Hamaayan / The Torah Spring Edited by Shlomo Katz Parasha Va'era Volume VI/ Number 14 (248) 28 Tevet 5752/January 4, 1992 Parasha Overview In this Parasha, Hashem keeps his promise to Avraham (B'reishit 15:14), "And also the nation that [your children] serve, I shall judge," a reference to the plagues that Hashem would visit upon Egypt. The Parasha opens with Hashem's rebuke of Moshe, "Why do you question my judgement when the Patriarchs did not. I made many promises to them which I have not yet fulfilled, but the Patriarchs did not complain!" (Rashi to Sh'mot 6:2). The Parasha goes on to describe the plagues through which Hashem liberated Bnei Yisrael from their slavery. Only seven of the ten plagues are actually found in our Parasha, but this is consistent with theme set out above, for only the first seven plagues were to punish Pharaoh and his nation. The last three were intended to demonstrate Hashem's power to the Egyptians, and to enable Bnei Yisrael to tell their children and grandchildren that Hashem can do anything that He wishes with the universe (Ramban to Sh'mot 10:1; see also Ohr Gedalyahu). One wonders why the first seven plagues did not suffice as material for Bnei Yisrael to use in teaching their children. Perhaps Bnei Yisrael were too preoccupied to take real notice of the first seven plagues. After the seventh plague, however, the Jews' slavery ended (He'emek Davar). Also, many commentaries note that each set of plagues - as grouped by R' Yehuda in the Pesach Haggadah - had a unique lesson to teach. The purpose of all of the plagues, in general, was to teach the world about the existence of Hashem, His control of the universe, and that none is as great as He. The Haftara (Yechezkel 28:25 - 29:21; Yeminite Jews begin with 28:24) tells of the eventual destruction of the nations that deny these truths. In particular, Hashem will punish Pharaoh, the one who says, "The Nile is mine, for myself I [Pharaoh] created it" (Yechezkel 29:3). This represents the complete rejection of the lessons of the plagues, so many of which showed that Hashem, not Pharaoh, is master of the Nile. Abarbanel offers another explanation for the division of the plagues into groups of seven and three, respectively. A significant change in Pharaoh's attitude occurred after the seventh plague - he began to negotiate with Moshe (see the beginning of next week's Parasha). For the first time, Pharaoh said, "I have sinned. Hashem is the righteous one, and I and my nation is are sinners." (Sh'mot 9:27). (Although Pharaoh had previously offered to let Bnei Yisrael go, that was during a plague. In Parashat Bo, however, he begins to negotiate between plagues. ************************************ "I, too, have heard the suffering of Bnei Yisrael from the slavery that the Egyptians have enslaved them, and I remembered my covenant." (6:5) A merchant once asked R' Moshe Sofer (the "Chatam Sofer") for a blessing, explaining that business had been very bad recently. "I have heard," answered R' Moshe, "that your brother is very poor, and you are not helping him." "But I just told you," said the merchant, "that my business is not doing as well as it used to." "Let me ask you," responded R' Moshe, "what is meant by the verse, 'I, too, have heard the suffering of Bnei Yisrael.'? What is added by the word, 'too'? "The answer is," continued the Chatam Sofer, "that even though each one of Bnei Yisrael was undergoing great suffering, each one noticed the suffering of his friend, and it pained him. In just that merit, Hashem too heard their suffering." (Al Hatorah) ************************************ [On the same verse] The Gemara (Berachot 5a) teaches that suffering cleanses one of sin. The "Amoraim" (Talmudic sages) Yochanan and Resh Lakish offer two different sources for this lesson. R' Yochanan says, "If the Torah ordains that a Canaanite slave should go free if his master knocks out his tooth or his eye, then certainly a person's suffering [sent from his master, Hashem] cleanses him of his sins." Resh Lakish says, "We learn this lesson from a 'Gezeirah Shavah' (comparing two verses that share a common word, one of the 13 divinely-ordained methods for interpreting the Torah). The word 'Berit' (covenant) is used in connection with suffering, and it is used in connection with salt. Just as salt cures meat, so suffering cures man." [Until here from the Gemara] What is the practical difference between the two ways of deriving the above lesson? The Halacha is that a slave goes free only if his master intentionally knocked out his tooth or eye. However, salt cures meat whether the salt was poured on the meat intentionally or not. Similarly, R' Yochanan maintains that suffering cleanses a person only if he is aware of the cause of that suffering, and Resh Lakish disagrees. Hashem said to Moshe, "I have heard the suffering...from the slavery that the Egyptians have enslaved them," Bnei Yisrael saw the Egyptians as the source of their suffering, and forgot that Hashem brought them to Egypt for a reason. According to R' Yochanan, therefore, they could not be redeemed. However, "I remembered my covenant," and according to Resh Lakish, this too is a reason to save Bnei Yisrael. (Sar Shalom of Belz) ************************************ "They are the spokesmen [sent] to Pharaoh...they are Moshe and Aharon." (6:27) Rashi writes: "They are the ones who were commanded [to speak], and they are the ones who carried out their mission, as righteous when they finished as they were when they began." Are Rashi's statements really necessary? Would I have thought otherwise of Moshe and Aaron? We learn from here that when one becomes involved with a "Rasha" - even as his opponent - it is noteworthy if one walks away from the encounter without at least a slight spiritual blemish. This is so even if one is as great as Moshe or Aharon. We find the same idea in last week's Parasha which concludes the list of Yaakov's sons with the words, "And Yosef was in Egypt." Rashi explains that even though Yosef was in Egypt, he was not affected. We see that even someone as great as Yosef had to fear being influenced. (Nevertheless, the lesson from Moshe and Aharon is deeper, for it teaches the even the Rasha'a adversary must fear that he will be influenced by the Rasha.) (R' David Soloveitchik) ************************************ The Gemara (Pesachim 53b) asks: How did Chananya, Mishael, and Azaryah conclude that they must throw themselves into a burning furnace for the sanctification of Hashem's name (see Daniel, ch.3)? They said, "If the frogs in Egypt, who were not given the Mitzvah of sanctifying Hashem's name, willingly entered the Egyptians' ovens (Sh'mot 7:28), certainly we, who were given that Mitzvah, are obligated to do so." Many commentaries ask: Didn't Hashem in effect command the frogs to enter the Egyptian oven when He told Moshe about the upcoming plague? The answer is that unlike the Mitzvah of sanctifying Hashem's name, which is incumbent upon every Jew, no specific frog was commanded to infest a specific part of Egypt. Each frog could have said, "Let some other frog infest the burning furnaces." Nevertheless, each frog rushed to die for Hashem's honor, and this was the lesson that Chananya, Mishael, and Azaryah learned. (R' Yehonatan Eyebschutz, when he was eight years old) ************************************ The Legacy of Brisk - Part 5: "The Brisker Rav" This week we turn to the best known son of R' Chaim Brisker, R' Yitzchak Ze'ev Soloveitchik, also known as R' Velvel Brisker or simply "The Brisker Rav". R' Shlomo Yosef Zevin writes that R' Velvel did not teach. Rather, he allowed others to listen while he studied. What is the difference? When one teaches, explains R' Zevin, he presents questions and answers. He offers possible solutions, and he explains why he is rejecting them. R' Velvel did none of this. He stated his interpretation, and that was the end of the matter. If R' Velvel found a difficulty with a "Rishon's" (early sage's) explanation of the Talmud, he offered an interpretation that did not present that difficulty. He did not, however, discuss the Rishon's view, or specify what the difficulty was. This is not to say that he did not show proper deference to the opinions and explanations of the Rishonim. It was just not his style to delve deeply into the differences between various Rishonim or between himself and them. There is another difference between a lecture and simply learning. An advanced lecturer in Gemara will not usually cover the whole tractate, but will skip over those portions from which fewer insights are to be gleaned. Not so, R' Velvel! He studied the entire tractate, and the careful listener learned a great deal as each section of the Talmud was covered. R' Velvel did not head a Yeshiva in Brisk, but he had hundreds of students. One of the greatest accomplishments that could be achieved by a young scholar was to travel to Brisk for six months or a year, and become a member of R' Velvel's "Kibbutz" (gathering). R' Velvel wrote no works, but his students published their notes in his name. R' Zevin reports that R' Velvel was not pleased by this, and that those notes do not always reflect accurately either the content or style of R' Velvel's comments. NEXT WEEK: Studying "Kodashim" ************************************ The learning schedule for this Shabbat is: Daily Mishnah Kelim 9:7-9 (Learn two Mishnayot every day) Daily Halacha Orach Chaim (Mishnah Berura) 329:4-6 (Learn three paragraphs each day) Daf Yomi Beitzah 12 (Learn two sides of a page each day) Shmirat Halashon: "Rechilut" 9:5-6 or Guard Your Tongue: L.H. 4:3-4 Rambam Chapter/Day: Hilchot Chovel V'Mazik: Chapter 8 3 Chapters/Day: Hilchot Machlot Asurot, Chapters 2-4 Sefer Hamitzvot Sh: N336,N335,N337-N339; Su: N340-N345; M: N348-N351 Tu: N352,N347,N346; W: N52,N53,N55,N54,N354,N360,N361 Th: N161,N162,P38,N160,N158,N159; F: N353,P149 ************************************ The hard copy distribution of this week's HaMaayan is sponsored by: Robin and Lawton Cooper in honor of Shoshana Leora's third birthday Terry Taerum in honor of Judy Taerum's 40th birthday