Thursday's Parsha Tidbits - Parshas Mikeitz & Bonus Chanuka Vort

Although R' Frand did not deliver his live shiur this evening, R' Frand did post a pre-recorded Parsha vort on OU Torah which I have summarized here. This week's vort can be found at https://outorah.org/p/212506 and I have attempted to reproduce the vort to the best of my ability in this post.  Any perceived inconsistency is the result of my efforts to transcribe the shiur and should not be attributed to the maggid shiur.

R' Frand noted that Parshas Mikeitz often falls on Shabbos Chanukah and he said a vort which linked the two topics.

R' Frand began by quoting Rashi on Bereishis 42:1 which states - וַיַּ֣רְא יַֽעֲקֹ֔ב כִּ֥י יֶשׁ־שֶׁ֖בֶר בְּמִצְרָ֑יִם וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יַֽעֲקֹב֙ לְבָנָ֔יו לָ֖מָּה תִּתְרָאֽוּ. Rashi explains that Ya'akov was saying to his sons - why do you want to appear before the children of Esav and Yishmael like you have food? There was enough food, but he did not want them to appear that you have when others don't. Therefore he sent them on the difficult journey to Egypt to get food.

R' Frand next quoted Devarim 2:3 which states - רַב־לָכֶ֕ם סֹ֖ב אֶת־הָהָ֣ר הַזֶּ֑ה פְּנ֥וּ לָכֶ֖ם צָפֹֽנָה. The Klei Yakar says that the word צָפֹֽנָה could mean north and it could also mean hidden. The Klei Yakar explains that the message was - if you are successful while in Galus - hide it. The reason is that the descendants of Esav are jealous and they never got over the fact that Ya'akov "stole" the Berachos. The Klei Yakar then quotes Rashi cited above and stated that the children of Yishmael also feel that the Jews are not entitled to their wealth. The Klei Yakar states that in his generation, someone with 100 pretends that they have 200 and they flaunt their wealth.

R' Frand mentioned a Gemara in Ta'anis which states that if there is a fast declared in a city because of a need, a person who travels to that city must fast as well. And even if the visitor did not realize that it was a fast, he should not continue eating, because he should not be eating while others are fasting. The Gemara in Ta'anis also quotes Mikeitz and uses this as a proof that one should not appear to have when others do not.

R' Frand then cited a vort from R' Pa'am that although there is a requirement to be Mefarsem the miracle, once the candles go out, close the shades. Because the neighbors don't need to see your chandelier or silver candlesticks. As there already is a deep seated jealousy and enmity, don't add "fuel" to the fire - close the shades after the candles go out.

Bonus Chanukah Vort - As I mentioned above, R' Frand did not give his shiur tonight. Instead, R' Heber was the maggid shiur. I wanted to briefly summarize one of his vorts (with the same rules as usual - these are just my efforts to transcribe the thought and any errors are mine).

Rabbi Heber noted that there are seven liquids which can transmit Tumah as we learn from the Mishna in Machsirim - wine, oil, milk, dew, honey, blood and water. R' Heber said that each of these connect with a holiday - wine - Purim, blood - Yom Kippur (because we reduce our blood and they sprinkled it in the avodah), oil - Chanukah, milk - Shavuous, dew is Pesach, honey is Rosh Hashanah and water is Sukkos. He remarked that these beverages have importance and the Yomim Tovim give importance to our lives.

R' Heber says that the five holidays which start with Pesach and run through Sukkos connect with five liquids, but wine and oil connect with Purim and Chanukah. These two liquids require man's efforts whereas the other beverage are all used in their natural state. R' Heber said that when we come out of Sukkos and we enter a long dark winter that we need to carry until Pesach - we have two holidays which strengthen us and we need the effort to create the oil and wine for the holidays. These holidays were not given to us, we needed to work for them. And we don't have Krias HaTorah which relate to them - as we yearn for what is missing.

R' Heber quoted Halichos Shlomo that we eat Sufganiyot on Chanukah because the Greeks had defiled the temple and we needed to cleanse it, but the stones of the Mizbeach which could not be cleansed had to be cut out and put away. R' Heber said that the reason that we eat Sufganiyot is not only because they are fried in oil, but because we make an Al Hamichya - which invokes the Mizbeach which we don't mention in Benching. When we eat the donut we yearn for the Mizbeach and the real Chanukas HaMizbeach in the future. R' Heber also noted that Hechalecha is in Al Hamicya and not in Benching except when we say Al Hanissim.

R' Heber then added that we eat Mezonos on Purim and this ties into a Gemara in Megillah which states that the angels argued before Hashem that the Jews should not be destroyed. It ties into the Pasuk in Esther 1:14 - וְהַקָּרֹ֣ב אֵלָ֗יו כַּרְשְׁנָ֤א שֵׁתָר֙ אַדְמָ֣תָא תַרְשִׁ֔ישׁ מֶ֥רֶס מַרְסְנָ֖א מְמוּכָ֑ן. The angels cited to each word to say that the Jews do something to serve Hashem which the gentiles do not. More specifically there is a citation to אַדְמָ֣תָא where the angels ask - do the gentiles bring sacrifices on a Mizbach Adama like the Jews do? R' Heber said that this conversation is hinted to by the fact that we make an Al Hamichya which invokes the Mizbeach.

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 Vayeshev

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 his first vort by quoting Rashi who explains that the reason that the Tamar-Yehuda story interrupts the discussion of the Yosef story is to compare the acts of Tamar and the wife of Potiphar. Rashi explains that both women acted L'Shem Shamayim as even the wife of Potiphar saw through the astrologers that she would be the ancestor of children through Yosef, she just did not know if it would be through her or her daughter.

R' Frand told a story involving R' Shalom Schwardon which connected to this thought. R' Schwadron had been in a shul on Parshas Zachor in which a man had pushed his way to lain. Why? Because he said that it was a Hiddur for the person who read Zachor to have a beard and the young Ba'al Koreh did not. R' Schwadron saw this occur and he left the shul. He remarked - how can we be Mekayem Mechiyas Amalek - this man did an act of Amalek?

R' Frand then made a reference to a story in the Gemara Yoma about two Kohanim who were running up the ramp to have a chance to do the Avodah. One took a sacrificial knife and stabbed the other. The father of the victim came to examine his son and when he realized the son was still alive he remarked that it was fortunate the son had not been killed as the knife could be used for the Avodah.

The Gemara then asks -what motivated him? Was his motivation that they could bring the sacrifice an act of Tzidkus or Rishus? Was the import of bringing the sacrifice paramount? Or was murder not significant in those days?

R' Frand said that R' Schwadron told the Gemara to the person who chased the young Ba'al Koreh away. Did you do so because the mitzva of hearing Zachor from a bearded person is so important? Or is it because you had no regard for the feelings of the Ba'al Koreh.

To return to the story of the two women - the reason that Tamar is viewed favorably is because she was concerned about Yehuda's Kavod - even if it meant that she would die and not have the child, it was more important that Yehuda not be embarrassed. Meanwhile the wife of Potiphar when she met an obstacle was ready to publicly embarrass Yosef.

R' Frand said a second vort in the name of R' Akiva Eger related to the interplay of Yosef and the Sar Hamashikm. When Yosef tells him the butler the meaning of his dream, the Torah recounts in Bereishis 40:13 that Yosef tells him that in three days he will be restored to his old position and that he will place Pharaoh's cup in Pharaoh's hand as was his former practice when he was the cup bearer. 

R' Akiva Eiger asked - why does the Torah need to tell us at the end of the pasuk the mechanics of what the butler did and will do? Why not just say that he will get his old job back? What is added by telling him that he will put the cup back in Pharaoh's hand just like originally?

R' Akiva Eiger also asked on the next pasuk wherein Yosef says "Ki Im Zechartani" - which implies that this is happening so that you will remember me. Why not just say - please remember me?

R' Akiva Eiger answered his questions by stating that if Yosef had just told him that he was getting his job back, the butler would have been a nervous wreck. After all, if he was jailed simply because a fly fell in the wine, what would stop it from happening again. And the next time that the fly was in the wine, he could lose his head. 

In order to calm down the butler, Yosef tells him that he did not do anything wrong. He definitely checked the wine each time. Yosef was telling him that this happened because it is the hand of Hashem. You were put in jail because Hashem wanted this to happen, but it wont happen again. Hashem put you there so that you would meet me and be the vehicle for me to get out of jail. So relax, there wont be another fly in the cup and you will go back to doing all the things that you used to do for Pharaoh. And this is why you should remember me and mention me to Pharaoh.

R' Frand connected this to a story about an Askan named Gary Turgo (sp?) who is involved in many Jewish organizations in Detroit. He told a story of hashgacha pratis which related to Blue Cross-Blue Shield. He had attended a meeting of Blue Cross-Blue Shield where he intended to announce that he was going to resign as he had completed all that he needed to do there. And while he was at the meeting he got a text message from someone who had a loved one in the hospital in NY and needed an operation. 

The problem was that Blue Cross-Blue Shield had not approved the operation and time was of the essence. The person wanted to know of Mr. Turgo knew anyone at Blue Cross-Blue Shield who could help. Since Mr. Turgo was siting next to the head of Blue Cross-Blue Shield, he showed her his phone and within five minutes the operation was approved.

And he did not resign his post.

This was a Ki Im Zechartani situation - this is why he was on the board of Blue Cross-Blue Shield.

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 Vayishlach

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 his vort by discussing the battle between Ya'akov and the angel of Esav who fought until Alos HaShachar. R' Frand noted that the Torah uses the language "Vayeavek" instead of "Vayliachem." Rashi explains that the work "Vayeavek" refers to the dust which was generated by the battle which went all the way up to the Kisai HaKavod. This obviously must be a metaphor, but what does it connote?

R' Frand quoted R' Immanuel Bernstein who cites the Sefer Be'er Yosef which explains that there was a fundamental difference between Esav and Ya'akov as Ya'akov had a connection to Hashem and Esav did not. He notes that Ya'akov went back to retrieve Pachim Ketanim - small jugs. Why was this important to him? Because Hashem gave them to him and therefore they were intended for a purpose. And this is what the angel of Esav wanted to disabuse him of - there is no such thing as Hashgacha Pratis and He certainly does not worry about Pachim Ketanim. The angel wanted to start him on the path to believing that Hashem does not care or is not involved.

The Be'er Yosef quoted the Arizal who states that Tzaddikim view their resources dearly because they came from Heaven and if Hashem gave them to the Tzaddik, it was for a purpose. The angel of Esav wanted to convince Ya'akov that Hashem did not care about these items. And this is why the dust was rising to the Kisai HaKavod - because dust is worthless, yet it still has a relationship with the Kisai HaKavod.

The Be'er Yosef also quoted the Gra who notes that there is a reference to the Kisai HaKavod in the Beracha of Asher Yatzar. Even the most physical, mundane activity rises to the Kisai HaKavod as we recognize that Hashem gives us the ability to relieve ourselves. 

R' Frand also said a second vort related to the story of Dina and Shechem and how Shimon and Levi took revenge. Ya'akov was unhappy about this act and he chastised them. They then responded to him - HaKizonah Ya'aseh Es Achoseinu. R' Frand noted that this was an early dispute about whether we shoud care about public opinion and what the New York Times will say about us.

R' Frand quoted the Or HaChaim HaKadosh who explains that what Shimon and Levi were saying is that - if we don't react it will be open season on Jews - this will just be the first in a series. We need to go out and put fear into them.

R' Frand tied this into what is going on in Israel - the actions in Gaza, decimating Hezballah and bombing Syrian military sites. 1700 soldiers have lost their lives in the process and Israel has paid a price. But sometimes its necessary to take such actions to prevent the world from trampling on Jews.

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!

Belated Parshas Tidbits - Parshas Vateitzei

The following is a brief summary of some of thoughts said over by R' Frand on the parsha last evening (due to being at a wedding I was unable to blog this yesterday). 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 his thoughts by noting that the parsha is completely "Stumah" - there are no paragraph breaks. R' Frand quoted R' Gedalya Shor who explains that this parsha is the parsha of Galus. He quoted the Ramban who explains that the fights in the previous parshios about the building of the wells were references to the Batei Mikdash. But after this, Ya'akov goes into Galus.

R' Shor explains that there are no Pesuchas - openings, because Galus is all Satum - we don't understand why things happen to us in Galus - be it from October 7, the Holocaust, the Pogroms in Europe and further back.

R' Frand quoted R' Chaim Shmulevitz who explains that the breaks in Parshios are meant to give Moshe time to stop and contemplate what the stories or mitzvos are about. But this Parsha as a symbol of Galus has no breaks and until Galus is over, everything is a cloud.

R' Frand noted that the Parsha of Balak also has no breaks. He quoted the Chofetz Chaim who explains that Bila'am never stopped to understand the message, thus there were no breaks and no time to reflect.

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!