If the Clothes Make the Man/Leader - It Needs Sponsorship! (Maybe)

Parshat Tetzaveh

by Rabbi Avi Billet

The opening instructions for the clothing of the Kohen Gadol focus on how the “Chachmei Lev” (the skilled artisans) are to take the donated materials and fashion the special garments of Kohanim. 

In his comments on the beginning of the Parsha, R Yosef B’Chor Shor makes two points of significance. 

1. When the Kohanim are standing in the service of God, they are to wear these special uniforms, and not to dress in “Bigdei Chol” (weekday clothes), which is not considered properly respectful. 

This point reminds us that when we are engaged in holy activities we should do our part to dress the part. This is why some people enhance their outfit for prayer, and certainly for the holy days of Shabbos and Yom Tov. It is also why people at least have in their mind "these are my wedding clothes," or similar thought processes, when it comes to certain articles of clothing in their closet. 

While it is not as common in my field, I personally reserve white-only shirts for Shabbos, Yom Tov, weddings, and sometimes funerals. When a person wears suits/jackets and ties daily, it is harder to set aside suits specifically for Shabbos - they get worn, they get cleaned, they get used for all purposes when appropriate. 

Those who wish to live up to this ideal that follows the model of the Kohanim and their garments might want to consider having specific garments set aside for Shabbos and Yom Tov and for special occasions. At the very least these garments should be a little nicer than those for weekdays - but as long as one knows "this is how I make Shabbos and Yom Tov different," with specific clothing items designated for those special times, one is certainly on the right path.

B'chor Shor's second idea:

 

2. The instruction is given to the people to assure Aharon has what he needs to best do his job of serving the people in his capacity as Kohen Gadol. They should not have it fall on Aharon to hire someone to make his clothes – it should come as an initiative of the people.

This is a dicey situation for us to consider, because in reality we don't have kohanim serving in the Mishkan/Mikdash today, leaving us to wonder if there is a parallel in our world.

There is a kollel that I support with consistent donations throughout the year, and the Rosh Kollel has told me that while the members of the kollel manage on minimal funds throughout the year - by choice - he does try to help them buy a "used suit" once a year. This suit becomes the Shabbos/Yom Tov suit, and the former Shabbos/Yom Tov suit becomes the kollel member's daily suit which he wears every weekday of the year until the suit is worn out. Then, per the cycle a new "used suit" is purchased again, becoming the Shabbos suit, when last year's "new suit" once again becomes the weekday one.

Personally having a sensitivity to clothing looking nice and presentable, I was recently talking to a rabbinical colleague (with whom I feel close enough to comment about these things) - he cares less about externalities - and I told him that as a Rov, he has a responsibility to look a little more put together. This is not about wearing expensive clothing! But it is about choosing a little better in terms of what he wears, for example, when serving in his capacity as Rabbi of his Kehillah, versus when he is on vacation and no one knows who he is. An unironed shirt, a white shirt that doesn't look white, an unkempt tie, a not-as-clean-as-it-could-be suit, etc., are unbefitting his role as a rabbi.

Having said that, it is understandable if he can't afford to maintain such a wardrobe, which may arguably put the onus of a minimal aspect of his wardrobe on his kehillah to maintain or sponsor. 

No, he is not a kohen or a Kohen Gadol. But in our world, a person in that position is our spiritual leader. While he does not have to be a clothing-model, in whatever capacity possible, a budget should be considered so that his clothing can help him look the part of the dignified spiritual representative he is to his congregation.

B'chor Shor noted that the clothing of the Kohanim were the responsibility of the community of the Jewish people, and was not meant to be placed on Aharon and sons as a burden they had to bear or sponsor.

The parallel is not exactly the same - but if it is, then whatever help can be given to those in these positions should be granted so our communities' representatives can adequately look the part we hope for them to fill.

The Testimony I Give You

Parshat Terumah

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

In the instructions for the Mishkan, Moshe is told (25:21), “And into the Ark you will place the testimony that I will give you.” On the surface, this seems a straightforward instruction for where the Luchot are to be placed. 

When one thinks of the timing of the instruction of the Mishkan, however, consideration must be given to the Ark mentioned in Parshat Eikev to make a wooden (temporary) Ark (Devarim 10:1-5) (see also here - a related exploration in Ki Sisa). And the following questions must be considered as well: was it always the intent for there to be 2 sets of Luchot? Did God plan for Moshe to break the first Tablets? Considering that the instruction for the making of the wooden Ark came at the same time Moshe was told to carve out two stones to replace the ones he had broken, were the first Luchot originally to be left without a home from the time Moshe received them until the Mishkan was built? If the instructions for the Mishkan came before Moshe came down from the mountain, then God referencing Luchot “that I will give you” makes sense. But that thwarts the theory that the Mishkan instructions were given after the Golden Calf to help the Bnei Yisrael achieve a “tikkun” – a corrective – for the events of the Golden Calf! But if the instructions were given in that order – after the events of the Golden Calf (following the line of thinking of Rashi that the Torah is not presented in chronological order), then Moshe had already been given the Luchot! What does God mean when He says “Into the Ark you will place the testimony that I will give you”? First – they were given, and already destroyed, and Second – the second set of Luchot were carved out by Moshe, given for God to inscribe (or engrave?), and then returned to him! Who is giving stones to whom? 

Ramban says Moshe wasn’t given this instruction for the first Luchot, because God knew the first ones would be broken. Or HaChaim argues they were so supernatural they would have stored themselves had they not been destroyed by Moshe. He further suggests that Moshe was instructed by God to make an Ark “for you” (meaning for Moshe – עשה לך ארון עץ) to indicate that the second Luchot were actually Moshe’s, for he had carved them out himself and now would need a place to store them, whereas the first Luchot were entirely of God’s design in both selection and engraving. A number of sources indicate that the pieces of the broken Luchot were gathered and put into the Ark along with the second Luchot (Baba Batra 14b, Yerushalmi: Shekalim 6:1, Sotah 8:3). 

 There is likely a crossover in terms of which Ark is being referenced in some of these sources – our tradition has it that when the Ark of the Mishkan was completed both sets of Luchot were placed in it, the complete second set and the broken first set. 

 But the question remains about the timing of the instruction and what Moshe was being told? Rashi enhances the question by wondering why the instruction is given twice (in 25:16 & 25:21). Rashi suggests (and Ibn Ezra echoes) that the instruction may be assigning a specific order for how things are to be placed in the Ark. Don’t ever put the cover on the Ark (even while constructing it) until you’ve placed the Luchot inside. 

Ramban disagrees, feeling that it is also called an Ark when the cover is on it, so the cover could be placed on it, completing it, and then removed so the Luchot can be placed inside. 

 Ramban argues that the placement of the cover, which has its Keruvim, above the Luchos is a way of giving God a “Kisei Kavod” – a throne of glory in this world, a place from which “I will have My presence rest in this world.” כי אני אועד לך שם ואשכין שכינתי עליהם 

Alshikh quotes the Midrash Rabba that the instruction for the Mishkan is a parable to a king who had a betrothed daughter. As long as she remained in her father’s house, her fiancée would visit her in her father’s home. Once she married, her father, the king, would visit her in her new palace. 

 Putting the Testimony in the Ark refers to the Torah “which I will give you,” I (God – the king in the parable) will make her home my destination since I will have to visit her to see her. Prior to her moving, she (the Torah) was in my domain, and you needed to come to Me to see her. 

 This is how Alshikh explains his own parable. 

 I believe we can take this to a next stage. If God is speaking of how “you are to place the testimony I will be giving you” into the Ark, that implies that the Testimony might not be completely in their hands and that God will still be giving it as time continues to pass. 

Testimony refers to the Luchos, and also refers to the Torah, both of which we have a tradition that they were placed in the Ark. On a simple level that is easy to understand if we are looking to point to physical objects as being defined as the עדות/testimony. 

But if we look at them as ideas, as Jewish knowledge which testify of God’s existence, then the עדות is continuing to be disseminated and given over to the Jewish people, for us to learn from, grow from, and see as part of our continued education, and more importantly, identification, even in our day, over 3300 years later!

 There are times in our liturgy when we serve as witnesses, testifying to God’s existence and the truth of His Torah. We do this in Kiddush, in the recitation of ויכלו on Friday nights, and when we say most of davening, including most significantly, the שמע. 

 God continues to exist for us, in our world, and we have the opportunity to see how the Testimony He provides for us is continually placed in the Ark, the symbol that houses the Torah – His gift to us of His existence, and of His desire for there to be a place on earth from which His presence can be felt. 

 That place is our synagogues. May we be blessed to feel His presence, and to see that we are still putting testimony into the Ark, testimony of our continued existence due to God’s benevolence, and our fealty to His teachings.

How Idolatry Could Destroy Shabbos and Yom Tov

Parshat Mishpatim 

by Rabbi Avi Billet

A few verses into Chapter 23, the Torah effortlessly transitions from speaking about the Shmittah year to speaking of Shabbos, and from there it goes into the other holidays. Before it speaks of the holidays, however, it slips in a small verse that seems out of place, in that it warns about observing all that God has instructed and not mentioning the names of other gods. 

שמות פרק כג

 (י) וְשֵׁ֥שׁ שָׁנִ֖ים תִּזְרַ֣ע אֶת־אַרְצֶ֑ךָ... (יא) וְהַשְּׁבִיעִ֞ת תִּשְׁמְטֶ֣נָּה וּנְטַשְׁתָּ֗הּ... (יב) שֵׁ֤שֶׁת יָמִים֙ תַּעֲשֶׂ֣ה מַעֲשֶׂ֔יךָ וּבַיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֖י תִּשְׁבֹּ֑ת... (יג) וּבְכֹ֛ל אֲשֶׁר־אָמַ֥רְתִּי אֲלֵיכֶ֖ם תִּשָּׁמֵ֑רוּ וְשֵׁ֨ם אֱלֹהִ֤ים אֲחֵרִים֙ לֹ֣א תַזְכִּ֔ירוּ לֹ֥א יִשָּׁמַ֖ע עַל־פִּֽיךָ: (יד) שָׁלֹ֣שׁ רְגָלִ֔ים תָּחֹ֥ג לִ֖י בַּשָּׁנָֽה: (טו) אֶת־חַ֣ג הַמַּצּוֹת֘ תִּשְׁמֹר֒... 

Considering that the topic has genuinely changed to speaking of the Shabbos and holidays, this verse seems out of place. Further considering that most commentaries follow the same line of thinking, that this is a warning to not be a partner with idolators in business for they may force you to swear in the name of their god (or they might swear on account of you) – there doesn’t seem to be any connection to the holidays at all. 

Here is a sampling of some of the commentaries who think otherwise. We will regroup after reading their remarks. 

 Baal HaTurim: The reference to not mentioning other gods is connected to the 3 festivals to teach you that anyone who denigrates the festivals is considered as if serving foreign gods (based on Pesachim 118a). This idolatry is mentioned closest to the holiday of Pesach as if to suggest that “just as idolatry is forbidden from benefit in even the tiniest amount, so is Hametz forbidden on Pesach in even the tiniest amount.” (Pesachim 30a) 

Alshikh: “All that I told you” refers to the first two of the Ten Commandments – I am the Lord your God, and you shall not have any other gods before Me, not to make images or bow to/serve them – and now it is added that you shall not recall their names aloud. Through this you prevent the power of tumah from influencing the land. 

 Or HaChaim: The number of positive mitzvos is 248, and the number of negative ones are 365 (corresponding to the numbers of limbs and organs in the body). A person shouldn’t think that doing a certain number of mitzvos is sufficient to protect oneself from sin. Each mitzvah a person avoids (or sin one violates) has a negative impact on the organ/limb that it correspond to. As such, the number of fulfilled/guarded mitzvos helps guard oneself from idolatry, since rejecting idolatry is as if one agrees with all of the Torah. 

R Ramson Raphael Hirsch: This verse introduces us to the concept of a s’yag l’Torah – a fence protecting the Torah and its observance. 

In simple terms, then, this reference to avoiding speaking of idolatry being placed between a reference to Shabbos and all the other holidays may be coming to remind us of the distinction between Shabbos being described as 'כלו לה, and the holidays being considered as חצי לה' וחצי לכם. Shabbos is meant to be designated toward the service of God, while holidays are a time when we split our time – focusing halfways on God and the other half on our own enjoyment of the celebratory time. 

 It is entirely possible that if someone were to bring up an idol in the context of the resting time of a holiday that it may put a person on a bad path, or may take a person’s mind away from appreciating the Almighty favorably. 

The Torah is telling us, “Don’t go there.” The Torah is reminding us of the Ten Commandments. The Torah is presenting us with the importance of ALL the mitzvos. It is placing before us a protection for the land, so it is not invaded by foreign ideas, especially in a time when we are free to think and are not busied by our regular vocations and daily pursuits. 

Our challenge today is far less idolatry, but far more “distractions.” One could easily argue that our distractions, which are primarily technology and media, take us away from our spiritual pursuits, and would even take us away from our holiday observance if we are not careful. 

 Heaven knows that Alshich’s warning about tumah being brought in is most relevant. I remember as a child when one of the rebbeim came into our class and asked what we thought about allowing strangers into our living room conducting conversations that we don’t approve of, but allowing them to continue because we actually want to hear what they have to say, even if everything they say goes against our values? He told us that parable was what watching television was about (mostly referencing sitcoms and certain toxic talk shows).

 It may not always be true – sometimes it’s purely entertainment, informational, or educational. But can you imagine what our Shabbos and Yom Tov would look like if we hadn’t taken the bold move to say “this is not Shabbosdik” “We don’t use electricity in that way on Shabbos and Yom Tov.” “Though we could technically leave it on before Shabbos or Yom Tov, doing so would ruin the spirit of the day.” 

Let this verse forever serve as a reminder to us that even Shabbos and Yom Tov are targets for where idolatry can sneak its way in to destroy us. 

The Torah is telling us, DON’T TAKE THE BAIT. Remember who you are and don’t allow foreign influence to destroy that which you hold most precious and most dear. 

There is a time and place for almost everything. Shabbos and Yom Tov is about divesting from that which takes us away from holiness. The most unholy thing, the opposite of holiness, is idolatry and tumah. 

We should be blessed to keep ourselves as clean and pure as possible, especially when we are observing the holy days of Shabbos and Tom Tov.

Yisro: Adjudication and Compromise: Different Goals and Outcomes of Conflict Resolution

Parshat Yitro

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

In one of his essays on Parshas Yisro (“Justice or Peace?”) Rabbi Jonathan Sacks writes of the challenge Moshe’s father-in-law witnessed in the leader’s inability to process all of the people who came to him on the model day in question. In his suggestion to Moshe to delegate judgment responsibilities to others, Rabbi Sacks quotes Netziv’s analysis of methods a court can take, focusing on the Talmudic preference for pshara (compromise) through mediation. 

 This was an innovative solution because it went against Moshe’s innate ability to get to the core of an issue, and bring forth a ruling that saw through a case to its rights and wrongs. Moshe’s strength was justice, being able to discern a victor and one who must pay (or whatever the dispute concerned – who was in the right and who was less right or wrong). 

One of Yisro’s arguments was that Moshe was exhausted after a long day, and that if he would only delegate the responsibilities, the people would be able to get home sooner and go about their day. Rabbi Sacks rightly notes, the people weren’t exhausted! Only Moshe was! 

And why weren’t the people exhausted? Because they were coming to learn, to watch the process with others, to see Moshe’s greatness and to learn from it. 

In other words, Moshe delegating would thus be advantageous to him alone, giving him more free time, less cases to deal with. But insofar as the people go, they would have less of a connection to Moshe, they wouldn’t learn from him anymore… unless their particular dispute would make its way through the tiered system back to the man at the top of the chain. 

 How then, is this to their advantage? 

Because life is not only about seeing black and white – as Moshe did in judgment. Life is also about being able to come to a table, to realize that each side may have a valid claim, and that while one side might surely be more right, that doesn’t mean the side that is less right is totally in the wrong. In other words, sometimes compromise is better for everyone in the long run.

 Rabbi Sacks rightly notes “No one regarded Moshe as anything less than the greatest leader and prophet Israel has ever had. It is rather that no one individual can embody all the virtues necessary to sustain a people. A priest is not a prophet (with rare exception). A king needs different virtues than a saint. A military man is not a man of peace (though he can become one later in life).” 

In other words, we are not being critical of Moshe here. We are wondering if there are advantages to a different way, if Yisro’s suggestion has merit (and if so, how much) or if Moshe’s method is what is best for the people, even if it is quite taxing on Moshe. 

 Malbim notes on 18:13 that everyone stood around watching the proceedings because this was how they were engaged in “studying and learning of God’s laws.” This is irrespective of whether Yisro’s visit was before or after the giving of the Torah (as the debate goes) because even if the visit follows the chronology of the Torah (i.e. before the giving of the Torah), there were an unspecified number of laws and statutes that were given over in Marah. Surely some mitzvos were already made clear to the Bnei Yisrael, such as Shabbos, Bris Milah, Rosh Chodesh, Korban Pesach, as well as basics of living together no longer under Egyptian rule. 

In Malbim’s view, Moshe’s big concern was that no one (other than himself) had a handle on “the law” and their judgments, which would have to come about from their own logic and however they saw things, would not be accepted by the litigants. They would have to come Moshe anyway. 

Yisro, on the other hand, thought that Moshe was actually judging in that way himself! Yisro was unaware of a “law system” his son-in-law might be using, especially prior to Matan Torah! 

Malbim further notes that the verse describes the people as standing around Moshe, with the word עמד, while when Yisro questions him about it, Yisro describes their standing around him as נצב from morning until evening. The difference between the two words for standing, Malbim explains, is that עמד implies simply standing, the opposite of sitting. הצבה (the kind of action that is described as נצב) is how people stand in a situation that requires strengthening. The king’s guards, for example, are typically described as נצבים. His servants, on the other hand, are עמדים. Those who came to stand around are described by the Torah as עמדים, because they chose to stand in order to listen to Moshe’s teachings and rulings. Yisro looked at the people as נצבים because from his perspective each person really wanted to have his case heard and wanted to go home. In his mind, they needed strengthening to carry them through the day’s worth of proceedings. Yisro did not realize people were choosing to be there to bask in the light of Moshe’s illuminating teachings.

Moshe thus had to explain that people were coming for different possible reasons: 

1. To seek an answer from God, or to learn of the future 
2. Conflict resolution 
3. Remedial intervention – such as a person who knows he has damaged someone else’s property, might go to Moshe to find out what he owes
1. Sometimes both parties would go together                        
4. Sometimes people would come just to learn about the laws of God 

In verse 18:16 Moshe claims that he is not doing things based on his own facts and logic, but that he is works based on the חקי הא-לקים ואת תורותיו – God’s laws and teachings. 

 The Rabbis teach us how Moshe trained the judges who ultimately formed his tier system. We know nothing of how they operated as the Torah does not describe it beyond that Moshe hired people to fill these roles, a narrative which is presented a little differently in Devarim chapter 1:13-18. [Those differences are discussed by various commentators]

In an ideal world, this method that Moshe used should be one employed by all Jews today when it comes to conflict resolution. We should not be going to secular court. We should be going to Beit Din to settle disputes, or to a qualified rabbinic scholar who could judge a case on its merits, and bring about an equitable solution. Some cases might be black and white and clear. Most cases likely have an area of gray in them, lending themselves to some kind of compromise. [People like to go to secular court because they feel if they win they’ll get a much bigger payout, and it’s more enforceable than a Bet Din judgment/ruling.] 

The problem is that some Batei Din have a reputation for being corrupt. Some Batei Din have fees that prevent people from coming to them. And Batei Din are limited in their power in that they can issue hazmanot (invitations) to individuals, but they have no authority to enforce that a person show up. Even if they call someone a m’sarev l’din (someone who refuses to come to work out their difference with someone calling them to court), invariably that person will delegitimize the Bet Din and will use stronger social media tactics than the Bet Din is interested in engaging in. As such, the entire system is undermined by the flaws that are inherent in it. [Not to mention that sending several hazmanot and several warnings against being a m’sarev l’din can take several months.] There are certainly unscrupulous people who take advantage of others (these "others" would never go to secular court), but also feel that going to Bet Din is a waste of time and money. Which leaves conflict resolution as a matter remaining in limbo – some conflicts are thus never resolved, and two parties may have nothing to do with each other - for a long time or for the rest of their lives! - on account of this, because there is no resolution. 

I’ll conclude with a masterful story about Rabbi Meir Shapiro. When he was the new rabbi in Glina, two people who shared ownership of a certain road in the town each wanted the other to pay for the post-winter repairs of the road. After their dispute eventually involved most of the Jews in town, they decided to come to the new rabbi in town to test him in his ability to resolve their issue. 

When they presented their case to him, he saw right away that it wasn’t about the money, as each could afford to fix the road himself. It was about ego and about being right – each wanted the other guy to pay for it, each for his own reasons. 

 As his biographer Rav Yehoshua Baumol told it: 

“He ordered each of them to produce the full amount of money that it would cost to repair the road properly. He soon had in his hand twice the amount that was needed. Without another word, he gave the money to one of his trusted attendants with orders to deliver it to the managers of the Talmud Torah. The money, he explained, was his fee for trying the case, and it was to be used for the school’s upkeep. “Now,” he said, “I will decide your case. Did you ever study the Mishna?” They answered in the affirmative. “When you have a chance, take a look at the beginning of Shekalim. There you will find a plain ruling that on the 15th of Adar the roads and byways have to be repaired. Why on that day? By then spring has certainly come. The winter is over, with all the rain and snow that must have melted, which has quite certainly left the roads an impossible and impassable mess of misshapen mud dried hard. So the 15th of Adar is a fine time to get the pathways and byways properly fixed and made usable. 

“On whom, though, does the duty fall to get the job done? Like the other rulings in the Mishna there, it is obviously the obligation of the Bet Din. That means that the matter is no business of yours,” he said to the fellow on the right, “nor is it any business of yours,” to the fellow on the left, “but entirely my affair.” 

 And then he took the money out of his own purse, to give it to a trusted attendant 

 “Since today is the fast of Esther, that means today is the 13th and since today is Thursday, the 15th falls on Shabbos, and consequently, the work cannot be started till Sunday. But that is in a mere detail. On Sunday,” he ordered his attendant, “you bring all the laborers you need and set [them] to work.” 

The impression that this stunning decision made on the community was beyond words. Everyone realized that by this master stroke of his, the new Rav of Glina had hit the target perfectly. Resolved and gone was the long-standing conflict, which had begun to turn acrimonious, drawing in evermore members of the community to take sides, and make matters worse. Now peace and quiet could return to the Jewry of Glina .

Just as important was the fact that Rav Meir emerged, completely clean and unharmed, untouched, and uninvolved. Had his decision favored one of the two the other would likely have remained resentful, and perhaps would even turn into something of an enemy of the Rav. Now, both the antagonist, and the Rav, could all live in peace. Neither had won, neither had lost . [- “A Blaze in the Darkening Gloom”, p. 64-66]

 It also helps that Rav Meir had those kinds of resources, as he had wealthy in-laws who supported him in his early years. 

This story is unique in that money was not an issue to either litigant, and the “compromise” achieved actually cost both sides the amount of the repair. They saw their monies go to support Torah study, though, and therefore each felt his money went to a good cause, while neither ended up paying for the road repair. 

Moshe’s cases were different – he was judging for right and wrong. Yisro’s goals for outcomes were also different. He was looking for mediation and compromise. And the Bnei Yisrael’s goals were also different – they wanted to learn from their new Rebbe, Moshe Rabbenu. 

May we all have a similar desire to learn and grow. May we merit to see proper resolution of disputes, and may Bet Din find a way to be relevant and fair to all parties, so that disputes can be resolved in the proper halakhic way, with everyone emerging feeling heard and finding a path forward through compromise.

Going Up and Out of Egypt

 Parshat B'Shalach 

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

 Rephidim (a place referenced in Shmot 17) is synonymous with two events: (1) there was no water, and perhaps as a result of what the people did in response, testing God and wondering if He’s even there, and (2) the battle with Amalek. 

 In the context of the complaining about water, Moshe is asked why he took them out of Egypt (ג) וַיִּצְמָ֨א שָׁ֤ם הָעָם֙ לַמַּ֔יִם וַיָּ֥לֶן הָעָ֖ם עַל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר לָ֤מָּה זֶּה֙ הֶעֱלִיתָ֣נוּ מִמִּצְרַ֔יִם לְהָמִ֥ית אֹתִ֛י וְאֶת־בָּנַ֥י וְאֶת־מִקְנַ֖י בַּצָּמָֽא: 

 Notice that they ask לָ֤מָּה זֶּה֙ הֶעֱלִיתָ֣נוּ מִמִּצְרַ֔יִם – Why’d you bring us UP from Egypt? This is a seemingly odd phrase for when we think of the Exodus, we think of יציאת מצרים. God begins the Decalogue with אנכי ה' א-לקיך אשר הוצאתיך… Are we talking about going out of Egypt? Or Aliyah from מצרים – going up? 

 While one might think these words are interchangeable, the fact is they are different. They don’t mean the same thing, and the truth is that they don’t have the same connotation either. 

 Yetziah means leaving. Aliyah means going up. 

 Just to clarify, the phrase למה הֶעֱלִיתָ֣נוּ appears two times – here and in a complaint of Dasan and Aviram in Parshas Korach. In Parshas Chukas, when the people are complaining about water before the מי מריבה episode, they say twice למה העליתנו – He’elisoonoo. Why did you bring us up? 

 [In Parshas Chukas, Ibn Ezra notes that “He’elisoonoo” is a strange word. Obviously its vowelization is different than הֶעֱלִיתָ֣נוּ, but I couldn’t explain its difference otherwise beyond some subtlety in grammar.] 

 Which means that primarily at major moments of confronting Moshe over the Exodus, this term of ALIYAH MIMITZRAYIM is making an appearance. 

 Some commentaries (Ibn Ezra, Rabbenu Bachaye) note that since the wilderness and Canaan are north of Egypt, they’re simply noting a geographical move northward. This is certainly a definition of going up! But perhaps there is greater depth to the distinction. 

 A number of commentaries and Midrashim (see Midrash Sechel Tov) take the Aliyah depiction of this matter as a specific attack against Moshe, not for the Exodus (leaving Egypt), which everyone accepts as coming from God, but for the specific concept of העלאה, of raising up from Egypt, as if this was Moshe’s plan. And so the question becomes, what else are they complaining about with this word? Are they suggesting, for example, that since their “Aliyah” is Moshe’s fault, all of their religious commitments are Moshe’s fault? From whatever happened in Marah, to, as later complaints might include, Sinai, the Mishkan, and God’s role even in our destiny? Alshikh and Abravanel specifically identify their complaint against Moshe for putting the children and animals in harm’s way – because Pharaoh was long ago agreeing to let the adults go. And so, the argument goes, had you Moshe accepted that offer, we’d have left a long time ago and not put our children in this situation. Yes, we’d have left the kids in Egypt, but that simply means we’d have returned to Egypt! Wasn’t that the original plan anyway? So the Aliyah we are experiencing is YOUR fault, since God only recommended a 3-day journey at the outset! 

Or maybe, as Malbim puts it, they blamed Moshe for working alone, without the input and advice of the Zekenim (elders)! 

There is a small problem, however, in that God told Moshe at the burning bush to gather the elders, tell them God appeared to you, and tell them “וָאֹמַ֗ר אַעֲלֶ֣ה אֶתְכֶם֘ מֵעֳנִ֣י מִצְרַיִם֒” I will bring you UP from Egypt, and וְשָׁמְע֖וּ לְקֹלֶ֑ךָ – they will listen to you! 

Aliyah from Egypt was always part of God’s plan! The question is if the people knew or were aware of this, or if they simply accidentally co-opted a phrase in their complaining. [I am not sure of the answer…] 

Netziv, both in our parsha and in Parshas Chukas, focuses on this phrase and teaches us a profound lesson about what Aliyah Mimitzrayim is all about. 

 Netziv says their complaint was that they had to function in the world in a manner that was למעלה מן הטבע – above the laws of nature. So whoever wasn’t cut out for this kind of higher level living was lost at the lifestyle they were now exposed to. Miracle manna, miracle water, body needs that simply vanished – when you have heavenly bread and heavenly water it might just dissipate from the body without producing waste. After all, how could this perfect food have any “waste” in it? 

In Chukas, Netziv has them asking היינו שנהיה בדוקא אנשי מעלה הראוים להשגחה פרטית – they wondered what gave Moshe the impression that they were אנשי מעלה or that they could be אנשי מעלה who were deserving of such a high-level- spiritually-sustaining existence of supernatural sustenance. Why can’t you make it simple through not making it so simple? 

We need bread, we need a river. So let us make the things ourselves and eat them ourselves and gather water ourselves! 

To be אנשי מעלה – people who aim higher – is the task of the Jewish people. 

 קדשים תהיו כי קדוש אני – Be holy, for I [God] am Holy. 

Rabb Morris Joseph, a British rabbi from the turn of the previous century (he died in 1930) wrote in his book “Judaism as Creed and Life,” “Being chosen doesn’t mean that we are better, but that we ought to be.” 

It’s a good aphorism that models a particular kind of behavior, but perhaps it’s more important for us to remember not that we are better, but that we ought to be striving for higher and better. 

 While certainly everyone’s task in this world is personal improvement, every now and then someone laments to me about others’ public observances: some people are lax about washing, brachos, bentching, bracha acharona, people engage in gossip, or perhaps in general some don’t seem to care much about halakha or God. 

Obviously each person has his or her own relationship with God, but perhaps we ought to ask if we truly believe in God or whether we live this life because it’s most convenient or because it was how we were raised, rather than on account of a true conviction, or a belief in reward and punishment in the next world? 

 Each of us may benefit from asking the following questions: 

• What do I believe in? What do I want to believe in? 
• What choices do I make and what actions do I take to demonstrate my beliefs? 
• When I come to shul, do I turn off the phone and eliminate distractions, including talking to neighbors? 
• Do I pay attention to all the words of davening – such as when we sanctify God’s name in Kaddish and Kedusha? 
• Do I pay attention to the Torah reading? Am I listening as God speaks to me through the words of the Torah? 
• Do I believe that צדקה in both the charitable giving sense, and in the doing the right thing sense, is the way I’m supposed to behave always? After all, in the Sodom story, God chose to tell Avraham Avinu His plans because He knew that Avraham will be teaching his descendants לעשות צדקה ומשפט, to live out our creed of living for righteousness and justice. 
•  Do we seek out opportunities to learn more, or do we only perk up when an opportunity to learn something piques our interest because of a clever title? While it’s difficult to navigate a website like yutorah.org that has hundreds of thousands of lectures and shiurim, plenty of filters can be plugged in that you can really find whatever you want there – from history, to biographies of great Jews, to Jews in the entertainment industry, to of course every Halakha and Gemara under the sun. 

The Bnei Yisrael who complained to Moshe missed a particular opportunity in למה העליתנו. They did not want the burden of being אנשי מעלה, and as a result, Amalek came. 

 And what is Amalek? 

 The Slonimer Rebbe explains in Parshas Ki Setze that the commandment for remembering Amalek זכור את אשר עשה לך is a reminder that we have a spiritual battle against evil. Amalek is the ultimate distraction from being and becoming אנשי מעלה. The mitzvah is written in the singular because this battle is every individual’s battle – each of us comes to our relationship with God on our own basis, based on our particular needs, understandings, and of course our own output. The Slonimer Rebbe said Remember that YOU the individual faces this battle with Amalek, because each person has different challenges. 

 It is Eisav’s descendants saying “What do you need God for? Come live with us! Disappear as a unique identity!” It’s Amalek enticing the נחשלים, the weakhearted and saying “Join our way! No rules! Anything and everything goes.” 

For us, for our ancestors who were told at the splitting of the Sea, התיצבו וראו את ישועת ה', see God’s salvation, the goal of our connection is ויאמינו בה' ובמשה עבדו – to believe in God and in Moshe and His servant

 אנשי מעלה. Being people who ascend. Being people who are מעלים בקדש. Let us take the slip of the tongue of those who challenged God and say not למה העליתנו – why did you take us up from Egypt, and instead say “How privileged we are to be elevated.”

 ברוך הוא א-לקינו שבראנו לכבודו והבדילנו מן הטועים ונתן לנו תורת אמת. 

If indeed we are privileged as we say in עלינו – שלא עשנו כגויי הארצות - that we are different than others, our difference is in our being אנשי מעלה, people who are always an upward trajectory to be closer and closer to the Almighty. 

Rephidim’s challenges are therefore a call to all of us to remember our calling – not to get distracted by the things which take us away from our life goals. May we merit to live up to our creed, and embrace our lot of being אנשי מעלה.

The Darkness of Depression – a Modern Plague

Parshat Bo

by Rabbi Avi Billet 

The Plague of Darkness comes upon Egypt without warning, and the Torah describes it in this way. 

 21 God said to Moshe, “Stretch your hands toward the heavens, and there will be darkness on the land of Egypt, and the darkness will be tangible.” 22 And so Moshe stretched his hand heavenward, and there was a thick darkness in all of the land of Egypt for three days. 23 No person saw his fellow, and no person rose from his place for three days, and the for the children of Israel, there was light in their dwellings.

 שמות פרק י (כא) וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יְקֹוָ֜ק אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֗ה נְטֵ֤ה יָֽדְךָ֙ עַל־הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם וִ֥יהִי חֹ֖שֶׁךְ עַל־אֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם וְיָמֵ֖שׁ חֹֽשֶׁךְ: (כב) וַיֵּ֥ט מֹשֶׁ֛ה אֶת־יָד֖וֹ עַל־הַשָּׁמָ֑יִם וַיְהִ֧י חֹֽשֶׁךְ־אֲפֵלָ֛ה בְּכָל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם שְׁלֹ֥שֶׁת יָמִֽים: (כג) לֹֽא־רָא֞וּ אִ֣ישׁ אֶת־אָחִ֗יו וְלֹא־קָ֛מוּ אִ֥ישׁ מִתַּחְתָּ֖יו שְׁלֹ֣שֶׁת יָמִ֑ים וּֽלְכָל־בְּנֵ֧י יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל הָ֥יָה א֖וֹר בְּמוֹשְׁבֹתָֽם: 

A few questions stand out. In other plagues, Moshe is told either to stretch his hand or staff, and he, in turn, always uses his staff. This time, he is told to stretch his hand and he stretches his hand (!). Why? How many days of darkness were there – 3 (and verses 22-23 are referring to the same 3 days), or 6, and the verse speaks of two different 3-day periods? If the darkness was thick, wouldn’t telling us that people did not see each other for 3 days be superfluous? 

Or HaChaim addresses some of these questions in his commentary, noting that the darkness was a spiritual entity (base on Tehillim 18:12), and thus had to be treated with respect. This could only be achieved with the soft touch of the hand, rather than through the waving of a stick. 

Or HaChaim quotes a Midrash that the darkness came from Gehinnom, which he takes to suggest that there were actually two kinds of darkness: the first set of three days in which people could not see one another, and the second set of three days in which people could not rise from their place. 

 Continuing with his explanation of the light that the children of Israel had, he quotes another Midrash that describes how in the world the come the wicked will be enveloped in darkness, whereas the righteous will be illuminated by His light. 

Whether there were 3 days of one kind of darkness and 3 days of another kind, or there were only 3 days altogether which are described in two different ways, there is room to suggest that there are different ways the Egyptians experienced darkness. A pshat understanding would simply follow a translation that the darkness was intense and inhibited both sight and movement. Understandably, the “thickness” of darkness inhibiting movement is hard for us to imagine, unless we can imagine a Hamsin (some kind of sandstorm) or a very difficult humidity that simply zapped all the strength out of the Egyptians (neither of those are pshat, and I am not suggesting that’s what brought darkness). At the same time, this would all be irrelevant if the comments of Or HaChaim are meant for us to understand that this darkness was other-worldly. But the degree of the darkness bringing an inability to see and move is exactly what the text says. 

Another kind of darkness is a darkness some people experience when sitting on the pit of despair, namely a darkness of Depression. 

According to the Mayo Clinic, the following are signs of Major Depression Disorder.

 • Feelings of sadness, tearfulness, emptiness or hopelessness

 • Angry outbursts, irritability or frustration, even over small matters

 • Loss of interest or pleasure in most or all normal activities…

 • Sleep disturbances, including insomnia or sleeping too much

 • Tiredness and lack of energy, so even small tasks take extra effort

 • Reduced appetite and weight loss or increased cravings for food and weight gain

 • Anxiety, agitation or restlessness

 • Slowed thinking, speaking or body movements

 • Feelings of worthlessness or guilt, fixating on past failures or self-blame

 • Trouble thinking, concentrating, making decisions and remembering things

 • Frequent or recurrent thoughts of death, suicidal thoughts, suicide attempts or suicide

 • Unexplained physical problems, such as back pain or headaches

While I am not arguing that all of these applied to the Egyptians, surely some of them did. Pharaoh may have been stubborn and may have had a hardened heart but he was likely experiencing some of these symptoms as well. 

 For all purposes, the plague of Darkness was the last plague from which people could emerge and say “Pharaoh, enough is enough. How far do you want this to go? Do you want people to die? Everything else has happened to us, and that seems to be the logical next step!” We have seen such arguments coming to Pharaoh from his own people over the course of the plagues. Sometimes Pharaoh listens, and sometimes he does not. He has offered for Israel to leave on a number of occasions, but he has also walked back those offers when the terms of agreement weren’t to his liking, or when plagues that seemed to be driving his allowance for Exodus came to their conclusions. But at least, until now, Egypt could recover from the plagues as none of them caused the mayhem that a plague of death would cause. 

Darkness was certainly real, but there is the other element of darkness, an ominous feeling, a premonition perhaps, that this darkness is a prelude to a different kind of darkness, one from which there is no return. It is that feeling that is contributing to people’s inability to get up and move. They know their king is stubborn. They know he is not letting Israel go. They have seen what the God of the Hebrews is capable of, and they are licked. They don’t want this fight anymore. But what could they do? The people were so controlled, so owned, they could not mount a revolution and overthrow the Pharaoh. They had to roll with the punches that God was throwing their way, and with the inability to challenge Pharaoh any more than through simply asking “How long will you allow this to go on?” 

Depression is real. It can be debilitating, it can cause a person to feel unable to do simple tasks, and sometimes can prevent a person from even getting out of bed for days or weeks at a time. It is not something a person can “snap out of” or “get over” – sometimes real intervention, help, a plan, goals are needed in order to get a person to a place of balanced equilibrium. 

The important thing is to recognize it, to accept it as a reality, and to seek help in order to begin to heal and to get to a place where recovery is on the horizon. 

We often ask people, “How are you?” and we don’t stick around to hear the answer. Or, if the answer is anything other than “I am great! Thank you!” we are not interested in hearing it. Good friends can see through the “front” that some people put up when they’re actually not OK and might have the guts to say “You don’t seem OK. What is going on?” If we can tap into that pain – which is sometimes identifiable, but sometimes unclear as to its source – we may be able to help someone who seems helpless, someone who really needs intervention but does not know where to turn.

As a mohel, I sometimes encounter parents who are extremely anxious about the bris. I often tell them that their anxiety and moodiness is quite identifiable, and will be over after the bris, when you see your baby is fine. And that is just about how it always goes!

Were it only that easy to know what is bothering people, what causes their bouts with anxiety or Depression, it would be a much simpler world – with simple solutions to what are sometimes big challenges, but never insurmountable. 

Some people experienced varying degrees of Depression in the immediate aftermath of October 7 in Israel, wondering and worrying over what the future of the Jewish people in Israel can actually look like with barbarous enemies living on their doorstop, more out-in-the-open than ever about their goals and ambitions of seeing every Jew removed from Israel in one form or another. Some may have sought intervention, some managed to pull through, and many may still need assistance in coming round the corner from those terrible days and personal feelings. 

 In the case of Egypt, the Depression people may have felt was beyond out of their hands. They were at the will and whim of a stubborn dictator who let his own ego get in the way of concern for his people and what he was doing to their own prospects for the future. Did all of Egypt deserve the fate of the plagues, especially the coming Plague of the First Born? It is hard to know with certainty. But as in modern warfare, the way an enemy capitulates and gives up is when leadership no longer has the support of the people, because the civilian population has been vanquished and no longer wish for the fight to go on. The Egyptian population were helpless and suffered as a result. Their Depression couldn’t be treated – it was a lead in to the almost-worst-plague imaginable (worse would have been even more death than “only” the firstborn, unless the “firstborn” was the absolute worst because of how antiquity valued the firstborn and its stance as being representative of the fate of a nation). 

May those who experience this modern plague of Darkness find healing, and may those who are watching a friend or loved one cope and find healing be sensitive and supportive through that process.

P'Dut - (פדת) - Redemption From Three Exiles

Parshat Va'era 

by Rabbi Avi Billet

 One word for ‘redemption’ – פדת – is often translated as ‘distinction.’ Rabbi Sholom of Belz (as quoted by Rabbi Scheinbaum in his Peninim Al HaTorah vol 14 – all quotes below are from Rabbi Scheinbaum) noted that the word פדת appears three times in Tanakh. The first is in our parsha, 8:19, when a distinction is made between the Israelites and the Egyptians in a plague of Arov. The second is in Tehillim 111:9 – referencing a redemption that came upon His people. The third is in Tehillim 130 – Shir Hama'alos Mima'amakim – כי עם ה' החסד והרבה עמו פדת – with Him (God) is kindness, and abundant redemption. 

He suggested that these three forms of redemption correspond with three different kinds of galus - three kinds of feelings of exile. 

 The first is the most obvious, when a Jew is exiled among non-Jews. Unfortunately, we often lose sight of the reality of this exile, because we become so comfortable in our own existence that we don’t think about the fact that we are in galus. Even though we have our shuls and our schools and our kosher stores and restaurants, and we can walk around in most places freely, openly Jewish, the fact is that our focus is not even close to 100% on Torah pursuits. 

Torah pursuits would include living in the land of Israel, working the land to fulfill all mitzvos associated with the land. It would also include mindful and intentional living to focus on our relationship with God through Torah study and mitzvah fulfillment. We are all very distracted from what should be our pursuits in what should be our God-focused goals in life. This is an outgrowth of being in a non-Jewish culture, with all its bells and whistles and technology. 

The second kind of exile is the one imposed by a Jew on another Jew. “When Jews disparage and hurt each other verbally, and even physically, we have a bitter galus that is far worse than when the persecution is directed at us by gentiles.” We need look no further at the division in Israel pre October 7 and how enemies of our people used that division to their advantage. But it is more important for us to consider if we ever engage in that kind of disparagement towards others – perhaps because of varying ways we disagree with one another in politics, in life choices, in how we diet, make medical decisions. It would be a beautiful utopia if everyone agreed about everything and every life-path chosen worked for everyone. But then we’d be robots, not human, and we would be missing so much of the beauty that comes with seeing others for who they are, and even learning from their perspectives and their ways – even if our own path works for us at this time. 

 This kind of exile is demonstrated through simply seeing another as “the other” and not seeing the soul of the person who is worthy of respect. [I have different words for actual criminals who hurt people and ruin their lives.] If our shared collective goal is to serve God and to be among people who share a commitment to the same Torah, and if there are many recognized paths for how to achieve those goals, then it doesn’t seem that this kind of exile – pinning ourselves against ourselves – needs to be an exile we ought to want to stay in. 

 The third kind of exile is the Jew who is in exile within himself. “The Jew who has no control over himself is in a deep exile. He can ascend from the depths of his self-inflicted exile only through his own efforts. It takes courage, strength, faith and incredible siyata dishmaya (assistance from heaven)…” 

We pray for this daily in the blessing of ראה נא וענינו, which is largely viewed as a blessing asking God to heal us from our spiritual maladies and ailments. It’s more to give us a Refuas HaNefesh – a healing of the soul, before we even approach the healing of the body. 

A body can usually heal relatively quickly. A tormented soul can take years to heal, if ever. 

We find that when Moshe appears on the scene in our Parsha, long after the people believed he had been sent by God at the end of Chapter 4, that they aren’t listening to him. While it is clear that their work is getting in their way of being able to pay attention – ולא שמעו אל משה מקצר רוח ומעבודה קשה – the fact that they had believed Moshe was sent by God seems to have been forgotten. 

This is the downside of being in a personal exile within oneself. 

 Viktor Frankl famously observed that those who had the best chance of survival in a concentration camp were those who had not only not given up on life but had things to look forward to. Some may have had a family member they believed was alive and whom they’d find after the war. Some had research to do, books to write, songs to compose. On the other side, he noted that when he was in Auschwitz at the end of 1944, the highest concentration of natural deaths were at the end of 1944, among people who had help out hope that they’d return home for Christman or New Years. (Obviously he’s not only talking about Jewish prisoners.) 

And so we are reminded that there are many things that can drag us into a personal exile. Some people are distraught over the war in Israel. We get a shot in the heart every time we hear of the falling of another holy, precious, beautiful IDF soldier. Some people have family members who are ill or ailing. Some people have trouble with a child or grandchild, or with an elderly parent whose care has become a particular challenge. 

 The strength of community is found when we gather, and when we give ourselves the chance to share our difficulties and our challenges. 

 For Moshe, who went through his own struggles of acceptance in Pharaoh’s eyes and in the eyes of the people, as well as his own development in his relationship with God, life was clearly a journey that included much struggle and ended with the most incredible relationship with God. Even his relationship to the people evolved from being a stranger to their greatest advocate, defender and protector. 

 May we work our way through the self-imposed personal exile, through the exile of not getting along, and may God help us through the final exile of struggling with enemy nations who remain hell-bent on the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people. May He do to them as He did to Egypt – deliver us from their evil plans so they may not bother us again for the remainder of time.