OnegShabbos Vayeshev

‫בס"דפרשת וישב‬

‫הריני בא ללמוד תורה לשמה לעשות נחת רוח לאבינו שבשמים‬

OnegShabbos NORTH WEST LONDON’S WEEKLY TORAH & OPINION SHEETS A Torah publication that enables local Rabbonim and Avreichim to share their insights and Divrei Torah on a variety of different levels, to provide something for everyone

‫כג‬:‫מ‬-‫א‬:‫ בראשית לז‬:‫קריאת התורה‬

Shabbos Times

9TH DECEMBER 2017

‫כ"א כסלו תשע"ח‬

LONDON

MANCHESTER

GATESHEAD

3:36 PM

3:34 PM

3:24 PM

‫הדלקת נרות‬

4:50 PM

4:52 PM

4:44 PM

‫מוצש’’ק‬

K I N D LY S P O N S O R E D

In Memory of Leslie and Freda Aronson

Time4Mishna is an international program which involves learning 4 new Mishnayos each day from Sunday to Thursday, reviewing that week's 20 Mishnayos on Friday, and going over the previous Masechtos on Shabbos. A time committment of just 15 mins a day, and finish Shas Mishnayos in 4 years - having reviewed it multiple times!

To Sign Up for a 15 min daily Shiur visit the website time4torah.org

Sunday 10th Dec - ‫כ"ב כסלו‬ ‫ה‬:‫ א‬- ‫ב‬:‫עירובין א‬

Monday 11th Dec - ‫כ"ג כסלו‬ ‫ט‬:‫ א‬- ‫ו‬:‫עירובין א‬

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Shabbos

12th Dec - ‫כ"ד כסלו‬

13th Dec - ‫כ"ה כסלו‬

14th Dec - ‫כ"ו כסלו‬

15th Dec - ‫כ"ז כסלו‬

16th Dec - ‫כ"ח כסלו‬

‫ג‬:‫ ב‬- ‫י‬:‫עירובין א‬

‫א‬:‫ ג‬- ‫ד‬:‫עירובין ב‬

‫ה‬:‫ ג‬- ‫ב‬:‫עירובין ג‬

‫ה‬:‫ ג‬- ‫ה‬:‫עירובין א‬

‫ ד‬- ‫שבת פרקים א‬

Just a few minutes a day and finish Nach in just a year and a half! Sign Up at dailynach.com Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 10th Dec - ‫כ"ב כסלו‬ 11th Dec - ‫כ"ג כסלו‬ 12th Dec - ‫כ"ד כסלו‬ 13th Dec - ‫כ"ה כסלו‬ 14th Dec - ‫כ"ו כסלו‬ ‫איוב י"ב‬ ‫איוב י"ג‬ ‫איוב י"ד‬ ‫איוב ט"ו‬ ‫איוב ט"ז‬

Rabbi Dovid Eisenberg Rabbi of the Prestwich Hebrew Congregation The Author can be contacted at dovideisenberg@gmail.com

The Gemara tells us that when Moshe was Parshah shown the future generations of Talmidei Chachamim, he glanced upon Rabbi Akiva who was able to make deductions from every crown on each letter. From this we see that there are many lessons and halachos to be learnt from every line in the Torah.

In this week’s sedra we have a line that teaches

attached to the refusal, they will often try changing

us a great lesson. In Egypt, Yosef was sold to

their parents’ mind by saying that the reason isn’t

Potifar and he became an important person in his

really valid or illogical. As parents and educators

household. Potifar’s wife took a liking to Yosef and

that is a bad position to find ourselves in.

tried to entice him on a daily basis. Yosef said no repeatedly but she wouldn’t be deterred. The verse tells us that he refused and then gives the reason for his refusal. In the cantillation (Taamei Hamikrah) of the Torah there is a line after the word that says he refused and that line is known as a psik, which means that the reader (Ba’al Keriah) needs to stop there. Why is there this stop there?

refusal and the “no” that he gave her stood alone and wasn’t up for changing. However, he didn’t want to sound absolutely unreasonable so he gave her a reason that she could understand but as far as he was concerned the answer was no and there was

Shabbos 16th Dec - ‫כ"ח כסלו‬

‫איוב י"ז‬

‫איוב י"ח‬

Please urgently Daven For

‫שלמה טבלי בן שרה נ''י‬ '‫שירה תמר בת שושנה דבורה תחי‬ ‫אריאל יהודה בן יהודית נ"י‬ ‎'‫חיה רוחמה בת אטא תחי‬ ‫הרב יונתן יוסף בן טעמא שליט"א‬ ‫לרפואה שלימה בתוך שאר חולי ישראל‬

More than 20,000 Torah Videos Over 400 different speakers

no leeway. He realised this was a big aveirah and

In order to understand this we must look at human nature and understand how we

This is what Yosef was trying to say to the wife of Potifar. When he refused it was an unequivocal

Friday 15th Dec - ‫כ"ז כסלו‬

behave.

Let us imagine that a child has asked for a certain present or privilege and we don’t want to give it to him. Many people make the mistake of giving excuses and trying to explain why they decided not to acquiesce. Often, one of the worst thing to do is to give the reason for refusing. When children receive an unequivocal no, they don’t try as hard to change the verdict. If they are told no and there is a reason

he wasn’t going to change for any reason or logic in the world.

In our daily struggles and battles with the yetzer hora or with bad influences we often try to make excuses why we don’t want to do certain things. A person must know that excuses become liabilities because people will try and poke a hole in the logic.

Our true morals and values must be unchanging and not up for discussion or debate.

torahanytime.com

Rabbi Yitzchok Sandler

2

The Author can be contacted at rabbiyitz613@gmail.com

SEDRA SUMMARY Thank you to Chabad.org

Y

aakov settles in Chevron with his twelve sons. His favourite is seventeen-year-old Yosef, whose brothers are jealous of the preferential treatment he receives from his father, such as a precious Kesones passim. Yosef relates to his brothers two of his dreams which foretell that he is destined to rule over them, increasing their enmity

towards him.

Shimon and Levi plot to kill him, but Reuven suggests that they throw him into

a pit instead, intending to come back later and save him. While Yosef is in the pit, Yehudah has him sold to a band of passing Yishmaelites. The brothers dip Yosef’s special coat in the blood of a goat and show it to their father, leading him to believe that his most beloved son was devoured by a wild beast.

Yehudah marries and has three children.

The eldest, Er, dies young and childless, and his wife, Tamar, is given in levirate marriage to the second son, Onan. Onan sins, and he too meets an early death.

Yehudah is reluctant to have his third son marry her and instead does so himself in a round-about fashion. Tamar gives birth to twin sons, Peretz (an ancestor of King David) and Zerach.

Yosef is taken to Mitzrayim and sold to Potiphar, one of Paroh’s ministers.

Hashem blesses everything he does, and soon he is made overseer of all his master’s property. Potiphar’s wife desires a relationship with the handsome and charismatic lad. When Yosef rejects her advances, she tells her husband that the Hebrew slave tried to force himself on her, and has him thrown into prison. Yosef gains the trust and admiration of his jailers, who appoint him to a position of authority in the prison administration.

In prison, Yosef meets Paroh’s chief butler and chief baker, both incarcerated for offending their royal master. Both have disturbing dreams, which Yosef interprets; in three days, he tells them, the butler will be released and the baker hanged. Yosef asks the butler to intercede on his behalf with Paroh. Yosef’s predictions are fulfilled, and in a dramatic conclusion to the parsha, the butler forgets all about Yosef and does nothing for him.

Yosef is referred to by chazal as Yosef Hatzaddik – the only person in the whole of Tanach with this title! But why? What did he do that made him deserve such an accolade?

Parshah The

only

possible

answer

QUIZ TIME

from

understanding the nature of Egyptian society – this was a place of abject immorality and lewdness.

Could it possibly be that Yosef’s crime, in a society with so much depravity, actually wasn’t seen as such a bad thing? Could it be that in the immorality

Chazal highlight the exemplary way in which

and lewdness of Egypt, a slave trying to assault

Yosef resisted the advances of his master’s wife.

your wife when left alone was only to be expected –

But wait a minute – is this really SUCH an act of

and if so, why ‘waste’ a good slave, when you could

righteousness? Surely any self-respecting moral

cool him off for a while in the slammer?

person, let alone a father of the Jewish people,

We are all affected by our surroundings and by

would know not to get involved with another man’s

our social pressure, and we tend to legitimise our

wife? So he did what any self-respecting person

mistakes by how others judge them, rather than

would do – why does that make him a tzaddik?

by any objective standard. If our surroundings are

Let’s look again at the story.

immoral, we can be tempted to rationalize down

We see that the attractive Mrs Potiphar tries

our own moral standards. By the same measure,

to entice Yosef in ingenious ways, but he resists –

in elevated moral surroundings, we find greater

time and again – until ultimately, when they are left

inner moral strength. We see this clearly in many

alone, she literally throws herself at him. Knowing

sources – chazal tell us in so many places to choose

they are alone he is momentarily tempted, but he

our friends carefully, and notably in the Gemorro

quickly comes to his senses and runs away, while

Brochos 28b we are told that Rabbi Yochanan ben

Mrs Potiphar grabs his shirt and tears it off his

Zakkai on his death bed implored his talmidim that

back as he flees. She is angry and humiliated at

their yiras shomayim should be at least as great

being rejected, and when Potiphar himself returns,

as their fear of people around them…..suggesting

she shows him Yosef’s shirt and claims that HE

that we will necessarily be driven more by what

tried to assault HER! Seemingly, Potiphar believes

people think of us than by what Hashem thinks

his wife, and so he does the honourable thing…….

of us!

he throws Yosef into jail!

The fact is that if our surroundings are morally

Now does this make sense? If you were a

weak, then our own compass tends to shrivel.

leading dignitary in an ancient civilisation, and a

We’d like to think we are all so dedicated to our

lowly servant tried to assault your wife, would you

moral standards, but when push comes to shove

simply send him to jail? Wouldn’t you be a little

its only when tested that we would ever know.

more miffed than that? You would likely impose

The greatness of Yosef is that he maintained his

the full force of the law – or even take the law into

standards and didn’t let his surroundings affect

your own hands – but either way, your slave would

him, in the most testing moral environment. This

likely find his head removed from his shoulders!!?

is what made him to be known as such a tzaddik. It

What does it mean that Yosef got off so lightly?

behooves us to choose our surroundings carefully!

Rachel Charitable Trust ??

comes

1. livingwithmitzvos.com

How could the brothers even think about killing their own brother, Yosef?

This page is sponsored by Federation

Dayan Yehonoson Hool

3

Federation Beis Din

The Author can be contacted at dayan.hool@federation.org.uk

The Crafty Customer

R

abbi Friedman authored a sefer, and as is common practice, put out a pile of ten of his seforim on a table in the lobby of a shul, with a money box next to the seforim and a handwritten sign saying “£9 a sefer.”

Mr. S. Alec passed by shortly after, and having had a quick look at the seforim, came up with an idea. He took out a pen and crossed out the words “£9 a sefer,” and changed it to read “£10 a sefer.” He then stood back and waited.

Over the next half hour, nine other people passed by, viewed the offer, placed £10 each into the money box and took for themselves a sefer. Mr Alec then took the last sefer for himself without paying.

As he explained later to his friends, “Rabbi Friedman wanted to get £90 from the sale of his seforim, by selling ten seforim for £9, and he did in fact receive £90, from the nine people who paid £10 each. The buyers were all happy to pay £10 for the sefer, which is a fair price. And I got a free sefer. So everyone is happy. Right?”

Is he right?

Discussion The Mishnah at the beginning of the sixth perek of Bava Metzia states that if someone hired workers, and they tricked each other they have nothing against each other apart from a grievance. This means to say that they have no financial claim that is actionable, but it is legitimate for them to hold a grievance against the party that wronged them.

In the first explanation given by the Gemara, the case involves someone who is looking for employees to perform some work for him. He asks someone to find him workers to do the job, and offers to pay them 4 shekels for their work.

This go-between goes an offers some workers the job, and, misrepresenting the employer, says that the employer has offered 3 shekels for the work. The workers agree to work for three shekels, but then when they complete the job they discover that the employer had originally been willing to pay them four and not three.

The Gemara rules that the employer need not pay them more than three shekels for the job, and it is implied (and indeed written explicitly

TEXT

SHAILATEXT 07403 939 613 NEW NUMBER

in the Rambam, Shulchan Aruch et al) that this is so even if the job was actually worth four shekel. As the Gemara says, the workers agreed in advance to this price, and can’t demand more after the work is completed.

The Chiddushei HaRitv”o (Hayeshonim) adds that the intermediary can’t go back to the employer and ask for the extra shekel for himself.

Although the employer had offered to pay four shekels for the job, that was to be given to the ones who actually carry out the work. Once he managed to have the work done for three shekels, there is no reason for the intermediary to claim the extra shekel.

Regarding the workers, who as we said have no financial claim against the intermediary, at first the Gemara suggests that they can’t even hold a grievance against the intermediary – after all they agreed to the three shekels so what is there to complain about? Later, though, the Gemara retracts and does legitimise their grievance. They can point to the verse in Mishlei, 3:27: ”‫ – ַאל ִת ְּמנַ ע טֹוב ִמ ְב ָּעלָ יו‬Don’t hold back a benefit from those to whom it is due.” Whilst it is true, they might say to the intermediary, that we agreed to work for three shekels, nonetheless the employer was willing to offer us four shekel, so why did you hold back this information from us? You caused us to lose out on an extra shekel that we could have earned legitimately!”

That is the source for their justifiable grievance, although it doesn’t give them a right to actually claim the extra shekel from anyone.

(R’ Yisroel Salanter famously points out that this is a rare instance in which Chazal state that although one might have no actionable financial claim, one is justified to hold a grievance against the perpetrator of a wrong, unless he makes amends or otherwise appeases you.

The implication is that in all other cases, if one has no actionable financial claim, one is not permitted to hold even a grievance against the other party.)

But why can’t the intermediary respond to their gripe by saying, “Look here, you were prepared to work for three, and the employer was prepared to pay four, so I had to choose to benefit one of you, and I chose to help the employer rather than you!”?

QUIZ TIME

The Ritv”o answers this by saying that once the employer had already offered four, the intermediary should not have changed that offer to three when he spoke to the workers. The offer of four had already been made, and once that has happened the intermediary should faithfully pass on the message and not choose to help out one more than the other. (It should be noted that Rashi understands that the intermediary is actually himself one of the workers. Had he been acting as an employee or agent of the employer, it is possible that he would be permitted to try and get the best deal for his principle, and so even if the employer was offering four, he could legitimately offer the workers only three.)

Let us revisit our original case, in the light of this Gemara.

Mr. Alec clearly cannot keep the book that he took for free and must return it. No-one gave him permission to take a book for free, and even if he has managed to arrange for the author to get his full intended profit, there is no reason why any extra money made by the author should go to Mr Alec (just as the intermediary in the Gemara’s case does not get the extra shekel).

The purchasers of the book, who paid £10 instead of £9, cannot claim the extra pound off Mr Alec, because he did not actually take that extra £1. They can’t claim it off the author either, because although he was prepared to sell it for £9, they agreed to pay, and in fact already paid, £10. This is similar to the workers who, once they have given away their work worth four shekels for three, cannot ask for an extra shekel, even though the employer had originally been willing to offer them four.

However, the purchasers of the book would be entitled to hold a grievance against Mr Alec, because although they did agree to pay £10, the author had been willing to sell it to them for £9.

As such, the verse in Mishlei,”‫ַאל ִת ְּמנַ ע טֹוב ִמ ְב ָּעלָ יו‬ – Don’t hold back a benefit from those to whom it is due,” applies to their scenario too, and Mr Alec was wrong to interfere in the sale offer that the author had made.

(Condensed and adapted from a chaburah given at the Sinai Beis Hamedrash to the Evening Chaburah learning Hasocher es Ha’umnin)

07403 939 613

For more information visit www.federation.org.uk/shailatext/

??

Parshah

2. livingwithmitzvos.com

‫ לע”נ‬DAYAN GERSHON LOPIAN ‫זצ”ל‬

Who took Yosef out of the pit (37:28)?

SAVE THIS NUMBER IN YOUR CONTACTS LIST NOW!

A COMMUNITY SERVICE OF THE

Rabbi Daniel Fine

4

Community Rabbi, Stanmore and Canons Park US; the Hasmonean Beis Programme The Author can be contacted at danielpfine@gmail.com

Brotherly Misconceptions

Parshah

Brothers can be great friends. They can also be great rivals. That picture of the Brownlee brothers crossing the marathon line together is an example of the former. Perhaps the episode of Yosef and his brothers was the latter. Yet the Netziv makes clear that what occurred between Yosef and his brothers was no more than a miscommunication or failure to appraise the situation correctly. The brothers mistakenly thought that Yakov liked Yosef more as a person than anyone else; that Yosef was loved and favoured well beyond any normal parameters. Yet Yakov simply saw the same qualities that he had - chesed and pursuit of peace - in Yosef. Yakov was trying to cultivate those qualities.

It’s fascinating that people can often wrongly appraise others. The Shulchan Aruch in discussing the laws of giving a hesped writes that

the eulogiser may exaggerate the good deeds of the deceased a little. The commentaries are puzzled by this; surely this is speaking falsehood? And what difference therefore would there be between a slight exaggeration or a total exaggeration? The Taz answers that most people would have pushed themselves a bit further to achieve a bit more in life. The willingness to do so allows us to say in a eulogy that they did so - it’s as if they did so! But Rav Pam understands this Shulchan Aruch a bit differently. He writes that we often underestimate other people by a little. Often we can be a little bit out in our evaluation of others; we underestimate others’ achievements or do not see others as great as they really are. Thus, the Shulchan Aruch is saying that it’s okay to exaggerate a little bit, because that’s probably who they really were anyway.

We are very good at misreading people or evaluating them incorrectly. Social psychology speaks about the attribution phenomenon or the fundamental attribution error: Think about the last time you received a good grade on a psychology exam. Chances are that you attributed your success to internal factors.

“I did well because I am smart” or “I did well because I studied and was well-prepared” are two common explanations you might use to justify your test performance. What happens when you receive a poor grade, though? Social psychologists have found that in this situation, you are more likely to attribute your failure to external forces. "I failed because the teacher included trick questions" or "The classroom was so hot that I couldn't concentrate" are examples of excuses a student might come up with to explain their poor performance. Notice that both of these explanations lay the blame on outside forces rather than accepting personal responsibility. Psychologists refer to this phenomenon as the self-serving bias.

When it comes to other people, we tend to attribute causes to internal factors such as personality characteristics and ignore or minimize external variables. This phenomenon tends to be very widespread, particularly among individualistic cultures.

Psychologists refer to this tendency as the fundamental attribution error; even though situational variables are very likely present, we automatically attribute the cause to internal characteristics.[i] Part of the lesson from Yosef’s brothers is to evaluate others clearly, cleanly, and with as little personal bias as possible.

QUIZ TIME

??

3. livingwithmitzvos.com

What do the Asara Harugei Malchus have to do with Parshas Vayeishev?

Rabbi David Ariel Sher

5

The Jerusalem Kolel

The Author can be contacted at ?????

Parshah For Shame!

The Evil of Causing Embarrassment

V

ivienne Wohl would often take a Friday constitutional in a large Jerusalem park. Once, as she meandered across the manicured lawns, she spotted a weed and plucked it out. She was immediately accosted by an irascible gardener who delivered a thundering animadversion, demanding to know how dare she have the temerity to uproot ‘plants’ in this park? She apologised politely to him and walked on. This seems an unremarkable story, except that the recreation spot in question was the 19-acre Wohl Rose Park, opposite the Knesset in Jerusalem, where some 400 varieties of roses were planted. The park was Vivienne’s brainchild and had come into being thanks to her munificence and that of her husband, Maurice. It was for deeds such as this that they received encomia from Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau who commended their “caring for every Jew in need, with compassion, respect and devotion.”

Tel Aviv’s main hospital and donated the Wohl Center at Bar Ilan University. The Wohls also established a permanent place for themselves on London’s cultural scene with the Wohl Room at London’s National Gallery on Trafalgar Square and the Wohl Central Hall at the Royal Academy of Arts being important assets to these two quintessentially British institutions.

The Hammersmith Hospital owes much to the Wohls as does King’s College London. In 1992 Vivienne joined Maurice at Buckingham Palace where he was made Commander of the British Empire by Queen Elizabeth II. If there was anyone whom one could expect to reprimand a gauche, misinformed and truculent gardener, it would have been a respected philanthropist of this calibre. But Vivienne did not. For she knew it would mortify and humiliate this irate worker and instead she walked away, even apologising to him, with the question of who was in the right or wrong set aside so as not to cause another human being shame.

Jews from all over the world have heard of the Wohls. They owned property on London’s most salubrious boulevards including Piccadilly. They donated to every Jewish cause, of every persuasion, from Mercaz HaRav Yeshiva, and Yeshivat HaKotel, to the Slonimer Yeshivas Beis Avraham in Jerusalem’s Meah She’arim. In London, British Jews recognise the Wohls philanthropy which ranged from the Golders Green Beth Hamedrash (Munk’s) Hall, the Wohl Synagogue at Jewish Care’s Lady Sarah Cohen House, the Wohl Synagogue at the Jews’ Free School, the Meals on Wheels organisation and the couple’s assistance in financing the fleet of ambulances operated by Hatzola North West.

In the Gemara (Berachos 43b), we are startlingly adjured in a direct reference from this week’s Torah portion: “It is better for a man that he should cast himself into a fiery furnace rather than that he should put his fellow to shame in public. From where do we know this? From Tamar, about whom it says, “When she was brought forth [to be burned for alleged immorality] she sent the pledge to her father-in-law, Yehuda, with the message, ‘By the man, whose these are, am I with child’ [i.e. pregnant]; and she said: ‘Discern, I pray, whose are these, the signet, and the cords, and the staff.’ (Genesis 38:25).” Tamar chose to be put to death rather than identify Yehuda as the father of her yet unborn child and publicly put him to shame. One can only marvel at her fortitude. Even in today’s lascivious ambient culture, infidelity is deemed reprehensible and in ancient Israel, in a purely religious age, Tamar’s crime would appear indefensible and of moral turpitude. This only underscores her piety in disregarding her honour, stature and her own life in her refusal to incriminate

In Israel, Maurice and Vivienne donated synagogues in Tel Aviv and Maurice was the President of the Jerusalem Great Synagogue.

In Jerusalem, many lives have been saved by the surgical complex donated by the Wohls to the Sha’are Zedek Medical Centre. They also built medical complexes at Petach Tikva, at

Does your child have difficulty with Hebrew translation?

QUIZ TIME

??

We may never know, but we ourselves should emulate the splendid example of Tamar and be inspired by those in more recent times who have followed in her footsteps. For the colossal gravity of shaming someone is not only indicated by what we must sacrifice to avoid this, but also by what we lose ourselves if we fail to do so. In Baba Metzia (59a) it is recorded that King David related that he was asked “David! what is the death penalty of him who seduces a married woman?” I reply to them, “He is executed by strangulation, yet has he a portion in the World to Come. But he who publicly puts his neighbour to shame has no portion in the World to Come.”

Moreover, we need not limit ourselves to corporeal beings to find guidance on this matter, for in the Gemara, in Sanhedrin (11a) we see how G-d Himself has demonstrated to mankind this elevated concept. After Achan illicitly took of the consecrated property, “Hashem said to Joshua, Get up, why have you fallen upon your face? Israel has sinned …” (Joshua 7:10, 11). “Master of the Universe,” asked Joshua, “who are the sinners?” “Am I an informer?” replied Hashem. “Go and cast lots” [to discover the culprit.] The A-lmighty thus saved the sinner from embarrassment by not revealing his identity. We have a positive command “You shall walk after Hashem your G-d” Deut 13:5 and as the Gemara (Sotah 14a) makes clear, this means following His attributes. In our case, just as A-lmighty G-d avoids shaming others so too must we mortals strive to avoid causing another’s humiliation.

The revolutionary Chumash Vocabulary System (CVS) is changing lives!

Qualified and experienced teacher available for small groups and individuals.

4.

livingwithmitzvos.com

Yehuda, whom she was no doubt aware had just said “Bring her forth, and let her be burnt!”

Was our British philanthropist inspired by this story to take her own, albeit less dramatic, stand?

It is an ideal. An elevated ideal. An ideal which Hashem himself embodies. And it is an ideal for which we must make the supreme sacrifice, as the story of Tamar has so starkly shown.

Please call Mrs Harris on 020 8958 3218 or 07779 570 246

Full assessment available

(37:21) What made Reuven, more than any of the other brothers, want to save Yosef?

Chazan Michael Simon

6

Author of Likutei Mimini Michoel, weekly email on the Parshah and Mo'adim The Author can be contacted at shemetz.taher@gmail.com

PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE DREAM SEQUENCE

Parshah

In my experience, barmitzvah boys often find the narrative sections of the Torah easier to master, no doubt because they are able to identify more closely with the ‘storyline’.

There is a danger, however, that in the narrative-filled sefer Bereishis we can all overlook important lessons for life.

How was Yosef able to interpret accurately the dreams of his fellow inmates? The obvious answer is ruach hakodesh. However, I was once accused of proffering a balebatishe answer to a particular query on Chumash and I fear that the obvious answer to our question on Yosef’s interpretative prowess suffers from the same ailment. Furthermore, the whole of sefer Bereishis is intended to have a pedagogic quality in line with the dictum of ma’aseh ovos siman le’bonim – that we should derive moral and ethical lessons from the actions of our biblical forbears.

To find a more lomdishe, and by implication more satisfying, answer to our question, we need carefully to compare and contrast the detail of each of the convicts’ dreams, explains the Bostoner Rebbe ztvk’’l zy’’a, whose yahrzeit fell on Thursday of this week.

First, we have the butler. The pesukim describe to us his vision of the full progression from vine to wine, that is, from grapes ripening on the tendrils to their being freshly pressed into the cup of Paroh, which the butler sees himself passing personally into the hand of his master.

The butler is directly involved at all stages in the process, exerting himself to manage every detail of production in order to achieve a beverage worthy of being handed to the king to imbibe.

riddle

Parsha

And what of the baker? There is nothing in the retelling of his dream that suggests his

Thank you to Boruch Kahan bkahan47@yahoo.co.uk

QUIZ TIME

??

having expended any effort in the creation of the delicacies in the baskets atop his head. They make their first appearance ready-formed.

In noting this distinction, the Rebbe reminds us of the maxim in Maseches Megillah [6b] that if a person asserts yogati umotzosi – I strove and then I found, such a person is believed. This is because success is achieved through toil and effort. The butler’s description of his diligent involvement in each stage of the process, his careful preparations for the task in hand and thus his achievement of the goal of handing the wine goblet to Paroh, signalled to Yosef that this man’s judgment would be positive. The baker’s dream, on the other hand, disclosed no industry at all on his part, no personal involvement or input into the finished product, leading Yosef to the conclusion that this man would not be returning to his post.

The distinction between the dreams, and the significance thereof, does not stop there. In his dream, the butler witnesses the fulfilment of his overall objective, squeezing the grapes into Paroh’s goblet and handing this to the king – mentioning Paroh twice by name. Yosef saw this, not only as an indication of the butler’s recognition of the objective of his role, but more importantly that this disclosed his personal aspiration to return to his former occupation.

The baker, on the other hand, only sees himself in his dream, emphasising the placement of the

QUESTION

Where do you find in this week's Parsha a Possuk that has three different words made up of three different verbs but they are in the order of past, present, and future?

CLUE

The first mention of a “GPS/SatNav” FIND THE ANSWER IN NEXT WEEK'S ONEG

livingwithmitzvos.com

baskets on his head, without any mention of his seeing Paroh.

If the narrative of Yosef’s interpreting dreams in prison was intended to do no more than lay the foundation for his release from incarceration, once Paroh himself experienced incomprehensible dreams, the Torah could have achieved this through the butler alone. The presence of the baker must do more than merely reinforce Yosef’s abilities in this regard. The Rebbe sees a clear message in the distinctions between the two dreams; a message that should resonate with us in our search for the proper way to grow in our avodas Hashem.

On the one hand, we have to understand that growth in Torah and mitzvos, indeed success in all realms of spiritual matters, is achieved only through preparation, effort and focussed graft. It is not something that is gained through pure osmosis. The butler’s reinstatement was obvious to Yosef from the detailed, stage upon stage description of his actions within his dream, each stage building on those that came before it.

On the other hand, we have to work on ourselves to ensure that the goal of coming closer to Hashem’s service in purity and sincerity is kept constantly in our minds, so that it will be a conduit for His individual message to us as to how to achieve our objectives.

ANSWER FROM LAST WEEK Vesimnah (Perek 36 Possuk 12). It is made up of five letters Vov ,Tof ,Mem,Nun, and Ayin There is a Halochoh in Korbonos that in five specific cases you have to let an animal that is meant to be brought as a Korbon Chatos die and not be offered up.

These are called the five "Chatos SheMeisos". To help you remember what they are you can use this word.

The Roshei Teivos is brought down in the Tosfos Yom Tov in the Mishnayos at the beginning of the fourth Perek of Temurah. a) Vov = Vlad Chatos b) Tof = Temuras Chatos c) Mem = Chatos SheMeisoh Baalehoh d) Nun = Chatos SheNiskapru Baalehoh e) Ayin = Chatos SheOvroh Shenosoh

5. (37:20) How could the Shevatim seem to lie and say that a wild animal ate him up?

Why didn’t they simply keep quiet?

Questions from

7

The Federation’s recently launched technology department

Is your oven Shabbos compliant? (Part 1) Based on our recently launched online guides, this column sets out to raise awareness of the problems inherent in the use of domestic ovens on Shabbos. We will clarify that even models which carry a ‘Sabbath mode’ feature are not guaranteed to be compliant with halachic requirements. We will explore the options available for those ovens which do not carry an approved ‘Sabbath mode’, and we will direct the householder towards ways to assess whether their oven can be used on Shabbos.

What Is ‘Sabbath Mode’ In An Oven?

In many cases, use of the word ‘Sabbath mode’ is a misnomer as manufacturers have not adequately researched the issues involved. When manufactured with input from a competent halachic authority, an oven working in ‘Sabbath mode’ is truly ‘Sabbath friendly’ as it complies with the laws of Shabbos – allowing one to access food which is heating in the oven.

In all cases, the food must have been placed in the oven before Shabbos.

Here in the UK, an increasing number of models offer this mode, but are manufactured without halachic input; as such, their use on Shabbos must be evaluated on a product-by-product basis.

Where available, information from the manufacturer can assist in the evaluation process, and one needs to consult a halachic authority on the correct use of these models.

By their own admission, some companies have manufactured ovens which raise serious concerns even if ‘Sabbath mode’ is operating.

Members of the public are advised to research the model they are buying, and where necessary, to resort to other methods of heating food.

Which Concerns Do ‘Sabbath Mode’ Ovens Need To Address?

The following is a list of the issues which an oven can present in its Shabbos use; different models can show some of or all of the following problems: •

Light and fan turn on or off when door opens or closes

•

When oven is operating, element switches off when door is opened

•

Heating element reignites when door closes

•

Writing on LED display screen appears or changes when door is opened

What Could Be Wrong With An Oven Which Claims To Operate In ‘Sabbath Mode’?

When designed under Rabbinic supervision, the mode will have dealt with all relevant issues. When input is lacking, not all issues are necessarily addressed. Taken as an example, one company told us that the when the door of their oven opens, the power supply to the heating element will be immediately shut.

When questioned, this company told us that they do not claim their mode to be halachically compliant with the laws of Sabbath. Use of the term Sabbath mode is certainly misleading in this context.

If The Oven I Have Bought Offers ‘Sabbath Mode’, Can I Open The Door When Sabbath Mode Is Activated?

If the oven is manufactured under supervision – with a hechsher, we advise you to consult the halachic guidance notes prepared by the relevant authority. To clarify whether your model is one of the rare few in the UK which has a hechsher we recommend you check the following link https://www.star-k.org/appliance/.

To date we are not aware of any locally available models which are under supervision. If your model does not appear on the Star-K’s, website you can e-mail us with a product name and number, and we will attempt to investigate further.

If your oven’s Sabbath mode is indeed not supervised, its use would only be permitted after thorough investigation.

In Part 2 next week: Sabbath mode ovens on the UK market, and their use on yom tov.

This column is based on our online guides which can be found at www.federation.org.uk/fedtech For specific shailos, send an SMS message to ShailaText on 07403 939 613.

Questions can also be directed to technology@federation.org.uk.

A competent ‘Sabbath mode’ will address all issues by neutralising the effects of opening and closing the oven door on appliance activity.

This mode also addresses issues related to convenience and technical design. Amongst them is an ‘auto cut off’ feature – designed to lower the risk of fires; this safety feature will halt oven activity after a period of time. To allow for the convenience of Yom Tov cooking, the oven continues to run for up to 72 hours, but at a relatively low temperature.

BUYING A NEW KITCHEN APPLIANCE? MAKE SURE THERE ARE NO ‫ שבת‬OR ‫ כשרות‬ISSUES! QUIZ TIME

??

TECHNOLOGY GUIDES

AVAILABLE FROM THE FEDERATION

Pre-purchase tips and information for ovens and fridges.

www.federation.org.uk/fed-tech/ technology@federation.org.uk

livingwithmitzvos.com

6. (37:22) The Shevatim decided not to kill Yosef and instead throw him into a pit. How was this any better, since the pit contained deadly snakes and scorpions?

Rabbi Dov Birnbaum

8

Rabbi of The Seed Shul, Edgware

The Author can be contacted at dbirnbaum@seed.uk.net

Parshah

The Gift of Hindsight

It is well known that most men would rather get lost than ask for directions! According to Dr. Linda Sapadin this is because men prefer to learn by doing, not by being told what to do. Grown men don’t readily give up this part of themselves. Hence, if a man is lost, asking for directions is like admitting defeat. He had to ask for assistance. He couldn’t figure it out for himself. How humiliating!

It seems that Yosef was part of the minority; otherwise things may have turned out very differently…

Yaakov Avinu sends Yosef to his brothers who have gone to Shechem. He arrives to discover that his brothers are no longer there.

He stops someone to ask if he has seen them and receives an interesting reply: “They have journeyed from this, since I heard them saying let us got to Dosan” There is an obvious difficulty in his words.

What did he mean “they have journeyed from this”? He should have said “they have journeyed from here”. Furthermore, Yosef knew they had journeyed. That was why he

was asking the man whether he had seen them!

Rashi explains that this man was in fact the angel Gavriel. He was hinting in his words that the brothers were plotting against Yosef “They have journeyed away from brotherhood.”

The question is; if we are able to understand the hint in the Angel’s words, why did Yosef himself not understand?

To answer this let’s look at things from Yosef’s perspective. He had been sent on an errand by his father. He had no idea that this seemingly innocuous mission was the beginning of a life-changing journey for him.

He was also unaware that he was speaking to

an Angel. Therefore it is understandable that he didn’t pay attention to the hidden message in the man’s words.

On the other hand, when we read the Torah we have the benefit of hindsight. We approach the verse already knowing the end of the story.

The words of the Angel take on a new meaning when seen from our perspective.

In our own lives too we go through the same process. Many things happen to us daily without us paying attention. Whilst we are the characters in the story it is hard to see the writer’s hand. Only once we have the advantage of hindsight are we able to see Hashem’s hand guiding us.

ANSWERS 1. They viewed him as a Rodef, someone who was coming to get them in danger. The halacha is that when faced with someone who wants to kill you, then you should kill him first.

2. Rashi explains that is was the Shevatim who took Yosef out of the pit. However, when reading the passuk the implication is that the Midyanim took him out (see Chizkuni). Rashi (Matos, 31:6) brings that this is why Pinchas, a descendent of Yosef, went to fight the Midyanim and avenge them for their part in the selling of Yosef.

3. Years later, the enemy king said that since ten brothers were involved in the sale of Yosef, therefore ten great Sages who were to represent the ten Shevatim needed to be punished. They were killed in horrific ways as read on Yom Kippur and on Tisha BiAv.

TO SPONSOR A WEEK please email mc@markittech.com Cost per week: £500 (which covers production costs)

NOW IN THE FOLLOWING PLACES

Please could you ensure that there are ample sheets left in shuls for Shabbos before taking one home.

4. The Chizkuni says that since the firstborn (of tribes) had been given over from Reuven to Yosef, Reuven was scared that Yaakov would suspect him of trying to avenge and harm Yosef.

He therefore wanted to save Yosef.

5. The Ohr Hachaim says that the brothers were almost certain that when Yosef was thrown into the pit he would die and his body would be eaten by animals. Therefore what they were saying was true.

6. The Gemara (Brachos 33a) says that snakes and scorpions only attack when fallen upon and angered. Here the pit was very wide that this would not happen. Alternatively, they thought the pit looked empty.

For questions on Divrei Torah, please contact the Editor in Chief, Rabbi Yonasan Roodyn rabbiroodyn@jewishfuturestrust.com To receive this via email please email mc@markittech.com

Yerushalayim, Amsterdam, Antwerp, Baltimore, Beit- Shemesh, Birmingham, Borehamwood, Budapest, Cancun, Detroit, Edgware, Elstree, Gateshead, Gibraltar, Glasgow, Hale, Henderson, Hong Kong, Ilford, Johannesburg, Lakewood, Larnaca, Las Vegas, Leeds, London, Los Angeles, Manchester, Melbourne, Miami, Milan, New York, Oslo, Paris, Petach Tikva, Philadelphia, Pressburg, Radlett, Ruislip, Santiago, Sao Paulo, Southend, Tallinn, Tarzana, Toronto, Uman, Vienna, Zurich

This newsletter contains Divrei Torah and may contain Sheimos. Please dispose of accordingly.

NISHMAS YISROEL • SINAI •YESHURUN • OHR YISRAEL www.federation.org.uk/sheimos-lgeniza