The father suspected that his son was lying to his mother, and when the son admitted it his father told him to stop. After seeing this introduction, we can now go on to our story:

"Every Friday Simcha's grandson (or according to another tradition, her son) would buy fruit and vegetables for her in honor of Shabbat. The Rabbanit insisted that she pay for all the food that was bought for Shabbat, and she refused to accept the fruits and vegetables as a gift. However, her grandson would quote a reduced price, and in this way everybody was happy: She was happy because she had paid for the food, and her grandson was happy because he had helped to pay for it. One day Simcha spoke to her neighbors about the cost of living, and they brought up the high price of vegetables. Thus, she understood what her grandson was doing. The next Friday, when he arrived with the produce and gave her a price, she said he should sit down and she told him the story of Rav that we quoted above. Her grandson smiled and apologized, and he promised her that from then on he would quote the correct price..."

There is tension in this story. Simcha Tzadka runs her own household and her kitchen, and her grandson buys fruits and vegetables for her every week. She is in charge of her home, and she talks to her friends about many subjects, but she is not fully aware of current prices. When she discovers what her grandson is doing, she chooses to scold him in a roundabout way. Instead of directly confronting him she quotes a passage in the Talmud to him, since she is a learned person and that is the language that she uses. And in this way we can see an image of a woman who is both a Torah scholar and a mother to her family. e-mail: [email protected] (I will be happy to hear any stories you have about the wise men of the east.)

THE PLACE OF THE WORLD Is the Beit Chisda Pool the "Upper Pool"? - by Rabbi Yitzchak Levy, Yeshivat Har Etzion

A riverbed descends to the southeast from the area of the American Colony north of the Damascus Gate. As it descends, it crosses the wall of the near the Rockefeller Museum and continues down to the southeast, towards the Kidron River. When Herod built the Temple Mount and extended it to the north, he blocked this riverbed.

Along the path of the riverbed there are several ancient pools. Northwest of the Temple Mount, in the Santa Anna Monastery, are the "Beit Chisda" Pools. To the north (northwest of the Minaret of the Tribes, at the northeastern

5 corner of the Temple Mount), and next to the Minaret of the Tribes, is the Yisrael Pool.

The Beit Chisda Pools

One of the most prominent features of this riverbed in the area where the pools exist is that it slopes very steeply downward. The stream joins the Kidron River about 45 meters below the current ground level.

In many cases pools are formed when the streams are blocked by dams which have been placed from east to west, stopping the water from flowing to the south. That is the case here too. The dam across the Beit Zeita riverbed creates the area of the pool, which collects the water from the upper level, and the water continues to flow down to the south. Here are the measurements of the dam: it is 13 meters high, 6 meters wide at the top and 7 meters wide at the bottom. The size of the northern pool is 40 by 60 meters.

This pool has been dated by archeological evidence, specifically the style of construction, as belonging to the end of the era of the First Temple.

A Sophisticated Drainage System

The most interesting element of the dam is the method that is used to drain out the water from the pool that gathers in the north.

In the dam that blocks the exit of the water, which serves as the southern wall of the pool, there is a vertical shaft. It can be thought of as a vertical chimney, one meter by one meter for the entire height of the wall – that is, 13 meters tall. Along the face of the dam, openings have been made 2 meters apart, one underneath the other. Each opening is about 15 by 20 cm. The purpose of this shaft is to regulate the water flow south of the dam, depending on the desired water level. When it is desired to add to the water held north of the dam, the openings are blocked for the entire height of the dam. If it is desired to let some of the water flow to the south, the top opening is unblocked, allowing a small amount of water to flow out. If a large flow of water is desired, openings further down the shaft are also opened.

At the bottom of the shaft there is a water channel that was carved into the rock. It is about a meter and a half deep and about 75 cm wide. This channel extends a few dozen meters to the south. Warren followed this path until he reached a place which was blocked fifty meters further on. Based on the low position of the channel, it is not likely at all that the water was sent from here to the Temple Mount.

Based on the heights involved and the fact that there is a similar channel with the same design southeast of the Temple Mount, Dan Bahat suggests that this aqueduct provided water to living quarters that were situated south of the Temple Mount during the time of the First Temple.

The Southern Pool

South of the dam of the northern pool, there is another pool that is dated by the archeologists to the era of the Second Temple, evidently from the time of Hellenism and the Chashmona'im. Christian tradition describes the area as a site for medical cures, since Jesus performed healing miracles there.

Dan Bahat suggests in a journal article that this might be the site of the "channel of the upper pool on the road of the launderer's field" which is mentioned by Yeshayahu both during the time of Achaz and during the meeting between the representatives of Chizkiyahu and Sancheriv, the King of Ashur.

Bahat gives the following proofs to justify this identification:

- Yeshayahu was told to leave the city in order to stand at the edge of the channel of the pool. This implies that the position was outside the limits

6 of the city. It is reasonable to assume that they might be situated in one of the streams to the north.

- Josephus Flavius notes that the station of the launderers at the end of the era of the Second Temple was in the northeastern corner of the city, near the northeastern corner of the Third Wall.

- It is possible, according to the writings, that the exit from the channel was within shouting distance from the wall of the city. A water channel exited from this pool which brought water to the south.

In an earlier article, we suggested a different possibility – that the upper pool in the road of the launderer's field was in the Tyropoeon, the valley of the cheese makers, in the heart of the Old City.

Aside from the question of identification, the fact that the pool is very close to the northern section of the Temple Mount allows us to say that during the pilgrimages in the era of the Second Temple the area of the pool was very crowded. We can assume that every day tens of thousands of people came, wanting to immerse themselves before visiting the Temple, and also wanting to drink and wash themselves in preparation for their purification, before entering the Mount in order to bring sacrifices, to pray, and to join all the others in the nation of Yisrael – in their desire to encounter the King, the Holy One, Blessed be He, who chose this site as His dwelling place.

HALACHA FROM THE SOURCE The Mitzva of Dwelling in Eretz Yisrael Today - by Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Rimon, Director of the Center for Teaching and Halacha and a Teacher in Yeshivat Har Etzion

In this week's Torah portion we read about the sin of the scouts. This gives us an opportunity to discuss the mitzva of settling Eretz Yisrael in modern times. Much can be said about this matter, but we will summarize a few important points.

Is the Mitzva an Obligation Today?

It is well known that the Rambam did not include the mitzva of dwelling in the land in the Sefer Hamitzvot. Megilat Esther explains that the Rambam did not mention the mitzva because it is not relevant today, after the Temple was destroyed and we were sent into exile. (Comments on the Rambam, leaving out positive mitzvot, 4).

In addition, the Talmud teaches us that Rabbi Zeira, a disciple of Rav Yehuda, wanted to ascend to Eretz Yisrael but Rav Yehuda objected, based on the prophecy of Yirmiyahu:

"Rav Yehuda said, Whoever rises up from Babylon to Eretz Yisrael is in violation of a positive command, as is written, 'They will be brought to Babylon and they will remain there - that is what G-d says' [Yirmiyahu 27:22]." [Ketuvot 110b].

This means not only that there is no mitzva to settle the land today but that there is a prohibition to leave the land abroad and rise up to Eretz Yisrael.

The Approach of the Ramban and the Explanation of the Sifri

The Ramban refuses to accept the possibility that the mitzva of settling in the land has been cancelled in modern times, and he feels that this mitzva is valid for all times. As proof of his approach, he quotes the Midrash:

"A story is told about Rabbi Yehuda Ben Beteira, Rabbi Matia Ben Charash, and Rabbi Chanina... who were leaving Eretz Yisrael to go out of the land. They reached Platia and remembered Eretz Yisrael. They opened their eyes and their tears flowed, and they tore their clothing. They read the following verse: 'And you shall take possession of it and dwell in it, and you shall

7 take care to perform all of these laws' [Devarim 11:31]. They said: to dwell in Eretz Yisrael is the equivalent of all the mitzvot of the Torah." [Sifri, Torah portion of Re'eih, 80].

From the fact that the rabbis wept it is clear that they were sorry that they were not observing the mitzva of settling the land, and we thus see that the mitzva is in effect even during the time of the exile. However, Megilat Esther claims that the opposite is true and the Midrash can be explained to support his own opinion. He says the scholars wept because today there is no mitzva to settle the land, and they are therefore not required to do so. If a mitzva to settle the land had indeed existed, instead of weeping and tearing their garments they would simply have returned to the land.

On the other hand, Pe'at Hashulchan ( 1:14) and Avnei Nezer (Yoreh Dai'ah 454) bring a powerful proof against the approach of Megillat Esther. In the continuation of the passage in the Sifri it is written that as a result of their weeping, the rabbis "turned around and went back to Eretz Yisrael." Thus, as soon as these rabbis remembered the mitzva of settling the land they returned – to Eretz Yisrael.

The Approach of the Rambam

It can be seen from various halachic rulings of the Rambam that he also feels that the mitzva of settling the land remains in force today. For example, he rules that if a slave wants to move to the land his master is forced to take the slave there, and he writes that "this law is in effect for all times, even now when the land is in the hands of idol worshippers." [Hilchot Avadim 8:9]. The GRA emphasizes that this ruling opposes that of Rabeinu Chaim in the Tosafot (Ketuvot 110b), who feels that today this mitzva is not in effect. Another law is that "a person should always live in Eretz Yisrael... and not live outside of the land... because whoever leaves to go abroad can be compared to one who worshipped idols" [Hilchot Melachim 5:12]. In view of these sources, Pe'at Hashulchan and Avnei Nezer rejected the opinion of the Megillat Esther.

But if we are right, we might ask why in fact the Rambam did not list the mitzva of dwelling in the land. According to Avnei Nezer, the mitzva of living in the land is included in the mitzva to "destroy them completely" [Devarim 20:17], which requires us to expel the Seven Canaanite nations from Eretz Yisrael. According to Rav Kook (quoted in Tzitz Eliezer 7, 48, chapter 12) and Rabbi Teichtal ("Eim Habanim Semeicha," page 169) the reason that the Rambam does not list this mitzva is related to the fourth principle in the way he built his list. There he writes that he does not count a general mitzva, and the mitzva of settling the land is indeed such a mitzva (either because it includes within it a large number of specific mitzvot – all the mitzvot that depend on the land – or as is written by the Ramban, that "the main observance of all the mitzvot is in the land" [Devarim 4:5]).

Today, when it is possible to travel to Eretz Yisrael in great safety, it is a great mitzva for every Jew to come to the land and to settle here. This is one of the most important mitzvot, and it is also an important stage in the process of our redemption. The Chazon Ish also wrote in practical terms, that "the mitzva of settling the land is presented by the Rambam and the Ramban and the other rabbis. And it is known how much the Chafetz Chaim wanted to make Aliyah." [Igrot volume 1, 175].

The Opinion of Rav Yehuda

How can we explain the words of Rav Yehuda that are quoted in Ketuvot, that a person is not allowed to leave Babylon? Some rabbis feel that Rav Yehuda's approach is not accepted by the halacha (Pe'at Hashulchan, ibid), as can be seen by the fact that many rabbis of the Talmud did not listen to him and did come to Eretz Yisrael. Perhaps it is better to accept the explanation of Avnei Nezer – that the Holy One, Blessed be He, did indeed send a message through Yirmiyahu, "Go to Babylon and remain there until the day that I remember them," but we have no way of knowing when "the day that I remember them" has come. Does this mean that we must wait for a miracle? It is

8 reasonable to assume that when it is possible in a natural way to establish a state, this is a sign that "the day" has come. As Avnei Nezer wrote, "If everybody is given permission to go there, this will be considered as 'the day.'"

Summary

Our mentor, Rabbi Lichtenstein, had a great love for Eretz Yisrael. One time he complained that often those who were born in the land do not appreciate the sanctity and feel drawn to the land as strongly as those who made Aliyah from abroad. He noted the words of the Talmud (Ketuvot 75a), that one who is born in Zion is greater than one who is born abroad ("one of these is to be preferred over two of these"), but that one who is born abroad and makes Aliyah is the best of all ("one of us who moves to there is better than two of them"). Rabbi Lichtenstein explained that a person who grew up abroad and moved to Eretz Yisrael has a deep understanding and feels the yearning for the land, misses living here, and understands the dream.

Whenever Rabbi Lichtenstein returned from a trip abroad, during the last fifteen minutes of the flight he would recite Tehillim, denoting the fact that he was about to return to the sanctity of the land (I was told this by his son, Rabbi Meir).

We must rejoice every day anew for the fact that we are in Eretz Yisrael, for the privilege of joining together with the great sanctity, and for the privilege of living in the very midst of the process of redemption.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? Green Sky? - by Yaacov Etzion

At the end of this week's Torah portion, we are given a command, "Let them place on the tzitzit at the corner a thread of 'techelet.'" [Bamidbar 15:38]. Rashi explains that techelet is "the 'yarok' color of a snail." Any speaker of modern Hebrew can only wonder at this. Why does Rashi call the blue color of techelet "yarok" – that is, green?

Well, it is not only Rashi that calls techelet "yarok." It is an explicit ruling that appears in the Shulchan Aruch: "The color white is ritually pure, as is the look of 'yarok,' even if it has the look of wax or of gold. And this certainly includes the 'yarok' of leek or grass (and also the color that is called 'blue' is included in 'yarok')" [Hilchot Nidda, 188].

We are not interested at this point in the details of the halacha but rather in the fact that the RAMA writes that the color "blue" is called "yarok" in our traditional sources.

Our sages spoke of four main colors: shachor (black), lavan (white), adom (red), and yarok. And "yarok" included yellow, orange, blue, and turquoise of today. For example, it happens quite often that a newborn baby is a bit yellow right after its birth. But the Tosefta calls this color "yarok." Rabbi Natan says the following: "When I was in the Land of Kapotakia, there was a woman who had given birth to boys... They brought him to me, and I saw that he was 'yarok'... I looked at him and did not find any blood for circumcision..." [Shabbat 134a]. Moreover, in the wording of the ROSH in his halachic rulings the word yarok as used by the sages is not our color green (which they call "yarok as a leek") but is yellow or orange. "This shows that the word yarok is similar to the yolk of an egg or to gold, which has a tinge of red." Among other sources, the ROSH bases his decision on the words of the verse, "the wings of a dove coated with silver and its limbs the 'yerakrak' of gold" [Tehillim 68:14]. Yerakrak is clearly the color of gold, that is, yellow.

The words for orange (katom) and blue (kachol) were instituted in modern times by Zeev Yavetz. This was reported by David Yalin in the newspaper "Hatzevi" in 1887: "When I spoke to my uncle the illustrious rabbi and investigator Rabbi Zeev Yavetz, he said to me that he wants to fill what is missing in our language for the names of two colors, the color of techelet

9 and the color of the yoke of an egg." Yavetz proposed that techelet should be called kachol and that the yoke should be called "ketem," which in the holy writings refers to gold or to the color of gold. (An example appears in the following verse: "Woe, the gold is dim, the good 'ketem' has changed" [Eichah 4:1].) Yavetz wanted to use the word katom for the color of yellow (which we call tzahov), since he felt that tzahov "includes a bit of red" (as per a note by Yalin). But as time went on, katom became the color orange, as we use it today.

Thus, the word "yarok" changed in meaning during the years, as did "tzahov." However, "techelet" evidently kept its original meaning, and it remains similar to the color of the sea, which is similar to the color of the sky, and this reminds us of the Divine Throne of Glory.

THE CLEAR VISION OF RAV KOOK Creativity - by Rabbi Hagay Lundin, Hesder Yeshiva in Sdeirot and Machon Meir

Rav Kook defines creativity in the following terms: "Every creative element that is characteristic of a human being must always be the result of the two sources together: From the exalted and noble source which is in the root of the soul with its hidden strength, and from the source of the physical trait in the darkness of its emotions." [Shemonah Kevatzim 2:252].

That is, true creativity, which faithfully reflects the character of the person, is a product of an encounter between the exalted aspects of his personality and his earthy emotions. The friction between the soul and the feelings of life brings forth a creation which is an expression of the internal dimension of life in this world. In line with this, Rav Kook adds in another place, "the pain of pure creativity can be compared to the pain of prophecy" [Ibid, 3:25]. Thus, the pain that a person feels when he or she comes to make a true creation is similar to the pain felt by a prophet when he comes to prophesize. Both cases entail making a connection between the spiritual and the physical worlds, as a means of revealing the inner truth that is hiding behind the falsity and the forgery of open reality – and such actions are by nature accompanied by suffering.

Creativity is a product of the encounter between two worlds that would seem to be direct opposites – the creator describes life, he attempts to expose the depth that exists in earthly life, which is accompanied by its own nature by coarse materialism. But on the other hand, the creativity is a result of a hint of spirituality, coming from the world above, linked to the soul, which must learn how to constrict and limit itself in order to appear in this world.

This encounter, between the earthly reality which struggles to expose the essence which is hidden within it and the exalted reality which finds it difficult to take on a physical shape, leads to tremendous suffering and pain. However, in spite of this, Rav Kook emphasizes that "It is utterly impossible to block the creativity of somebody whose nature is to create all the time. Whenever spiritual lethargy sets in, it comes only because the one who is making the creation has begun to feel that creativity is difficult labor." [Orot Hakodesh, 1:168].

Thus, in spite of the suffering that accompanies the act of creativity, it is important to remember that pain does not mean that the effort is a mechanical one. Anybody who by nature tends to create new things is not able to block the flow of creativity that wells up within him. If a person feels that creativity does not flow to him or her in a natural way but that the action is forced, then he clearly feels that such creativity is external to his soul, and that it therefore requires coercion and difficult labor. But this is not a proper approach, since creativity is a revelation of the internal-natural truth of mankind. And the personal creativity of a person is a spark of the general Creation. Just as the Holy One, Blessed be He, created the world in a way that "did not include labor and exertion" [ibid], so a human artist must reveal his own inner self in a natural way.

STRAIGHT TALK

10 The Ten Commandments for a Couple in Love – by Rabbi Yoni Lavie, Manager, "Chaverim Makshivim" Website

(1) I am G-d – Have faith, my darling husband, that if somebody high above us made sure that we would meet and then led us on the twisted path to our wedding, evidently we are meant for each other. Even if down here on the earth our sensors might be too rusty to hear the wonderful voice from heaven, it would seem that in heaven it resounded even before we were born. And this heavenly voice made it very clear: the two halves of our souls can be combined into a single whole.

I want you to remember this at all times, but especially in moments of difficulty and tension, when our gaze is confused by a cloudy curtain, and we have a feeling that we are rushing down a slope. Remember that we are never alone. G-d is with us all the time, in all circumstances. In our life, in our home, and certainly in our companionship. How strongly will He be felt? That is up to us. How much will we open our hearts and make room for Him? I will be very happy, my darling, if together we can give the Shechina more and more room to rest among us.

(2) Do not have any other ... in front of me. Always remember that I am the one and only for you. From the moment that we made an eternal covenant, the link between us rose up to a completely different level than before, totally different than the relationship we have with any other people. You will not have "girl friends," and I will gladly give up on having any "boy friends." Our personal items, our secrets and the deep experiences of our lives, we will reserve forever for the contact between us.

(3) Do not use the name ... in vain. To be "married" entails an obligation. This is not a static position but a mission for life. It requires hard work and an unending investment, but it is a lot of fun to do it, because you do it all together with the person you love most in the whole world... I look at our wedding pictures sometimes, seeing how we stood there young and beautiful, looking at each other bright from happiness, with a unique shine in our eyes. So many years have passed since then, and the ship of our lives has been rocked by many waves. Our shiny eyes have developed some creases, and the color of our hair is different than it was then. But I am happy to find every time I look that the light and the happiness that was in our eyes at the time have been strengthened and have reached ever greater heights.

(4) Remember the Shabbat to keep it holy. All week long we are very busy – with study, work, activities, the children. I am not complaining, not for one moment, rather I thank G-d for giving us the strength and the health to keep on going. But still, the unending pace of life draws us along in its path, and it leaves very little time and space for the very precious realm of our own companionship. We are so lucky to have that amazing thing called Shabbat. It gives us magical moments when time stops in its tracks. The obsessive telephone stops ringing for a few hours, and even the internet and e-mail are turned off. The clock is replaced by the magical notes of peace and quiet, and our love grows with clear and refreshing emotions. Tell me, is there any possibility of grabbing a piece of this Garden of Eden and keeping it with us during the other days of the week?

(5) Honor your father and your mother. I know that you have difficulty with some of the things that you see and hear in my family, and I suppose you will not be very happy to hear that I sometimes feel the same way about your family... When we chose each other we knew that each one brought to the deal a family, with parents, brothers, and sisters, and a complex history. I hope we will always know to show respect for the parents of the other side, and that in the end we will be able to choose together elements from our homes that we want to adopt in our own house.

(6) Do not kill. You are already familiar with my sensitivities and how easily I start to cry, even when "nothing much has happened, it's not anywhere near the end of the world!" I ask you, please, set aside the cynicism and the barbs that you trade with your friends. They are not meant for me. I guess G-d created me with different mechanisms, and I don't enjoy such things, they give me pain. 11

(7) Do not be unfaithful. Our absolute loyalty is the very foundation of our close relationship. In our world, full of extroverts, permissiveness, and open media, a man and a woman face great challenges if they do not want anything to make any cracks in their "unity." In an era when the norm of the relationships between men and women have gone beyond all limits, we must be very careful, and we have a special responsibility to remain faithful to the covenant we have made with each other.

(8) Do not steal. I know that you work very hard and that you are busy with a thousand different things. It is important for me not to feel that I am number one-thousand-and-one on your list. I want to feel that I am first and most important to you, and it is important to me to be able to hear this in your voice. I need for you to tell me that you love me, and you should tell me this very often. The small talk and quick flirting, and your compliments, all serve as oxygen to me. They give me fuel to continue with a lot of effort and action. And, for example, if I ask you, "What do you think of my new dress?" – Don't reply like a good Jew with another question, such as, "How much did it cost?" There is only one appropriate answer to this question – "Wow!" I give my soul to you. Don't steal from me what I deserve.

(9) Do not bear false witness. Don't make empty promises and don't give a glib reply with words that you may not be able to keep. When you tell me on the phone, "Dear, I will be home in five minutes," I take your statement seriously, and I put the tasty meal that I have prepared in the oven. Please, make sure that the five minutes do not turn into fifty. I know that there are traffic delays. But you know about them too. You should be able to arrange things so that we are not late for an affair which is very important to me.

(10) Do not covet. The "Temple" which we are struggling to build together is a unique creation unlike anything else in the whole world. Don't let your gaze stray to the outside. Don't compare me to other women, not out loud and not in your heart. Don't look at other homes and at other couples with a feeling of jealousy in your heart. We have the privilege of sharing our own Divine heritage. With love and with hard work together, we can turn it into our own private Garden of Eden.

For reactions, added material, and to join an e-mail list: milatova.org.il

ITEMS FROM "IN THE TENTS OF SHEM" The First of Many - by Dov Rozen (Summarized by Yisrael Rosenberg)

Who was the first one who had the privilege of being named in memory of Rav Kook? The following appears in the book by Simcha Raz, "Ish Tzadik Hayah."

"In 5696 (1936), a year after the passing of Rav Avraham Yitzchak Kook, my uncle Rabbi Aharon Teitelbaum saw Rav Kook in a dream, dressed in festive clothing, about to leave his home. Rav Kook said to him, 'I am in a hurry to get to a Brit that was set for ten o'clock, and it is getting late.'

"In the morning, Rabbi Teitelbaum asked his wife Chaya to call the home of Rav Kook and ask if they were planning a Brit in the family. Rav Kook's widow replied, 'Not in our family, but in the family of a friend who is as close to us as can be there is a festivity planned. A grandson was born to Reb Aryeh, and we are in a hurry to get to the Brit, which has been called for ten o'clock.'

"Rabbi Aharon Teitelbaum understood that Rav Kook's soul was nearby and wanted to take part in the festivities, and he hurried to join the Brit. Of course the grandfather of the newborn, Rabbi Aryeh Levin, participated too. And the boy was given the name Avraham Yitzchak, in memory of Rav Kook. This was the first child named in memory of Rav Kook."

RIDDLE OF THE WEEK by Yoav Shelosberg, Director of "Quiz and Experience"

12 Shelach The threat against the two of them which did not take place Will occur at the end of the Torah portion What is this?

Answers for last week – the riddle was: Two that appear in this week's Torah portion also appear in the Prophets and in the Writings. Who are they?

The two are Eldad and Meidad, two prophets about whom it is written in the Torah, "And two men remained behind in the camp, one was named Eldad and the other was named Meidad. And the spirit came over them and they were listed in writing but they did not go to the Tent of Meeting, and they prophesied in the camp." [Bamidbar 11:26].

* * * * * *

Do you have a bar/bat mitzva coming up? Are you looking for a special quiz? To order: www.hidonim.com e-mail: [email protected]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * SHABBAT-ZOMET is an extract from SHABBAT-B'SHABBATO, a weekly bulletin distributed free of charge in hundreds of in Israel. It is published by the Zomet Institute of Alon Shevut, Israel, under the auspices of the National Religious Party. Translated by: Moshe Goldberg To subscribe: http://www.zomet.org.il/eng/?pg=subscribe&CategoryID=165 Visit the Zomet Institute web site: http://www.zomet.org.il Contact Zomet with comments about this bulletin or questions on the link between modern technology and halacha at: [email protected] Or: Phone: +972-2-9931442; FAX: +972-2-9931889 (Attention: Dan Marans) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

13