Does anyone have a davar Torah on parshat Emor?

Answer 1

Devarim

Sefer Devarim is called Mishneh Torah (meaning: repetition of the Torah).

The Ramban (in his introduction to sefer Devarim) asks: Why is it necessary to repeat all the laws in the Torah? They were already taught in the first 4 sefarim!?!

The Ramban answers: Moshe was nearing his death and the Jews were about to enter the land of Israel where they would implement the Torah they had learned. As a result, Moshe felt the need to clarify the Torah and encourage them to be zealous in fulfilling the laws. Additionally, there was an even greater need to re-teach the laws because this was a new generation which didn't receive the Torah directly from Hashem on Mount Sinai--so they had questions. Therefore, Moshe needed to clarify the Torah since the current generation didn't understand it clearly, and he needed to intensify their motivation regarding the implementation of the laws--since they didn't receive them directly from Hashem.

The Ramban continues by explaining a number of "new" law which weren't mentioned in the first 4 sefarim: 1) Divorce, 2) Giving someone a bad name, 3) Levirate marriage (Yibum), 4)witnesses who are found to be liars--but indicates that there are even more.

The question arises: Why were these laws specifically left out of the first 4 sefarim? To strengthen the question, the Ramban states that Hashem told ALL the laws to Moshe during the first year of Exodus...So why weren't these laws taught before?

The Abarbanel asks on the Ramban: If Moshe knew all the laws in the first year of the Exodus, then how could he withhold the knowledge from the nation for 39 years?!?

The Ramban offers 2 answers: 1) As stated earlier, Moshe needed to clarify the laws and intensify Israel's motivation in their fulfillment since they didn't experience Hashem giving over the Torah first hand on Mount Sinai. This was only needed now--for the new generation. 2) These "new" laws applied ONLY in the land of Israel--which they were now entering for the first time. Therefore, there was no need for the nation to know these laws until now.

However, how does the second answer make sense? The Gemara (Kiddushin, 37a) describes those laws which are limited to the land of Israel as "agricultural obligations." The "new" laws of sefer Devarim that the Ramban mentioned (Divorce, etc.) have clearly no connection to agriculture!?!

The Ramban answers by mentioning "nesachim" (libations--korban offering) as an example of a law which is not agricultural, and yet is applicable ONLY in Israel (as learned out from the Torah--Bambidbar, 15;2) Thus, the Ramban proves that there is at least one exception to the rule that only agricultural laws are limited to the land of Israel.

However, the laws of nesachim are in Bamidbar--not Devarim. If the laws of nesachim weren't needed to be taught until Israel reached the land of Israel and yet they were still taught before--then why weren't the "new" laws taught before as well?

Additionally, why were the laws of nesachim taught in Bamidbar if they weren't applicable until the nation reached the land of Israel?

Furthermore, the Abarbanel and Radbaz question the Ramban: We find that there are many agricultural laws that apply ONLY in Israel--and yet they are taught before sefer Devarim!?! (e.g. the laws of Shmittah and Yovel are taught in parshat Behar) Therefore, how could the Ramban say that these laws (Divorce, etc.) weren't taught until sefer Devarim because they're limited to the land of Israel? There were clearly many laws that were limited to the land of Israel and yet they were taught before!?!

The Ramban answers that the "new" laws in sefer Devarim are only new in terms of writing. Meaning, ALL the laws were taught to the nation in the previous 39 years in the desert. However, Hashem determined that certain laws should not be written until sefer Devarim (even though they were implemented earlier). The Ramban is telling us that just because a law is written at a certain place in the Torah doesn't mean that it was taught at that particular point in time.

Additionally, the Ramban offers a second answer: Moshe couldn't teach the nation the whole Torah at one time--he had to do it gradually As a result, there were certain laws that he didn't get the time to teach until the 40th year before they entered the land of Israel. Now, this isn't to say that the "new" laws in sefer Devarim weren't acted upon earlier--rather, among all the other laws, these new laws were able to suffer more procrastination than the others as they occur infrequently.

Now, sefer Devarim isn't unique just because it's a repetition of the previous 4 sefarim...but it's also unique due to its author.

Many commentators note that sefer Devarim was written by Moshe in his own words.

However, the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 104a) states that a prophet can't say in Hashem's name something in which he didn't hear directly from Him. Therefore, how could it be that Moshe wrote sefer Devarim all by himself if we know that the whole Torah came from Hashem?

The Abarbanel answers: At first Moshe said these words from his own initiative--then afterwards Hashem commanded him to write, and He dictated the same words that Moshe had said. Hence, there is nothing unique about the nature of this sefer, since there are similar instances in the Torah where other people have uttered their own words, and then Hashem dictated their words back to Moshe (e.g. Pharaoh, etc.). Thus, what sets sefer Devarim apart from the other sefarim isn't the quality of the author (Moshe). Rather, the quantity of the amount which originated from Moshe in sefer Devarim is much greater than all of the other sefarim.

I think we could learn from here a very important lesson: Sometimes people tend to feel a lack of connection to the Torah, for the Torah was written by Hashem who isn't human like we are. For this reason, Hashem showed the nation of Israel that the whole Torah was brought into existence by man (i.e. Moshe) in order to provide for them a greater connection to the laws (and thus be zealous in fulfilling them). Similarly, if we ever feel disconnected from the Torah due to its divine nature, we should all take note that nearly the whole entire sefer Devarim was taken from the exact words of Moshe, a human like us.

Summary: Sefer Devarim (mostly originated from Moshe) is known as Mishneh Torah (repetition of the Torah) for it repeats many laws stated previously in the Torah. However, the sefer still includes a number of "new" laws. The Ramban explains that these new laws were either taught previously and are only considered "new" in terms of being written in the Torah. Or, the Ramban explains, these "new" laws could be taken as genuine new laws in which their teaching was delayed since they occur infrequently.

Answer 2

Balak

Parshat Balak is a very notable parsha...

The Gemara (Berachot, 12b) says that Chazal wanted to add in parshat Balak to the Shema, but decided not to because it would be a burden for the congregation due to its length.

In this weeks parsha, Balak, the king of Moab, sends Bilaam as a messenger to curse the Jews. Therefore, let's meet Bilaam, the centerpiece of this weeks parsha..

Firstly, the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 105a) relates that Bilaam was blind in one eye and lame in one foot. Secondly, the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 105a) relates that Bilaam had relations with his donkey. Thirdly, the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 105a) relates that Bilaam was Laban's son (and according to some commentators, he was actually a reincarnation of Laban himself). Fourthly, according to the Midrash, Bilaam was one of the innovators of gambling dens and prostitution houses. Lastly, the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 105a) relates that Bilaam has no portion in the World to Come. And yet, despite his physical disabilities, his "interesting" sexual desires, his evil genes and his own evil doings, he was still a great man...

The Gemara (Sanhedrin, 105b) tells us that Bilaam was the only person in the world who knew the precise moment (about 1/15 of a second) in which Hashem gets angry every day (Note: The Gemara explains that this moment occurs when a roosters mane is completely white). Additionally, Chazal (Sifrei: Devarim, 34;10) tell us that Bilaam had prophetic powers on par with Moshe Rabbeinu--for Bilaam was the only other prophet besides Moshe to receive prophecy directly from Hashem (Note: The Rambam, however, states in "The Guide for the Perplexed" that there are 12 levels of prophecy, and Moshe was the only person to reach the 12th level. He maintains that Bilaam only reached the 2nd level of prophecy). Furthermore, Rashi (22;5) relates Bilaam was looked up to by all the kings, as they would all rush letters to him (asking for advice--Sifsei Chachamim). And what did Bilaam do for work? The Torah (Yehoshua, 13;22) relates that Bilaam was a sorcerer. Additionally, the Midrash (Bamidbar Rabbah, 20;7) relates that Bilaam was a philosopher, a dream interpreter and that kings would pay him large sums of money to bless/curse others. .

(Since the parsha is named after Balak, let's give him some attention. The Zohar states that Balak was a sorcerer and acquired all his wisdom from a bird--and so he was called "Balak the son of a bird." This is how he made the bird: He made the head out of gold, the mouth of out silver, the wings from light copper blended with silver, the body with gold, the feathers with round points of silver, the legs with gold, and he put the tongue of a bird called "known" inside its mouth. Balak would then place the bird by the window in the direction of the sun during the day, and by the window in the direction of the moon at night for 7 days. After 7 days the tongue would begin rattling but would be unable to speak. Balak would then puncture the tongue with a golden needle to which it would be able to speak and reveal the future using the powers of impurity. Additionally, the Zohar later states that Balak was a wise man, for he knew that the Satan transforms into the form of an ox, and he knew all the habits of that ox--if not for that knowledge he wouldn't have been able to perform all his witchcraft and enchanting charms.)

The obvious question is: Why did Hashem give so much prophecy to a wicked non-Jew?

Rashi (22;5) answers that if not for Bilaam, all the non-Jewish nations would give an excuse for why they didn't repent, saying "were we to have prophets we would have repented."

However, the problem still remains! Surely the non-Jews could still claim that were they to have a righteous prophet they would have repented?!?

Therefore, perhaps we could answer differently...

The Rambam (Yesodei Torah, Chapter 7) states that prophecy can only be received by one who is extremely wise, has mastered proper character traits, and battles to defeat his evil inclination constantly. Additionally, he must also sanctify himself and separate himself from the ways of the commoners. Moreover, he must bind all his intellect to Hashem. Furthermore, he must contemplate Hashem's wisdom regarding all matters and understand its significance. Lastly, he must hold a high rank in his generation regarding both wisdom and piety.

The obvious question is: How on earth did Bilaam receive so much prophecy?

I think if we take a close look at the parsha we'll see that Bilaam was actually righteous, and that all his powers simply got the best of him. Firstly, the Torah (22;8) relates that Bilaam told the elders of Moab and Midian that he would first need to ask Hashem if he could go on the mission to curse the Jews. We therefore see that Bilaam knew that Hashem was the source of all his powers. Later on (22;18) Bilaam even says "If Balak were to give me his houseful of silver and gold, I am unable to transgress the word of Hashem, my G-d, to do anything small or great." We therefore see that Bilaam had such a strong cling to Hashem that even all the riches in the world couldn't break the bond between them. Additionally, even after Bilaam sinned by hitting his donkey, he quickly admitted his sin and aspired to do the will of Hashem, as the Torah states (22;34): "I have sinned for I did not now that you were standing opposite me on the road. And now, if it is evil in your eyes, I shall return." Bilaam later tells Balak (22;38), "Whatever word Hashem puts into my mouth, that shall I speak!" Lastly, the Torah (23;10) relates that Bilaam wished to die among the righteous, as it states, "Who has counted the dust of Jacob or numbered a quarter of Israel? May my soul die the death of the upright, and may my end be like his!" We therefore see that Bilaam knew that he should have been righteous like Yaakov.

Bilaam summary: I think we could learn several points regarding Bilaam. Firstly, he knew that Hashem was the source of all his powers (for he first went to ask Hashem if he could go on his mission). Secondly, he had a strong connection with Hashem (for he said he would not be bribed to go against Him, even for a houseful of silver and gold). Thirdly, even when his powers got the best of him, Bilaam was able change his frame of mind and realize that he should be following the will of Hashem (for he admitted to sinning and aspired to follow in Hashem's ways). Fourthly and lastly, he knew he was supposed to be righteous, even though he acted wickedly (for he wanted to die and have the same merits as Yaakov).

I think we can now answer that Bilaam was able to receive all his prophecy because he really was righteous. It could be that before Bilaam received his prophecies he fulfilled all the requirements set by the Rambam. After he received his powers, however, he simply couldn't handle himself and they took over him.

I think we could also defend Rashi: The non-Jews can't complain that had they been given a righteous prophet they would have repented--for they were given a righteous prophet in Bilaam...He just simply became wicked.

Summary: Although Bilaam is known to be a truly evil man, it could be that he was once a righteous man, for even while performing wicked acts, he still knew that Hashem was the source of all his powers and would not be bribed, even for all the riches in the world, to go against Him.

***Bilaam not only tried to destroy the nation of Israel through curses--he also tried to destroy them through prostitutes. The Gemara (Sanhedrin, 106a) relates that Bilaam told Balak that Hashem hates prostitution, and that the Jews love linen garments. Therefore, he came up with the following plan. They made a bunch of curtains and had old harlots selling the linen garments outside for their true value, then he would have young (very attractive) harlots selling them inside (more secluded) at cheaper prices (in order so that the Jews would buy from the young harlots and realize the great deals). The Jews would (obviously) go buy their linen from the young harlots (since they came at cheaper prices), and after a few sales the young harlots would tell the Jews, "You are like family, take what you want for free." They would then pop out the wine and have the Jews drink in order to arouse their evil inclinations. After drinking the Jews would then ask the harlots to have relations with them...To which the young harlots would then take out an idol and tell them that they must first serve the idol. However, the Jews would respond that they are Jewish and thus cannot serve idolatry. To which the harlots would respond that they must simply excrete in front of it (since that's how the idol was meant to be served, and the Jews were unaware of this). And after the Jews would serve the idol, the harlots would add on a second condition--that they must deny the whole entire Torah...and the Jews (sadly) would follow through.

Answer 3

Behaaloscha "And the man Moshe was extremely humble, more than any person on the face of the earth" (Bamidbar, 12;3). The question is: How could someone so humble be a leader? The Rambam (Hilchos De'os, 1;4) writes that regarding all character traits, one must follow the middle path and not go to any extremes. The question grows: How could Moshe take his humility to the extreme? The Rambam (2;3) writes regarding arrogance that a person should go to the extreme and be "lowly of spirit." Additionally, the Mishna (Pirkei Avos, 4;4) writes "Rabbi Levitas of Yavneh said, be extremely lowly of spirit, for the end of man is worms." Furthermore, the Rambam (Pirkei Avos, 4;4) relates the following story: A religious Jew was once asked, "what was the happiest day of your life?" The man responded that once he was traveling on a ship in the lowest class when a wealthy man, in need to relieve himself, urinated all over him. And why was he so happy? The man explained that he was so happy because he knew that he had reached the level where he was able to throw away his pride and accept what had been done to him. Similarly, the Rambam explains on the Mishna that one should go to the extreme and be "extremely low of spirit." We now understand how Moshe was allowed to take his humility to the extreme. However, how could Moshe, being so humble, properly lead the nation of Israel? The Gemara (Sotah, 5a) states that a Torah scholar must have "an eight of an eight" of haughtiness. Additionally, the Gemara later says that anyone who doesn't possess at least some pride should be excommunicated. Rashi explains that the reasoning behind the excommunication is because without at least some haughtiness, the people of his community wont have the proper respect towards him and he'll therefore be unable to rebuke them. Therefore, it stands to reason that Moshe had some level of haughtiness in order so that he would be able to lead the nation of Israel. Now that we understand that Moshe was able to lead the nation of Israel because he had some level of haughtiness, why did the Rambam write (2;3) that a person should go to the extreme in terms of humility? Certainly, it seems clear from the Gemara (Sotah, 5a) that a person shouldn't go to the extreme (Note: The Rambam also contradicts himself by writing in 1;4 that a person should take the middle path regarding all character traits--meanwhile, he later says in 2;3 that a person should take arrogance to the extreme and be humble)? The Rambam (1;7) explains: A person should take his humility to the extreme in terms of thoughts (and not actions). Regarding his actions, however, the Rambam explains that a person should take the middle path. Therefore, the 2 pieces of Rambam do not contradict themselves, for the Rambam holds that a person should follow the middle path regarding humility (just like all other character traits) and only go to the extreme in his thoughts (but not his actions). We can also now explain the Rambam's view against the Gemara (Sotah, 5a). The Gemara held that a person must have at least some level of haughtiness, and indeed, the Rambam agrees with the Gemara, for he holds that in actions, a person should take the middle path in terms of humility (although the Gemara seems to imply that a person actually shouldn't take the middle path in terms of humility, from the fact that it writes "an eight of an eight of haughtiness"--which is simply speaking a lot less than the "middle path"--still, nevertheless, the Rambam seems to agree with the Gemara that a person requires at least some level of haughtiness, and that it must not be taken to the extreme). Now, why exactly does the Rambam differentiate between how a person should think and act regarding humility? If a person is supposed to act with some level of haughtiness, then why should he be required to think in his mind that he's really nothing? I think we can answer this question through the character trait of anger... Regarding the character trait of anger, we find a similar problem. In 1;4 the Rambam states that a person should take the middle path in terms of anger, whereas in 2;3 he states that a person should go to the extreme and not even become angry when there is good reason to become angry!?! I think we can answer these 2 questions as follows. Although anger is a horrible character trait, there are times when one is required to show some anger. For example, if a parent sees their child committing a terrible action, they are required to show some anger and rebuke their child. However, while they are required to show some anger in order to make sure their child acts properly, in their minds and in their thoughts they must keep a complete sense of serenity. Therefore, it could be that the Rambam states that one must take the middle path only in regards to his actions--in regards to his thoughts, however, he must be at complete peace. And why is there a differentiation by anger? Simply speaking, if a person doesn't keep a peaceful mind while showing anger then his actions could take over his thoughts, and he would then acquire a terrible character trait. Similarly, I think we can say the samething in regards to arrogance/humility. While one must take the middle path and show some level of arrogance, if one doesn't keep the mindset of complete humility then his actions will take over his thoughts and he'd acquire the terrible character trait of arrogance. Summary: Although Moshe was the humblest person in the whole world, he did attain some level of haughtiness, for one is required to have at least "an eight of an eight" or arrogance, and one who doesn't should be excommunicated (Sotah, 5a). Through this small level of arrogance Moshe was able to lead the nation of Israel. However, while Moshe acted as though he had a degree of haughtiness, in his thoughts he was completely clean, for otherwise his actions might overtake his thoughts and he'd go over the required level of arrogance.

Answer 4

Behar/Bechukotai In this weeks parsha we have the mitzvah of shmittah. The laws of shmittah state that every seventh year one is forbidden to work their fields and that they must leave their fields open for others to take whatever they wish. Rashi (25;18) states that the punishment for not fulfilling this commandment is excommunication. Additionally, the Gemara (Kiddushin, 20a) states that if one fails to fulfill this mitzvah then he will be forced to sell his chattel, then his fields, then his house, then his daughter, then he will have to borrow with interest, and lastly, he will be forced to sell himself to an idol worshipper who'll cause him to worship idols as well. Why is there such a severe punishment for not fulfilling the mitzvah of shmittah? Why should one who works their field every single year, instead of 6 out of every 7 years, be excommunicated or be forced to become an idol worshipper? Many commentators answer: The whole basis for the mitzvah of shmittah is that one must show faith in Hashem. Similar to Shabbat (in which the punishment is cares--being cut off from the nation), by not working ones field 1 out of every 7 years one shows that he trusts in Hashem that he will not lose out on any produce by refraining from work. Simply speaking, anyone who doesn't believe in Hashem, the most basic requirement of Judaism, is considered an idol worshipper and must be excommunicated. However, the Torah (25; 21) states that in the 6th year, the year before shmittah, anyone who didn't have faith in Hashem would receive a blessing so that their field would yield 3 years worth of crops. By doing this, Hashem would prove that He is in control of all their produce in order so that the nation shouldn't experience any financial loss by not working their fields the following year. Therefore, how could the whole basis for the mitzvah of shmittah be faith in Hashem? There's no need for faith when you're getting paid in advance!?! For this reason, I'd like to present an alternative possibility as for the reasoning behind the mitzvah of shmittah... Rashi (25;1) asks: Why does the Torah need to mention that the laws of shmittah were taught on Mount Sinai? Surely we know that the whole entire Torah was taught on Mount Sinai!?! Rashi answers that the Torah wanted to teach us that just as the laws of shmittah were taught in full detail on Mount Sinai, so too all the other mitzvot were taught in full detail on Mount Sinai (for perhaps one may have thought that the mitzvot were simply given on Mount Sinai and only explained afterwards). However, why did the Torah specifically use shmittah to teach us that all the laws were taught in full detail on Mount Sinai? Surely Hashem didn't just pick a random mitzvah in order to teach us this lesson...What was His reasoning behind using the mitzvah of shmittah to teach us that all the other mitzvot were taught in full detail on Mount Sinai? I think we could answer this question if we focus on the second main component of the mitzvah of Shmittah. Simply speaking, there are 2 difficulties in fulfilling the mitzvah of shmittah. The first one is very well known. As explained above, every seventh year one is forbidden to work on their field. This is difficult mitzvah to fulfill, for one must have proper faith in Hashem in order to trust that he won't suffer financially from not working. There is, however, another difficult aspect towards fulfilling the mitzvah of Shmittah... The second aspect of shmittah, also mentioned earlier, is that one must leave their fields open for others to take. On the surface level, this may seem like a side point. Surely, one may argue, that similar to Shabbat, the main aspect of shmittah is simply not to work your fields. While many commentators appear to hold this way, I'd like to present another perspective... I think that Torah is teaching us a great lesson by using the mitzvah of shmittah to teach us that all the mitzvot were explained in full detail on Mount Sinai. When Hashem gave the Torah on Mount Sinai, there was an extremely close connection between the whole nation of Israel. As many commentators explain, they were "like one man with one heart." Similarly, in order to properly fulfill the mitzvah of shmittah, one must have a feeling of oneness with the whole nation of Israel. And why is this? Because in order to allow others to take from your fields as they wish, one must feel a strong connection with them. If there is no feeling of unity between you and your neighbors, then one will end up closing their fields in order to avoid sharing their produce. Therefore, it could be that the Torah chose the mitzvah of shmittah because just like the nation of Israel were "like one man with one heart" on Mount Sinai, so too the nation of Israel must be "like one man with one heart" in order to properly fulfill the mitzvah of shmittah. (Additionally, the notion that the whole purpose of shmittah is to show faith in Hashem would be disproved, for there is no need for faith if one could take from any field as much produce as he wants.) Now that we understand the underlying aspect of shmittah, what exactly is the greatness of this mitzvah? I think we could compare the mitzvah of shmittah to the mitzvah of welcoming guests. And why is that? Because when one properly fulfills the mitzvah of shmittah, he is basically welcoming all guests to partake from the produce of his field. Similarly, when one fulfills the mitzvah of welcoming guests, he is allowing others to enjoy the fine comforts of his home (the only difference is, obviously, that shmittah is inviting guests outside your home, whereas welcoming guests is mainly performed inside your home). Now, how great exactly is the mitzvah of welcoming guests? The Gemara (Shabbat, 127a) speaks about the importance of welcoming guests. Rabbi Yochanan says that hosting guests is as great as coming early to the Beis Medresh. Rabbi Dimi of Neharda'a says that hosting guests is greater than coming early to the Beis Medresh. Rabbi Yehuda then says: Hosting guests is greater than receiving the shechinah (divine providence). Therefore, perhaps we can say that just like welcoming guests requires one to feel a strong connection with others, and is therefore even greater than receiving the divine providence, so too the mitzvah of shmittah which requires one to feel a strong connection with others is even greater than receiving the divine providence (although the mitzvah of welcoming guests is more difficult since it mainly takes place inside ones home, the mitzvah of shmittah counters with the extra difficulty that anyone could come and enjoy the produce of the field, whereas by welcoming guests, one could pick and choose who he wishes to have over his house--for this reason, it may even be possible to say that the mitzvah of shmittah is even greater than the mitzvah of welcoming guests). Let's Summarize: The popular opinion is that the purpose of fulfilling the mitzvah of shmittah is to show bitachon (trust in Hashem). However, considering Hashem blesses all those who don't trust in him by having their fields yield 3 years worth of produce the year before shmittah, there doesn't seem to be an issue of trust. The purpose of shmittah could therefore be that one must show a strong connection with his fellows, for in order to allow others to take as they wish from his field, one must feel a sense of oneness with them. Similarly, the mitzvah of welcoming guests, for which it is said to be greater than receiving the divine providence (Shabbat, 127a), requires one to feel a strong connection with his friends. Thus, perhaps one could argue that the mitzvah of shmittah is even greater than receiving the divine providence.

Answer 5

Acharei Mos/ Kedoshim

"You shall love your fellow as yourself--I am Hashem. (Vayikra, 19;18).

Rashi: Rabbi Akiva said, "This is a great rule in the Torah."

Many commentators note the following story regarding Rabbi Akiva before he began studying Torah at the age of 40:

The Gemara (Shabbat, 127b) relates: A man (Rabbi Akiva) in the north hired himself out to a man in the south for 3 years. At the end of the 3 year period (Erev Yom Kippur) he requested his wages, to which the employer responded that he had no money. The worker then requested his wages in produce, land, animals, pillows, blankets...but each time the employer responded that he had none. A little later (after Sukkot) the employer came back with the wages and 3 donkeys full of foods, drinks and delicacies. After eating and drinking the employer asked the worker what he thought when all his requests were denied. The worker responded: When you denied having money, I thought you spent all your money on merchandise. Regarding your animals and land, I thought you had rented them out. For your produce, I assumed it was not tithed yet. And regarding your pillows and blankets, I thought you must have pledged all your property for the Beis Hamikdash. Thus, we see that Rabbi Akiva cared so much about his fellows that he always made sure to judge them favorably.

However, loving your fellow as yourself appears more than just a "great rule"...

The Gemara (Shabbat, 31a) relates the following story: A non-Jew came in front of Shammai and requested conversion on condition that Shammai teach him the whole entire Torah while standing on one foot. Shammai then drove him away with a builder's rod. The non-Jew then decided to ask Hillel to convert him on the same condition (that he teach him the whole entire Torah while standing on one foot). Hillel responded the following: "Do not do to your friend what is hateful to you...the rest is commentary, go learn!" We therefore see that according to Hillel, loving your fellow as yourself is so important that in essence it is the entire Torah!

However, how could loving your fellow as yourself be the whole entire Torah?

The Rambam (Vayishlach) explains: It's impossible for one to fulfill all of the 613 mitzvot single-handedly--for some are only applicable to women, men, Cohanim, Levi'im, etc. How then does one fulfill all the mitzvot? The answer is by "loving your friend as much as yourself (Vayikra, 19;18)." (Similarly, the Mishna (Pirkei Avot, 2;10) states: "Let your friend's honor be as dear to you as your own.") When one cares for his friend as much as he cares for himself--he creates a bond with his friend and they automatically become partners in fulfilling the will of Hashem. As a result, through loving your friend as yourself one fulfils the whole entire Torah through messengers.

Now that we understand the greatness of loving our fellow Jews, how does one perform this near-impossible feat?

Rabbi Eliyahu Dessler writes that in order for one to develop a love for another person they must give to them. And why is that? Because when one gives to another they in effect become an extension of that other person. Naturally, when one gives to another, they rejoice in their success as if it was their own. For example, if one were to spend time and tutor a fellow for a test--surely they would rejoice if their fellow did well...Similarly, in order to love our fellow as ourselves we must first give--only then will we be able to merit a portion in their mitzvot and fulfill the whole entire Torah!

In Summary: Through mitzvah of loving our fellows as ourselves one could fulfill the whole entire Torah. However, in order to properly perform this great mitzvah, one must first be willing to give towards their fellows...Through giving we become extensions of our fellows and are thus able to merit a portion in their mitzvot...in this manner we will be able to fulfill the whole Torah!

Answer 6

Tazria/Metzora I'm sure most of us remember when we were kids and we got the chicken pox...It was basically a free week off from school. In this weeks Parsha we deal with tzaaras (a spiritual blemish, commonly known as leprosy). Similar to chicken pox, tzaaras was a skin disease... The Gemara (Erchin, 15b) relates that tzaaras comes upon one who speaks Lashon Hara. But how could that be? lashon hara is a terrible sin that's surely worth a more severe punishment!?! Before we answer this question, let's review the severity of speaking lashon hara: For starters, the Gemara (Sotah, 42a) relates that those who speak lashon hara will never be allowed to stand in the presence of the Divine Providence. Additionally, the Gemara (Erchin, 15b) states "it is fitting to stone one who speaks lashon hara" and "one who speaks lashon hara accumulates sins equal to the 3 great transgressions: idolatry, adultery and murder." Furthermore, the Gemara (Pe'ah, 1;1) states "lashon hara equals all sins combined." For this reason, the Chofetz Chaim, Vilna Gaon and other commentators classify lashon hara as the most severe sin in the whole Torah. Now let's review the actual punishment one receives when speaking lashon hara... The Rambam (Tumas Tzaaras, 16;10) writes that if a person would speak lashon hara, then the wall of his house would change color. The house would then be pronounced impure, and if he continued speaking lashon hara then his house would eventually be destroyed (while this may seem like a terrible punishment, chazal note that the previous inhabitants would hide their valuables in the walls of the homes, and these treasures would later be found when the house was destroyed). Once his house was destroyed, if he continued speaking lashon hara then the hides upon which he would sit/lie would change color and become impure. If he continued speaking lashon hara then the hides would be burned. Once the hides were burned, if he continued speaking lashon hara then his clothes would change color. If he continued speaking lashon hara then his clothing would be burned. Once his clothing were burned, if he still continued speaking lashon hara then his skin color would change and he would be declared a metzora (meaning, one who is afflicted with tzaaras). As a result, he would be forced to be alone and thus unable to speak lashon hara. Now that we understand the severity of speaking lashon hara, and the punishment which one would receive for speaking lashon hara, the obvious question arises... How could the Torah be so lenient on those who spoke lashon hara?!? I think the whole basis for tzaaras is to simply embarrass the person who spoke lashon hara. When he spoke lashon hara about his friend, he caused his friend needless embarrassment. So now in return, the Torah is causing him embarrassment by giving him tzaaras. If you look at the punishments, you'll see that the Torah really isn't trying to cause him a monetary loss (for even after his house is destroyed, he finds a treasure...etc.). Rather, the Torah's goal was to simply embarrass the one who spoke lashon hara, like he caused his friend...Therefore, when he goes out, his clothes have tzaaras, his skin has tzaaras...it's everywhere and he can't escape from it. As a result, quite naturally, he stays by himself out of pure embarrassment. However, how does this answer the question? One who speaks lashon hara should be stoned!?! How could we allow him to get "off the hook" by just getting tzaaras? The Gemara (Bava Metzia, 58b) states that anyone who whitens his fellow's face is considered as if he has killed him. From this Gemara we learn that embarrassing someone is like killing them. In explaining the severity of embarrassing another, the Gemara (Bava Metzia, 59a) states "it is better to throw oneself in a lit furnace than to make someone blush." Many commentaries explain that when one is embarrassed he feels such a strong sense of worthlessness that he is considered dead. Mar Ukva, a great scholar who was considered one of the Princes of the Babylonian exile, was a firm believer in risking ones life in order to keep a fellow from embarrassment... The Gemara (Ketubot, 67b) relates a very famous story. There was a poor man in Mar Ukva's neighborhood in which he would support by throwing 4 zuzim every day by his front door. One day the poor man decided to see who this generous donor was. That day, Mar Ukva was late returning from the Beis Medresh, while with his wife. When the poor man saw them put money by the door, he ran out to greet them. Mar Ukva and his wife then began to run away, with the poor man chasing after them. In order to avoid the poor man from seeing them, they jumping into a hot oven. The Gemara asks the obvious question: Why did Mar Ukva and his wife put their lives in danger just to avoid the poor man from seeing them? The Gemara then answers that it is better to throw oneself in a furnace than to make someone blush (the poor man would have blushed had he known who had been supporting him). I think we can now explain why the Torah punishes one who speaks lashon hara with tzaaras. When one gets tzaaras, he becomes embarrassed, just like he caused his fellow. The tzaaras is all over the place...on his house, clothes, furniture...even on himself. Everywhere he goes, everyone knows that he speaks lashon hara. As a result, this person is constantly embarrassed and begins to feel absolutely worthless. This feeling of embarrassment, the Gemara is telling us, makes him considered as though he was dead. Therefore, by receiving tzaarat, the one who spoke lashon hara actually received the punishment which he deserved...that being, death. In Summary: Lashon hara is the most severe sin according to many commentaries, deserving of death. As a result, when one would speak lashon hara they would receive tzaarat, for tzaarat causes one to feel embarrassed, thus causing a strong sense of worthlessness as though they were dead. *I once received an email with the following story: There was once a boy who peed in his pants during class (well, actually, I'm sure that has happened many times). The urine was all over his pants and dripped on to the floor. A little later, a girl was walking through the aisle holding a fish tank and slipped, causing all the water to spill on the boy (thus mixing in with the urine, making the urine unnoticeable). The teacher then became angry at the girl, and made sure that the boy was properly cleaned up with a brand new set of clothes. Later on the girl was told to apologize to the boy...To which she told him: I remember when I peed in my pants during class...I was so embarrassed. I saw that you had peed in your pants and I didn't want you to go through the same embarrassment I went through, so I spilled on the water on you...From this story I think we can learn the importance of avoiding our friends from embarrassment.

Answer 7

EMOR In this week's parsha we have a very interesting story... The Torah/Rashi (24;10-14) relate that the son of the Egyptian man who Moshe killed amazingly converted to Judaism and wanted to pitch his tent in the camp of the tribe of Dan. A certain individual, however, objected against him being allowed to do this. The man who converted reacted by cursing Hashem. As punishment, the Jews placed him in solitude. Hashem, however, commanded that the entire assembly should stone him...and so it was. The question is: How could the Egyptian who amazing converted just curse Hashem because of a petty argument? Let's go back to the incident in which Moshe killed his father... The Torah (Shemos, 12;2) states: "And Moses looked this way and that and saw there was no man, so he struck down the Egyptian and hid him in the sand." Rashi clarifies that "there was no man" doesn't mean, as one would think, that no one was around...for obviously Dathan and Aviram saw Moshe kill him. Rather, Rashi explains that Moshe saw that there was no one destined to convert from this Egyptian...as a result, Moshe saw no harm in killing him. However, the Egyptian's son actually did convert!?! There's seemingly a direct contradiction between 2 Rashi's!?! Before we answer this question, how exactly did Moshe kill the Egyptian? The Midrash Rabbah relates that Moshe pronounced Hashem's name against him and thus slew him. Why is it that when Moshe pronounced Hashem's against the Egyptian, the Egyptian died--and yet when the Egyptian convert pronounced Hashem's name against the Jews he got stoned? The answer could rest in the purpose behind the pronouncements. When Moshe killed the Egyptian by pronouncing the name of Hashem, he was following in the path of Hashem. The Egyptian deserved death, and so Moshe killed him. However, when the Egyptian convert pronounced the name of Hashem, his goal was to rebel against the Jews, for he was clearly furious. Now, to answer the first 2 questions (How could the Egyptian convert just curse Hashem, and why did Rashi say there would be no convert) let's take a look at how the Egyptian convert knew Hashem's ineffable name... Rashi (Vayikra, 24, 11) relates that the Egyptian convert knew the name of Hashem from Mount Sinai, when the Jews received the Torah. When Hashem said "I am the G-d who took you out of Egypt...etc.", he heard Hashem's ineffable name. I think we can now answer the first 2 questions. The greatness of the scene in which the Jews received the Torah was unimaginable. For example, the Gemara (Zevachim, 116a) relates that when the Torah was given, Hashem's voice was heard over the entire world and there was a worldwide earthquake! Hashem performed many miracles (e.g. healed all the blind and deaf people) at the time of the giving of the Torah just so he could establish a closeness between Him and his nation...and yet, what did the Egyptian convert learn from this incident? He learned how to curse Hashem and failed to be moved, just like all the non-jews, by all the miraculous miracles. Because of this, I believe, Rashi said that there would be no convert from the Egyptian whom Moshe killed because the purpose of the most significant event in Jewish history was completely missed by the Egyptian convert. Although he was technically Jewish, he was lacking the real live experience in which all Jews, even nowadays, experienced back then. As a result, the Egyptian convert didn't really feel a closeness to Hashem (for by missing the purpose, he was basically not present at the time the Torah was given), and he was thus able to bring himself to curse Hashem through a petty argument. --Through the same incident in which, according to Rabbi Elazar (Zevachim, 116a), caused Yisro to convert (the giving over of the Torah)--the Egyptian convert ended up cursing Hashem and getting stoned as a result. In Summary: Although the son of the Egyptian in which Moshe killed technically converted, he was lacking the closeness to Hashem in which the whole nation of Israel, even nowadays, experienced and was thus not really Jewish. Each and every one of us, whether we remember/feel it or not, experienced the giving over of the Torah, and that is something in which we needed in order to properly serve Hashem. Although the Egyptian convert experienced the giving over of the Torah, he completely missed the whole point of the incident, and was thus able to be conquered by the yetzer hara to curse Hashem over a petty argument.

Answer 8

Shoftim

In this week's parsha we have the mitzvah of appointing judges.

Let's first see the rewards for fulfilling this mitzvah properly...

The Gemara (Shabbat, 10a) relates that a judge who performs his work properly even for a short period of time receives reward as though he was Hashem's partner in creation. Additionally, Rashi (16;20) states that by appointing righteous judges, the nation of Israel merit life and the ability to settle in the land of Israel. Furthermore, the Gemara (Shabbat, 139a) states that if all evil judges are destroyed, then so too will all the oppressors of the nation. Lastly, the Gemara (Shabbat, 139a) relates that one who judges righteously receives the divine providence.

Now let's see the punishments regarding this mitzvah...

The Gemara (Shabbat, 139a) states "Every punishment that comes in this world is only on account of the judges." Additionally, the Gemara (Shabbat, 139a) states that Hashem won't rest his divine presence on the nation of Israel until all evil judges are destroyed. Furthermore, the Torah (17;12) relates that one who didn't listen to the judges would be put to death. Even further, the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 7a) states: A judge should imagine that a sword is between his thighs and that Gehinnom is underneath. If he judges truthfully then he is saved from both; if not, he is punished by both Lastly, the Gemara (Bava Metzia, 30b) states that Jerusalem was destroyed because the judges judged in accordance with the Torah's laws instead of going "beyond the letter of the law."

The question is: Why does the whole entire nation get rewarded/punished based on the actions of their judges? I think a close look at this mitzvah will show that the whole nation plays a key role in their rulings...

The Torah (16;19) states "the bribe will blind the eyes of the wise and make righteous words crooked" (Kesubos 105b: A wise man who accepts a bribe will turn blind before they die). I think the Torah is teaching us that even if the judges are very righteous and wise, they still won't be able to hold back the natural temptation of accepting bribes. Therefore, in order to avoid judges accepting bribes, people themselves must act righteously and not try to seek favor in eyes of judges. Thus, when judges rule erroneously, it is partially because of the litigants involved...

Now, the law against accepting bribes didn't only apply to money, but to any type of favor. To illustrate, the Gemara (Kesubos, 105b) relates that Shmuel (a judge) was walking on a bridge when a man gave him some help. Shmuel then found out that the man had a court case and immediately disqualified himself from judging his case (for then he would be biased). Additionally, the Gemara (Kesubos, 105b) relates that a feather blew onto Ameimar's (a judge) head and a man removed it. Ameimar then learned that this man had a court case, so Ameimar immediately disqualified himself from judging the case (again, because he would be biased). The Gemara (Kesubos, 105b) relates further that Mar Ukva (a judge) spit and a man then came and covered his spit. Mar Ukva then heard that the man had a court case, so he disqualified himself from judging the case. We see that are so many ways in which people could make themselves more favorable in the eyes of judges...

Rashi (19;16) relates that in order for both parties to have a fair chance, a judge can't have one party sit and the other stand. On this point, the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 19a) relates that King Yanai's slave killed someone. Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach, the president of the Sanhedrin, ordered that the king be present while his slave is judged. When Yanai came to the court case he sat down. Rabbi Shimon, however, told him that he must stand up. Yanai responded that he would listen to the judges...The judges, however, feared the king so they looked down...Rabbi Shimon then said that Hashem should punish them (since they were clearly biased in favor of the king and his slave)...Immediately, an angel (Gavriel) came and struck them to death.

Now we understand why the whole nation gets rewarded/punished when judges don't work properly. However, what should people do in order to make sure they act correctly? I think a close reading of the parsha will give us this answer...

The Torah (16;18) states, "Judges and officers shall YOU give UNTO YOURSELF." The question is: Why is everyone required to give themselves their own judges? Why couldn't Moshe simply appoint judges for the whole nation himself? Many commentators answer: The Torah is teaching us that everyone has an obligation to have their own actions judged. Meaning, we all need people watching over us to make sure we stay on the right path. It's when we don't have guidance that we stray off the path. Therefore, the mitzvah of appointing judges is applicable to the whole nation, and in order to prevent ourselves from acting improperly we must appoint "judges and officers unto ourselves."

Similarly, the Mishna (Pirkei Avos, 1;6) states "acquire a friend for yourself." What's the reasoning for this? Many commentators explain that one must acquire a friend in order to have all their actions corrected. The importance of friendship is astronomical, as the Gemara (Taanis, 23a) states "either friendship or death." We are all responsible for the actions of our fellow Jews (Shavuot, 39b) and must therefore take action to guide one another. Thus, I think we could draw a comparison between the mitzvah of appointing judges and the mitzvah to acquire a friend. Why? Because both mitzvot require one to appoint a guardian over themselves to make sure they act correctly.

Summary: The whole nation of Israel receive incredible rewards (Rashi 16;20--life, land of Israel, etc.) and punishments (Shabbat 139a: no divine providence, Bava Metzia 30b: destruction of Jerusalem, etc.) based on the rulings of their judges. And why is that? Because everyone is able to affect the judgments ruled by even the most righteous and wise of judges (based on pasuk 16;19). The solution to prevent oneself from seeking favor in the eyes of judges is to appoint "judges" over ONESELF (as the Torah states: 16;18) in order to have all their actions corrected. This is similar to the mitzvah of acquiring a friend (Pirkei Avos, 1;6) who will provide constant guidance on to the right path. If we all properly fulfill this mitzvah then we will receive no punishments (Shabbat, 139a).

Answer 9

Succot

The Vilna Gaon was once asked what the hardest mitzva to perform in the Torah is. He replied by saying that he had examined all the mitzvot, and that the hardest one to perform is undoubtedly the mitzva to rejoice during Succot. The Torah explains that one must rejoice every instant of the seven days and nights of the festival. During that time, it is forbidden to have any sad thoughts whatsoever. That, the Vilna Gaon said, is indeed the hardest mitzva to perform.

However, what's so difficult about being happy? Happiness doesn't require any work!?! Why did the Vilna Gaon consider happiness during Succot the hardest mitzva in the Torah?

Let's first learn the greatness and importance of happiness...

The Midrash (Tanna D'Bei Eliyahu Zutta, Ch. 17) states that the true essence of Torah could only be experienced in happiness. Additionally, the Gemara (Shabbat, 30b) states that the divine providence only rests in a place of happiness. Similarly, the Gemara (Chagigah, 5a) relates that in Hashem's dwelling place there only exists joy. Furthermore, the Gemara (Shabbat, 30b) states that happiness causes good dreams. Lastly, the Gemara (Yerushalmi: Sukkah, 5;1) states that divine inspiration will never enter an unhappy heart.

However, how does one learn to become happy? What is the key to happiness?

Two pesukim before the commandment to be happy (Devarim, 16;14), the Torah tells us, "And you shall remember that you were a slave in Egypt; and you shall watch and do these statues" (Devarim, 16;12). Hashem is telling us to remember that He took us out of the land of Egypt, tended to our every need in the desert for 40 years, then brought us to the land of Israel. In other words, Hashem only wants the best for us. Similarly, the Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 325) writes that the mitzvah of Sukkah is designed so that we remember all the miracles Hashem performed for us in the desert.

When one recognizes that Hashem is always there for them--happiness becomes natural. Hashem doesn't simply command us to be happy on Succot. He first tells us that we should recognize that everything is for the best. Once one recognizes this fact, one can easily fulfill the commandment to be happy for the 7 days of Succot.

Going back to the story about the Vilna Gaon, perhaps we can now understand why he considered happiness for the 7 days of Succot the hardest mitzva to perform in the whole Torah. True happiness requires constant awareness and recognition of everything Hashem provides us with. Although everyone wants to be happy, giving Hashem credit for everything you do is something very difficult to do. Therefore, the Vilna Gaon said that happiness during the 7 days of Succot is the hardest mitzva in the Torah to perform.

However, why exactly is happiness so important?

In parshat Ki Tavo we have 98 curses, and the reason given for them is (Devarim, 28;47): "Since you did not serve Hashem, your G-d, with joy and good heartedness, in total affluence"

I think the Torah is teaching us a very important lesson. Even if we fulfill all the mitzvot, if we do them simply out of fear/habit then they really don't mean anything to us. We have to take the mitzvot to our hearts and fulfill them out of love. And why is that? Because if we don't follow in Hashem's ways in happiness then we fail to establish a connection with Him--which is the whole point of performing mitzvot. Therefore, in order to become closer to Hashem we must constantly push ourselves to be in a state of happiness.

Rabbi Nachman of Breslov (Likutei HaMaHaRan Tanina, chapter 24) states that it's a great mitzvah to constantly be full of joy. In fact, Rabbi Nachman goes on to say that when one lacks joy it leads to illness, and only through rejoicing can the illness be cured. Due to constant life troubles, happiness at times could be very hard. But one must always make effort to push themselves "over the hill" and gladden themselves.

Summary: According to the Vilna Gaon, the hardest mitzvah in the Torah to fulfill is to be happy all 7 days of Succot. Why? Because true happiness requires constant awareness and recognition that Hashem is the source of everything. The Torah hints this to us by telling us to remember how Hashem freed us from Egypt right before the commandment to be happy (Devarim, 16;12, 14). It is only through happiness that one can establish a connection with Hashem, for He only dwells in places of joy (Chagigah, 5a). We must make sure to perform all of His commandments out of love and not out of fear/habit, for it is only through love which we could establish a connection with Him. It's a GREAT mitzvah to be constantly full of joy, and we should all learn how to gladden our hearts during times of trouble.