Student Contributors

Not long ago we were reading in the parshat Shelach of the fall-out from the report of the 12 spies sent to investigate the Land of Israel. In 14:34 there is a doubling of the phrase “a day for a year” such that the verse reads “Like the number of days that you spied out the Land, forty days, A DAY FOR A YEAR, A DAY FOR A YEAR, shall you bear your iniquities - forty years - and you shall comprehend straying from Me.”

The question I propose is: What is the meaning of this doubling? Why is that phrase there two times? In the past I have learned that when there is a doubling of a word or phrase it is there to teach us something. I do not like to come up with an answer “off the top of my head based on my internal logic,” but prefer to rely on source material. To my surprise, I could not find any one mentioning this doubling. This is after searching through Midrash Rabba, Rashi, Ramban, RaMChaL, the Stone edition commentators, and Toras Menachman. I do not pretend to have a complete library, but something so glaring should have something? Nu? The only answer I could come up with is that it is so obvious, that it need not be discussed by any of our Torah giants.

I consulted with my chavruta partner who is also Ishti, Elisheva. She was able to see an understanding right away. While this is not the type of source material I generally use, at least it is not something off the top of my head. The two identical phrases have two meanings. The first phrase refers to the punishment that HaShem will exact on Bnai Israel. The second phrase refers to the distillation process that HaShem will winnow out those who lack faith.

This fits in with what Rabbi Shlomo Katz has taught in his class on Chasidut. It is not enough just to want to be in the Land of Israel, you have to be ready at the level of Tamid (always). You have to know automatically, Tamid, inside “What is Right.” Bnai’ Israel wanted to be in the Land of Israel. But, they were not at the level of Tamid. Therefore, they were not allowed to enter and it was up to their children to demonstrate Tamid.

Also, we once again see the number 40. In this case the spies spent 40 days spying. Their punishment was 40 years in length. Forty is for the number of days of rain (Noah), the number of days Moshe was receiving the Commandments, the number of lashes the Court meted out, etc., etc. It would seem that an undertaking involving 40 should caution us to pending errors in our ways. Just a thought.

Dear Reader, if you have another interpretation based on source material, I would dearly like to hear it, either through the Comments section or directly via my email address.

There is very little written and much confusion about the Obligation of Women for Tefilla.  A Siddur we recently purchased from Artscroll has a section written by Rabbi Hersch Goldwurm entitled “Women’s Obligation to Pray”.  There is some confusion in this section concerning whether this obligation is from the Torah or Rabbinic; as well as the extent of this obligation. 

Without the Oral Torah we would often not understand what are the true Torah requirements. I decided to do a little research on my own and found that Gemara Tractate Kiddushin (29a) derives from the Scripture that women are exempt from all positive commandments from the Torah whose performance are time-bound.  The Shema falls into this category, according to Rashi, since its recital is required at certain times of the day.   In Mishna Berachos we are told that women are exempt from reciting the Shema but are obligated in prayer.  We are definitely here informed that despite the profound significance of Shema, women nevertheless are exempt.

The Gemara Berachot (20b) states that women “are obligated in prayer, because prayer is essentially a request for Divine mercy, and women have as much a need as men.

Now the big questions are whether this obligation is from the Torah or the Rabbis and what women’s prayers should include.  Don’t expect this to be a simple answer please.  Rashi states that prayer is a rabbinic obligation, and thus the issue of time is no longer relevant.  Ramban also holds this view. According to Rambam and Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 106:1) women’s obligation to pray is from the Torah.  Rambam finds this Biblical obligation to pray, based on Exodus 23:25.  “You shall worship Hashem, your G-d, and He shall bless your bread and your water, and I will remove illness from your midst.” (Hilchot Tefilla 1:1)  Rambam also tells us that in the Torah there were no set times at which one must pray.  The times set were of rabbinic origin. To Rambam this makes prayer a non-time-bound obligation, and therefore women are included in it.

There are several opinions regarding the extent of the obligation. According to the Mishna Berura (106:4) women are required to recite the Shemoneh Esrei of Shacharit and Mincha. Women also are obligated to recall the Exodus and recite the Shema twice a day.  Some require further prayers.  A lenient opinion of Magen Avraham (Orach Chaim 106:2) is that women are obligated by the Torah to pray once a day and they may formulate the prayer as they wish. In many places the minhag follows this lenient opinion.

Any thoughts on Women’s Obligation for Tefilla would be appreciated.  Feel free to write them in the Webyeshiva blog or contact me directly.

This article was originally published at http://torahonline.weebly.com http://dwellingplacebelow.blogspot.com

Imagine the world before creation… the Spirit of G-d hovered over the face of the waters. A topsy turvy world flooded with water, the source of life. G-d brings light into the world… and darkness. He separates the waters and the dry land is seen. It is here where creation takes places. Life comes into the world. Even the dry earth is filled with a sense of life – or else it would be non-existent. The plants grow, the animals move, and man speaks.

None will survive without the waters, the very essence of all creation. Inside those waters rest a stillness, a purity of G-dliness. Without these waters, life ends. But the waters have been separated, and it seems we mostly associate them with the fluid that enters our body – that it is only here where life exists. Yet, in truth, we look upon that same fluid as the very element to bring comfort to ourselves, whether it be through taking a bath, a shower, a swim in the pool or in the sea itself.

Not for nothing do these waters bring life to the soul inside the body – and to the body itself as it becomes refreshed and rejuvenated through being in contact with them. It is from them that all life began.

And G-d separated these waters into four main channels – and a river flowed out from Eden. That place of absolute purity, of absolute goodness and kindness, that place of heaven on earth. And through these waters, the rest of the world has some contact with the original waters originating in Eden itself.

When those waters gather of their own accord without any human intervention, into a specific sized vessel inside the ground itself, they become known as a Mikva – a place used for the “purification” of every married Jewish woman once a month. She enters these waters after experiencing a “loss” of life some 12 days before. It is by no means a physical purity which she seeks, nor did she do anything consciously wrong to need these holy waters. Through the mystical process related directly to the concept of conception, and having lost the opportunity (often by no choice of her own) of conceiving a child, a spiritual “impurity” rests upon her. She must remove this through re-entering the womb of life itself. She enters the waters in the ground, covering her naked body completely – not even one hair of her head remains above the water, and then renews herself (through the mystical process of the Mikva) as a baby leaving the womb filled with water around it. But more, she unites with the original water that lies in the Garden of Eden itself.

It is not something to be taken lightly, for every Jewish woman must spend much time and money in being able to fulfill this Mitzva – this commandment. It is a most precious one, that ultimately brings into the world holy Jewish souls. Souls that will enter bodies – to bring goodness and kindness to this world.

A Primer on the Washing of the Hands (Netilat Yadayim) - by Larry Cohen

I have recently begun reading a very interesting book recently published in English by Artscroll. It is the first of a five-volume set containing the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch with differing interpretations to and rulings of Mishna Berura and Igros Moshe. Other sources are delved into as well. I had become interested in source material for Halacha through the inspiration provided by Rabbi Fink in his classes on Halacha. Concurrent with this renewed interest I answered Artscroll’s advertisement for this book. While it does go into many other sources for rulings, it will not make me a giant in this subject — perhaps a pigmy? I would recommend this series for as it is in Hebrew, and Hebrew Interpolated with the English as well. Volume 2 is scheduled to come out in July.

Many of us (including myself) have learned hand washing from others (through observation). I have never seen a course offered in this subject or even publically discussed at all. What we learned to do through observation and/or instruction has become routine. I started reading the above referenced book and found it to be an eye opener on this subject. I would like to share with you some of the concepts that were a surprise to me.

While hand washing upon rising in the morning is Rabbinic in nature; there is an allusion to it in Tehillim 26:6-7. “I will wash in cleanliness my hands …” A spirit of impurity leaves your body after awakening — except for your fingers. Washing of the hands (really the fingers) in the prescribed manner without a blessing removes the impurity. However, it is considered proper to wash the hands until the wrist.

Now, what is the proscribed procedure? “One takes the utensil filled with water with his right hand and transfers it to his left hand. He then pours the water first onto his right hand. After this he takes the utensil filled with water with his right hand and pours the water onto his left hand. He should do this (in alternating fashion) three times.”

Where should the water go from the hand washing? One must keep in mind that the water is impure. It should not be used to water animals, wash the floor, wash dishes, or thrown onto an area where people will walk so as they do not become contaminated by the impurity in the water. It should simply be poured down the drain or an open area that is not walked on.

Before washing, one must be careful not to touch an orifice of the body (mouth, nostrils, eyes, eyelids, ears, rectum), or food. If food is touched before washing then the food must be rinsed off three times.

The amount of water used should equal at least a revi’it (between 2.9 and 5.1 oz.), not discolored, be applied through human force (i.e., not from the faucet directly over the hands but from a utensil).

After you clean yourself and have attended to your needs (urination, etc.) you return again to perform the hand washing a second time and with the standard blessing. Some hold that the second washing should be done just prior to when you begin davening.

There are many activities during the day that require hand washing. A few are: arising from a bed, leaving a lavatory, cutting nails or hair, marital relations, scratching the head, etc. The Mishna Berura specifically states “having impurities (ruach ra) on his hands does not prohibit him from praying or studying Torah. Thus, one who does not have water (without which the ruach ra will not be removed), can clean his hands with any material and pray; later, when he obtains water he must wash his hands with water to remove the ruach ra.”

I would be remiss if I did not address Chabad. Undoubtedly some of you noticed that Chabad conducts hand washing differently than described above. To understand how Chabad has changed from the Mishna Berura, one needs to consult the Shulchan HaRav — not a very large book.

There are other important details that I have not included. I hope this short essay sparks the reader’s interest to investigate further.

There are very few specific women named at all in the Talmud. Bruria, the great scholarly wife of Rabbi Meir, has attained some fame and popularity today. Her knowledge brought her to such a summit of true spiritual wisdom that she was able to accept the sudden tragedy of her sons’ deaths on a Shabbat afternoon. She withheld her agony until after Rabbi Meir completed the Shabbat Havdala ritual, then she spoke to him like a teacher using the style of rabbinic discourse to edify deep love and acceptance for Divine Judgment.

Ima Shalom, the kind and pious wife of Rabbi Eliezer is another woman quoted in the Talmud. Few other women are mentioned by name in rabbinic literature. Talmudically speaking, however, Yalta is the most remembered woman. As an aristocrat living in the fabulous mid 3rd century CE, during the early generations of the Amoraim, Yalta is referred to or directly quoted 8 times in the Babylonian Talmud—more than any other woman before or after.

Yalta’s fame has much to do with her family’s fortune. She lived in the city of Nehardea, in Babylon, known as an affluent southern town along the Euphrates River. Her father Rabba Bar Avuha held very important positions in Babylon. He was the Reish Galuta, the Exilarch or governor of the Jewish community in Babylon, as well as the Reish Sidra, the Head of the Academy in Nehardea. Yalta’s family had great wealth and powerful influence. She was the privileged pubescent princess when her father chose as her groom the young Rav Nachman, who would later become a very prominent rabbinic Judge.

The empires ruling the lands of Babylon employed leaders to govern the various subcultures living within their territories. Members of the Jewish royalty with direct lineage from King David were appointed by the Babylonian rulers to govern the Jewish community. This position of leadership was called the Exilarch, Reish Galuta in Aramaic, which meant “head of the exiled community”. The Exilarch governed the entire Jewish community, collected their taxes and petitioned the rulers for their needs. The Exilarchy was employed in the lands of Babylon from as early as 598 BCE until as late as the 11th century CE. There is mystery surrounding its beginnings, and only later was the ancestry traced back to King Yehoyakim, the last king of Israel from the Davidic line.

The infamous “Babylonian Exile” following the destruction of the First Temple in Jerusalem was actually made up of 3 events spanning 17 years: 1) In 597 BCE during the time of King Yehoyakim, the Temple of Jerusalem was partially despoiled and a number of the leading citizens were removed; 2) Eleven years later, in 586 BCE during the reign of King Tzidkiyahu, the Holy City of Jerusalem was razed to the ground and a further deportation ensued; 3) Finally, in 581 BCE the Prophet Yermiyahu recorded a third captivity. According to Jewish tradition they returned to the Holy Land 70 years later. In 537 BCE, 2 years after the Babylonian Empire was overthrown by Cyrus II of Persia, the Jewish exiles were given permission to return to their Holy Land; more than 40,000 are said to have availed themselves of the privilege. However, the vast majority of the Jewish “exiles” remained in what they called Babylon, living and thriving under the new Persian rule.

Today we still talk about the Babylonian Exile, the Babylonian Talmud, and refer to the geographical area of the Diaspora as Babylon, but the actual ancient Babylonian Empire was already ancient history for Yalta and her Sassanian contemporaries. The Babylonian Empire was overthrown by Cyrus II of Persia in 539 BCE; later defeated in 331 BCE by Alexander the Great, whose mysterious death left the area to decades of turmoil; in 141 BCE ruled by the Parthian Empire, remaining desolate and obscure for the next 300 years. In 224 CE the Sassanian Empire rose to power and began an expansionist period. The Jewish exiles flourished, establishing cities in Nehardea, Sura and Pumbedita along the Euphrates River, the calmer of the two primary rivers joined by a series of man-made channels irrigating the entire fertile expanse. The Jewish settlement followed along the famous trade route—the Silk Road. Today the area is part of Iraq.

Jewish life back in the Holy Land of Israel went through a few major changes over the roughly 850 years from the original Babylonian Exile to the period of Yalta’s lifetime, while perhaps the majority Jewish population remained in “exile”. Two destructions of the Temple in Jerusalem, followed by two resurgences of Jewish civilization occurred in the Holy Land of Israel, all the while a Jewish community remained, established itself, and even thrived in the area of ancient Babylon in cities along the Euphrates river.

Yalta’s privileged childhood in Nehardea closely followed the epic historical return to Babylon of the great Abba Arecha, the most legendary member of her own extended family, best known simply as “Rav”. Born in Babylon, Rav went to live and learn in the Holy Land of Israel for many years. When Rav eventually returned to Babylon he discovered the local Jewish scholarship poorly organized and the standards of knowledge greatly lacking. Rav brought back the Mishna of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and founded an academy in Sura. He led the ancient Jewish renaissance of his time, spreading the teachings and customs of the Holy Land of Israel to the large population of Jews throughout Babylon. Yalta was most likely born a few years before Rav passed away in 242 CE.

As a Jewish woman living in today’s Diaspora, having enjoyed the best years of my life in Jerusalem, I am often reminded of Yalta and the times in which she lived. Jewish life was in transition for the better. There was a renaissance of Jewish learning and observance happening in the Diaspora. The majority Jewish population of the world lived in the Diaspora, praying towards Jerusalem and praying for Jerusalem. Jews in “exile” were emotionally and spiritually involved with news of happenings back in the Land of Israel. Emissaries, or Shlichim from the Holy Land of Israel brought the news and teachings to Babylon regularly and hoped to return to the Holy Land with plenty in collected donations. The similarities between Yalta’s times and my own today are often uncanny.

Continuous conflict between the warring nations in the Middle East affect all Jewish establishments in the Holy Land and throughout the Diaspora. During Yalta’s time the effects were somewhat different than today—the Jewish population in the Holy Land of Israel was dwindling, due to political oppression and economic hardship. The wealthy communities throughout the Diaspora pulled the center outward—to Alexandria, Constantinople, Rome, and the Babylonian academies in Nehardea, Sura and Pumbedita. Today, the converse is happening. The anticipated majority world Jewish population is returning to the Holy Land in the modern State of Israel. Today, the worldwide resurgence of Jewish learning and observance is pulling the exiled back to their center in Jerusalem.

The Jewish renaissance that benefited Yalta was led by Rav and continued to flourish in Babylon. The Jewish renaissance that benefits me owes much to the recent leadership of Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik (1903-1993), best known simply as “The Rov” who ordained close to 2,000 rabbis in America over 40 years as the head of Yeshiva University. The Rov articulated the paradigm of Torah U’Mada—Torah and Scientific Knowledge, advocating a synthesis between Torah and secular scholarship, as well as positive involvement with the broader community. The Rov expressed open and passionate love for the Holy Land and later modern State of Israel throughout his life. At the beginning of his career in Boston, young Rabbi Yosef Soloveitchik decided to compete for the position of Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv in 1935, prior even to establishment of the state. Elections were held at the end of 1936—The Rov came in third. Rav Amiel became the new Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv. Rav Herzog, who would later become Chief Rabbi of Israel, came in second. Sadly, The Rov’s love of Israel was often staunchly opposed by prominent members of his own family, and he was never able to actualize his own teachings promoting the current shift of the center of Jewish life back to the Land of Israel.

I feel that The Rov, like Rav, was the harbinger for the Jewish renaissance and shifting center of scholarship in each time. Just as Rav brought the Mishna from the Holy Land to establish academies in the Diaspora, so too The Rov enabled the return to Jerusalem and the Land of Israel as the center of Jewish learning.

In remembering Yalta, we gain perspective on our own times. Today, most can live as privileged in Jewish learning as only she, the princess of the Exilarch, daughter of the Reish Sidra and wife of the prominent Judge Nachman could in her own auspicious time. Today, just as in Yalta’s day, Jews in the Diaspora are, primarily, wealthy and established, and not victims of oppression. Today, like Princess Yalta herself, most Jews are considered to be descendants of the great King David of the tribe of Yehuda. Today, as only the aristocrats such as Yalta could in those times, all can learn Torah from Israel no matter where they are in the world through the internet, 24 hours a day! Today, if Yalta could see and hear a class on WebYeshiva, she would be utterly amazed! Today, if she could fully understand the worldwide Jewish learning explosion, she would be completely in awe! With Yalta as our honored onlooker, may we give thanks to the Master of the Universe and acknowledge the miraculous age in which we are living!

After the Book of Vayikra many may find Parshat Bamidbar purely technical and administrative thus boring and dull. Full of numbers, statistical calculations, names and delegations at first glance appears more like a historical record of a tactical, strategic approach or camp logistics. Rabbi Alex Israel writes:

“It is a world of administration. National demographic statistics are procured about the state of the nation, the number of fighting men, the twelve army divisions which consist of the twelve tribes of the nation. There are precise coordinates for tribal encampment, the teeming masses organized in efficient units. Everyone has their place, their station. The Levites too…”

Of course one will say the parsha teaches us being proactive and prepared for defense, while others will see it as an incipient of the State and this will also be true. But there’s more than that and the parsha signals importance of the message in the very first pasuk: “The Lord spoke to Moses in the Sinai Desert, in the Tent of Meeting on the first day of the second month, in the second year after the exodus from the land of Egypt” (Bamidbar 1:1)

Intriguing? In one verse the Torah informs us that Hashem spoke to Moshe Rabbeinu in the desert of Sinai and then adds “in the Tent of Meeting.” Why does our parsha mention the Sinai Desert if then specifies it happened in the Tent of Meeting? We know where the Tent of Meeting was at that time. Bnei Israel spent a year there learning the divine law and building the Mishkan after exodus from the Land of Egypt. And the pasuk tells us that too. Moreover it provides a detailed date of this event. Doesn’t it sound like an official announcement?

R’ Aba suggests the answer: “Once for the Torah and once for the Mishkan. And both were ‘on the first day of the second month, in the second year.’ And all is one.” (Zohar. Parshat Bamidbar)

Zohar clearly holds that there is analogy between the Torah and a desert or the Mishkan and the Tent of Meeting. No doubt the Torah was given in the desert but what links those two here? What does the Zohar want to teach us? In Mechilta D’Rashbi we find the following explanation:

“The Torah was given to the people of Israel in the ownerless desert. For if it were given in the Land of Israel, the residents of the Land of Israel would say, ‘It is ours’; and if it were given in some other place, the residents of that place would say, ‘It is ours.’ Therefore it was given in the wilderness, so that anyone who wishes to acquire it may acquire it.”

According to this opinion the ownerless land was necessary to guarantee freedom of choice. Consequently it infers two levels of freedom: legal since the ownerless desert is not limited by any jurisdiction (except mi’shamaim) and volitive as there is no one who could infringe freedom of choice. Pesikta D’Rav Kahana provides us however with different insight: “Why was the Torah given in the desert? To teach us that if a person does not surrender himself to it like the desert, he cannot merit the words of Torah. And to teach us that just as the desert is endless, so is the Torah without end.”

A similar concept presented in Midrash Rabba connects all the pieces: „…whoever doesn’t make himself open and free like a desert will not be able to acquire wisdom and Torah.” (Midrash Rabba 1:7)

Sfat Emet in his ma’amar on Parshat Bamidbar goes even further offering us his non-pshat on “midbar.” First he emphasizes a meaning (of many) of the “dalet-bet-resh” shoresh - “to lead” – and then finds indirect reference to an Aramaic passive form – “to be led” – “mem-dalet-bet-resh.” For Sfat Emet “midbar” refers to the act of giving ourselves over (and Bnei Israel in the desert specifically) to Hashem’s leadership.

A contradiction between subordination to ratzon Hashem and our free will that initially stems from the perspective of Gerrer Rebbe does not actually exist. Indeed Sfat Emet suggests we should view ourselves “as the axe in the hand of the wood-cutter” (Yeshayahu 10:15) yet he understands that living according to Hashem’s will requires a strong act of volition from an individual (who must de-emphasize his ego). And this is our primary goal in learning Torah.

Now, after the artful and elaborate message interwoven to the first pasuk of the parsha, we learn about the census and responsibilities assigned to Israel. Unlike modern censuses the parsha recounts headcount that serves completely different purposes – it reveals two paradoxical truths: no matter who you are from the lowliest to the greatest ones, each of us to Hashem means no more than “one” that adds to the unity of the nation. But the census also implies that each person is important. Ramban explains it beautifully in such a way: “The Holy One blessed be He instructed Moshe to count them in a manner that would confer honor and greatness on each one of them individually. Not that you should say to the head of the family: ‘How many are there in your family? How many children?,’ but rather, all of them should pass before you with the honor due to them …” (Ramban on Bamidbar 1:45)

And now one may ask what all these things have to do with separating Levites from Bnei Israel. Where is this unity and equality? And the Zohar offers us a great thought: “Here, also, the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to count the soldiers of the Torah and the soldiers of the Mishkan. And they are all united and are inseparable from each other. Everything is in a likeness of above, since the Torah and Tabernacle, are inseparable from each other, and are in unison.” (Zohar. Parshat Bamidbar)

The camp in the desert consists of two circles: soldiers of the Torah (Bnei Israel) and soldiers of the Mishkan (Levites), and Shechina dwelles among them in the very center. Amazingly this fits to the concept of Sfat Emet. First we need to de-emphasize our ego and learn Torah (which is the outer protection) to subordinate our personal intelect so that we can know and follow the ratzon Hashem (the center of everything). The parsha opens with the name ה’ that represents Hashem’s attribute of mercy but when it comes to Levites all the names of their princes contain the name אל representing attribute of stern justice. Two sides of the coin. And all is one.

Okay so why is this Pesach not like every other Pesach? Well, just when you think it’s safe to put down your mop and sponge chop a shacharit and siyum to avoid fasting if you’re a 1st born, or even just a l’chaim and then dash off to incinerate some Chametz… hang on just a second, this year has a twist – Birkat ha Chama. Yes, you’ll need to save some l’chaim, put on your dancing shoes and come with fine voice as the minhag according to Eliyahu Kitov in The Book of Our Heritage is to recite the bracha after a dawn shacharit with great joy, song and praises both before and after the bracha. He doesn’t give specifics as to exactly what dance steps to follow or songs and praises to be sung but seeing this is done only once every 28 years it seems we should make a good show of it!

There are a few other things Rav Kitov writes about which caught my eye. For one, the fact that it’s Erev Pesach this year is nothing particularly significant, as technically the day can fall at the beginning, middle or end of the month of Nissan. That the bracha is recited in Nissan is a machloket, based on the opinion of R.Yeshoshua that creation took place in Nissan as opposed to Tishrei -which is a bit confusing given we hold that New Year is in Tishrei - but we can’t solve all problems in one blog entry! The thing that is less controversial is that it was the evening of the 4th day of the week (Tuesday night) that the sun was put in its place, and that is why Wednesday morning is the important moment where after 28 years the sun has finished it’s solar cycle and is in exactly the same position, or we’re in the same position relative to the sun (same thing?) as we were 28 years prior. Only once in 532 years is it in exactly the same position as it was during Creation vis-à-vis the day of the week and the day of the month.

This year marks the conclusion of 206 28year cycles, spin the calculating wheels and you should get 5768. Well that’s funny, you should say, maybe we missed it last year already? Think again! You’re forgetting about the year of the flood where all the normal functioning of things in the world was suspended.

A couple of other potential questions/situations to give Rabbis grey hairs over…. What if it’s a cloudy day? Machloket. What if I was cleaning/locating chametz all night, slept in, and missed the dawn minyan? Machloket (although saying the bracha within the 1st 3 halachic hours of the day is highly recommended). What if I’m a woman? Rollover and dream of matza - you’re spared this one, and it’s not just because of time bound reasons; it is linked to an incidence of women offering incense to the “Queen of the heavens” in the days of the prophet Yirmeyahu. In other words, apparently a woman making a blessing relating to the sun is a bit too close for comfort and some people might get the wrong idea - just don’t say the reason is marit eyin anywhere near Rav Fink!

There is a famous debate between Rashi and Ramban about the order of events between the last few parshiyot. We are given this whole interlude about the details of the Mishkan and Priestly Garments, in between Har Sinai, the Revelation and the Ten Commandments, and the Golden Calf incident.

Why is the Mishkan specifically discussed right before the Golden Calf?

I believe it is the Netivot Shalom or the Or HaChaim, who asks the question why the Mishkan was necessarily so grand, magnificent, laden with gold, etcetera, etcetera. Does Hashem need a golden palace? A bit haughty, no? Well, after Am Yisrael sinned with the Golden Calf, it became evident that their majestic G-dly figure was attributed the aspect of gold. Since Am Yisrael associated gold to G-d, so too, the Mishkan necessitated being made of gold and grandeur.

However if we take it one step further, the poskim teach of an eternal link between the teshuva (repentance) the Mishkan and the Golden Calf. The Mishkan represents Har Sinai, the eternal marriage between Hashem and His People.

Thus, perhaps the para aduma, in my humble opinion - the ultimate return to the natural, the calf without gold, purely red, the color of the earth - is then what provides the ultimate cleansing from sin, into purity, as it is the true final teshuva me’ahava necessary for geula.

Deborah Tannen wrote an excellent book, You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. She describes how men and women might code their speech and decipher speech differently and how this can lead to communication problems. Let’s see how this might have played out in the relationship between King Achashverosh and Esther.

Following the Amida prayer recited every day, we say, “May it be your will, Lord our God and the God of our forefathers, that the Holy Temple be rebuilt, speedily in our days. Grants us our share in Your Torah, and may we serve You there with reverence, as in days of old and in former years. Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the Lord, as in days of old and in former years.” Of all the Parshiot and of all the Jewish holidays, the biblical description of the building of the Temple, the sacrifices, and the story of Purim are the most foreign to the non-Jewish experience, the most difficult for non-Jews to understand, and the most difficult for them to accept.

In chapter five of the book of Esther, King Achashverosh asked Esther what it was that she wanted and what it was that she was asking for. Why the “and”? Wasn’t what she wanted and what she was asking for the same thing? Or, like many men, was Achashverosh having trouble deciphering “female” communication? It seems that the man really was trying hard to understand the difference between what Esther seemed to be asking for and what she really wanted. He certainly seemed to sense that Esther wanted something other than what she was asking for, because he persisted in asking this double question no fewer than three times. Twice, Esther turned down the fantastic offer of half the kingdom and told him, basically, that all she really wanted was exactly what she was asking for – that he just be home on time for dinner. Unbelievable!

In tractate Megillah 15b of the Talmud, we learn that the offer of half the kingdom was not as generous as it might appear. King Achashverosh would give Esther half the kingdom, but not the entire kingdom – that seems reasonable. Nor would he give her that which divides the kingdom, that which was located in the centre. There is a play on words here, since “chatzi” means half, but chotzeitz means “divides”. “Half” necessarily excludes that which divides. And what was that? It was the Temple – or, more precisely at that time, it was the rebuilding of the Temple.

The Jews were allowed many things in the kingdom, but not that which uniquely identified them as Jews, not even the smallest symbol of their relationship with God, not the Temple, not the small piece of land on which it stood – not to live as Jews. Esther could have anything else, but not that.

Finally, after Achashverosh asked her for the third time what it was that she really wanted, Esther answers. She was asking for her life and for the life of her people as Jews. Just to be able to live – is that so much to ask for that it must be refused?

Would it have been difficult for Achashverosh to intervene in the attacks on the Jews? The impending slaughter had no reason other than to eliminate these people simply because they were Jews. The answer, of course, is yes, he could have intervened and prevented it. He was the King, after all, and he seemed to have pretty good control of his kingdom. He was even sympathetic to the Jews. He gave them moral support and he permitted them to defend themselves – but, he would not intervene. That he would not do, because it would mean legitimizing the Jewish people just as allowing them to rebuild the Temple would have legitimized them. They could have anything else, they could even become great in the King’s land as Mordechai did, becoming second only after the King in the entire kingdom. But for all of that, they were not allowed legitimacy as Jews. And so, given the impending destruction, the Jews did what they had to do to defend themselves so that they could continue to live. Unfortunately, Achashverosh’s response has, all too often, been about as far as the Jew’s “friends” have been prepared to go.

We find the answer to Achashverosh’s question, “What did Esther really want?” in the very last sentence of the book of Esther. What Esther really wanted, what the Jewish people really wanted was peace. The Jews didn’t want their jewels, not their honors, not their land, not anything that belonged to anyone else. What the Jews really wanted was just to be able to live in peace as Jews.