Back to Home -> 5755 ->

Chazal cite the above two pesukim as presenting two of the instances which merited Yehudah the role of monarch over his brothers and — eventually — over Klal Yisrael. In both cases Yehudah asserted himself, either by taking command of an ambiguous situation or by accepting blame for his own actions. Are these sufficient reasons for transferring the mantle of malchus, kingship, to Yehudah? Horav Chaim Shmuelevitz z.l., asserts that the greatness of a man is commensurate to the degree that he is inclined to assume and accept responsibility. One who shuns responsibility for his actions is not considered a…

Yehudah’s idea for preventing Yosef’s death comes across as preposterous. Once they had convened a bais din, court of law, and adjudicated Yosef’s guilt, they had no more patience for counterclaims, especially one that asserted that no monetary gain would be achieved. Is this a reason to spare someone’s life? Were they killing him for money – or because he was a rodef, pursuer, who was endangering the spiritual lives of each of them? Horav Yerachmiel Chasid, Shlita, quotes an explanation from Horav Chaim Shmuelevitz, zl, that illuminates this query, teaching us a significant principle in avodas Hashem, service to…