Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> 5753 ->


“And He called unto Moshe.” (1:1)

The Midrash states that Moshe was actually known by ten different names, each describing a different aspect of his multi-faceted personality. Each name depicted a specific trait not implied by the others. Of all the names mentioned, however, the name Moshe, given to him by Bisya, the daughter of Pharaoh, was the one by which Hashem addressed him. A name is an appellation which characterizes a person’s personality, a single word which uniquely encapsulates an individual’s entire essence. We must, therefore, endeavor to understand why Hashem selected the name Moshe to reign supreme over all the other names. Indeed, the…

Continue Reading

“For the cloud of Hashem (was) upon the Mishkan by day and used to be on it (by) night, before the eyes of all the House of Yisrael throughout their journeys.” (40:38)

The importance of the words, “before the eyes of all Yisrael,” is indicated by their placement at the end of Sefer Shemos. Similarly, at the end of Sefer Devarim we find a comparable statement, which concludes the entire Chumash. The emphasis is placed upon the fact that this generation has served as eternal witnesses to attest to Hashem’s wondrous glory to all future generations. Today we view events of the past through the eyes of that generation. Hashem’s power, might, and miracles were demonstrated before a whole nation, not in an isolated place before a select group of witnesses. Consequently,…

Continue Reading

“And so Moshe finished the work.” (40:33)

The parsha concludes with the final account of the erection of the Mishkan. It mandates the precise placement of the Shulchan, table, the menorah, and the Aron Hakodesh. The entire parsha is a study in detail, providing the exact description of each vessel and the specific verbs used to describe each activity necessary for creating these vessels. Examples include: “and he gave;” “and he placed;” “and he brought;” “and he spread out;” “and he screened.”             Horav Moshe Swift, z.l., notes the Torah‘s emphasis on each activity. Every man has his own job to perform. One cannot be a silent…

Continue Reading

“And the stuff they had was “sufficient” for all the work to make it with some “left over.” (36:7)

The text of this pasuk seems enigmatic. The word “sufficient” implies an accounting of materials for a precise purpose, for which an accurate amount is necessary. “Left over,” on the other hand, denotes a surplus of these materials.             Horav M. Shapiro, z.l., offers a novel approach to resolving this apparent “contradiction.” Every Jew contributed towards the Mishkan, each according to his own means. Some individuals wanted to donate more than their resources permitted, but were not allowed to do so. There were also probably individuals who had procrastinated, intending to give more before the call came to cease the…

Continue Reading

“And Moshe stood in the gate of the camp and he said (called out) whoever is with Hashem (should come) to me!” (32:26)

As a young man, Horav S. Schwab, z.l., had the occasion to spend a Shabbos with the Chofetz Chaim, z.l., On Friday morning, the Chofetz Chaim questioned him regarding his lineage, whether he was a Kohen or a Levi. Horav Schwab responded in the negative. The Chofetz Chaim remarked, “What a pity! Moshiach is coming, and the Bais Hamikdash will be rebuilt. If you are not a Kohen, you will be unable to perform the Avodah, priestly service.” The Chofetz Chaim continued, “Do you know why? Because 3,000 years ago, during the incident of the Golden Calf, when Moshe called…

Continue Reading

“And it came to pass when he came near to the camp, that he saw the calf and (the) dancing that Moshe’s anger arose, and he threw from his hands the Luchos and he broke them.” (32:19)

We must endeavor to understand what transpired when Moshe approached the camp that precipitated his angry reaction. Did he not already know the extent of Bnei Yisrael‘s transgression? The Abarbanel questions Moshe’s intentions in bringing the Luchos down only in order to break them. He responds that Moshe desired to accentuate Bnei Yisrael’s travesty and its consequences. Therefore, he broke the Luchos blatantly in front of them. The text, however, seems to imply that it was only after Moshe “came near” the camp and actually saw their conspicuous transgression that he reacted in such an intense manner. We may also…

Continue Reading

“And Hashem spoke to Moshe… go descend, for your people have become corrupt… they made for themselves a Golden Calf… and Hashem said to Moshe: I have seen these people and behold they are a stubborn people… and now leave Me be and let Me vent My anger and annihilate them.” (32:7,8,9,10)

The Torah lists the sins transgressed by Bnei Yisrael. They corrupted themselves, and they made a Golden Calf. They replaced service to a Divine G-d with the worship of a molten image. Hashem did not choose to destroy them, however, for these sins. Only after they are described as an obstinate people does Hashem seek to decimate them. Horav Meir Chadash, z.l., notes that stubbornness is an evil which must be totally eradicated. Obstinacy, by its very nature, is the antithesis of free will. One who doggedly refuses to accept guidance and reproach, who continues upon his chosen path of…

Continue Reading

“And they arose early on the morrow, and they offered burnt offerings, and they brought peace offerings, and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and they rose up to (play) make merry.” (32:6)

The Golden Calf incident was Am Yisrael‘s first deviation from the Torah path. This was the first time that Bnei Yisrael supported ideals antithetical to Torah values. The relationship between the ideology of these historical sinners and their actions is typical of those who have espoused distorted thinking throughout the generations. The visions and their behavioral consquences are the same today. It is only the names and places which have changed.             Horav Y. Galinsky, Shlita, notes the progressive deterioration of Bnei Yisrael’s values from the sequence of events portrayed by the pasuk. First it states, “They offered burnt offerings.”…

Continue Reading

And the altar (of copper) shall be a sanctuary for sanctuaries” (29:37)

It seems peculiar that the Torah twice refers to the copper altar, which was situated outside of the “Heichal,” as “kodesh kodoshim.” This is in contrast to the altar of incense , which was placed opposite the Aron Hakodesh and is described merely as “kodesh.” Horav Moshe Feinstein, z.l., suggests the following homiletic interpretation. The placement of the altars, inside or outside, symbolizes the Torah scholar when he is inside or outside of the Bais Hamidrash. A Torah scholar should be cognizant that while he is “holy” in the Bais Hamidrash, he must be “doubly holy” when he leaves this…

Continue Reading

“And you shall make a showplate of pure gold… and this shall go over the turban… and it shall be on Aharon’s forehead, and so Aharon shall do away with the transgressions of the holy things.” (28:36,37,38)

Chazal state that the “tzitz” atoned for the sin of impudence exhibited by the people. This seems enigmatic. How does Aharon’s wearing of the tzitz atone for a generation’s brazenness and lack of courtesy? Does the Kohen Gadol’s wearing of the tzitz give one license to be impertinent? Horav Reuven Katz, z.l., resolves this difficulty in the following way. One who secretly sins will be embarrassed if his baneful act is publicized. In contrast, one who is impudent defies criticism and publicly flaunts his evil in the most arrogant manner. Atonement for a sin is effected through the balance of…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!