Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> Vaeira ->


“These are the heads of their fathers houses… and the sons of Shimon… and these are the names of the sons of Levi. (6:13,14,15)

Why does the Torah emphasize the word “names”, in regard to Shevet Levi, tribe of Levi, in contrast to the other shevatim? The Shelah Ha’kadosh offers a powerful insight. The tribe of Levi was not included in the Egyptian bondage. They did not suffer the cruelty which was an everyday experience for Bnei Yisrael.  What could they do to share in Bnei Yisrael’s anguish at this particularly trying time? They gave their children names which reflected the suffering and exile of their brethren. The name Gershon implies being a stranger in a strange land. Kehas alludes to dulling of the…

Continue Reading

“Behold, Bnei Yisrael will not listen to me, how then shall Pharaoh hear me, for I am of uncircumcised lips.” (6:12)

Moshe Rabbeinu was reluctant to accept the position as spokesman and leader of Bnei Yisrael. Moshe’s reason is clear. How could Pharaoh accept Moshe, if Bnei Yisrael, the people whom he was attempting to rescue, themselves did not believe in him? Much has been discussed by the commentators regarding Moshe’s kal v’chomer, a ‘priori argument. Bnei Yisrael had a somewhat justifiable reason for not heading Moshe. They were overwhelmed and dejected. They yearned for freedom, but they were too discouraged to hope for it.  On the other hand, Pharaoh had no reason to ignore Moshe’s words, other than pure obstinacy. …

Continue Reading

And Yosef died . . . and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.” (50:26)

The family was unable to remove Yosef’s body from Egypt. Indeed, had Yosef not been under oath to remove Yaakov’s body from Egypt for burial, it would also have been impossible. Horav Avigdor Miller, Shlita, suggests that these instances demonstrate the enormous impossibility of having procured permission for the entire Bnei Yisrael to leave Egypt.  Since this was the situation under Yosef’s rule, how much more inconceivable would this venture be some 210 years later under the tyrannical Egyptian bondage. They might have despaired and completely assimilated in response to the hopeless situation, had it not been for Yosef’s dying…

Continue Reading

“Dan shall judge his people . . . Dan shall be a serpent in the way.” (49:16,17)

The Kli Yakar notes the fact that Yaakov compared Dan to a serpent, while, in contrast, Moshe compared him to a lion. He suggests the disparity in metaphor is due to the dual challenges facing a judge. Some litigants openly confront a judge with defiance and impudence, casting aspersion on his legal decisions. On the other hand, others cloak their evil intentions under a facade of acceptance, while they secretly slander the judge with venomous gossip. The judge must be strong and resolute in responding to these divergent critics.  At times, he must maintain the strength and courage of the…

Continue Reading

“Dan shall judge his people as one of the tribes of Yisrael.” (49:16)

Rashi states that the pasuk is referring to Shimshon, who judged Klal Yisrael. The Rashbam and Kli Yakar disagree. They maintain that the pasuk applies to all judges.  Horav Elchanan Sorotzkin z.t.l. questions the emphasis on shevet Dan. Were there not judges from the other tribes?  Indeed, Yissachar merited to be represented by two hundred heads of the Sanhedrin.  What was so unique about shevet Dan, and especially Shimshon, that was distinguished for recognition? Horav Sorotzkin explains that, although the other tribes also produced judges and erudite scholars who judged and led Klal Yisrael, Shimshon was unique in his “profession.”…

Continue Reading

“By you shall Yisrael bless, saying: Hashem shall make you as Efraim and Menashe.” (48:20)

Rashi interprets the pasuk above to mean that whoever blesses his sons will bless them with their (Efraim and Menashe’s) blessing.  Indeed, the standard blessing of father to son is, “Hashem shall make you as Efraim and as Menashe.” What was unique about these two brothers that so endeared them to Yaakov? Why do they, from amongst all the tribes, stand conspicuous as the paradigm for blessing? Horav Eliezer Sorotzkin, Shlita, suggests the following reason. Although the shevatim, tribes, were unique in their yiraas shomayim, fear of Heaven, they were regrettably hampered by strife and discord.  The brothers’ jealousy of…

Continue Reading

“And Yisrael stretched out his right hand and placed (it) upon Efraim’s head . . . and his left (hand he placed) on Menashe’s head . . . and he (Yosef) held up his father’s hand to remove it.” (48:14,17)

Why did Yaakov not change Menashe and Efraim’s position, thereby avoiding the necessity of criss-crossing his hands over them? The commentators cite various responses to this question.  Horav Chaim M’Volozhin z.t.l.  offers a profound insight into Yaakov’s behavior. The nature of a person is to minimize his friend’s virtues, while simultaneously exaggerating his failings.  This represents an unconscious attempt to allay one’s own insecurities. One foolishly thinks that he improves himself by denigrating others. This characteristic becomes manifest when two people stand facing each other.  The right hand of one is across from his friend’s left hand and vice versa. …

Continue Reading

“And Yosef sustained his father and his brothers… And they brought their cattle unto Yosef, and Yosef gave them bread . . . and he provided them with bread.” (47:12,17)

Rashi understands the word okvbhu to mean “he led (them).” He thus interprets the verse, “Yosef controlled the Egyptians by means of the bread which he gave them.” This contrasts to the word okfkfhu, “he sustained (them),” which is emphasized regarding Yosef’s brothers. Horav Z. Sorotzkin z.t.l. explains the contrasting choice of words. While okfkfhu means simply “to sustain,” okvbhu also means “to manage” or “to provide.” The Jew will not allow himself to be sold in exchange for bread. His commitment to Torah and Yidishkeit is resolute. Only Eisav was prepared to sell his birthright and his soul for…

Continue Reading

“And the sons of Binyamin were Bela, Bechar and Ashbel . . .” (46:21)

Chazal cite the source for the name of each of Binyamin’s sons.  They explain that each name alludes in one way or another to Yosef, his only brother with whom he shares his mother, Rachel.  This is striking!  Binyamin fathered ten sons.  This was undoubtedly an amazing fountain of joy. Binyamin, however, did not lose himself in self-agrandizment. Instead, he named every child, every source of joy, after his lost brother. The Ponevezer Rav notes Binyamin’s singular love and devotion to Yosef. Throughout all of these years, he never allowed his longing for Yosef to become obsequious. He felt every…

Continue Reading

“These are the names of the Bnei Yisrael who came to Egypt.” (46:8)

Rashi notes that the Torah uses the present tense in this pasuk.  He explains that the verb tense refers to the actual time at which they arrived in Egypt. This seems surprising. If the pasuk is referring back to the time of arrival, it should have stated; “Who came to Egypt”. The Belzar Rebbe z.t.l. derives from this pasuk an important lesson for the Jew in galus, exile. The Jews must always view themselves as having just arrived on this very day. They are still brand new arrivals. Their source of guidance is still Yaakov, the Patriarch. Regardless of the…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!