Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> Vaeira ->


“And the frog(s) came up and covered the land of Egypt.” (8:2)

Rashi explains that originally there was only one frog.  The Egyptians attempted to kill this frog by beating it. As they continued beating, it divided into swarms and swarms of frogs. Horav Itze’le Voloshiner z.t.l. asks what would have occurred if they had not provoked and beat that original frog? Probably nothing! Why, then, did they foolishly continue the beating, only to see their endeavor “backfire” and produce more frogs? He responds that this lack of self- control is human nature. Every provocation encourages a reciprocal response. Each time the Egyptians saw the frogs’ “response” they, in reaction, kept on…

Continue Reading

“And the years of the life of Levi were 137 years.” (6:16)

Horav Avigdor Miller, Shlita, suggests that the secret of this family’s success and virtue is found in this pasuk. Levi, who was four years Yosef’s senior, lived 23 years longer than he. During Yosef’s tenure as viceroy of Egypt, he undoubtedly supervised the complete spiritual education and development of his extended family.  After Yosef’s death, which was generally at the same time as the demise of most of his brothers, a spiritual decline among the surviving brothers began. After all, a deterioration was to be expected in light of the loss of Yosef’s spiritual leadership. The exposure to the decadence…

Continue Reading

“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

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!