Parshat Shmot
by Rabbi Avi Billet
After Moshe and Aharon are reunited and they convince the nation of Israel that they were sent by God to redeem them (4:30-31), they come and declare before Pharoah, “Send My nation to celebrate for me in the wilderness!” Pharaoh refuses, denying God’s divinity and existence, causing Moshe and Aharon to say, “The God of the Hebrews has called upon us, so let us go on a three day journey to bring offerings to our God, lest we be smitten by a plague or by the sword.” (5:1-3)
The two verses which follow this show Pharaoh’s response, but they are introduced with a subtle difference. And, while similar, have 3 other distinct differences.
The King of Egypt said to them, “Moshe and Aharon, why are you distracting the people (עם) from their work? Get back to your own business!' (5:4)
Pharaoh said, “The peasants (עם הארץ) are becoming more numerous, and you want them to take a vacation from their labors!” (5:5)
First the King of Egypt, then Pharaoh. Each one says something different. It would not be farfetched for the "king of Egypt" to say two different statements. But why does he need to be introduced twice, and each time a different way? There is particularly no need for a reintroduction since Moshe and Aharon do not respond to the things he says in verse 4.
Let us look at three different ways of understanding these noted differences.
Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch says verse 4 was the king speaking to Moshe and Aharon personally but publicly. You’re using this ‘God-talk’ to just disturb people. The king is having a premonition to the famous line uttered by Wesley at his capture in “The Princess Bride” – “We are men of action, lies do not become us.” Don’t bring some ridiculous unheard of God into any conversation of whom to worship. This is the king talking to those who have taken the role of leaders – this is a political conversation between the top diplomats of each nation.
As Pharaoh, on the other hand, he speaks to them confidentially, using the term “Am Haaretz” (which we defined above as ‘peasants’) to describe his own nation of Egyptians that has multiplied, forcing an economy that can only survive only if each subject works diligently at his occupation. You, Moshe and Aharon, are asking for the Hebrew slaves to get a week off (3 days journey, 1 day of worship, 3 days return journey). Were the slaves to get a week off, you can only imagine what kinds of vacation the Egyptian population would demand. Everyone needs to make their contribution to society! If they walk off the jobs, the economy would collapse!
The Alshikh views these verses similarly, though he reverses the interpretation, suggesting verse 4 describes the Egyptians, while verse 5 describes the Israelites.
Alshikh describes the scene in very plain terms, that Moshe and Aharon approaching the palace would cause a stir amongst the Egyptian population, many of whom would follow Moshe and Aharon to witness their impertinence in asking the king for favors, thereby abandoning their own tasks and jobs for the day. The king of the Egyptians is therefore blaming Moshe and Aharon for causing Egyptians to take a day off through distracting them.
As Pharaoh, who has caused the Israelites to be enslaved, he notes the impossibility of letting the Israelites take a day off, as they have increased manifold. Noting their increased numbers, Pharaoh then takes steps, in verses 6-9, to increase their labor, making it more difficult for them to rebel because their responsibilities – getting their own straw for the bricks instead of being supplied with it – make their brick tally so much more difficult to achieve.
Malbim notes the distinction between “Why are you distracting the people (ha’am) from their ‘work’ (‘ma’asav’ in Hebrew)?” (verse 4) and “you want the ‘am ha’aretz’ to take a vacation from their labors (‘mi’sivlotam’ in Hebrew)?” (verse 5)
‘Am’ refers to the tribe of Levi, who were exempt from labor, while ‘Am Ha’aretz’ are the poorest and lowliest of the nation, those whose labors are ‘sivlot.’ The ‘maasim’ of the Tribe of Levi refers to commerce, and work in the house and the field. ‘Sivlot’ is the back-breaking slave labor of the rest of the nation.
Being distracted (verse 4) is also different than taking a vacation (verse 5). A distraction is temporary, which is followed by the distracted person going back to work. But a vacation breaks the rhythm of never-ending labor, a rhythm which, once broken, is very difficult to return to.
Malbim argues that when Moshe came to speak to the people (in 4:30) to convince them of his being sent by God, there is no way he was able to communicate with the back-broken laborers, because they had no rest or respite from their slavery. He must have been speaking to his fellow tribesmen, Levi, who were not so consistently needed at their tasks, as they did not participate in the slave labor.
The king saying at the end of verse 4, “Go to your labors (l'sivloteicheim)!” was his way of saying, “You’re looking to get your otherwise excused tribe of Levi (the 'am') involved in slave labor? Watch yourself!” And then Pharaoh (verse 5) checked himself thinking, “If I employ the tribe of Levi and the elders, it will get the rest of the nation ('am ha'aretz'), who are many, to relax from their labors – either in protest, or because they’ll see an expansion of laborers which will cause them to take less responsibility for their own tasks.” In other words, the statement of Pharaoh (verse 5) was checking the hasty statement made by himself in his role as king (verse 4), essentially negating it so the labor will continue.
These perspectives show that there were political considerations beyond just pure evil ascribed to the king. This does not excuse how Pharaoh viewed his role, nor how Egypt as a whole enslaved the Israelites. But it is interesting to think that the people we read of were real, and were looking at a world that was not just black and white.
Every situation on a world stage is complicated. Evil can be viewed in black and white terms, but until people on different sides are able to talk to one another, understand the other perspective, and come to a table in which real agreements can be made (with each side needing to bend a bit), negotiations between opposing sides will remain difficult, if not impossibly insurmountable.
Thursday, December 31, 2015
Friday, December 25, 2015
The Bracha to Naftali
Parshat Vaychi
by Rabbi Avi Billet
On his deathbed, Yaakov gives blessings to all his children. The first three sons – Reuven, Shimon and Levi – receive farewell wishes which are not as pleasant as those given to the rest of their brothers. The remaining blessings are shrouded with depth, meaning, and a sense of prophesy. It seems that Yaakov is talking to each tribe in their present, sometimes referencing their past, but also speaking to future generations and events.
Some commentaries go into great detail to try to explain these blessings, while others lay off, as the interpretation of the blessings is a bit overwhelming.
The blessing given to Naftali is one of the shorter ones, only six words (Gad also has six, and Asher has seven words), but it is probably one of the more misunderstood blessings.
The common translation suggests Naftali is comparable to a hind, “Naftali is a deer running free; he delivers words of beauty.”
But, as Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan notes in his Chumash, each word has other possible meanings. The word Ayalah “can also be translated as a tree or plain.” Of course, once we are possibly talking about an intangible object, such as a piece of land or a tree, the phrase translated as “running free” will have to be retranslated as well. ”
This is why he offers the other translations of “Naphtali is a spreading tree, that puts out beautiful branches” quoting the Baalei Tosafot and the Malbim, and “Naphtali is a full-bearing field, that bears beautiful trees” following the view of Chizkuni, HaKtav V’Hakabbalah.
The Rav Peninim Chumash has an entry explaining the blessing of Naftali. We need to see the Hebrew words to understand: Naftali ayalah Shluchah Hanoten Imrei Shafer.
Ayalah – comes from the word Ilan, which means a tree, as per the verse in Isaiah 1:29 in which “Eilim” reference trees.
Shluchah – comes from a word which means to spread out, such as in Yechezkel 17:6, when the verb is used to mean “sent forth boughs,” or Tehillim 80:12, “It sent forth its branches to the sea.”
Hanoten – means to give
Imrei – means branches, like in the verses in Isaiah 17:6,9 in which the word “Amir” appears.
Shafer - beautiful
The Chumash Rav Peninim concludes that the passage’s meaning is a more profound message. “Naftali will be like a pleasant tree who gives off pleasant branches – which grow from it. This suggests Naftali will have great leaders who will stand like branches at the tops of trees.”
He gives a parable to what this is compared. A man had a lazy son who would stay in bed half the day. The father would rebuke him, telling him that laziness is a bad character trait which is much better replaced with “zerizut” (zeal, enthusiasm). Eventually the young man decided to listen to his father, but took it to such an extreme that even when he spoke, he exhibited “zerizut,” which is sometimes translated to mean “hurriedly.”
His father called him out on his smart-aleck ways, as the son tried explaining, “But you told me to be fast about everything.” And the father responded that “zerizut” is a good character trait for actions. But when it comes to speech, what is better is to speak with pause and inflection so that people can understand what is being said.
The blessing to Naftali reflected that he had the trait of “zerizut” in all his deeds, but was super careful in his speech to “deliver words of beauty.”
This is an important lesson on possessing leadership skills. Actions speak louder than words. But words also need to be spoken loudly and clearly, so they can be understood properly.
The question is which perspective of Naftali’s blessing is more profound. The method which has Naftali like a deer spreading nice thoughts has Naftali running from place to place. Maybe like a traveling salesman, or even a traveling teacher, who leaves his mark, hopefully leaving a good impression and a good reputation when he departs.
The perspective which compares Naftali to the branches on a tree may, in fact, be more inspiring, because a tree stands there, is visible, and can serve as a source of inspiration as it doesn’t go away. It is a constant presence in the lives of those who are reached by its branches.
We don’t need to be from the tribe of Naftali to recognize the gift that comes from those who represent either Naftali-prototype. We should be blessed to be articulate representatives of the Torah, our People and the nation of Israel, whether we are the kind of people who travel and share out message or become mainstays in our communities, powerhouses standing for who we are. We should only be blessed to find success, and be great communicators within our people and to those who turn to us to see what a Jew is.
by Rabbi Avi Billet
On his deathbed, Yaakov gives blessings to all his children. The first three sons – Reuven, Shimon and Levi – receive farewell wishes which are not as pleasant as those given to the rest of their brothers. The remaining blessings are shrouded with depth, meaning, and a sense of prophesy. It seems that Yaakov is talking to each tribe in their present, sometimes referencing their past, but also speaking to future generations and events.
Some commentaries go into great detail to try to explain these blessings, while others lay off, as the interpretation of the blessings is a bit overwhelming.
The blessing given to Naftali is one of the shorter ones, only six words (Gad also has six, and Asher has seven words), but it is probably one of the more misunderstood blessings.
The common translation suggests Naftali is comparable to a hind, “Naftali is a deer running free; he delivers words of beauty.”
But, as Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan notes in his Chumash, each word has other possible meanings. The word Ayalah “can also be translated as a tree or plain.” Of course, once we are possibly talking about an intangible object, such as a piece of land or a tree, the phrase translated as “running free” will have to be retranslated as well. ”
This is why he offers the other translations of “Naphtali is a spreading tree, that puts out beautiful branches” quoting the Baalei Tosafot and the Malbim, and “Naphtali is a full-bearing field, that bears beautiful trees” following the view of Chizkuni, HaKtav V’Hakabbalah.
The Rav Peninim Chumash has an entry explaining the blessing of Naftali. We need to see the Hebrew words to understand: Naftali ayalah Shluchah Hanoten Imrei Shafer.
Ayalah – comes from the word Ilan, which means a tree, as per the verse in Isaiah 1:29 in which “Eilim” reference trees.
Shluchah – comes from a word which means to spread out, such as in Yechezkel 17:6, when the verb is used to mean “sent forth boughs,” or Tehillim 80:12, “It sent forth its branches to the sea.”
Hanoten – means to give
Imrei – means branches, like in the verses in Isaiah 17:6,9 in which the word “Amir” appears.
Shafer - beautiful
The Chumash Rav Peninim concludes that the passage’s meaning is a more profound message. “Naftali will be like a pleasant tree who gives off pleasant branches – which grow from it. This suggests Naftali will have great leaders who will stand like branches at the tops of trees.”
He gives a parable to what this is compared. A man had a lazy son who would stay in bed half the day. The father would rebuke him, telling him that laziness is a bad character trait which is much better replaced with “zerizut” (zeal, enthusiasm). Eventually the young man decided to listen to his father, but took it to such an extreme that even when he spoke, he exhibited “zerizut,” which is sometimes translated to mean “hurriedly.”
His father called him out on his smart-aleck ways, as the son tried explaining, “But you told me to be fast about everything.” And the father responded that “zerizut” is a good character trait for actions. But when it comes to speech, what is better is to speak with pause and inflection so that people can understand what is being said.
The blessing to Naftali reflected that he had the trait of “zerizut” in all his deeds, but was super careful in his speech to “deliver words of beauty.”
This is an important lesson on possessing leadership skills. Actions speak louder than words. But words also need to be spoken loudly and clearly, so they can be understood properly.
The question is which perspective of Naftali’s blessing is more profound. The method which has Naftali like a deer spreading nice thoughts has Naftali running from place to place. Maybe like a traveling salesman, or even a traveling teacher, who leaves his mark, hopefully leaving a good impression and a good reputation when he departs.
The perspective which compares Naftali to the branches on a tree may, in fact, be more inspiring, because a tree stands there, is visible, and can serve as a source of inspiration as it doesn’t go away. It is a constant presence in the lives of those who are reached by its branches.
We don’t need to be from the tribe of Naftali to recognize the gift that comes from those who represent either Naftali-prototype. We should be blessed to be articulate representatives of the Torah, our People and the nation of Israel, whether we are the kind of people who travel and share out message or become mainstays in our communities, powerhouses standing for who we are. We should only be blessed to find success, and be great communicators within our people and to those who turn to us to see what a Jew is.
Tuesday, December 15, 2015
An Installation to Remember
This past Saturday night was a memorable evening as I was installed as the rabbi at our shul.
Here is the video:
Here is the video:
Knowing the Inside Scoop of God's Plan
Parshat Vayigash
by Rabbi Avi Billet
Shortly after revealing himself to his brothers, Yosef tells them that “It has already been two years of famine throughout the land, but there will be five more years where there will be no plowing and [no] harvest.” (45:6)
Why doesn’t he just say there will be no food? Ramban translates Yosef’s statement here to mean exactly that. But if that’s what Yosef meant, why didn’t he just say it? Furthermore, why mention both? Isn’t it obvious that if you’re not plowing, you won’t be harvesting?
by Rabbi Avi Billet
Shortly after revealing himself to his brothers, Yosef tells them that “It has already been two years of famine throughout the land, but there will be five more years where there will be no plowing and [no] harvest.” (45:6)
Why doesn’t he just say there will be no food? Ramban translates Yosef’s statement here to mean exactly that. But if that’s what Yosef meant, why didn’t he just say it? Furthermore, why mention both? Isn’t it obvious that if you’re not plowing, you won’t be harvesting?
Thursday, December 10, 2015
Dreaming and Rising to the Top
Parshat Miketz
by Rabbi Avi Billet
“Strange as it seems there’s been a run of crazy dreams” sings the narrator in the musical about Joseph. And it seems that what is most needed is a dream interpreter. What a strange time to live in when people who are not prophets receive messages from the Master of the World that are, in their own way, prophetic.
Rav Amnon Bazak wrote his analysis of the dreams of these parshas pointing out the stages of the dreams in what looks like a developing pattern.
by Rabbi Avi Billet
“Strange as it seems there’s been a run of crazy dreams” sings the narrator in the musical about Joseph. And it seems that what is most needed is a dream interpreter. What a strange time to live in when people who are not prophets receive messages from the Master of the World that are, in their own way, prophetic.
Rav Amnon Bazak wrote his analysis of the dreams of these parshas pointing out the stages of the dreams in what looks like a developing pattern.
Thursday, December 3, 2015
Filling the Emptiness with Inspiration
My thanks to Rabbi Zvi Romm for the inspiration
Parshat Vayeshev (and Chanukah)
by Rabbi Avi Billet
When Yosef was confronted by the temptress, his master Potiphar’s wife, the Talmud says he was able to control himself and overcome her advances because he saw his father Yaakov's image appear "in the window." If an image popped into his head or mind, why did it specifically need to be seen in a window? The old cartoon method of having a conscience on the shoulder, countering the little red guy who is telling him to sin, might accomplish the same mission! Why the window?
Parshat Vayeshev (and Chanukah)
by Rabbi Avi Billet
When Yosef was confronted by the temptress, his master Potiphar’s wife, the Talmud says he was able to control himself and overcome her advances because he saw his father Yaakov's image appear "in the window." If an image popped into his head or mind, why did it specifically need to be seen in a window? The old cartoon method of having a conscience on the shoulder, countering the little red guy who is telling him to sin, might accomplish the same mission! Why the window?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)