Torah Tidbits Issue 1352 - 21/12/19

ISSUE 1352 DEC. 21ST '19

‫כג' כסלו תש"פ‬

‫פרשת וישב‬ PARSHAT VAYEISHEV • SHABBAT MEVARCHIM

ONE STEP AHEAD

By Rabbi Shalom Rosner see page 32

SPECIAL EXPANDED PRE-CHANUKAH EDITION

8 page pullout see centerfold

‫יֹוסף‬ ֵ ‫"וַ ִּי ַּקח ֲאדֹנֵ י‬ ‫אֹתֹו וַ ִּי ְּתנֵ הּו ֶאל‬ "‫ֵּבית ַה ּסֹ ַהר‬

YERUSHALAYIM IN/OUT TIMES FOR SHABBAT PARSHAT VAYEISHEV Candles 4:04PM • Havdala 5:19PM • Rabbeinu Tam 5:57PM

OU ISRAEL 02-560-9100 |

www.ttidbits.com |

ADVERTISING 02-999-3938

PARSHAPIX

PPexplanations on p.68 and at www.ttidbits.com Click on the PPW link

WORD OF THE MONTH This Shabbat (Vayeishev) we bench Rosh Chodesh Tevet which will be on Shabbat and the following day, Sunday. (Dec 28-29) The 6th day of Chanuka is always Rosh Chodesh, and so is the 7th day when there are two days R"Ch. ‫ר ֹאשׁ חֹ דֶ ש טֵ בֵ ת י ְִהיֶה ְבּיוֹם ַשׁבָּ ת קוֹדֶ שׁ וּלְ מָ חֳ ָרתוֹ ְבּיוֹם ִראשׁוֹן הַ בָּ א עָ ֵ ֽלינוּ וְעַ ל כָּל י ְִשׂ ָראֵ ל לְ טוֹבָ ה‬ The molad of Tevet is THU 20h 2m 8p which is Dec 26th, 7:41pm (Israel Winter Time) ‫מד‬:‫ו' ב‬ ‫ישׁי (ליל ששי‬ ִ ‫ הַ מּוֹלַד י ְִהיֶה ְבּיוֹם חֲ ִמ‬a.k.a), ‫וּשׁמוֹנָה חַ ל ִָקים אַ חֲ ֵרי ְשׁ ֹמנֶה בָּ עֶ ֶרב‬ ְ ‫שׁתֵּ י דַ קוֹת‬. ְ The actual molad (astronomical no moon) is Thursday, December 26th, at 7:13am.

2

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OTHER Z'MANIM

CANDLE LIGHTING A N D H AV DA L A T I M ES

JERUSALEM CANDLES

4:04 4:22 4:19 4:19 4:19 4:19 4:18 4:19 4:20 4:04 4:18 4:07 4:17 4:17 4:18 4:19 4:21 4:20 4:04 4:13

VAYEISHEV

Yerushalayim / Maale Adumim Aza area (Netivot, S’deirot, Bet al)

Beit Shemesh / RBS Gush Etzion Raanana/ Tel Mond/ Herzliya/ K. Saba

Modi’in / Chashmona’im Netanya Be’er Sheva Rehovot Petach Tikva Ginot Shomron Haifa / Zichron Gush Shiloh Tel Aviv / Giv’at Shmuel Giv’at Ze’ev Chevron / Kiryat Arba Ashkelon Yad Binyamin Tzfat / Bik’at HaYarden Golan

HAVDALA

5:19 5:23 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:22 5:21 5:20 5:19 5:18 5:19 5:21 5:20 5:20 5:22 5:21 5:16 5:15

MIKEITZ

4:08* 4:25 4:23 4:23 4:23 4:23 4:22 4:23

5:23 5:27 5:24 5:24 5:24 5:24 5:24 5:26

4:23 5:25 4:08 5:24 4:22 5:23 4:10 5:18 4:21 5:22 4:21 5:25 4:22 5:23 4:23 5:24 4:25 5:26 4:24 5:25 4:08 5:19 4:17 5:19

Rabbeinu Tam (J'lem) - 5:57pm • next week - 6:01pm *See Chanukah pullout for explanation OU Kashrut  NCSY  Jewish Action  JLIC NJCD / Yachad / Our Way  OU West Coast  OU Press  Synagogue/ Community Services  OU Advocacy  OU Israel MOISHE BANE, PRESIDENT OF THE ORTHODOX UNION Howard Tzvi Friedman,

Chairman of the Board, Orthodox Union | Dr. Michael Elman, OU Israel Chair | Gary Torgow, Chair, OU Kashrus Commission ALLEN FAGIN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT | Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, Exec. V.P. Emeritus | Rabbi Steven Weil, Senior Managing Director | Shlomo Schwartz, Chief Financial Officer | Lenny Bessler, Chief Human Resources Officer | Rabbi Dave Felsenthal, Chief Innovation Officer OU KOSHER: Rabbi Menachem Genack, CEO/Rabbinic Administrator OU Kosher | Rabbi Moshe Elefant, COO/Executive Rabbinic Coordinator ISRAEL: Rabbi Yissachar Dov Krakowski, Rabbinic Field Representative

Headquarters: 11 Broadway, New York, NY 10004 212-563-4000  website: www.ou.org

Editor Emeritus: Phil Chernofsky Editor: Rabbi Aaron Goldscheider|aarong@ouisrael.org Coordinator: Ita Rochel Russek Advertising: anglomedia@anglomedia.biz (02) 999-3938 Website: www.ou.org/torah/tt www.ttidbits.com

Not getting enough TTs? Too many?

Contact our distribution 050-577-2111 • ttdist@ouisrael.org

RANGES ARE 11 DAYS, WED-SHABBAT 20-30 KISLEV (DEC 18-28) Earliest Talit & T'filin Sunrise Sof Z'man K' Sh'ma

5:39-5:43am 6:33-6:38am 9:04-9:09am

(Magen Avraham: 8:25-8:30am)

Sof Z'man T'fila

(Magen Avraham: 9:22-9:27am)

Chatzot (Halachic noon) Mincha Gedola (Earliest Mincha) Plag Mincha Sunset (counting elevation) (based on sea level: 4:38-4:43pm)

9:54-9:59am

11:35½-11:40½am 12:06-12:11pm 3:35-3:40pm 4:43-4:48½pm

Seymour J. AbramsOrthodox Union Jerusalem World CenterAvrom Silver Jerusalem College for AdultsWolinetz Family ShulMakom BaLevBirthrightYachadNCSY in IsraelJLIC in IsraelPearl & Harold M. Jacobs ZULA Outreach CenterThe Jack Gindi Oraita ProgramOU Israel Kashrut

ZVI SAND, PRESIDENT, OU ISRAEL Yitzchak Fund, Former President, OU Israel | Rabbi Emanuel Quint z”l, Senior Vice President | Prof. Meni Koslowsky, Vice President VAAD MEMBERS: Dr. Simcha Heller | Stuart Hershkowitz | Moshe Kempinski | Sandy Kestenbaum| Ben Wiener | Harvey Wolinetz RABBI AVI BERMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OU ISRAEL David Katz, CFO, OU Israel | Chaim Pelzner, Director of Programs, OU Israel | Rabbi Sam Shor, Director of Programs, OU Israel Center | Rabbi Sholom Gold, Dean, Avrom Silver Jerusalem College for Adults

22 Keren HaYesod <> POB 37015 <> Jerusalem 91370 phone: (02) 560 9100 | fax: (02) 566-0156 email: office@ouisrael.org | website: www.ouisrael.org Founders and initial benefactors of the OU Israel Center: George and Ilse Falk a”h OU Israel, Torah Tidbits and Anglo Media do not endorse the political or halachic positions of its editor, columnists or advertisers, nor guarantee the quality of advertised services or products. Nor do we endorse the kashrut of hotels, restaurants, caterers or food products that are advertised in TT (except, of course, those under OU-Israel hashgacha).

Any "promises" made in ads are the sole responsibility of the advertisers and not that of OU Israel, the OU Israel Center , Torah Tidbits and Anglo Media.

Torah Tidbits and many of the projects of OU Israel are assisted by grants from MISRAD HACHINUCH- Dept of Tarbut Yehudit

OU ISRAEL CENTER

3

WEEKLY INSPIRATION

‘Everyone must know that within burns a candle. No one’s candle is like his or her fellow’s candle. No one lacks their own candle. Everyone must know that it is their task to reveal their light to the world, to ignite it until it is a great flame, and to illuminate the universe.’

Rabbi Abraham Isaac HaKohen KooK zt”l ,‫ ואין נרו שלו כנר חברו‬,‫ שבתוך תוכו דולק נר‬,‫צריך שכל איש ידע ויבין‬ ‫ שעליו לעמול ולגלות‬,‫ וצריך שכל איש ידע ויבין‬.‫ואין איש שאין לו נר‬ .‫ ולהדליקו לאבוקה גדולה ולהאיר את העולם כולו‬,‫את אור הנר ברבים‬ ‫הרב אברהם יצחק הכהן קוק זצ”ל‬

TABLE OF CONTENTS

by Aliya 06Aliya Sedra Summary ‘Wisdom’ of the East 16The Rabbi Dr. Tzvi Hersh Weinreb Angel Who Didn’t Know he was...

22The Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks the Prophets 28Probing Rabbi Nachman Winkler Step Ahead 32One Rabbi Shalom Rosner Image in the Window 36The Rebbetzin Shira Smiles ISRAEL CENTER 42OUSCHEDULE REVIEW 45CHANUKAH 8 PAGE PULLOUT Vayeishev: A Little Bit of Light 56Rabbi Judah Mischel Shmuel 60Simchat Rabbi Sam Shor Yosef Defeated the Yetzer Hara 62How Rabbi Aaron Goldscheider 4

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Was Born to Toil 66Man Menachem Persoff Tidbits This 'n That 69Torah Phil Chernofsky Chazanim at Ashrei 70Switching Rav Daniel Mann, Eretz Chemda Everywhere 72Miracles Rabbi Gideon Weitzman, Machon Puah berachah do you say on...

74What Rabbi Moshe Bloom Vayeishev 76Parshat Rabbi Berel Wein Menorah as the Emblem of the....

78The Rabbi Shimshon Hakohen Nadel beautiful Battle 82ARabbi Shmuel Goldin Let’s Talk It Out 88Sivan Rahav Meir in Rome 90When Rabbi Benji Levy 4 Teens By Teens 92Torah Shlomo Rayman // Amichai Pollock

OU ISRAEL CENTER

5

VAYEISHEV

ALIYA-BY-ALIYA SEDRA SUMMARY [P> X:Y (Z)] and [S> X:Y (Z)] indicate start of a parsha p’tucha or s’tuma. X:Y is

STATS 9th of 54 sedras; 9th of 12 in B'reishit Written on 190 lines, ranks 28th 4 Parshiyot; 3 open, 1 closed 112 p'sukim - ranks 24th (8th) tied with Matot; more words & letters than it, same line count 1558 words - ranks 24th (8th) tied with Vayakhel; fewer p'sukim & letters than it. Vayakhel is 20 lines longer 5972 letters - ranks 24th (8th) tied with D'varim; more p'sukim & words than it, but fewer lines

Perek:Pasuk of the Parsha’s beginning; (Z) is the number of p’sukim in the parsha.

KOHEN FIRST ALIYA 11 P'SUKIM - 37:1-11 [P> 37:1 (36)] Yaakov has spent years away from home and now has returned.

The Torah indicates that it is through Yosef that Yaakov's legacy continues.

17 year old Yosef brings bad reports about his brothers to Yaakov. Yaakov loves Yosef above his brothers and gives him a special (striped, colorful) coat. As a result, the brothers hate Yosef and cannot talk civilly to him. Yosef's two dreams

MITZVOT No mitzvot are counted from Vayeishev

(and especially, his telling his brothers about them) increases their hatred and jealousy, and this alarms Yaakov.

SDT

These are the TO-L'DOT of Yaakov: Yosef... Should not the Torah have started with

Reuven? This comes to show us, says the Gemara, that Yosef should have been Yaakov's firstborn, but G-d's mercy for

6

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Leah put her before Rachel in giving birth.

The first dream was of his brother's sheaves of wheat bowing to his sheaf.

Yosef's second dream, of the Sun, Moon, and stars bowing to him, added fuel to his brothers' hatred. Yaakov pointed out the absurdity of the dream, since Rachel, the Moon, had already died and would therefore not be bowing to Yosef.

Rashi says 2 different things: (1) The dream was referring to Bilha who raised Yosef in Rachel's absence; and (2) even "true" dreams have an element of nonsense. These seem to be mutually exclusive statements - if the Moon represents Bilha, then the dream contained no nonsense. Yaakov seems to have purposely voiced the second option in order to diffuse some of the brothers' anger.

SDT

The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat says, in the name of R' Chama b. Guriya in the

name of Rav, that a person should never favor one child among his children, because it was a little bit of cloth that aroused jealousy of the brothers for Yosef and that it brought the whole family down to Egypt. Parents and grandparents (aunts and uncles too)

OU ISRAEL CENTER

7

have to be very careful not to cause jealousy among siblings to rear its ugly head. This does not necessarily mean identical presents and treatment, but it means thinking care- fully and acting wisely.

intended to save Yosef.

A point must be made about the concluding pasuk of this Aliya, which gives credit to Reuven for saving Yosef.

Commentaries say that Reuven could have talked the brothers out of the whole

LEVI SECOND ALIYA 11 P'SUKIM - 37:12-22

thing; instead, he suggested the snakeand scorpion-infested pit. And, Yosef wasn't saved. Nonetheless, Reuven is credited for his intention to save Yosef.

The brothers are tending sheep near Sh'chem. Yaakov sends Yosef to them.

A stranger (some say, the angel Gavriel) helps him find them.

Rashi says that Reuven truly intended to come back and save Yosef - that's good - but his reason was that he, as oldest, would be blamed for anything that

In the whole story of Yosef and his

happened to Yosef - not a nice reason.

brothers, one can see that G-d has a

Nonetheless, he gets the credit for the

plan which proceeds with the unknow-

good deed he planned on doing - even

ing help of the brothers and other

though it wasn't accomplished AND even

individuals.

though his motives were not pure.

And

yet,

each

person

involved acts of his own free will, and is therefore accountable for his actions.

When the brothers see Yosef coming,

SHLISHI THIRD ALIYA 14 P'SUKIM - 37:23-36

they (some say, Shimon and Levi) suggest killing him. Reuven talks them out of

When Yosef arrives, the brothers

it by suggesting that they not spill his

remove his coat and throw him into a

blood, but throw him into a pit instead.

deep pit. The brothers sit to eat. (This is

The Torah testifies that Reuven really

considered a sign of callousness towards

8

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

their brother and what they have done to him.) When a Ishmaelite caravan approaches, Yehuda suggests that it would be wrong to kill Yosef (Reuven's intentions notwithstanding, the brothers expected Yosef to die in the pit); they should rather get rid of him by selling him into slavery. Through a series of transactions, Yosef ends up in Egypt as a slave to Potifar. When Reuven returns to the scene and discovers Yosef missing, he rends his garment and expresses his distress to the others. The brothers slaughter a goat, smear Yosef's multicolored, striped coat in its blood, and send it to Yaakov to identify.

SDT

Commentaries

point

out

that just as Yaakov had deceived his father with a

goat and a garment (goat & coat), so too was he deceived with a goat and a coat.

This is a stark example of "Mida k'neged mida" - measure for measure.

Yaakov

is

inconsolable.

(This

is

considered an indication that Yaakov subconsciously knew that Yosef was alive; one naturally accepts consolation for the dead after a time, but not for the missing.)

Because of Yosef's story, Vayeishev is designated each year as SHABBAT SH'VUYEI V'NE'EDAREI TZAHA"L - the Shabbat for Israel's captives and missing.

SDT

Rashi

gives

us

another

aspect of the "Measure for Measure" punishment of OU ISRAEL CENTER

9

Yaakov. The pasuk says that he "mourned

longer looked up to by his brothers. After

for his son MANY DAYS." Rashi says that

they saw the terrible effect on Yaakov of

it was 22 years! Yosef was 17 when he

the Yosef business, they blamed Yehuda

was sold. He was 30 when he stood before

for not talking them out of the whole

Par'o. That's 13. Seven years of plenty

idea. Hence the term "And Yehuda went

and the first two years of famine before

down from his brothers" has a double

father and son were reunited. That

meaning.

makes 22 years that Yaakov was without Yosef. This, says Rashi, is the exact length of time that Yaakov was away from Yitzchak. It includes the 20 years with Lavan, a year and a half in Sukkot, and six months in Beit El before Yaakov returned to his father's house. Remember that Yaakov had various good excuses, nonethe- less...

R'VI'I FOURTH ALIYA 30 P'SUKIM - 38:1-30

There he meets and marries the daughter of Shu'a, who bears him three sons. He marries off his eldest, Er, to Tamar. When Er dies, the next brother Onan, marries his brother's widow, Yibum-style. The Torah tells us that Onan refused to have a child with Tamar, because that child would "belong" (so to speak) to Er. This, G-d took seriously (so to speak) and Onan also dies. Tamar is left to wait for the third son, Shela (for Yibum).

[P> 38:1 (30)] Subsequently, Yehuda

Some time later, Yehuda's wife dies.

leaves home and befriends an Adullamite

Yehuda travels to the area where Tamar

named CHIRA.

lives. When she hears of his impending

SDT

Why is the story of Yosef interrupted to tell us about Yehuda's situation?

Rashi tells us that Yehuda was no

10

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

arrival and realizes that she has not been given to Shela yet, she disguises herself.

Yehuda, thinking she is a prostitute, sleeps with her. She asks and receives three items as security to guarantee

that he will send her payment (a goat).

When it becomes known that Tamar is

pregnant,

Yehuda

is

summoned.

Assuming that she has acted sinfully, he is prepared to have her punished. Tamar produces the three items and announces that she is pregnant by their owner.

Commentaries explain that prior to Matan Torah, any close relative could take the childless wife of the deceased; after the Torah was given, only a brother qualifies for YIBUM. Yehuda recognizes that he is the guilty one, not Tamar, and he admits it. She gives birth to twins (one extending his hand first, the other actually being born first). They are named Peretz (ancestor of King David) and Zerach.

Note the repeat of the confused firstborn theme. It pervades Sefer B'reishit.

OBSERVATION: Yaakov deceives his father with a garment (Eisav's) and fans the jealousy of his son's against Yosef with the "coat of many colors". He is deceived (and devastated) by that same coat when the brothers bring it back to him all bloodied. Yehuda is "troubled" by his garment which he gave to Tamar as one of the three securities for his promise to pay her with goats. (P'tilim, says Rashi, refers to Yehuda's cloak.) Yosef, the victim (but not completely free of guilt in the matter) has his coat grabbed by Potifar's wife. Yosef leaves it in her hands as he runs from the house; the coat becomes the damning piece of evidence against him.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

11

CHAMISHI 5TH ALIYA 6 P'SUKIM - 39:1-6 [S> 39:1 (23)] In "meanwhile back at the ranch" style, the Torah returns us to the story of Yosef. Yosef serves in Potifar's house and brings success to his master.

said to Yosef: Your father is in agony over your disappear- ance and supposed demise and you are enjoying yourself? I shall make things rough for you too.

SHISHI SIXTH ALIYA 17 P'SUKIM - 39:7-23

He is well-liked by all, and is given much responsibility. Then the Torah makes

Potifar's wife casts her eye upon Yosef.

a point of telling us that Yosef was very

She repeatedly attempts to seduce him.

handsome.

His constant refusal angers her.

The Midrash says that Yosef

She grabs him on a day when no one

was aware of his looks and

else is in the house. Yosef flees, leaving

became too comfortable in

his coat behind. (This is the second time

Potifar's house. Things were going well,

his coat has been left in the hands of

he had good food and drink, and he

others!) Potifar's wife denounces Yosef

began "curling his hair". G-d (so to speak)

to all who will listen, and Potifar has

SDT

no choice but to have Yosef tossed into prison.

[Speculation: Potifar likely believed that Yosef was innocent, which would explain why he didn't have Yosef killed, only jailed. There seems to be a source that says that As'nat - Potifar's daughter and Yosef's future wife - told her father that Yosef was innocent. Potifar apparently couldn't let him off scot-free 12

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

13

- his wife would blow a gasket, but he

for misdemean- ors. Both dream on the

spared his life.]

same night and awake in morning very

G-d "favors" Yosef in prison, and Yosef becomes well-liked and respected there too. Even in his troubled circumstances, Yosef is watched over favorably by G-d.

SDT

agitated. After Yosef interprets the wine steward's dream in a positive manner, the baker asks Yosef to interpret his dream as well. Yosef predicts death for him. Both dreams come true: the wine

the

steward is restored to his position of

episode of Potifar's wife as

honor and the baker is hanged. Yosef

Commentaries

see

an appropriate punishment

asks the wine steward to remember him

for Yosef: (a) having been vain about his

to Par'o, but he forgets Yosef and his

good looks, (b) having reported to his

promise to him.

father that his brothers had been "lifting their eyes" to the local girls, and (c) experiencing

libelous

accusations

against himself, as he had reported the "evil-doings" of his brothers to their father. Baal HaTurim adds that Yosef spent 10 years in prison corresponding to the 10 brothers he reported on.

SH'VII SEVENTH ALIYA 23 P'SUKIM - 40:1-23

Rashi tells us that Yosef was to spend another two years in prison for relying on the Wine Steward to get him out of prison. This raises the question in our minds of the line between BITACHON, trust in G-d, and HISHTADLUS, effort a person expends to get himself out of a tough situation. Could it not have been viewed that G-d set up the whole dream situation with the Wine Steward and the Baker, so that Yosef would do exactly what he did, and the Wine Steward

[P> 40:1 (23)] The last portion of

would then be in a position and willing

Vayeishev tells of the dreams of the Royal

state of mind to help Yosef and put in

Wine Steward and the Royal Baker, both

the good word to Par'o? Why is Yosef

of whom had been imprisoned by Par'o

faulted for taking the opportunity to try to get out of prison via the Wine Steward, when one can claim that G-d had sent the Wine Steward to Yosef (so to speak) for exactly that purpose.

It is possible that the spiritual level of Yosef required different behavior than would be reasonable and proper for "the rest of us".

Or... it is possible that under the

14

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

cirscumstances, namely that Yosef had just credited G-d repeatedly for his ability to interpret dreams, that the Wine Steward received the "wrong message" from Yosef when Yosef asks him to remember Yosef favorably. Maybe like: "Hey, your G-d can interpret dreams but can't even get you out of this dump without you asking me for a favor."

Maybe there is a Chilul HaShem factor to consider here.

HAFTARA 19 P'SUKIM AMOS 2:6-3:8 Amos was an early prophet (and a sheep farmer - whatever that is), shortly after the kingdom split into Israel and Judea.

He lived in Tekoa, Judea, but prophesied mostly in the Kingdom of Israel, where he tried to warn the people of the tragic end they faced. Amos warns the people that their behavior is repugnant before G-d and that He has already destroyed some of the neighboring nations for their misdeeds. The first pasuk is the perfect connection to the sedra; mentioning the sale of Yosef by his brothers.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

15

RABBI DR. TZVI HERSH WEINREB THE PERSON BY OU Executive Vice President, Emeritus IN THE PARSHA

The ‘Wisdom’ of the East

T

here are jokes which are very funny on the surface, but which, upon reflection, can be quite painful and disturbing.

One of them, which was told frequently twenty years ago or more, concerns a matronly woman from the Bronx who seeks to visit a famous guru somewhere in the Far East, perhaps in the mountains of northern India or Tibet.

She boards a plane at John F. Kennedy airport and begins the long and arduous flight, which necessitates several stopovers and the changing of planes. She lands at the closest airport to the remote ashram, or temple, where the guru has his mountain retreat. She finds a bus that takes her part of the way to the ashram and, although she’s never even seen a donkey before, summons a donkey cart to continue her trek to her encounter with the guru.

Totally exhausted, she finally arrives at the guru’s quarters. To her great disappointment, she learns that the guru has just begun a three-day period of fasting and meditation and cannot

16

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

possibly be interrupted. Anything but total solitude is forbidden.

She pleads and begs and finally resorts to one of the strategies of persuasion that she learned back in the Bronx. She tells the guru’s guards that she only wants to say three words to him.

On the condition that she limits her message to just three words, they allow her access into the guru’s inner chamber.

There she finds him sitting in the lotus yoga position, totally entranced in his meditation.

She approaches him, but he remains unaware of her presence. Finally, she bends over him and whispers in his ear: “Melvin? Come home!”

I used to tell his story many times, not so long ago, when so many young Jewish men and women, from the Bronx and from elsewhere, left to the Far East in their quest for spiritual truth and a meaningful path in life.

The story always drew laughs from the crowd, but the laughs were inevitably followed by a contemplative silence as the audience began to reflect upon the point of the story. Young Jews by the thousands had become alienated not only from their Jewish roots, but from Western civilization in general.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

17

Although this phenomenon is no longer as prevalent as it once was, Eastern religions remain attractive to many, and not just to young Jews but to a wide variety of individuals in search of a “New Age” alternative to Western culture.

These words imply that it was somehow improper for Jacob to desire a calm and serene existence. The comment even suggests that Jacob was punished for his wish by suffering the disappearance, and supposed death, of his favored son.

The reasons why so many are dissatisfied with the Western way of life center around the relentless pressures and frantic pace which that way of life entails. Eastern religions offer an alternative which promises serenity, tranquility, and inner peace.

Why? What possible sin would Jacob have committed by hoping for tranquility?

Had he not suffered enough during his years of exile? Were the family crises described in detail in last week’s parsha not sufficient torture?

This leads us to a question that surprisingly connects to this week’s Torah portion, Parshat Vayeshev (Genesis 37:140:23).

The question is: “Is there anything wrong with seeking tranquility and inner peace? Are they not highly desirable components of a healthy and meaningful lifestyle?”

An answer can be found in the words of the Midrash Rabbah that appear in most contemporary editions of Rashi’s commentary, although they are absent from earlier manuscript editions.

The first words in this week’s Torah portion read: “Now Jacob was settled in the land where his father had sojourned…” The Bible then narrates the story of Jacob’s son Joseph and how he is sold into slavery by his brothers.

Rashi, quoting the Midrash, comments: “Jacob wished to dwell in peace and tranquility but immediately was beset by Joseph’s troubles and tribulations.”

18

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Rabbi Yehuda Leib Alter (the second Rebbe of Gur), the author of the Sfat Emet (“Lips of Truth”), a profoundly insightful Chassidic work, suggests that the calm and peaceful life is not necessarily the religiously desirable. Such a life is conducive to complacency.

“What God wants from the Jew,” he writes, “is for him to have a life of constant toil in the service of His Blessed Name, because there is no limit to striving for perfection.”

The Torah’s ideal is a life of action and involvement in worldly affairs. The Torah rejects the attitude of detachment and passivity which is implicit in the teachings of Eastern religions.

The Torah cannot envision the good life if that life is without challenge.

Achievement of inner peace is not the ultimate value, especially not if it results in withdrawal from responsible action within society.

The author of the Sfat Emet led his flock and wrote his works in the latter half

of the 19th century. But the important lesson he taught was expressed about a century before, in the words of Rabbi Moses Chaim Luzzato, the 18th-century Italian mystic, whose work Mesilat Yesharim (“The Path of the Just”) contains the following demanding passage: A man must know that he was not created to enjoy rest in this world, but to toil and labor. He should, therefore, act as though he were a laborer working for hire. We are only day laborers. Think of the soldier at the battlefront who eats in haste, whose sleep is interrupted, and who is always prepared for an attack.

“Man is born to toil” (Job 5:7).

The teaching of both of these authors was anticipated by this passage in the Talmud (Berakhot 64a), as translated and elucidated in the Koren Talmud Bavli: Torah scholars have rest neither in this world nor in the World-to-Come, as in both worlds they are constantly progressing, as it is stated: “They go from strength to strength, every one of them appears before God in Zion.”

The differences between the ideologies of Judaism and other religions are sometimes subtle and hard to define. But in contrasting Judaism with the religions of the Far East, the differences are quite clear. The latter promise inner peace and serenity and advocate detachment.

Judaism makes no such promises. It tells us that life is all about struggle and challenge, and it demands that we be actively involved in improving the world.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

19

20

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

21

on the Weekly Parsha from COVENANT & Thoughts RABBI LORD JONATHAN SACKS CONVERSATION

‫לעילוי נשמות‬ ‫פנחס בן יעקב אשר וגולדה בת ישראל דוד אייז ע״ה‬ ‫עזריאל בן אריה לייב ומעניה בת יצחק שרטר ע״ה‬ Dedicated by Dr. Robert Sreter DDS., M.S.

The Angel Who Didn’t Know He Was An Angel

T

he story of Joseph and his brothers, spread over four parshiyot, is the longest and most tightly-scripted of all the narratives in the Torah. Nothing is there by accident; every detail counts.

One moment, however, seems gloriously irrelevant – and it is this that contains one of the most beautiful of the Torah’s ideas.

With great speed, we are introduced to the broad lines of the story. Joseph is envied and hated by his brothers. So deep has the animosity gone that they cannot talk peaceably with one another. Now the brothers have left home to tend their sheep, and Jacob tells Joseph to go and see how they are doing. This encounter will set in motion the central drama from which 22

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

all else will follow: the moment when the brothers sell Joseph into Egypt as a slave.

But it nearly didn’t happen. Joseph arrived at Shechem where he expected his brothers to be, but they were not there. He might well have wandered around for a while and then, failing to find them, gone home. None of the events that take up the rest of the Torah would have happened: no Joseph the slave, no Joseph the viceroy, no storage of food during the years of plenty, no descent of Joseph’s family to Egypt, no exile, no slavery, no exodus. The entire story – already revealed in broad outlines to Abraham in a night vision – seemed about to be derailed. Then we read the following: A man found [Joseph] wandering around in the fields and asked him, “What are you looking for?” He replied, “I’m looking for my brothers. Can you tell me where they are grazing their flocks?” “They have moved on from here,” the man answered.

“I heard them say, ‘Let’s go to Dothan.’” So Joseph went after his brothers and found them near Dothan. (Gen. 37:15-17) I know of no comparable passage in the Torah: three verses dedicated to an apparently trivial, eminently forgettable detail of someone having to ask directions from a stranger. Who was this unnamed man? And what conceivable message does the episode hold for future generations,

OU ISRAEL CENTER

23

for us? Rashi says he was the angel Gabriel. Ibn Ezra says he was a passer-by.

Ramban however says that “the Holy One, blessed be He, sent him a guide without his knowledge.”

I am not sure whether Ramban meant without Joseph’s knowledge or without the guide’s knowledge. I prefer to think both. The anonymous man – so the Torah is intimating – represented an intrusion of providence to make sure that Joseph went to where he was supposed to be, so that the rest of the drama could unfold.

He may not have known he had such a role. Joseph surely did not know. To put it as simply as I can: he was an angel who didn’t know he was an angel. He had a vital role in the story. Without him, it would not have happened. But he had no way of knowing, at the time, the significance of his intervention.

The message could not be more significant.

When heaven intends something to happen, and it seems to be impossible, sometimes it sends an angel down to earth – an angel who didn’t know he or she was an angel – to move the story from here to there. Let me tell the story

24

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

of two such angels, without whom there might not be a State of Israel today.

One was a remarkable young woman from a Sephardi family who, at the age of seventeen, married into the most famous Ashkenazi family in the world. Her name was Dorothy Pinto; her husband was James de Rothschild, son of the great Baron Edmond de Rothschild who did so much to support the settlement of the land in the days before the proclamation of the State.

A critical juncture occurred during the First World War that would eventually lead to the defeat of the Ottoman Empire and the placing of Palestine under a British mandate. Suddenly, Britain became absolutely central to the Zionist dream. A key figure in the Zionist movement, Chaim Weizmann, was in Britain, experimenting and lecturing in chemistry at Manchester University. But Weizmann was a Russian immigrant, not a prominent member of British society. Manchester was not London. Chemistry was not politics. The most influential and well-connected Jewish family was the Rothschilds. But Edmond was in France. James was a soldier on the battlefield. And not every member of the

British Rothschilds was a Zionist.

At that moment, Dorothy suddenly assumed a leading role. She was only nineteen when she first met Weizmann in December 1914, and understood very little of the political complexities involved in realising the Zionist dream. But she learned quickly. She was perceptive, resourceful, energetic, delightful and determined. She connected Weizmann with everyone he needed to know and persuade. Simon Schama, in his definitive account of Two Rothschilds and the Land of Israel, says that “young as she was… she combined charm, intelligence and more than a hint of steely resolution in just the right mixture to coax commitment from the equivocal, enthusiasm from the lukewarm and sympathy from the indifferent.”

His judgement on the effect of her interventions is that “through tireless but prudent social diplomacy she had managed to open avenues of influence and persuasion at a time when they were badly needed.” The result, in 1917, was the Balfour Declaration, a milestone in the history of Zionism – and we should not forget that the Declaration itself took the form of a letter to Lord (Walter) Rothschild.

Dorothy’s husband James, in his will, left the money to build the Knesset, Israel’s parliament building. In her own will, Dorothy left the money to build a new Supreme Court Building, a project undertaken by her nephew Jacob, the current Lord Rothschild. But of all the things she did, it was those connections she made for Chaim Weizmann in the OU ISRAEL CENTER

25

years 1914 to 1917 that were surely the most important. Without them, there might have been no Balfour Declaration and no State of Israel.

The other figure, who could not have been less like Dorothy de Rothschild, was Eddie Jacobson. The son of poor Jewish immigrants, born in New York’s Lower East Side, he moved with his family to Kansas City where he befriended another young man called Harry Truman. They knew one another as teenagers, and became close in 1917 when they underwent military training together. After the end of World War I, they opened a haberdashery business together. It failed in 1922 because of the recession.

From then on, they went their separate ways, Jacobson as a travelling salesman, and Truman successively a county administrator, Senator, Vice-President, and then when F.D. Roosevelt died in office in 1945, President of the United States. Despite their very different lifetrajectories, the two stayed friends, and Jacobson would often visit Truman, talking to him about, among other things, about the fate of European Jewry during the Holocaust.

26

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

After the war, the position of America vis-à-vis the State of Israel was deeply ambivalent. The State Department was opposed. Truman himself refused to meet Chaim Weizmann. On 13 March 1948, Jacobson went to the White House and persuaded Truman to change his mind and meet Weizmann. Largely as a result of this, the United States became the first nation to grant diplomatic recognition to Israel on 14 May 1948.

Many years later, Truman wrote: One of the proudest moments of my life occurred at 6:12 p.m. on Friday, May 14, 1948, when I was able to announce recognition of the new State of Israel by the government of the United States. I remain particularly gratified by the role I was fortunate to play in the birth of Israel as, in the immortal words of the Balfour Declaration, “a national home for the Jewish people.”

Two people, Dorothy de Rothschild and Eddie Jacobson, appeared on the scene of history and connected Chaim Weizmann with individuals he might otherwise not have met, among them Arthur Balfour and Harry Truman. They were like the

stranger who connected Joseph and his brothers, but with infinitely more positive consequences. I think of them both as angels who did not know they were angels.

Perhaps this is true not only about the destiny of nations but also about each of us at critical junctures in our lives. I believe that there are times when we feel lost, and then someone says or does something that lifts us or points the way to a new direction and destination. Years later, looking back, we see how important that intervention was, even though it seemed slight at the time. That is when we know that we too encountered an angel who didn’t know he or she was an angel. That is what the story of Joseph’s stranger is about.

Shabbat Shalom Covenant and Conversation 5780 is kindly supported by the Maurice Wohl Charitable Foundation in memory of Maurice and Vivienne Wohl z”l.

These weekly teachings from Rabbi Sacks are part of the ‘Covenant & Conversation’ series on the weekly Torah reading. Read more on www.rabbisacks.org.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

27

RABBI NACHMAN (NEIL) WINKLER PROBING BY Faculty, OU Israel Center THE PROPHETS l

T

he prophet Amos, a contemporary of the nevi’im Yish’ayahu, Micha and Hoshe’a, was a simple shepherd by trade who was called upon by Hashem to deliver words of admonition and warning to the wayward people of the Southern Kingdom of Israel. He begins his words by taking an overview of the sins of Israel’s neighbors, explaining that Hashem’s mercies would allow one, two and even three transgressions to go unpunished but, by the fourth offense, He will bring retribution upon that nation. After reviewing the wrongdoings of the neighboring kingdoms of Aram, Philistia, Phoenicia, Amon, Moav and Yehuda, Amos focuses upon the sins of Yisra’el, the target of his prophecies, which is where our haftarah begins.

It is common knowledge, as Chazal points out, that the primary sin that caused the Northern Kingdom’s exile (which took place not long after Amos delivers G-d’s warnings to the nation) was the sin of idolatry. From its very inception, the Northern Kingdom strayed from Hashem and, eventually,

28

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

turned to pagan worship. The first king of Israel, Yerov’am, prohibited his people from worshipping in the Bet HaMikdash in Yerushalayim and, instead, erected religious centers in the cities of Bet El and Dan, with worship that centered around golden calves that the king placed there.

It is, therefore, rather puzzling that Amos HaNavi focuses upon the corruption of the legal system and the oppression of the weak by the powerful leadership, rather than the very cause of the soonto-be exile!

In his book, Netivai Nevuah, HaRav Moshe Lichtenstein analyzes the underlying causes of avodah zarah and suggests two basic reasons for this false worship. The first reason, he proposes, derived from one’s need to draw closer to the divine. The drive for this is centered about one’s need for spirituality in life and, therefore, its motivation is essentially, a spiritual one. The danger, therefore, is found NOT in one’s thirst to attach to the immortal but in the search to find that attachment in falsehood, thereby leading to the abandonment of

OU ISRAEL CENTER

29

the true G-d, the One and Only Immortal.

The second draw to idolatry is quite different. It is not caused by a need or search for the metaphysical but quite the opposite: it is caused by the thirst for the physical, the material. It is driven by a rejection of laws that limit one from pursuing one’s own selfish desires, whether they be wealth, power or fame, and the need to put those priorities above anything or anyone. It is this second cause, submits Rav Lichtenstein that is decried by the prophet. The taking of bribes in order to condemn the innocent, the oppression of the weak and the insensitivity to the suffering of the poor are all manifestations of tat which led them to idolatry: the selfish need for power, wealth and fame.

So, although the connection of this haftarah to our parasha is clearly made in the opening psukim where the description of the rampant corruption includes “selling the innocent/righteous for money”, Rav Lichtenstein sees yet another connection to the events in the parasha.

Pointing to Amos’ condemnation of the “insensitivity” of his society to the plight of the weak and the innocent, Chazal may have well seen a connection to the behavior of Yosef’s brothers as they sat and ate their lunch while Yosef cried out from the pit, into which they threw him. In fact, it is interesting to note that, when contemplating what sin they could have committed that lad the viceroy of Egypt to accuse them of being spies, the 30

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

brothers agree that their sin was NOT the fact that they sold Yosef as a slave but that they saw the pain of Yosef and refused to listen to his pleas. They were insensitive to the cries of the innocent-precisely the sin for which Amos condemns Israel.

And the sin that, eventually, leads one to idolatry.

One need not be an idolater to close eyes to the suffering of another and be insensitive to those who need help.

But perhaps, maybe just perhaps, G-d regards it as that cardinal sin.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

31

RABBI SHALOM Kehilla, Nofei HaShemesh ROSNER Rav Maggid Shiur, Daf Yomi, OU.org

One Step Ahead

pasuk is emphasizing that Yosef, despite his confidence that he could withstand the pressure, did not just overcome the sin itself, but he withdrew himself from the entire situation of nisayon.

,‫ָד ּה‬ ָ ‫ַעזֹב ִּב ְגדוֹ ְּבי‬ ֲ ‫ ִׁש ְכ ָבה ִע ִּמי; ַו ּי‬,‫ׂה ּו ְּב ִב ְגדוֹ ֵלאמֹר‬ ‫ַת ְת ְּפ ֵש‬ ִּ ‫ו‬ )‫יב‬:‫ֵצא ַהחו ָּצה (בראשית לט‬ ֵ ‫ַוָּינָס ַו ּי‬

The job of an eved Hashem, is to be roeh es hanolad, to stay spiritually a step ahead, not to place oneself in a potentially compromising situation and exhibit strength by overcoming the temptation. One is not to be considered a greater hero for successfully defeating his yetzer hara and not surrendering to his desires. Rather, the greater and wiser Jew is the one who avoids a situation that can create a challenging nisayon. Every morning we daven to not be placed in a situation of nisyonos.

“But he left his garment in her hand and fled and went outside.” (Bereshit 39:12) Potiphar’s wife tried to seduce Yosef on numerous occasions, but Yosef repeatedly refused. One day, when no one was home, she tried again. Yosef refused and raced out of the house, leaving his garment in her hands. Asks Rav Moshe Feinstein in Darash Moshe, why does the pasuk use a double lashon of ‫ וינס‬- vayanas and ‫ ויצא החוצה‬vayetze hachutza? Couldn’t the pasuk just state ‫?וינס החוצה‬ Rav Moshe Feinstein explains, ‫וינס‬ implies running away from a specific danger while still remaining in the environment that poses a hazard, still being in the makom of the nisayon. The

32

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

‫ ולא‬,‫ ולא לידי עברה ועון‬,‫ואל תביאנו לא לידי חטא‬ ‫לידי נסיון‬ It is an even greater madreigah to keep oneself out of a makom nisayon than to knowingly enter a dangerous area and overcome the challenge.

According to numerous mefarshim, this is how the nachash convinced Adam and Chavah to sin. He taunted them: you think you’re so great, doing G-d’s ultimate plan? You don’t even have a desire to sin! If you had the desire to sin, and then overcome that desire, that would be the greatest form of serving

Hashem! Tragically, they fell for the nachashâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s trap and failed their test.

In life, we have many spiritual challenges. We need to act with wisdom and foresight. The Torah uses a double lashon to warn us to take preparatory steps and set boundaries to avoid pitfalls.

We need to be careful to avoid placing ourselves in potentially compromising situations and to ensure that dangerous forces from the outside world do not penetrate our homes and adversely influence our children. Yosef is one of the few people referred to as a Tzadik.

We should emulate his actions and make sure to create a conducive environment for torah and spiritual growth.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

33

34

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

35

REBBETZIN SHIRA SMILES Faculty, OU Israel Center

The Image in the Window

S

aved in the nick of time; the image that Yosef Hatzadik saw of his father rescued him from the clutches of sin.

Where did this image come from? Is there a way that we can access a similar force to guide us as we encounter challenges and adversity?

Rabbi Chanan in Toras Chesed explains that Yosef Hatzadik withstood the temptation of Potifar’s wife for an entire year. Yosef was a youth, extraordinarily handsome, alone in a foreign country. He tried with all his inner strength to ward off her allures and provocations. Hashem promises a person who tries his utmost to fight the yetzer hara, that He will come to help him succeed. The image that Yosef saw was Yaakov Avinu’s likeness taken from the kisei hakavod; a representation of the siyata dishmaya that came from Above.

Rabbi Chanan offers an additional explanation. What Yosef Hatzadik saw

36

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

was actually an image of himself. Near the bed of Potifar’s wife was something that few people possessed at that time, a mirror. When he suddenly caught a vision of himself, he was reminded of his father, whom he resembled exactly. At that moment, he asked himself, “What would my father do at this moment?” Yosef, notes the Netivot Shalom, focused on the middah of emet, his father’s hallmark. This gave him the fortitude to resist the enticement.

Often, at critical moments in our lives, we can ask ourselves how parents or mentors would act or react given our circumstances. Such reflection provides a person with guidance and direction.

Rabbi Grossbard, in Daas Shraga on the topic of chinuch, remarks that it is noteworthy that Yosef Hatzadik didn’t ‘hear his father’s voice’ or ‘recall a mussar speech’ from his father, rather he specifically saw the image of his father.

The impact of a person’s behavior carries more weight than all the words one can say. It would be interesting to consider what ‘picture’ our children carry within them, that directs and inspires them in their lives.

How was Yosef successful in bringing this vision to the fore? The Slonimer Rebbe teaches that Yaakov Avinu never stopped thinking about his son. The deep connection between the two enabled Yosef Hatzadik to access his fatherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s image at that critical moment. Hence, when Yosef Hatzadik later tells his brothers, â&#x20AC;&#x153;ani Yosef, haod avi chaiâ&#x20AC;? he was explaining how he was expressing how strongly his father was always alive within him. Just as a person holds on to a life preserver and someone standing on shore keeps him from drowning by holding onto the attached rope, consistently maintaining the image of his father within enabled Yosef to stay alive spiritually and not fall.

No matter how old our children may be, our minds must stay connected to them, empowering them to access the strength to overcome the challenges that life present.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

37

38

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

39

40

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

41

42

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

43

44

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

45

46

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

47

48

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

49

50

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

51

52

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

53

54

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

55

RABBI JUDAH OU-NCSY MISCHEL Mashpiah, Executive Director, Camp HASC Dedicated L'Iluy Nishmas HaChaver Shlomo Michael ben Meir z'l

Vayeishev: A Little Bit of Light

A

story is told of an Adam Gadol, a respected wise man, who was thrust into the midst of an ugly controversy and Machlokes. Both sides cast recriminations, and as he sat with them to attempt mediation and compromise, representatives of each side began shouting over one another, hurling insults and accusations. It was impossible to hear anyone — there was just so much noise.

The Adam Gadol attempted to calm the conflict: “Rabbosai,” he said, “this meeting reminds me of the story of a Baal Agalah, a wagon-driver whose carriage wheel broke right in the middle of a thunderstorm in the black of night.

The thunder was booming as the rain poured down, sinking the carriage into the mud. The simple wagon-driver was soaked and freezing cold as he worked frantically, trying in any way possible to 56

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

repair the wheel.

Suddenly, the sky was illuminated by a magnificent bolt of lightning that lit up the forest. For a split second the darkness was lifted and the night shone like the day.

Moments later the earth shook from the deafening crash of thunder.

The exhausted wagon-driver then raised his eyes heavenward: ‘‘Ribbono Shel Olam, Master of the World,’ he cried, ‘would it be possible to provide just a little more light and a little less noise?’” ~ “Vayeishev Yaakov…” Rashi (37:1) explains that our forefather Jacob wanted what all tzadikim, and all of us, desire: to dwell in tranquility. He was seeking respite from all of the ‘noise’, the hassle and torment of life, when suddenly, the troubles of Joseph sprang upon him.

Plunged even more deeply into darkness and struggle, Yaakov Avinu’s desire for “a little more light” multiplied.

This weekend, as we prepare for Chanukah, the headquarters of light, let us reflect on a subtle yet significant difference between the ways of Yakov and his brother Eisav.

When our holy Forefather saw the army and numerous the chieftains of Esav described in our Sedra, he wondered how

OU ISRAEL CENTER

57

it would be possible to overcome them all. Rashi explains with a Mashal from Medrash Tanchuma: The camels of a flax dealer entered a town, laden with flax. The blacksmith wondered, “Where will all this flax go?”

One clever fellow answered him, “One burning ember, a single spark will fly from your bellows, and it will consume it all, as the Navi Ovadya prophesized (1:18), “And the house of Yakov shall be Eish (fire), and the house of Yosef, Lehava (a flame), and the house of Esau shall become stubble”.

Thus, Eisav may be bigger, stronger and greater in numbers, but is no match for the holy fire of Am Yisrael.

feeling that we can only take pride in doing and having ‘a lot’; in order for our Avodas Hashem to be meaningful, we must daven for a long time and learn extraordinary amounts of Torah. Flax is only valuable in massive amounts.

Yaakov Avinu recognizes the power of ‘a little bit’ and expends great effort to retrieve his Pachim Ketanim, the small vessels that he had forgotten on the other side of the Jordan River (32:25). Our Sages tell us these are an allusion to the Pach Shemen, the one cruse of oil that turned out to be ‘enough’ for the Chanukah miracle.

Eisav represents the worldview that emphasizes quantity and wealth: Yeish li rav; “I have a lot.”(33:9) However, the pathway to tranquility, the Shalva that we yearn for, lies in not in how much we have, but in appreciating every little gift in our lives, and deeply connecting to whatever we have, to what is ours. In response to Eisav, Yakov Avinu therefore declares his joyful acceptance and appreciation for his lot: Yeish li kol ; “I have enough”; I have everything I need right now.

“U-miNosar Kan-kanim, Na’asah Nes laShoshanim... “And from the remaining flasks there was made a miracle for Your Beloved Ones.” Reb Shlomo Carlebach zy’a suggested that the Greeks might have even seen the cruse of oil that remained, but did not bother with it; for the descendants of Eisav, it was impossible, even ‘heretical’, to think that something so awesome and exalted could emerge from such a small, seemingly insignificant bottle. The world of Yavan and Eisav attributes value only to quantity and grandeur.

If our Torah study, mitzvah observance and Yidishkeit is meaningful only in quantity, we have fallen into the snare of Eisav: spiritual materialism. It is the

This alludes to the Halachic principle of “Kavsa, Ein Zakuk Lah”: If the candles are blown out before the minimum amount of time necessary to fulfill the Mitzvah (in

58

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

the ideal way), one is not required to relight the extinguished flame. Even their having been lit for a moment is enough; we have done the Mitzvah fully. On Chanukah we honor the power of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;a little bitâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, and know that in the realm of the soul, value is not measured physically or quantitatively. In the world of the infinite, a single moment, a half hour, and one hundred years, are all equal.

This Chanukah, may we merit to know, believe and experience the power of the fire of Yaakov and the flame of Yosef: the little bit of light that dispels great darkness. And with this, may we enjoy a few moments of tranquility, joy and yishuv haDaas, sitting by our candles.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

59

SIMCHAT SHMUEL

BY RABBI SAM SHOR

Program Director, OU Israel Center

T

he Talmud in Masechet Shabbat (21B) instructs us that our Chanuka candles are to be lit anytime from sunset ad shetichleh regel min hashukuntil there is no longer anyone walking in the market. The gemara continues to elaborate that this means until the Tramadeans depart from the market.

Rashi explains that the Tramadeans were a specific ethnic group that made their livelihood as woodtraders, and therefore were the last one’s walking in the streets at night, as anyone passing through the marketplace at the end of the day might be seeking firewood to provide heat and light for their homes after nightfall.

lights need not solely be seen by our Jewish brothers and sisters for us to fulfill our obligation of pirsumei nisa, of publicizing the miracle of Chanuka, but that our non-Jewish neighbors, like the Tramadeans, also are included in those whom our candles should be seen by, who also should be reminded of the miracle of Chanuka. Rabbi Soloveitchik further suggests that even if our Chanuka candles are seen only by our non-Jewish neighbors, we have completely fulfilled our mandate to publicize the miracle.

On Chanuka, the Rav explained, we commemorate the miracle of spiritual salvation, of a rejection of assimilation and return to embrace a life of Divine service.

This idea, explains Rabbi Soloveitchik, is a fundamental message which Am Yisrael must share with the entire world!

Rabbi Soloveitchik zt’l points to this Rashi to teach that the miracle of Chanuka is unique in teaching us that our Chanuka

The Chidushei HaRim zy’a, the first Gerer Rebbe, offers a more novel, less literal analytical interpretation. The Rebbe

Who exactly were these Tramadeans, and why were they the last to depart from the shuk?

CHESED FUND

Please help us help the 40 individuals and families who turn to us for help Make checks (Israeli, only) payable to the "Chesed Fund" and send them to

ISRAEL CENTER CHESED FUND att. Menachem Persoff POB 37015 Jerusalem 91370 or leave them at the front desk

60

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

suggests that ad shetichle regel, might mean- until there is a cessation of regel- a cessation of feeling rote or routine in our Avodat Hashem.

The message of our Chanuka lights says the Chidushei HaRIm is to reignite our passion for Torah and Avodat Hashem.

Chanuka, the Rebbe explains, is the time where a person must look inward and realize that we must constantly work to feel a sense of renewal, of excitement in our commitment to Torah and our observance of mitzvot. The message of our Chanuka lights, is to bring new inspiration to all our sacred acts, to bring a sense of renewed dedication and commitment to our daily lives.

Chanuka Sameach

OU ISRAEL CENTER

61

RABBI AARON Editor, Torah Tidbits GOLDSCHEIDER

How Yosef Defeated the Yetzer Hara

P

otifar’s wife attempted to lure Yosef into an adulterous relationship.

What prevented Yosef from succumbing to seduction?

“And Yosef saw the image of his father in the window” (Talmud Sotah 36b).

This memorable statement of the Sages suggests that Yosef conjured up an image of his beloved father in order to bolster his resolve at a moment of temptation.

Rabbi Chaim Sabato, founder of Yeshivat Birkat Moshe in Maale Adumim, offered an intriguing take on this midrash: In the home of the patriarch Yaakov in the land of Canaan there were no mirrors, and certainly men did not gaze upon their own images. Therefore Yosef the Righteous had never seen his own face. Furthermore, the Sages interpreted the verse describing the child Yosef as “the son of Yaakov’s old age . . .” to mean that Yosef looked much like his father, except that young Yosef was beardless, of course. But during the years in Egypt Yosef’s beard grew in thick, and then he looked like his father in every way.

62

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Now the vile seductress, Potiphar’s wife, most certainly had more than one mirror in her boudoir. When she enticed Yosef, he almost succumbed to sin. As he entered her room there was a mirror opposite him. He saw in front of him an image reflected in the mirror. Yosef, who had never seen his own face, saw an image and was unnerved.

“Father, what are you doing here?” he said to himself and immediately recoiled from her. In fact, it was his own face he was seeing, not his father’s.

How wise are the words of our Sages who said that when Yosef saw the face of his father, he turned away from sin.

The Sages were conveying that if a person sees in his own face the image of his father and the faces of those earlier generations, then this may well prevent him from sinning.

The classic Chassidic work Shem Mishmuel, authored by Rabbi Shmuel Bornstein, the second Sochatchover Rebbe (1855-1926) cites a midrash which follows a similar line of thinking: Namely, Yosef conjures up in his mind visualizations in order to bolster his resolve. Yosef actually shares the following with Potiphar’s wife, in response to her advances, “What if God chooses me to be placed on the altar, as he did with my grandfather Yitzchak? If I sin with you, I will no longer be suitable for this lofty honor. Second, My father, my

OU ISRAEL CENTER

63

grandfather, and my great-grandfather both received visions of God , “And the Lord appeared to him”. If I listen to you I will forfeit my opportunity to see God’s revelation (Midrash Rabbah, Chapter 87).

Israel. Potiphar’s wife had foreseen by astrological signs that she was destined to be the ancestress of the children by Yosef - but she did not know whether she or her daughter would have the children.

The Rebbe of Sochatchov says: ‘Make no mistake. Yosef was absolutely defiant.

These assertions and explanations were merely afterthoughts for Yosef; he shares these sentiments with Potiphar’s wife only to assuage and mollify her. Yosef himself never had a second thought. He never wavered. He intuitively knew the depth of such a sin and remained resolute.’

If she was able to see what would unfold in the future, then Yosef certainly was privy to this vision as well. Yosef could easily have used this astrological forecast to rationalize and acquiesce. He could easily have convinced himself that being intimate with Potifar’s wife was acceptable, even meritorious. This is the way of the yetzer hara - the evil inclination is fond of convincing a person that his actions, even when sinful, are justified and can be vindicated.

The words of the text and even the ancient melody on these words, suggest the Rebbe, prove this point. The Torah describes Yosef’s refusal with a striking term: Va’ye’maen. ‘But he adamantly refused.’ The word itself is chanted with the staccato and emphatic Masoretic cantillation, known as the shalshelet; it is then followed by psik [disjunction], both of which set the word apart and enhance the absoluteness of its implication. It indicates that Yosef’s refusal was constant, categorical, and definitive. Yosef fights off Potifar’s wife with absolute firmness.

‫תיבת וימאן היא בשלשלת ובפסיק כדי להפרידה מן‬ ‫ ויש להורות שמיאן לא‬,‫התיבות ויאמר אל אשת אדוניו‬ ‫מצד הטענות אלא שמיאן בפשיטות בלי שום טעם ובלי‬ )‫ פרשת וישב ד"ה וימאן‬,‫ (שם משמואל‬.‫שום התחכמות‬ Rashi offers a striking detail in elucidating Potiphar’s wife true intent in seducing Yosef. Remarkably, the great commentator suggests that she had pure motives. She hoped to mother a child who would be part of the nation of 64

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Yosef was obstinate. In the throes of being allured by sin he shut his mind and heart down leaving no room for exploration, examination, or emotion.

Va’ye’maen. Yosef adamantly refused.

Yosef is called tzaddik, the ‘righteous one’, because righteousness is often defined by the ability to abstain and to refrain.

A hundred years ago the holy Rebbe of Sochatchov guided his chassidim with this teaching. He teaches even today that the most effective way to defeat the yetzer hara is by overpowering its unwelcome assault with fortitude, a relentless dedication to virtue, and a passionate love for the Holy One Blessed be He.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

65

DIVREI MENACHEM

BY MENACHEM PERSOFF

Special Projects Consultant, OU Israel Center mpersoff@ou.org

Man Was Born to Toil

I

n our Parsha we learn that Yaakov dwelt in the land of his father’s sojourning – a phrase implying, perhaps, that in Eretz Yisrael we are forever restless and struggling, even as we search for peace and tranquility.

Rashi remarks that Yaakov wanted a life free from past burdens. But, no! “When the righteous seek to dwell in peace, Hashem says, ‘is it not sufficient for the righteous that which lies in store for them in the World to Come? Must they also have ease in this world?’” Perhaps the intention is, as some sources indicate, that Hashem only taxes the righteous with wakeup calls (“Yissurim”) because only they can recognize them and correct what needs fixing.

To be sure, commenting on the notion that man was born to toil (Job 5:7), Rashi posits that “toil” is trouble, the consequence of man’s propensity to sin. And Rabbi M. Miller concurs that our world is essentially not a world of comfort. However, for the rabbi, toil is not necessarily a result because: “Man lives in order to toil, to reach out to boundaries almost beyond his reach, to achieve, to progress.”

66

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Either way, we might add, “No spiritual pain, no spiritual gain.” Thus exponents of the Mussar movement teach that only through the constant encounter with, and victory over, the temptation to sin can “one’s nature be refined and strengthened.”

It seems, however, that Yaakov craved for more than a life free from anguish and transgression. R. Miller proposes that Yaakov’s sentiments were a prayer for his descendants to be freed from two types of enemies: (1) the openly hostile antiSemitic Lavan and (2) the seemingly good son, Esav, who was in reality a scheming, two-faced scoundrel. Undaunted by his enemies, Yaakov overcame. So now he wished that we too would never have to confront the overt enmity and hypocrisy of the nations.

However we understand Yaakov’s sentiments, may Hashem grant us the wisdom and strength to follow in Yaakov’s footsteps.

Shabbat Shalom!

OU ISRAEL CENTER

67

L

ower-left is the Davka Graphic of Yosef's dreams ### No water in the pit into which the brothers threw Yosef, but there were snakes and scorpions, as pictured ### Animals you see are the sheep, as in the sheep that were being tended by Yosef's brothers ### The camel represents the passing caravans... ### and the goat is, of course, for the goat that the brothers slaughtered to cover-up their terrible deed. It also represents the goat that Yehuda sent to Tamar. Note well that the main animal that is used in the Beit HaMikdash as a CHATAT, a sin offering, is the goat. Communal chatat as well as individual chatat. This includes the two identical goats upon which lots were drawn on Yom Kippur ### Yehuda's staff (cane) ### seal (play on words) ### and hooded coat, which is close to the meaning of p'tilecha, that Yehuda gave to Tamar as security for the future payment of the goat ### Wine and bread represent the Wine Steward and the Baker ### The snow flake: Twice, once after the brothers saw that Yaakov loved Yosef the most, and once after he told them his dream, the Torah tells us, VAYOSIFU OD SNOW OTO, and they further hated him ### The birthday cake is for Par'o (end of the sedra) ### Insignia is that of the Israel Prison Service. The one who wears it can represent SAR BEIT HASOHAR ### Butcher stands for SAR HATABACHIM ### symbol for Gemini, the Twins represent Peretz and

68

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Zerach ### dreidels and Chanuka gelt is for upcoming festival of lights. Don't miss the Chanuka section in this week's TT ### The wrinkly brown thing is a date, in Hebrew TAMAR, as in daughter-in-law of Yehuda... ### the little girl next to the tamar is also Tamar - face covered in chocolate ### The fellow in the upper-right corner is Y.L. Peretz - Yitschok Leybush Peretz, one of the great Yiddish-language authors and playwrights ### Above roaring lion is photo of Rabbi Dr. Zerach Warhaftig, lawyer, politician, one of the (37) signatories of Israel's Declaration of Independence... ### Top center is a picture of Rabbi Yaakov Yosef (because of EILEH TO-L'DOT YAAKOV, YOSEF...), the first, and really the only one to hold the position of Chief Rabbi of New York; RJJ is named for him. Google him - very interesting, especially his funeral ### The roaring lion is from the haftara ### as is the Shofar ### as is the bird ### The fellow with the mustache in the picture under the fellow with the mustache and pipe is Edgar Allen Poe. Following Poe are the letter T and the number 4. If you say that consecutively you get something like POTIFAR ### Below the T4 is one of the first flags of the Confederate States of America. This one, which was used for several months, has 11 stars (when there were 11 states in the Confederacy) reminder of the 11 stars in Yosef's dream ### And then there is the emblem of the US Customs service, which also has 11 stars.

According to an article on the internet, the design that was submitted for production had 13 stars, as well as 13 each of other items - arrows, olive branches, and more.

A prototype was made with only 11 stars (and other mistakes) because that's all that could fit using the embroidery machine. So instead of correcting it, they left 11 stars

OU ISRAEL CENTER

69

FROM THE VIRTUAL DESK OF THE

OU VEBBE REBBE RAV DANIEL MANN

Switching Chazanim at Ashrei Question: In my small, Ashkenazi Shacharit minyan (without a rav), we now have two aveilim. They have been switching being chazan at Ashrei, but recently some people (mainly Sephardim) raised objections. I thought it was a standard practice. Is there a problem with it?

Answer: There is a consensus that Kaddish Titkabel (after U’va L’tziyon), including the line that Hashem accept our prayers, relates to chazarat hashatz.

For example, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 123:5) says that a chazan does not take three steps back after chazarat hashatz, as one does after the silent amida, because he will do so at Kaddish Titkabel (Mishna Berura 123:18). (For this reason, the chazan should not talk between the end of chazarat hashatz and

70

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Kaddish Titkabel (ibid.).) The Rama (OC 55:3) says, regarding the rule that when the minyan quorum is lost in the middle of a unit we finish up the unit, that this rule allows saying KaddishTitkabel if chazarat hashatz began with a minyan.

Therefore, your shul’s dissenters have logic to posit that one who did chazarat hashatz should finish the Kaddish that completes it. On the other hand, it is possible to split units among people.

If needed, the chazan can be switched even in the middle of chazarat hashatz without returning to the beginning (Shulchan Aruch, OC 126:2).

The question is whether a shul should ever choose to do this. An early source providing a scenario when this is called for is the Rama in the laws of aveilut (Yoreh Deah 364:4). In promoting the idea that an avel being chazan provides better virtue for the deceased than his reciting Kaddish, the Rama says that if an avel is not a fluent davener, he should be chazan for “Lamenatzei’ach and U’va L’tziyon.” Poskim assume that he means that the new chazan will recite Kaddish Titkabel. The Bi’ur Halacha (siman 132

The Orthodox Union - via its website - fields questions of all types in areas of kashrut, Jewish law and values. Some of them are answered by Eretz Hemdah, the Institute for Advanced Jewish Studies, Jerusalem, headed by Rav Yosef Carmel and Rav Moshe Ehrenreich, founded by HaRav Shaul Yisraeli zt”l, to prepare rabbanim and dayanim to serve the National Religious community in Israel and abroad. Ask the Rabbi is a joint venture of the OU, Yerushalayim Network, Eretz Hemdah... and OU Israel’s Torah Tidbits.

in Kuntras Ma’amar Kaddishin, which deals with questions of preference in being chazan/saying Kaddish) says that with two mourners with the same level of precedence, one davens until Ashrei, at which point a second mourner takes over. Thus, the central decisors of Ashkenazi tradition uphold the practice of switching chazanim when there are multiple mourners. While I have heard Ashkenazi poskim (including in the name of the Aderet) not being pleased with this practice, it is a long-held, broad Ashkenazi minhag as found in sources and as I have seen in many places. (As the percentage of mourners at minyanim decreases, mourners often find a minyan to be the exclusive chazan, and this accepted minhag is used more sparingly.)

The issue in your shul arose because of the knowledge and experience of the Sephardi members. The broad Sephardi minhag is to not switch chazanim and have the second one recite Kaddish Titkabel (see Yalkut Yosef, OC 123:9; Yaskil Avdi VIII:20). Yaskil Avdi posits that the Ashkenazi minhag is simply wrong and should be stopped. He is most concerned with the line of “Titkabel …,” which relates to the chazan’s chazarat hashatz. Yalkut Yosef, while confirming the Sephardi minhag, says the Ashkenazi minhag is justifiable. First of all, the chazarat hashatz applies to the new chazan, as

part of the tzibbur (and especially if he was attentive). The Asheknazi version of Titkabel is also more general than the Sephardi one. There are also opinions and indications that Titkabel applies to the silent Shemoneh Esrei, as it does at Ma’ariv, which has no chazarat hashatz.

Interestingly, Sephardim are consistent in their minhag in the following way.

To them, an avel’s main obligation is to recite Kaddish, whereas many do not serve as chazan. Therefore, the need to “share the amud” is smaller. Note that the now almost universal minhag that all mourners recite Kaddish together started with Sephardim, who, again, stress Kaddish.

Several poskim rule that if a chazan will be replaced at Ashrei, he should take the three steps back at the end of chazarat hashatz (see sources in Ishei Yisrael 24:(158)). The same is true of reciting Yiheyu L’ratzon at the end of chazarat hashatz (Dirshu 123:25).

Having a dispute?

For a Din Torah in English or Hebrew contact ‘Eretz Hemdah - Gazit’ Rabbinical Court: 077215-8-215 • fax: (02) 537-9626 beitdin@eretzhemdah.org OU ISRAEL CENTER

71

Puah for Fertility and RABBI GIDEON Machon Gynecology in Accordance with Halacha WEITZMAN

Miracles Everywhere

T

here is a very famous and oftanswered question of Rabbi Yosef Karo regarding Chanukah. He asks, in the Beit Yosef, why is Chanukah eight days long? The usual response is that the small jug of oil found by the Maccabees lasted for eight days. But, says Rabbi Karo, they found enough oil for one day and, while the oil burned for eight days, there were only seven days that were miraculous.

There are many answers to this question and I would like to suggest a simple solution. The Maccabees established the eight days to stress two different types of miracles. There are supernatural miracles that cannot be explained in an ordinary, expected or logical manner. There are other types of miracles that are more natural and are surprising and wonderful, but can be explained in a logical way. In truth both

72

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

of them are Divine acts and show the hand of God in our world and lives.

It was a supernatural miracle when the light burned for a full seven days longer than it was supposed to, and for this we celebrate the festival of Chanukah by lighting candles. But it was no less praiseworthy and awesome when the Maccabees won the war and found that one jug of oil. For this we add one more day and recite in our prayers â&#x20AC;&#x153;for the miracles, and for the warsâ&#x20AC;?.

In PUAH we see these different types of miracles every day. Everyone likes to hear the fantastic stories of the couple who were married for 14 years before having their first child, the couple who underwent numerous rounds of fertility treatment and then got pregnant naturally, or the couple who had fertility problems and realized that they both carried a rare but deadly genetic abnormality that would have been fatal for any children born. As a result of their testing they were able to have healthy children. We have had all of these cases in the past few months.

But we also see great miracles in the mundane and the ordinary. The couple who have tried for a few months and turn for some support and guidance, and then have a child naturally. The young newly married who need some direction and validation. After a short consultation everything works out fine. The couple who have a known genetic abnormality and are undergoing testing to have a healthy child.

Their stories are less exciting but no less miraculous, as is the birth of every single child.

When we think of miracles during Chanukah we need to see and recognize both types of miracles - the astounding as well as the more normal, the rare as well as the common, the hidden as well as the revealed. When we look carefully and sensitively we can feel and sense the miracles all around us.

The Puah Institute is based in Jerusalem and helps couples from all over the world who are experiencing fertility problems.

Offices in Jerusalem, New York, Los Angeles & Paris. Contact (Isr) 02-651-5050 (US) 718-336-0603 www.puahonline.org

OU ISRAEL CENTER

73

TORAH VEHA'ARETZ RABBI MOSHE BLOOM INSTITUTE BY www.toraland.org.il/en

What berachah do you say on cranberries?

C

tall trees, but lower than three tefachim (24 cm) the fruit looks like a vegetable.

Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach rules accordingly.R’ Moshe Feinstein writes that the custom in most places is to say ha’eitz on cranberries; where the custom is unknown or there is a doubt whether the shrub is taller than three tefachim, ha’eitz should be said.

ranberries grow on low shrubs up to 20 cm high and are common throughout Europe and North America. When raw, they are tart.

Today they are generally sold in Israel sweetened and dried. The commentators of the Shulchan Aruch (OC 202:2) discuss at length a few types of berries to determine the appropriate berachah—ha’eitz or ha’adamah.

Rabbi Efrati writes that since today cranberry shrubs are cultivated for the fruit, even according to the Mishnah Berurah ha’eitz is called for.

The cranberry bush is perennial and renews from the trunk. Its trunk is thick and its branches are slender but strong, and it does not bear fruit within its first year.

For these reasons, contemporary Sephardi poskim rule that ha’eitz is in order.Shrubs shorter than three tefachimMishnah Berurah (quoting Chayei Adam) states that even though the Magen Avraham maintains they are ha’eitz, the general practice is to say ha’adamah on shrubs shorter than three tefachim “since they are not truly considered fruit.” It seems he means that fruit generally grows on

Orlah: Since cranberries are imported from abroad, safek orlah is permitted there. If growing cranberries in Israel, one needs to count three orlah years first before eating the fruit.

74

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Conclusion: Sephardim should say Ha’eitz. Ashkenazim: Seems that they should say Ha’eitz, but one whose custom is to say ha’adamah may continue accordingly.

Cranberry shrub.

Photo: Chris Conway OR:

Cranberry harvest.

Photo: Ron Amundson

OU ISRAEL CENTER

75

RABBI BEREL WEIN Rav, Beit Knesset Hanassi, Jerusalem

I

n this great emotional drama that will consume the balance of the sections of this book of the Torah, we are witness to a very difficult family situation and the dynamic consequences that it creates.

The Torah itself testifies to the love and favoritism that Jacob shows towards his son Joseph.

We can well understand this relationship of Jacob to Joseph, since Joseph strongly resemble this father physically, he was extremely talented and precocious,. and was the son of Jacobâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s beloved wife, Rachel.

However Jewish tradition raised objections to the overt favoritism shown to Joseph

by Jacob when he bestowed upon him the special garment that signified their bond and love for one another. We can also understand why Joseph himself felt to be so special, and, therefore, he was justified in his mind lording it over his brothers by telling them of his dreams and ambitions.

Again, the traditional commentaries to the

76

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

Torah found fault in his youthful arrogance and lack of judgment on the part of Joseph.

And, finally, we can also appreciate how hurt the brothers were by the actions of their father and their brother. They were so hurt that they felt that Joseph was an existential threat to their very survival as a family and future nation. So, we are, therefore, faced with a situation where all of the leading people involved in the story are both right and wrong at the very same time.

We can appreciate the feelings of each of the parties to the story, and, yet, at the same time, we are aware of the disaster and trauma that are headed for each of them.

There has been over-arching drama that is being enacted here in the story of Joseph and his brothers. Jewish tradition teaches us that we are all somehow mere actors in the great drama of human civilization that is being presented on the stage of the history of the Jewish people. Even though

each of the individuals involved in the narrative of the story presented in this weekâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Torah reading acts apparently on his own volition, nevertheless, the sum total of their actions will result in the descent of the Jewish people into Egyptian slavery and eventual redemption and the acceptance of the Torah at Sinai.

We recite in our daily prayers that there are many thoughts and intents in the hearts of human beings, but that eventually it is the guidance of Heaven that will prevail.

Nowhere is that basic understanding of the pattern of Jewish history more evident than it is in this weekâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s narrative of the story of Joseph and his brothers. Everyone involved seemingly follows their own individual course of action, but the result is a historic change in the dynamics of the family and the trajectory of Jewish history.

Only if we step back and view the entire chain of events in their totality can we begin to see this emerging pattern as the will of Heaven guiding the family of Jacob and the Jewish people as a whole.

Shabbat shalom Rabbi Berel Wein

OU ISRAEL CENTER

77

MEDINA & RABBI SHIMSHON HAKOHEN NADEL HALACHA BY Mara D'atra, Kehilat Zichron Yosef, Har Nof

The Menorah as the Emblem of the State of Israel

T

he emblem of the State of Israel is a Menorah flanked on each side by an olive branch. This familiar image was adopted as the official emblem by the Provisional Council of the State of Israel on February 10th, 1949. It was designed by Gabriel and Maxim Shamir, two brothers from Latvia who studied graphics and design in Berlin prior to making Aliyah, and were responsible for creating a number of emblems, medals, stamps, and currency for the young State.

78

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

It’s easy to understand why the emblem was adopted by the nascent Nation.

The Menorah has been a central Jewish symbol since antiquity. In addition to its role in the Mishkan, the Beit Hamikdash, and the Chanukah story, images of the Menorah have been found in synagogues, cemeteries, mosaics, and seals throughout Jewish history. The decision to surround it with olive branches is based on the prophet Zechariah’s vision of a Menorah flanked by olive branches (Chap. 4).

But the choice of the Menorah was not without controversy.

Upon careful inspection, the Menorah depicted on Israel’s national emblem is the very Menorah that appears on the Arch of Titus in Rome. Built ca. 81 CE by Emporer Domitian to commemorate the victories of his brother Titus, including his conquest of Jerusalem, the south panel of the Arch famously depicts

Roman soldiers with celebratory wreaths on their heads parading vessels taken from the Holy Temple: The Shulchan, trumpets, fire pans, and at its center, the Menorah.

Chief Rabbi Yitzchak Halevi Herzog strongly objected to the choice for Israel’s emblem, as he believed that the Menorah which appears on the Arch of Titus is not the Menorah from the Beit Hamkidash (See his article, “Tzurat Hamenorah B’Keshet Titus,” published in Scritti in Memoria di Sally Mayer (1956), pp. 95-98).

For Rav Herzog, most telling is the hexagonal base of the Menorah which appears on the Arch. According to the Talmud (Menachot 28b) and Rashi to Shemot 25:31, the Menorah had a threelegged base and not a hexagonal base. In fact, images of a three-legged Menorah appear in carvings on a number of ancient synagogues and graves, and in ancient mosaics throughout Israel.

Another concern for Rav Herzog were the dragons and other mythical beasts like griffins, lions, eagles, and sea creatures, depicted on the base. According to Rav Herzog, it is inconceivable that such idolatrous creatures could be depicted on a Menorah that stood in the Holy Temple. The use of objects ornamented with dragons is forbidden by Jewish Law (See Mishnah Avodah Zarah 3:3). More proof that the Menorah on the Arch of Titus is not the Menorah from the Beit Hamikdash.

Instead, Rav Herzog suggests that it is possible that something happened to OU ISRAEL CENTER

79

the original base of the Menorah on its way from Jerusalem to Rome, and the Romans replaced the original base with the hexagonal base depicted on the Arch.

on the base of Arch of Titus Menorah and obscured the images in the emblem of Israel. Instead, they appear as unclear squiggly lines on the emblem’s base.

Rav Herzog concludes and writes, “What emerges from this is that our government has not done well today when we have merited again the light of Zion symbolized by the Menorah, copying specifically the image of the Menorah on the Arch of Titus which was made by the hands of foreigners and not made in the purity of holiness according to the Torah of Moshe Rabeinu, genius of geniuses, and from other sources derived

by Chachmei Torah. And not just that, but an expert archeologist testified before me that the Menorot depicted on the graves in the catacombs of Rome are all threelegged, as are all of the Menorot depicted in mosaics of the remains of synagogues found in the Land of Israel.”

Rav Herzog advocated that the Provisional Council adopt one of the other submissions. But his opposition fell upon deaf ears. Even other Religious Zionist rabbis did not voice an objection. Very quickly, the controversial new emblem gained acceptance. In time for Israel’s first Independence Day, the Religious Zionist newspaper Hatzofeh chose the new emblem to grace the cover of one of its supplements.

Rav Herzog was not the only one to question the identity and authenticity of the Menorah that appears on the Arch of Titus. Both Rav Yosef Kapach and the Lubavitcher Rebbe believed that the branches of the Temple Menorah were straight and not curved, based on an illustration of the Rambam in the manuscript of his Peirush Hamishnah to Menachot. Accordingly, they did not believe the Menorah on the the Arch of Titus to be the Menorah from the Beit Hamikdash.

It would appear as if the Shamir brothers anticipated the objection - at least the objectionable mythical beasts 80

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

For some, the choice of the Menorah from the Arch of Titus in Rome for the newly created modern State of Israel was symbolic and meaningful. For centuries the Arch of Titus represented the destruction of the Holy Temple and Jerusalem. It represented the long Exile.

But following Israel’s independence, that very same image took on new life and new meaning. Now that they had built a state and returned home to Jerusalem, they viewed the image with a new found sense of hope and even victory. And the Menorah of the Arch of Titus, along with other images invoking the famous relief in Rome, began to appear on Jewish book covers, on monuments, and in religious art, following the founding of the State of Israel.

The emblem was adopted by the Jewish State and has since become a source of national pride.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

81

MIDEI CHODESH RABBI SHMUEL GOLDIN B'CHADSHO BY Faculty, OU Israel

A Beautiful Battle

direct obligations on individuals. Why, then, do the rabbis construct the basic mitzva of the Chanuka lights as an obligation of one candle per household?

P

2. Hidur Mitzva, the beautification of the commandments, is an overarching halachic mandate, applicable as an overlay to all mitzvot. We are obligated to beautify our performance of every mitzva as much as possible.

uzzling questions emerge when we consider the mitzva of Neirot Chanuka, the rabbinically mandated mitzva of the Chanuka lights.

The Talmudic sages structure the basic mitzva as follows: Ner Chanuka ish u’veito, The fundamental obligation is to light one candle [per night] for an individual and his entire household.

They then, however, continue: Mehadrin, those who beautify the mitzvot, kindle one candle per night for each and every member of the household.

Mehadrin min ha’Mehadrin, those who beautify the mitzvot even further, kindle candles corresponding to the passing days.

[According to Beit Shammai, eight candles on the first night and then counting down; according to Beit Hillel, one candle on the first night and then counting up.] 1 Two basic questions are immediately apparent: 1. Personal mitzvot in Jewish law are invariably structured as Chovot Gavra, 1 Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 21b

82

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

With no other mitzva, however, is the concept of Hidur Mitzva, the beautification of the mitzvot, built into the developing structure of the obligation itself, as it is with the Chanuka lights.

Why do the rabbis view Hidur Mitzva as such an essential component of the mitzva of Neirot Chanuka? And why did it become universal practice to fulfill the Mehadrin min ha’Mehadrin version of the obligation, as if that were the basic mitzva?

[Sephardim kindle one Chanukiya for the entire home with increasing lights on each of the passing days, while Ashkenazim kindle a Chanukiya for each member of the household with increasing lights on each of the passing days.]

Let’s address the second question first…

Years ago, I heard a powerfully beautiful interpretation concerning the relationship of Hidur Mitzva to the Chanuka festival, in the name of Rav

Aharon Soloveitchik, Z”TL. 2 This great sage suggests that in order to understand the connection between Hidur Mitzva and Chanuka, we must return to the festival’s origins.

The decades prior to the Maccabean revolt were marked by tragic inroads of assimilation into the Jewish community.

Bordered by the Syrian Greek (Seleucid) Empire to the north and the Egyptian Greek (Ptolemaic) Empire to the south, the citizens of Judea were literally surrounded by the overwhelming power and beauty of Greek society and culture.

Over the course of years, countless Judeans fell prey to the enormous attraction of that culture. One could argue, in fact, that had the Syrian Greek Emperor, Antiochus the 4th, not pushed the Judeans against the wall through his onerous edits; the Maccabean rebellion might never have occurred; and the inexorable, devastating assimilation of the Jewish community might have run its course. When Matityahu raised his sword in Modi’in, he not only issued a battle cry against Antiochus and the 2 Please note that I received this interpretation thirdhand and that I am expanding upon it - so whatever portion of this approach that you like, assume that it is Rav Aharon’s, and whatever portion you disagree with, assume that it is mine.

Syrian Greeks, he directly challenged the Jewish Hellenizers within his own world.

The Syrian Greek army was thus not the only adversary confronting the Jewish nation at the time of the Chanuka story.

An even more dangerous, pervasive threat was presented by the attraction of Greek culture, itself.

The Chanuka festival thus emerges as the calendar festival that most clearly confronts the ongoing threat of Jewish assimilation into an outside world.

Recognizing this fact, the rabbis use the festival’s central mitzva, the mitzva of Neirot Chanuka, to make a powerfully essential point concerning the battle against “external attraction:” The best way to fight the Hidur, beauty, of an outside world is to be mehader, to beautify, your own.

The rabbis understood that significance and wisdom can exist in cultures other than our own. “If one states that wisdom exists among the nations,” the midrash declares, “believe him!”3 How then, are we to resist the powerful attraction of elements of those cultures that are contrary to our beliefs and practices? How are we to battle the “siren song” of assimilation, powered by the apparent “beauty” that surrounds us?

3 Midrash Rabba, Eicha 2:13

OU ISRAEL CENTER

83

The answer proposed by the rabbis is direct and clear. In the face of the “beauty of others,” our task, is to “beautify our own;” to examine, explore, emphasize, study, and teach the extraordinary significance and wisdom that exists within our own heritage. Only through such ongoing positive efforts, can we hope to combat the powerful pulls that surround us.

To underscore this lesson, the rabbis weave the concept of Hidur Mitzva into the central mitzva of Chanuka, the festival that mirrors our ongoing battle, not just for “Jewish survival,” but for “the survival of Judaism.” Simply kindling the candles is not enough, they effectively proclaim, every effort must be made to kindle those candles in the most beautiful way possible.

The Neirot Chanuka must serve as a reminder that the task of beautifying our entire heritage is essential to the successful transmission of that heritage.

We can now propose an answer to our first question, as well. Why do the rabbis structure the foundational obligation of the Chanuka lights as a responsibility on the household, rather than the individual?

The answer, I believe, is abundantly clear.

The single most important medium in which the beautification of our heritage can take place is the Jewish home. When it comes to the attitudinal education of our children and grandchildren, the home towers over any other institution, including the synagogue and school. A parental word, look, or gesture can have greater impact on our children’s feeling towards mitzvot, positively or negatively, than years of 84

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

formal instruction. Our nuclear and extended families are deeply affected by the way we consciously and unconsciously model our approach to Jewish observance.

Do we beautify the mitzvot? Do we view, and therefore transmit, the mitzvot as opportunities or burdens? Do we focus on bequeathing the spirit, as well as the letter, of the law? Do we take the time to make Shabbat, the Holidays, and all of Jewish practice meaningful and enjoyable for our children and grandchildren? By fashioning the mitzva of Neirot Chanuka as a household mitzva, the rabbis remind us the battle against assimilation begins at home; in the warmth and beauty of Jewish family observance.

At a time when diaspora Jewish communities are assimilating into outside culture at an alarming rate; at a time when Chanuka, the festival designed to fight assimilation, has ironically become the most assimilated Jewish festival in so many countries throughout the world; at a time when religiously observant families in the Diaspora and in Israel are facing new challenges in the transmission of tradition to the next generation, the messages of Neirot Chanuka must burn more brightly against the night than ever: The best way to fight the Hidur, beauty, of an outside world is to be mehader, to beautify, your own; and the place to begin that beautification is in the home.

Rabbi Shmuel Goldin’s Dvar Torah will be featured each month marking the new Hebrew month on Shabbat Mevarchim HaChodesh.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

85

86

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

87

THE DAILY BY SIVAN RAHAV-MEIR PORTION

Let’s Talk It Out ֹ‫ׂנְ א ּו אֹתו‬ ‫ּש‬ ְ ‫יהם ִמ ָּכל ֶא ָחיו ַו ִי‬ ֶ ‫ֲב‬ ִ ‫ַו ִי ְּרא ּו ֶא ָחיו ִּכי אֹתוֹ ָא ַהב א‬ .‫ׁשלֹם‬ ָ ‫ְולֹא י ְָכל ּו ַּד ְּברוֹ ְל‬ And his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, so they hated him, and they could not speak with him peacefully.

(Gen. 37:4) The famous story of Joseph and the brothers begins in Parashat Vayeshev. Why did the brothers not speak to Joseph? Why didn’t they tell him what was bothering them? Joseph has his dreams, wears a coat of many colors, and his brothers are jealous of him: “And they hated him, and they could not speak with him peacefully.” Their deafening silence and inability to speak to Joseph led to a deterioration in their relationship. They hated him, distanced themselves from him, threw him in the pit, and he was later sold as a slave. Thus hatred led to exile and slavery in Egypt.

How did they get into such a mess? Some commentators claim that the siblings’ feud with its severe outcome resulted 88

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

from their silence and distance from each other. There are occasions when it is acceptable to sweep certain, small issues under the carpet and not deal with them, but when there is an increasingly serious dispute and the two sides are moving apart, there is no reason to suffer in silence. It is best to speak frankly.

Both sides should air their grievances in order to ensure that the problem is not covered by a blanket of silence.

Violence begets more violence. It is better to talk to the opposing side to try and understand them rather than let the negative feelings build up inside until they become blown out of all proportion and the result is a worsened relationship and continued treachery.

The same holds true for the different sectors and tribes within the Jewish people, relationships between siblings, and also between husband and wife.

It is no coincidence that in his words of wisdom in Ecclesiastes, King Solomon teaches us, “a time to speak,” followed immediately by “a time to love.”

Sivan Rahav-Meir is an Israeli journalist, currently on shlichut of World Mizrahi movement to the US. She is the author of #Parasha. To receive her daily insight on the portion of the week, text your name to: 972-58-679-9000

OU ISRAEL CENTER

89

THE NEW OLD PATH

BY RABBI BENJI LEVY CEO Of Mosaic United

When in Rome

T

he introduction of the character of Joseph is multi-layered, comprising three different descriptions within two verses. In relation to his brothers he is described as a ‘shepherd’ in relation to the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah he is described as a ‘youth’ (which Rashi sees as a sign of immaturity) and in relation to his father he is described as the ‘son of his old age’ (which Onkolos translates as relating to wisdom). It is perplexing that Joseph is described as both wise and immature simultaneously. Surely wisdom suggests maturity? If the different descriptions are due to the fact that Joseph behaved differently depending on the setting, this seems to reflect a fickle persona at best, and a schizophrenic or two-faced personality at worst. In light of this strange combination of descriptions, we are forced to delve deeper in order to understand the introduction of Joseph’s character and what it indicates about this celebrated leader’s qualities.

It is possible to suggest that these multiple and seemingly contradictory characteristics of Joseph are not a sign of capricious weakness but rather reflect tremendous strength of character – a unique and insightful ability to tap

90

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

into the nuance of a specific situation.

Joseph is not simply influenced by his surroundings to act differently, rather he is conscious that he needs to speak to and read each person on their own level. Joseph is a shepherd amongst his brothers because that is their primary vocation. He displays youthfulness around Bilhah and Zilpah’s sons because they themselves are youths, and thus he embodies the concept that one should ‘educate youth, each according to their way.’ And he exercises wisdom around his father because of his father’s wise disposition. This trait of flexibility holds him in good stead later on, with respect to his interpersonal relations with individuals from the entire spectrum of society. In relation to the notable Potiphar, ‘Joseph found favour in his eyes’ and subsequently the same occurs with the prison warden in a ‘lower-class’ setting.

Within his approach of adaptability, Joseph is nonetheless able to preserve his own personal core values, most notably when Potiphar’s wife attempts to seduce him and despite the personal temptation and potential social advance, ‘he nonetheless refused’ explaining that this act was morally wrong.

There is a rabbinic teaching that states: Do not stand amongst those that sit, nor sit amongst those that stand,

do not despair amidst happy people, nor express joy amongst those that despair â&#x20AC;&#x201C; rather live within your context.

Within the context of the firmly defined boundaries of Jewish law and a strongly grounded value system, it is important to absorb the range of approaches that pervade our various environments and react accordingly. It is inevitable that over the course of our lives we will play many different roles, often simultaneously. It is common to be a parent, child, leader, follower, colleague, spouse and friend, with each of these roles pertaining to different and unique behavioural dynamics. It was in part Josephâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to simultaneously tap into different elements of his personality, speaking at the same time to the immature youth and to the wisest of men, that warranted his rise from the lowest level of jail, to the top of society as viceroy of Egypt.

Ultimately his multi-faceted personality helped shape his journey and foster his transition to becoming a true leader who could appropriately read and adapt to his surroundings while at the same time preserving who he was, with steadfast ideals, beliefs and values.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

91

TORAH 4 TEENS

BY TEENS NCSY ISRAEL Shlomo Rayman, Beit Shemesh Chapter Director, NCSY Israel Our Inner Yosef Yosef was a teenager. We don’t have many stories in the Torah about teenagers, yet, in this week’s Parsha not only does it explicitly tell us that Yosef is seventeen, but the Torah emphasizes that he is a “Na’ar” on which Rashi explains, he would fix his hair and touch up his eyes so that he should appear good-looking.” It is safe to assume that if Rashi had written his commentary today, he would have just translated “Na’ar”, as 'teenager.’

Why is there such an emphasis on his age and the fact that he acted a little immature? Why is this important to the story?

For some reason, a lot of focus is put on a teenager’s future. We ask what they are doing next and what they plan on becoming. I remember being in twelfth grade, and the only conversation I ever had with adults was about what yeshiva I was going to the following year. Perhaps, because of this phenomenon, the Torah brings to our attention that Yosef’s story started when he was seventeen years old.

There is no rule that states one may only 92

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

impact the world as an adult. Yosef, with his perfect hair and big dreams, was a young man when he started his journey; quarreling with his brothers, descending down to Egypt and eventually rising to power. A journey which didn’t wait for him to become a full-fledged adult to start.

Teens, don’t wait for the world to tell you that you can make a difference! Today is the day to embrace your inner Yosef and start writing your very own story!

Amichai Pollock Bet Shemesh, 11th grade Parshat Vayeishev: 'Well' Made Decisions In this week’s Parsha, Parshat Vayeishev, the Torah tells us that the sons of Yaakov threw Yosef into an empty pit. The Pasuk says: “V'habor rake, 'And the pit was empty.” Then the Pasuk goes on to say “Aiyn Bo Mayim, "there was no water.”

Why does the Torah add the last part that there was no water? It would seem extra because if the pit is empty then it obviously didn't have any water in it! Rashi answers this question by quoting the Midrash, which says that the pit was empty of water but had snakes and scorpions in it.

This answers the first question but raises a second. Why does the Torah say it was

empty if it had snakes and scorpions in it?

What does the knowledge of the pit being empty add to our understanding of the story?

Perhaps the words “Aiyn Bo Mayim,” are hinting at the brothers motivation to throw Yosef into the pit. Torah is frequently compared by the Mefarshim to water.

Maybe the Torah was trying to emphasize that the brothers decision was without “water,” or without “Torah insight” and proper motivations. Rather it was based on hatred and harmful intent, symbolized by the snakes and scorpions.

What I think the Torah is trying to teach us, is that we should always pause for a moment before we take action and think about our motivation when making a decision. Is it a decision based off of bad feelings and negativity? Or is it a sound decision motivated by good intentions built on Torah values? Is it an action that could hurt someone, or an action that could be helpful? May we all have the knowledge and power to make all of our decisions full of water and Torah. And be able to recognize potential actions that are harmful before we do them, and choose to be better.

OU ISRAEL CENTER

93

94

TORAH TIDBITS / VAYEISHEV 5780

OU ISRAEL CENTER

95