Today's Learning Eruvin 10:10-11 O.C. 21:3-22:1 Bava Metzia 11 Yerushalmi-- Pesachim 25 Hamaayan/The Torah Spring edited by Shlomo Katz PARASHAT PINCHAS Vol. VIII, No. 38 (373), 23 Tamuz 5754, July 2, 1994 We read in this parasha that Hashem designated Moshe's successor, the person who would take Bnei Yisrael into Eretz Yisrael. Chazal say that had Moshe entered Eretz Yisrael, he would have built the Bet haMikdash and it would never have been destroyed. Rav Aryeh Leib Zunz zatz'l (1768-1833) writes that the reason that Moshe refused at first to be Hashem's agent to bring about the Exodus was that Moshe wanted Hashem to agree that the Temple would never be destroyed. This is what Moshe meant by (Sh'mot 3:13), "When they ask me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" Hashem's four letter Name (which we never pronounce) is the name which belongs in the Bet haMikdash. However, when Hashem answered with a different name, Moshe understood that the Bet haMikdash would be destroyed. After Moshe refused to lead Bnei Yisrael, Hashem did agree to preserve the Bet haMikdash forever. However, when Bnei Yisrael sinned in the desert, they lost this privilege (see page 2). (Shiyurei Kometz haMinchah: Drush l'Bein haMetzarim) ************************************ The midrash (baMidbar Rabbah 19:13) says that the reason Moshe did not enter Eretz Yisrael was in order that he might lead the generation of the desert into the Land at the time of the resurrection. Rav Yehudah Rosannes zatz'l asks: If that generation deserves to return, why does it need Moshe? If it does not deserve to return how will Moshe help it? Hashem has taken an oath (Tehilim ch.95): "For forty years I was angry with the generation; then I said, 'They are an errant-hearted people, they do not know My ways.' Therefore I have sworn in My wrath, they shall not enter My [land of] rest." Because of Hashem's oath, that generation may not enter Eretz Yisrael. However, the halacha provides that if a person makes a vow excluding another from his house, then if the house is razed and rebuilt, the vow is nullified. Had Moshe entered Eretz Yisrael, he would have built the Temple, and had he done so, it would never have been destroyed. [Ed. note: Due to space considerations, an explanation of that fact is omitted.] However, because the Temple was destroyed, Hashem's oath is nullified. This is what is meant by Moshe's dying in the desert so that his generation could enter the Land. (Parashat Derachim) ************************************ In discussing the calendar in Hamaayan for Parashat vaYakhel, we wrote: Note that, in theory, Cheshvan and Kislev can both be short months, i.e., with only 29 days. However, that could not occur this year, as it would cause Tisha b'Av to fall on Friday, a situation which our calendar is designed to prevent. While it is true that Tisha b'Av never falls on Friday, a reader has pointed out that the calendar was not "designed" to prevent this. Rather, Ra'avad (Hil. Kiddush haChodesh 7:7) and the Magen Avraham (O.C. 428) write that the entire calendar revolves around two principles: that Yom Kippur should not fall on Friday or Sunday and that Hoshana Rabbah should not fall on Shabbat. The Chafetz Chaim notes in Be'ur Halachah that as a result of this, Tisha b'Av will never fall on Friday. Having referred to Ra'avad's comments in Hil. Kiddush haChodesh 7:7, it is worthwhile to quote an additional portion of those comments. He writes of another scholar, "[He writes what he does] because he takes pride in this wisdom [of the calendar], which he believes he has understood in its entirety. I, however, am not one of its people and even my teachers did not reach it-- therefore I have not checked his words. . . ." ************************************ The midrash states, "If Moshe had killed Zimri, Moshe's grave-site would not be unknown." Rav Yehuda Assad zatz'l explains: The reason Hashem hid Moshe's grave-site was to prevent it from becoming a cultic shrine. Why wasn't Aharon's grave-site hidden (it was known in Talmudic times)? Since Aharon served as a kohen, everyone knew that he was G-d's servant. People do not elevate a servant to the level of a deity. Pinchas' reward for killing Zimri was being made a kohen. Had Moshe killed Zimri, Moshe would have become a kohen and, like Aharon, his grave-site could be known. (Divrei Maharia) ************************************ "And the daughters of Tzelofchad approached, [they were] from the family of Menashe, the son of Yosef." (27:1) Rashi says that Yosef is mentioned here to teach us that just as Yosef loved Eretz Yisrael (and asked to be buried there), so his descendants loved Eretz Yisrael. Their request for a share of the land was not motivated by materialistic concerns. Rav Moshe Feinstein zatz'l asks: Whether or not Tzelofchad's daughters received a share of the land, they would still live there. Why, then, did they insist on owning their own portions? The Torah is teaching us that if one loves something, he should want to own it. Thus we can understand the halacha which requires a person to own a Torah library (Yoreh Deah 270:2). For studying alone, it is enough to borrow Torah works. However, to enhance one's love of Torah, he should try to own its works. (Darash Moshe) ************************************ Among the voluminous teachings of Rav Menachem Mendel Schneerson zatz'l (the "Lubavitcher Rebbe," who passed away three weeks ago on 3 Tamuz 5754) numerous discourses which delve into the plain meaning of Rashi's Torah commentary sit side-by-side with chassidic discourses. In fact, the Lubavitcher Rebbe's rules for interpreting Rashi have been gathered into a separate work by one of his chassidim. On the verse in our parasha, "And the sons of Korach did not die" (26:11), Rashi explains: "They were originally among the conspirators but at the time of the actual dispute [with Moshe] they had repentant thoughts. Therefore, a place was set aside for them high up in Gehinom and they sat there." In a discourse delivered in 1977, the Lubavitcher Rebbe dealt at length with this Rashi. Just a few points are brought here. Chazal say that Korach gained the courage to challenge Moshe by seeing through ruach hakodesh that the prophet Shmuel would be his (Korach's) descendant. What he did not see, Chazal say, is that his sons would repent and only then Shmuel's ancestors would be born. But if Korach's sons entered Gehinom with him, how did they father Shmuel's ancestors? To answer this question, Rashi writes that Korach's sons "sat" in Gehinom. Korach's sons did not die with him, and eventually they were released. Why is this fact revealed here, in the middle of the census taken in Parashat Pinchas, rather than earlier, in Parashat Korach? Rashi answers this by saying that they had repentant thoughts; their repentance was only in their hearts, but they did not express it in any way. Therefore, had they not been swallowed up by the earth along with Korach it would have caused a desecration of G-d's name. However, by the time the census was taken in Parashat Pinchas, nearly all of the adults who had witnessed Korach's rebellion had died. Accordingly, it was now "safe" to release Korach's sons. Why is this fact revealed in the census of the tribe of Reuven (with its sons Datan and Aviram) and not in the census of the tribe of Levi? To answer this Rashi explains, "[The sons of Korach] were originally among the conspirators," i.e., no less than were Datan and Aviram. But in contrast to Datan and Aviram's horrible deaths, the sons of Korach were saved merely by thinking of repentance. (Likutei Sichot) ************************************ DONATIONS TO HAMAAYAN ARE TAX DEDUCTIBLE