Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

  • Reset

Home -> 5778 -> Balak

ויעל בלק ובלעם פר ואיל במזבח

Moshe Marcovich
In Balak, 5778

And Balak and Bilaam brought up a bull and a ram on each alter. (23:2)

Horav Sholom Schwadron, zl, was a master orator. As a maggid, he was able to reach thousands with his powerful, animated oratory. The manner in which he presented his ethical lessons, couched in stories to which his listeners could well relate, captivated his audience, impacting them with his critical message and sage advice. Yet, Rav Sholom was not happy. He felt that in order to be worthy of lecturing to the masses, he himself should be more “sincere.” There should be no vestige of eminence or haughtiness, no personal interest whatsoever. (This story is related by Horav Reuven Karlinstein, zl….

Continue Reading

Home -> 5778 -> Balak

ויאמר בלעם אל מלאך ד' חטאתי כי לא ידעתי כי אתה נצב לקראתי בדרך

Moshe Marcovich
In Balak, 5778

Bilaam said to the angel of Hashem, “I have sinned, for I did not know that you were standing opposite me on the road. (22:34)

As usual, Bilaam speaks out of both sides of his mouth. On the one hand, he seeks to excuse himself for his actions, claiming, Lo yadati, “I did not know” that you (the angel) stood before me. On the other hand, he concedes, Chatasi, “I sinned.” What is it: excuse, or sin? He cannot have it both ways. The Shlah HaKadosh explains that the two go together – chatasi, ki lo yadaati, “I sinned, because I did not know.” The mere fact that I did not know is a sin. How can Bilaam claim that he was unaware, that he…

Continue Reading

Home -> 5778 -> Balak

ועתה לכה נא ארה לי את העם הזה

Moshe Marcovich
In Balak, 5778

So now please come and curse this people for me. (22:6)

How often does it occur that someone harms us? We are talking about an evil person who, for whatever reason, decides that we are in the way of his progress; or he wants to take revenge on us for something we have done which, in his mind, deserves punishment. While the individual may be totally wrong (or, even if he is totally right), we are not permitted to curse him. First, we do not curse Jews. They are our brothers. The fact that they are not acting like brothers does not change our relationship towards them. So, what does one do…

Continue Reading

Home -> 5778 -> Balak

הנה עם יצא ממצרים הנה כסה את עין הארץ

Moshe Marcovich
In Balak, 5778

Behold a nation left Egypt, and behold they are covering the earth’s eye. (22:5)

Earth’s eye? Simply, this refers to the surface of the earth. Rashi explains that Balak was referring to Klal Yisrael’s decimation of the two powerful kings –Sichon and Og, who were considered the shomrim ha’aretz, guardians of the land. If the two giants who protected the land were quickly dispatched by the Jews, what should Balak say? He realized that he had no chance against the Jewish army. Horav Elimelech Biderman, Shlita, the Lelover Rebbe, defines earth’s eye as the way people view matters that occur. They look at it through the earth’s eye, as being teva, natural. Regardless of…

Continue Reading

Home -> 5778 -> Chukas

וירם משה את ידו ויך את הסלע במטהו פעמים

Moshe Marcovich
In Chukas, 5778

Then Moshe raised his arm and struck the rock with his staff twice. (20:11)

When Moshe Rabbeinu struck the stone, instead of speaking to it, as per his instructions from Hashem, his actions were considered to be sinful. As a result, he was not permitted to enter into Eretz Yisrael. The commentators offer a number of different explanations to shed light on Moshe’s error. Rashi says that altering Hashem’s command from “speaking” to “striking” was wrong. Other commentators attribute the error to his reaction, the derogatory manner in which he spoke to the people: Shimu na hamorim, “Listen, you rebellious ones/fools.” Whether the issue was becoming angry or referring to descendants of the Avos,…

Continue Reading

Home -> 5778 -> Chukas

זאת התורה אדם כי ימות באהל

Moshe Marcovich
In Chukas, 5778

This is the teaching regarding a man who would die in his tent. (19:14)

Chazal (Berachos 63b) render the above pasuk homiletically, “This is the Torah – a man who dies in a tent. The Torah is not acquired only (unless) a person kills himself over it.” Obviously, such a compelling statement warrants considerable commentary. Simply, it teaches that in order for one to succeed in Torah study, he must view it as the essence of his life – without which he cannot survive. One must be prepared to devote himself totally to Torah study. The Torah is the life source of the Jew. The Vishnitzer Rebbe, Horav Moshe Hager, zl, offers a profound,…

Continue Reading

Home -> 5778 -> Chukas

זאת חקת התורה

Moshe Marcovich
In Chukas, 5778

This is the decree of the Torah. (19:2)

Rashi explains the concept of chok, a mitzvah whose Divine rationale eludes us. While Hashem certainly has a reason for every one of the Taryag, 613 mitzvos, the reason behind every mitzvah is beyond our grasp. Understandably, one might say that not all mitzvos are beyond our ken. Ostensibly, specific mitzvos – such as Kibbud Av v’Eim, Honoring father and mother – are rationally based. The Rambam (Shemoneh Perakim) distinguishes between mitzvos sichlios, rational mitzvos (which supposedly anyone who possesses a modicum of intelligence can understand on his own), and mitzvos shlmiyos, mitzvos we accept and perform purely because we…

Continue Reading

Home -> 5778 -> Chukas

יען לא האמנתם בי להקדישני לעיני בני ישראל... המה מי מריבה אשר רבו בני ישראל את ד' ויקדש בם

Sruly Schnair
In Chukas, 5778

Because you did not believe in Me to sanctify Me in the eyes of Bnei Yisrael…They are the waters of strife where Bnei Yisrael contended with Hashem, and He was sanctified through them. (20:12,13)

Had Moshe Rabbeinu and Aharon HaKohen demonstrated greater faith in Hashem by speaking to the rock, rather than striking it, Hashem’s Name would have been sanctified. The Nation would have derived the message: If an inanimate rock – which does not hear, speak, or require sustenance – carries out Hashem’s command (when spoken to), surely we (humans) should do so Ramban explains that Moshe and Aharon certainly were not lacking in faith; rather the phrase should be understood, “Because you did not cause them (the people) to believe in Me;” for if Moshe would have followed Hashem’s directive as commanded,…

Continue Reading

Home -> 5778 -> Korach

ויקם משה וילך אל דתן ואבירם

Moshe Marcovich
In Korach, 5778

So Moshe stood up and went to Dassan and Aviram. (16:25)

Why did Moshe Rabbeinu denigrate himself to go to such miscreants as Dassan and Aviram? He was the quintessential leader of Klal Yisrael, the Rabban Shel Kol Yisrael, the nation’s Rebbe. They were nothing. Yet, he went to them. Why? Chazal (Sanhedrin 110a) derive from here that one does not sustain a dispute. If he can diffuse a controversy from growing, spreading, he should do everything possible to extinguish the flames of discord. Furthermore, one who supports a machlokes, controversy, transgresses the prohibition’ of V’lo yiheyeh k’Korach v’chaadaso, “that he not be like Korach and his assembly” (Bamidbar 17:5). Simply…

Continue Reading

Home -> 5778 -> Korach

וישלח משה לקרא לדתן ולאבירם בני אליאב ויאמרו לא נעלה

Moshe Marcovich
In Korach, 5778

Moshe sent forth to summon Dassan and Aviram, bnei Eliav, but they said, “We shall not go up!” (16:12)

Two words: discord and disagreement, both begin with the same letter – “D,” but the words could otherwise not be further apart. Discord is the result of a disagreement in which one or both factions take it personally. Our parsha presents a classic case in which one side made every attempt to ameliorate a disagreement but did not succeed, since the other side was insistent on taking it to the next level. When Korach rebelled against Moshe Rabbeinu, he was joined by Dassan and Aviram, Moshe’s nemeses. Our leader did everything to appease them to the point that he sent a…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!