PHILOTORAH


May HaShem protect our soldiers and the hostages; may He send Refu'ah Sh'leima to the many injured; may He console the bereaved families and
all of Israel and may He end this was with success for us and peace.


YERUSHALAYIM in/out times for VAYEISHEV Shabbat Chanuka (m'vorchim)

26 Kislev 5784 <> December 8-9, '23

4:00*PM <> PLAG 3:32PM  <<>>  5:15*PM <> R' Tam 5:53PM

*See Chanuka file, p.8 <> For other locales, click on the Z'MANIM link <> *pp.8,9,10



CALnotes

Shabbat M'vorchim

This Shabbat - Shabbat Chanuka, Parshat Vayeishev - we bench Rosh Chodesh Tevet, which will be on Yom R'vi'i, Wednesday, the sixth day of Chanuka, December 15th.


Usually, Rosh Chodesh Tevet is two days, because Kislev usually has 30 days. This is a CHASEIR year and Kislev has only 29 days - hence, one day Rosh Chodesh. Tevet itself always has only 29 days in our current Calendar system.

The molad of Tevet 5784 is Tuesday, Dec 14th, 20 hours, 1 minute, 3 chalakim. This corresponds to 7:34pm Israel Winter Time.


In Rambam notation: DALET BET:KAF-ALEF, meaning Wednesday (Rambam starts the day at 6:00pm rather than midnight for the standard molad time), 2 hours into the eve of Wednesday, and 21 chalakim (Rambam does not use minutes, he rather uses 1080 parts per hour.

The actual (astronomical) molad (a.k.a. New Moon) of Tevet is 1:33am on Wednesday morning.


Kiddush L'vana

First opportunity for Kiddush L'vana this month - according to Minhag Yerushalayim - is Motza'ei Shabbat Parshat Mikeitz, December 18th.

For those who say KL only after 7 full days after the molad, their first op is Tuesday night, December 21st, but only after 7:34pm.

Another accepted timing for KL is to be close enough to 7 days after the molad. In this case, KL could be said right after dark on December 18th.

Calendar observation

Interesting how things balance out sometimes. On most Rosh Chodeshes we say Hallel with skipping (referred to as half-Hallel, although it is more than half which is said). On Rosh Chodesh Tevet, we always say full Hallel. But on Rosh Chodesh Tishrei - we don't say Hallel at all, because it is Rosh HaShana.

Chanuka Samei'ach, Shabbat Shalom, Chodesh Tov 



VAYEISHEV

9th of 54 sedras; 9th of 12 in B'reishit

Written on 190 lines, ranks 28th

4 Parshiyot; 3 open, 1 closed

112 p'sukim - ranks 24th (8th) tied with Matot; more words & letters than Matot, same line count

1558 words - ranks 24th (8th) tied with Vayakhel; fewer p'sukim & letters than it. Vayakhel is 20 lines longer

5972 letters - ranks 24th (8th) tied with D'varim; more p'sukim & words than it, but fewer lines



MITZVOT 

No mitzvot are counted from Vayeishev



Aliya-by-Aliya Sedra Summary

[P> X:Y (Z)] and [S> X:Y (Z)] indicate start of a parsha p'tucha or s'tuma. X:Y is Perek:Pasuk of the beginning of the parsha; (Z) is the number of p'sukim in the parsha.


And it's also Shabbat Chanuka see further



Kohen - First Aliya - 11 p'sukim - 37:1-11

[P> 37:1 (36)] Yaakov has spent years away from home and now has returned. The Torah indicates that it is through Yosef that Yaakov's legacy continues. 

17 year old Yosef brings bad reports about his brothers to Yaakov. Yaakov loves Yosef above his brothers and gives him a special (striped, colorful) coat. As a result, the brothers hate Yosef and cannot talk civilly to him. Yosef's two dreams (and especially, his telling his brothers about them) increases their hatred and jealousy, and this alarms Yaakov.

SDT: These are the TO-L'DOT of Yaakov: Yosef... Should not the Torah have started with Reuven? This comes to show us, says the Gemara, that Yosef should have been Yaakov's firstborn, but G-d's mercy for Leah put her before Rachel in giving birth.

The first dream was of his brother's sheaves of wheat bowing to his sheaf. Yosef's second dream, of the Sun, Moon, and stars bowing to him, added fuel to his brothers' hatred. Yaakov pointed out the absurdity of the dream, since Rachel, the Moon, had already died and would therefore not be bowing to Yosef.


Rashi says 2 different things: 

(1) The dream was referring to Bilha who raised Yosef in Rachel's absence; and
(2) even "true" dreams have an element of nonsense. These seem to be mutually exclusive statements - if the Moon represents Bilha, then the dream contained no nonsense. Yaakov seems to have purposely voiced the second option in order to diffuse some of the brothers' anger.

SDT: The Gemara, Masechet Shabbat says, in the name of R' Chama b. Guriya in the name of Rav, that a person should never favor one child among his children, because it was a little bit of cloth that aroused jealousy of the brothers for Yosef and that it brought the whole family down to Egypt. Parents and grandparents (aunts and uncles too) have to be very careful not to cause jealousy among siblings to rear its ugly head. This does not necessarily mean identical presents and treatment, but it means thinking carefully and acting wisely.



Levi - Second Aliya - 11 p'sukim - 37:12-22

The brothers are tending sheep near Sh'chem. Yaakov sends Yosef to them. A stranger (some say, the angel Gavriel) helps him find them. 

In the whole story of Yosef and his brothers, one can see that G-d has a plan which proceeds with the unknowing help of the brothers and other individuals. And yet, each person involved acts of his own free will, and is therefore accountable for his actions. 

When the brothers see Yosef coming, they (some say, Shimon and Levi) suggest killing him. Reuven talks them out of it by suggesting that they not spill his blood, but throw him into a pit instead. The Torah testifies that Reuven really intended to save Yosef.

A point must be made about the concluding pasuk of this Aliya, which gives credit to Reuven for saving Yosef. Commentaries say that Reuven could have talked the brothers out of the whole thing; instead, he suggested the snake- and scorpion-infested pit. And, Yosef wasn't saved. Nonetheless, Reuven is credited for his intention to save Yosef.

Rashi says that Reuven truly intended to come back and save Yosef - that's good - but his reason was that he, as oldest, would be blamed for anything that happened to Yosef - not a nice reason. Nonetheless, he gets the credit for the good deed he planned on doing - even though it wasn't accomplished AND even though his motives were not pure.

Imagine our merit for good actions with good intentions with good results.



Shlishi - Third Aliya - 14 p'sukim - 37:23-36

When Yosef arrives, the brothers remove his coat and throw him into a deep pit. The brothers sit to eat. (This is considered a sign of callousness towards their brother and what they have done to him.) When a Ishmaelite caravan approaches, Yehuda suggests that it would be wrong to kill Yosef (Reuven's intentions notwithstanding, the brothers expected Yosef to die in the pit); they should rather get rid of him by selling him into slavery. Through a series of transactions, Yosef ends up in Egypt as a slave to Potifar.

(If that sounded vague, there is good reason - commentaries suggest different scenarios as to who sold Yosef to whom; how many transactions were there; who took Yosef out of the BOR. One thing is sure - Yosef ended up in Egypt.)

When Reuven returns to the scene and discovers Yosef missing, he rends his garment and expresses his distress to the others. The brothers slaughter a goat, smear Yosef's multi-colored, striped coat in its blood, and send it to Yaakov to identify.

SDT: Commentaries point out that just as Yaakov had deceived his father with a goat and a garment (goat & coat), so too was he deceived with a goat and a coat. This is a stark example of "Mida k'neged mida" - measure for measure.

Yaakov is inconsolable. (This is considered an indication that Yaakov subconsciously knew that Yosef was alive; one naturally accepts consolation for the dead after a time, but not for the missing.) Think about the hostages who are still in Gaza.

Because of Yosef's story, Vayeishev is designated each year as SHABBAT SH'VUYEI V'NE'EDAREI TZAHA"L - the Shabbat for Israel's captives and missing.

SDT: Rashi gives us another aspect of the "Measure for Measure" punishment of Yaakov. The pasuk says that he "mourned for his son MANY DAYS". Rashi says that it was 22 years! Yosef was 17 when he was sold. He was 30 when he stood before Par'o. That's 13. Seven years of plenty and the first two years of famine before father and son were reunited. That makes 22 years that Yaakov was without Yosef. This, says Rashi, is the exact length of time that Yaakov was away from Yitzchak. It includes the 20 years with Lavan, a year and a half in Sukkot, and six months in Beit El before Yaakov returned to his father's house. Remember that Yaakov had various good excuses, nonetheless...



R'vi'i - Fourth Aliya - 30 p'sukim - 38:1-30

[P> 38:1 (30)] Subsequently, Yehuda leaves home and befriends an Adullamite named CHIRA.

SDT: Why is the story of Yosef interrupted to tell us about Yehuda's situation? 

Rashi tells us that Yehuda was no longer looked up to by his brothers. After they saw the terrible effect on Yaakov of the Yosef business, they blamed Yehuda for not talking them out of the whole idea. Hence the term "And Yehuda went down from his brothers" has a double meaning.

There he meets and marries the daughter of Shu'a, who bears him three sons. He marries off his eldest, Er, to Tamar. When Er dies, the next brother Onan, marries his brother's widow, Yibum-style. The Torah tells us that Onan refused to have a child with Tamar, because that child would "belong" (so to speak) to Er. This, G-d took seriously (so to speak) and Onan also dies. Tamar is left to wait for the third son, Shela (for Yibum). 

Some time later, Yehuda's wife dies. Yehuda travels to the area where Tamar lives. When she hears of his impending arrival and realizes that she has not been given to Shela yet, she disguises herself. Yehuda, thinking she is a prostitute, sleeps with her. She asks and receives three items as security to guarantee that he will send her payment (a goat). When it becomes known that Tamar is pregnant, Yehuda is summoned. Assuming that she has acted sinfully, he is prepared to have her punished. Tamar produces the three items and announces that she is pregnant by their owner.

Commentaries explain that prior to Matan Torah, any close relative could take the childless wife of the deceased; after the Torah was given, only a brother qualifies for YIBUM.

Yehuda recognizes that he is the guilty one, not Tamar, and he admits it. She gives birth to twins (one extending his hand first, the other actually being born first). They are named Peretz (ancestor of King David) and Zerach.

Note the repeat of the confused firstborn theme. It pervades Sefer B'reishit.

OBSERVATION: Yaakov deceives his father with a garment (Eisav's) and fans the jealousy of his son's against Yosef with the "coat of many colors". He is deceived (and devastated) by that same coat when the brothers bring it back to him all bloodied. Yehuda is "troubled" by his garment which he gave to Tamar as one of the three securities for his promise to pay her with goats. (P'tilim, says Rashi, refers to Yehuda's cloak.) Yosef, the victim (but not completely free of guilt in the matter) has his coat grabbed by Potifar's wife. Yosef leaves it in her hands as he runs from the house; the coat becomes the damning piece of evidence against him.



Chamishi - 5th Aliya - 6 p'sukim - 39:1-6

[S> 39:1 (23)] In "meanwhile back at the ranch" style, the Torah returns us to the story of Yosef. Yosef serves in Potifar's house and brings success to his master. He is well-liked by all, and is given much responsibility. Then the Torah makes a point of telling us that Yosef was very handsome.

SDT: The Midrash says that Yosef was aware of his looks and became too comfortable in Potifar's house. Things were going well, he had good food and drink, and he began "curling his hair". G-d (so to speak) said to Yosef: Your father is in agony over your disappearance and supposed demise and you are enjoying yourself? I shall make things rough for you too.



Shishi - Sixth Aliya - 17 p'sukim - 39:7-23

Potifar's wife casts her eye upon Yosef. She repeatedly attempts to seduce him. His constant refusal angers her.

She grabs him on a day when no one else is in the house. Yosef flees, leaving his coat behind. (This is the second time his coat has been left in the hands of others!) Potifar's wife denounces Yosef to all who will listen, and Potifar has no choice but to have Yosef tossed into prison.

[Speculation: Potifar likely believed that Yosef was innocent, which would explain why he didn't have Yosef killed, only jailed. There seems to be a source that says that As'nat - Potifar's daughter and Yosef's future wife - told her father that Yosef was innocent. Potifar apparently couldn't let him off scot-free - his wife would blow a gasket, but he spared his life.]

G-d "favors" Yosef in prison, and Yosef becomes well-liked and respected there too. Even in his troubled circumstances, Yosef is watched over favorably by G-d.

SDT: Commentaries see the episode of Potifar's wife as an appropriate punishment for Yosef: 

(a) having been vain about his good looks, 

(b) having reported to his father that his brothers had been "lifting their eyes" to the local girls, and 

(c) experiencing libelous accusations against himself, as he had reported the "evil-doings" of his brothers to their father. Baal HaTurim adds that Yosef spent 10 years in prison corresponding to the 10 brothers he reported on.



Sh'VII - Seventh Aliya - 23 p'sukim - 40:1-23

[P> 40:1 (23)] The last portion of Vayeishev tells of the dreams of the Royal Wine Steward and the Royal Baker, both of whom had been imprisoned by Par'o for misdemeanors. Both dream on the same night and awake in morning very agitated. After Yosef interprets the wine steward's dream in a positive manner, the baker asks Yosef to interpret his dream as well. Yosef predicts death for him. Both dreams come true: the wine steward is restored to his position of honor and the baker is hanged. Yosef asks the wine steward to remember him to Par'o, but he forgets Yosef and his promise to him.

Rashi tells us that Yosef was to spend another two years in prison for relying on the Wine Steward to get him out of prison. This raises the question in our minds of the line between BITACHON, trust in G-d, and HISHTADLUS, effort a person expends to get himself out of a tough situation. Could it not have been viewed that G-d set up the whole dream situation with the Wine Steward and the Baker, so that Yosef would do exactly what he did, and the Wine Steward would then be in a position and willing state of mind to help Yosef and put in the good word to Par'o? Why is Yosef faulted for taking the opportunity to try to get out of prison via the Wine Steward, when one can claim that G-d had sent the Wine Steward to Yosef (so to speak) for exactly that purpose. 

It is possible that the spiritual level of Yosef required different behavior than would be reasonable and proper for "the rest of us". 

Or... it is possible that under the circumstances, namely that Yosef had just credited G-d repeatedly for his ability to interpret dreams, that the Wine Steward received the "wrong message" from Yosef when Yosef asks him to remember Yosef favorably. Maybe like: "Hey, your G-d can interpret dreams but can't even get you out of this dump without you asking me for a favor." Maybe there is a Chilul HaShem factor to consider here.

Maftir - 2nd Torah - 6 p'sukim - Bamidbar 7:24-29

When Shabbat Chanuka is not the first and last day of Chanuka - in other words, when there is only one Shabbat Chanuka, then Maftir is the 6-pasuk portion of the gifts of the tribal leader of the day to the Dedication of the Mishkan. (The readings for the first and last day include more. When Shabbat is also Rosh Chodesh, the maftir is in the third Torah, but still a 6-pasuk piece.

For day 2 of Chanuka (ours and Chanukat HaMizbei'ach the first time around), the leader of the tribe of Yissachar offered his gifts. N'tan-el b. Tzu'ar brought exactly what each of the other Nesi'im brought, but the Torah repeats the details, so that each tribe "has its day", so to speak. Some commentaries describe different significances to the same items, for each tribe, further highlighting the individual natures of the tribes.



Haftara - 21 p'sukim - Zacharia 2:14-4:7

The Haftara for Shabbat Chanuka is "borrowed" from B'ha'alot'cha, the Menora being the obvious connection. Chanuka has parallels throughout history.

The opening words of the Haftara are G-d's promise to dwell among us. This is the purpose of having built the Mishkan and the Beit HaMikdash in the first place, and this is the purpose of rededicating it, as we did on Chanuka.

The Haftara contains the vision of olive oil miraculously flowing into the gold Menora flanked by olive trees. This vision matches so much of the Chanuka story. 

It is also the basis of the emblem of the State of Israel. This is particularly significant in light of the meaning of the vision. The message to the king, to Jewish leaders in general, is that our success is not measured by might and power, but rather by the spirit of G-d. This was an important message for the Chashmona'im and it remains a vital message for the leaders of today's Israel.

Aside from the obvious connection between Chanuka and the original Chanukat HaMizbei'ach of the Mishkan - as in Dedication and Re-dedication of the Mikdash, there is another, more specific connection, which tightens things up neatly.

It is said that... The original Mishkan was completed and "ready to roll" on the 25th of Kislev, more than 8 months out of Egypt. The dedication was postponed until the first of Nisan, in honor of Yitzchak Avinu, who was born during Nissan. To inaugurate the Mishkan in honor of Yitzchak, is a good choice, because he was actually placed on a Mizbei'ach and was to be offered as an Olah. Yitzchak is like the patron of the Mikdash.

Over 1100 years later, Kislev 25 finally got its Chanuka. So the Torah reading of Chanuka is particularly appropriate. And there is also a connection to 25 Kislev from the original building of the second Beit HaMikdash. Chanuka is a perfect fit, just where it is in the calendar.



Bringing the Prophets to Life

Weekly insights into the Haftara
by Rabbi Nachman (Neil) Winkler
Author of Bringing the Prophets to Life (Gefen Publ.)

Vayeishev-Chanuka

This year, the only Shabbat that coincides with Chanuka is Shabbat Parashat Vayeishev - not Parashat Miketz. This confluence is rather rare as it occurs but once in ten years, on the average. Nonetheless, this unique occurrence does not impact the choice of the haftara, as the selection remains the same as on every Shabbat Chanuka, i.e. a reading from Sefer Zecharya, p'rakim 2-4, which is also read on Shabbat Parashat B'ha-alo-t'cha.

The exultant opening of the haftara in which Zecharya promises G-d's return to Israel, reflects the reality that faced Zecharya's generation, Jews who were returning from the Babylonian exile, and were struggling to rebuild the Beit HaMikdash. The prophet's promise that Hashem would, once again, "dwell in your midst", i.e. through the "new" Beit HaMikdash, was certainly a welcomed one to the nation and, in fact, echoed the exact promise made by Chaggai - a contemporary of Zecharya - who also urged the returnees to build Bayit Sheni and promised that Hashem V'ERTZEH BO V'IKAVDA - would be pleased with the Mikdash and be honored (through it).  Chazal saw the rededication of the purified Beit HaMikdash by the Chashmona'im as form of "reconstruction" of Bayit Sheni by the returning exiles of Chaggai's time. Our Tana'im (early rabbinic scholars) regarded both events to be the fulfillment of the promised return of Hashem's presence to Yerushalayim. 

The second vision of the navi, the image of the Menora and its lights, creates the obvious connection to Shabbat Chanuka and is therefore the most familiar reason given as to why the haftara was chosen to be read on Chanuka.

These two visions are certainly convincing links to Chanuka, but we would be remiss in our study were we to ignore the introductory section Zecharya's nevu'a that, at first glance, does not seem to be connected to the holiday at all. The prophet describes a scene in which the Sahtahn stands to the right of Yehoshua, the Kohen Gadol, in order to condemn him and prevent him from fulfilling his mission of returning the sacrificial rite to the Temple. It appears that Chazal saw this as a parallel to the many obstacles that faced the Chashmona'im that would "prevent" or hinder their efforts to rededicate the defiled Mikdash. G-d Himself responds by defending Yehoshua and reprimanding the Sahtahn for daring to attack one who had "survived a conflagration" (UD MUTZAL MEI'EISH). 

I would submit that Hashem's message was directed not to the Kohen Gadol alone but to his entire generation. Throughout his sefer, Zecharya speaks pointing to the shortcomings of this generation in an effort to have them repair their ways - criticism that could easily have the people believe that their efforts to rebuild Jewish life once more was doomed to failure. For that reason, G-d teaches Yehoshua and His entire nation that the promised redemption would arrive - despite their sins - as Hashem understands fully the great suffering Israel had endured. 

G-d's message should echo in our ears for His condemnation of the Sahtahn applies to all those who fail to stand behind Hashem's nation when they struggle to return and rebuild. He denounces those who criticize the UD MUTZAL MEI'EISH, the generation of survivors, those who rebuild their own lives in their homeland and who thirst to return to G-d and His Torah by reestablishing yeshivot and batei Knesset! 

Who, after all, would dare to censure those who marched from Holocaust to Independence, from the ghettos of Europe to the Army of Israel? Could there be ANYONE so insensitive or so selfish to find reason to chastise the generation who, like that of Chaggai, struggles against enemies who endeavor to chase them out of their land - a mere 75-80 years after their near destruction? Or would there be anyone with the chutzpa to join in the despicable effort of defending the slaughter of innocents, babies and elderly, of the very descendants of that UD MUTZAL MEI'EISH?

Who could ever do such a thing? 

YES! A Sahtahn!

The message for Chanuka is a message for all time. So when we see these followers of Sahtahn criticizing and condemning, we can be confident that YIG'AR B'CHA HASHEM - G-d will denounce them and will continue to defend the UD MUTZAL MEI'EISH!



ParshaPix explanations

The fun way to go over the weekly sedra with your children, grandchildren, Shabbat guests

Vayishlach

<> And one old-style TTriddle, a word Unexplained

His first cousin and his great-great-grandson had the same name.

Yaakov's father's (Yitzchak) brother's (Yishmael) son (one of them, from Aholivama) was Korach. That Korach was Yaakov's first cousin. Yaakov's son, Levi, his sons Ger'shon, K'hat, and Merari. K'hat's son Yitzhar. His son, Korach. So the answer is YAAKOV. (and I missed a great- in the original question - sorry.)

Vayeishev-Chanuka

Let's start with the upper-left: Snow (also Chanuka, but SNOW). Twice, once after the brothers saw that Yaakov loved Yosef the most, and once after Yosef told them his dream, the Torah tells us, VAYOSIFU OD SNOW OTO, and they further hated him <> Dreidels are for Chanuka - don't forget to see the Chanuka files link on the website <> Rabbi Dr. Zerach Warhaftig z"l, lawyer, politician, one of the (37) signatories of Israel's Declaration of Independence... <> And Y.L. Peretz - Yitschok Leybush Peretz, one of the great Yiddish-language authors and playwrights - both representing the twins born to Tamar and Yehuda <> second row: birthday cake for Par'o <> Rub a dub dub, three men in a tub. <> They were the butcher, as in Sar HaTabachim, <> the baker, as in Sar HaOfim, <> and the candlestick maker, who has no place in the PP for Vayeishev, but he does have a very significant role for Chanuka <> and taking his place in the tub trio is the one who serves wine, the Sar HaMashkim <> the sweetie in the pic is Tamar <> next to a photo of a tamar, a date <> next row: that's Edgar Allan Poe followed by a golf tee followed by the number 4 - together they make POTIFAR (sort of) <> Snake and scorpion but no water, describes the pit into which Yosef was thrown <> emblem of the Israel Prison Service, worn by the Israeli equivalent of Sar Beit HaSohar <> symbol of Gemini, the twins, as in Peretz and Zerach <> US Customs insignia has 11 stars, just like Yosef's second dream. According to an article on the internet, the design that was submitted for production had 13 stars, as well as 13 each of other items - arrows, olive branches, and more. A prototype was made with only 11 stars (and other mistakes) because that's all that could fit using the embroidery machine. So instead of correcting it, they left 11 stars <> goat, is, of course, for the goat that the brothers slaughtered to cover-up their terrible deed. It also represents the goat that Yehuda sent to Tamar. Note well that the main animal that is used in the Beit HaMikdash as a CHATAT, a sin offering, is the goat. Communal chatat as well as individual chatat. This includes the two identical goats upon which lots were drawn on Yom Kippur <> next row: sheep, as in sheep, the flocks the brothers were shepherding when Yaakov sent Yosef to find out how they were doing <> one of the first flags of the Confederate States of America. This one, which was used for several months, has 11 stars (when there were 11 states in the Confederacy) - reminder of the 11 stars in Yosef's dream <> celery ready to dip in saltwater - in defining K'TONET PASIM, Rashi mentions the color green from the decorations of Achashveirosh's palace. The word in common is KARPAS. This gives a very strong connection between the jealousy caused by said garment and the descent of Yosef to Egypt as a slave, which was followed years later as the descent of the whole future nation of Israel to Egypt and their subsequent enslavement. This then is one of the things that karpas reminds us of <> the rabbinical figure in the picture is Rabbi Yaakov Yosef (because of EILEH TO-L'DOT YAAKOV, YOSEF...), the first, and really the only one to hold the position of Chief Rabbi of New York; RJJ is named for him. Google him - very interesting, especially his funeral <> the remembering finger is negated because the Sar HaMashkim did not remember to tell Par'o about Yosef. He eventually did, two years later <> next are three related items, standing for the items that Yehuda gave to Tamar as security for the goat he promised. seal (play on words) for CHOTEMCHA <> Yehuda's staff <> the hooded coat, which is close to the meaning of p'tilecha <> next row: caravan of camels to which Yosef was sold, resold, and eventually ended up in Egypt <> a scene from Kever Yosef in Sh'chem <> lower-left, Davka graphics of Yosef's dreams <> and now we have the haftara for Chanuka: rock with 7 eyes is for the rock with seven eyes that the navi set before Yehoshua, the Kohein Gadol <> at the bottom is a graphic of the Menora that was shown in a vision - a golden Menora with a bowl above it and two olive trees, one on each side <> the next Menora takes the word for bowl - GULA, which in modern Hebrew means a marble (the one in the pic is a cat's eye) with an olive to its right and to its left  <> the emblem of the State of Israel is based on that vision <> finally, the Merkava tank with a no symbol stands for LO V'CHAYIL... the final message in the haftara. See Sedra Summary for more on this <> Plus two Unexplaineds

An unusually long PPx. Besides the many elements in it, the explanations are meant to teach more than what each element stands for. Parents and grandparents should pick and choose the elements that are appropriate to your (grand)children. Enjoy, and educate. Happy Chanuka.



In Memory of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks z"l


Speech Therapy

Vayeishev

From Vayeishev to the end of the book of B'reishit we read the story of Yosef and his brothers. From the very beginning we are plunged into a drama of sibling rivalry that seems destined to end in tragedy. 

All the elements are there, and it begins with ominous parental favouritism. Yaakov loved Yosef more than his other sons. The Torah says this was because "he had been born to him in his old age." But we also know it was because Yosef was the first son of his beloved Rachel, who had been infertile for many years.

Yaakov gave this favouritism a visible symbol, the richly ornamented robe or coat of many colours that he commissioned for him. The mere sight of this coat served as constant provocation to the brothers. In addition there were the bad reports Yosef brought to his father about his half-brothers. And by the fourth verse of the parsha we read the following:

When his brothers saw that their father loved him more than any of them, they hated him, V'LO YACHLU DABRO L'SHALOM (B'reishit 37:4).

What is the meaning of this last phrase? Here are some of the standard translations:

They could not speak a kind word to him.

They could not speak peacefully to him.

They could not speak to him on friendly terms.

Rabbi Yonatan Eybeschutz, however, recognised that the Hebrew construction is strange. Literally it means, "they could not speak him to peace." What might this mean? Rabbi Eybeschutz refers us to the command in Vayikra 19:17:

You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely reprimand your neighbour and not bear sin because of him (Vayikra 19:17).

This is how Rambam interprets this command as it relates to interpersonal relations:

When a person sins against another, the injured party should not hate the offender and keep silent... it is his duty to inform the offender and say to him, why did you do this to me? Why did you sin against me in this matter? ... If the offender repents and pleads for forgiveness, he should be forgiven (Hilchot Dei'ot 6:6).

Rabbi Eybeschutz's point is simple. Had the brothers been able to speak to Yosef they might have told him of their anger at his talebearing, and of their distress at seeing the many-coloured coat. They might have spoken frankly about their sense of humiliation at the way their father favoured Rachel over their mother Leah, a favouritism that was now being carried through into a second generation. Yosef might have come to understand their feelings. It might have made him more modest or at least more thoughtful. But V'LO YACHLU DABRO L'SHALOM. They simply couldn't bring themselves to speak. As Ramban writes, on the command: You shall not hate your brother in your heart: "Those who hate tend to hide their hate in their heart."

We have here an instance of one of the Torah's great insights, that conversation is a form of conflict resolution, whereas the breakdown of speech is often a prelude to violent revenge.

The classic case is that of Avshalom and Amnon, two half-brothers who were sons of king David. In a shocking episode, Amnon rapes Avshalom's sister Tamar:

Tamar put ashes on her head and tore the ornate tunic that she wore; she put her hand to her head and went off, weeping as she went. 

And Avshalom, her brother, said to her, "Has your brother Amnon been with you? For now, my sister, be silent; he is your brother. Do not take this affair to heart." 

And Tamar remained, forlorn, in the house of her brother Avshalom. When King David heard all about this affair, he was absolutely livid. And Avshalom would not speak a word to Amnon, neither good nor bad, for Avshalom despised Amnon for having violated Tamar, his sister (Sh'muel Bet 13:19-22).

Avshalom maintained his silence for two years. Then he invited all of David's sons for a feast at the time of sheep-shearing, and ordered his servants to wait until Amnon was drunk and then kill him, which they did. 

Hate grows in silence. It did with Avshalom. It did with Yosef's brothers. Before the chapter ends, we see them plot to kill Yosef, then throw him into a pit, and then sell him into slavery. It is a terrible story and led directly to the Israelites' exile and slavery in Egypt.

The Talmud (B'rachot 26b) uses the phrase, EIN SICHA ELA T'FILA, which literally means, "Conversation is a form of prayer", because in opening ourselves up to the human other, we prepare ourselves for the act of opening ourselves up with the Divine Other, which is what prayer is: a conversation with God.

Conversation does not, in and of itself, resolve conflict. Two people who are open with one another may still have clashing desires or competing claims. They may simply not like one another. There is no law of predetermined harmony in the human domain. But conversation means that we recognise one another's humanity. At its best it allows us to engage in role reversal, seeing the world from the other's point of view. Think of how many real and intractable conflicts, whether in the personal or political domain, might be transformed if we could do that.

In the end Yosef and his brothers had to live through real trauma before they were able to recognise one another's humanity, and much of the rest of their story - the longest single narrative in the Torah - is about just that.

Judaism is about the God who cannot be seen, who can only be heard; about the God who created the universe with words and whose first act of kindness to the first human being was to teach him how to use words. Jews, even highly secular Jews, have often been preoccupied with language. Wittgenstein understood that philosophy is about language.

Levi Strauss saw cultures as forms of language. Noam Chomsky and Steven Pinker pioneered study of the language instinct. George Steiner has written about translation and the limits of language.

The Sages were eloquent in speaking about the dangers of lashon hara, "evil speech", the power of language to fracture relationships and destroy trust and goodwill. But there is evil silence as well as evil speech. It is no accident that at the very beginning of the most fateful tale of sibling rivalry in B'reishit, the role - specifically the failure - of language is alluded to, in a way missed by virtually all translations. Yosef's brothers might have "spoken him to peace" had they been open, candid and willing to communicate. Speech broke down at the very point where it was needed most.

Words create; words reveal; words command; words redeem. Judaism is a religion of holy words. For words are the narrow bridge across the abyss between soul and soul, between two human beings, and between humanity and God.

Language is the redemption of solitude, and the mender of broken relationships. However painful it is to speak about our hurt, it is more dangerous not to do so. Yosef and his brothers might have been reconciled early on in their lives, and thus spared themselves, their father, and their descendants, much grief. Revealing pain is the first step to healing pain.

Speech is a path to peace.

Around the Shabbat Table:

Can you relate to a time when you found it challenging to communicate your feelings? Did it impact a relationship? How was that tension resolved?

Can you think of other times in the Torah where communication, or lack thereof, played a crucial role in the narrative?

How might the brothers have used open communication to resolve their conflict with Yosef, if we were to re-imagine their story?



PTDT - PhiloTorah D'var Torah

THEN AND NOW

BAYAMIM HAHEIM BIZMAN HAZEH

The first b'racha we say for Chanuka lights is the b'racha for the mitzva - 

BARUCH ATA... who has sanctified us with His mitzvot, and commanded us to kindle the NER (of) Chanuka.

[See the Chanuka file for the explanation of the parentheses around the word (of) - i.e. SHEL.]

And then, immediately, we say a second b'racha -

SHE'ASA NISIM... Who did work miracles for our ancestors in days of old, at this season.

That's one way to understand BAZMAN (or BIZMAN) HAZEH - at this time.

We can also understand the wording of the second b'racha to mean that G-d performed miracles then and also now, at this time.

Looking at it this way, we can broaden the picture to include more than miracles - meaning, to look at then and now for similarities and patterns... and differences.

Ed. note: I'm leaving the first column as I wrote it, but I am changing the focus of the rest of this PTDT.

Let's look at two THENs and the one NOW.

2216 from Creation - The Sale of Yosef. Previously in Sefer B'reishit, we have seen friction and tension between Yishmael and Yitzchak, between Eisav and Yaakov, Lavan and Yaakov. Let's call that our difficulties from outside. We've had plenty of that throughout Jewish History.

But the Sale of Yosef is another story altogether. It is within the family, internal. And the problems between Yosef and his brothers didn't end with their 'reconciliation' towards the end of B'reishit. It too, echoes throughout Jewish History.

Fast forward to 3622 from Creation. The Chanuka story. A success over one of our oppressors and enemies from the outside. But a serious internal problem. The Chanuka Story included - although it is totally downplayed by Chazal - a brother vs brother battle between the Mityavnim (Hellenized Jews) and the Chashmona'im and those who remained faithful to G-d and Torah.

As mentioned, Chazal downplayed that part of the story. They touched on it briefly in Al HaNisim in describing the miracle of the victory - GIBORIM (the Greeks), RABIM (the Greeks), T'MEI'IM (the Greeks), R'SHA'IM (the Greeks), but...

ZEIDIM B'YAD O-S'KEI TORATECHA (the Mityavnim).

Fast forward to 5784, the first 21 days of the year. Until, but not including Simchat Torah. Brother vs brother - sadly, YES and the split ever increasing.

Since Simchat Torah - the war - there are encouraging signs and deeds of Jewish Unity. Will it last? Who knows. What we should know is that it is possible to unify. But it shouldn't be just when we are face to face with a vile and despicable enemy.

(Sadly, even during the war, even when we are seeing such amazing acts of unity, we also hear about a non-religious woman who saw a t'filin stand and swept the t'filin to the ground.)

We in 5784 have a tremendous challenge - to improve (vastly) the notion that what unites the Jewish People is greater than what divides us. We need to do our share - actually more than our share of reconciling the Brothers and Yosef, and the problem of assimilation (as typified by the Mityavnim), and develop a society that - while not ignoring differences within the Jewish People, will recognize that Jewish Unity is the only way to go. The only way to proceed towards the Geula Sh'leima.



Walk through the Parsha with Rabbi David Walk

The Tamar Affair

Vayeishev

This week's Torah reading presents us with new and very different heroes. As we enter the final third of B'reishit, a new phenomenon emerges, multiple protagonists. From chapter 12 until chapter 38 of the Book, we are always focusing on one main character at a time. First Avraham, then Yitzchak and finally Ya'akov. Now our attention must be divided between two new leading men, Yosef and Yehuda.

Chapter 38 begins: About that time Yehuda went down from his brothers. Chapter 39 begins: When Yosef was brought down to Egypt. Both their stories begin with a downward direction.

Yosef's descent was forced upon him by circumstances, and eventually he prevails against all odds. Yehuda's descent was of his own choosing, and we're not sure why he departs from the family and seems to join Canaanite society. Yosef descends by force; Yehuda descends by choice. The latter is often a harder circumstance from which to recover.

Yehuda truly appears to be on a negative trajectory. He marries a Canaanite woman, daughter of Shua, and finds a Canaanite wife, Tamar, for Er, his son. Our Patriarchs had clearly disapproved of marrying into Canaanite society. 

This downward spiral seems to accelerate when he sleeps with what appears to be a harlot, in reality Tamar. How far has Yehuda fallen! The Torah pulls no punches when describing our heroes. As Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch noted:  The Torah never hides from us the faults, errors and weaknesses of our great men. By that it gives the stamp of veracity to what it relates. But in truth, by the knowledge which is given us of their faults and weaknesses, our great men are in no wise made lesser but actually greater and more instructive.

This continuing descent comes to a screeching stop when judging Tamar for becoming pregnant while a YEVAMA (widow bound to the family). Yehuda could have easily executed her for what the world saw as an adulterous act, and no one would know that he was the father of the unborn child. It is very easy for men in power to bury their indiscretions. He publicly declares: She is more righteous than I, the fetus is from me! (Breishit 39:18).

There we have it. The Torah's first public admission of sin. This begins Yehuda's ascension through the ranks of the 12 brothers to become the acknowledged leader. Why? Because, as Rav Ari Kahn explained: A leader is one who, though they may stumble and fall, arises more honest, humble and courageous than they were before.

Now he can be the guarantor for Binyamin (43:8-9), now he is worthy to stand up to Yosef, when he was viceroy of Egypt (44:18-30), now he can lead the family into Egypt (46:28), and now he deserves Ya'akov's greatest blessing: Your brothers will acknowledge you, your hand will be on the neck of your enemies, your father's sons will bow down before you…The scepter will never depart from Yehuda (49:8 & 10).  

In other words, those who carry Yehuda's genes will rule Israel and, one will, eventually, become MASHIACH. His heirs will eventually surpass Yosef's heirs, because ultimately the ZADIK, who never sinned, can't stand in the lofty position of the BA'AL TESHUVA, penitent (Brachot 34b).

Is that the whole story? Have we finished describing the DNA of Mashiach? No, because half those genes have another source: Tamar!

Usually, when poring over these stories we feel that our description of Mashiach is complete once we've concluded that Yehuda will be the father. But there's also a mother. We can't see the whole picture until Tamar's role has been described.

Rav Soloveitchik described the role of Tamar in the following manner: Tamar was a heroic woman, a great woman. What could Tamar do that others could not? She could wait; she possessed the heroic ability to wait without end. Judah told Tamar, his daughter-in-law, 'Remain a widow in your father's house until Shelah my son be grown up'. All her friends married; people treated her with ridicule and contempt. Shelah married; Judah had forgotten her. And yet she waited. Wasn't she the incarnation of Keneset Yisrael, which has waited for her Beloved thousands of years? Did not Tamar personify the greatest of all heroic action-to wait while the waiting arouses laughter and derision?  

However, as powerful as this image conjured by the Rav's words, there is another aspect of Tamar's greatness and importance. Rav Amnon Bazak explains: Apparently, Yehuda is simply dumbstruck in the face of Tamar. By placing the entire burden of responsibility on Yehuda while refusing to accuse him directly, Tamar leaves him no choice - he is forced to confront himself. For the first time since the beginning of the parsha, he assumes responsibility for his actions. Not only does he acknowledge that Tamar has not played the harlot, he goes so far as to acknowledge his own responsibility for neglecting her for so many years.

Tamar is the perfect catalyst for Yehuda's rehabilitation. As Rav Bazak points out, she cunningly induces Yehuda to acknowledge his responsibility. She did this by asking, 'HAKER NA', 'would you, please, acknowledge (who owns these, 38:25). This seemingly innocent, polite request cunningly echoes Yehuda's own question to Ya'akov, 'HAKER NA, please, recognize your son's (Yosef's) coat (37:32).

Tamar is not only monumentally patient, she also has the acute awareness of how to bring out the best in those around her. 

Our MASHIACH will inherit all these remarkable traits. From Yehuda, he will feel responsibility for others and have the strength of character to admit mistakes, to repent and reform. From Tamar, he will inherit patience and the keen ability to bring out the best in others. This is a powerful combination of talents making MASHIACH the great leader 'to smite the world with the staff of his tongue' (Yeshayahu 11:4).

BARUCH HASHEM, we all have, hopefully, inherited at least parts of these traits. But mostly patience. And now in these difficult days, we patiently turn to God and say: Haven't we been patient long enough? p



Rav Kook Torah

by Rabbi Chanan Morrison <> www.ravkooktorah.com



The Sacred Protects Itself

Rav Kook made the following comments when speaking at the inaugural ceremony for the Mizrachi Teachers Institute in Jerusalem during Chanuka, 1932:

Why is it that the Menorah we use in our homes for Chanuka must be different than the Menorah in the Temple, bearing eight or nine branches instead of seven?

People think that kodesh and chol - the realms of sacred and secular - are adversaries battling one another. But in truth, there is no conflict between kodesh and chol. Our national life requires that both of these domains be fully developed and channeled toward building the nation. We should aspire to combine them and imbue the secular with holiness.

We strive for kiddush, to sanctify the mundane and extend the influence of kodesh on chol. But we also need havdala to differentiate between the two realms. Havdala is necessary to prevent the blurring of the boundaries between the sacred and the secular, to preclude the debasement of kodesh and its misuse for secular purposes.

There exists a perfect kodesh, lofty and sublime. We draw from its essence, from its content, from its living treasure. And we are commanded to protect it from any secular influences that could dull the rich tapestry of the kodesh.

Thus, Jewish law forbids us to fashion a Menora similar to the one used in the Beit HaMikdash. In this way, the kodesh defends itself from any flow of secular influences that may diminish its value. It is because of this self-protection that the kodesh is able to retain its power to strengthen and vitalize secular frameworks.

Greek thought asserted that there is no holiness in the practical world. The Greek mind could only see in the universe - from the lowest depths to the farthest stars - mundane forces. Knesset Yisrael, however, knows how to join heaven and earth. We know how to unite kodesh and chol, how to sanctify ourselves with that which is permissible, to eat a meal in holiness and purity.

We are able to attain this ideal unification because we maintain the necessary barriers, we know how to distinguish between the sacred and the secular. Eternal Israel is built on these complementary principles of chibur and havdala, unification and distinction.

In an institution where both sacred subjects and secular disciplines are taught, we must not forget that our ancient battle against Greek culture is not over. If we are careless, the sacred will become profane.

We must remember that we are descendants of those heroes who sacrificed their lives to guard the holy. Like the Temple Menora, Torah study is the highest level of kodesh. We must be careful that our study of Torah does not degenerate into a study of literature, not even a study of national literature or an ancient science. Torah is the word of the Living God. Our practical activities must be illuminated by the holy light of Torah and its mitzvot. As the psalmist said,

"Your word is a lamp for my feet and a light for my path" (T'hilim 119:5).

Adapted from Mo'adei HaRe'iyah, pp. 181-182, and Celebration of the Soul by Rabbi Pesach Jaffe, pp. 99-100



Parsha Story

Stories and Parables from the famed Maggid of Dubno

by Rabbi Chanan Morrison

The Ugly Present

Vayeishev

The peculiar - and uncomplimentary - story of Yehuda and Tamar was meant to set the stage for King David and the future Mashiach, the messianic king. The Midrash poignantly describes the scene:

"The tribes [Yaakov's sons] were occupied with selling Yosef. Yosef was occupied with his sackcloth and fasting. Reuven was occupied with his sackcloth and fasting. Yaakov was occupied with his sackcloth and fasting. Yehuda was occupied finding a wife.

And God? He was occupied creating the light of the Mashiach."

But the entire story is strange. If God had already decided to bestow this wonderful honor to Yehuda - the Mashiach would come from his descendants! - then why couldn't Yehuda have found a wife in a more respectable manner?

The Matching Gift

The Maggid told the story of a wealthy man who married off his son. The local rabbi sent a congratulatory letter. The letter included a beautiful poem, written in exquisite calligraphy, extolling the virtues of the bride and groom and their respective families.

The letter and the poem were truly wonderful - but it was inscribed on an worn-out piece of scrap paper with uneven edges. The father of the groom was upset when he saw this peculiar gift. However, he decided not to ruin the joy of the moment; he would respond to the slight on a later date.

After the wedding, the wealthy man sent the rabbi a basket of fresh fruits and delicious cakes. But he placed the fruits and cakes inside a grimy bowl, and covered it with a soiled napkin. He found a bedraggled street urchin to deliver the gift.

The rabbi was amazed by this strange gift. When he met the wealthy man a few days later, he asked him, "Why did you do this? Why did you send me such an expensive gift wrapped in rags?"

The wealthy man replied, "I was only repaying you in kind. You also sent me a beautiful gift in an ugly, unattractive vessel."

Yehuda's 'Reward'

The Midrash teaches that Yosef was destined to go down to Egypt in order to fulfill the "profound counsel" of God's covenant with Avraham, the Brit Bein HaBetarim. "They will enslave and persecute them." This was all part of the Divine plan to create the Jewish people.

There were many ways that God could have brought Yosef down to Egypt. Since the brothers hated Yosef and sought to disprove his dreams of grandeur, God let them be the cause for Yosef's descent. The final result of the sale of Yosef - which was Yehuda's idea - was desirable; but the way it was done, with betrayal and lies to their father, was obviously improper and unseemly.

The Midrash teaches that the affair of Tamar was a case of poetic justice, mida k'neged mida. With this incident, God was telling Yehuda:

"You tricked your father with a goat; so too, Tamar will trick you with a goat.

You asked your father, "Do you recognize this?" Tamar will also ask you, "Do you recognize this?"

The ultimate result of Yosef's sale was good; but on the outside it looked ugly and repulsive. God therefore repaid Yehuda in the same coin. He gave Yehuda a wonderful gift, but in a soiled and tattered wrapping. The final result was priceless - preparing the way for King David and the Mashiach - but it came in a disreputable vessel, in a way that suggested prostitution and moral turpitude.

Adapted from Mishlei Yaakov, p. 73-74



Rabbi Ephraim Sprecher

Chanuka: Festival of Education

The Talmud Shabbat 23 states, "One who is careful about Chanuka lights will have children who are Torah scholars." Rashi explains this enigmatic passage referring to the verse in Mishlei 6 which says, "A candle is a Mitzva and the Torah is light." On the basis of this Mitzva of the Chanuka candles, the light of Torah will come. However, Rashi does not explain why. To answer this question, we will ask another. Some of the laws of Chanuka seem strange, for example, even a poor person is required to light the Menora, even if this entails begging from door to door to get money to purchase the oil and wicks.

This is not so for any other Mitzva, where one is not obligated to spend more than 20 percent of one's assets to fulfill the Mitzva. Why is there such a tremendous stress on the lighting of the Chanuka candles? How can it be that the Mitzva of Chanuka, which is only Rabbinic, requires one to spend all his money to observe it? How can it be that by observing this Mitzva we will have worthy and learned children?

To answer these questions, we must face a simple reality - candles burn out. It was a miracle that the oil lasted for a week longer than expected. The Menora of the Beit HaMikdash had to be tended and refueled daily. When the little amount of oil lasted for eight days, it was a miracle. This seems like such an obvious fact, but it often passes us by.

The Mitzva of Chanuka is so precious and important because it reminds us of this elementary fact of life - we must constantly provide fuel if we expect candles to burn. This fact is also true regarding the Light of Torah. Whatever is true in the physical world is certainly true in the spiritual world. Chanuka teaches that in matters of spirituality there is no status quo. If we are not progressing spiritually, we are automatically regressing. This is what Shlomo HaMelech meant in Mishlei, "The candle of G-d is the soul of the human being." Just as a candle needs constant refueling in order to give light, so too the G-dly soul needs the constant light of Torah.

Chanuka is related to the word CHINUCH - education, teaching and dedication. Our existence as a people depends on proper CHINUCH - education and communicating our beliefs, observances, and feelings on a constant and continual basis.

Chanuka reminds us to light the candles and to refuel our soul with Mitzvot. This festival reminds us that we must be involved daily in growing and progressing and spiritually.

Therefore, the Talmud tells us that if we are careful about the Mitzva of Chanuka, our children will be Torah scholars. Perhaps the reason now becomes clear, because our children will understand what the meaning of constant commitment to Torah Judaism is all about. "For a candle is a Mitzva, and the Torah is light." As Rashi explains, on the basis of the Mitzva of Chanuka, the Light of Torah will illuminate all the members of our household. From Chanuka we learn that we need a constant refueling of Torah and Mitzvot. ESP



CHIZUK & IDUD

Divrei Torah from the weekly sedra with a focus on living in Eretz Yisrael

Chizuk for Olim & Idud for not-yet-Olim

by Rabbi Yerachmiel Roness - Ramat Shiloh, Beit Shemesh

Vayeishev

Every year as we read Parshat Vayeishev,  I am wont to repeat a Dvar Torah I heard more than  fifty years ago from my beloved Rebbe at YU, Rabbi Avigdor Cyperstein zt"l. 

Rabbi Cyperstein began with the following story: "A Roman matron once said to Rav Yossi that she could believe the whole Torah as being true, except for one single episode which she felt could not have possibly taken place as reported in the Bible. She was unwilling to accept the story of Yosef and Potifar's wife: "When a beautiful woman sets her eyes on a young man", the matron proceeded, "and attempts to seduce him, it is impossible for him to successfully withstand her womanly wiles." How then is it that Yosef did not succumb? From whence did he draw the immense spiritual and moral resolve needed to emerge intact from his predicament? The Rabbis tell us that indeed Yosef had initially entered the house with the intention to do "his work" with Potifar's wife, and yet at the ultimate moment he beheld his father's image, and this picture provided him with the strength to run away (Rashi 39:11). This Midrash seems to suggest that it was the moral, or ethical, credo which his father had successfully instilled within him, which ultimately saved the day. 

My Rebbe quoted a parallel suggestion found in the Yerushalmi (Horayot 2:5; B'reishit Rabba 98:24), wherein Yosef's actions are attributed not to his having envisioned his father's countenance but rather that of his mother Rachel. What saved the day was not the memory of a philosophical construct or legalistic code; in order to counterbalance the attraction of the physical beauty of Potifar's wife, spiritual beauty was needed. 

Potifar's wife symbolized the sanctification of physical beauty, while Rachel Imeinu personified a competing ideal: Deep appreciation of the beauty inherent in holiness. The Egyptian world, like the Greeks later on, worshiped physical beauty. While Yosef, and later on the Maccabbees, were enchanted by the beauty in the sublime, the allure of the lights of the Menorah. To counteract the fatal attraction of Kedushat HaYofi -the sanctification of physical beauty - Rachel's image reminded Yosef of the charm of "Yofi Shel Kedusha", the beauty of sanctity. 

Yosef's battle, in which Rachel's image serves such an important role, is still being fought today. Can we succeed, as a minority culture within Western society, to overcome the attraction of the values and mores of the majority culture which are at times so averse and antithetical to our own? Yosef had his Mother's and Father's countenance to accompany him, but the alarmingly high rates of intermarriage all over the world, indicate that we are currently losing the battle...

Many visit Kever Rachel in order to pray, to be inspired by her memory and draw strength from her spiritual image, knowing  as we do that Rachel refuses to be comforted for her children (plural), crying that we may yet return home, KI EINENU (for he is not yet here - singular), Yirmiyahu 31:15-17. Rachel does not cry for us as a collective, but rather, like every mother, she weeps over each and every one of her children. Seeing the unique characteristics of each and every one of her children she will not forsake them, hoping that even the most distant will ultimately return home.

The Almighty answers Rachel telling her to: "refrain from weeping and your eyes from tears for your children will come back from the land of the enemy. There is hope for the future, your children shall return to their own border - V'SHAVU VANIM LIGVULAM. 

Rachel is buried "by the way" to enable her to beseech the Almighty on behalf of her children in exile (Rashi on B'reishit 48:7). 

We have to strive to make Rachel's tears, our own. Rachel, the symbol of the Shechina, is with us in Galut.

We can help bring her home by resolving to come home ourselves. 

V'SHAVU VANIM LIGVULAM 



Q&A

Reprinted from Living the Halachic Process by Rabbi Daniel Mann - Eretz Hemdah, with their permission [www.eretzhemdah.org]

Lighting Chanuka Lights on Friday

Question: I am nervous this year, with the second day of Chanuka falling on Shabbat, that my one Chanuka light may go out too early. Is there a halachic solution to this problem?

Answer: Indeed, the Chanuka lights must last quite a while on Friday evening. There is a disagreement regarding whether the mitzva to light usually begins at sh'ki'a or at tzeit hakochavim. Chanuka lights should remain lit half an hour past that point. Since we generally accept Shabbat around 20 minutes before sh'ki'a and Chanuka lights must be lit prior to that time, the lights must last considerably longer than on a weekday.

Generally, if one set up the Chanuka lights with enough fuel to last the required time but  unexpectedly they went out earlier, he does not have to relight them. The question is whether this applies even when lighting them for Shabbat, which has to be done during the day. If the lights go out before Shabbat begins, it might be worse than the situation on an ordinary night, when at least the mitzva of lighting is fulfilled at the correct time. 

The Terumat HaDeshen makes an interesting argument on the matter. Although the purpose of the lighting on Friday is for the lights to burn into the night, the lighting itself is an important part of the mitzva, specifically the hechsher mitzva (the necessary facilitator). He notes that we recite the b'rachot when we light, although it is still not the mitzva's classic time, because it is necessary to carry out the lighting prior to the approach of Shabbat. Thus, however long the lights end up burning, including during the period before Shabbat, is sufficient. 

According to the Terumat HaDeshen, even if it is possible to relight the extinguished candles before Shabbat begins, it is not necessary to do so. (We note that several poskim say that although it is not necessary, it is still worthwhile to relight the lights. This is true even during the week, when the the lighting was performed at the correct time, and certainly before Shabbat.) Certainly, then, you should not feel that you have failed halachically if the lights accidentally go out sometime after Shabbat has begun, when you cannot relight them.

The Taz (673:9) takes issue with the Terumat HaDeshen and requires relighting an extinguished Chanuka candle if one has not yet accepted Shabbat. He agrees with the Terumat HaDeshen's primary thesis - that the mitzva can be actuated before nightfall. However, he says that the fulfillment of the mitzva begins at the last moment that one can light the candles, which is immediately before Shabbat starts, either automatically at the conclusion of Friday or at whatever time one accepts Shabbat earlier. If the candles are still burning at that point, it is equivalent to their burning a little into a regular night of Chanuka, when it would not be necessary to rekindle them. However, according to the Taz, one cannot be credited with the mitzva before Shabbat has actually begun for him. Thus, if the Chanuka candle is extinguished before Shabbat begins, one must light it again. In the case with which you are concerned, in which the flame goes out after your Shabbat has begun, the Taz would agree that you would have fulfilled the mitzva already. 

To minimize your nervousness that your Chanuka lights might not last as long as intended, we suggest you consider the following. First of all, after the first day of Chanuka, it is pretty safe to assume that at least one light will last long enough, and that is sufficient according to the basic halacha, which requires just one light per household. Even on the first night, if more than one adult is lighting, you can instruct everyone to have in mind that if some lights go out prematurely, the remaining one(s) should count as a household Chanuka light. Again, in no way is this required halachically, but it may assuage your worry.

In particular, a practical idea is to use a (long-lasting) wax candle rather than olive oil for this night, as wax is usually more reliable. Another piece of general advice is to do a trial run to see that your wick/oil combinations work well. However, just as importantly, we suggest that you get used to following the normal halachic rules without being more nervous than halacha expects or the Torah desires.



From the Pen of Rabbi Nachman HaKohen Kahana

Vayeishev

The Cyclical Nature of Jewish History 

Part One: 

VALLEY OF DOTAN

Like a motion picture composed of thousands of individual frames passing before the viewer's eyes, life consists of a series of individual time frames amounting to 70 years ("The span of our life is 70 years or with strength 80 years" - T'hilim 90:10). And just as one cannot understand the plot of a movie from a fleeting glance, one cannot decipher HaShem's intent in history from one or two time frames or from a thousand years. 

Our parasha relates that Ya'akov sent the young Yosef to meet with his 11 brothers who were tending sheep in the area of Shechem (northern Shomron), and report back. 

He arrived at Shechem, but the brothers were nowhere to be found. He then met a local (who Rashi says was an angel) who informed him that the brothers were in the valley of Dotan, about 20 kilometers to the north of Shechem, as it says, "Yosef followed his brothers and found them at Dotan" (B'reishit 37:17).

The Torah does not inform us why the brothers left Shechem for the valley of Dotan. This is a meaningful detail in the unfolding saga, as we shall see.

Upon arrival, the brothers removing his many-colored cloak, lowered him into a pit of reptiles, eventually selling Yosef into slavery to a passing caravan destined for Egypt. 

As the saga unfolds, after Ya'akov's death at the end of Parashat Vaychi, when Yosef was already the Viceroy of Egypt, the brothers bowed down to him begging mercy and forgiveness for their past deeds. 

Yosef does not answer the way they expected, he said:

"Do not fear (that I might punish you); am I instead of HaShem!?" (50:19). 

Meaning: you deserve to be punished, but I am not in place of HaShem who will decide what and when you will pay for your actions.

The "Ten Martyrs"

About 1600 years later, the Romans controlled Eretz Yisrael with enormous cruelty, in the manner that characterizes them and many nations since: You may perform the worst atrocities, but just make sure that the law is on your side.

The Pro-Consul of Judea at the time was Quintus Tineius Rufus, also known as the evil Turnus Rufus. This devil sought a way to legally "dispose" of the generation's leading rabbis according to Jewish law in order to prevent mass uprisings if he killed then only according to Roman Law.

The leading rabbi were:

R. Yishmael ben Elisha, R. Shimon ben Gamliel HaZaken (senior), R. Chanina ben Tradion, R. Akiva, R. Yehuda ben Bava, R. Chutzpit HaMeturgaman (the translator), R. Yeshovav HaSofer (the scribe), R. Chanina S'gan HaKohanim, R. Chanina ben Chachai, R. Yehuda ben Dama, and R. Elazar ben Shamua - HASHEM YIKOM DAMAM.

The Roman gleaned the pages of the Torah to find some passage which would "halachically permit" him to murder the rabbinic leaders.

He read the saga of Yosef who was kidnapped by his brothers and sold into slavery. And then saw in the book of Sh'mot 21:16 - Whoever kidnaps (his fellow Jew) and sells him to another, where there are witnesses, shall surely die.

Here was his false license to murder which would be with the consent of the Jewish halacha.

We weep over the fate that befell these great men and the implications it has had for the Jewish People. But HaShem's ways are mysterious, and no one can fathom the thoughts of the Creator whose gaze encompasses all generations from Adam to the last person on earth. 

To jump 2000 years later. The evil Mufti of Yerushalayim, Amin Al-Husseini, spent the years of World War Two in Berlin, with his mentor Hitler. The two entered into an agreement: the Mufti would enroll thousands of Moslems from Bosnia and its related areas into the ranks of the SS. In return, the Germans, after conquering Palestine, would construct a major death camp where the Jews of the Middle East would be sent to their death. 

But in November 1942, General Rommel was defeated at the battle of El Alamein and the murderous plan was averted. 

Now to connect the lines between the historical dots.

The site that Hitler and the Mufti earmarked for the death camp of the over one million Middle East Jews was the very same Valley of Dotan where the brothers sold Yosef.

However, the quality of severe justice was subverted by the death of the ten martyred rabbis centuries before and the Germans did not enter the Holy Land.

We wept for 2000 years over the death of the ten martyred rabbis and it was the proper thing to do, for we could not know that with their death the lives of countless Jews 2000 years later would be saved.

The lesson to be learned from this:

The constraints of understanding and foreseeing the future are a part of being human. But we Jews know that whatever happens in human events is under the full control of the Almighty Creator and is for the attainment of the  ultimate goal for which we were created.

The horrific murder of the ten martyred rabbis 2000 years ago, turned out to be the event that annulled the plans in our time to build "Auschwitz Two" in the Valley of Dotan. Perhaps the horrific Sho'ah that gave rise to the establishment of Medinat Yisrael will one day prove to be the factor that saved the Jews in galut who will find refuge and salvation in Eretz Yisrael. 

PART TWO

Our parasha begins with Ya'akov reaching "retirement age", after surviving extended periods of self-sacrifice and imminent danger to his and his family's lives. He is now well over 100 years old, having brought into the world the sons from whom would descend the 12 tribes of the future Am Yisrael, and has returned to reclaim possession of Eretz Yisrael for the Jewish nation. 

Rashi quotes the Midrash that HaShem was "unhappy" with Ya'akov's choice of retirement. "Is it not sufficient for a tzaddik to have his reward of pleasure in the eternal next world, that he wishes to be rewarded also in this world?", declared HaShem, and brought about in Ya'akov's waning years the trials and tribulation regarding  his beloved son Yosef. 

Now in the middle of our war against the Nazi-Hamas barbarians, we should ask ourselves how did this group of Moslem fanatics turn into a fighting machine of 20,000 men with an additional 15,000 belonging to the other terrorist group, the Islamic Jahadists?

I submit that it was a repeat of Ya'akov (the Jews in Eretz Yisrael) wanting to retire into a life of comfort.

For years we were aware of their military activities and build up, but we gave them "protection" money, cement, and everything else in return for comfortable and good lives with our stock market and high-tech advances. Life was great, with millions of Israelis taking off from Ben Gurion Airport to enjoy the wonders of the goishe world.

Until HaShem said "Enough!" and our lives turned over on Shmini Atzeret 5784.

HaShem didn't permit Ya'akov to live the lazy life to go fishing or to lounge on a hammock tied to two trees. 

Our mission in this world is to be the universal revolutionaries; the conscience of mankind, to pin-point evil and act to eradicate its existence in the name of HaShem. HaShem will return us to this holy mission, even against our will, as stated in Yechezkel 20:32-33 - But what you have in mind will never happen. You say, We want to be like the nations, like the peoples of the world, who serve wood (the wooden cross - Christianity) and stone (Islam).

As surely as I am, declares the Sovereign Lord, I will reign over you with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm and with outpoured wrath. 

I will bring you from the nations and gather you from the countries where you have been with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm and with outpoured wrath...

I will take note of you as you pass under my rod, and I will bring you into the bond of the covenant.



OzTORAH - Rabbi Raymond Apple

DREAMS & DREAMERS

The story in this week's Torah reading (B'reishit 37:5-9) is largely about dreams.

Yosef has dreams about leadership and status. The brothers recognise Yosef's authority and pay homage to him. The dream actually came true when Yosef was a high official in Egypt and his brothers gave him obeisance.

Go to next week's reading and we find this time that it is Pharaoh who is the dreamer. His dreams are about cows and corn.

The difference between Yosef and Pharaoh is in the theme of their respective dreams. Yosef's dreams are about where a person fits in the order of the universe.

What Pharaoh dreams about is not the world, about the structure of society and indeed about how God wants things to be, but about what he will eat and what he will possess.

SIMILAR VERBS

The Bible has similar verbs for sit/dwell (YASHAV) and turn/return (SHUV).

At the beginning of this week's Torah reading the verb YUD-SHIN-VET denotes to dwell, but when we come to the Psalms the two options are both there and the commentators sometimes get confused.

Take for example the beginning of Psalm 126, the famous SHIR HAMA'ALOT. It says B'SHUV HASHEM, which denotes "When the Lord overturned the exile of Zion"… and look at Psalm 23:6, V'SHAVTI B'VEIT HASHEM ("I shall dwell in the House of the Lord"). Some choose to translate this latter phrase "I shall turn to the House of the Lord".

The likelihood is that the apparent ambivalence is deliberate and the poet is well aware of what he is doing.

THE PIT WAS EMPTY

One of the problems we find in the wording of the sidra is the verse which says that Yosef was thrown into a pit.

The verse reads, "The pit was empty - there was no water in it" (37:24). If there was no water in a pit, the pit was obviously empty. But wait. If there was no water there could be something else, and that is what the commentators tell us: The Talmud Shabbat 22a says, "There was no water there but there were serpents and scorpions".

It recalls the detective story about Father Brown. The story says, "No-one was there." In the ordinary course of events the regular things were happening. The postman would come, the gas man, the street sweeper. Because we are used to their presence we don't notice them and we think no-one was there.

In the end we discover that emptiness is only relative. OZ



THE MIRACLE OF CHANUKA

Chanuka is colourful, exciting and popular, ranking with Purim in carnival spirit. Every type of talent is part of the festival: art, music, drama, cookery. The games are absorbing.

The songs centre on Ma'oz Tzur, with the debate as to whether the final stanza is authentic. There are many attempts to modernise the song with a new verse about the Holocaust and Israel.

The lights are lit, with the proponents of oil-lights ranged against those who prefer candles. The chanukiyot come in a plethora of shapes. Some are elegant works of art; in the Bayswater Synagogue in London we had a dazzling display ranging from a chanukiya carved out of a potato, another made of bullet shells, a third built out of toy chairs. In the Hampstead Shule, our grand chanukiya was pressed into service one winter when we had an electricity blackout and the shule had no lights.

It wouldn't do for a yom-tov to be without heroes and villains. There also must be miracles, but which miracles?

The Talmud asks in tractate Shabbat, "What is Chanuka" (i.e. what is its main essence?) There are different approaches in tractates Yoma and Shabbat. Yoma gives a nationalistic answer, highlighting the conclusion of the brilliant military campaign led by Yehuda the Maccabee against the Syrian Greeks.

Tractate Shabbat gives a spiritual, not a nationalistic explanation: "When the Hasmoneans became strong and overcame the enemy, they searched and could only find one flask of oil with the seal of the Kohen Gadol. It only contained enough oil for one day. A miracle occurred, and they lit the Menorah with it for eight days."

If the miracle was spiritual, why did the oil keep burning for eight days? These are some of the theories:

- Getting a fresh supply of oil took four days' journey from Jerusalem, plus four days to return.

- The experts able to produce fresh oil had become ritually impure and had to wait for the defilement to end. They could then prepare the fresh oil on the eighth day.

- Seven days were needed to rebuild the altar and the sacred vessels of the sanctuary. Only then could the seventh day be devoted to preparing fresh oil.

- There were actually two miracles. One is the discovery of the one-day supply of oil; the second is the continuation of the day's supply for a further week.

Rav Soloveitchik sees the festival as serving another purpose, the rededication of the Altar.

If the main thing is the miracle of the oil, why do the Torah readings mark the dedication of the Altar by the tribal princes? If the main thing is the oil for the Menorah, we would read about the construction of the Menorah. The texts imply that the oil-miracle was merely a stage in the rededication.

Rav Soloveitchik's approach, like the story of the flask of oil, exemplifies the rabbinic insistence that there was a battle for the soul of the Jew. When challenges arise, what should a Jew think and feel, how does a Jew express Jewish identity?

The Jewish spiritual and cultural tradition must be preserved. If we focus on battles and not blessings, on fighting and not faith, a crucial dimension is missing. OZ



Sedra Highlight - Dr Jacob Solomon

Vayeishev

It was that day: Yosef came to the house to do his work… (39:11)

The passage relates the captive Yosef's rise out of slavery to a position of trust and responsibility. Potifar, the grand vizier of Par'o, had promoted him to general manager of his estate. His wife, however, had plans of a more personal nature; namely in scheming seduction. But Yosef refused, declaring that it would be an abuse of Potifar's trust, and, further, 'How can I do such a great evil and sin against G-d'? (33:9). That Egyptian lady did not take 'no for an answer'; she seized her opportunity when 'it was that day: Yosef came to the house to do his work, and nobody else was at home' (39:11).

Rashi brings the opinion cited in the Talmud that 'his work' did not mean his routine work, but that Yosef wished to indeed sleep with the temptress. That was 'his work'. But at the last moment, 'he saw the image of his father Ya'akov', and he said no.

What was it about specifically his father's image that made him change his mind at the last minute? Didn't he fear that G-d was actually watching at the time? Indeed, earlier on he rejected her by proudly proclaiming the Name of G-d: 'How can I do such a great evil and sin against G-d'? Why was the turning point his father, and not the Almighty?

Rashi (to 39:1), quoting B'reishit Rabba, brings a tradition that Potifar's wife's attempt to seduce Yosef came from higher rather than entirely base motives. For her astrological perceptions (which she could well have shared with Yosef) indicated that in the future, Yosef's descendants be would connected with her, though it was unclear whether they would issue from her or from her daughter. (Yosef in due course would marry her daughter, 41:45, see Rashi).

And yet, when the time came round, Yosef said "No!" That was both despite and because of the image of his father. Despite - for indeed, his father had also followed a practice explicitly forbidden from Matan Torah onwards: he had married two sisters. And because - Yosef also knew his father, he had not made that decision lightly. He perceived that it was his father's deeper spiritual awareness of his position in the Creation that prompted him to take that step. As Ya'akov's disciple (37:3), he knew something of his deep spiritual perception: it was not a self-serving device, but for the spiritual advancement of Creation. And it was that deep spiritual awareness that his father's image represented that told Yosef that in this instance, it was "No!" "No" was "No". And he listened, and he obeyed.

This conveys a very important message when deciding whether or not to proceed. Sometimes, even when we can intellectualize and justify an action or a decision, we hear a voice screaming "No. Don't do it!" It is our work to pay attention to that voice, judge from where it is coming, and what precisely is prompting it… 



Menachem Persoff - menpmp@gmail.com



Our Parsha describes Yosef's journey to seek out his brothers at the bequest of his father Yaakov. Altogether a puzzle because Yosef's brothers hated him; because Yaakov clearly knew that he was sending his favorite son into a hornet's nest - towards Shechem of renowned infamy, towards Dotan meaning "trouble"; and because Yaakov could have sent his servants to check on his sons...

So what is really happening? In reality, Hashem has a plan, anchored in Brit Bein HaBetarim - a covenant indicating that Avraham's descendants would go into exile (where they would be refined like metal and purified to become G-d's Chosen People).

Consider the possibility that Yaakov's Ru'ach HaKodesh propelled these events. And that the brother's jealousy of Yosef facilitated the saga. And that the hand of Hashem intervened when Yosef "happened" upon a "man" to guide him after losing his way.

Yes, the world works in mysterious ways. Most surely, however, there is an interaction between our daily actions (anchored in free will) and Hashgacha, (the guiding hand of G-d), towards the fulfillment of the ongoing Divine plan. MP



The Daily Portion - Sivan Rahav Meir

Bar Mitzva at 49

Translation by Yehoshua Siskin

"Shalom Sivan,

We have already seen weddings happening during this war but the Bar Mitzva of a 49-year-old we have yet to see.

We are in a paratrooper unit that has been serving on the northern border for two months. The machine gunner in our platoon, whose name is Robert, informed us that he never celebrated a Bar Mitzva because he was born in the Soviet Union where observing Judaism was prohibited.

In heart-to-heart conversations, he asked many questions about Judaism and Tefillin, and so we decided to celebrate his Bar Mitzva despite the war. We set the date for his birthday and everyone who could be there to share in his joy arrived for the occasion.

The Tikvat Olam organization donated an elegant pair of Tefillin and a Tallit so that today, Monday, the 21st of Kislev, Robert put on his new pair of Tefillin and was called up to the Torah, coming full circle on his 49th birthday.

Let's hope that all of us can live up to this verse regarding Tefillin:

'Then all the peoples of the earth will see that the name of the Lord is called upon you, and they will fear you' (D'varim 28:10).

Mazal tov, dear Robert, 

Asaf Maki and all your fellow soldiers."

To receive Sivan Rahav-Meir's daily WhatsApp: tiny.cc/DailyPortion



Dvar Torah by Rabbi Chanoch Yeres

to his community at Beit Knesset Beit Yisrael, Yemin Moshe

Graciously shared with PhiloTorah



Vayeishev-Chanuka 


Jews from all walks of life can recount the miracles of Chanuka, even more, perhaps. than the Biblical Holidays of the year. Rambam (Chanuka 3:1-3) offers an elaborate account of Chanuka. The Greeks, attempting to subvert Jewish life and coerce assimilation into Greek culture, ransack the Temple and deprive the Jewish people from practicing Mitzvot. After retaking control of the Temple, only one unopened and sealed flask of oil is found. Enough oil in this flask to light for one night yet lasted eight nights. Hence, the celebration of Chanuka. What is troubling about the miracle of Chanuka is that if we examine the Jewish Law, this miracle was not necessary. The Talmud (Pesachim 66b) states TUM'A B'TZIBUR HUTRA - "Spiritual impurity is permitted when it concerns the whole community who are unclean." The Hasmoneans would have well been within bounds of Halacha to light the Menorah with any oil that would found. What then is the significance of the miracle of Chanuka?

Rabbi A. Miller points out that the true miracle of Chanuka lies in the perseverance of the Jewish people to stand strong against any adversaries to adherence to our Jewish values. It is certainly correct that any oil could have been kindled in the Menorah by the Hasmoneans, but what a mistake that would be for the masses of Jews who had all but given up hope for a brighter Jewish future. When the story of Chanuka occurred, Jewish morale was at an all time low. Jewish life was ravaged. In fact, the majority of Jews were assimilated into Greek culture. Shabbat observance and Brit Mila were waning. In this context, the initial kindling of the Menorah in the Temple symbolized Jewish renewal. To get oil from anything less than the "best" would seriously undermine the intent of a Chanukat HaBayit and Jewish renaissance of the special eternal connection between G-d and the Jewish people. Perhaps, this is also the reason why Parshat Vayeishev is read around the time of Chanuka. After being sold down to Egypt, the protagonist Yosef was bombarded with all the entrapments of the then civilized world, including its moral depravity and lack of regard for the spirit. It would have been very easy for an embittered Yosef, to forget or at least want to forget about the ways of his father and grandfather. Instead, Yosef was constantly aware of the special heritage he represented to the outside world. He did not compromise his ideals. Under each set of hostile and unfavorable circumstances, Yosef would have been more than justified in hiding his belief in G-d, but instead made a deliberate and unswerving decision to sanctify G-d's name. Therefore, in the metaphysical sense, the Hasmonean's struggle for the purest of oils is that we, while being bombarded by outside cultures and voiced objections against us, it is imperative not to compromise our own Jewish values in the process.  



The Weekly 'Hi All' by Rabbi Jeff Bienenfeld

Vayeishev-Chanuka 5783

The Mission of the Tzadik

On the opening verse in the Parsha (37:1), Rashi quotes the Midrash: "Yaakov sought to dwell in tranquility [but then] the ordeal of Yosef sprung upon him. The tzadik seeks to dwell peaceably, but the Holy One Blessed Be He says, 'Is it not enough for the tzadik that which is prepared for him in the World to Come, and yet he seeks to dwell serenely in this world [as well]!'" In light of this Chazal, how are we to understand the mission of a tzadik in this world?

A tzadik is not necessarily one who lives a perfectly blameless ethical and religious life. To the contrary, "For there is no man so wholly righteous on earth who always does good and never sins" (Kohelet 7:20). As such, many decent people would qualify for this laudable designation. What the Midrash, however, is adding is this apodictic truth: that the life of the tzadik will constantly be confronted with increasing challenges and trials. The Almighty apparently needs the righteous ones of the world to each contribute their unique talents towards the realization of His ultimate eschatological vision for humanity. And so, there is no rest for the tzadik; he/she is never permitted to retire from the "work" of life. As soon as one task is accomplished, another challenge quickly erupts to unsettle the tranquility of the righteous. Often, there are setbacks, failures and defeats: yisurim/sufferings, as Rav Soloveitchik often defined these frustrations. But this too is part of the interminable struggle that is fated for the tzadik.

But lest view the mission of the tzadik as tragic and simply unfair, we are reminded of Yaakov's wrestling with his nemesis, the archenemy who seeks to thwart Yaakov from fulfilling his destiny (B'reishit 32:25-30). The Rav reminds us (Chumash Mesoras HaRav, B'reishit pp. 243-248) that in that bitter encounter, Yaakov, even while wounded, comes out victorious - he was blessed! His new name, Yisrael, attests to the portentous but promising truth that all the "yisurim" - all the obstacles, all the disappointments and struggles - are often the necessary means to fulfill the great mission.

The Talmud tells us (Arachin 16b-17a) that even our illustrious Forefathers "would not have been able to stand in the face of Gd's strict justice." And further, that "Whoever goes for 40 days without yisurim has received his world", that is, he is finished here in this world. The message should be quite clear. That we - the humbled, flawed tzadikim of this world - are nevertheless tapped by the Almighty to do and accomplish. And in that Divine mandate, we realize in the very depth of our being that HaShem values our existence - that in the grand scheme of thing, we matter! Thus, no matter the hardships and pain, no matter the difficulties, the plain fact that we have been chosen for something worthwhile - no matter it's size or prominence - is the greatest blessing and compliment of all.

The Rav once put it this way: "The struggle is the sanctification!" Indeed, there was to be no rest for Yaakov, but by virtue of that turbulent life, we are here. Let us then commit that "putting our feet up" is not an option, and that until our "120", we will embrace the great mission which is ours, bequeath its successes to the future of our people and thus - like Yisrael - be worthy of an everlasting blessing.

The Sufgania-Doughnut

R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichos Shlomo, Chanuka p. 319) offers an interesting suggestion for the custom to eat doughnuts on Chanuka. The Talmud (Avoda Zara 52b) states that the Chashmona’im were able to restore and rededicate every part of the Beit HaMikdash with the exception of the Mizbei'ach, the Altar. As we are told in Sefer HaMaccabim, they were forced to bury the stones of the ritually contaminated Mizbei'ach and build anew. By eating a doughnut then, we are given a special opportunity to pray for the rebuilding of the Mizbei'ach. How so? After we eat doughnuts (or other foods from the five grains that do not constitute bread), we recite the Al HaMichya blessing. In the bracha of Al HaMichya, we specifically pray for the restoration of the Mizbei'ach when we say "Have compassion, Lord, our Gd, on Israel Your people… V'AL MIZB'CHECHA, on Your Altar and Your Temple..."  Although Al HaMichya is a shortened version of Birkat HaMazon, this particular phrase only appears in Al HaMichya and not in the full benching. Therefore, a custom developed to eat doughnuts and have additional opportunities to pray for the rededication of the Mizbei'ach. 

This answer, of course, only begs the question as to why - other than its historical value - should we be remembering the rededication of the Altar on Chanuka. Rama (O. C. 670:2) suggests that although on Chanuka, having a seuda (special meal) is completely optional, the justification for so doing might be the mitzva to commemorate this Altar rededication. How though are we to understand why this CHANUKAT HAMIZBEI'ACH should be so significant?

R. Yoel Sirkis (Poland, 16-17th c.), the Bach, offers this explanation (ad loc, s.v. V'HAYA). The Jews, surrendering to the allures of a decadent Hellenistic culture, had forsaken the Temple service. The Mizbei'ach had for all intents and purposes been abandoned. In essence, this disregard of the Avoda signified much more than simply a weakening of ritual observance. It underscored how seriously the Jews had deserting their sacred faith in favor of the regnant Greek hedonistic ethos. The fact is that Mattityahu and his stalwart sons spearheaded only a small minority of Jews who chose to remain steadfast in their ancestral traditions and were willing to fight to the death in order to preserve them. When they were victorious and set about cleansing the Temple of its idolatries and restoring the Avoda - the Mizbei'ach, this act of supreme mesirat nefesh, of great courage, reignited the religious commitment of the people and ensure its spiritual continuity.

And so, let us have a Chanuka meal and enjoy some sufganiot, and in that merriment, remember to hold fast to our Torah traditions and not succumb to a secular ethos, and then give thanks to the Almighty that "He has kept us alive… (SHE-HE-CHE-YANU)" so that we may do our share to guarantee its perpetuation. 



Afterthoughts - Yocheved Bienenfeld

SH'MA YISRAEL HASHEM ELOKEINU...

One understanding of these words, as explained in the Zohar, that we - especially as Jews - need to understand is that HaShem, as He is known to be in the 4-letter spelling of His name (Y-H-V-H) - the Merciful One, is also ELOKEINU, that Gd of strict justice - MIDAT HADIN. Nevertheless, these two traits co-exist in the One Being, HASHEM ECHAD. This idea is given expression in many places in the siddur, not the least of which is this phrase used countless times in every bracha: BARUCH ATA HASHEM ELOKEINU… Perhaps, it is possible to follow this theme even further as the Sh'ma continues:

BARUCH SHEM K'VOD MALCHUTO L'OLAM VA'ED - may His name be blessed eternally - even in those times when He expresses Himself as ELOKIM, times when we are not inclined to feel like praising Him. Nonetheless, we recognize that this, too, is part of His essence and we are obligated to be M'VOREICH AL HARA as well (Orach Chayim 222:3).

V'AHAVTA EIT HASHEM… B'CHOL L'VAV'CHA UVCHOL NAFSH'CHA UVCHOL M'ODECHA  - our love for Gd must be expressed in all these ways. And although these words are written in the singular as a mandate to each and every individual, it is part of the exclamation "Sh'ma YISRAEL" an address to us as a nation as well. In that context, could this reminder to us about loving Gd be a national charge that holds true under different circumstances and times? That this love is for both Gd Who is merciful, as well as Who is Elokeinu, the judge.

B'CHOL L'VAV'CHA - even these words express the same idea with the dual nature of the heart: serving Gd wholly - the Gd (Y-H-V-H) Who is merciful as well as when He is the judge.

UVCHOL M'ODECHA - we know that one of the understandings of this is B'CHOL MIDA UMIDA SHEHU MODED L'CHA - that this love includes even the times when what Gd metes out to us is not what we would consider very desirable or comfortable.

V'HAYU HAD'VORIM HA'ELEH - these words, this idea that Gd is the same Being who is merciful as well as One Who delivers justice and punishment, needs to accompany us as well as our descendants - V'SHINANTAM L'VANECHA V'DIBARTA BAM at all times: B'SHIVTECHA B'VEITECHA - when we are dwelling in our Homeland, in Israel; UVLECHT'CHA VADERECH - and even in the times when we are in galut; and B'SHOCHB'CHA - when the Jewish people appear to be dead, Gd forbid, and certainly UVKUMECHA - when we are reborn and are recreated in our homeland again.

UKSHARTAM L'OT AL YADECHA - this idea of the unity yet dichotomous nature of Gd must guide our actions even as a nation; V'HAYU L'TOTAFOT BEIN EINECHA - and serve to direct our eyes toward the proper goal. As in Amos (7:16) where the word TATIF (related to TOTAFOT?) is defined by Rashi as 'a language of prophecy', there is a hint of prophecy, a proper reading of the future, when we can direct our eyes and thoughts in the direction Gd would want.

I wonder if TOTAFOT is somehow related to TAF - our children. If so, it might imply that HAD'VORIM HA'ELU' - these matters, this philosophy, should mean as much to us as our children (TOTAFOT) are in our eyes. [A little far-fetched, but…]

UCH-TAVTAM AL M'ZUZOT BEITECHA UVISH-ARECHA - And this force will invariably inscribe this lesson in how we live in our individual homes as well as in the cities of our Land.

We don't need to be reminded, as a nation, that there are times when our faith and trust in Gd are tested. We have been miraculously reborn in the Land promised our forefathers, a dream none would have ever thought could be realized; and yet, we struggle every day for our right to exist, to live safely, to protect ourselves against a reality that seems inhuman. Even now or, actually, especially now, we need to remind ourselves that the Gd Who brought us back here, will fight our fight and protect us and get us through these times not only as a Merciful Father, but even as a Judge, because we deserve it: HaShem is BA'AL MILCHAMOT - HE is the one running the war - ZOREI'A TZ'DAKOT - He 'plants' the TZ'DAKOT, the good deeds we are doing, especially at this time - and that is MATZMI'ACH Y'SHU'OT - it causes salvation to sprout. Yes, even according to 'justice', we deserve it. 



Insights into Halacha - Rabbi Yehuda Spitz

Ohr Somayach (yspitz@ohr.edu)

A Bochur's Perennial Predicament

Applies to one-year students, too.

Some footnotes are included in the article; most are not. See website for full footnotes and sources.

One fascinating issue that affects many thousands annually is the quite contemporary question: Where is the proper place for a Yeshiva Bochur to light his Chanukiya? Since the phenomenon of having a yeshiva where students not only eat but also dorm is relatively recent, there is not much early Rabbinic or halachic literature on this exact topic. Bochurim are not really guests, and might be getting their spending money from their parents - who are usually paying their tuition; yet, many do not live at home. So, they do not seem to fit into any clear-cut category. What is a striving student to do?

A 'Fiery' Debate

Contemporary authorities use precedents as clues to ascertain the proper solution for the Bochur Dilemma. One relevant debate is that of where a guest who generally eats at another's house but "comes home to roost" is supposed to light his Chanuka candles. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 677:2), quoting the Tur and Rosh (See Gemara Shabbat 23a, passage about Rav Sheishet), states that a guest (Achsanoi) is required to light his own Chanukiya, or at least contribute to the host's Chanuka candle expenses. However, if this guest, even a son who's hanging out at his parents' place, has his own apartment (that opens to a public thoroughfare) where he sleeps, then he must light his Chanukiya there.

The reason is because of CHASHAD, suspicion. Since passersby know that our Achsanoi has his own pad, and will notice whether or not there was a lit Chanukiya there, they will suspect that he did not light one at all, not realizing that he eats his meals out and possibly would have kindled where he ate. Accordingly, it would seem that the place where one sleeps is considered his key "dwelling place".

However, the Rema (ad loc.), citing the Rashba (Shu"t HaRashba vol. 1, 542),

See the Taz's (Orach Chayim 677:2) explanation of the Rashba's intent. Although others argue that this was not necessarily the Rashba's true intent, nonetheless, in the words of the Pri HaSadeh (Shu"t vol. 2, 70) "we need to pasken like the Rashba, according to the Taz's understanding".

asserts that one should light his Chanukiya in the place where he eats. He explains that "nowadays" since we light indoors, the 'Pirsumei Nisa' engendered by kindling the Chanuka lights, is no longer actually meant for random passersby, but rather for the people living in the house. If so, there is no reason to be worried about CHASHAD, as his family and friends would know that he eats in one place and sleeps in another. Therefore, he rules that such an Achsanoi would light his Chanukiya where he eats, and not where he sleeps.

Many great authorities, including the Bach, Magen Avraham, Taz, Pri Chadash, Pri Megadim, Chayei Adam, Aruch Hashulchan, and Mishna Berura, [The Rema, as well as several others, maintain that in their times, even the Rosh would agree to the Rashba's ruling] all agree with the Rema, that a guest who eats in one place yet sleeps in another, should light his Chanukiya where he eats. The Taz adds proof to this from the halachot of Eruvei Chatzeirot, where we find that the main dwelling place of one who sleeps in one location but eats in another, is considered where he eats. [See Gemara Eruvin (72b - 74b) and Shulchan Aruch and main commentaries (Orach Chayim 370, 5)]

Accordingly, it would seem that a Yeshiva Bochur might fit into this category, as he (hopefully) eats in a different location than where he sleeps. So where should he light? The Yeshiva's dining room or in his dira / dorm room?

Dira Daze

Several authorities, including the Chazon Ish, Rav Aharon Kotler, the Steipler Gaon, Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky, mv"r Rav Yaakov Blau, and Rav Asher Weiss, maintain that the Rema's ruling still holds true and rule that the proper place for a Bochur to light the Chanukiya is the Yeshiva's dining room.

However, many other contemporary decisors question the application of the halacha of a guest pertaining to the average Bochur, due to several reasons, including:

A Bochur's "dwelling place", where he feels "at home" and considers his own personal place, storing all of his belongings, etc. is in his dira / dorm room, and not in the yeshiva's communal dining room.

Students have no personal stake in the dining room; they eat and leave, similar to a restaurant. Therefore, many consider it a stretch to consider a dining room as a Bochur's "prime dwelling place".

Many Yeshiva dining rooms are locked throughout the day and only open mealtimes. How can it possibly be considered someone's personal place if he is denied entry most of the time?

It is possible that a Yeshiva Bochur's din is more comparable to the case of the shepherd (or talmid) that lives in the field yet eats at someone's house, that for him, regarding the halachot of Eruvei T'chumin, the T'chum follows the place where he sleeps, and not where he eats.

For those living in Eretz Yisrael, nowadays most people do light the Chanuka licht outdoors, potentially making the Rosh's shita once again the core ruling. Ergo, CHASHAD might once again be a problem. Therefore, one living in Eretz Yisrael should need to light where he sleeps.

It is well known that Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt"l maintained this very strongly, that nowadays in Eretz Yisrael, with no problems regarding lighting outdoors, one must do so. Consequently, Chashad becomes a problem again and therefore one must light where he sleeps. Recently, a talmid of Rav Elyashiv's ruled for a visiting relative in Eretz Yisrael who was eating out over Shabbat Chanuka, that although the ikar place for lighting Shabbat candles is where one eats [see Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 263:9), Shulchan Aruch HaRav (ad loc. 1), Chayei Adam (vol. 2, 5, 14), Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (75, 8), Aruch Hashulchan (ad loc. 3 & 4), and Mishna Berura (ad loc. 40 & 41)], nevertheless, one must first light the Chanukiya where he was sleeping.

Due to these concerns, many contemporary decisors, including Rav Moshe Feinstein, the Minchas Yitzchak, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, Rav Shmuel HaLevi Wosner, Rav Moshe Sternbuch, Rav Binyomin Zilber, Rav Yisrael Yaakov Fischer, Rav Nosson Gestetner, Rav Menashe Klein, the Rivevos Efrayim, and the Nitei Gavriel, all rule that the main dwelling of a Bochur is his dira / dorm room, and that that is the preferred place where he should light his Chanukiya. Yet, several of these Poskim assert that in order not to come into a halachic dispute and to better satisfy all opinions, that it is preferable that the Bochurim should eat at least one meal a day in their dorm room. Others advocate contributing to someone lighting in the dining room's Chanuka candle expenses, or lighting again there without a b'racha.

One source adds that it should not help if one changes his usual eating place just for Chanuka, as the halacha should follow his usual year-round routine as that would be one's IKAR K'VIYAT DIRA

Safety First

Yet, it must be stressed that many of these Poskim qualify their ruling, explaining that if the hanhala of the Yeshiva forbids lighting Menoras in the dorm due to the ever possible threat of fire, R"L, and instead orders the Bochurim to light in the dining room, then that is indeed what they must do. Most Yeshivot, especially in Chutz La'aretz, practically follow this minhag, and lighting in the dining room is de rigueur.

Sefardic Illumination

Sefardic Bochurim have a bit of a different issue. Sefardim predominantly follow the Shulchan Aruch's ruling of only the head of the household, functioning as an agent of sorts, lighting one Chanukiya for the entire family. Poskim are divided as to whether these Sefardic Bochurim who eat and sleep in Yeshiva are considered part of their father's household or not.

Many contemporary authorities, including Rav Ovadiah Yosef, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul, the Tefilla L'Moshe, Rav Ezra Attiah, and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, rule that a Sefardic Bochur may not light in his Yeshiva at all, as he is exempted by his father lighting at home.

Interestingly, Rav Ovadia Yosef (Chazon Ovadia on Hilchot Chanuka pg. 150-151; also cited in Yalkut Yosef on Moadim pg. 231, 2) and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo ibid. footnote 22; however, he prefers that the Sefardi Bochur join into someone else's lighting) maintain that even if a Sefardi Bochur is in a different country and time zone than his parents (ex. an American Sefardi boy learning in Eretz Yisrael), he nevertheless should still not light his own Menorah, as he is still considered part of their household, since the father is still sending him allowance, paying his tuition and expenses etc. However, most other poskim (including Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu) do not agree, and in this instance maintain that the Bochur is required to light his own Menorah. See sefer Toras HaYeshiva (Ch. 12) at length.

However, others Sefardic decisors, including the Yaskil Avdi, Rav Shalom Mashash, and Rav Yehuda Adess, maintain that a Bochur living in Yeshiva is deemed 'his own man' and therefore even a Sefardic Bochur would be required to light his own Menorah, or join in with someone else lighting (preferably an Ashkenazic Bochur) in his Yeshiva.

Accordingly, all the Sefardim can get together and light one Menorah. Alternatively, the Sefardi Bochur might fulfill his obligation by the Menorah lighting in the Beis HaMidrash (see Shu"t Yechaveh Daas ibid.).

This is also how many Ashkenazic poskim ruled for Sefardim, including the Chazon Ish, Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, the Az Nidberu, and the Shevet Halevi. Rav Wosner adds that it is nevertheless preferable that these Sefardic Bochurim should have kavanna specifically to not be yotzei with their fathers' lighting.

Every Bochur should ascertain from his Rav or Rosh Yeshiva which opinion the Yeshiva follows before Chanuka, to mitigate any potential halachic mix-ups.

The Gemara teaches, and is later codified in halacha, that someone who is scrupulous with kindling Ner Shabbat and Ner Chanuka will merit having sons who are Talmidei Chachamim. Therefore, it certainly seems worthwhile and apropos that our budding Talmidei Chachamim should be meticulous in making sure that their lighting of the Chanukiya is truly MEHADRIN MIN HAMEHADRIN.

See website for footnotes and sources.

For any questions, comments or for the full Mareh Mekomot / sources, please email the author: yspitz@ohr.edu

Rabbi Yehuda Spitz serves as the Sho'el U'Meishiv and Rosh Chavura of the Ohr Lagolah Halacha Kollel at Yeshivas Ohr Somayach in Yerushalayim. He also currently writes a contemporary halacha column for the Ohr Somayach website titled "Insights Into Halacha". ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/

Disclaimer: This is not a comprehensive guide, rather a brief summary to raise awareness of the issues. In any real case one should ask a competent Halachic authority.

Rabbi Yehuda Spitz's English halacha sefer, "Food: A Halachic Analysis" (Mosaica/ Feldheim) containing over 500 pages featuring over 30 comprehensive chapters discussing the myriad halachic issues pertaining to food, is now available online and in bookstores everywhere."



VAYEISHEV See the whole GMS file for more Vayeishev GMs

GM What led to Yosef's descent into Mitzrayim, which resulted in Yaakov and family going down to Mitzrayim, which led to the enslavement and oppression of Bnei Yisrael in Mitzrayim? Not just this, but a significant contributory factor was the K'TONET PASSIM that Yaakov gave Yosef, which fanned the jealousy and hatred of the brothers against Yosef. B'reishit 37:3 from the beginning of Parshat Vayeishev - 

And Yisrael loved Yosef more than all his sons, because he was a son of his old age; and he made him a fine woolen coat.

The Gimatriya of this pasuk is 3084. Our searches found a significant match to the AT-BASH Gimatriya of the pasuk in Vayeishev. Its AT-BASH Gimatriya is 3925. The regular gimatriya of D'varim 26:7 in Parshat Ki Tavo is 3925 - 

So we cried out to HaShem, God of our fathers, and HaShem heard our voice and saw our affliction, our toil, and our oppression.

This is sort of a Bookend type of Gimatriya Match.



RED ALERT!

Vayeishev-Chanuka

by Rabbi Eddie Davis (RED) of the Young Israel of Hollywood - Ft. Lauderdale (Florida)

DIVREI TORAH

<> When Yaakov concluded that Yosef was dead, he cried over his loss (B'reishit 37:35). The Midrash commented over the verse and quoted Yaakov as saying, "Woe unto me for I married two sisters." What connection is there between these two events: marrying two sisters and the death of Yosef? The Midrash is relating a comment on the existing question: we say that the Patriarchs observed all the Mitzvot of the Torah, even before the Torah was given. If so, how could Yaakov marry two sisters, a clear violation? The basis of this Halacha is that marrying two sisters would create jealousy and hatred in the family, between the two sisters! But Yaakov reasoned that since Leah and Rachel loved each other so much, this won't be the case. And it wasn't. But with the children, it happened. The sons of Leah hated the son of Rachel. So now it is logical for Yaakov to say… Woe unto me because I married two sisters.

 <> One time a student asked Rav Soloveitchik the following: If Mikeitz is always Shabbat Chanuka, why is there a Haftora listed for Shabbat Mikeitz? We never read it! The Rav quickly corrected him. Mikeitz is not always Shabbat Chanuka. Like this year. Shabbat Chanuka is Vayeishev, and next week is regular Shabbat Mikeitz. (This happens 10.1% of years, when Chanuka is Friday to Friday.)

But then the Rav added the next statement which surprised all of us listening. The Rav stated that only one Haftora is read publicly. But the other Haftora still must be read privately. So if Rosh Chodesh falls on a Shabbat, for example, that Shabbat's Haftora is for Rosh Chodesh. But the regular Haftora for that Shabbat still must be read privately. It can be read after Shabbat morning services, anytime during that day.

<> We celebrate Chanuka this Shabbat, miracles orchestrated by a family of Kohanim. They were motivated by what they saw the Greek-Syrians did in the Beit HaMikdash and elsewhere in Israel. The Greek-Syrians were joined by Jews who converted to Hellenism. Their efforts were to destroy Judaism, not to destroy or kill Jews. Besides being courageous fighters, the Chashmonaim were determined to revive Judaism among the people, and in so doing resanctify the Beit HaMikdash. They could not create a new Menorah out of gold, but nevertheless built a Menorah out of wood or tin (which is permitted), but until enough gold was acquired to do the job the way the Torah said. They displayed great determination to accomplish these tasks; Hashem helped them!

Questions by RED 

From the Text

1. Why did Yaakov love Yosef more than any other son? (37:3)

2. What were Yosef's two dreams? (37:5…)

3. What did Reuven have in mind when he advised his brothers to throw Yosef into the pit? (37:22)

4. What pledge did the supposed harlot (Tamar) ask from Yehuda for being together with him? (38:18)

5. Who bought Yosef as his slave when Yosef was brought to Egypt? (39:1)

From Rashi

6. Why did Yaakov love Yosef more than the others? (37:3)

7. What terrible events occurred in Shechem? (37:14)

8. How long did Yaakov mourn the loss of Yosef? (37:34)

9. When Yosef prospered as Potifar's slave, he started to groom himself. What divine punishment did he receive? (39:6)

10. What were the sins of the Chief Butler and Chief Baker that got them imprisoned? (40:1)

From the Rabbis

11. What is the source of the Pidyon HaBen costing five shekels? (Rabbeinu Bachya)

12. Why does the Torah repeat three times, identifying Potifar as an Egyptian? (39:1,2) (Hirsch)

13. Why did the warden of the prison put Yosef in charge of the prison? (Targum Yonatan)

From the Midrash

14. Who argued on Yosef's behalf and told Potifar that Yosef was innocent of Mrs. Potifar's accusation? (Yalkut)

From the Haftara (Zecharia)

15. Why was Zecharia disappointed with Yehoshua the Kohen Gadol?

Relationships

16.

a) No'ach - Arpachshad

b) Terach - Haran

c) Nachor - Milka (2 answers)

d) Chushim - Guni

e) Machli - Mushi

ANSWERS

1. Because Yosef was born when Yaakov was older.

2. The brothers' sheaves bowed down to Yosef's. And the sun, moon, and stars bowed down to Yosef.

3. Reuven intended to retrieve Yosef from the pit and return him to their father.

4. Yehuda's signet, his wrap, and his staff. (All things that would prove his identity.)

5. Potifar, Pharaoh's Chief Butcher.

6. Yosef was born when Yaakov was older. Onkelos: Yosef was the smartest (Yaakov taught him what Yaakov learned with Shem and Eiver.) And Yosef looked like Yaakov.

7. The tribes erred there; Dina was raped and kidnapped there; and the kingdom of Israel was split there after King Solomon died.

8. 22 years.

9. Hashem sent the bear to trouble him (Potifar's wife).

10. The Chief Butler: a fly was found in Pharaoh's wine goblet. The Chief Baker: a pebble was found in the king's bread.

11. The brothers sold Yosef for 20 pieces of silver, which equals 5 shekels.

12. The Egyptians abhorred all Canaanites, especially the Hebrews. It was an act of Hashem that Yosef was treated so well.

13. He saw that Hashem made Yosef successful in everything, and he really believed that Yosef was innocent of Mrs. Potifar's charge.

14. Osnat, Potifar's daughter, who later married Yosef.

15. Yehoshua's sons married non-Jewish women, and Yehoshua did not chastise them.

16.

a) Grandfather - grandson

b) Father - son

c) Husband - wife, and uncle - niece

d) First cousins (Chushim was Dan's son, Guni was Naftali's son)

e) Brothers (sons of Merari)