Beha'alotkha: Four Approaches to Being Humble

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

This week's Torah portion of Beha'alotkha (Bamidbar 8-12) recounts many aspects of Bnei Yisrael preparing to enter the Land of Israel (though their entry was ultimately delayed by 40 years). Let us focus on just one verse:

 “And the man Moshe was very humble - more than any man on the face of the earth” (12,3).

The Rambam famously writes (Laws of Character Traits, Chapter 2) that we must always strive to take the middle path in our behavior. For instance, we must not be too frugal, nor too stingy; we must not be too sensitive, nor may we be like a stone with no feelings; etc.

However, he adds, “There are character traits in which one is not permitted to take the middle path, but must rather distance himself to the extreme – such as arrogance. It is not enough to merely be humble; one must be very lowly in spirit… and therefore it is said about Moshe Rabbeinu that he was ‘very humble.’”

Similarly, in the prayer Elokai Netzor, immediately following our quiet Shmoneh Esreh prayer thrice a day, we say: “May my soul be like dust to everyone.”

The simple understanding of these words does not provide very much information as to what exactly is required of us, in terms of how to behave with humility in practical life. Let us therefore simply highlight certain perspectives on this fundamental trait.

1. The Da’at Sofrim, Rabbi Chaim Dov Rabinowitz (d. 2001) explains in his well-accepted commentary on the Tanakh what the trait of anavah, humility, truly is, and how Moshe Rabbeinu acquired it. Perhaps we can sum up his approach by saying that we are meant to understand intellectually what Moshe experienced and felt, and wage our lives accordingly. Rabbi Rabinowitz writes:

“Humility is the feeling of smallness in relation to the greatness and eternity of G-d, in the light of which, all of man’s most important matters are totally insignificant and transient, and there is simply no point in boasting about them.”

And how did Moshe reach this level? Let us not forget that he spent 40 days, twice or three times, in the upper worlds themselves, receiving the Torah from G-d.  The Daat Sofrim therefore writes that Moshe "recognized the higher worlds more than any other person on the face of the earth, and knew the insignificance of this-worldly matters compared to the eternal worlds."

This might be meant to teach that although we may not be able to truly reach this experiential level - as the Torah appears to emphasize in saying that Moshe was more humble than any person "on the face of the earth" - still, the very intellectual understanding of this idea can guide and moderate our behavior in interpersonal matters.

2. Taking a different approach, HaRav Kook, of saintly blessed memory - the first Chief Rabbi of the 20^th-century Land of Israel - quotes in his work Midot HaR’ayah the words of Rashi to B'reshit 22,1. The Torah there tells us that G-d called to our Patriarch Abraham in order to command him to bind and sacrifice his son, and Avraham responds with one word: Hineni, 'Here I am.' Rashi writes that this word represents humbleness and readiness, and Rav Kook offers these few words of explanation: "For the humble person is also quick and eager."

That is to say, Rav Kook views humbleness as the trait of being open to forego his own needs and answer the call of others – quickly, without looking for excuses, without the instinctive thought that 'I am too busy or too important to do what I am being asked to do.' One who is always ready to take on a task is truly humble. [Rav Kook also has many other valuable insights into this trait, such as: "When anavah leads to sadness, it is not acceptable;" see Midot HaR’ayah, pages 140-142.]

3. The Talmud (Sotah 5a) states: “R. Ḥiyya bar Ashi said in the name of Rav: A Torah scholar must have one-eighth of one-eighth of pride.” This can possibly be connected in an unlikely manner to chametz on Pesach! That is, there is a question as to whether it is permitted to drink tap water on Pesach, given that it invariably comes from the Kineret, where chametz is always found – and chametz on Pesach is so greatly forbidden that even a mixture of water and the absolutely tiniest amount of chametz is also forbidden. However, one reason that it is in fact permitted is because the chametz proportion in question can never lead to an actual perceptible "taste" of chametz. Perhaps this can be stated as follows: Although chametz is forbidden even in the absolute smallest amount, it must still be an amount!

Similarly regarding arrogance: In order to function in the world and not be ignored or disregarded, a Torah scholar cannot be totally and absolutely humble, but must rather have the slightest measure of pride and forcefulness, even if only "an eighth of an eighth."

4. And yet another approach is taken by many rabbis, who explain that true humility does not mean that one should negate himself, his character, and/or his accomplishments. He must rather have a true appreciation of who he is in terms of both his good and less-good qualities, and understand where his good qualities stem from. As such, one who thinks, "G-d has given me such-and-such good qualities, with which I strive to do good, and I also have other negative qualities which I must work to improve," is truly humble.

We have thus seen four approaches regarding how to be humble: understanding and internalizing what Moshe grasped; being quick to answer a call to action; retaining a jot of forcefulness; and truly understanding one's place and qualities. But all agree that arrogance, the pursuit of honor for its own sake, and lack of consideration for others, are despicable traits. The Talmud states that one who has the trait of arrogance "is as one who has repudiated the principles of our faith," and G-d says about him, "He and I cannot live together in this world."

"The man Moshe was very humble, more than any other person on the face of the earth." Let us humbly learn from Moshe our teacher, Moshe Rabbeinu.

Acharei Mot-Kedoshim: The Strange Case of the Back-and-Forth Format: Rebuke with Love

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

This week's Torah reading comprises two portions – Acharei Mot and Kedoshim (Vayikra 16-20). Between them they have 79 Torah commandments, including (especially in Kedoshim) many having to do with dealing honestly in monetary matters. Perhaps most famously, however, is the commandment to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Vayikra 19,18) – and related mitzvot, such as not to embarrass people, not to take revenge, and perhaps surprisingly, to admonish those who are sinning and help return them to the Torah path. How is admonishment related to love?

The relevant verse is: "Do not hate your brother in your heart; you shall certainly admonish him, and do not bear sin because of him" (19,17). This appears to say that if one has sinned against you or offended you, do not keep your angry feelings to yourself; rather, the Rambam writes (Laws of Character Traits, Hilkhot De'ot, 6,6), you are "commanded to make the matter known and ask him: 'Why did you do this to me?'" That is, you must not let your resentment fester, but rather show him that you were offended or wronged, for the goal of making peace with him.

However, there is another way in which this mitzvah of admonishment, called "tokhecha," can be fulfilled. The Rambam (in the very next paragraph, Law 7), abandons the case of one who was wronged by another and discusses this new case: "If one sees that his fellow Jew has sinned [in general] or is following an improper path, you must [seek to] correct his behavior and tell him that he is harming himself by his evil deeds… [You should] rebuke him privately, patiently and gently, and tell him that [you are] only saying this for his own benefit, to allow him to merit the life of the World to Come..."

There are, of course, many details as to how this commandment must be fulfilled, so that it does not lead to hatred and resentment. In fact, the Rambam continues in the next paragraph (Law 8) to details some of these laws.

Fascinatingly, however, in the next law, Law 9, the Rambam returns to the original case, and says: "If one was wronged by a colleague and prefers not to admonish him or even mention the matter… but rather forgives him in his heart and bears no hatred, this is pious behavior – for the Torah is concerned only that there be no feelings of hatred."

That is to say, he no longer has an obligation to admonish! Instead, because he was able to totally forgive him, this not only takes the place of rebuke, but is actually considered a very high level of behavior.

Back and Forth

If we follow carefully the above rulings by the Rambam, we can almost not avoid asking the following question: Why does he discuss the case of one who was wronged by his colleague in Laws 6 and 9, and the laws of one who has sinned in general in Laws 7 and 8? Would it not have been more logical to place Law 9 right after 6, and thus complete the first topic, and only then to teach Laws 7 and 8?

This question does not appear to be addressed by any of the major commentaries on the Rambam. This makes it possibly even more puzzling: Why did the Rambam, the great organizer of the laws of all the Torah's mitzvot and the Talmud's rulings, choose to break up the laws of the tochekha in this manner?

Perhaps we can offer the following explanation:

The Rambam was not coming to teach us the laws of hokhei'ach tokhiach, rebuke and admonishment – but rather the "special character traits that must accompany the administering of such admonishment." That is, this mitzvah is not just a mechanical one, but rather one whose fulfillment requires special attention to how it is to be carried out.

This becomes somewhat evident when we us review some of the details that the Rambam included in the laws of this mitzvah: "If [one who has wronged you] asks you to forgive him, you must forgive…" That is, the Rambam steps back from the mitzvah of rebuking to tell you that the goal of the obligation is to be able to forgive him!

The Rambam then continues [regarding one who sinned in general]: "You must tell him that you are admonishing him only for his own good, and that he is only harming himself by his sins… You must speak to him calmly and nicely, and say that you wish only to help him attain the World to Come…" What beautiful sentiments accompany this seemingly harsh mitzvah!

The Rambam then elaborates at length that when rebuking him for sins between-man-and-man [as opposed to sins between-man-and-G-d], you must "not shame him, and certainly not in public." Don't get carried away in your fervor to rebuke and cause him shame, which the Sages teach is akin to spilling his blood! And by the by, we can infer from the Rambam's last words that you must be careful not to shame him even when talking to him privately...

And finally, the Rambam concludes by returning to where he started - the scenario of one who wronged another - and explains that the ideal is actually not to rebuke at all, if possible, but rather to attain the level of midat hassidut, true piety, and forgive him in your heart altogether! This of course only applies when one has sinned towards you, and not in general – and this is why the Rambam returns to this case at the end, in order to conclude with this highest level. 

In sum: The strange format by which the Rambam explains the mitzvah of rebuke is so that he can teach us, at the same time, the important character traits and sensitivity that must accompany its performance. 

Tzav: Even Law-Breakers Deserve Some Respect

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

Technical laws, when they are given by G-d's holy Torah, can teach us much about even our inter-personal relations.

This week's Torah portion of Tzav (Leviticus, Chapters 6-8), discusses many details of the Holy Temple service. For instance, the sin-offering sacrifice (ḥatat) is to be slaughtered in the northern part of the Temple's main Priestly section, north of the large Altar. The Torah does not tell us this detail in a straightforward manner; we rather have to figure it out ourselves. How so?

The Torah states, "In the place that the burnt-offering [olah] is slaughtered, there the ḥatat shall be slaughtered" (Vayikra 6,18). And where is this place, the Talmud asks (Z'vahim 48a)? It is in the north, as written, "He shall slaughter [the olah] north of the Altar." (Though the context is referring to the Priest, the owner of the sacrifice may also slaughter; see Z'vahim 31b.)

This simple but technical law regarding the location of the hatat offering teaches us a very important ethical lesson: If there would have been a specific place set aside only for sin-offerings, then the sinners who bring them would be quite embarrassed; everyone who sees them in that place would realize that they have sinned. In order to prevent this, the sinners and those who bring other sacrifices are all assigned to the same place. So explains the Jerusalem Talmud (Yevamot 8,3).

How does the Talmud know that this is the reason for slaughtering the ḥatat there? Perhaps there is something special about the "northern" part of the Altar? The answer is that though this is certainly true, it seems obvious that the Torah could have simply stated straight out, "Slaughter it in the north!" But it didn't; it rather linked the ḥatat with the place of the olah, indicating to our Sages that the place of the ḥatat is not connected specifically to the north, but rather just that it should be together with other sacrifices – in order to avoid embarrassment.

There are several other Torah laws as well that teach us that the dignity even of sinners must be maintained. For instance, it is well-known that our primary prayer, the Amidah (Shmoneh Esreh), must be recited quietly. Why is this? Because it includes the blessing S'laḥ lanu, "Forgive us for we have sinned," in which the worshiper can add his own words of repentance for specific sins. In order that others not hear his words of confession, the entire Amidah is recited silently.

Even a thief in the midst of carrying out his crime is sometimes given extra consideration! The Torah tells us (Sh'mot 21,37): "If a man steals an ox or sheep and sells it or slaughters it, he is liable to pay five [times the value] of the ox, or four times the sheep." Why the difference between an ox and a sheep? Rashi cites the famous explanation of the Talmudic sage R. Yochanan: Because the thief must carry the sheep on his shoulders, he is "compensated" for the blow to his dignity by having to pay less than one who steals an ox, which can walk on its own. Both are gravely punished, of course, but the Torah makes this "token" difference in order to teach us how careful we must be when dealing with a human being – even a sinner.

Another fascinating example:

The Torah tells us (D'varim 20) that during wartime, everyone must participate in the battles – except for certain exceptions. These include one who built a new house and did not yet dedicate it; one who betrothed a woman and did not yet marry her – and one who is afraid. R. Yosi HaGlili explains in the Talmud that this refers not necessarily to one who is physically afraid, but rather fears that his sins will cause him to lose Divine protection. And the reason all of these exceptions are grouped together is so that no one will know who is turning back from the war because of his sins and who for the other reasons. Again we see that the sinner must be accorded the same "protection from shame" that everyone else is.

It should also be noted that when, unfortunately, a death sentence must be carried out, a woman convict is treated extra modestly – for even when she is about to be executed, her dignity is still an important priority.

Let us bring a final example, unconnected to sinners, but one that emphasizes how careful we must be not to shame another – even inadvertently! If Reuven owes money to Shimon, but he does not have the money to pay him back, Shimon must be careful not to have Reuven even see him on the street! That is, when Shimon sees Reuven happening to walk in his direction, Shimon must cross over to the other side, so that Reuven not be embarrassed before him. So precious are the Torah's ways and commandments!

As we began: "In the place where the olah is slaughtered, there – and not in its own reserved section – shall the hatat be slaughtered."

HaChodesh: A Special Month and its First Day

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

This Shabbat we will read not only the last two portions of the Book of Sh'mot – Vayak'hel and Pekudei – but also an additional passage in honor of the special month of Nissan, which begins next week. In fact, the name of this passage is HaChodesh, meaning "The Month."

Why and wherefore do we read HaChodesh? And is it connected with the curious fact that the Torah, which is not a history book, focus sharply in on the first day (Rosh Chodesh) of Nissan in two consecutive years?

The Book of Sh'mot begins, tells a long story of Israelites and their Exodus from Egypt, ending with the construction and completion of the Tabernacle (Mishkan), Israel's portable Holy Temple. Both of these two events center around Rosh Chodesh Nissan.

Chapter 12 in Sh'mot tells us that, shortly before the Plague of the Firstborns, G-d commanded Moshe and Aharon to tell Israel how to commemorate the coming days. On the first day of Nissan in the year 2448, the Israelites were instructed, first of all, how to relate to Rosh Chodesh Nissan: "This [new moon] shall be the head of the month for you, the first month of the year for you" (Sh'mot 12,1). The second of these two commands tells us to ensure that Nissan retains a prominent place in the Jewish calendar.

As Rav Eliyahu Ki-Tov writes in Sefer HaTodaah (Book of our Heritage), the verse states "the first month for you" – lakhem, in Hebrew -  spelled with the same letters as the word melekh, meaning "king."

The first command in this verse, however, is more specific. It instructs us regarding the laws of determining Rosh Chodesh, and also to set a permanent annual calendar. This command might seem trivial, but in fact it is a central tenet in Judaism in more than one way. For one thing, without knowing what day of the week or month it is, we would not be able to observe many of the Torah's commandment, such as the Sabbath and holidays.

No Jews in the Land of Israel? Impossible!
In addition, Maimonides (in his Book of Mitzvot, positive mitzvah #153) writes that the mitzvah of determining the months and festivals is fulfilled exclusively by the Great Court in the Land of Israel, or by virtue of its calculations. The Rambam continues: "Let us assume, for example, that there would be no Jews in the Land – Heaven forbid that G-d would do this, because He promised that he would never totally erase the signs or vestiges of the Jewish nation… - we would not be able to calculate the calendar…"

This tells us two very basic principles of Judaism. One is that the so-critical calculations regarding the beginning of the months and year are not made by individuals, but only on a national basis, by the Court in Jerusalem. Until the Court is reinstated, the calendar that we use is based directly on its original calculations.

The second point is that the lack of Jews in the Holy Land is something that can simply never happen, because it would mean, Heaven forbid, the end of the Jewish Nation – which is impossible as long as the sun, moon and stars exist (see Yirmiyahu 31,34-35); without a Jewish presence in the Land, there is no Judaism!

Back to the first Rosh Chodesh Nissan: G-d further commanded us on that day how to start preparing for the first Passover celebration, including when to take a Paschal lamb, and not to eat leaven but only matzot for the week of the holiday.

The Ten Firsts

Exactly a year later, on the second Rosh Chodesh Nissan, the Torah tells us exactly what happened on that very special day – and it was quite a list! The first thing that happened, as we read in this week's Torah reading in Sh'mot 40,2 and 17), is that the Mishkan was finally erected – after a few months of construction and a few more months of waiting for the month of Nissan to start!

In addition, the Gemara tells us that no fewer than ten "firsts" happened that day. Given that the sanctification period for the sons of Aharon as priests had just ended, it was the first-ever day that the Cohanim, and not the first-borns, served as Priests; it was the first day that the regular daily Temple service was held; it was the first time that the Priestly Blessing was recited; and more.

Why, Then?
When we speak of the special HaChodesh reading, then, we have to figure out why the first one was chosen, referring to the Rosh Chodesh just before the Exodus – and not the second one, which was a festive day having to do with the Grand Opening of the Mishkan!

According to Rashi, the answer is clear: He says (Tr. Megillah 29a) that the HaChodesh passage is connected to the upcoming holiday of Passover, in that many laws of the holiday are included there. It is therefore logical to read from the Rosh Chodesh passage that deals with Passover.

However, the Jerusalem Talmud (JT) has a different take. Based on a question it asks, we can see that the JT feels that the main thing about HaChodesh is that the Mishkan was erected on that day. Let us explain.

The JT asks why it is that during this period when four special passages are read over the course of a few weeks, the passage of the Red Heifer comes before HaChodesh? It ought to be the opposite, the JT states, because the Red Heifer was prepared for purifying the Israelites on the second day of Nissan – which comes after the construction of the Mishkan on the first day! This tells us that HaChodesh is meant to commemorate the Mishkan – so why, then, is the passage that we read taken from Sh'mot 12 and not from Sh'mot 40 or Vayikra 9, which tell the story of the first days of the Mishkan?

Firstly, let us answer the JT's question: The passage of the Red Heifer precedes that of The Month because it "involves the purification of all of Israel" – reason enough to give it precedence.

Let us now try to answer the question on the JT: It could be that the Sages did not want to choose to read about that second Rosh Chodesh, when the Mishkan was dedicated, because of the terrible tragedy that occurred in the midst of the festivities: the deaths of two of Aharon's sons, Nadav and Avihu, for having offered up a "strange fire." [See Vayikra 10 to learn about this tragic episode.]

Other Possibilities
It could also be that the passage in Sh'mot 12 was chosen because of the critical importance of the mitzvah of having a set calendar, as we explained above. Or it could be because of its relevance to the time of year – Passover; it is as an essential reminder that the month of Nissan is approaching and we must prepare to ascend to Jerusalem in purity.

In any event, even though we read the Passover section for HaChodesh, it is good to have in mind as well that this upcoming day of Rosh Chodesh Nissan marks the anniversary of the Mishkan's presence in Israel – and therefore the beginning of G-d's "dwelling in our midst" (Sh'mot 25,8).

Shmot: Anyone Here Who's a Man?

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

This week's Torah portion of Sh'mot, which begins the second Book of the Pentateuch, tells the story of Bnei Yisrael's first years in Egypt, and their first decades under Egyptian bondage. The story largely revolves around Moshe Rabbeinu, who grows up in the luxury of Pharoah's palace, but still feels very strongly the pain of his suffering brethren.  

At one point, Moshe goes out and sees an Egyptian beating a Jew. The Torah tells us his response: "Moshe looked this way and that way, saw that there was no man, and smote the Egyptian and buried him in the sand." Rashi does not explain according to the simple meaning – that Moshe did not wish to be caught in this act. Rather, he says that Moshe looked "this way and that way," meaning at all the harm that this particular Egyptian had done to the Israelite, which went beyond just simple physical harm. 

However, the Netziv – the author of the Ha'amek Davar, Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin, Rosh Yeshiva of the famous Volozhin Yeshiva – gives a different, straightforward explanation. He says that Moshe looked around in all directions, specifically to see if anyone was there who would respond to this injustice! But, "he saw that there was no man!" He saw no one who was willing to get up and act with simple humanity and right the wrong that was being done! And so, he took action himself. 

This was in accordance with the Mishna taught many centuries later by Hillel the Elder: "Where there are no men [people], strive to be a man!" (Pirkei Avot 2,5)

In short, the first lesson that Moshe our Teacher teaches us is not to wait for others to take action, but to take responsibility ourselves – and especially when our brothers' fate is at stake!

Shabbat Shalom.

Vayechi: The Message from Pharaoh's Egypt: Look Behind the Scenes

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

We conclude the first Book of the Torah this Shabbat with Parshat Vayechi. Unlike every other portion in the Torah, Vayechi is "closed off," meaning it begins neither on a new line in the Torah, nor even after a break of nine spaces. Why is this? Why is there no break between last week's portion of Vayigash and Vayechi?

Rashi gives two answers. One is that Vayechi begins with Yaakov on his deathbed, seeking not only to bless his sons but also to reveal to them the End of the exile – but it was “closed off” (concealed) from him and he was unable to do so.

The second explanation is also based on the fact that Yaakov's death was near, and once he died, "the eyes and the heart of Israel [Yaakov's descendants] were 'closed' because of the misery of the Egyptian slavery" that began, in a way, with Yaakov's death.

What can be the connection between the suffering of the slavery and Israel's closed, darkened eyes? Rav Chaim Druckman often explained that the meaning is that the children of Yaakov became blinded to the very fact that their Exile, along with its suffering, had begun.

This ties directly into the last verse of the previous Torah portion, which succinctly sums up the Israelites' new situation in Egypt as follows: "Israel dwelt in the land of Egypt, in the land of Goshen, and they acquired a stronghold there, and they were prolific and multiplied greatly." Let us explain the connection between this verse and Israel's oblivion to their new, developing situation.

The classic commentary Kli Yakar (by R. Shlomo Ephraim Luntschitz, rabbi of Prague for 15 years until his death in 1619) explains that this entire verse "is condemnatory of Israel." He says that they never should have put themselves in the position of settling so comfortably in a foreign land: "G-d had decreed upon them that they would be foreigners in [Egypt], yet they sought to be permanent residents there, in a land not theirs. They were so strongly entrenched in Egypt that they did not want to leave, and many wanted to stay even when they were already enslaved."

It is now clear: Because of their attachment to their seemingly good lives in Egypt, they forgot about returning to the Land promised to their forefathers – and did not even notice the suffering that was about to fall upon them.

The parallel to today, and to recent decades, is striking. The Ohr Same'ach, for instance – Rav Meir Simcha of Dvinsk, who died in 1926 – bemoaned in his Torah commentary that there were many Jews in his time who had grown accustomed to their lives and comforts, both spiritual and material, in the Diaspora, forgot their origins, and felt that "Berlin is Jerusalem." This, he wrote, would last for a while – until their lives would be shattered and they would again be exiled. He thus "foresaw" the Shoah that began only some years later, while others of his time did not even realize what was already beginning to happen to them – just as the sons of Yaakov did not realize what was happening to them.

In a similar manner some explain the Fast of the Tenth of Tevet that we commemorated this week. As is known, most of our prophetically-prescribed days of fasting mark one aspect or another of the destruction of the Holy Temple and the Jewish national presence in the Holy Land. The Tenth of Tevet is different: It marks not the destruction, but the beginning of the Babylonian siege on the Holy City, some seven months before the actual razing of the Temple. When the siege started outside the city walls, most Jews did not feel a thing! They went on with their lives as usual – and this raises the question: Why should a day of fasting be instituted for such a non-event?

The answer is as we have said: As we see in the lack of separation between Vayigash and Vay'chi, between the blinding of Israel's eyes and their failure to see and feel the onset of the suffering of Egyptian bondage – the beginning of all tribulations and Exiles is our blindness to what is developing, and our difficulty in realizing our own role in bringing them on.

Let us not repeat the same errors made by our ancestors more than a few times in our history. It should be easier now than ever to grasp that the Diaspora is no longer our home. Not only does the Holy Land and the State of Israel need the entire Jewish nation to return, the returning Jews need the Land and the State!

Never again may we make the mistakes of Bnei Yisrael in Egypt, of the Jews under the Bablonian siege, of our recent ancestors in Europe less than a century ago – and of some Jews living today, in 2026, throughout the comfortable countries of the West.

Noah: Keeping Kosher on the Ark – and in the Holy Land

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

This week's Torah portion of Noah (B'reshit 6,9 - 11,32) is a fine opportunity to learn a bit about some of the laws of kashrut. How so?

We know that Noah was originally commanded to bring “two of every kind of every living thing of all flesh” (6,19). However, as Rashi explains, what this meant was at least two, and possibly more – for shortly afterwards we read that G-d told Noah: “Of every animal take with you seven, and of every animal that is not pure, take two…" (7,2)

How was Noah to know what rendered an animal pure or impure? Again, Rashi explains: A pure animal is “one that is destined to be pure for Israel.” In short: a kosher animal.

And what makes a kosher animal? In Parashat Sh'mini the Torah tells us (Vayikra 11,2): “Every animal that has a split hoof, completely divided, and that chews the cud - that animal you may eat.”

For one thing, as Rashi further tells us, this shows that Noah was taught at least some laws of the Torah, nearly 800 years before it was given to Israel. That is, he was taught which animals were kosher, to be saved in groups of seven, and which were not kosher and should be saved only in pairs. The intention was that there would be more kosher animals than impure: three pairs that would reproduce, and one individual to be brought as a sacrificial offering to G-d after the Flood.

Regarding these signs that Noah was taught, and which we later learned in the Torah (Vayikra 11,2), there appear to be three: mafris parsah, shosaat shesa, and maaleh gera. However, in fact the second term is an elaboration of the first, and it means that the hoof - a kind of thick nail on the animal’s foot, helping it climb rocky terrain safely - must be split all the way through. A camel, for instance, has a partially split hoof, but because it is not split all the way up, it lacks this kosher sign and is in fact not kosher.

The second sign, chewing the cud, is that the animal regurgitates partially digested food from its stomach in order to re-chew it; this aids digestion.

The Shulchan Aruch rules that there is an additional identifying sign: the animal must not have upper teeth. This is based on a Rabbinic tradition.

 The Ramban, Rabbeinu Bachye, and others wrote that pure mammals are herbivores and have gentle temperaments, whereas impure ones are predators and aggressive.

“And since the food a person eats influences his soul, the Torah commanded us not to eat species that are inclined toward cruelty,” summarized Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, Rosh Yeshivat Har Bracha in the Shomron (Samaria) region of Israel.

 The two signs we mentioned indeed relate to the kind of food these animals eat: grass and plants contain much cellulose, which is hard to digest – such that chewing the cud allows for repeated chewing to improve digestion. And the split hooves allow climbing on rocks and steep hillsides to reach the necessary grass.

It is important to note the following sign of the Divinity of the Torah: The Torah mentions exactly four species that have exactly one of these two signs: the camel, the hyrax, and the hare (which only chew the cud), and the pig (which only has split hooves). And indeed, no animal other than these has ever been discovered with only one of the two signs.

Walking in the Wilderness
This fact leads to the following fascinating Halakhah [Jewish law], as ruled in the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deah 79,1):

“If someone finds an animal in the wilderness and does not recognize it, yet he knows that it is not a camel, and that it chews its cud, and it is impossible to check its hooves – he should check whether it has teeth in the upper jaw. If it does not, it is known to be a kosher animal. Similarly, if one finds an animal and it is impossible to determine whether it chews the cud, he should examine its feet: if its hooves are split, it is known to be kosher, provided that he recognizes that it is not a pig.”

That is to say: If the animal has one sign, and we cannot know if it has the other sign, and we know that it is not a pig or another of the four animals that have only one sign – then it is kosher, provided it also has the Rabbinic sign of no upper teeth.

Behind the Scenes
We know that we cannot ascertain absolute reasons for many of the Torah's commandments, especially those that are chukim, seemingly incomprehensible statutes. However, we can still derive values and meanings from many of the mitzvot. Rav Melamed, for instance, comments that the most important principle regarding chukim is that they distinguish between the Jewish Nation and the other peoples. G-d first created many different animals, and permitted them to be eaten by all – but He then separated us from the other nations (as we say in the Havdalah blessing), and sanctified us with His mitzvot. That is, He permitted us to eat only the "pure" animals and forbade us those that are impure.

 This is summed up in the following Torah passage from Parashat Kedoshim (Vayikra 20, 23-26):

"You shall not follow the practices of the nation that I am driving out [from the Holy Land] before you, for they committed all these [sins]… You shall take over their land, and I shall give it to you to possess it - a Land flowing with milk and honey. I am the Lord your God, Who has distinguished you from the peoples. And you shall distinguish between pure animals and impure ones… And you shall be holy to Me, for I, the Lord, am holy, and I have distinguished you from the peoples, to be Mine."

Thus, we may sum up as follows:
The laws of kashrut return us full-circle to the fact that we are a holy and distinguished nation, and have been given the Holy Land in which to fully manifest our sanctified peoplehood.

Breishit: Creation - Not Just a Story, but Testimony

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

This week's Torah portion of B'reshit, with which the Torah begins, tells the story of the Divine creation of the world. The story is capped by a three-verse passage known by its first word, Vay'khulu, which tells us the origin of the holy Sabbath day: "The heavens and the earth were completed… G-d completed His work on the seventh day, and abstained from all His work, and blessed the seventh day and hallowed it…" (B'reshit 2,1-3).

We recite this short passage three times on Sabbath eve (Friday night): Once in the evening Amidah prayer, once right after it, and again during the Kiddush at home. All three of these are said while standing [including Kiddush, according to most customs], as the 14^th-century scholar Avudraham wrote: "[It] is said loudly and while standing, because it is edut, testimony that G-d created the heavens and the earth in six days and rested on the seventh day, and testimony must be said while standing." [See Siftei Cohen to Sh. Ar. Choshen Mishpat 17,3.]

This raises an interesting question: When we recite Kriat Shma morning and evening, this is also considered edut: We are testifying that G-d is One, that He is our G-d, and that we are His nation. A strong allusion to this is found in the fact that in the Torah (Deut. 6,4), where we read Shma Yisrael, "Hear O Israel," the last letter of the word Shma, and the last letter of the word Echad (One), are both larger than all the other letters – and these two letters spell ed, meaning "witness"! Yet still, we know that the law follows Beit Hillel, in that one does not need to stand for Kriat Shma! Why is this different than Vaykhulu?

Let us elaborate on the law regarding Kriat Shma. The scholars of the School of Shammai understood that when the Torah instructs us (in Deut. 6,7) to recite Shma both when we lie down and when we arise, this is meant literally: one must recite the morning Shma while standing and the evening Shma while lying down! However, the School of Hillel ruled – and this is accepted as law – that these words merely allude to "evening and morning," and that one need not physically stand for the morning Shma.

In fact, the Shulchan Arukh rules (O.C. 63,2) that "one who wishes to be stringent on himself and stand up from his sitting position for Kriat Shma, is called a violator of the Law!" The Mishna Brurah goes even further and states: "Even if he stands not because he believes the law is like Beit Shammai, but only because he wishes to arouse his feelings of concentration – he may not do so!" That is, he may stand up before saying Shma and then remain standing, but he may not stand up specifically for Kriat Shma.

Let us return to our originl question: Why must we stand for the Vaykhulu testimony regarding Creation, but not for the Kriat Shma testimony of G-d's existence? The Iyun Tfilah – author of one of the first commentaries on the prayerbook – asked this question, and did not provide an answer.

However, perhaps we can explain as follows: The two "testimonies" are fundamentally different! That of Shma Yisrael is actually a mitzvah, a positive commandment: We are instructed in the first of the Ten Commandments to know and believe that G-d is One. When we fulfill this mitzvah by reciting Shma, we are reminding ourselves to internalize these concepts that are incumbent upon us to know. It is "testimony" to ourselves!

But when we recite Vaykhulu, telling the story of G-d's creation of the world in six days and then His sanctification of the seventh day as the Sabbath, we are not commanded to do so; we are simply magnifying G-d's honor, and that of the Sabbath, before all. We are "testifying" aloud to the story of the Sabbath, and therefore we must stand, as with all testimony.

Similarly, this explains why Vaykhulu should be recited by two people together, as with all testimony, while Kriat Shma may be recited alone.

May we merit, as this new year begins, to imbue our lives with all of these fundamental concepts: the Oneness of G-d, His relationship to Israel, and the holiness of the Sabbath, leading to our personal and national obligations to participate in G-d's work to bless the Nation of Israel in the Land of Israel in the spirit of the Torah of Israel.

Va'etchanan: Keeping the Torah, Details and Principles

by Rav Hillel Fendel.

Moshe Rabbeinu continues his parting speech to the Children of Israel in this week's Torah portion of Va'etchanan (D'varim 3,23-7,11). This is just before his death and as the nation is about to enter the promised Land of Israel without him. In his speech, Moshe continues to emphasize the importance of keeping the Torah as they begin their national life in the Holy Land, repeating the Ten Commandments and telling them the principles of Sh'ma Yisrael.

At one point, Moshe says (6,24-25): "G-d commanded us to keep all these rules… It is our privilege to safeguard and observe this entire mandate before Hashem our G-d, as He commanded us."

A famous Talmudic teaching states, in the name of R. Samlai, that the Torah given to Moshe to give to Israel contains 613 commandments – 365 negative commandments of what not to do, corresponding to the days of the solar year, and 248 proactive commandments, corresponding to the organs of the human body. R. Hamnuna adds that this is alluded to in the Torah itself, in the verse, "Moshe commanded us the Torah as a legacy" (D'varim 33,4) – "Torah" that was given to Moshe to give to Israel is equal to 611 in gematriya, plus another two commandments that were commanded directly to Israel (the first two of the Ten Commandments), for a total of 613.

The Talmud then adds a fascinating but puzzling insight: "King David came and stood/established them on only 11 commandments, as he wrote in Psalms 15: “Lord, who shall sojourn in Your Tabernacle? Who shall dwell upon Your sacred mountain? He who walks wholeheartedly, and does righteousness, and speaks truth in his heart; who has no slander upon his tongue, nor does evil to his neighbor, nor takes up reproach against his relative; in whose eyes a vile person is despised, and honors those who fear the Lord; he takes an oath to his own detriment, and changes not. He neither gives his money with interest, nor takes a bribe against the innocent."

Rashi – actually, his student and son-in-law known as Rivan – explains: "At first, they were righteous and were able to fulfill many of the mitzvot, but in later generations, they were not as righteous, and if they would seek to fulfill all of them, no one would merit to do so. David them came and established them on 11 so that they would be meritorious if they would fulfill these…"

The famous question is of course, "Are the other 600-plus mitzvot then null and void simply because they became too hard?! This certainly cannot be!"

The Maharsha (a famous commentary on the Talmud by R. Shmuel Eliezer Edeles, 1555-1631) explains as follows [paraphrased]:

"Most of the 613 cannot be fulfilled by everyone: Most people are exempt from the Priestly mitzvot, and the priests are exempt from giving tithes to the Levites, and others cannot fulfill the commandments that apply only to the Land of Israel, etc., etc. The same is true for negative mitzvot: One does not fulfill the mitzvah of not eating non-kosher food, for instance, unless he was faced with that situation and overcame it. As such, how can we ever merit the World to Come? The answer is that the Prophets provided comprehensive principles of behavior for the entire Jewish Nation, which apply at all times and in all places. These 11 principles that David established include a great part of the Torah and apply to everyone at all time, and with these we can attain the World to Come."

Another explanation is provided by the renowned Rabbi Moshe Feinstein of New York (d. 1986) in his work Dibrot Moshe. He writes that the Gemara explains that the 11 principles of David are principles and character traits that one must adopt and live by in order to fulfill the entire Torah. As such, they are not "replacement" mitzvot, but rather attributes that we should adopt in order to overcome the negative behaviors we became accustomed to in our childhood, before we acquired the maturity to understand what is right and what is wrong. (See there for a learned discourse on whether character traits can be commanded, and more.)

May we merit to work hard and be privileged to "safeguard and observe this entire mandate before Hashem our G-d, as He commanded us" so that it may be "good for us all the days" (ibid. verse 24).