Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Bamidbar

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.

R' Frand began the vort tonight by quoting Rashi who stated that each of the flags of the tribes had a specific color and that the color was the same as that tribe's stone on the Urim V'Tumim.

R' Frand then quoted a Medrash which states that Hashem showed a great love for the Jews in giving them flags. This can be seen in the pasuk in Shir HaShirim 2:4 - הֱבִיאַ֨נִי֙ אֶל־בֵּ֣ית הַיָּ֔יִן וְדִגְל֥וֹ עָלַ֖י אַֽהֲבָֽה. The Medrash continues - when Hashem came down on Har Sinai accompanied by the angels, each of the 2.2 million angels had their own flag. The Jews desired these flags and Hashem said that He would provide for them and He instructed Moshe that the Jews should have a flag for each tribe.

R' Frand asked - why at the time of Matan Torah did the Jews have a desire for flags? He gave a modern day example - if your team wins the Super Bowl and they have a parade, do you want to be in a picture with one of the athletes, or the float that carries him?

R' Frand answered his question by quoting the Nesivos Shalom who explains that the Jews did not simply want the flags. Instead they saw that each of the 2.2 million angels had a flag which identified his role and the Jews wanted to flags which showed their tafkid as well. Hashem granted this request as each tribe's flag identified their nature. The flag of Reuven had the duda'im, because of his middah of chessed in procuring them for his mother when she felt bereft. The flag of Shimon was Shechem because it showed his placing his sister's honor above all.

Each of the Jews wanted a flag so that they could display their role in Bnei Yisrael.

R' Frand also discussed the tribes and the configuration they marched in - specifically the tribes of Dan, Naphtali and Asher. The Torah writes in Bamidbar 2:27 that the Nasi of Asher who traveled with Dan was  פַּגְעִיאֵ֖ל בֶּן־עָכְרָֽן. This is an odd name as עָכְרָֽן means perverter. Similarly, Bamidbar 2:29 states that the Nasi of Naftali was אֲחִירַ֖ע בֶּן־עֵינָֽן. Would anyone name their child - my bad brother?

R' Frand quoted the Rabbeinu Ephraim who explains that these were not actually their given names. Instead they took on these names because they were travelling with the tribe of Dan who had taken the idol Pesel Micha with them when they left Egypt and were carrying it with them in the desert. The other tribes who were travelling with them did not want to become complacent or used to seeing an idol, so the Nesi'im took on those names to remember that their brother was doing wrong.

R' Frand closed the vort by discussing the story of Palti Ben Laish and referring to a shmuze of R' Chaim Shmulevitz. He noted that the story as told in Nach was that Palti put a sword between the beds and said that whomever crosses this will be stabbed. But since he was the one who put the sword, couldn't he have removed it as well?

R' Chaim explained that Palti felt a sense of terror the first night as he knew that she was a married woman, notwithstanding Shaul's machinations. In order to not forget how he felt, he put the sword between them as a constant reminder.

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's Parsha Tidbits - Parshios Behar Bechukosai

The following is a brief summary of some of thoughts said over by R' Frand on the parshios 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.

The vort this evening related to the prohibition against charging interest. The Gemara in Bava Metzia states that a person who lends on interest loses more money than he gains.

R' Frand asked - why is it that the person who lends money on interest receives such a punishment? R' Frand gave a hypothetical - if the bank is lending money at 5% and the person buying a house needs cash and the lender offer to lend at 3%, why would this be a problem? The borrower is paying less in interest and is happy to do so?

R' Frand answered by quoting the Klei Yakar who explains that the main problem with lending on interest is that it causes a deficiency in the emunah of the person lending the money. In a traditional business setting a storeowner faces the possibility of loss. Maybe the product wont sell. Maybe there will be a problem with the product. But a person who makes money by lending on interest sleeps well, knowing that he will always have the interest coming in. Whereas the storeowner is relying on Hashem, the lender does not need such reliance and he forgets about Hashem.

R' Frand quoted the Malbim who explains that this is why a loan to an Akum is permitted. Since they don't believe in Hashem anyway there is no loss of emunah.

R' Frand then cited to the mitzva of redeeming an ancestral field. The Torah describes how a person may not have money and no family to help him and then he has to sell the field. But then at some point in the future he is able to redeem the field. How does this happen? The Netziv explains that since the person has no resources and he has no family to assist him, he must have come before Hashem and asked Him for help in redeeming the field.

R' Frand similarly quoted R' Bechaye who discusses the mitzva in Parshas Mishpatim of not distressing a widow or orphan. The Torah states in Shemos 22:22 - כִּ֣י אִם־צָעֹ֤ק יִצְעַק֙ אֵלַ֔י שָׁמֹ֥עַ אֶשְׁמַ֖ע צַֽעֲקָתֽוֹ - you should not do so because if they cry out to Hashem, He will surely hear them. Again, a person who relies on Hashem will be answered.

R' Frand closed by telling what he termed a potentially apocryphal story about the Kotsker Rebbi. One day his sister came to him and begged him to daven for her. He told her that he could not do so. She went out the door and wept and said aloud - Hashem, even my brother won't help me, I have only you to rely on. The Kotsker opened the door and embraced his sister and said - that was what I was waiting for. 

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's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Emor

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.

The first vort R' Frand said related to the Mikallel. The Torah writes in Vayikra 24:12 that after he cursed Hashem, he was placed in a lockup while Moshe asked Hashem what he should be done to him.

Rashi explains that at the time of this incident there was another person who was being held -the Mikoshesh. Unlike the Mikallel, it was known that the Mikoshesh was going to be put to death, they just did not know which form of the death penalty would be applied.

Rashi further explains that although both of these men were being held, they were not placed together in the same cell. But Rashi does not explain why they were held separately.

R' Frand quoted the Sefer Ikvei Erev who explains that because it was known that the Mikoshesh was going to receive the death penalty but the punishment for the Mikallel was not yet known, they were not put together so that the Mikallel would not have the anguish of thinking that he might be put to death when the rule of law had not yet been established.

R' Frand commented that we see how considerate they were of the Mikallel's feelings even though he was a miserable human being. It is understandable why a person might violate certain rules such as eating non-kosher, working on Shabbos or chasing other desires, there is no Yetzer Hara for cursing Hashem. Yet, his feelings were considered and he was not housed with someone who was known to be facing the death penalty.

R' Frand said a second vort on the mitzva of Kiddush Hashem which is found in Vayikra 22:32 (וְנִ֨קְדַּשְׁתִּ֔י בְּת֖וֹךְ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל). He quoted R' Ya'akov Kaminetzky who asked - why is this mitzva not a direct command - be Mikadesh Hashem? 

R' Kaminetzky writes in Emes L'Ya'akov that the answer can be found in the Rambam Hilchos Yisodei HaTorah (5:5). The Ramam writes that "Kol Beis Yisrael" is required to be Mikadesh Hashem. In so doing he does not write that men and women are required but uses this unusual term of Kol Beis Yisrael. R' Kaminetzky explains that this is because if it was a command, then children would be exempt. However since the requirement is that Hashem's name should be sanctified, it would apply even to children. He further explains that even if a non-Jew sanctifies Hashem's name, he would be rewarded since the end result is Hashem is sanctified. 

He also noted that this is the reason why during the Middle Ages during the crusades, people went to their death with their children, rather than allow the children to be raised as non-Jews.

R' Frand said a different answer in the name of R' Nissan Alpert who writes in Limudei Nissan that a person who is not frum would have a hard time with the concept of dying Al Kiddush Hashem. But a frum person who lives his life by eating kosher, keeping family purity, observing Shabbos, being honest in business, not speaking lashon hara - when the opportunity to die Al Kiddush Hashem comes up it winds up being part of his nature - (וְנִ֨קְדַּשְׁתִּ֔י). 

He tied this into the Gemara in Berachos when R' Akiva's students were asking him - isn't it enough all the torture you are undergoing and he responded that all his life he was pained about how he could keep this mitzva.

R' Frand closed the vort by telling a few stories about Kiddush Hashem. I will summarize the first here - there was a man who had Hertz President's Club privileges which allows the member to pick any car in the lot and then when he checks out they look at his license, print a contract and he leaves without needing to wait at the counter or in any line.

There was a frum man who went and picked up a car under the program. But when he went to drop off the car he realized that they had misread his license and had charged someone else. He thought about just dropping the car and sending the money to the person by Zelle, but decided instead to go in and tell the attendant. 

When he went inside the attendant got the manager who was so amazed by this person's honesty (because he could have just left and someone else would have been charged with no one knowing who he was) that he said to him - even though this cost $217, I am going to comp you because of how honest you are.

This is Kiddush Hashem.

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!