Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

5753

YEARS

5751
5752
5753
5754
5755
5756
5757
5758
5759
5760
5761
5762
5763
5764
5765
5766
5767
5768
5769
5770
5771
5772
5773
5774
5775
5776
5777
5778

“These things are the burden of the Bnei Kehas.” (4:15)

The Midrash illustrates the moral superiority of the Leviim by citing the difference between the footwear each wore. While members of the other tribes wore sandals, the Leviim who were responsible for carrying the Mishkan and its vessels, walked barefoot. Chazal also observe that the virtuous Bnei Kehas, the actual transporters of the Aron, walked backward, so that they did not turn their back on the Aron. This Midrash demands explanation. While walking barefoot and backward are noble ways to express reverence to the Aron, these acts do not demonstrate the Leviim’s unique virtue. In order to clarify this Midrash,…

Continue Reading

“And Moshe counted them according to Hashem’s word.” (3:16)

Horav Moshe Swift, z.l., notes a disparity between the census of Bnei Yisrael and that of Bnei Levi. Bnei Yisrael were counted from age twenty and over, thereby facilitating an easy count. Bnei Levi, who were counted from age one month upwards, demanded a more difficult count. The Midrash emphasized this by noting that Moshe asked, “How can I enter their tents to determine the number of babies in each family?” Hashem responded, “You do your share, and I will do mine.” The Midrash continues that Moshe stood at the doorway of each tent. The Shechinah preceded him, and a…

Continue Reading

“And Nadav and Avihu died before Hashem when they offered a strange fire … and they had no children.” (3:4)

The Midrash states that had Nadav and Avihu taken wives and had children, they would not have died. The Chasam Sofer explains that innocent children have the need to receive proper guidance from their parents. It would, therefore, have been in the children’s merit that Hashem would have granted the parents life. Chazal, however, state other reasons for Nadav and Avihu’s tragic deaths. Two reasons which are emphasized are: Nadav and Avihu’s entrance into the Mikdash after having drunk wine; and their inappropriate rendering of a halachic decision in the presence of Moshe, their rebbe. These latter two reasons do…

Continue Reading

“And Hashem spoke to Moshe in the wilderness of Sinai.” (1:1)

Chazal note an integral relationship between the “midbar,” wilderness, and the Torah. Much of the Torah’s narrative takes place in the wilderness. The Torah itself was given in the wilderness, a point which Chazal emphasize frequently. It is, therefore, appropriate that the Torah reading immediately prior to Shavuos, the festival of the giving of the Torah, is Parashas Bamidbar. Chazal suggest many explanations for this connection. Horav S.R. Hirsch, z.l., expresses a simple, but profound, idea regarding the Torah’s ideology in forming the framework of each Jew individually and Klal Yisrael as a unified entity. Hashem chose the barren, free…

Continue Reading

“And Hashem spoke to Moshe in the wilderness of Sinai.” (1:1)

The Midrash states that the Torah was given through the media of fire, water, and wilderness. The commentators differ in communicating the message of this Midrash. Horav M. Shapiro, z.l., suggests that these three elements reflect the magnitude of Klal Yisrael’s devotion to Hashem to the point of their self-sacrifice. Fire alludes to the fiery caldron into which Avraham Avinu was thrown because of his staunch belief in Hashem. This, however, only illustrates self-sacrifice on the part of the individual Jew. Water, which symbolizes Klal Yisrael’s passage through the Red Sea, represents our unwavering devotion to Hashem as a whole…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!