The words “es korbano” are not found regarding the korbanos of any of the other nesiim. Nachshon was unique among the nesiim. Along with his korban, he brought himself, his devotion, his spirit of sanctity, his mitzvos and maasim tovim, good deeds. The Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh says that while all the nesiim brought “themselves” along with their korbanos, Nachshon was the most outstanding. Consequently, the Torah emphasizes “es korbano, his korban, himself. The Torah does not refer to Nachshon as a nasi. Why? Ohr Hachayim explains that he viewed himself as just another Jew, not as the greatest of the…
Back to Home -> Naso ->
Rashi comments that the “echad,” the individual who opened his sack and found the money, was Levi. Abarbanel says that it was by design that Levi found the money first. Yosef had Levi’s money placed by the top of his sack, so that he would be the first to discover the money. Since he was the one most responsible for Yosef’s sale into slavery, the distress he experienced would provide atonement for his sin. In any event, the one who found the money first would be the one to impose a feeling of fear and remorse upon the rest of…
Had the Kohen Gadol prayed with greater devotion, had he entreated Hashem to arrange that fatal accidents not occur during his tenure as Kohen Gadol, they might not have happened. Chazal tell us that the Kohen Gadol’s mother supplied the unintentional murderers with food and clothing, so that they would not pray for her son’s premature death. It seems difficult to accept that food and clothing would take precedence over one’s liberty. One has only to ask a person who has been incarcerated for an extended period of time, to determine whether food and clothing would be an acceptable trade …
Avraham and Sarah had almost everything, they lacked only a child to carry on their legacy. Sarah suggested that Avraham take Hagar, her Egyptian maidservant, as a wife. Sarah would raise the child, that would hopefully be born to them, as her adopted child. One would think that Hagar would be enthusiastic about the idea of becoming Avraham’s wife. Indeed, her father told her, “Better to be a maidservant to Avraham and Sarah than a mistress anywhere else.” Rashi, however, says that Sarah had to convince Hagar to marry Avraham. This hardly seems consistent with a person who pursued any…
The creation of the Golden Calf was a grave sin. It was compounded when the Bnei Yisrael rose to revel. Rashi explains the word “l’tzachek,” “to have fun,” to revel, as implying a complete degeneration on their part. Their behavior became wanton. In addition to the idolatry of the Golden Calf, they committed various immoral acts. These acts even included murder, when they killed Chur as he attempted to dissuade them from serving the Golden Calf. Horav Eliyahu Meier Bloch, zl, observes that not all errors in philosophy are critical ones. It is still possible for an individual to modify…
But Hashem did not give you a heart to know, or eyes to see, or ears to hear, until this day. (29:3)
Moshe began his final charge to Klal Yisrael by putting the experiences of their forty years in the wilderness into perspective. The commentators offer a number of explanations for “hayom hazeh,” “this day” to which Moshe is referring. Simply, in the forty years of miraculous survival, Klal Yisrael were exposed to the highest degree of spiritual revelation; they were nurtured and taught by the greatest teachers. Klal Yisrael could now fully appreciate the overwhelming debt of gratitude they owed to Hashem. They were finally ready to really serve Him. He could now expect more from them. Rashi suggests another analysis. …
Perhaps Moshe Rabbeinu could have sanctified Hashem more emphatically. Why, however, is this considered to be a transgression against the Almighty? Did Moshe’s error constitute such an incursion against Hashem that hundreds of entreaties and prayers were not sufficient to effect his passage into Eretz Yisrael? Hashem refused to allow Moshe to enter the land, neither as a living being or as a corpse, as an animal or even an inanimate stone! He could not pardon Moshe’s error! Moshe’s behavior demanded serious consequences. Why? Horav Baruch Mordechai Ezrachi, Shlita, employs a practical approach to explaining this anomaly. Heads of state…
Moshe adjured the judges to be deliberate in judgement, to listen to the litigants and to understand their claims — not to make rash decisions. Rashi adds, if a case comes before you two or three times, do not say, “I have already rendered my decision in this case. Rather, listen to each case, regardless of its redundancy, and be deliberate in rendering your decision”. The Mizrachi contends that Rashi derives his thesis from the words, “Listen among your brothers.” How do we infer from this phrase that one should view each case as original, regardless of how many times…
Chazal tell us that these “devarim,” words, constituted the content of Moshe’s speech – divrei tochachah, words of reproachment. Moshe spoke to all of the Klal Yisrael, so that no individual would later say, “Had we been present we would have challenged his words.” Anyone who had an objection to Moshe’s admonishment had the opportunity to challenge Moshe, although nobody did so. Offering tochachah, reproach, is a serious endeavor which should not be undertaken lightly. It obliges every member of the Jewish community to try his hardest to improve his fellow man. Indeed, as Horav Shlomo Breuer, zl, writes,…
Aharon merited a unique and exalted departure from this world. The ritual of stripping him of his clothes, so that his son Elazar could don them seems a bit enigmatic. What really is the significance of removing Aharon’s clothes prior to his death? If the underlying purpose had been that Aharon could see his son attired in the priestly vestments of the Kohen Gadol, it could have been accomplished without Aharon being dressed and then having his clothes removed. Apparently, the actual removing of Aharon’s vestments plays an important role. Horav Zaidel Epstein, Shlita, cites the Talmud Shabbos, 153A, wherein…
