Geshmack Dvar Torah

has been moved to new address

http://www.gtorah.com

Sorry for inconvenience...

Geshmack Dvar Torah of the Week

Monday, 28 December 2009

Vayechi - Handy tips from יעקב

שכל את ידיו - he maneuvered his hands... (48:14)

I saw a stunning idea from R' Moshe Sternbuch in Ta'am Voda'as. We see that Yaakov switched around his right hand with his left, so that Ephraim was under his right hand. But why did he not just tell Menashe and Ephraim to switch places?

R' Chaim Volozhin explains that the nature of the average person is to talk down the positive attributes of his fellow, but when it comes to the negative side, he is ready to speak up and even exaggerate the other's bad traits. In this way, he will look like a tzaddik compared with his friend.

Indeed, when one stands opposite his fellow, one's left is the other's right and vice-versa. This hints to the fact that his friend's right, or stature, stands opposite his left, traditionally the one seen as weaker, i.e. weakening his friend's strengths (sorry to all those lefties out there - including half of my family!), whereas his friend's left, or weaker side, is opposite his right, i.e. making a bigger deal out of his weaknesses.

Yaakov, as we know, is the ultimate man of truth, not wishing to detract or embellish any point. So what does he do? He only crosses his hands - the result being that his right hand corresponds with the boys' right and his left with theirs!

It teaches us a really important Mussar point, says R' Sternbuch - how careful we must be when relating to the strengths and weaknesses of our friends (and others!), placing our right opposite their right...

He cites the Rambam (Hilchos Dei'os chapter 6 halacha 3) for further proof - ''it's a mitzva upon every person to to love his fellow Jew as himself as it says ואהבת לרעך כמוך. Therefore, he must tell of his praiseworthy points...as himself...'' Geshmack!

As an addendum, Gav C pointed out that the Ohr Hachaim says a beautiful idea associated with the above: it says שכל את ידיו כי מנשה הבכור - he maneuvered his hands because Menashe was the firstborn - surely Menashe being the firstborn would be reason to not cross hands!?
So he answers that just before, we were told that ''Yisrael's eyes were heavy from old age and he could not see''. This indicates that he couldn't see who was Menashe - the firstborn - and who was Ephraim. So when it came to blessing them, he knew who he wanted under his right hand. He worked out in his mind that Yosef would have placed Menashe on his right - therefore he crossed his hands because he knew where the firstborn was, and because Menashe was the בכור. Geshmack!

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, 17 December 2009

Is there a hidur mitzva after the mitzva is done?

There is a concept of hidur mitzva, which means that we can make the mitzvos we do more beautiful. Examples of this are taking nice esrogim on Succos, getting larger tfillin, getting a megillah written by the best scribe, among many countless others.

The basic level of the mitzva of Chanuka is ner ish uveiso, where the man of the house will light one candle each night for his household. A step up is called mehadrin (beautiful), where the man will light progressively as the holiday progresses. The best is called mehadrin min hamehadrin, which is what most tend to do, whereby each member of the household will light progressively.

The Rambam (a Sephardi) says something most interesting that people don't normally notice, but the Griz (The Brisker Rav) points out that the Rambam says the word Madlik, as opposed to Madlikin, which indicates his view is that there is no such step as the final one we mentioned, that the best mitzva one can do is for the householder to light progressively or recessively, but not for each member to.

This is at odds with the Rema (R' Moshe Isserles, whom Ashkenazi Jews tend to hold like) who holds that each person lighting is mehadrin. So whow are we to understand the Rambam's position, and why does the Rema argue?

We can look to a Gemara in Shabbos that can perhaps shed light on this issue. The context is Bris Milah, where the Mohel realises afterwards that he has left something called tzitzin (small piece of skin). There are two types of tzitzin, the type that leaves the baby boy considered uncircumcised, and the type that doesn't matter. The Gemara concludes that eino chozrin al tzitzin she'einon meakvin, that there is no need for the Mohel to perform the Bris again if it is the type which does not matter.

Rashi explains that this is only on Shabbos that the Mohel doesn't return, but that on weekdays he would. The Rambam says that he wouldn't go back to perform the operation again even on a weekday.

So the Brisker Rav, the Griz, explains to us what the issue really is: after the shaas mitzva is gone, you can't make it better. There is no doubt that this is the case on Shabbos, where everyone agrees that you don't break it for the hidur, but the Rambam sas that once the Mohel is finished the Bris, he can't make it any more mehudar than it was, as the Mitzva has been completed.

The Rema and Rashi disagree, and say that yes, you can! This is the difference with regard to lighting Menoras; The Rambam says that once the householder has lit, there is no hidur mitzva for the rest of the householders to perform a hidur, as the mitzva has already finished when the householder lit the first light, so the hidur stops once he has lit additional lights. Any further attempts at hidur ie mehadrin min hamehadrin are after the shaas hamitzva, so are unnecessary.

We hold like the Rema and Rashi, that we can do hidur after the main mitzva has been completed, which is why each of us lights our own Menora.

Labels: , , , , , ,