PHILOTORAH



May HaShem protect our soldiers and the hostages; may He send Refu'ah Sh'leima to the many injured; may He console the bereaved families and
all of Israel, and may He end this war with success and peace for Klal Yisrael.



YERUSHALAYIM in/out times for Parshat Pi-N'CHAS


21 Tamuz 5784 <> July 26-27, '24


7:05PM <> PLAG (earliest) 6:14PM  <<>>  8:20PM R' Tam <> 8:57PM


For other locales, click on the Z'MANIM link



CALnotes


Shiv'a Asar b'Tamuz

Tuesday, July 23rd is the 17th of Tamuz. Use 4:25am for the beginning of the fast. It ends in Jerusalem at 8:12pm (for other locales, check the calendar link).

This mishna in Masechet Taanit (4:6) tells us that five calamities occurred to our ancestors on the 17th of Tamuz and five on Tish'a b'Av. On 17 Tamuz, the (first) Luchot were broken (i.e. the sin of the golden calf), the daily korbanot (morning and afternoon lambs) ceased (prior to the first Churban), the city (Jerusalem) was breached (prior to the destruction of the second Beit HaMikdash; the breach of Jerusalem the first time was on 9 Tamuz), Apostimus burned the Torah (no certainty who he was or what year this happened), and an idol was placed in the Heichal (main sanctuary of the Beit HaMikdash).

Interesting - and important - to note that of the five calamities listed for Shiv'a Asar b'Tamuz, four of them are related to Churban Beit HaMikdash in some way, and the first - is an event that occurred in the time of Dor HaMidbar, when Bnei Yisrael had just left Egypt.

Doubly interesting is that we can say the same thing about the five calamities associated with Tish'a b'Av - four are connected to the Churban and the first on the list - the Sin of the Spies - belongs to Dor HaMidbar.

While the Three Weeks (a.k.a. Bein HaMeitzarim) is the mourning period for the destructions of the Batei Mikdash, we need also to focus on the 'foundation' calamities which opened the door, so to speak) for other calamities to occur.

It can be said that a building - any building, but especially The Building - that has a flawed foundation, cannot last forever.

Cheit HaEigel and Cheit HaMeraglim indicated the existence of flaws in us - the People of Israel. The only way to guarantee that the next Beit HaMikdash will be part of the Geula Sh'leima, is to perfect ourselves.

Shiv'a Asar b'Tamuz (and the other fast days) is not just for not eating and drinking. 

It is a day for serious introspection and T'shuva. We are promised by HKBH, via the Navi, that the fast days associated with the Churban will become Yamim Tovim - as Rabbi Sprecher z"l like to say, with the addition of the letter "e", the fast days will become feast days.

It is up to each of us to do our share in preparing and erasing the causes of the Churban, by the aforementioned T'shuva and the spread of Torah and Mitzvot and Chesed throughout the Jewish World.



A different question

Why will 17 Tamuz and 9 Av become Yamim Tovim in the future? We can understand that they will no longer be sad, mournful days - but why will they become festivals? They should just become ordinary calendar dates.

A long time ago, I heard a beautiful explanation from Rabbi Ephraim Sprecher z"l.

What would 17 Tamuz have been without CHEIT HA-EIGEL, without the sin of the golden calf?

Picture this: 40 days after the day of Revelation at Sinai, the people eagerly awaited Moshe's return from his one-on-one with G-d. Finally, the wait was over. Moshe descends Har Sinai with the LUCHOT EVEN (Tablets of Stone) in hand and with the teachings of Torah and Mitzvot ready to be transmitted to Bnei Yisrael.

Can you imagine the celebration of that day, as the completion of that which began with ANOCHI HASHEM ELOKECHA...

We, Bnei Yisrael, cheated the 17th of Tamuz out of its festive nature that it should have had. That festive nature will be restored with the Geula Sh'leima.

Similarly, for Tish'a b'Av. Here's what should have been. 12 scouts, each a leader of his tribe, return to the people after a 40 days tour of the Land of Israel. They each express their impressions of the beautiful land and outdo each other in praising G-d for the special gift the people would soon be receiving.

Imagine how joyous that day would be. G-d took us out of Egypt to bring us to Eretz Yisrael and to give us the Torah on the way.

We cheated 9 Av big time! It should have been a joyous day of celebration - and it yet will be!

May we be privileged to merit and witness the restoration of the FASTS that commemorate the Churban, and see the E returned to each date (another way that Ephraim used to say it) when we will celebrate the FEASTS of the 17th of Tamuz and the 9th of Av respectively.



More in Tamuz...

15 Tamuz - Chur, son of Miriam and Kalev, was killed when he attempted to dissuade the Israelites from demanding a golden calf. (Some say it was 16 Tamuz.)

Yahrzeit of R' Chayim ben Moshe Attar, author of the Ohr HaChayim.

16 Tamuz - Czarina Anne ordered the expulsion of all Jews from Little Russia, 1740.

Pompey captured Jerusalem in 63BCE. This was the first military confrontation between Rome and Judea. This gives a connection to 9 Tamuz with both the First and the Second Beit HaMikdash.

17 Tamuz - See above

Yahrzeit of R' Yehuda ben Asher (son of the ROSH), 1349.

4000 Jews were killed in Toledo, Spain, in riots that broke out on Shiva Asar b'Tamuz, 1391.

American Independence, July 4th, 1776, was on the fast day. What does that say? Possibly, it serves as a ray of good light that shines through the darkness of our national day of mourning.

4000 Jews of the ghetto of Bialystok were shot, 1941.

The Nazis decreed the liquidation of the Kovno ghetto, 1944.

18 Tamuz - King Louis IX (St. Louis) decreed, 1269, that all Jews must wear the yellow badge, known as the badge of shame. Almost seven centuries before the Sho'ah.

19 Tamuz - 6000 Lithuanian Jews were killed, 1941.

Yahrzeit of R' Yitzchak HaLevi Herzog, first chief rabbi of the State of Israel, 1959.

20 Tamuz - Yahrzeit of Theodore Herzl, 1904.

21 Tamuz - Jews were barred from living in Brazil, 1567.

Many Jews lost their lives in Vilna in riots, 1795.

The remains of 25 members of the Masada community were interred with full honors on Masada, 1969 (I happened to have been there on the occasion.)

"More in Tamuz" excerpted from Day by Day in Jewish History by Abraham P. Bloch (1983)



PINCHAS

41st of the 54 sedras; 8th of 10 in Bamidbar

Written on 280 lines (rank: 2nd)

35 Parshiyot; 10p 25s (2nd most)

168 p'sukim - 2nd (2nd in Bamidbar)

1887 words - 9th (2nd in Bamidbar)

7853 letters - 4th (2nd in Bamidbar)

Second shortest p'sukim in the Torah, wordwise. Longest words in the Torah (on average). 49th of 54 in length of p'sukim, letterwise. Second longest sedra, pasuk-wise. These factors combine to explain the different ranks above.



MITZVOT

Contains 6 of the 613 mitzvot, all positive. One of only six sedras that have only positive mitzvot.



Aliya-by-Aliya Sedra Summary

[P>] and [S>] indicate start of a parsha p'tucha or s'tuma. X:Y is Perek:Pasuk of the beginning of the parsha; (Z) is the number of p'sukim in the parsha.

Numbers in [square brackets] are the Mitzva-count of Sefer HaChinuch AND Rambam's Sefer HaMitzvot. A=ASEI; L=LAV (prohibition). X:Y is the perek & pasuk from which the mitzva comes.



Concerning the strange transliteration of the name of this week' sedra - pi-N'CHAS. English speakers will usually call someone with that name, PIN-chas, which is doubly inaccurate. The NUN has a SH'VA NA under it and belongs to the second syllable, not the first. And the accent is on that second syllable, not the first.
As to correct accenting of names, native English speakers are notorious about misaccenting them. MO-sheh, YITZ-chak, YAA-kov, YO-sef and so on - all wrongly accented. But totally acceptable in a colloquial way.
Israelis get most names accented properly. I have a grandson named yo-na-TAN. If I accidently slip and call him YO-na-tan, my daughter corrects me.
(Politely and respectfully, of course.) 
Same for my newest grandchild - Avigayil Bracha. Americans would say BRA-cha. Correct is b'ra-CHA.



Kohen - First Aliya - 13 p'sukim - 25:10-26:4 

[P> 25:10 (6)] When Pinchas killed Zimri and Kozbi, a tremendous controversy erupted among the people as to whether his actions were correct or criminal. This week's sedra begins with G-d "testifying" to the correctness of what Pinchas did. First, because of what Pinchas did, the plague that had broken out, stopped. Second, the Torah repeatedly identifies Pinchas as the grandson of Aharon HaKohen. Third, G-d places His stamp of approval upon Pinchas by giving him "the covenant of the eternal kehuna" and the "covenant of peace". Perhaps, without G-d's seal of approval, the controversy would have continued.

SDT: A scribal tradition is to write the VAV in the word SHALOM with a break. Peace that results from violence, even required and approved violence, is defective. (Just one possible idea.)

Other commentaries look at the unusual VAV as allowing the word SHALOM to be read also as SHALEIM, complete. This relates to the Kohein, who must be without blemish in order to serve in the Mikdash.

[P> 25:16 (3.23)] Next, G-d tells Moshe to go to war against Midyan in revenge for their seduction of Israel to the worship of Baal Peor. (The battle does not take place until next sedra, the rest of Pinchas is a digression of sorts.) It is after the plague...

[P> 26:1* (10.77)] (this parsha break comes in the middle of a pasuk - unusual, but there are others.) G-d commands Moshe and Elazar that a new census be taken of the people. 

The counting of the people at this point has several functions. Rashi says that after the plague(s) that devastated the people, G-d wants to count them as a shepherd would count his sheep after wolves attacked the flock. Second, having just been commanded to prepare to fight against Midyan, a census of men of military age is necessary. Third and most significantly, it is these people who will fight for Eretz Yisrael, and it is to these people that the Land will be apportioned (but based on the original post-Exodus census).

SDT: Moav was the partner of Midyan and should have been included in this avenging war. Some explain that Moav was spared this battle in the merit of the future Ruth. Other commentaries explain that there was a significant difference between Moav and Midyan. Moav was afraid of Israel. They feared that their land would be conquered by them (us). That is why they wanted to fight against us. Midyan agreed to help Moav because of their desire to destroy the Jewish People. They went as far as using their women to seduce the Israelites to immoral and idolatrous behavior. G-d's command of revenge is directed at the latter type of enemy.



Levi - Second Aliya - 47 p'sukim - 26:5-51

Longest 2nd-Aliya in the Torah, tied with Ki Tisa's. Both are tied for 3rd place for all Aliyot in the Torah. There are three different whole sedras with fewer p'sukim than this aliya.

In preparation for conscripting an army to fight Midyan, a new census is taken. The Torah lists each of the tribes, their family sub-units, and the number of males of military age.

In addition to this information, it is interesting to note the "extra" material mentioned in this portion - such as...

Under Reuven, the Torah tells us about Datan and Aviram who, with Korach, were swallowed up by the ground. The Torah then makes a point of telling us that Korach's sons did not die. Korach was from Levi. The inclusion of the sons of Korach at this point is not of census value, but does teach us the power of T'shuva. Korach's sons did not follow in their father's ways. They were (semi-) righteous. 

Generally, the family units of a tribe are based on the sons of the sons of Yaakov. In Reuven's case, we have Chanoch, Palu, Chetzron, and Karmi, giving Reuven a total of 43,730. Palu's son, Eliav, is mentioned because his sons were N'mu'el, Datan and Aviram.

One more observation...

Reuven is often called B'CHOR YISRAEL. This is noteworthy in light of the fact that Reuven "lost" the status of firstborn to three younger brothers. The Kehuna went to Levi, the kingship was destined to go the Yehuda, and the double portion of the B'chor went to Yosef. Yet the Torah repeatedly calls Reuven the B'chor of Yisrael.

Reuven's count dropped 2770 since the first counting in the Midbar. (To be expected, because of their involvement in the Korach rebellion.)

[S> 26:12 (3)] Shimon: note the relatively small number. Members of the tribe of Shimon were the main victims of the plague that followed the Zimri (one of the leaders of Shimon) affair. Shimon: 22,200. Down 37,100!

Shimon's family units are from N'mu'el (a different one), Yamin, Yachin, Zerach, and Sha'ul.

[S> 26:15 (4)] Gad: 40,500. Down 5150. The families from Gad's sons are Tz'fon, Chagi, Shuni, Ozni, Eiri, Arodi, Ar'eili.

[S> 26:19 (4)] Yehuda: 76,500. Up 1900. Yehuda's families are from sons Sheila, Peretz, Zerach. From Peretz come the families of Chetzron and Chamul. Yehuda's first two sons Er and Onan, who died childless, are mentioned at this point in the Torah.

[S> 26:23 (3)] Yissachar: One of his sons is identified as Yashuv. Commentaries say that he is Yov, as recorded in Vayigash. Yov was an inappropriate name (of pagan origin). The extra SHIN that was added to his name is symbolically taken from his father's name - spelled with two S(H)INs but pronounced as if there is only one. The families of Yissachar are Tola, Puva (family name is Puni), Yashuv, and Shimron. Yissachar: 64,300. Up 9900.

[S> 26:26 (2)] Zevulun: 60,500. Up 3100. Families are from sons Sered, Eilon, and Yachl'eil.

[S> 26:28 (7)] Notice that the sons of Yosef are listed as Menashe and Efrayim - in that order. Although this is birth order, it is unusual to find Menashe mentioned first.

Also note the great increase in the population of Menashe, and the decrease in the population of Efrayim. The increase in Menashe is considered to be related to the fact that their tribe was given land on both sides of the Jordan. They were not the ones who asked to settle on the east side of the Jordan -- that was Reuven and Gad. Menashe was sent along, so to speak, to keep an eye on the other two tribes. It would therefore be unfair to give them a smaller portion of Eretz Yisrael (west of the Jordan). Their increase in population got them a "regular" share on the west side in addition to their territory on the east bank.

Menashe: here we are introduced to the five daughters of Tz'lofchad. We will hear more from them shortly. Menashe: 52,700. Increase of 20,500. By the way, Efrayim was mentioned before Menashe in that earlier census. Menashe's sons (family units) are Machir, Machir's son Gil'ad, Gil'ad's sons I'ezer, Cheilek, Asri'el, Shechem, Sh'mida, Cheifer, and Cheifer's son Tz'lofchad. 

[S> 26:35 (3)] Efrayim: 32,500. Down 8000. Efrayim's families are from Shutelach, Becher, Tachan. And Shutelach's son Eiran. The Torah then says again that these two (Menashe and Efrayim) are the children of Yosef.

[S> 26:38 (4)] Binyamin: Families from sons Bela, Ashbel, Achiram, Sh'fufam, Chupam. Bela's sons Ard and Naaman. Binyamin: 45,600. Up 10,200. Note: Back in Vayigash, Binyamin is recorded as having 10 sons: Bela, Becher, Ashbel, Geira, Naaman, Eichi, Rosh, Mupim, Chupim, and Ard.

[S> 26:42 (2)] Dan: One son, Shucham, family name Shuchami. Previously, Dan's son is called Chushim. Dan: 64,400. Up 1700.

Note that Binyamin's ten sons produced a smaller tribe than the one son of Dan. This is considered as a(nother) lesson that we cannot second-guess G-d. He has an agenda, we do what we do, but He "calls the shots".

[S> 26:44 (4)] Asher: Note the rare inclusion of a daughter - Serach bat Asher. Great longevity is attributed to her, and she is considered the bridge between Yaakov and his sons on the one hand, and the new nation of Israel that emerged from Egyptian slavery. Serach was alive throughout the entire Egyptian experience, and then some. Asher's total: 53,400. Up 11,900, comes from sons Yimna, Yishvi, B'ri'a. B'ri'a's sons Chever and Malki'el. 

[S> 26:48 (4)] Naftali: Yachtz'eil, Guni, Yeitzer, Shileim. 45,400. Down 8000.

And, within this Naftali parsha we are presented with the total for Bnei Yisrael: 601,730. Down 1820 from the 603,550 following the Exodus.



Shlishi - Third Aliya - 19 p'sukim - 26:52-27:5

[P> 26:52 (5)] It is to these people that the Land will be apportioned. The actual distribution of land will be done by (Divine) lottery and will involve this census and the earlier one.

[S> 26:57 (9)] The Torah next details the family tree of Levi (whose Tribe does not receive land). Specific attention is paid to Amram's family - namely, his wife Yocheved (daughter of Levi), Moshe, Aharon and his sons, and daughter/sister Miriam.

The Torah next states that no one in this national census was in the previous census except for Kalev and Yehoshua.

[S> 27:1 (5)] The daughters of Tz'lofchad (identified here as 6th generation from Yosef, an unusually long ancestry to present) approach Moshe, Elazar HaKohen, the leaders of the Tribes, and the People, and petition for property in the Land of Israel for themselves because their father had no sons. They emphasize that their father was not part of Korach's rebellion but died for his own sins.

Tradition tells us that Tz'lofchad was the "wood-gatherer" who was executed for public desecration of the Shabbat. Had he been part of Korach's rebellion, he would have been considered a MOREID B'MALCHUT, one who rebels against the king, and would have forfeited any claim to land. But in his situation, his property still goes to his heirs.

Moshe appeals to G-d for a decision in their case. (Commentaries say that the details of the laws of inheritance momentarily escapes Moshe's memory, either as punishment for an inappropriate comment he had made, or to give honor to these "lovers of the Land" - Tz'lofchad's daughters - by having the laws of inheritance presented "to them"... or both.)

To clarify: The laws of inheritance - as all of the Torah's mitzvot - were taught by G-d to Moshe to transmit to Bnei Yisrael, during the 40 days and 40 nights following the day of Revelation at Sinai, the day of Matan Torah. They were subsequently taught to the People by Moshe, in the course of the wandering period in the Midbar. 

The Laws of Inheritance were NOT an afterthought by G-d (no such thing) in answer to the challenge of the daughters of Tz'lofchad. 

The Laws of Inheritance (DINEI N'CHALOT) are part of Torah MiSinai and were first introduced to the People at the point, following the census and the Torah's statement of LA-EILEH TEICHALEIK ET HAARETZ - to these (people) you will distribute the Land.



R'vi'i - Fourth Aliya - 18 p'sukim - 27:6-23

[P> 27:6 (6)] G-d's answer to the daughters of Tz'lofchad is in the affirmative - they will acquire both their father's share and part of their grandfather's share (specifically a double portion of Chefer's allotment, since Tz'lofchad was Chefer's b'chor. Note that both Chefer and Tz'lofchad were among those who left Egypt - males 20 and up, and therefore their heirs are to receive their allotments).

Furthermore, the laws of inheritance [400, A248 27:8] are hereby set down as follows:

A man's son(s) inherit from him. If there are no sons, his daughters inherit. (When a man has sons and daughters, his sons inherit and are responsible to support the daughters, even if it means begging door-to-door to do so.) A man without children is inherited by his father, then his brothers (if his father is not alive), and if there are no brothers (or sisters), then his paternal uncles (or aunts), and then by the closest relatives along paternal lines.

[P> 27:12 (3)] G-d next tells Moshe to ascend Har HaAvarim and view the Land into which he (Moshe) will not go. Moshe is then to prepare for his death.

[S> 27:15 (9)] VAYDABEIR MOSHE EL HASHEM LEIMOR - "And Moshe spoke to G-d saying."

This unique variation of the most common pasuk in the Torah, creates a dramatic mood as we wait to hear what Moshe is about to say to G-d. Will he ask for his life? Will he ask to be permitted even a brief excursion into the beloved Land of Israel?

Moshe Rabeinu asks that a suitable leader be appointed to take his place.

A true leader is concerned first and foremost with his charges - this is part of the legacy of Moshe Rabeinu.

G-d's response to Moshe's request is immediate. Yehoshua is to be presented to the People as Moshe's successor and Moshe is to transfer to him some of his "majesty". Elazar has already taken over from Aharon, and it will be Yehoshua and Elazar who will lead the People into the Land.



Chamishi - 5th Aliya - 15 p'sukim - 28:1-15

[P> 28:1 (8)] This entire Aliya is the Torah reading of Rosh Chodesh when it falls on a weekday. The first part contains the mitzva of the Daily Sacrifices [401, A39 28:2], one male lamb, in its first year of life, blemish-free, in the morning and a second lamb before evening. Our t'filot of Shacharit and Mincha correspond to these T'midim.

[P> 28:9 (2)] Then comes Musaf for Shabbat - two lambs [402, A41 28:9]. Correspondingly, we daven Musaf on Shabbat. 

[P> 28:11 (5)] The Musaf of Rosh Chodesh [403, A42 28:9] consists of two bulls, one ram, and seven lambs. In addition to these "Olot", a goat was to be offered as a communal Sin Offering (CHATAT). Korbanot were accompanied by wine for libation (in varying amounts for the different animals) and fine flour & oil mixtures, known as Menachot.



Shishi - Sixth Aliya - 27 p'sukim - 28:16-29:11

[S> 28:16 (10)] Next the Torah presents the Musafim of the Holidays, beginning with Pesach. Note that each day of Pesach is a "carbon-copy" of the first day (as opposed to Sukkot - see further).

[S> 28:26 (6)] Then, Shavuot - here referred to as Yom HaBikurim. The Musaf of Shavuot is counted as a mitzva here [404, A45 28:26] - that of Pesach (and the other holidays) have been counted already from Parshat Emor. In Emor, the korbanot that accompanied the Two Loaves offering on Shavuot are presented and Musaf is not mentioned until here in Pinchas.

[P> 29:1 (6)] Next comes Rosh HaShana, called here YOM T'RUA. Its Musaf has also been counted as a mitzva previously (in Emor), but the mitzva of blowing Shofar is counted here [405, A170 29:1]. Since Rosh HaShana is also Rosh Chodesh Tishrei, double musafim are brought.



MITZVAnotes

The Torah does not say: YOU SHALL BLOW THE SHOFAR. (Not for Rosh HaShana, that is.) It tells us to have a YOM T'RU'A on the first of Tishrei. The Gemara teaches us what that means, using a G'zeira Shava (parallel terminology) to Yovel. In B'har, there is a command to blow the Shofar on Yom Kippur of Yovel. The Oral Law teaches us a parallel between the T'RU'A of Tishrei (Yovel) and the T'RU'A of Tishrei (Rosh HaShana). Although the word SHOFAR does not appear in context of RH, it DOES appear in connection with the "other" Tishrei-T'ru'a. The Talmudic principle of G'zeira Shava is used to define the Rosh HaShana T'ru'a requirement as Shofar. Shofar is one of a small list of mitzvot that the Torah commands in an indirect way.

It can also be suggested, that by the Torah's wording, we need to do more than 'just' hear the Shofar on Rosh HaShana - we need to transform that day into a T'RU'A day that combines the blasts of the Shofar with the special davening and with our mood, attitude, and behavior.

[S> 29:7 (5)] Next comes Yom Kippur's Musaf. All the Chagim are presented here and previously in Emor (in addition to other places).

Notice that there is brief reference to the requirement of fasting and the Shabbat-like prohibition of Melacha, and slight reference to the special Yom Kippur service (presented in detail back in Parshat Acharei). Here, in Parshat Pinchas, the main emphasis is on the Musaf korbanot of the Holy days, the other details seemly coming as a by-the-way.


The gimatriya of PINCHAS is 208. So is that of YITZCHAK. Connection? Find one. HAGAR is also 208, and that fits with YITZCHAK.



Sh'VII - Seventh Aliya - 29 p'sukim - 29:12-30:1

[S> 29:12 (5)] Lastly, the musafim of Sukkot and Sh'mini Atzeret are presented. The numbers of animals on Sukkot vary day-to-day, with the bulls totalling 70, a symbolic universal number. Specifically, each day has 2 rams, 14 lambs, and a goat as a Chatat, but the bulls range from 13 down to 7 for the 7 days of Sukkot.

Note: Each day of Sukkot has an "identity" of its own. There IS a third day of Sukkot in the Torah. In contrast, there is no mention of a third day of Pesach - just KA-ELEH, like ditto marks. On the other hand, the counting of the Omer gives Pesach what Sukkot has from its Musafim - a counting dimension.

First day: 13 bulls, 2 rams, 14 lambs...

[S> 29:17 (3)] And on the second day... (12, 2, 14)

[S> 29:20 (3)] And on the third day... (11, 2, 14)

[S> 29:23 (3)] And on the fourth day... (10, 2, 14)

[S> 29:26 (3)] And on the fifth day... (9, 2, 14)

[S> 29:29 (3)] And on the sixth day... (8, 2, 14)

[S> 29:32 (3)] And on the seventh day... (7, 2, 14)

[S> 29:35 (6)] On the eighth day... (without "and", because Sh'mini Atzeret is its own holiday, in addition to being the 8th day of Sukkot, sort of)

These musaf passages for Chagim are the respective Maftirs of the Holidays.

The sedra ends with references to other korbanot in the Mikdash. And finally, a summary/divider pasuk - And Moshe told the people all that HaShem had commanded.

Rashi explains that Matot begins with Moshe speaking to the people, so the pasuk at the end of Pinchas has to restate that Moshe has been transmitting G-d's words all along, and not just from the portion of Nedarim at the beginning of Matot. 

The last 6 p'sukim are reread for the Maftir. (6 p'sukim is the most for a regular maftir. Only one other sedra has a sixer - Nitzavim. Special maftirs range from 3 to 40 p'sukim. When do we read a 40-pasuk maftir?)



Haftara - 22 p'sukim - Yirmiyahu 1:1-2:3

Pinchas has two haftarot, one for when it is during the 3 Weeks (majority of years) and one for when it falls before (rareish)...

The first of the three HAFTAROT OF TRAGEDY. When Matot and Mas'ei are combined, this is the haftara for Parshat Pinchas. When they are separated, it is the haftara for Matot. Furthermore, even when the Torah reading for Israel and Chutz LaAretz is out of sync, the haftara is the same - the Shabbat after 17 Tamuz is Divrei Yirmiyahu.

The haftara consists of the opening words of the book of Yirmiyahu. Aside from the personal exchange between G-d and Yirmiyahu, we are told of his visions of an almond tree (which blooms early in the year, a sign that G-d's judgment is coming soon) and the "boiling pot", representing the enemy from the north (Bavel) who will come to destroy Jerusalem. This prophecy of destruction, because of idolatry and unfaithfulness, sets the tone for the 3 Week mourning period for the Beit HaMikdash and for the main part of the book of Yirmiyahu. 

The concluding p'sukim allow us to end the haftara on a high note: telling us of the promise that G-d will punish those who rise against Israel, for Israel - despite its sins - is holy and special to HaShem.



Bringing the Prophets to Life

Weekly insights into the Haftara

by Rabbi Nachman (Neil) Winkler

Author of Bringing the Prophets to Life (Gefen Publ.)

Pi-n'chas - 22 p'sukim - Yirmiyahu 1:1-2:3

Throughout the Tanach we read a number of instances where Hashem calls upon outstanding individuals to accept the mantel of prophecy and serve as a navi for G-d. Although these "calls" are usually not found in the text, we do find two instances where those who are called do not respond (Elisha and Yechezkel), one prophet who offers his service to G-d (Yishayahu, who responds: HINEINI, SH'LACHEINI - "I am here; send me") and two chosen ones who express reluctance to accept that post: Moshe and Yirmiyahu. 

We are familiar with the story of Moshe Rabbeinu who stood before Hashem at the burning bush and argued that he is a K'VAD PEH, - one who was 'slow of speech' and, therefore, was incapable of being G-d's spokesman. In fact, Hashem remains at Chorev for seven days (according to Chazal) attempting to convince Moshe to take on G-d's charge, until eventually, Hashem had to insist that Moshe accept His mission.

We are, however, not as familiar with the reaction of Yirmiyahu to G-d's charge, a reluctance detailed in the very first perek of Sefer Yirmiyahu which we read as this week's haftara.  This chapter includes G-d's consecration of Yirmiyahu to be His agent and the navi's refusal, hesitating to shoulder the weighty responsibility by contending NA'AR ANOCHI - that he was young and too inexperienced to take on such a role. However, in contrast to His seven-day argument with Moshe, Hashem makes no such attempt to convince Yirmiyahu. Instead, he tells the newly appointed navi, NOT to argue with Him, for, G-d declares "wherever I send you - you shall go and whatever I command you-you shall speak!" 

We should rightly wonder why there was such as difference. Why would G-d patiently deal with Moshe's reasoning but immediately reject Yirmiyahu's argument? If, ultimately, both would be required to follow the divine command - reluctantly or not - why would Hashem attempt to change Moshe's mind but not to persuade Yirmiyahu HaNavi?

I would suggest that the difference in G-d's reactions was based upon the contrast between the respective personalities of the two individuals and the particular tasks they were called to perform.

G-d's choice to have Moshe lead Israel out of bondage might be understood through the three events included in the Torah's review of Moshe's early years. When he first leaves the royal palace, Moshe is troubled by the suffering of his brethren that he sees. He exhibits this same sensitivity to the weak and afflicted when he slays the Egyptian taskmaster who was beating the Israelite slave. And that same quality of compassion is reflected when protecting an Israelite from his attacker and yet, again, when saving the Midyanite women from those shepherds who harassed them. It is, therefore, quite understandable for Hashem to see in him a future leader of His nation, one who cares, responds to suffering and, therefore, would save them from Egyptian slavery. 

And yet, despite his caring and sensitivity, Moshe is unwilling to accept G-d's calling, for, as the "the most humble of all", he saw himself unsuitable for leadership. I would even suggest, that, given the fact he had been separated from the suffering of his people for the forty years he was in Midyan, Moshe believed that there had to be others far more fitting for the job. Hashem's week of cajoling used Moshe's natural caring and sensitivity to convince him that he WAS the right choice, thereby avoiding any argument that would weaken Moshe's admirable qualities that was the very reason for having been chosen.  

 This was not so with Yirmiyahu.

This tragic prophet was filled with AHAVAT YISRA'EL, a love for his nation - despite their shortcomings. His reluctance to accept the position Hashem offered him was because, for him, it was an impossible one. He was charged to warn his nation of a future of LINTOSH, LINTOTZ, L'HA'AVID V'LAHAROS… - "to crush, to destroy and demolish". How could such an OHEIV YISRAEL hope to fulfill that mission? Hashem understood the difficult choice Yirmiyahu would have and would never allow this Oheiv Yisrael become a SONEI YISRA'EL, for only one who deeply loved Israel could be allowed to condemn them.

Yirmiyahu's love FOR, led him to became hated BY Israel.

But not by G-d.



ParshaPix explanations

The fun way to go over the weekly sedra with your children, grandchildren, Shabbat guests

BALAK

<> and 3 new Unexplaineds

Jennie, spelled JENNY is the term for a female donkey, like Bil'am's ATON.


Without even a tiny ALEF refers to VAYIKRa, which, as tradition has it, Moshe wrote with a small ALEF at the end, humbly suggesting that he was contacted by G-d with VAYIKOR, less personal and intimate, let us say, than VAYIKRA. Bil'am got VAYIKOR, without even a tiny ALEF.


Bob the Builder's Moavite name might have been Balak, since Bil'am repeatedly told him to build altars.



Pi-N'CHAS


In years past, the PP of Pinchas had a picture of a well-known comedian and actor who has fallen into disrepute. So we have replaced him with Bing and subtract an r from his last name to give us what we are looking for <> Contradictory symbol of war (the spear) and peace (the dove with olive branch). Pinchas's act of "violence" was rewarded by the Covenant of Peace. It works this way sometimes <> so it is with the emblem of TZAHAL, the Israeli army. A sword and an olive branch. Israel wants peace but is ready to defend itself with the sword and G-d's help. <> Kohein Gadol's CHOSHEN, representing the perpetual covenant of the kehuna - BRIT K'HUNAT OLAM <> Broken 6 (look closely, there are breaks in the number) represents the broken VAV (numerical value of 6) in the word SHALOM <> Small 10 is for the small YUD (numeric value of 10) in Pinchas <> large 50 is for the large NUN SOFIT (numeric value of 50) in MISHPATAN, their judgment, which Moshe brought before G-d - referring to the claim of the daughters of Tz'lofchad <> Loads of numbers for the counting of the people. It is the many countings that earned Bamidbar its other name of Sefer P'kudim, from which comes its English name, Numbers <> Two lambs are the daily T'MIDIM, or the Musaf of Shabbat - both of which are mitzvot in Pinchas <> Binoculars are for Moshe Rabeinu to look out over the Land... as he was told to do by G-d (while he didn't use binoculars, his vision of the Land was miraculously enhanced by G-d to allow Moshe to see all the Land <> there is a collection of symbols representing Shabbat (candle sticks) <> Pesach (Seder plate) <> Shavuot (Har Sinai with the Luchot) <> Rosh HaShana (shofar - which is also its own mitzva in the sedra, not just a symbol for RH) <> Yom Kippur (father and son saying vidui) <> Sukkot (Lulav & Etrog) <> The Maftir readings for all of the Holidays come from Parshat Pinchas <> along the bottom of the ParshaPix, from left to right, is an updated redo of an old (one of the oldest) PPP (ParshaPixPuzzles). It reads from left to right: candy CANE inside a musical NOTE. Which is a KEIN B'NOT... Next is the flower of the caper plant - in Hebrew, TZALAF, followed by musical symbol for a SHARP, in Hebrew - CHAD, giving TZ'LOFCHAD, Yogi bear is a DOV and the piece of the multiplication table reminds us of the method by which many of us had to learn it - namely, by ROTE. All together, we have G-d's answer through Moshe to Machla, No'a, Chogla, Milka, and Tirtza: KEIN B'NOT TZ'LOFCHAD DO'V'ROT <> The bird is an albatross, a.k.a. a gooney bird or just a gooney - and thus it represents GUNI, one of Naftali's sons and the family name of those who descended from GUNI <> The worm is for TOLA, son of Yissachar <> The compass with its needle pointing north is TZ'FON, son of GAD <> large wine cup is a KOS SHEL ELIYAHU, appropriate to Parshat Pinchas because of the Midrash that says that Pinchas was Eliyahu - additionally, this is an Unexplained <> bunch of keys. In Hebrew, the term TZ'ROR MAFTEICHOT refers to a bunch of keys. The command to Moshe was to TZAROR ET HAMIDYANIM, attack the Midyanites and kill them. TZ'ROR/ TZAROR <> BELA is one of the sons of Binyamin. The vampire-looking fellow in the picture is BELA Lugosi, who played Count Dracula on the stage (1927) and in the movies (from 1931) <> Bullwinkle the moose with the arrow pointing to his nose is for moose-af, that is, MUSAF <> No'ach sending the dove from the Ark. Describing the daughters of Tz'lofchad who had no brothers - NO'ACH. Furthermore, one of the daughters is NO'A, sound-alike for NO'AH. And the dove with the olive branch is the BRITI SHALOM that G-d gave to Pinchas <> the almond branch and the boiling pot are from the haftara <> the wine cup is a BECHER, as in one of the sons of Binyamin <> BECAUSE the syllables are reversed. So reverse the syllables of BECAUSE to get KOZBI, the Midyanite princess who was with Zimri <> Three Unexplaineds



In Memory of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks z"l

PACING CHANGE

Pinchas

Embedded in this week's parsha is one of the great principles of leadership. The context is this: Moshe, knowing that he was not destined to lead the next generation across the Jordan into the promised land, asked God to appoint a successor. He remembered what had happened when he had been away from the Israelites for a mere 40 days. They had panicked and made a Golden Calf. Even when he was present, there were times of strife, and in recent memory, the rebellion on the part of Korach and others against his leadership. The possibility of rift or schism if he died without a designated successor in place was immense. So he said to God:

"May the Lord, the God who gives breath to all living things, appoint someone over this community to go out before them and come in before them, one who will lead them out and bring them in. Let the Lord's people not be like sheep without a shepherd." (Bamidbar 27:16-17)

God duly chose Yehoshua, and Moshe inducted him. One detail in Moshe's request, however, always puzzled me. Moshe asked for a leader who would "go out before them and come in before them, one who will lead them out and bring them in." That, surely, is saying the same thing twice. If you go out before the people, you are leading them out. If you come in before the people, you are bringing them in. Why then say the same thing twice?

The answer comes from a direct experience of leadership itself. One of the arts of leadership - and it is an art, not a science - is a sense of timing, of knowing what is possible when. 

Sometimes the problem is technical. In 1981, there was a threat of a coal miners' strike. Margaret Thatcher knew that the country had very limited supplies of coal and could not survive a prolonged strike. So she negotiated a settlement. In effect, she gave in. Afterward, and very quietly, she ordered coal stocks to be built up. The next time there was a dispute between the miners and the government - 1984-1985 - there were large coal reserves. She resisted the miners and after many weeks of strike action they conceded defeat. The miners may have been right both times, or wrong both times, but in 1981 the Prime Minister knew she could not win, and in 1984 she knew she could.

A much more formidable challenge occurs when it is people, not facts, that must change. Human change is a very slow. Moshe discovered this in the most dramatic way, through the episode of the spies. An entire generation lost the chance of entering the land. Born in slavery, they lacked the courage and independence of mind to face a prolonged struggle. That would take a new generation born in freedom.

If you do not challenge people, you are not a leader. But if you challenge them too far, too fast, disaster happens. First there is dissension. People start complaining. Then there are challenges to your leadership. They grow more clamorous, more dangerous. Eventually there will be a rebellion or worse.

On 13 September 1993, on the lawn of the White House, Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, and Yasser Arafat shook hands and signed a Declaration of Principles intended to carry the parties forward to a negotiated peace. Rabin's body language that day made it clear that he had many qualms, but he continued to negotiate. Meanwhile, month by month, public disagreement within Israel grew.

Two phenomena in the summer of 1995 were particularly striking: the increasingly vituperative language being used between the factions, and several public calls to civil disobedience, suggesting that students serving in Israel's defence forces should disobey army orders if called on to evacuate settlements as part of a peace agreement.

Calls to civil disobedience on any significant scale is a sign of a breakdown of trust in the political process and of a deep rift between the government and a section of society. Violent language in the public arena is also dangerous. It testifies to a loss of confidence in reason, persuasion, and civil debate.

On 29 September 1995 I published an article in support of Rabin and the peace process. Privately, however, I wrote to him and urged him to spend more time on winning the argument within Israel itself. You did not have to be a prophet to see the danger he was in from his fellow Jews.

The weeks went by, and I did not hear from him. Then, on Motza’ei Shabbat, 4 November 1995, we heard the news that he had been assassinated. I went to the funeral in Jerusalem. The next morning, Tuesday 7 November, I went to the Israeli Embassy in London to pay my condolences to the ambassador. He handed me a letter, saying, "This has just arrived for you."

We opened it and read it together in silence. It was from Yitzhak Rabin, one of the last letters he ever wrote. It was his reply to my letter. It was three pages long, deeply moving, an eloquent restatement of his commitment to peace. We have it, framed, on the walls of my office to this day. But it was too late.

That, at critical moments, is the hardest of all leadership challenges. When times are normal, change can come slowly. But there are situations in which leadership involves getting people to change, and that is something they resist, especially when they experience change as a form of loss.

Great leaders see the need for change, but not everyone else does. People cling to the past. They feel safe in the way things were. They see the new policy as a form of betrayal. It is no accident that some of the greatest of all leaders - Lincoln, Gandhi, John F. and Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Sadat, and Rabin himself - were assassinated.

A leader who fails to work for change is not a leader. But a leader who attempts too much change in too short a time will fail. That, ultimately, is why neither Moshe nor his entire generation (with a handful of exceptions) were destined to enter the land. It is a problem of timing and pace, and there is no way of knowing in advance what is too fast and what too slow, but this is the challenge a leader must strive to address.

That is what Moshe meant when he asked God to appoint a leader "to go out before them and come in before them, one who will lead them out and bring them in." These were two separate requests. The first - "to go out before them and come in before them" - was for someone who would lead from the front, setting a personal example of being unafraid to face new challenges. That is the easier part.

The second request - for someone who would "lead them out and bring them in" - is harder. A leader can be so far out in front that when he turns round he sees that no one is following. He or she has gone out "before" the people, but has not "led them out." He has led but people have not followed. His courage is not in doubt. Neither is his vision. What is wrong in this case is simply his sense of timing. His people are not yet ready.

It seems that at the end of his life Moshe realised that he had been impatient, expecting people to change faster than they were capable of doing. That impatience is evident at several points in the book of Bamidbar, most famously when he lost his temper at Meriva, got angry with the people and struck the rock, for which he forfeited the chance of leading the people across the Jordan and into the promised land.

Leading from the front, all too often he found people not willing to follow. Realising this, it is as if he were urging his successor not to make the same mistake. Leadership is a constant battle between the changes you know must be made, and the changes people are willing to make. That is why the most visionary of leaders seem, in their lifetime, to have failed. So it was. So it always will be.

But in truth they have not failed. Their success comes when - as in the case of Moshe and Yehoshua - others complete what they began.


Around the Shabbat Table:

Can you think of a time when a leader tried to change things too quickly? What happened?

How do you think Moshe's leadership influenced the future of Bnei Yisrael?

Who are some other leaders you admire in both the Tanach, as well as your life today? 

Y'HI ZICHRO BARUCH



Message from the Parsha - Rabbi Katriel (Kenneth) Brander

In Search of Leadership

As Israel enters the tumultuous summer of 2024, we find ourselves in the grip of protests that bring tens of thousands to the streets each week. Unlike last year's focus on judicial reform, today's demonstrations reflect a nation deeply divided over the ongoing war, the fate of hostages still held in Gaza, sharing of the military burden, and calls for new elections. The tone of the rhetoric is becoming toxic as the intensity of the protests has increased. The fact is that many people do not trust the current leadership, believing that they are more concerned with their political futures than with the fate of the country. 

How can we bridge these ever growing rifts in our society while effectively addressing the existential issues that face us? What type of leader do we need in this time of profound crisis? 

Perhaps the answer can be found in an examination of the leadership transition described in the second half of Bamidbar and in D'varim. 

The Torah repeatedly reminds us that Moshe will not enter Eretz Yisrael. Instead, a new leader will be guiding the nation through the complex moral and strategic dilemmas that will be faced upon entering the Promised Land. Moshe's fate is initially pronounced after he strikes the rock, back in Parshat Chukat. Yet in our parsha this week, which begins in the middle of the crisis of the Jewish people engaging with Moav in acts of idolatry and orgiastic behavior, culminating with the Jewish prince Zimri performing a public lewd act with the Midyanite princess Kozbi, Moshe's fate is again repeated (Bamidbar 26:65 and 27:12-14). From the rock incident to Parshat V'zot HaBracha and including this week's reading, the Torah reiterates Moshe's punishment multiple times, even though Moshe's actual passing doesn't occur until the Torah's final verses.

The repetition that Moshe will not enter the Land, and that he will be succeeded as a leader, highlights the fact that Moshe's striking the rock was not in and of itself so heinous a crime that it warranted so grave a punishment. Rather, as noted by the Sfat Emet (Chukat 5647), the rock episode served as a symptom of a larger systemic issue: how Moshe engaged with the second generation of Jews in the desert. 

Moshe Rabeinu - MOSHIAN SHEL YISRAEL, the savior of Israel (Sota 12b) - begins his own story with a display of empathy towards his enslaved brethren, whose oppression he witnessed. The generation that left Egypt had been robbed of a normal life, living under the lash of the Egyptian taskmasters, with the threat of death for disobeying orders a daily possibility. They had their marital lives disrupted, their family lives destroyed, and their very children cast helplessly into the Nile. From the very beginning, Moshe is taken by their suffering, willing to forgive their indulgences and rebelliousness, and he defends their misdoings to God time and time again. 

But the same can't be said for the second generation, the children of the enslaved, born into freedom in the desert. The only life they knew was miraculous! Their clothing grew with their bodies; their food and drink came from heaven; their pathway was miraculously lit up by the Almighty. Their challenges were minor compared to those of their parents, who suffered through backbreaking labor amid a spell of Divine silence over years of oppression. 

Yet despite being blessed with all the comforts they could have ever imagined, this younger generation fails to step up to the plate, instead complaining incessantly and venting their frustrations. They demand more water; they sin at Baal Peor; they ask to stay on the eastern bank of the Jordan - and throughout all this, Moshe freezes. He falls silent, even cries, as he fails to communicate with the people and help them move forward. And at each of these occasions, God reminds Moshe that his time is up, that the time has come for new leadership. Truth be told, Moshe knows it too. In our parsha, he even addresses God directly, asking that a new leader be appointed who can better understand the particular needs of the new generation. 

Moshe spoke to Hashem, saying: "Let God, Source of the breath of all flesh, appoint someone over the community who shall go out before them and come in before them, and who shall take them out and bring them in, so that God's community may not be like sheep that have no shepherd. (Bamidbar 27:15-17)

The need for attentive, well-matched leadership is a perennial issue that continues to hold true today as much as it did in the Biblical wilderness. In our generation, we need leaders who are visionaries for the future of the Jewish people, including feeling the urgency with which we must find a way for all members of our society to take part in defending the homeland. Yet we need leaders that can also empathize and appreciate the difficulty in implementing such a vision. For example, when it comes to sharing the defense burden, we need national leaders who will make sure to provide conditions in the military to maximize the comfort of incoming recruits. In our generation, we also need religious leaders who are unafraid to chart new territory, albeit within the confines of halacha, in making our communal spaces welcoming to women, LGBTQ people, and others who find themselves today at the periphery of our communal tapestry. We need leaders who can encourage those who are formally observant to be deliberate about their Jewish experience while providing space for those who are serious Jews but not themselves observant. In our generation, we need Jewish leaders who celebrate individuality, who will empower our community and challenge our people, as Elie Wiesel once said, 'to think higher and live deeper'. 

Generations ago, Yehoshua was chosen to succeed Moshe. While he inherited Moshe's tradition, Yehoshua's personality set him apart from his mentor. Today we face a similar transition: our rapidly evolving world demands new leadership, and throughout this ongoing conflict, we've witnessed the emergence of an unexpected cohort of communal leaders: our youth. This younger generation, shaped by contemporary challenges, is already stepping into roles that echo the transition from Moshe to Yehoshua.

Our youth have helped to give birth to our nation for a second time. They have been involved in its rethinking and transformation. They have been assuming civic responsibility. Not running away from the draft but, at the rate of 130%, embracing their responsibility. Many have sacrificed their lives at the very moment in which they were overflowing with promise. But to quote Yami Weiser, father of a fallen soldier and beloved Ohr Torah Stone alumnus, his son Roey "did not fall in battle, he was elevated in battle." 

Over the past nine months, we have seen high school students clean out hundreds of bomb shelters, engage with children who have moved to the merkaz, seeking safety from the South and the North, and for families whose parents are in milu'im. Young parents who were not called up to serve spent evenings cleaning school toilets to keep the schools open in the absence of adequate staff, and students swept the floors and straightened up classrooms to make sure their schools were ready for the next day. 

We must embrace and encourage this momentum, as communities and a nation, to create the opportunities and environment for our youth to be further nurtured and for their potential to continue to be actualized. For I have faith that it is they, the leaders of tomorrow, who are best suited to show us the way forward. Like Yehoshua, they understand the challenges of these times. 



PTDT - PhiloTorah D'var Torah

FORK IN THE ROAD 

Parshat Pinchas is usually the first Shabbat of the Three Weeks (in years that Matot and Mas'ei are read combined); on the rare side, it is the Shabbat right before the Three Weeks (when Matot and Mas'ei are read separately). 

Either way, Parshat Pinchas is read very close to the fast of Shiv'a Asar b'Tamuz.

And that brings us to a fork in the road.

Shiv'a Asar b'Tamuz commemorates five calamities that befell Israel - according the the Mishna towards the end of Masechet Taanit. One of those tragedies is the cessation of the Korban Tamid, the daily sacrifices, that had continued to be brought even during the two and a half year siege of Jerusalem. Even with the upcoming destruction of the Beit HaMikdash three weeks later, the Mishna considers the end of the daily T'midim to be a tragedy in its own right.

That is one path in front of us, at this fork in the road. The path to perpetuating the various causes of the Churban.

Put simply, our national mourning is not just for events that occurred a long time ago. We also mourn the state of affairs of the Jewish community now and ponder what we as individuals, and as part of K'lal Yisrael, can do to effect a TIKUN, a repair, for the various sins and shortcomings of our ancestors that added to the causes of the Churban. In this way, we will get closer to the days when the fast days will become Yamim Tovim with the building of the Beit HaMikdash and the Geula Sh'leima.

Thus, we will not be going down the Shiv'a Asar b'Tamuz path, but rather take the other path, symbolized by the mitzva of the T'midim - the Parshat Pinchas path.

AVEILUT HACHURBAN, mourning the destructions of the Batei Mikdash is only TEMPORARY. A very long temporary, but within our power and ability to end it, speedily in our time. Easy to say, but we have our work cut out for us. Let's get cracking. PTDT



MICRO ULPAN

Presenting words for things that are commonly called by foreign names, and whose names in Hebrew are little-known or used.
For example: How do you say logo in Hebrew? LO-GO, right? Not in Hebrew. In Hebrew a logo is a SAM-LIL (SAMACH-MEM-LAMED-YUD-LAMED)



Walk through the Parsha with Rabbi David Walk

In the Wilderness - The Place to Complain

Pinchas

The two popular names for the Book which we are presently reading are NUMBERS and BAMIDBAR. One name suggests that the major topic of the tome is counting the Jews, repeatedly. The other name implies that the central concept of the volume is the geography of the trek from bondage to statehood, namely the desert or wilderness. So, we have two legitimate candidates for the central idea in this the Torah's fourth volume. But I think that there's another issue which must be considered. 

Professor Everett Fox addressed this concern over the subject matter of the book of Bamidbar: The reader who approaches the Book of Numbers under the influence of its common Hebrew name, B'MIDBAR, "In the Wilderness", will logically expect a narrative account of the wanderings of the Israelites before they reach the Promised Land. But the book in its present form is a great deal more than that… the book also features census and sacrificial donation lists; details of the setup of Israel's camp; the duties of the Levites, and mysterious ritual for removing ritual pollution; a doubled tale about daughters inheriting land; and a host of other rules and regulations… It is this composite character and apparent lack of easily definable structure that imbue the book with its fascination for scholars and with frustration for lay readers.

Thank you Prof. Fox. This is, indeed, the most complicated narrative in the Tanach. The Wilderness is the backdrop for the drama, but not its content. The content is the most human of the Five Books of Moshe Rabbeinu, and highlights human foibles and frailty.

Almost hidden in the account are shining examples of personal greatness. We are impressed and inspired by the likes of Yehoshua, Kalev and Pinchas. However, there is a major, if not overriding issue, in the volume which introduces an unlikely quintet of heroes, and that issue is complaining.

I'm using the blanket term 'complaining' to cover an array of behaviors. Some were constructive, like the bearers of the casket of Yosef, who became ritually impure, asking if they could bring the Pesach offering at a later date. Others were less helpful, as in the questioning of Moshe's prophetic power by his brother and sister. But the array of various expressions of discontent are ubiquitous and, clearly, would undermine the cohesiveness of society if left unchecked.

This, finally, brings me to the specific example which I want to highlight: the daughters of Tz'lofchad. His five daughters come to Moshe and say: Our father died in the wilderness. He was not one of the faction, Korach's faction, which banded together against the Eternal, but rather he died for his own sin; and he has left no sons. Let not our father's name be lost to his clan just because he had no son! Give us a holding among our father's kinsmen! (Bamidbar 27:3-4).

There are so many fascinating aspects to this respectful exchange of ideas between these women and Moshe. Their 'complaint' was clear. They were concerned that their father (and grandfather) would be forgotten, because there were no sons to inherit the portion allotted to the family. 

Of course, this feeds into the many expressions of discontent, but this one is special, even when compared to the issue raised by those bearing  the bones of Yosef. What is so special? Well, the names.

The daughters are listed by name FOUR times in our Tanach (Bamidbar 26:33, 27:1, 35:11 [the antepenultimate verse in Bamidbar]; Yehoshua 17:2), and later discussed in Divrei HaYamim (7:14-19) without listing all the names. This is surprising because women are not named nearly as often as men in the Tanach. In one study, of the 1426 people named in the 24 books of Tanach only 111 are women. But these women are mentioned liberally, and the men who wanted an extension on bringing the Paschal Lamb aren't named. 

Perhaps even cooler, is that clay tablets from the period of the Northern Kings list their names as the names of villages north of the city Shomron (Samaria). Also, the names Machla, Hogla and Tirtza appear as place names today.  

Why so much honor for these wonderful women? I'm not sure, but, I believe, that the critical word appears in verse 7: The daughters of Tz'lofchad speak KEIN. What is KEIN? Translations include: right, justified, correct, true, and Onkelos translate it to YE'UT or 'appropriately'. 

We know this term from Yosef's question to his brothers, IM KEINIM ATEM (B'reishit 42:19). Rashi and others assume that the reference is to the honesty of the brothers. The Ohr HaChayim explains that Yosef is asking if they are really brothers. If so they would confidently leave one behind, and know he'd be released when they bring Binyamin.

The sisters are KEINIM. It's not only that their case is sound. They are also upright and sincere. I think God accedes to the request because it's just (just like those who carried Yosef's casket), but their names are remembered and honored throughout history because they are righteous.

Winning in court requires a just and legal argument; winning a place in history requires much more. B'not Tz'lofchad will always be remembered because they were selfless and righteous. They represented the best cause ever fought for during the difficult period in the Wilderness, protecting our heritage! We salute them, and pray that we can rise to their level of sincerity and altruism.



Rav Kook Torah

by Rabbi Chanan Morrison <> www.ravkooktorah.com

Appointing a Leader for Israel

Moshe was worried. Who would lead the Jewish people after his death?

"Moshe spoke to God, saying, 'Let God... appoint someone over the community... so that God's community will not be like sheep that have no shepherd.'

God told Moshe, 'Take Yehoshua the son of Nun, a man of spirit, and lay your hand on him.'

Moshe did as God ordered him. He took Yehoshua and had him stand before Elazar the Kohen and before the entire community. He then laid his hands on him and commissioned him." (Bamidbar 27:15-23)

Yehoshua's appointment to replace Moshe was a critical point in the spiritual and political development of the Jewish people. Every detail of this transfer of power is significant.

We read that God commanded Moshe to "lay your hand" on Yehoshua, and the Torah testifies that Moshe did as he was commanded. In fact, Moshe placed both of his hands on his disciple. What is the significance of this change?

Material and Spiritual Leadership

The Jewish people require two types of leadership. Like any other nation, they need leaders for worldly matters, whether they be economic, societal, political, or military. In addition, as bearers of God's Torah, they require spiritual guidance. Capable leadership will bring success in both spheres, revealing the greatness of Israel. All will recognize the wisdom of their ways, as befits a special people who enlighten the world with spiritual knowledge and holiness.

In his plea before God, we find that Moshe referred to the people as "the community" and also as "God's community". This reflects Moshe's desire that they have a leader in both spheres, material - as any nation - as well as spiritual - as "God's community".

One or Two Leaders?

The question is: Can both of these realms be combined under the guidance of a single leader? Or perhaps, it is necessary to establish two positions, one leader to govern the nation's material needs, and a second for spiritual direction.

If there is no conflict between the two functions, it is preferable to limit the number of leaders. King Solomon described the instability generated by too many authorities: "Because of a land's sins, it will have many rulers. But a leader of understanding and knowledge will bring stability" (Mishlei 28:2).

The answer - whether spiritual and worldly leadership should be combined into one position - depends upon the state of the nation and the world. When God's unity is manifest and the entire world enjoys God's beneficence, anything contributing to the world's advance is directly connected to God's will. With material progress, the spirit gains understanding and insight. As the Talmud teaches, "All of your builders will be disciples of God" (B'rachot 64a, based on Yeshayahu 54:13). Those who build up the world, in all of its aspects, will be granted enlightenment and wisdom. All who facilitate the world's progress will be carrying out the will of their Creator. In their actions, they cleave to God's holiness, just like the holiness associated with performing mitzvot and studying Torah.

In such an elevated reality, there is no conflict between the spiritual and material spheres, and supervision of both realms should be combined under a single leader. The prophetic visions foretold this state of the world under the leadership of the messianic king.

This was also the level of Moshe, who was responsible for both the spiritual and physical needs of Israel in the wilderness. He was an EVED NE'EMAN, a faithful servant who looked after the people's material needs, yet was also crowned with KALIL TIFERET, pure splendor, an expression of Moshe's lofty spiritual state. Moshe never felt a contradiction between these two functions. His bodily powers were not weakened when he experienced prophecy, due to his clear recognition of the unity in God's Divine will.

But when we are unable to attain such an elevated state - when we can grow spiritually only when we are not encumbered by material occupations - then it is necessary to limit the time and effort spent in worldly matters.

In summary: when the Jewish people merit the revelation of God's unity in all realms, then they should be governed by one leader, who provides enlightenment in spiritual matters and leadership in material ones. Occupation in worldly matters will not distance him from holiness.

When, however, the Jewish people are not on this spiritual level, there is a conflict between the physical and the spiritual realms. Then they require two distinct leaders.

Two Hands

Now we can understand why God commanded Moshe to place a single hand on Yehoshua. The hand is a metaphor for control and governance. Placing two hands would reflect control over both realms, both spiritual and material. Were God to command Moshe to place both of his hands on Yehoshua, that would indicate that - for all times - both spiritual and practical leadership would be Divinely issued. In dark times, when material life is distant from the spiritual, we can hardly ascribe to the material leader the same Divine right to rule that Moshe passed on to his disciple.

Why then did Moshe place both hands on Yehoshua?

Moshe understood from God's command that only the spiritual realm would benefit from leaders who are Divinely-appointed. Nonetheless, Moshe wanted to prepare the stage for a future world, an era in which both spheres will be united under one leader. Therefore, he made Yehoshua stand before both the Kohen Gadol (representing the spiritual realm) and the common people (the physical). Moshe then placed both of his hands on the new leader.

Adapted from Otzarot HaRe'iyah vol. II, pp. 179-186



Parsha Story

Stories and Parables from the famed Maggid of Dubno

by Rabbi Chanan Morrison

Pinchas Saves the Day

Pinchas

Jake owed large sums of money to several people. Lacking a steady job, he was unable to pay back his loans. However, his friends came to his rescue, convincing the lenders to give Jake more time to pay back his debts.

When this extension ran out, the lenders again demanded their money back. Once again, Jake's friends spoke with them and were able to obtain an additional postponement.

The days passed, and this date also arrived. His friends had run out of excuses. What more could they do?

But Jake had a very close friend. This friend now approached the lenders.

"Of course, you are right - you lent money and it should be returned. But what can be done when the borrower has no money to give back?

"Look here, I am willing to give Jake a sum of money. I calculate that it is enough to cover 15% of all his debts. I suggest that you agree to take 15% and sign that you relinquish all claims on the rest. Otherwise, you will end up losing even that!"

The lenders unhappily agreed to this solution.

In the end, who helped Jake the most? The other friends, who used all sorts of excuses, were only able to delay the repayment date. But his closest friend succeeded in canceling all claims and wipe his debts clean.

Moshe and Pinchas

After the sin of the Golden Calf, Moshe prayed in defense of the Jewish people. God agreed not to punish them right away, but to "collect the debt" little by little in future generations. "But on the day I make an accounting [of their sins], I will bring their sin to account against them" (Sh'mot 32:34).

Similarly, after the sin of the spies, the Israelites were also not punished immediately. Due to Moshe's intercession, their punishment was spread out over 40 years.

Pinchas, on the other hand, did not just delay their punishment. When the Israelite men cavorted with the Moabite women and worshiped their idols, the entire nation was in grave danger. The low point of this catastrophe took place when Zimri, a prince of the tribe of Shimon, publicly took a Midyanite princess. "And they were weeping at the entrance of the Communion Tent" (Bamidbar 25:6).

Pinchas killed Zimri and arrested the plague. "Pinchas... was the one who zealously took up My cause among the Israelites and turned My anger away from them, so that I did not destroy them" (25:11). Moshe only delayed Israel's punishment with his prayers. But Pinchas, like Jake's friend in the parable, succeeded in completely annulling the Divine decree against Israel.

Adapted from Mishlei Yaakov, pp. 363-364



Rabbi Ephraim Sprecher z"l

The Link between Pinchas and Eliyahu HaNavi

The Zohar says that Eliyahu Hanavi was the reincarnated soul of Pinchas, the grandson of Aharon, the Kohen Gadol. Pinchas was the hero whose act of Zealotry saved the Jewish People from destruction by a deadly plague (Bamidbar 25). Is reincarnation mentioned in TANACH?

The Ramban and other Kabbalists state that the Book of Ruth teaches the doctrine of reincarnation (GILGUL NESHAMOT) by exposition of the following verses. "Boaz married Ruth… and she gave birth to a son" (Ruth 4:13). Then in Ruth 4:17 it says, "A son is born to Naomi." The Ramban explains that this verse is not a TYPO. The verse reveals that Ruth's child was in fact the reincarnated soul of Naomi's deceased son, Machlon. The name, Machlon, means illness. He became spiritually sick by leaving the Land of Israel and marrying a non-Jewish woman, Ruth. Thus G-d recycled his soul to become Ruth's child, Oved, which means the servant of G-d, who became the grandfather of King David.

The Ramban also brings another proof text for reincarnation from the book of Iyov, "Wow, all these wonders G-d does, two or three times with a person. To bring back his soul from the grave, to light up his life with the living light" (33:29-30).

Why is there reincarnation? Life works the way that education works, which is about moving up from level to level as one matures and becomes more intelligent. The educational process that we go through in life is meant to enhance a person's ability to function in the world and to help people make the most of their lives. Life is about our need to become responsible members of society.

As a person grows up, his spiritual capabilities also increase and mature - but not automatically. The more one puts into an education the more one derives from it. Similarly the more one puts into spiritual growth, the more one grows spiritually, and the more spiritually empowered one becomes. This process of spiritual growth enables one to enjoy and delight in G-d's presence for eternity in the Afterlife.

Kabbala teaches that though we all have one, special soul, each soul is actually comprised of five parts, each of which has a specific name - NEFESH, RU'ACH, N'SHAMA, CHAYA, AND Y'CHIDA. NEFESH is the life force. RU'ACH is the spirit. N'SHAMA is the breath of life. CHAYA is the living soul, and Y'CHIDA is the unique soul. These soul parts represent the path to spiritual completion and perfection, because each level up provides increasingly greater access to higher levels of spiritual capacity and eternal closeness to G-d.

At birth every individual has all five levels of soul. We have to, if we are going to continuously receive G-d's light to keep us functioning, since the five levels of soul connects us to the light of G-d which nourishes our souls and keeps our bodies alive. To be missing a level of soul would be to break the connection between a person and G-d, the Source of Life.

The Torah gives a person access to higher levels of spiritual understanding and to the perfection of the soul. The problem is that the Evil Inclination can interfere with our ability to climb the soul ladder from Nefesh to Ru’ach to Neshama, etc. So much so, that time can run out on our lifetime before we are done. People often remain stuck on the lowest levels of soul for decades, or even entire lifetimes. G-d can't afford to give up on any soul as Iyov 31:2 states, CHEILEK ELO-AK MIMA'AL (We are a portion of G-d from above.) Thus there is reincarnation. We return to complete and perfect what we started in other lifetimes even if we aren't aware of who we were or where we were. The Hebrew word for reincarnation is GILGUL which means recycling.

The word GILGUL in Hebrew, GIMEL LAMED GIMEL VAV LAMED, has the numerical value of the word CHESED, CHET SAMACH DALET, lovingkindness, which both equal the number 72 which is one of G-d's Mystical Names, His 72-letter Name. When this type of numerical connection occurs, it implies a profound, conceptual relationship. GILGUL is the ultimate CHESED of G-d, in that a soul is given another chance for the refinement of its past and the spiritual growth and advancement of its future.

To succeed in Eternity, a soul must return to this physical world again and again to do its TIKUN (correction / repair) and to fulfill its spiritual mission. -ESP

Ed. note: Although GILGUL NESHAMOT is an accepted principle of Kabala, it is not as clearly accepted in mainstream Judaism.

Y'HI ZICHRO BARUCH



Q & A

Reprinted from Living the Halachic Process by Rabbi Daniel Mann - Eretz Hemdah, with their permission [www.eretzhemdah.org]

Remodeling Work During the Three Weeks and the Nine Days

Question: We are remodeling our kitchen. My wife ordered and signed a contract for work to be done on cabinets and other things that is supposed to start on 23 Tammuz. May work continue during the Nine Days [before and including Tish'a b'Av] or must it be stopped?

Answer: The gemara says that from the beginning of the month of Av until after Tish'a b'Av, one should lessen his business dealings and his building activities. The gemara does not specify the types of business transactions and building it refers to, nor does it clarify what "lessen" means. However, in the context of restrictions that apply on fast days that are established in response to a drought, the gemara refers to "building of joy" and gives the example of the house in which one's son will be married. The Yerushalmi gives a counter example of a type of construction that is permitted: when a wall needs support to prevent its collapse. What is the halacha in cases between these two extremes? 

The poskim arrive at the following basic consensus. If there is a fear of collapse, one can do what is required even for the needs of a "building of joy". In general, however, any type of construction whose purpose is to enhance and not for a necessity should not be performed during the Nine Days. This would apply to most cases of kitchen renovations, which usually take a functional kitchen and make it more attractive or more convenient. There is an opinion that this is forbidden even from the beginning of the Three Weeks. However, one has the right to be lenient on the matter before the Nine Days, especially if she already made an agreement with workers.

This brings us to what may be a major point of leniency in your situation. Several poskim say that if one hired a non-Jew before the Nine Days to do the work in a manner in which he is paid by the job (as opposed to according to time), the job is in the province of the non-Jew and may be done during the Nine Days. However, some of these poskim add the proviso that if the worker will accept a small fee to delay the work, the owner should prefer that option. Another scenario in which it is not required to push off the work is when the delay will cause a significant loss. Some examples include when the work or materials will be more expensive later or a case in which an interim setup would be difficult to maintain given that the work has already begun.

Essentially, there are three ideas that motivate us to refrain from certain types of acquisitions and construction during the period of national mourning. One is that the mazal of Bnei Yisrael is low at that time (which is something you may want to consider). Another is that one should avoid doing the type of activities that are considered overly happy. The third idea is that the entire Three Weeks is a time that is historically tragic for us and we are therefore not supposed to recite the b'racha of SHEHECHEYANU, which includes the phrase LAZ'MAN HAZEH ("to this time"). If you plan to recite Shehecheyanu on the renovations (which itself is a good question that is beyond our present scope), it should not be done during this period. Consequently, it would be  problematic to have the job finished before midday of the 10th of Av. Even if you do not contemplate making the b’racha, it is still proper that the project not be completed during the Nine Days, as this affords greater joy than the interim progress on the work does. Therefore, in the event you have little choice but to have the workers do the bulk of the work during the Nine Days, try to have some of the overall job finished afterwards. Additionally, no work should be done on Tish'a b'Av itself.



OzTORAH by Rabbi Dr Raymond Apple z"l

HARD TO LIVE WITH

Zealots are not easy company. They are too serious, too intense, too single-minded.

You feel they have lost all sense of humour, all capacity for self-deprecation. They are so sure they are right and everyone else is wrong. Whatever the cause they believe in so firmly, you think they might serve it better by being a bit more laid-back.

The first of the Biblical zealots was Pinchas. When he saw something intolerable, he couldn't stand it. He had to stand up and speak out. He even took the law into his own hands and killed the people responsible for the hateful deed. Whether he became hard to live with as a result of his fanaticism, we cannot be certain.

But one thing we know. God could have rebuked him and not given him the kehuna, but He recognised why Pinchas had acted as he did.

Said God, "Pinchas the son of Elazar the son of Aharon the Kohen has turned My anger away from the children of Israel, in that he was very zealous for My sake" (Bamidbar 25:10-11). Pinchas was rewarded with the Covenant of Shalom and the Covenant of the Eternal Kehuna.

What marked Pinchas is what Ignaz Maybaum calls his "messianic impatience". Maybaum explains, "That is the messianic impatience which is a feature of the Jewish character. The Kingdom of God may come at any moment, and those who appear to be zealots may, if God wills it, become justified as true prophets."

To be messianically impatient does not necessarily mean storming the heavens and forcing God to send the Mashi'ach before He is ready. It does mean being the champion of truth, justice, peace and morality and making the world ready for the Mashi'ach.

That was Pinchas: he saw gross immorality and idolatry in the camp and knew that it would hold back the moment when Israel would become "a kingdom of kohanim and a holy nation".

It would help our age to have a Pinchas or two, not that they should go as far as Pinchas and carry out an act of physical violence, but insisting that there is such a thing as right and wrong and not remaining silent when "each person does that which is right in their own eyes".



YOUR NEW MOONS

A lengthy passage in the sidra deals with the laws of Shabbat, the festivals and Rosh Chodesh.

All these calendar occasions became beloved companions of the Jewish people as they moved through the year. None was more important than another; all brought richness, excitement and symbolism to Jewish life.

But S'forno points out there must have been some extra special link between the Jewish people and Rosh Chodesh, because the Torah says, "On your new moons…" (Bamidbar 28:11), and the word "your" is not used in relation to the other festivals.

One explanation is that Jewish experience was like the Moon - small in size but immense in its contribution to the world; often thought to have waned but always renewing itself; and never completely independent. -OZ

Y'HI ZICHRO BARUCH



Sedra Highlight - Dr Jacob Solomon

Pinchas

After G-d told Moshe to view the Promised Land from a distance:

Moshe spoke to G-d saying: "May Hashem, G-d of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a leader over the congregation. He shall go out before them and come in before them, and take them out and bring them in. And so the congregation of G-d shall not be like sheep that have no shepherd." 

G-d said to Moshe:

"Take Yehoshua the son of Nun, a man who has the spirit in him…" (27:15-18)

Moshe' quest for a successor prioritized the qualities of leadership: "He shall go out before them and come in before them, he shall take them out and bring them in."

Rashi explains this refers to a person of great spiritual merit who will successfully lead them at the head of military campaigns as Moshe had in the recent wars of Sichon and Og, and Yehoshua in the earlier confrontation with Amalek.

The S’forno, as Rashi, interprets "He shall go out before them and come in before them" as a military leader, but he goes further in explaining "He shall take them out and bring them in" as being suitable as an administrator of national affairs. Moshe's prayer to G-d was that the leader would know how to lead the people in times of war, and in times of peace.

Thus Moshe himself did not nominate a successor for his manifold inspirational and management tasks. He approached G-d as the "G-d of the spirits of all flesh" to pick out the one who should take over his mantle of leadership when the time came. G-d, Man's creator, knew who truly was the right person for that role. Rashi, based on the Midrash Tanchuma, indicates that Moshe hoped that the position would go to one of his sons, Gershom or Eliezer. It was not to be so: G-d replied by making it clear that it would be his student Yehoshua who would continue his work and traditions.

Possibly, Moshe justified in hoping that G-d would consider the leadership to come from his offspring for the following reason. In the Torah, we hear nothing of Gershom and Eliezer once they arrived with Yitro. But maybe Moshe felt that at least one of them may have had hidden qualities that he himself didn't know of, even though he was their father. In addition, they may have had unnoticed potential. History has shown repeatedly that although some people grow into successful leaders, others are propelled into greatness through the force of the responsibilities and the circumstances of their office. They then show dimensions and capacities that no-one would ever guess they ever had. This would especially be true where the 'spirit of G-d' would fall on them (c.f. Shmuel Alef 10:11-12 - "Is Shaul also among the prophets?").

But it was not to be. G-d, who sees the insides of people's minds and knows how they think, informed Moshe gently that it was to be his disciple rather than his son who was to take his leadership forward into Eretz Yisrael. Gently, in that although Moshe approaches G-d firmly and decisively by speaking to G-d in the stronger PI'EL form with VAYDABEIR, G-d, sensing Moshe's disappointment, changed the tone and replied to him in the softer form of VAYOMER.  

Thus in considering his two sons, perhaps Moshe was like many parents of all generations who suffer fears and apprehensions as they watch their children grow up from close quarters: so much so that a person much further away can see the big picture more clearly. As they emerge as successful people in their work and in their communities, their parents shake their heads in pride with a "Who ever would have thought of it?" (Perhaps Gershom or Eliezer might have been the same, given the chance.) Indeed, those who know them in other contexts and have seen them at a greater distance may see the whole picture, and are thus less surprised.

But however well intentioned, in the case of Moshe as the parasha tell us, it was not to be. 



Menachem Persoff - menpmp@gmail.com



It's fashionable these days to talk of discrimination against women or, if you wish, the inequality that women face in the modern world. But, in truth, our Torah talked of this issue some 3000 years ago, at least concerning the laws of inheritance.

For the daughters of Tz'lofchad came before Moshe, not only pleading for an inheritance because their father died leaving no sons; but more so, in their wisdom, they presented Moshe with a halachic quandary. Their father had sinned when he collected wood on Shabbat, but did not forfeit his inheritance because his offence was private (in contradistinction to the Korach rebels). Moreover, knowing that he was doomed to die in the wilderness (along with that generation), Tz'lofchad exposed himself to the ultimate penalty in order to signal to the people that, despite their fate in the desert, they were still to keep the Mitzvot. For that "merit", the "sinner" would still warrant an inheritance (Shabbat 96, Tos’fot Bava Batra 119).

Yes, these wise women, each recorded by name, spoke up before the elders and the entire congregation. They knew Halacha and they earned an honorable mention in the Torah, even to the point that G-d afforded them the privilege of being the catalyst for the pronouncement of the laws of inheritance (Rashi).

This is discrimination? MP 



The Daily Portion - Sivan Rahav Meir

How to respond to a nation called Israel

Translated by Janine Muller Sherr

The following are some reflections for the days following Israel's attack on its enemies in distant Yemen:

Two non-Jewish people were rewarded by having a Torah portion named after them: Yitro and Balak. We find many similarities between these two individuals. Both were very curious about the new nation that had been freed from Egypt and both arrived at conclusions regarding its impact. But their conclusions were radically different: Yitro was thrilled about the emergence of this new nation and was eager to support and even join them; Balak, on the other hand, concluded that this nation posed a dangerous threat and decided to curse and attack them. Each of these men will be remembered in history for the choice that he made at that pivotal time. 

Whenever something dramatic occurs, we need to decide what part we will play in the story. Balak could have chosen to follow in Yitro's footsteps, and then the beginning of his parsha would have read: "And Balak heard all that God had done for Moshe and the people of Israel… and Balak and his sons came to meet Moshe…" By the same token, Yitro could have arrived at Bil'am's conclusion and then his parsha would have read: "And Yitro sent messengers to Bilaam" - in order to curse the Jewish people.

Rabbi Shmuel Pollack writes that there is an important message here: when faced with the ultimate truth, it is impossible for people to remain indifferent.  We are witnessing this phenomenon today as we observe the attitudes of different nations towards Jewish people - how they address the rise of antisemitism, their response to the terror unleashed by Hamas, and their reaction to the hostage crisis.  But we too are always facing choices: what we should pray for, what cause to support, and what to dream about for the future. 

May we always strive to make the proper choices. And may the world do likewise.

To receive Sivan Rahav-Meir's daily WhatsApp: tiny.cc/DailyPortion



Dvar Torah by Rabbi Chanoch Yeres

to his community at Beit Knesset Beit Yisrael, Yemin Moshe

Graciously shared with PhiloTorah

Pi-n'chas

In this week's Parsha, we discuss the story of the daughters of Tz'lofchad. They came to Moshe because their father, Tz'lofchad, had died without any sons.

The daughters contended that they should not be left out of the inheritance. They wanted their father's potion of land in Eretz Yisrael. Moshe Rabbeinu presented the question before G-d who ruled in favor of the daughters.

The Midrash here points out that "There are times when an individual can take the reward of an entire generation.

No'ach stood up against an entire generation and took the reward destined to them. Avraham stood up to his generation and merited the reward meant for that generation. Lot stood up to the people of Sodom and took the reward destined for them." The Midrash concludes that the daughters of Tz'lofchad too, took the reward of their entire generation.

What did they do to earn such a reward? No'ach fought a generation for one hundred and twenty years. Avraham jumped into a furnace for his values. Lot stood up against the immorality of his generation - but what did the daughters of Tz'lofchad do? All they did was to argue to receive their father's inheritance. What is so virtuous of that?

The Midrash answers that while everyone else was screaming and yelling to go back to Egypt, it was the determination of these women who remain steadfast that their future was in the Land of Israel and nowhere else. Moshe was impressed that they went against the tide.

We learn from this Midrash that the activities and deeds of every person cannot be judged in a vacuum but rather in the context of the times. Under normal circumstances, asking for one's father's inheritance does not constitute a brave and courageous act. However, this time in history, such a simple act is seen as an act of utmost bravery. In the climate of widespread criticism of the Land of Israel and yearning to return to Egypt, it was act of Tz'lofchad's daughters that prevailed against the swarm of hatred and criticism to Israel.

As Rabbi Frand once wrote, sometimes, even the most mundane of activities, given the atmosphere and climate, can be a most noble act - to such an extent that the Midrash equates the daughters of Tz'lofchad with Avraham Avinu himself.  



The Weekly 'Hi All' by Rabbi Jeff Bienenfeld

Pinchas

Using Words Properly

When the daughters of Tz'lofchad appeal to Moshe to redress an inheritance issue, Moshe takes their case to HaShem. Gd responds, "… the daughters of Tzelofchad speak properly (Rashi)" (27:7). Why was it necessary for Gd to compliment these women? Wouldn't it have been sufficient to simply begin by stating the law in their favor?

The Maharal (Gur Aryeh, ad loc) suggests that the daughters were being praised for their wisdom. But what was it exactly that demonstrated "wisdom?" The S'fat Emet makes an important observation. Throughout the sojourn of the People in the desert, there were many complaints. When the People experienced hardship, frustration or fear, they often expressed their displeasure and discontent in unwholesome, disrespectful ways. They grumbled and rebelled. The daughters of Tz'lofchad now had their own grievance. They felt that their father's loss of a share in the Land - and hence theirs - was a grave injustice and they petitioned Moshe to remedy the situation.

Here, though, we have the first case where people with a complaint wisely chose to make their case with admirable grace and refinement. HaShem therefore added those few words of introduction to testify that these five daughters "were not seeking any personal gain or benefit and had come truly out of honor for their father. Their intentions were sound and their presentation was impeccable … they came forward with the utmost level of respect and honor for one another and their leaders."

Indeed, knowing how to speak with civility and deference in making a request can make all the difference in how the other will respond. Thinking first about the right words to use and then, the manner in which they should be expressed reflects the respect and regard you have for the dignity of the person before whom you are making the appeal.

There is another fascinating Midrash which makes a similar point. Our Parsha tells us about Serach the daughter of Asher, who is mentioned in the census although she was born in Canaan some 250 years earlier. Rashi tells us she is mentioned here (26:46) to underscore the fact that she was still alive at this time. Targum Yonatan (B'reishit 46:17) explains her longevity. He quotes earlier sources that Serach was one of nine people who entered Gan Eden alive. What exactly did she do to merit such an incredible distinction? The Targum continues: because she was the one chosen to tell Yaakov that Yosef was still alive in Egypt. All the others were fearful that Yaakov might die from the shock of the report. How did she tell her grandfather the news? Other Midrashim tell us that Serach chose to sing softly a song to Yaakov, and within the lyrics, inserted the phrase, "Yosef is alive." Yaakov understood and was so grateful for this incredible display of sensitivity that he blessed her with immortality.

Again, the context into which words are placed - emphatically framing a message - is absolutely critical, both pragmatically and morally.

We now find ourselves during the Three Weeks prior to Tish'a b'Av. The needless hatred which brought about the Second Temple's destruction remains the cardinal sin frustrating and impeding our dream of redemption. If we fail to act and speak wisely, as did the daughters of Tz'lofchad, and neglect to cultivate the extraordinary sensitivity of a Serach bat Asher, then needless hatred becomes endemic and devastating. Let's try to rectify this terrible ill. What we say and how we say it, to our loved ones and frankly to anyone, can do much to hasten our ultimate redemption.



17th of Tamuz

Needless Hatred

This week, we commemorate(d) the 17th of Tammuz. We fasted and the beginning of the Three Weeks of semi-mourning has commenced. Among the reasons for the Fast, the most well-known was the breaching of the walls of the First and Second Temples. The Talmud (Ta'anit 28b), though, raises a rather interesting question. In the Book of Yirmiyahu (39:2, 52:6), we read that the breaching of the walls of the Temple took place on the 9th of Tammuz and not the 17th. The Talmud answers that it was only the breaching of the walls of the Second Temple took place on the 17th. The question, of course, is: why did the Sages choose the 17th and not the 9th upon which to fast?

There are two interesting answers that are given. The first by Tosafot (Rosh HaShana 18b). There, Tosafot, based upon the Yerushalmi makes the remarkable suggestion that the first recorded date in Yirmiyahu was a mistake, and the reason why that mistake was not corrected was to demonstrate the utter confusion and mayhem that marked this terrible event. In the midst of this tragedy, it was simply impossible to remember dates. But was there not significant suffering and turmoil in the wake of the Churban of the Second Temple as well? No doubt, but the trauma of the first Churban was more severe. And that, because the people never imagined that after some 410 years, Gd would allow His Temple to be destroyed. The refrain of the people was, HEICHAL HASHEM, HEICHAL HASHEM - "the Temple of HaShem, the Temple of HaShem" (Yirmiyahu 7:4). Gd's house would be forever! And then, catastrophe struck. The shock was devastating. The Churban completely stunned and disoriented the people, so much so that the true date of the breaching of the walls was not recorded. And Yirmiyahu, who certainly could have corrected the error, chose instead to enshrine the mistake in the Holy Canon and thus remind future generations of the sheer enormity and magnitude of the destruction of the First Beit HaMikdash. Indeed, there is ample reason to mourn!

Ramban (Torat HaAdam, Sha'ar HaAveil) offers another explanation of the apparent discrepancy of dates, one which was adopted by the Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 549:2). Ramban asserts that no mistake was made at all, and the reason the 17th was chosen for the fast was because the destruction of the Second Temple was more severe. What does this mean? Some 70 years after the First Temple was destroyed, the Second Temple was built and the exile came to an end. Thus, as tragic as the first Churban was, it was remedied by the reconstruction of the Second Temple. Not so with the Churban of the Second Temple. All of us are still living in the terrible shadow of that event. According to this explanation, the message is equally important. As we surely all know, the Talmud (Yoma 9b) states that the sin that brought about the destruction of the Second Temple was baseless hatred. And tragically, we, as a people, have still not learned the horrific consequences of such dreadful malice.

The Talmud (Yerushalmi Yoma 1:38) tells us that if a generation did not see the rebuilding of the Third Temple, it is as if it was destroyed again. When we reflect upon what we lost (Tosafot) and why we lost it (Ramban), we should each resolve to do our share to restore our former glory and greatness! 



Afterthoughts - Yocheved Bienenfeld

THE MOON - an addendum

This Parsha contains the details of the various sacrifices offered on all the holidays, including Shabbat and Rosh Chodesh. Although all the holidays required, ultimately, a KORBAN CHATAT of a SE'IR IZIM, it's only regarding the one offered on Rosh Chodesh that it is called a SE'IR IZIM ECHAD L'CHATAT LASHEM - And one male he-goat for a sin-offering to HaShem (28:15) which Rashi explains by citing a Midrash: Bring an atonement for Me for My having reduced (the size of) the Moon. It is certainly difficult to understand how HaShem feels He "did something wrong", as it were, when He had the Moon reduce its size. 

The well-known story as Rashi explains (B'reishit 1:16), is that the Moon questioned Gd as to the wisdom in the equal sharing of the rulership by the Sun and the Moon, as a result of which, Gd asked the Moon to reduce itself. According to R. Moshe Shapiro (Mima'amakim p.273), Gd responded favorably to the Moon's statement and said 'since you understand this and comprehend that this is the way it must be, therefore contract yourself'. And in order to appease her, Gd added the host of all the stars to her. Gd's initial intention was that one luminary should be greater than the other, for there can be no two beings in the world that are the same.

The Sun is an entity of light while the Moon is an entity prepared to receive light. What the Sun does is in its nature, is its self-expression, while the Moon "illuminates because it negates itself and transforms its entire self into a vehicle of light capturing the light and transmitting it onward" (Reflections & Introspections: Building from the Ruins; R. Moshe Shapiro, p. 429). The relationship of the Sun to the Moon is one of a provider to a receiver which is the foundation of all relationships. As a matter of fact, the Gemara (Ketuvot 2a) relates how marriages were encouraged to take place on the 4th day of the week because this was the day the Sun and Moon were created, which is seen as the ideal marriage - the great provider and great recipient.

Given all this, it seems that the reduction of the Moon was not only something which Gd wanted but, also was an expression of a fundamental philosophy. So, why does the midrash suggest that the reason for the Rosh Chodesh chatat was that HaShem wanted a KAPARA for its reduction? 

This obviously forces Chazal to offer a number of explanations. Among them, the following: Tos'fot HaRosh (Shavuot 9a) suggests that Gd's trying to appease the Moon was really meant as a lesson for us, to teach that "a master, forced to discipline his servant for misbehavior, should nonetheless seek to mollify the servant afterwards" (Artscroll, Shavu'ot 9a, footnote #13). This is similar to other incidents where Gd's behavior is meant to be a lesson to us (e.g. "Let us make man" [B'reishit 1:26] which was to teach us that the superior should consult with his inferiors; "I will go down" [Vayeira 18:21] - which was to teach that capital crime cases have to be judged by actually 'seeing'). 

The Rif explains this differently: "To mollify the Moon, Gd granted the honor of its renewal being the occasion on which the Jewish people would bring a he-goat to atone for their sins. By bringing the he-goat on Rosh Chodesh, the Jewish people bestow, on behalf of Gd, the honor He promised to the Moon. Thus, the meaning of Gd's statement is: 'Bring your atonement for Me, i.e. to compensate the Moon on My behalf for having diminished it" (footnote #13). This is something we find to be 'typical' of Gd. Even though we know that everything He does is for our good, sometimes, it involves treatment that is harsh for us, and we know how much He bemoans the fact that He has to do this, and therefore "suffers" with us.

Personally, I was hoping to come up with some original explanation based upon the many various meanings of the root KUF-PEI-REISH, but failed to find anything legitimate. What puzzles me most is how the Moon is praised for its understanding of the nature of relationships and its ability to reduce itself to be a receiver rather than a giver and yet, somehow, this is not emphasized. Maybe that is why Gd feels the need for a kapara - because He didn't fully publicize this and in this way, He "minimized" what the importance of the Moon really was.

Perhaps the whole idea of KIDDUSH L'VANA, where we have a special ceremony just to "greet" HaShem in the presence of the new Moon, as it were, is something that Gd orchestrated, as well, to appease the Moon. What could be greater than to be compared to the Shechina, for the Gemara (Sanhedrin 42a) informs us that - all who bless over the new Moon in its proper time, it is as if he is greeting the Shechina. And, indeed, we get the impression that the Moon was mollified. As the words in the kiddush l'vana state: "…SASIM USMECHIM LA'ASOT R'TZON KONAM - they are joyous and glad to perform the will of their Creator.

The comparison of the Moon to the Sun, which was referred to in this Rashi, brought to mind something else, similar, in this Parsha. Moshe is instructed by Gd to give of his "splendor" to Yehoshua and to confirm him as the future leader of B'nei Yisrael. Despite this being done in the presence of all of the people, the Gemara tells us (Bava Batra 75a) that "the elders of that generation said: the face of Moshe was like the face of the Sun; the face of Yehoshua, only like the face of the Moon. Woe for the shame, for the embarrassment". It was their misfortune to see things in this way. Yehoshua was merely a reflection of the greatness that was Moshe. Just as the Moon, Yehoshua negated himself all his life to be the receptacle of whatever he could receive from Moshe. (Maybe this was why Moshe was worried about him in the company of the spies.) And, indeed, just like the Moon, his true greatness wasn't appreciated. We are taught in the book of Yehoshua (24:31) that the people of Israel were faithful to HaShem all the days of Yehoshua - which serves as a priceless praise of Yehoshua and his greatness. And yet, Rashi tells us that Yehoshua was buried in Timnat Serach near HAR GA'ASH, a volcanic mountain to tell us that it threatened to kill the people because - they neglected to properly eulogize Yehoshua. He, too, wasn't appreciated as he should have been. Indeed, he was like the Moon.

All of the above supports an understanding I have of some of the words in the KEIL ADON that we recite on Shabbat: TOVIM ME'OROT SHE'BARA ELOKEINU… - the luminaries that Gd created are good… He endowed them with KO'ACH and G'VURA. If I were to be asked what the difference is between the word KO'ACH and the word G'VURA - both of which denote strength and might - I would think that KO'ACH refers to physical strength while G'VURA refers to spiritual, emotional strength (as in EIZEHU GIBOR? HAKOVEISH ET YITZRO). If I am correct in my conclusion, then this would apply to these words in the KEIL ADON. I would submit that KO'ACH refers to the strength of the Sun, and G'VURA, to that of the Moon - who had to constrict itself to be a mere reflection of the Sun, until the time of the GEULA when it will have the light of the Shechina returned to it. 

And in spite of the idea presented by the midrash about the Moon needing to be appeased, the blessing of the kiddush l'vana clearly implies that it was. 9



Pi-N'CHAS

See the whole file of GMs for a number of GMs from the sedra. Remember to search for the name of the sedra and not just go to the sedra's section. Here's a new one:

GM The communal Korban Chatat for Rosh Chodesh and the Chagim is presented in its own pasuk for each. The wording, and therefore the Gimatriya of those p'sukim vary. Here is Bamidbar 28:22 in Parshat Pinchas, with the CHATAT for each day of Pesach -

And one young male goat for a sin offering to atone for you.

The gimatriya of this pasuk is 1517.

The AL-BAM gimatriya is 2068.

Focusing on the communal CHATAT in general, and not just the ones of Pesach, we can say that even though the topic is sin, we must be appreciative and even joyous, that HKBH gives us the mitzva of Korban Chatat - and the mitzva and opportunity of doing T'shuva. Our joy is expressed nicely in Megilat Esther (8:16), with the very familiar pasuk, whose regular gimatriya is 2068 -

The Jews had light and joy, and gladness and honor.



RED ALERT!

Pinchas

by Rabbi Eddie Davis (RED) of the Young Israel of Hollywood - Ft. Lauderdale (Florida)

DIVREI TORAH


<> Pinchas was not a Kohen because he was not a son of Aharon when they (Aharon and sons) became Kohanim. As a result of Pinchas' killing Kozbi and Zimri, which stopped a devastating plague, Pinchas was rewarded with Kehuna and eventually being the Kohen Gadol and being the ancestor of all future Kohanim Gedolim. It is ironic that he becomes a Kohen and a model of peace through an act of murder. But it was a case of KANAIIM POG'IM BO, "the zealous ones can attack him", which Pinchas committed out of pure love for Hashem, and not through hate for the sinners. This was a remarkable and courageous act by Pinchas. He was not daunted by killing a prince of an Israel tribe and a princess of Midyan. He was verbally attacked by Zimri's followers and powered through. He was now validated by Hashem Himself.



<> Hashem's decision to command a war with Midyan raises the issue of why did Hashem not declare war with Moav as well. One answer that Rashi poses is that Ruth was destined to come from Moav. I don't care for that answer because no one knew about that future occurrence. I prefer the second answer presented by Rashi later in 31:2 and the Ramban that Moav legitimately feared the approaching Jewish people. But Midyan was not in the way of Bnei Yisrael. Midyan acted out of hate, unsolicited hate for Am Yisrael. They therefore deserved the upcoming war. I prefer this explanation, but not fully. Balak had approached Midyan and "invited" them to join Moav in confronting Bnei Yisrael. So Midyan involved themselves in this confrontation and were involved due to Moav.



<> Chapter 26 starts in a strange fashion: there is a pause, a blank space after the opening clause "It was after the plague", before the Torah begins the new census. Chizkuni (Chizkiyah ben Mano'ach, French commentator of the 13th century) stated the these deaths that just now occurred were the last deaths that would be decreed upon that generation. All the people mentioned and counted in this census will enter the Promised Land. We are imminently about to enter the Land; we are months away. So this is not a big deal to state what Chizkuni has stated. Things will radically change with the sin that occurred at Jericho. The original plan was that every encounter would be like Jericho. No physical confrontation. Hashem will destroy the enemy without a fight. No loss of Jewish life. With Achan's sin in taking loot from the victory, Hashem will insist that the Jewish army with fight the enemy physically.



<> Shimon loses the numbers game in the census, mainly due to the fact that the 24,000 men who died in the plague of the sin of Pe'or were all from the tribe of Shimon. The real story began when Shimon and Levi combined to annihilate the entire city of Shechem. This annoyed Yaakov tremendously. From that time on, the secondary story in the Torah is the one of Shimon and Levi. Levi continued to rise in leadership and sanctity while Shimon would descend. This reached a crescendo with Pinchas, a Levi, killing Zimri, from Shimon. Shimon will continue to decline in Jewish history, virtually disappearing from the map of Israel. No mention of this is recorded, but this is a real development in Jewish history.



<> The daughters of Tz'lofchad are heroes in Torah literature because they demonstrated a strong love for Eretz Yisrael. Additionally what I find interesting is the parallel between this story and the request for a Pesach Sheini. The men in the Pesach Sheini story and the women in this story use the same verb in describing their question. "Why should our father's name be diminished" and "why should we be diminished" is an obvious connector between the two stories. And there is a positive answer to each request. The questioners in both stories introduced a new Torah Halacha. Each episode showed the close relationship between Hashem and His chosen people. That Hashem will respond to a questioner is a positive important idea in the religious life of every Jew.



<> One time two men had an argument and their debate to the great Rav Avraham of Sochotzav (Rav Avraham Bornstein, 1839-1910, student of the Kotzker Rebbe). One of the men said to the Rav that a year ago when the Rav wanted to remove a Shochet from his job, this man sided with the Rav the whole time. When the Rav heard this, he told the man that he cannot be a judge in this dispute. He supported his decision on the Torah case of the daughters of Tz'lofchad. The women said that their father had died, but he did not side with Korach. When hearing this, Moshe decided that he cannot judge the case. He turned it over to Hashem.



<> When it came time to appoint a successor to Moshe Rabbeinu, Rashi wrote that Moshe wanted his sons to inherit his position of leadership. In response Hashem rejects the request and appoints Yehoshua. Hashem does not state anything negative about Moshe's sons; it is just that Yehoshua deserved the promotion. He never left Moshe's side, even when Moshe was atop Mt. Sinai. Yehoshua was at the base of the mountain, separate from the people, anticipating Moshe's return. Loyalty and devotion, these were Yehoshua's qualities. The connection between master and student would last throughout the student's life. The Rambam viewed Moshe as a king of Israel, and he would similarly view Yehoshua in a Halachic understanding of a king.



<> MIDRASH. Rabbi Shimon analyzed the holidays of the Three Pilgrimage Festivals, and said that Pesach and Sukkot are week long festivals because the fields were not worked at that time, but Shavuot is a one day holiday because farmers need to work their farms at that time of the year. This demonstrates that Hashem does concern himself with the welfare of the Jewish farmer.



Questions by RED 


From the Text

1. What reward did Pinchas receive for his act of heroism? (25:22-23)

2. Contrasting the census in Bamidbar and Pinchas, which tribe lost the most and which tribe gained the most?

3. What did the daughters of Tzelofchad request? (27:3-4)

4. Who did Hashem appoint as Moshe's successor? (27:18)

5. How many lambs were the Shabbat Musaf offering? (28:7)


From Rashi

6. Why does the Torah now identify the names of the two people whom Pinchas killed? (25:14)

7. Why does the Torah command war with Midyan and not Moav? (25:18)

8. Why does the Torah mention that Korach's sons didn't die (in the rebellion)? (26:11)

9. Why does the Torah trace the lineage of the daughters of Tzelofchad all the way to Yosef? (27:1)

10. What made Moshe think that Hashem had a change of heart and would now allow Moshe to enter the Promised Land? (27:22)


From the Rabbis

11. Why did Hashem command a new census? (Abravanel)

12. What was Hashem promising Moshe when he told him to go up the mountain and he will "see" the Promised Land? (Our HaChayim)

13. What was Moshe to teach Yehoshua when Yehoshua was selected to succeed Moshe as the leader? (Ramban)


From the Midrash

14. Moshe did know how to answer Tzelofchad's daughters. Then why did Moshe say that he had to ask Hashem?


From the Haftara (Yirmiyahu)

15. What is the common ending of all three Haftarot of the Three Weeks?


Relationships

a) Menashe - Machir

b) Korach - Sh'muel

c) Machalat - Elifaz

d) MalkiTzedek - No'ach

e) Cham - Nimrod



ANSWERS

1. Pinchas will become a Kohen and the Kohen Gadol, and all future Kohanim Gedolim will come from his line.

2. Lost the most: Shimon lost about 37,000 men. Gained the most: Menashe gained about 30,000.

3. Since their deceased father had no sons, they requested receiving his heritage portion in the Promised Land.

4. Yehoshua

5. Two lambs

6. Pinchas deserved more praise for killing two prominent people from their respective societies.

7. Ruth will come from Moav.

8. The sons were originally part of the rebellion but did T'shuva immediately.

9. Because Yosef loved Eretz Yisrael, just as those women did.

10. Two things: One was that Hashem told Moshe about the laws of heritage land inheritance. Second was after defeating Sichon and Og, those lands were now part of Eretz Yisrael, and Moshe was in that territory.

11. To find out how many fighters there were in the army.

12. That Moshe was to experience a pain-free sacred death just like his brother had.

13. To instruct Yehoshua regarding his duties as a leader.

14. To give honor and respect to Hashem.

15. They all end with a note of hope and inspiration.

Relationships

a) Father & son

b) Korach was the great... grandfather of Sh'muel

c) Stepmother & stepson

d) Son & father
(MalkiTzedek was Sheim)

e) Grandfather & grandson



PhiloTorah This 'n That

TUE, eve of 18 Tamuz, July 23rd - Today, the fast day, saw me at home, not wanting to be out in the heat. Hence, a lot of the website has been updated already. The only things missing are contributions from some of the columnist who have yet to send me their piece.

The meal tonight was not just a fast-breaking meal for practical reasons. it was, or could have been, if one thought about it, a meal to commemorate the future.

Sounds weird? Agreed. Generally, one commemorates events that happened already, in the past. But when we have a prophecy of something to come, we have G-d's guarantee, so to speak, that it will definitely happen. And that allows us to commemorate that prophesied event.

Specifically, I am talking about the change of the fast days related to the Churban into Yamim Tovim. We weren't able to eat a festive meal on the 17th of Tamuz itself (except when the 17th falls on Shabbat), so right after the fast, we have the meal that reminds us of HaShem's promise. Remember, of course, that we cannot have a festive meal (at least one with meat) after Tish'a b'Av (unless that fast was postponed until Sunday the 10th). But for the other three fasts, one should keep in mind, the idea of projecting into the future (maybe even retro-actively).

Whole file on separate link



Saying SHEHECHEYANU DURING THE THREE WEEKS AND THE NINE DAYS


The following is culled from the sefer AVEILUT HACHURBAN by R' Yoel Schwartz


There are differing opinions on this issue.

According to Shulchan Aruch and the ARI z"l, one should not say this (joyous) bracha during the Three Weeks. Therefore, one should not buy a new fruit or new objects or clothing that would ordinarily prompt this bracha.

However, one should not "spoil" the joy of a mitzva during this period of time by not saying the bracha - therefore at a BRIT or a Pidyon HaBen (even if they were postponed) the bracha is said.

The Vilna Gaon holds that one need not refrain from this bracha during the Three Weeks.

The Mishna B'rura holds that one can say the bracha on Shabbat. Therefore a new fruit can be bought and held for Shabbat.

Furthermore, if a new fruit will not keep until Shabbat, then the bracha may be recited even during the week.

The Aruch HaShulchan holds that until Rosh Chodesh Av, one may say the bracha during the week, and thereafter, only on Shabbat.

Some poskim suggest that if refraining from SHEHECHEYANU will diminish one's ONEG SHABBAT, then the bracha can be said even according to those authorities who say not to say the bracha during the Three Weeks.

Ed. notes:

It would be simple to say that the bracha of SHEHECHEYANU is an expression of joy and it simply is out of place for the period of National Mourning known as the Three Weeks.

And that is close to what the Shulchan Aruch and the AR"I z"l say. But not quite. Because they allow it for the personal s'machot of Brit and Pidyon. And they even allow it for a fruit that will not be available after Tish'a b'Av.

This too is brought down in Aveilut HaChurban, with stages. If you can save the fruit for Shabbat, do so and make the bracha on Shabbat. But if the fruit will spoil by then, then you can eat it and make the bracha even during the week.

Wait. Stop. Reality check. Who says you have to eat a first-of-the-season fruit at any time? Why not avoid the clash of emotions by just skipping the new fruit for the Three Weeks? Simple, no? A mitzva is one thing, you might argue, but a fruit is just a fruit.

Obviously, not so. Even though it isn't obligatory, there is a special thing to saying a SHEHECHEYANU on a new fruit. Whenever possible. It isn't the fruit per se that requires the bracha, it is the good feeling of being alive at the milestones along the journey of life - the big milestones, such as Chagim and certain mitzvot - and the small milestones, the little things that remind us, over and over, that B"H we are alive.

And this joyous feeling of thanks to G-d need not be eliminated from the otherwise mournful period.

We might add that the Vilna Gaon is not bothered by the clash in feelings. We often have mixed feelings and emotions throughout our lives. We can say, That's Life! Or, perhaps more accurately, That's Jewish Life. We break a glass at a wedding to remind us of the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash and Yerushalayim specifically at the moment of our greatest joy. Shouldn't we be able to smile at the prune plum or the Anna apple that come out at this time of year?

This issue is apparently not simple. But what is? We need halachic guidelines as to how to cope with mixed emotions, rather than ignoring one or the other or suppressing one or the other.

In this particular issue, there is a range of opinions that allows us - perhaps - to handle things with a little flexibility, so that what we choose to do will be right for us, and with "on whom to rely".

One last point to think about:

Why should there be so many different opinions on this issue? Why make such a big deal out of what seems almost trivial?

Because it isn't trivial. Both aspects of this issue are important. National mourning for the Churban... and expressing our appreciation to G-d.