Thursday, October 31, 2019

Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Noach

The following is a brief summary of some of thoughts said over by R' Frand on the parsha this evening. I have attempted to reproduce these vorts to the best of my ability. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Frand.

In Bereishis 7:23 the Torah states "וַיִּשָּׁ֧אֶר אַךְ־נֹ֛חַ" - which literally translated means that only Noach (and his family) survived. Rashi offers multiple interpretations of this statement, including that Noach was bitten by a lion because he was late bringing its food.

R' Frand then asked - what is the purpose of this statement? Was it a lesson that if you are late feeding the lion it will get angry?

R' Frand answered by quoting a vort from the Ostrovser Rebbi [Ed note - I am probably off on that name, if you have the correct spelling, please post it in the comments below]. He first cited a Gemara in Yoma which states that the smoke of the burning wood of the Ma'aracha in the first Beis Hamikdash went up in the image of a lion and the second Beis Hamikdash like a dog. 

The Ari explains that the smoke was a protectant for the Jewish people and dissuaded them from sinning. In the days of the first Beis Hamikdash the protector was a lion and the second was a dog. There is a difference between being guarded by a lion and a dog, as a lion will attack an intruder, while a dog is more of a burglar alarm which alerts you that an intruder is present.

This was the difference between the two Batei Mikdash- in the first, the lion was strong and protected from sin, whereas the dog was nowhere near as strong of a protection. When the lion was present, there was no potential thought of sin. The dog could not offer such protection, it just barked to try to dissuade from sin.

The Ostrover Rebbi tied this into Noach. He was not interested in going out to convince others not to sin and just worked on his ark. Yes, when people came and asked him, he told them that the flood was coming, but he was not actively trying to prevent people from sinning. Thus he was bitten by a lion as a mussar to him that he should have been more actively involved in preventing sin.

R' Frand then connected this to the sign of the rainbow which was a promise  that there would not be another flood. Why did Hashem choose this sign? He quoted R' Yosher Ber Soloviechik who explained that the rainbow is a sign that even though there are clouds and darkness, there is light behind it. The message to Noach was, there is no generation without hope as there is always a possibility that they can be brought back. 

R' Frand then linked this to a Gemara in Berachos which provides the history of the admissions to the yeshiva as R' Gamliel only permitted those who who were the same on the inside and out, whereas R' Yehoshua allowed everyone to come and learn. The Gemara states that when R' Gamliel saw all the extra benches which were added after R' Yehoshua's open door policy began, he wept. To this he was shown an earthenware vessel filled with ash. He had solace as it appeared to him that the new students were empty on the inside. But the Gemara teaches that was not the case.

R' Soloviechik explained that the ash was not without potential as smoldering ash can reignite if there is oxygen blown back in. Similarly, the people who appeared empty and burned out on the inside could be motivated and their true souls reignited by Torah.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!


Sunday, October 27, 2019

Sunday Night Suds - Saranac Hop Harvest Haze IPA


This week's Sunday Night Suds looks at Saranac Brewery's Hop Harvest Haze IPA.

The Saranac Hop Harvest Haze IPA is one of two new beers in the Saranac German Roots mix box  for 2019. The box also includes new entry Hopskeller, as well as old standards Black Forest (reviewed here https://kosherbeers.blogspot.com/2010/01/sunday-night-suds-saranac-black-forest.html ) and Octoberfest (reviewed here https://kosherbeers.blogspot.com/2009/10/sunday-night-suds-saranac-octoberfest.html ) which is to be expected in a fall box calling itself "German Roots." 

This the second consecutive mix box from Saranac featuring a "Haze", the prior box for Summer containing the Summer Haze IPA (reviewed here   https://kosherbeers.blogspot.com/2019/08/sunday-night-suds-saranac-summer-haze.html). Much like the Summer Haze IPA, this beer is somewhat cloudy and is a very dark gold in color. But this beer also stands on its own as the hops make you swear that there is grapefruit juice. Yet all of the flavor comes from the mix of Citra, Mosaic, and Galaxy hops.

The beer runs 6% abv and packs a little bit of a punch. If you are looking for a medium bitter brew with a kick, this would be a good choice.

The Hop Harvest Haze IPA is under the Kosher Supervision of the Va'ad of Detroit as is every other beer produced at the Matt Brewery plant in Utica, NY. Keep in mind, Saranac brews some varieties off site, so check the cans/bottles for kosher certification from the Va'ad of Detroit.

To see what the experts on Beer Advocate think about the brew, please follow this link https://www.beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/99/435306.

As always, please remember to drink responsibly and to never waste good beer unless there is no designated driver.

If you've tried this beer or any others which have been reviewed on the kosher beers site, please feel free to post your comments (anonymous comments are acceptable).

Lastly, if you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Thursday, October 24, 2019

Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Bereishis

The following is a brief summary of some of thoughts said over by R' Frand on the parsha this evening. I have attempted to reproduce these vorts to the best of my ability. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Frand.

In Bereishis 3:12, the Torah provides Adam's response to Hashem when asked about eating from the Etz HaDa'as wherein Adam states - וַיֹּ֖אמֶר הָֽאָדָ֑ם הָֽאִשָּׁה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר נָתַ֣תָּה עִמָּדִ֔י הִ֛וא נָֽתְנָה־לִּ֥י מִן־הָעֵ֖ץ וָֽאֹכֵֽל. The basic translation of the pasuk is that Adam said that the woman that You gave with me provided me from the tree and I will eat.

R' Frand noted the use of the future tense ("will eat") and quoted Rashi's explanation that Adam was stating that he had eaten and will continue to eat. Yet it is hard to understand how Adam could have the chutzpah so say to Hashem that he will continue to eat in the future (my father asked me the same question over Simchas Torah).

R' Frand answered the question by quoting from the Sefer Imrei Da'as who explains that Adam was not saying that he will eat. Rather this was an observation about human nature. If a person makes a mistake (even on a purpose) and when confronted with the error, owns up to his actions, he will be unlikely to continue  that course of conduct in the future. However, is a person blames some external force (like Adam blaming his wife or even Hashem for giving him Chava), then he will continue to sin. In Adam's case, that would be continuing to eat.

R' Frand linked this to Kayin being confronted later in the parsha about the murder of his brother and the punishment meted out to the ground. The Torah states in Bereishis 4:11 that the ground will be punished, but the reason for the punishment is not immediately apparent. R' Frand tied this to the 70's Watergate incident. The crime was the burglary, but the bigger problem was the failure to admit the act and the attempted cover up. Had Kayin admitted that the murder was an act of passion, an action taken out of intense momentary anger, then perhaps the result could have been different. However, Kayin engaged in a cover up and for this reason the earth is punished for covering up the crime.

R' Frand also said a vort on man's punishment for eating from the tree in that man must work by the sweat of his brow to earn a living. R' Frand asked - why is the punishment characterized as sweat of the brow? This is an external manifestation, but in reality the work is done with the hands. Would it have been more accurate to say that the produce of the work of the hands (Y'giah Kapecha)?

R' Frand answered by quoting the sefer V'Lamedcha (not sure that is correct name) who writes that the sweat of the brow is not what results in a paycheck. This is only what a person needs to do in order to allow Hashem to work behind the scenes and provide a parnasah for a person. When a person works to earn a living, Hashem will provide, but not necessarily in the manner that the person expects as there is not always a direct correlation.

R' Frand told a story he had hear from R' CY Goldvicht (the KBY Rosh Yeshiva when I attended back in the late 80's). There was a man who owned a small five and dime in Israel when the British Mandate was in place. One day, a young girl stopped in and wanted to buy a notebook, The store owner had to climb a ladder to reach a high shelf where he moved things around until he found the 5 cent notebook. Immediately thereafter a British soldier entered and wanted to buy an expensive Parker pen. The store owner knew where the Parker pen was, because he had seen it when he was up on the ladder, rearranging the shelf to get the notebook. And by making the sale of the pen, he had covered his expenses for the store for the entire day.

The notebook was the sweat of the brow, and the pen was the resultant parnasah. Not the way that it was drawn up or intended by the store owner, but it often never is...

If you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Thursday, October 10, 2019

Thursday's Thoughts for the Sukkah

R' Frand did not give the shiur this evening as it was given by R' Azriel Hauptman in his stead. The following is a brief summary of the drush portion of the shiur. I have attempted to reproduce these vorts to the best of my ability. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to the maggid shiur.

R' Hauptman began the shiur with the famous question - why is Sukkos celebrated on the 15th of Tishrei? He quoted the answer of the Gra who explains that when the Jews sinned with Egel they lost the Ananaei HaKavod (loosely translated as heavenly clouds) which only returned on the 15th of Tishrei. This was the end of a period of kapparah for the Jewish people which began on the 1st of Elul when Moshe went back up to Har Sinai to receive the 2nd set of Luchos which he then brought back down on the 10th of Tishei (Yom Kippur).

R' Hauptman then diagrammed the next four days of Tishrei:

On the 11th, Moshe announced to the Jewish people that they were collecting to build the Mishkan.
On the 12th and 13th - the collection of goods and materials was held.
On the 14th, Moshe announced that everything which was needed had been collected.
On the 15th, the Annanei HaKavod returned.

R' Hauptman then digressed to discuss the Seir L'Azazael (loosely translated as the scapegoat). This sacrifice seems a bit surreal, as the service was performed outside of the holy, was performed without ritual slaughter and as a result of the service, the Jews were forgiven for their sins. It seems a bit hard to understand.

R' Hauptman tied this together by quoting R' Moshe Shapiro who explains that the word Kippur means Kinuach which is a cleansing which wipes away the external stain. When the Jews ask for forgiveness on Yom Kippur, they are saying - Hashem we want to do Your way, but the external force of the Yetzer Hara/Se'or SheBa'isa/Akum are pressing on us and causing the external stain. So please, take one goat which will be offered in the Holy of Holies, while this other goat is used outside to wipe away our external sins - because those sins are not us.

R' Hauptman then noted that the concept of Yom Kippur did not exist before the Egel. Prior to the Egel we had the first set of commandments which we heard and we were perfect. But perfection was not a state that we could maintain, thus the need for the second set of luchos, because we are not perfect. And Hashem sees that we have flaws, but they are external.

When the Jews enter the sukkah it is like entering a marriage, complete with a Chuppah (wedding canopy).  It is well established that a marriage is stronger after the couple rebuilds from their first fight then when they first get married. The strength is based on the couple's will to look past the imperfection which caused the fight, as the issue is external to their marriage.

After the first luchos we were not perfect anymore as we had sinned with the Egel and we asked for forgiveness. By giving us the second luchos, Hashem showed that he had forgiven us. Only then did the Ananei HaKavod come back and this is the end of the wedding ceremony.

R' Hauptman then asked - why is Sukkos called Zman Simchaseinu as opposed to any other holiday? Because we are happy that Hashem accepted us back, despite our external flaws.

R' Hauptman next quoted the Meshech Chachma who notes that before the Egel, the holiday we know as Sukkos was only called Chag Ha'asif - the holiday of gathering. The term Sukkos does not actually appear in the Torah until after we received the second Luchos in Sefer Devarim. This is because the clouds did not return until after we received the second Luchos and that is what triggered our need to remember the way we were housed in the desert.

R' Hauptman  closed the vort by quoting the Avodas HaGershuni who was the Gra's nephew. He in turn quoted his uncle who stated that on the 15th the Jews began to build the Mishkan and the Shechinah returned. For this reason we celebrate Sukkos as this was the day that we were zoche to sit under the wings of the Shechinah. He links it to the avodah on Yom Kippur where it states in Vayikra 16:16 "וְכִפֶּ֣ר עַל־הַקֹּ֗דֶשׁ מִטֻּמְאֹת֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וּמִפִּשְׁעֵיהֶ֖ם לְכָל־חַטֹּאתָ֑ם וְכֵ֤ן יַֽעֲשֶׂה֙ לְאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֔ד הַשֹּׁכֵ֣ן אִתָּ֔ם בְּת֖וֹךְ טֻמְאֹתָֽם" that the Kohain Gadol effects atonement in the Ohel Moed which dwells with the Jews in their state of Tumah. The first Yom Kippur established that even though we are tamei, Hashem will still dwell among us.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Sunday, October 6, 2019

Sunday's Second Section of the R' Frand Teshuva Derasha 5780

The following is a brief summary of some of thoughts said over by R' Frand in his annual Teshuva Derasha which was broadcast live from Baltimore on the TCN network this evening. I summarized the first part of the shiur in a post from Thursday evening (http://kosherbeers.blogspot.com/2019/10/thursdays-thoughts-on-teshuva-rabbi.html) and am attempting to summarize the rest of the derasha in this post. This was a very powerful derasha and my attempt to summarize should not be viewed as an exact transcript as it is based on my notes. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Frand.

The next section of the derasha began with a story involving R' Yossi Heber, the brother of R' Dovid Heber from Baltimore. He had been working in marketing and landed a big account - Kraft Jello. Now because Jello is not kosher, he could sample the product he was marketing. Yet he worked diligently on finding a way to market it albeit, without ever tasting it. He had a co-worker "Nancy" who told him how impressed she was with the way that he stayed with the account and that if she had that will power she would have lost 30 lbs. This is a lesson on living life about CD (cognitive dissonance - see first post).

R' Frand then noted that in the description of non kosher animals in Parshas Shemini there are four animals who have only one kosher sign, including the pig. In describing the pig's signs the Torah states "וְאֶת־הַֽ֠חֲזִ֠יר כִּֽי־מַפְרִ֨יס פַּרְסָ֜ה ה֗וּא וְשֹׁסַ֥ע שֶׁ֨סַע֙ פַּרְסָ֔ה וְה֖וּא גֵּרָ֣ה לֹֽא־יִגָּ֑ר טָמֵ֥א ה֖וּא לָכֶֽם". But why does the Torah tell us that it has a kosher sign (and even mention it first) if the bottom line is that without two kosher signs its not kosher? R' Frand quoted the Klei Yakar who explained that if the animal has only one sign it is more disgusting from no signs. Similarly, remarked R' Frand people will assume that with one kosher attribute they are OK and will not want to try and will have a more difficult time doing teshuva.

R' Frand gave suggestions to avoid CD. He first discussed being a diligent worker and noted that Ya'akov was mentioned eight times by the Rambam in the Yad Chazakah, but only one time was he called Ya'akov HaTzadik. This occurred in the discussion of how Ya'akov worked diligently for Lavan, even though Lavan was stealing from him. Regardless of how your employer treats you, you as the employee must give an honest days work.

R' Frand mentioned a statistic that the average American worker spends more than an hour a day on internet sites unrelated to work. And this is in addition to time lost from work for personal calls, texting, phone apps and the like.

R' Frand told a story about his father in law R' Ya'akov Blumenkrantz ztl who would ride the bus to raise money for the yeshiva. One day a man offered him a ride back to the yeshiva so that he would not need to take the bus. The next day he walked into the yeshiva office and put the bus fare that he had been advanced by the yeshiva on the desk, as he had not taken the bus and did not want to improperly keep the nickel.

R' Frand stated that the Al Cheit for Massa U'Matan means treating customers, competitors, employees and workers with honesty.

R' Frand also mentioned that people pay lip service to the concept that a person's financials are set by Hashem on Rosh Hashanah, but if we really believed that, we would not attempt to cut corners. He told a story about a Rav who sold his airline miles and was prepared to redeem $3,000 of airline miles, but did not go forward  with the transaction because he was informed that the airlines said that the practice was illegal. He did not attempt to verify whether the airlines were correct that it was illegal, but accepted that they believed that it was illegal and did not proceed with the transaction.

He also talked about being careful with relationship boundaries in the workplace and told a story about a salesman who gave his file for his biggest client to his manager and told him that he could not service the account anymore. The salesman explained that he was too attracted to the buyer to continue doing business with that account. This is living without CD.

R' Frand also referenced a book by Ari Wasserman called Making It All Work - Women Surviving and Thriving in the Workplace. He mentioned anecdotes and examples of how familiarity, even in an atmosphere of frum employees, can cause lines to blur as working together can cause people to feel others in the workplace, even if they did not act on it.

R' Frand also spoke about avoiding CD and sending mixed messages to the family by going places and doing things on vacation that would not be done at home. He talked about a trip to Cypress Gardens (a forerunner to Epcot) where they encountered a Mennonite family who remarked that they come to that park because other theme parks were not the proper environment for their family.

R' Frand talked about we want our children to come to shul to daven, but do we give them the right example? People go to  Kiddush club rather than hear the Haftorah, or stop in at multiple Kiddushes on the way home from shul, causing the family to wait an hour to start lunch, before he then falls asleep midway through the meal from all the scotch at the prior Kiddushes.

R' Frand told a story about Dovy Kurland whose 100 year old father did not learn in school and learned his Judaism from being in shul. He asked his son - why would you need a sign to tell people not to speak in shul? To him it was a given. He also told a story he heard from Shmuel Hyatt who went to the aufruf of the grandson of the Sanzer Rebbi. There were 22 aliyos and not a word spoken between aliyos. Why? Because there was a problem of speaking between aliyos and the Rebbi decided that speaking would be banned. He had to post ushers and even so there were fights and people had to be removed from shul. But it was important to him that the talking stop and the result was that 22 aliyah shabbos with no speaking.

R' Frand gave another example of CD from the story about Eliyahu confronting the prophets of Ba'al and asking for how long will you straddle both sides - worshiping Hashem one day and the Avodah Zarah another. It was not that he wished them to worship Avodah Zarah, but he could deal with them if they did, but not if they tried to do both.

The same symptoms can be seen Rivka. She was concerned about the child in her womb until she found out that the reason that it kicked in seeming contradictory times was that it was two different children and she had a rasha and a tzaddik. But why was she happy when she knew that there was a rasha inside as well? Because at least she knew that it was not one person acting in two different directions. 

R' Frand noted that the final Ashamnu is "Teetanu." This is learned from Ya'akov who protested that he did not want to be C'Mtaateah - a liar or a faker.

R' Frand noted that at the end of Yom Kippur we say the Hashem Hu Ha'Elokim 7 times. This was the response from the Jewish people when Eliyahu confronted the prophets of Ba'al. Why do we say this at the end of Yom Kippur? Because after Elul and Rosh Hashanah and the 10 days of repentance, Eliyahu comes and asks - how long will you straddle both sides? To this we need to respond with full force - Hashem Hu Ha'Elokim - I will make a change and wont live with CD - I will recognize Hashem fully.

May we all iyh have mechil gemura as a result of our teshuva.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!

Thursday, October 3, 2019

Thursday's Thoughts on Teshuva - the Rabbi Frand Teshuva Derasha 5780 - Part 1

The following is a brief summary of some of thoughts said over by R' Frand in his annual Teshuva Derasha which was broadcast live from Baltimore on the TCN network this evening. I have attempted to summarize the first part of the derasha in this post and iyh will do an additional post over the weekend. This was a very powerful derasha and my attempt to summarize should not be viewed as an exact transcript as it is based on my notes. Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to R' Frand.

R' Frand began the derasha by noting that the parshios of Netzavim, Vayelech and Ha'azinu speak to us about how to approach teshuva. He began by noting that in Netzavim (Devarim 30:11), Moshe tells the Jews "כִּ֚י הַמִּצְוָ֣ה הַזֹּ֔את אֲשֶׁ֛ר אָֽנֹכִ֥י מְצַוְּךָ֖ הַיּ֑וֹם לֹֽא־נִפְלֵ֥את הִוא֙ מִמְּךָ֔ וְלֹֽא־רְחֹקָ֖ה הִֽוא" - This Mitzva I am commanding you today (teshuva) is not concealed from you, nor is it far away. Moshe then tells the Jews in the next pesukim - " לֹ֥א בַשָּׁמַ֖יִם הִ֑וא" - its not in the Heavens and "וְלֹֽא־מֵעֵ֥בֶר לַיָּ֖ם הִ֑וא" - its not over the seas. Moshe then states in 30:14 - "כִּֽי־קָר֥וֹב אֵלֶ֛יךָ הַדָּבָ֖ר מְאֹ֑ד בְּפִ֥יךָ וּבִלְבָֽבְךָ֖ לַֽעֲשׂתֽוֹ" - Because this thing (teshuva) is very close to you, its in your mouth and in your heart to do it.

Moshe also tells the Jews in Parshas Netzavim not to worship idols, stating in 29:17 = "פֶּן־יֵ֣שׁ בָּ֠כֶ֠ם אִ֣ישׁ אֽוֹ־אִשָּׁ֞ה א֧וֹ מִשְׁפָּחָ֣ה אוֹ־שֵׁ֗בֶט אֲשֶׁר֩ לְבָב֨וֹ פֹנֶ֤ה הַיּוֹם֙ מֵעִם֙ יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֵ֔ינוּ לָלֶ֣כֶת לַֽעֲבֹ֔ד אֶת־אֱלֹהֵ֖י הַגּוֹיִ֣ם הָהֵ֑ם פֶּן־יֵ֣שׁ בָּכֶ֗ם שֹׁ֛רֶשׁ פֹּרֶ֥ה רֹ֖אשׁ וְלַֽעֲנָֽה:" - which (in summary) warns that there might be a man or woman or family or tribe whose heart will turn from Hashem to worship other gods.  Moshe follows this with a statement "וְהָיָ֡ה בְּשָׁמְעוֹ֩ אֶת־דִּבְרֵ֨י הָֽאָלָ֜ה הַזֹּ֗את וְהִתְבָּרֵ֨ךְ בִּלְבָב֤וֹ לֵאמֹר֙ שָׁל֣וֹם יִֽהְיֶה־לִּ֔י כִּ֛י בִּשְׁרִר֥וּת לִבִּ֖י אֵלֵ֑ך " - And it will be when he hears the words of this oath and he will bless himself and say that peace will be with me and I will follow my heart's desires...

R' Frand then asked, how can a person who has heard Moshe for 40 years in the desert and knows that Moshe is truthful, how can that person ignore Moshe's statements and think that its OK to follow his heart's desire and worship false gods?

R' Frand answered that this person is suffering from cognitive dissonance (CD for short). He defines this as the mental discomfort held by a person who believes two different things at the same time. To relieve this discomfort, a person will try to justify both beliefs or acts in order to feel better about himself.

R' Frand gave an example of CD as a person who is a smoker - people knew that it was unhealthy, but rationalized that it was not so bad because the person was not smoking so much, or because he is an active person and takes care of himself some other way, or even that if he quit smoking he would gain weight and that was more unhealthy. R' Frand even quoted some people from years ago who theorized that the studies on the damage of smoking were not applicable to Sabbath observers since the study group smoked 7 days a week and the frum people had a 25 hour window when they did not smoke. R' Frand said that this is a prime example of the Shalom Yihiyeh Li person.

R' Frand then gave an example from Nach in the persona of Shaul HaMelech. He was told by Shmuel when he went to conquer Amalek that he should not let any person or livestock survive. Yet, Shaul broke both rules as he brought back Aggag as well as livestock. And then, when confronted by Shmuel - he had the temerity to say to him - I have kept Hashem's word. Shmuel then said how? And only after 4x back and forth did he admit that he had not done what he was commanded to do. Why did he do this? Because he thought the Jews wanted to have the livestock for themselves and justified in his own mind (through CD) that he was doing the right thing by letting the animals live. 

R' Frand observed that people don't want to admit that they are wrong - this is the meaning of the Al Cheit of Imutz HaLev - that a person does not want to admit to being mistaken and this is a barrier to Teshuva.

There was much more to the derasha, but I will close with the following story that he told at this point. R' Bentzion Kook was approached about a shiduch for his daughter. The potential suitor was a top bochur and learned constantly. He was erudite and could deliver his learning with great analysis. But he also used to routinely skip the daily 15 minute mussar seder as well as the shmoozes from the Rebbeim. R' Kook asked R' Elyashiv - should they pursue this boy? He was told - absolutely not - if he does not learn mussar he cannot be introspective and will not admit when he is wrong. This is not a good quality to bring into a marriage.

As I mentioned above, I hope iyh to do a second post later this weekend which will contain the rest of the derasha.

If you have seen this post being carried on another site, please feel free to click www.kosherbeers.blogspot.com to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up