This is something that I wrote last year. Reading through it, it’s a little bit jumpy as it goes in and out of many different topics, but I can tell you, if you read it carefully and to the end, it should G-d Willing all come together very nicely. The sources for everything are cited at the end.
Read the rest of this entry »
A D’var Torah on Parshas Shemini (this week’s Parsha)
March 24th, 2008Intoxicated on Purim (i.e. not on a beverage)
March 21st, 2008This is from R’ Abba Wagensburg. It clarifies and brings light to the concept of being “drunk” on Purim. I recommend you read and enjoy it:
Read the rest of this entry »
Accounting
February 20th, 2008The following is an excerpt from here, which I came across in response to this and hence this post should be in merit of on R’ Yisrael Noach ben Hinda for a quick and complete recovery:
Read the rest of this entry »
ונתנו
February 17th, 2008The Ba’al HaTurim points out that in the second verse of this week’s Parsha, Ki Sisa, which speaks about giving, the word ונתנו is a palindrome, teaching that what a person gives to charity will come back to him. ”He will not be missing anything as a consequence of the giving.” (see Gittin 7b)
It is also noted in the Artscroll footnote that the trope (the cantillation marks) over this word form a mirror image of each-other, despite it being otherwise uncommon for a word in the Torah to have more than one cantillation mark – also alluding to this concept.
Parshat Terumah
February 6th, 2008In this week’s parshah, Exodus 25:1-27:19, Terumah, we find an elaborate description of the Ark and Tabernacle to be built to house the Torah. With gold-coated sweetwoods, silver plate, and solid gold covers, as well as woven curtains and three layers of containment, it is a housing for the Torah that is likely symbolic of many things. The first par that caught my eye was the arrangement of containers around the Torah, layered with gold, then wood, then gold. More specifically, three boxes are to be built inside of each other, sort of like Russian dolls, in that order, with the innermost to house the Torah. The wood is a specific type of wood, acacia, which I mentioned to Jeff. The hebrew root word for acacia is similar to the root for unproductive idleness, eitz shitim and shtut, respectively. One train of thought is that this is supposed to represent the good side of idleness, namely that it can be used to do good things. I drew a parallel there to our idea of Shabbat. The acacia wood is also, among other things, a sweet, fragrant wood that may have been a principal component of incense in Biblical times. It also exudes a sweet sap that can be made into a gum-Arabic substitute and is used extensively in the food and drink industry. Furthermore, acacia trees do grow in the desert, so it is likely that that might have been the logical choice based on availability to us as we were living in that environment. However, its sweet fragrance and antioxidant-rich sap would also chemically stabilize the wood, possibly making it an ideal choice for construction that is supposed to last for a very long time, and for ornamental purposes.
Parsha Mishpatim
February 6th, 2008In this belated post about the Parsha of Mishpatim (Exodus 21:1 – 24:18), we read a description of commandments which contain what we normally consider the Ten Commandments, as well as other mitzvot and a rich body of legal precedent. One point of discussion I had with Jeff was the variation in the punishments described for some transgressions. In those verses, the sentences did not seem to have a logical order in how the transgression and then the punishment are mentioned, but instead seems to, in the sense of prose, “skip a beat”. Since these anomalies usually catch my eye before anything else, I asked why there is a non-random pattern to the mentionings of transgressions and punishments.
As one example, consider the sins of cursing at one’s parents and striking one’s parent, which are given the punishments of stoning and strangulation, respectively. As Jeff explained, cursing is a greater sin than striking, because it is a double transgression, both disrespecting one’s parents and invoking the name of God in vain, and therefore is deserving of a more severe punishment. In a side note, kidnapping is partially an enabling sin – by kidnapping a small child, one allows the possibility of him/her growing up without parents and coincidentally striking his own parents or cursing at them later in life, due to not recognizing them.
Second Update
January 31st, 2008Well, it has been about a week since I have updated in here. There have been several things over the past week that I have wanted to share in this blog, but rather than dwell on what I didn’t post, I will, B’H, move forward and post one thing. The following is from the Gemara Berachos 10a:
There were certain boors in R’ Meir’s neighborhood and they caused [R' Meir] considerable distress. Once R’Meir was praying for mercy regarding them, so that they would die. His wife, Beruria, said to him: What is your reasoning to pray for their deaths? Because it is written in Tehillim (Psalms 104:35) Let sinners (chataim) cease from the earth.. But is the word – chotim written, [which would refer to sinners]? The word is written chataim, [which refers to what causes one to sin. i.e. the Evil Inclination]. And furthermore go down to the end of the verse, which states and let the wicked be no more [But the cessation of present-day sinners does not ensure that the future wicked men will not appear on the scene. Evidently, then, the term chataim refers not to sinners, but to that which causes sin - the Evil Inclination] Therefore, you should rather pray for mercy regarding [these boors] that they should repent and the wicked with be no more. [R' Meir] prayed for mercy regarding [these boors] and they repented.
Tu B’Shevat, 5768
January 23rd, 2008So, I have just installed this new word-press blog. This was in response to an inspiring Tu B’Shevat Seder in New London at the home of the Sternberg family, which was in turn inspired by Roee Ramot. So, you might presume that the re-inauguration of this blog (I previously had a similar blog on a system called Drupal, which I rarely updated) was indirectly inspired by Roee. But, no. The re-inauguration of this blog was not only directly inspired by Roee, but suggested.
Read the rest of this entry »
So, I’ve decided to use this blog…
February 1st, 2006So, I’ve decided to use this blog to write down various items of Torah that I either have learned up or am interested in finding an answer to. What prompted this? Well about a year ago, I asked the following question:
We have this:
<cite>Rebbi Yishak said, ?��Ǩ?�Blessing is not found except on things that are hidden from the eye [i.e. the view of others]. The Gemara adds that should one go to his storehouse to take inventory, one may pray, ?��Ǩ?�May it be your will our G-d that you bless my possessions — [blessing means ?��Ǩ?�increase?��Ǩ��]. If, however, one has already begun to count his inventory then he may only say, ?��Ǩ?�Blessed is the One who sends blessing to this stock.?��Ǩ�� If the person has already completed the inventory count then any blessing or prayer for a bountiful count is considered a blessing in vain. Blessing cannot fall on something counted exactly. [Baba Mesiah, 42a] (http://www.torah.org/learning/reflections/classes/reflection65.html)</cite>
And we have the Mishna 9 in Perek 3 of Mesechet Berachos, which states that:
<cite>To pray for what is past is a vain prayer. How is this? His wife was pregnant, and he said “May it be Thy will that my wife bear a male child”, this is a vain prayer. He was coming from a journey and heard a cry of anguish in the city and said “May it be Thy will that these are not the members of my household, this is a vain prayer.</cite>
The question here should be obvious. How do we have one place where it says that we should pray for things that are not known to us – to ask for blessing – that they increase, as long we don’t have any prior knowledge… however we have a Mishna that seems to state otherwise.
Well, over a year ago, I heard a beautiful answer to this. I sort-of remember part of it, but still am left with a huge question… you see… I forgot the answer! Why? Because I didn’t have a blog like this back then to record this stuff!
Well, fortunately I have the answer on a tape somewhere in my family’s house, but I’m away at school now, so that doesn’t help. Anyway, I can say that the answer is very much based on the first line of the Gemara. <b>Blessing is not found except on things that are hidden from the eye</b>. This is an amazing idea regardless – such an idea literally can change the way we see the world!
We run into what seems to be a huge problem with the case of the pregnant women. Isn’t the gender of the child “hidden from the eye”? If so, why are we told in the Mishna that we are not allowed to pray for that, when we are told in the Gemara in Bava Basra that we are allowed pray for something “hidden from the eye”. You see my question?
Well, that’s my first of G-d willing many entries in here. I hope to eventually post the answer to this once I find the tape. This first entry is written in the merit of my grandmother, Eshka bas Chaya.
Thanks for reading.
- Chaim