Ki Tissa - Who Are You?

"They exchanged their honor for that of a cow eating grass" This is how Dovid HaMelech describes the Cheit HaEigel (Tehillim 106:20). It would seem more appropriate to say that they exchanged his honor. Why does Dovid write, ”Vayamiru et kevodam"? ########j#########################################################
The Ralbag suggests that G-d's honor is being referred to, but out of respect it is referenced euphemistically. Rav Nissan Alpert suggests a different approach which expands upon this reference to “THEIR HONOR EXCHANGED.” ####j##########################################################
The Jewish People at the time of the Cheit HaEigel were the Dor Deah. They were highly knowledgeable, profoundly intelligent people. The construction of the eiegel was the subject of intense debate. The ones in favor of making the eigel wanted it as a metaphor of the true nature of man, representing the fact that man is essentially an animal. They said that Moshe had lifted them up from their physical nature, but in his absence it was time to return to being what they really were - no different than a cow, eating to live and living to eat. (This approach can be inferred from a nuanced reading of Shmot 32:1, which the people despair over the loss of Moshe, whom they describe as having raised them - he’elinu - up from Egypt. They felt that he raised them to an unnaturally high state and now it was time to return to “real life.”) $$j$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Those who opposed the constructing the eigel felt passionately that they were primarily spiritual in nature. Thus, it was wrong to suggest the cow as an appropriate symbol of the essence of man. (This was the reality, as supported by the seemingly unnecessary mention by G-d in 32:7 that the people whom Moshe had raised up – he’elita – had strayed and corrupted their essence). %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% j
There are various levels of tumah/impurity; the lowest is a dead human being. The reason why the human corpse ranks even lower than the carcass of an animal is that a man's real value rests in his soul. A dead cow can be utilized in many ways, but a dead man's work is done. The Para Aduma comes to purify the lowest form of impurity, acquired through contact with a dead human being. Acceptance of these laws is reflective of an understanding that man's essence is his soul. This is why Chazal tell us that the Para Aduma is kapara (provides atonement) for the cheit ha’eigel, the biggest mistake the Jewish People ever made. &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&j&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Entry level spirituality is to accept that humans are distinctive in all of creation, because we are created in the image of G-d. In Avot 3:18, Rabi Akiva implores us to remember that we are special first and foremost for this reason. He reminds us that we were then blessed with being considered G-d’s children, and finally with being gifted with the Torah. Rabi Akiva says that there is a particular power to the fact that we were granted an awareness of our true nature (“chibah yetaira noda’at lahem”). May we be blessed to always remember that we are uniquely spiritual, certainly more than animals, and even greater than angels. **************************

Purim - Guest Post

Rabbi Josh Hoffman sends out a weekly email on the parsha called Netvort. I am amazed by the quality of what he presents. Today he sent out a special thought for Purim. I find this piece to be outstanding and inspiring.

If you are interested in receiving an email of his weekly thought, let me know.

A Lot of Events

~

By Rabbi Joshua Hoffman

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

There is a well-known saying of the famed kabbalist Rabbi Yitzchak Ashekenazi, known as the Ari, which, I have heard, originates in the Tikunei Zohar, that there is a connection between Purim and Yom Ha Kippurim. In fact, according to the Ari, Yom HaKippurim, as the name implies, is only like Yom Kippur, not equivalent to it. In other words, Purim is on a higher level that Yom Kippur. many explanations of this comment have been given, the most common of which is that on Purim we reach the level of closeness to God that we reach on Yom Kippur, but through use of the physical aspects of the world, rather than through abstention from them, as we do on Yom Kippur. since our task in this world is to use its physical aspects to attain holiness, our abstention from physical pleasures on Yom Kippur is a kind of preparation for our service of God during the rest of the year. I would like to suggest a somewhat different explanation, based on a different linguistic connection between the two holidays.
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohhoooooooo
The name of the holiday of Purim comes from the Persian world for lot, pur, and refers to the lots which Haman made to determine the day and month which he would have the king issue a decree to wipe out al of the Jews in his kingdom. On Yom Kippur, as well, lots are chosen, to determine which of two goats, which are otherwise completely identical to each other, will be used as a sacrifice on the altar, and which of them will be sent to the wilderness, to Azazael, and there thrown off of a mountain to bring about atonement for the people. What is the idea behind choosing lots to determine the status of these two goats on Yom Kippur.? My teacher, Rav Ahron Soloveitchik, explained that often in life, one chance decision can determine the road that a person takes in life, and, in repenting, he must understand what choice he made that led him to this path. This concept is in accord with the teaching of Rabbi Bachya Ibn Pekudah in his classic work, Chovos Halvavos, in which he says that often in life, a person does not have free will in regard to each action he takes. Rather, his free choice manifests itself in the path he chooses to take in life. Once he has taken that path, however, his actions as a consequence, and, in order to reverse them, he has to get off the path. To do that, he must understand how he got on that path in the first place. The lesson of the two goats is to sharpen our awareness of how important a particular decision can be, and to spur us on to understand how we got onto a path that has been detrimental to our spiritual health. I have heard that Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt”l. explained the lesson of the lots drawn on Yom Kippur differently, saying that they are a mitigating factor in our judgment, in the sense that often the path we take in life is based on a chance decision, and therefore we are not totally to blame for what happens. In either case, the point of the drawing of lots on Yom Kippur is to focus on that one decision in life that has unanticipated repercussions. 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
The idea of lots on Purim is different from that on Yom Kippur. On Purim, the lots are symbolic of everything that happened in the course of the events presented in Megillas Esther. Each of the events , when seen n its own, seems too have been a natural occurrence, and it is only when taken together as a whole that we see the divine providence that was involved throughout. That is why we do not see God's name written in an explicit way in the megillah, although, as Chazal have taught us, it does appear 'in disguise,' for example, as the word "melech" - king- when it is written by itself, not followed by "Achashveiros." Rabbi Eliezer Ashkenazi, in his commentary to Megillas Esther , Yoseif Lekach, writes that it is for this reason that we must hear every word of the megillah in order to fulfill our obligation of mikra megillah, becuse it is the combination of all the events that led to our salvation, and we need to understand that divine providence was there behind the scenes throughout the entire scenario. uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
Perhaps, then, the connection between Yom Kippur, the day which is 'like a pur, a lot,' and Purim is that Yom Kippur focuses our attention on that one choice in our lives that determined which path we would take, and prepares us for understanding how it is that what followed came as a result. Purim, on the other hand, focuses our attention on the details of the path we have taken, and calls on us to understand how divine providence takes that decision and guides all the details of our lives, whether individually or on a collective basis, and, with that understanding, determine how we should order our lives and our actions on a daily basis. May we all, in the spirit of Purim, reach an understanding of God's role in our daily lives, and as a result, deepen our connection with Him on a constant basis.

Bo

Hashem said to Moshe, "Come to Par'oh,
for I have made his heart and the heart of his servants stubborn
so that I shall place these signs of mine in his midst.
And so that you may relate in the ears of your son
and your son's son that I have amused myself with Egypt,
and my signs that I placed among them -
that you may know that I am Hashem.

0
Shmot 10:1-2 (Opening lines of Parshat Bo.)

p
These lines are the introduction to Arbeh, the plague of locusts. This is the last plague that hit the landscape of Egypt. After this calamity Paroh's question, "Who is Hashem that I should listen to His voice?” was definitively answered. In the aftermath of this devastation the locusts retreated on their own volition, because there wasn't anything left for them to ravage. Paroh, left with nothing and unable to feign strength confesses, "I have sinned to Hashem."
9
Rav Simcha Zissel Broide noted that the point of the decimation was not merely to get Par'oh to acquiesce and release the Jews. The goal was to show Paroh who G-d is. Right before Arbeh Hashem states that part of the agenda is to pass on to future generations the story of what G-d did to Egypt, so that they will know who He is.
u
Rav Yaakov Weinberg takes the reference to ears as a metaphor for speech that is heard only superficially by ears but does not reach the heart. In other words, we should tell young children about these miracles despite the fact that they can't really comprehend. This is why we teach kids the fundamental statements "Torah tziva lanu Moshe…" and "Shma Yisrael". Words that enter ears but not hearts still make an impression. And there remains the possibility that greater understanding will follow at a later time.
u
This relates to the Kotzker Rebbe's comment on a line that we recite daily in Shma. Words of Torah are described as placed upon our hearts. The Kotzker Rebbe explained that words aren't always taken inside a person's heart. Once stated, words rest atop the heart and when the heart opens they will be there to go in. This is why children were taken to the Beit HaMikdash for the Torah reading of Hakhel. This also explains why a day school education is so important even if it seems ineffective.
i
This approach may help with my childhood friend Scott's haunting lament that Yeshiva taught him Gemora and Chumash and Tefila but not love of Torah. Perhaps the answer is that the best anyone can do for anyone else is put words in ears or on hearts. The absorption of the truth and goodness of Torah is a private process and a personal responsibility.
p
Rav Yaakov noticed that the pasuk ends by stating that the result of teaching our children is that we, not they, will know what we taught. As Rav Yisrael Salanter said, "It's worth speaking the truth even if only one person gets the message, and even if that one person is the speaker."

Teaching Shmot

This is from one year ago, when I was teaching Shmot. This year we spent a month on Vayikra and mostly are doing BaMidbar. Every year the whole school does the same Chumash. It used to be that we spent 2 years on Beishit, then 2 years on Shmot, then one year o each of the other books. Now, it's being switched to do all four books in four years.
i
Teaching In class today we discussed the questions on the previous post: Amram was a man of action - going back and taking his wife again, standing up against the decree of Paroh. He did this based on his young daughter's advice. Imagine how great she felt years later knowing the redemption was a result of her childhood activism! activism runs in the family for Levi, as we see from they way they take down Shechem in defense of Dina. He was a grandson, she was an actual daughter of Levi, both sharing Levi's inclination toward spiritual activism. Some note that the description of this baby matches the description of the original man. Just as Adam was born perfect, which means there was no need for circumcision, so too Moshe was born circumcised. The Ohr HaChayim says though that the real pshat in her seeing that he was good is that she saw that he was healthy (having feared that he would die at birth due to being premature). She his him when she realized he was a healthy baby and not a miscarriage. This type of תיבה is only described twice in all Tanach. It's a clear call back to Noach. Both of these men oversaw the recreation of the world (the ten plagues undid the world created with ten statements - the greatest civilization at the time, and led to a recreation via the Jewish People's birth. It's unclear if the baby was placed on the edge of the water on the shore, or on the edge of the water in the water itself. As one of my students asked - wouldn't a river be a dumb and unsafe place to put an infant? But another kid chimed in that maybe they chose to put him in the water as some kind of in your face to Paroh. There are sources to back this up - that they put him in the water because that was supposed to bring his end, but they had faith that he'd live. One might imagine that the Nile (graphic image to follow) was filled with dead babies, as that's where they were all being thrown and killed. So maybe it was the smartest place to throw a baby in a cradle, as it would be assumed to be another deceased one. Also, the astrologers thought the baby would be killed by water so even if he was alive they'd get the vibe that he was half way there. On the other hand maybe the shore, within the reeds, makes more sense in terms of Miriam being able to watch/visit and in terms of general safety. One student said maybe the parents were "dumb." Another smartly countered that maybe they were filled with faith. I think this is behind the statement that Miriam was waiting to see what would happen to him. It doesn't say she was worried, it doesn't say she was standing guard. There's a serenity here; she was awaiting Providence. And when Paroh's daughter appeared and took hold of the child there was good reason to take it hard. But Miriam calmly works with it - offers to get a nurse... She was the little girl who knew miracles were possible and was just doing her best to help facilitate those miracles. This reminds me of how Yosef was experiencing extreme providence and was punished when he nervously tried to push it instead of waiting and watching in faith.

Shmot - Zornberg on VaYishretzu

The following is excerpted from Aviva Zorberg's The Particulars of Rapture: Reflections on Exodus.
'A
ADD PESUKIM
These are the dead; listed to tell the reader that they are no more. In Jewish tradition the book is called The Book Of Names: The reference is clearly to the names of the children of Israel, those individuals who, in a moment of history went down to Egypt and died there, together with their brother Joseph, who had preceded them.
n
What follows, however, on this meticulous listing of the dead, is an explosion of life, an almost surrealistic description of the spawning of a nation. Nameless, faceless, these too are the children of Israel... "Even though Joseph and his brothers died, their G-d did not die, but the children of Israel were fruitful and multiplied." The Midrash (Shemot Rabba 1:7). The Midrash here wants to decipher the cascade of births not only as blessing, but as the "survival of G-d." The generation that connects with the meaningful past is all gone. But in some way that is not fully explained here, G-d expresses his undimmed vitality in the language of physical fertility.
b
An alternative reading of this passage, however, would take its cue from the ambiguous expression "vayishretzu" - "they swarmed" This can mean the blessing of extraordinary increase, but it connotes a reptilian fecundity, which introduces a bizarre note in a description of human fertility. In this second view, vayishretzu, is a repellent description for a family fallen from greatness."
u
ADD PASUK
Nameless, faceless, these too are "the children of Israel." How are we to read this description of theier anonymous fecundity? There are two possible understndings. On the one hand, this is a celebation of fullness, of life burgeoning and unontained. This reading would be a fulfilment of G-d's promise to Jacob: "Fear not to go down to Egypt, for I will make you there into a great nation" (Genesis 46:3). The redundant descriptions of fertitlity have been read as denoting multiple births, healthy developments, absence of fetal, infant, or adult mortality. In the midrashic readings, there is a miraculous, even a whimsical sense of the outrageous victory of life over death: these, for instance, take the six exprssions of fertility (they were fruitful, they swarmed, they multiplied, very, very much) to indicate that each woman gave birth to sextuplets ("six to a belly").

Breishit

Rabbi Yitzchak Twersky, based on the Abarbanel, says that the nachash/snake didn't talk, but that Chava heard her own voice inside her head. Although she should have known better, Chava worked under the assumption that people and animals were the same. She chose (accidentally on purpose) to think that G-d said not to eat from the tree because the tree was poisonous.

She could only accept it in that way and could not accept that G-d said no because people and G-d have a relationship that includes commandments and rewards and punishments based on free will and choices. When she saw the snake rubbing up against the tree she decided that the tree must not be dangerous. Thinking that you couldn't even touch the tree, lest you die, was a logical follow up to the thought that the tree was forbidden because it was lethal. In Chava’s mind, as she saw the snake touching the tree she said to herself, "isn't it true that G-d said that you can't eat from all of the trees of the garden?"

If you read that question over again, you'll realize that one could argue that the answer to the question is yes. Because once you can't eat from one tree then it is true to say that you can not eat from "all of the trees," as you can only eat in fact from some (albeit most) of the trees. That's one possibility of how she got from the one tree to all the trees in the garden, that it was based on her discomfort in having G-d control what trees she could eat from, even if it was only by saying that just one was off limits.

The idea that the snake was actually Chava's voice is applicable today. We weaken in resolve and in responsibility by talking about the yetzer hara as if it were a him, outside of ourselves. The snake/yetzer hara is a metaphor for a voice inside of us that we control. What this means is that the fruit had no power that changed Adam and Chava’s thinking. The powerful force that changed their way of thinking was the act of disobeying G-d and acting based on their own judgment.

This can be understood through the analogy of parents and their son or daughter. If there’s a party and the parents feel it’s best to not go to that party, the child may assume that he or she knows the parents’ reason and that it won’t be a problem to disobey the parents if that reason seems, in the child's mind, to not apply to the situation. If the kid attends the party, he or she will never be the same. It may be that nothing of import happened at the party, but what changes the child forever is the act of trusting his or her own instinct over the authority of parents.

The question that comes to mind after taking in this approach is - why was the snake punished if he didn’t speak to Chava? The answer is that the "punishment" of the snake was a necessary consequence to show Chavah, and to remind people forever, that animals and people are different. Animals were created to serve people so they are "punished" when it's necessary for the sake of people. This fits with what Rashi says about all the animals being "corrupt" and destroyed in the flood; they were only created to serve people and once people were corrupt, there was no use for animals. This also its with the idea that we sacrifice animals (and that the command to do so includes the word Adam!)

One strong indication that the snake never spoke is that when the snake is “punished,” we see no mention of his losing his power of speech. Another hole in the common conception that the snake spoke is that man is described upon his creation as a unique "nefesh chayah," which Unkelus defines as "ruach memalelah" – a speaking soul, clearly implying that man was the only creation endowed with the power of speech.

May we be blessed to remember that as human beings we are unique. May we be blessed to be strong and to honor our relationship with G-d through obedience. May we be blessed to learn from Adam and Chavah’s error, to make the greatest choice we could make, to pursue and hold onto our closeness to G-d.

On He'ezinu

1. G-d is described with the words "The Rock, His actions are perfect" followed by the statement "When I call the name of G-d, acknowledge greatness to our Master." The Da'at Zekeinim addresses the juxtaposition of these two lines and writes that "it is proper to give G-d honor for His greatness because of the fact that he is a Rock of consistency who acts in a pure way and does not show anger to those who act in a manner which is inciteful of anger. True greatness, the Daat Zekeinim teaches us, includes not getting angry even if it is well deserved. This is referred to as being maavir al midotav. Rabbi Neuberger reminds his congregants each year (my friend Martin tells me) that we must learn to be ma'avir on our midot in our relations with one another, and then G-d will do the same for us.

2. "VaYishman Yeshurun VaYiv’at.” The Torah tells us that by getting too satisfied (literally; fat) the Jewish People (Yeshurun) come to rebel (literally; kick) against G-d. The Shemen HaTov points out that Yeshurun is a name for the Jewish People that refers to us on our highest spiritual level. He explains that we are being reminded that one can come to rebel against G-d even through being on a high religious level. Sometimes we get a bit too proud of and full of ourselves as a People. Thank G-d in America today the Jewish People thrive in terms of both affluence and religion. Yet we have to be careful to always work on ourselves and not to rebel as a result of our good fortune.

VaYeilech

I will then display anger against them and abandon them.

I will hide my face from them

and they will be their enemies' prey.

Beset by many evils and troubles,

they will say, 'It is because my God is no longer with me

that these evils have befallen us.'

- Devarim 31:17

The conventional take of G-d hiding his face, which can be traced to Moreh Nevukhim 1:23, 3:51 and to the Ralbag on this verse is that G-d will take away his protection/providence. The lesser known alternative to this is that of the Chizzkuni and Paaneach Razah and Baaley Tosafot (cited by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan); that G-d out of love must look away when we are being punished, as if He can't bear to see it.

The above idea fits with the concept of "Imo Anochi Betzarah," G-d's telling us "I am with you in your pain" - Tehillim 91:15. There was once a rabbi who used to have a system with his children that if they misbehaved at breakfast they wouldn't get jelly on their bread. Part of the deal was that on days when he didn't spread jelly on their bread - he didn't put jelly on his own bread either.

The Ramban points out in his rich comment on this pasuk that feeling bad in our hearts is significant, real. When bad things happen around us and we say maybe evil has befallen us because G-d is not in our lives - that is true reflection, sincere regret, and of great value. (This is in contradistinction to the Rambam who says that we have to verbally confess our sins for it to qualify as legitimate teshuva.)

On Rosh HaShana the Jewish People re-accept G-d and start a process. May we be blessed to hold on to what our hearts feel via Rosh HaShana and continue to participate in the process of true teshuva and hasten the process of real redemption.

Text of Ramban:

רמב"ן - (דברים פרק לא:יז - יח) וטעם ואמר ביום ההוא הלא על כי אין אלהי בקרבי - איננו וידוי גמור כענין והתודו את עונם, אבל הוא הרהור וחרטה, שיתחרטו על מעלם ויכירו כי אשמים הם. וטעם ואנכי הסתר אסתיר פני - פעם אחרת, כי בעבור שהרהרו ישראל בלבם כי חטאו לאלהים ועל כי אין אלהיהם בקרבם מצאום הרעות האלה, היה ראוי לרוב חסדי השם שיעזרם ויצילם שכבר כפרו בע"ז, וכענין שאמר (ירמיה ב לה) הנני נשפט אותך על אמרך לא חטאתי: ולכך אמר, כי על כל הרעה הגדולה שעשו לבטוח בע"ז יסתיר עוד פנים מהם, לא כמסתר פנים הראשון שהסתיר פני רחמיו ומצאום רעות רבות וצרות, רק שיהיו בהסתר פני הגאולה, ויעמדו בהבטחת פני רחמיו (ויקרא כו מד) ואף גם זאת בהיותם בארץ אויביהם לא מאסתים ולא געלתים וגו' עד שיוסיפו על החרטה הנזכרת וידוי גמור ותשובה שלימה, כמו שנזכר למעלה (ל ב) ושבת עד ה' אלהיך וגו

nitzavim

The Shemen HaTov offers the following explanation of the pasuk:

”Hanistarim LaHashem Elokeinu,

VeHaniglot Lanu Ulevaneinu Ad Olam” -

"Hidden things may pertain to God our Lord,

but that which has been revealed

applies to us and our children forever."

- Devarim 29:28

(The crux of what I’m presenting here is based on the Shemen HaTov.

I have embellished and expanded on the idea.)

Really, mitzvot should only be between G-d and us (for Hashem what we do should be nistarot). Our own needs dictate that we publicize what we do, for the sake of our children as well as others (though, for our sake actions should be niglot). Children especially need to know about the Tzedaka , Torah, and Chesed of their parents because they learn through that example.

The Yalkut Shimoni says that when Elkana set out on his holiday pilgrimage he would camp out at a different spot in order to educate new people regarding the mitzvah of Aliya LaRegel. Rav Aron Kotler said based on this that we should tell others about the mitzvot we do, in order to teach and inspire them. Rabbi Paysach Krohn cited these two sources and gave the example of his wife telling her high school students about her involvement in the local Chevra Kadisha because it’s something they might not learn about otherwise.

On the other hand, the Zohar that says that if you do a mitzvah and tell someone, you lose the mitzvah. The message is that a mitzvah’s value should be the mitzvah itself, the relationship between you and G-d. Telling someone about the good you’ve done shows a need for something other than the act itself to make you feel good about what you’ve done. According to this quote G-d says if that’s what you want then you get that instead of the mitzvah itself.

Jeff Korbman once came across the following explanation of the Sfas Emes regarding the Seder. The Matzah is the main mitzvah of the night, and the fact that it is covered or uncovered at various times reflects the idea we’ve been discussing. When there is some educational purpose, then the Matzah is uncovered in order for our children to see it and learn from it. When there is nothing taking place that is educational in nature then proper etiquette is to cover our matzah/mitzvah.

If a person's intent is to teach others, and that is a viable possibility, then one can/should make his mitzvah known. If someone makes his positive actions known in order to feel good about what he's done it is less than ideal. Things like telling a classmate about one's extra learning or having a donation amount announced could be important lessons for others or they could be things we do for our own honor.

Deep inside our hearts know the truth.

Have a great Shabbos,

Rabbi Neil Fleischmann

Ki Tavo

There were these big stones

They aren't much spoken of

But there's a story

And it's not written in stone

Study Parshat Ki Tavo

o

I. Introduction: How the Torah Is Divided

A Hebrew letter Paih or a Samech in the Chumash indicates the Torah's paragraphs. These letters are codes for either open (patuach) or closed (satum) paragraphs. In a Torah scroll the former follow a space and begin on a new line, while the latter continue on the same line as the previous paragraph, after a brief space.

The Living Torah by Aryeh Kaplan is the only published version of the Torah to number and name the text according to the paragraphs of the the Torah, the way it was broken up in its original form. The chapters and verses of today were added later. Yeshivat Aish HaTorah encourages its students to pay close attention to and even memorize the names of the Torah's individual paragraphs as titled in a list, which they provide for their talmidim.

Let's focus together on one paragraph which Rabbi Kaplan calls "The Written Stones."

II. Main Body

A. Devarim 27:1-8, The Written Stones

Moshe and the 70 Zekeinim tell the people to construct twelve large stones and to cover them with lime. According to Sotah 32a the lime coating was to prepare them to be written on or to laminate that which was written upon them. Chizkuni says that these stones were made into an altar and the lime was used to attach them to each other. Ibn Ezra maintains that the lime was used to keep the pillars standing.

The people were told that after they crossed the Jordan River and entered Israel they were to write "all the words of this Torah on them." Some commentators say it was a review of the Torah, or parts of Devarim (Abarbanel). Ibn Ezra says it refers to certain commandments that were listed.

After they entered the land these pillars were to be set up on Har Eival - according to Chizkuni, as a consolation for those tribes who were associated with this mountain. Abarbanel says that the point of putting these pillars on Har Eival was to remind us that the curse comes for violating the Torah.

There was a stone alter that would also be built on this mountain - possibly made of the stones with the writing on them. The altar had to be of whole stones, untouched by iron, and was used for various offerings, some of which were to be eaten there in joy.

The paragraph ends with the instruction to write "all the words of this Torah in a clear script", which the Gemorah in Sotah (32b) interprets to mean that the Torah was translated into seventy languages.

B. What's It All About?

Rav Hirsch writes that the point of this section is to remind us that -"It is only the Torah that you have to thank for the Land, you receive the land for the Torah, for its preservation and observation of its dictates." He also notes that these pesukim switch between plural and singular. [In the first line we're told "Shamor" (singular)- keep the Torah. Then we are told that it was commanded "etchem" (plural) - to you. The second line also contains both plural and singular. The third is all singular. The fourth is mostly singular, with one exception. The rest of the paragraph is phrased in singular.] This oscillation between plural and singular emphasizes that the observance of Torah which the land of Israel exists to facilitate is not something that relates exclusively to either the individual members of the nation or just to the nation as a unit. Rather, the land is for "the nation as a single unit made into such by the plurality of its members, so that the whole nation, in the united working together of all its individuals, were responsible for it."

III. Conclusion: Take Home Point

It is is Ellul and we are all concerned about what will be for ourselves, and for the Jewish People, for the Jewish Land. This portion of the Torah serves to remind us that Teshuva and the land of Israel are more closely linked than it is sometimes comfortable to admit. May we merit being part of the unit comprised of various individuals that these pesukim allude to. May we do Teshuva Sheleima and experience Geula Sheleima as soon as possible. G-d knows we need it.

Shabbat Shalom,

Rabbi Neil Fleischmann