PHILOTORAH KI TEITZEI AVOT 1,2 May HaShem protect our soldiers and bring the hostages back safe & sound; may He send Refu'ah Sh'leima to the many injured; may He console the bereaved families and all of Israel, may He help end the war with total success and peace for Medinat Yisrael and Klal Yisrael wherever they are. YERUSHALAYIM in/out times for KI TEITZEI 13 ELUL 5785 <<>> September 5-6, '25 6:23PM <> PLAG 5:39PM <<>> 7:34PM <> R' Tam 8:09PM Use the Z'MANIM link for other locales and other halachic times CALnotes Kiddush L'vana First opportunity for Kiddush L'vana was last Wednesday, August 27th (according to Minhag Yerushalayim). The most popular night for KL was this past Motza'ei Shabbat (Shoftim). The last opportunity for Elul's KL is this coming Motza"Sh (Ki Teitzei). The regular references to Kiddush L'vana in CALnotes of PhiloTorah is purposeful, for two goals. One, as a reminder to those who regularly say Kiddush L'vana. But, maybe more importantly, for those who don't say Kiddush L'vana. To encourage them to take KL seriously and maybe start saying it on a regular basis. It is an important and special bracha. It is considered a Reception of the Divine Sh'china. Hilchot T'shuva Excerpts from Rambam's Hilchot T'shuva - ch. 1 - and comments... If a person transgresses any of the mitzvot of the Torah, whether a positive command or a negative command - whether willingly or inadvertently - when he repents, and returns from his sin, he must confess before God, blessed be He, as the Torah (Bamidbar 5:6-7) states: "If a man or a woman commit any of the sins of man... they must confess the sin that they committed." This refers to a verbal confession. This confession is a positive command. Notice well, the following: First, the Rambam does not count doing T'shuva as a mitzva among the 613; he counts VIDUI, verbal confession - which is a component of the T'shuva process. Some who count mitzvot do include T'shuva as a mitzva. How come the Rambam doesn't? Not now; maybe next week. Second, notice the IF, in if a person sins, and the WHEN, as in when he does T'shuva. Very significant. How does one confess: He states: "I implore You, God, I sinned, I transgressed, I committed iniquity before You by doing the following. Behold, I regret and am embarrassed for my deeds. I promise never to repeat this act again." The word VIDUI brings to mind the ASHAMNU... of Yom Kippur, Slichot, and various other situations. And the AL CHEIT... of Yom Kippur. But we also need to realize that VIDUI can (and should) be said, at any time of the year. It can begin with the Rambam's text - or with any wording in any language. The end of the Amida - right before YIHYU L'RATZON. Use it well. At present, when the Temple does not exist and there is no Altar of atonement, there remains nothing else aside from T'shuva. T'shuva atones for all sins. Even a person who was wicked his whole life and repented in his final moments will not be reminded of any aspect of his wickedness as Yechezkel 33:12 states "the wickedness of the evil one will not cause him to stumble on the day he repents his wickedness." The essence of Yom Kippur atones for those who repent as Vayikra 16:30 states: "This day will atone for you." Even though T'shuva atones for all [sins] and the essence of Yom Kippur brings atonement, [there are different levels of sin and hence, differences in the degree of atonement.] There are sins that can be atoned for immediately and other sins which can only be atoned for over the course of time. What is implied? If a person violates a positive command which is not punishable by KAREIT and repents, he will not leave that place before he is forgiven. Concerning these sins, Yirmiyahu (3:22) states: "Return, faithless children! I will heal your rebellious acts." If a person violates a prohibition that is not punishable by KAREIT or execution by the court and repents, T'shuva has a tentative effect and Yom Kippur brings atonement as the Torah states "This day will atone for you." If a person violates [sins punishable by] KAREIT or execution by the court and repents, T'shuva and Yom Kippur have a tentative effect and the sufferings which come upon him complete the atonement. He will never achieve complete atonement until he endures suffering for concerning these [sins, T'hilim 89:33] states: "I will punish their transgression with a rod." When does the above apply: When the desecration of God's name is not involved in the transgression. However, a person who desecrated God's name, even though he repented, Yom Kippur arrived while he continued his repentance, and he experienced suffering, will not be granted complete atonement until he dies. The three: repentance, Yom Kippur, and suffering have a tentative effect and death atones as Yishayahu (22:14) states: "It was revealed in my ears [by] the Lord of Hosts, surely this iniquity will not be atoned for until you die." There is more; hopefully, we will continue Hilchot T'shuva in this same column, in the coming weeks. A lot to put into action. May we be ZOCHEH. KI TEITZEI 49th of the 54 sedras; 6th of 11 in D'varim Written on 212.8 lines; ranks 21st 44 Parshiyot; 2 open, 42 closed; The most of any sedra 110 p'sukim; ranks 28th (5th in D'va) 1582 words; ranks 23rd (5th in D'va) 5856 letters; ranks 26th (6th in D'va) Slightly larger than average p'sukim; below average for D'varim. Overall, an average-sized sedra. Haftara - 10 p'sukim; S/H: 11.0 But Mitzva-wise... MITZVOT 74 of Taryag - 27 ASEI, 47 LO TAASEI Ki Teitzei has the most mitzvot (12.1% of the Torah's 613), most positive mitzvot (10.9%), most prohibitions (12.9%), and most parshiyot of any sedra. The MD (mitzva density) of Ki Teitzei is 673 m/kp (mitzvot per 1000 p'sukim). This is very high, as we would expect. The whole Torah's MD is 105. Ki Teitzei is the second most mitzva-dense sedra. Highest MD is K'doshim, with 51 mitzvot in its 64 p'sukim; it has a MD of 797. 17 of the Torah's 54 sedras do not have any mitzvot of the Sefer HaChinuch's count; 5 sedras have one mitzva each. 3 have two each. 3 have three each. That's 28 sedras (more than half) have a total of 20 mitzvot (3¼%). Aliya-by-Aliya Sedra Summary [P>] and [S>] 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. Numbers in [square brackets] are the Mitzva-count of Sefer HaChinuch AND Rambam's Sefer HaMitzvot. A=ASEI; L=LAV (prohibition). X:Y is the perek & pasuk from which the mitzva comes. Kohen - First Aliya - 12 p'sukim - 21:10-21 [S>21:10 (5)] The "beautiful captive": A Jewish soldier must resist the "normal" temptations of battle, but is permitted to take a captive woman - only according to the approved Torah procedures [532, A221 21:11]. Looking at this mitzva from both ends, we first see it as a "concession to the base inclinations of a man", in the heat of battle. On the other hand, it demands more of the Jew than is common of soldiers all over the world (obviously, not all soldiers), who are notorious for immoral behavior. If he decides after the one-month waiting period not to marry her, he must release her without abusing, humiliating, or selling her [533, 534; L263, L264 21:14]. A Jew's marriage to a Y'FAT TO'AR is also conditional on her conversion to Judaism. If she does not want to convert, he must release her. If she does convert and they want to marry, then it is a full, regular Jewish marriage, with K'dushin & Ketuba... Anecdote illustrating the higher moral standards of Israel's soldiers. Years ago, during the Lebanon war, my brother and a couple of fellows of his unit, went into a mini-market to by some food items. (Surprisingly, they found Peter Pan Peanut Butter with an OK hashgacha - something one could not find in Israel. But I digress.) They took their purchases to the counter, only to find it unattended. Then they looked over the counter and found the storekeeper cowering on the floor. When he realized he was 'discovered', he begged them to take anything they wanted - but don't hurt me. Imagine his shock when these IDF soldiers told him, in a calming voice, that they only wanted to pay for the items. KIDDUSH HASHEM. Not a story about a Y'FAT TO'AR, but it illustrates how the Jewish Army, the Israeli Army, is supposed to behave. [S>21:15 (3)] A man may not favor the son of his beloved wife over his firstborn from a "less-loved" wife. (The juxtaposition of these two topics implies that marrying for the wrong motive is likely to lead to a "hated wife".) This passage is the source of the firstborn's inheritance. Ramban counts two mitzvot here - the positive command to give the firstborn a double portion and the prohibition of not giving it to him. Rambam and the Chinuch include the rules of the firstborn as part of the laws of inheritance from Parshat Pinchas and not separately here. This is just one of many examples of different countings among the Sages who attempted to identify the traditional count of TARYAG, 613 mitzvot. SDT: The Vilna Gaon sees a REMEZ to the double portion of the B'chor in the letters of the word B'CHOR: BET-KAF-REISH. Each letter is double the letter before it - BET (2) is double ALEF (1), KAF (20) is double YUD (10), REISH (200) is double KUF (100). (No other letters of the ALEF-BET are double their predecessors.) If you have the right math-minded child or adult, you can challenge them to find all the letters of the ALEF-BET that are double their immediate predecessor. Rather than telling them. Then you can tie it to the sedra. [S>21:18 (4)] The "rebellious son" is warned by his parents to mend his ways. If he continues to defy them, violates certain mitzvot, engages in a specific sequence of actions, and if he is of a specific age and at a particular stage of physical development, and his parents are healthy, normal, and deemed to be on equal levels of character, THEN, AND ONLY THEN, would it be possible to execute him as a BEN SORER U'MOREH. Although it is (almost) impossible to reach that ultimate point - and sources indicate that there never actually was a case of "the rebellious son" - this parsha serves as a stern warning to wayward children - AND their parents! Some mitzvot seem to be intended primarily as deterrent and Mussar. Just as one example of the improbability of there actually being a BEN SORER UMOREH: the boy in question would have to be between 13 and 13¼ years old and would have to be at the beginning stage of puberty. If that three month window of time does not coincide with the onset of puberty, he cannot be an "official" rebellious son. There are so so many other technical conditions - he has to steal money from his parents, buy meat, eat it raw; the parents have be be of (near) equal character with neither dominating the other... - that must be met that it seems obvious that we were not expected to actually execute a rebellious child as a BEN SORER UMOREH... Levi - Second Aliya - 9 p'sukim - 21:22-22:7 [S>21:22 (2)] Those executed by stoning were hung after death [535, A230 21:22] for a brief period of time before sunset. They were then buried [536, L66 21:23] (with the hanging post) to avoid extra embarrassment to the Divine image in which we were all created. The hanging of the body after execution (which is done in some cases, not all) serves as a deterrent for others and is part of the atonement process for the soul of the guilty party. A MINI-LESSON IN ENGLISH The past tense of 'hang' is 'hung' - if that which is hung is inanimate. If a person was executed by hanging, then the past tense of hang is hanged. The cattle thief was hanged for his crimes. The picture was hung on the wall. And in this case, the dead body was hung on a post shortly before sunset... Using KAL VACHOMER (if this is the respect shown the body of an executed felon, how much more so...), we are taught that burial, in general, and "as soon as is feasible", in particular, is the proper procedure for the dead [537, A231 21:23]. Important to note that the mitzva and requirement of burial of the dead is a d'Oraita (Torah Law), even though it is not specified in the Written Word. [S>22:1 (3)] One is required to return identifiable lost objects to their rightful owners [538, A204 22:1], even if doing so is difficult. One cannot ignore this responsibility [539, L269 22:3] even if it is easier to just leave the object alone. Technically, the laws of LOST & FOUND apply to possessions of fellow Jews. However, with the potential for Kiddush HaShem and its opposite, depending upon what one does, it is important to go out of one's way to return a lost item to a non-Jew as well (and maybe even more so, in some cases!). This too is part of halacha, not just nice to do. [S>22:4 (1)] Nor may one ignore a fellow's beast of burden that has collapsed under its load [540, L270 22:4]. One is required to help his fellow load his animals [541, A203 22:4]. Sefer HaChinuch points out that this mitzva-pair applies to other animals, not just donkey, and it applies to people as well, by reasoning a KAL VACHOMER. If you see a fellow human over-loaded with what he or she is carrying (or trying to carry), it is a Torah mitzva to help out. Furthermore, if you are approached by friend or neighbor who offers to help you carry some of your packages, you should consider letting him/her, rather than the typical, "It's okay, I got it." It allows your burden to be eased while the other person fulfills a Torah mitzva. Everyone benefits. [S>22:5 (5)] Men and women may not interchange apparel [542, 543; L39,40 22:5] nor do certain things that are specific to the opposite sex. R' Yonatan b. Uziel in his Aramaic translation/commentary on Torah, "defines" the prohibition of a woman wearing a man's garb, as the mitzvot of Tallit and T'filin. Not everyone agrees, but it's something to think about; it might explain (partially) why women traditionally have not voluntarily done these mitzvot, even though there are many other mitzvot that are not obligatory on women which they have taken upon themselves. [P>22:6 (2)] When one happens upon a (kosher) bird's nest (in the wild), it is forbidden to take the mother bird alone or with her eggs or chicks [544, L306 22:6], but one may (must? - this is the subject of a dispute with a decidedly kabalistic flavor on the side that suggests it is an imperative rather than the assumed "if you want the eggs...") take the eggs/chicks if one first sends the mother bird away [545, A148 22:7]. This is an enigmatic mitzva that defies logic. It is shrouded in mysticism, more so than most other mitzvot. Although our Sages attribute kindness to animals as a reason for some mitzvot - e.g. not muzzling an animal that is working with food, helping to unload a beast of burden, not plowing with an ox and a donkey together - they (our Sages) were more cautious with Shilu'ach HaKen. It can be argued that it is far kinder to leave a nest alone than to chase away the mother bird. And if kindness were the issue, why does the mitzva not apply to a non-kosher bird? Or to a male bird who is tending the nest? This mitzva is more CHOK-like than other mitzvot involving animals. Shlishi - Third Aliya - 29 p'sukim - 22:8-23:7 [S>22:8 (2)] One is required to build a protective fence around one's (habitable) roof [546, A184 22:8]. It is forbidden to leave safety hazards on one's property [547, L298 22:8]. Oral law defines these mitzvot as more inclusive than just one's roof. Rabbinic law, "taking the Torah's lead", extends "safety & health" rules further into many areas. Rambam says that a person may not tell others: "Don't tell me what to do; if I want to risk my health or life, it's my business." Saying this can make a person liable to the punishment of MAKAT MARDUT (under conditions when that punishment was meted out). All Israel are responsible for each other. One may not plant mixed grains in a vineyard [548, L216 22:9], nor may one eat the resulting products [549, L193 22:9]. "Strangely", these two mitzvot - MAAKEH and Mixed Grain - share a single parsha. What connects them to each other more than other neighboring mitzvot? (Keep in mind that Ki Teitzei has the most parshiyot of any sedra. Many mitzvot are in their own parsha, so when two different kinds of mitzvot share a parsha, we have a question to ask. And for which, I don't have an answer - yet.) [S>22:10 (2)] Plowing with ox and donkey together is forbidden, as is the tying together of any non-compatible animals (or humans) for any purpose [550, L218 22:10]. Rambam holds that the Torah prohibits any combination of a kosher and non-kosher animal, based on the fact that the Torah's example is one of each. Rambam says that combinations of two kosher or two non-kosher animals is forbidden by Rabbinic law. Many authorities challenge Rambam's distinction and say that it is all Torah law. Furthermore, whereas most commentaries attribute this mitzva to the avoiding of TZAAR BAALEI CHAYIM, the Rambam considers it a partner mitzva (my term) to the prohibition of cross-breeding animals. Do not wear Shaatnez, wool and linen together [551, L42 22:11]. [S>22:12 (1)] ...put tzitzit on all four-cornered garments that you wear [counted back in Sh'lach]. [S>22:13 (7)] It is a mitzva to marry according to Jewish Law and for the husband to write a K'TUBA for his wife with various promises and assurances [552, A213 22:13]. The juxtaposition of tzitzit to marriage seems to be the source of the minhag of many Ashkenazi Jews of starting to wear a Talit when one marries (even though the Talit Katan is worn from early childhood). Other communities disagree with waiting until marriage to wear Talit Gadol and consider the obligation to take effect at Bar Mitzva. If a man had falsely accused his (betrothed) wife of infidelity, he may not divorce her (unless she so desires) [553, 554; A219, L359 22:19]. Penalties are also paid to the girl's family for the insult. [S>22:20 (2)] If the betrothed maiden did, in fact, willfully, intentionally have relations with another man, and there are kosher witnesses and proper warning, and all the other rules of evidence, then she is an adulteress and can be executed (by stoning). [S>22:22 (1)] If a man and a married woman have relations (knowing full-well the married status of the woman), and neither was forced, then they are both subject to the death penalty for adultery. [This prohibition counted from Commandment #7 in Parshat Yitro, and is repeated in Va'etchanan.] [S>22:23 (2)] The same applies if the woman is "just" betrothed (this is more than what we call engagement, in our time). The specific incident of stoning is generalized to the mitzva upon the court to carry out the punishment of "stoning" whenever required [555, A220 22:24]. [S>22:25 (3)] Both consenting parties to a forbidden relationship are culpable. However, if it is possible to consider the woman an unwilling participant, then she must not be punished. We must not punish anyone who might not be responsible for their actions [556, L294 22:26]. This is the source of giving people the benefit of the doubt. This does not mean that the person always deserves the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they actually sinned. The answer - it will have to be left to G-d to punish them; we are obligated to explain the situation as in this example - "certainly the girl screamed but there was no one to save her." [S>22:28 (2)] A man who forces himself on an unmarried maiden must pay a fine to her father. If the girl wants to be married to the man, he must marry her and never initiate divorce (she, of course, may insist that she wants nothing to do with him and then the court will force him to divorce her, had they married) [557, 558; A218, L358 22:29]. [S>23:1 (1)] A man may not marry his father's former wife (even after his father's death). [S>23:2 (1)] Castrated men (not all - it depends on how their situation happened) have marriage restrictions [559, L360 23:2]. [S>23:3 (1)] A "mamzer" has marriage restrictions [560, L354 23:3]. A mamzer is the offspring of a union that is prohibited by the Torah, with a death penalty. This includes incestuous and adulterous relationships. He may, however, marry a mamzeret or a female convert to Judaism. And vice versa for a mamzeret. [S>23:4 (4)] Amonite and Moabite males may not marry into the "Congregation of G-d" [561, L53 23:4], because of the cruel, inhospitable behavior of those two nations towards Israel. And also because they hired Bil'am to "bless" us. Nor may we ever offer those two nations peace as an alternative to war, as is required of all our other enemies [562, L56 23:7]. The Torah is giving a reason for a mitzva, something that it rarely does. We are to do mitzvot because they are G-d's commands. In this case, it is precisely the reason given for this mitzva that allowed our Sages to declare Ruth the Moavite able to marry into the Nation. It was the Moavite men who displayed that unforgivable behavior, not women, who did not "go out" and confront B'nei Yisrael. R'VI'I - Fourth Aliya - 17 p'sukim - 23:8-24 [S>23:8 (2)] OTOH, converts from Edom and Egypt are not to be discriminated against, but can fully integrate only from the third generation on [563, 564 L54, 55 23:8]. [S>23:10 (6)] A military camp must be kept spiritually and physically clean. Sanitary facilities must be provided outside the camp and soldiers must be equipped with appropriate tools for maintaining proper sanitation [566, 567; A192, A193 23:13,14]. An offshoot of this mitzva: entry to Har HaBayit (referring to the area where the Beit HaMikdash and its courtyard DID NOT stand) by people with certain types of ritual impurity is forbidden [565, L78 23:11]. (The area where the Mikdash was - or might have been - is off-limits to all T'MEI'IM.) Conceptually, we must realize that G-d's presence among us is affected by our physical and moral behavior. Thus, these mitzvot have ramifications to Jewish society as a whole, and not merely in a military setting. [S>23:16 (2)] A slave who runs from his master to us for protection, may not be returned. Nor may we abuse a slave who seeks haven in Eretz Yisrael [568, 569; L254, L255 23:16,17]. [S>23:18 (2)] Prostitution is forbidden [570, L355 23:18] and its revenues may not be used for sacred matters [571, L100 23:19]. (Some sources consider the prohibition sex between unmarried people as part of mitzva #570.) [S>23:20 (2)] Although interest on personal loans may not be taken from a Jew, it is correct to lend to non-Jews with interest [572, 573; L236, A198 23:20,21]. Society in general accepts the reasonableness of moderate interest on loans. Since a non-Jew can charge a Jew interest, the Torah gives us permission to take interest from them. Usury, loan sharking, is universally recognized as a wrong-doing; but the ban against any interest at all is particular to us - it is as if G-d is commanding us to go out of our way to help the less fortunate in our midst. [S>23:22 (3)] Pledges to the Mikdash must be fulfilled within the cycle of the three festivals [574, L155 23:22]. It is advisable to refrain from making promises, but once made, a person must keep them [575, A94 23:24]. (Hatarat N'darim provides an "out" for certain ill-advised promises, within limits. Consult a Rav for specific cases.) Chamishi - 5th Aliya - 6 p'sukim - 23:25-24:4 [S>23:25 (1)] Workers are entitled to eat of the food (that which is connected to the ground) they are working with [576, A201 23:25], but may not take any home without permission [577, L268 23:25]. [S>23:26 (1)] Workers mustn't eat while they are working [578, L267 23:26]. In other words, their right to eat [576] is restricted to their breaks. We see a beautiful balance in the area of Torah Law as it relates to boss-worker relations. On the one hand, the worker is allowed to eat from that which he picks. On the other hand, he cannot do this while he is actually working, as this would reduce his efficiency, thereby short-changing his boss. On the other hand, the boss must provide breaks during the day, when the worker is allowed to eat. On the other hand, the worker may not take any of the fruits home with him, without permission. Talmudic law adds to this list for both sides. For example, it advises a worker not to overdo the eating, although it is permitted, lest the word get out and people will stop hiring him. Boss may not take advantage of worker, and worker may not take advantage of their boss. [S>24:1 (4)] If a married couple wants to end their marriage, it must be done with a proper GET (divorce document, not the taxi company) [579, A222 24:1]. If a divorcee has remarried, and is subsequently widowed or divorced, she cannot remarry her first husband [580, L356 24:4]. Shishi - Sixth Aliya - 9 p'sukim - 24:5-13 [S>24:5 (2)] A man is exempt from military service during the first year of his marriage [581, L311 24:5], during which time he is to see to it that his wife is happy [582, A214 24:5]. This applies to Milchemet R'shut, optional wars. For Milchemet Mitzva - obligatory wars - there are no exemptions. On another note - a husband gets a military exemption for a year, but the "seeing to it that his wife is happy" is an untimed obligation (i.e. forever, and that is hopefully a great pleasure, as well). One may not take a vessel used for preparing food as a security against a loan [583, L242 24:6]. We must be sensitive to the needs of the borrower. [S>24:7 (1)] Kidnapping and selling the victim is a capital offense. Kidnapping is already counted as a prohibition from Commandment #8, LO TIGNOV (i.e. stealing a person) in Yitro. That was the "warning"; this is the notice of "punishment". Both are needed. [S>24:8 (2)] We must not remove signs of Tzora'at [584, L308 24:8]. Always remember what happened to Miriam. [Some mitzva-counters count this ZACHOR among the 613.] What happened to Miriam is that she was punished for speaking ill of her brother Moshe and she was afflicted with Tzora'at; hence, the connection between these two p'sukim that share this parsha. [S>24:10 (4)] We must not be overly forceful in the taking of a security from a poor person who has borrowed from us [585, L239 24:10]. We must not withhold that which has already been taken from him; if he needs it, we must return it to him [586, 587; L240, A199 24:12,13]. Another positive-prohibition pair of mitzvot. Along the lines above, of G-d is expecting (commanding) us to go way beyond the norm (of the rest of the world) in our treatment of borrowers (basically, this involves personal loans to fellow Jews - not business investments, including loans that are set up like a business deal - with a HETER ISKA.) Let's say you lend someone money and he gives you his winter coat as a security for the loan. Repayment was due at the end of the summer, but the person was not able at that time to repay the loan. Then the winter is upon us and he still hasn't repaid the loan. You have to give him his coat back so that he won't be cold in the winter. Logical? No, not really. You lent him money. You took something in security of the loan. He hasn't given you the money yet. You shouldn't have to give him the coat back. That's the standard of regular human behavior. The nicer people among the nations of the world might also give back a needed object. But that would be their personal decision. We, the Jewish People, are required - commanded - to give it back. ASHRECHA YISRAEL. Sh'VII - Seventh Aliya - 28 p'sukim - 24:14-25:19 [S>24:14 (2)] We may not take unfair advantage of our less-fortunate workers. A day-laborer must be paid on time [588, A200 24:15]. The partner-prohibition of delaying his wages is counted in Parshat K'doshim. [S>24:16 (1)] Close relatives may not testify against (or for) one another in criminal cases [589, L287 24:16]. There is also the implication here that a person will not be punished for deeds of his parents or children. This is an example (one of many) of a pasuk teaching us two or more quite different things. [S>24:17 (2)] One must not pervert justice even on behalf of an orphan [590, L280 24:17]. Securities for a loan must not be taken from a widow [591, L241 24:17]. Our experience in Egypt is to be remembered as the motive for many of these "sensitizing" mitzvot. [S>24:19 (1)] That which is forgotten in the fields after harvesting must be left for the poor; one should not return for it himself [592, 593; A122, L214 24:19]. [S>24:20 (3)] The previous parsha set down the rules of SHICH'CHA; this parsha adds rules for proper kind behavior when picking olives and grapes. Again we are reminded of our Egyptian experience. Even though Egypt was unspeakably cruel to us, our experience there is supposed to sensitize us to those who are strangers among us. [S>25:1 (4)] The punishment of makot (whipping) is to be administered by the courts to those found guilty of sins punishable thusly, but care must be taken not to exceed the required number of lashes [594, 595; A224, L300 25:2,3]. The prohibition of not exceeding the approved number of lashes, also includes the more general prohibition of striking a fellow Jew. Do not muzzle an animal when it is working with food [596, L219 25:4]. [S>25:5 (6)] The widow of a man without offspring is forbidden to marry anyone else [597, L357 25:5] until... She either "marries" her brother-in-law (Yibum) [598, A216 25:5] or the relationship is severed by chalitza [599, A217 25:9], in which case she may marry anyone else (except for a kohen). The Torah speaks of a man dying without having a BEN. Does that mean "son" or "child"? In this case, the word BEN includes any offspring. If a man has no sons, only a daughter, and he dies, his widow is free to marry anyone except a Kohein Gadol. And she may never marry her late husband's brother. If the man had no offspring, his widow must* marry his brother (*or receive Chalitza from him). Total opposites, depending upon exactly what BEN means. How do we know? TORAH SHE'B'AL PEH, the Oral Law. We cannot understand Torah without it. The word BEN, and many other words in the Torah, can be defined in an exclusive manner or an inclusive one. We don't get to choose - that's what the Oral Law does for us. If the deceased husband had no brothers, there is no YIBUM or CHALITZA. In our time, there is a Rabbinic ban on YIBUM and so CHALITZA is required - no choice. Which also means that it is not considered a criticism of the brother who refuses to perpetuate his brother's name in Israel. [S>25:11 (2)] If person "A" is pursuing "B" to kill him, we must save B's life even if it means killing "A" [600, A247 25:12]. Do not show mercy to the pursuer, "A" [601, L293 25:12]. If it is possible to stop "A" without killing him, we must do so - to kill him would be murder - even though he forfeits his life, so to speak - because he is a RODEIF. [S>25:13 (4)] Mere possession of false dry or liquid measures or weights is forbidden [602, L272 25:13]. Honest weights and measures is one of the pillars of society; G-d despises those who cheat in business. [P>25:17 (3)] The final portion of the sedra is ZACHOR. We are commanded to remember what Amalek did to us on our way out of Egypt [603, A189 25:17]. The Jewish People as a whole are commanded to destroy the remnant of Amalek from this world [604, A188 25:18]. We (each Jew) must never forget what Amalek did [605, L59 25:19]. Technically, these mitzvot apply to the specific Amalek nation. The idea of remembering and never forgetting, however, must be extended to the Amalek-types that have plagued us throughout Jewish history. Haftara - 10 p'sukim - Yeshayahu 54:1-10 Yeshayahu draws a comparison between the covenant that G-d made with all mankind via No'ach and the promises to the People of Israel concerning their future. Just as G-d promised never to flood the whole Earth again, so too does He promise not to rebuke and punish Israel (in the future). From A Candle by Day by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein z"l There are two types of sheltered existence - one good and one bad. The first is being sheltered from the rain; the second from a knowledge of the rain's existence. Imagination is the dream of the conscious mind. Bringing the Prophets to Life Weekly insights into the Haftara by Rabbi Nachman (Neil) Winkler Author of Bringing the Prophets to Life (Gefen Publ.) KI TEITZEI - 10 p'sukim - Yeshayahu 54:1-10 RONI AKARA - "Sing out, O barren one", PITZCHI V'TZAHALI - "burst forth in song and be jubilant!" These clarion calls to Israel with which the navi Yishayahu opens our haftara this week, are truly, unique cries. Consider: Throughout these post-Tish'a b'Av haftarot of consolation, we have read a number of the prophet's visions that describe a glorious future for the grieving nation. We listened to the chants, the praises toward our powerful G-d Who could, and would, bring about the promised miracles of victories over Israel's powerful enemies. And we have also heard soothing words of solace urging the people to allow Yishayahu's prophecies to comfort them, as G-d reassures them that their punishment and suffering would soon be removed. However, never before had we heard such a call for the nation to rejoice over the news. In last week's haftara (chapter 52), we read of the prophet's call for the Holy City to rise from the ashes of her destruction and to the ruins of Jerusalem to rejoice - but there was no such call for the people to do the same. Over the past weeks, we have heard the navi's predictions of a miraculous rebirth of the produce in the Land of Israel that would consequently lead to great joy and gladness there (chapter 51, haftara of Eikev). But never before had we heard the prophet's call for the nation herself to rejoice. In attempting to understand why this haftara begins with a declaration that Israel rejoice, perhaps we should begin by recalling that Chazal see these seven haftarot of consolation as steps toward return; the N'VU'OT therein include sequential steps of increasing comfort, and these steps, would ultimately, lead us closer to HaKadosh Baruch Hu inspiring us to repair our relationship with G-d and, thereby, preparing Israel to stand before Him on the Yamim Nora'im. This successful "journey through the haftarot" is meant to help an oft-suffering generation move closer to her Creator and open the doors to t'shuva and to Hashem's atonement. But what did our Rabbis see in this haftara specifically that had them regard her words as reflecting a higher level of consolation than the earlier prophetic messages? Or, simply: What inspired Yishayahu himself, for the first time, to cry out to the nation RONI, "Rejoice!" The answer might be found in the latter part of this chapter 54, (a section is read for the haftara of parashat R'ei), in which G-d proclaims His everlasting love for ALL of Israel, both the righteous and the not-yet-righteous. Indeed, the verses that immediately follow the closing of the haftara of parashat R'ei, contain the haftara for a fast day, DIRSHU HASHEM B'HIMATZ'O which call for Israel to seek out Hashem and abandon their wayward ways. Is it any wonder, then, that Chazal tell us that B'HIMATZ'O - the time when G-d is especially close to us and can be reached more readily - is actually right now, the days of Elul and the Yamim Nora'im! These days are not simply days of comfort and regret - they are days of rejoicing as well, RONI. For the knowledge that G-d loves ALL of Israel and has granted us a special time to call out to Him and be comforted, forgiven… and, of course, to rejoice! ParshaPix The fun way to go over the weekly sedra with your children, grandchildren, Shabbat guests SHO-F'TIM and two related verbal Unexplaineds to coop to = EL; coop = LUL. Together: ELUL not June The 6th month in our calendar is not June - it is ELUL KI TEITZEI Israeli tank represents the many times "army" issues are mentioned in the sedra - The Beautiful Captive, the cleanliness of an army camp, exemption from service for a groom for the first year of marriage, destroying Amalek... <=> The Xed out noose is NOT the hanging that is meant in Ki Teitzei - rather it is the hanging of the body after execution on a post, briefly <=> Warning lights to prevent someone getting injured from a hazard on one's property - the flip side of MAAKEH <=> Boot is for CHALITZA and the whole subject of YIBUM <=> Quail and her eggs and nest - the mitzva of Shilu'ach HaKen <=> CHUPA stands for several topics related to marriage <=> Garden spade is the YATEID, digging tool, that is required of soldiers to have and use for hygienic "bathroom" <=> The headstone is for the mitzva to bury our dead, and reasonably quickly <=> The donkey = many references to either donkey or other animal. The donkey gets lost, he is overburdened, he cannot pull a plow with an ox... <=> two 1 kilo weights obviously different - possession of false weights and measures. Forbidden by the Torah <=> Covered wagon drawn by two horses with a cow tied behind the wagon is a Torah violation of plowing with an ox and a donkey together <=> Taxi driver being paid at the conclusion of a ride is a fulfillment of B'YOMO TITEIN S'CHARO, paying someone you hired, on time <=> Purim grogger stands for ZACHOR and especially wiping out Amalek <=> KEY = KI, the word that starts the sedra off and appears 50 times (including twice V'CHI) <=> T'filin are not mentioned in Ki Teitzei. Here it refers to the prohibition of a woman's wearing K'LEI GEVER, men's apparel - according to Targum Yonatan ben Uziel <=> Pawn = "Something given as security for a loan...", which is in the sedra <=> Xed out cat-o-nine-tails. MAKOT, whipping, punishment for many violations, was with a broad leather strip meant to hurt but not cut <=> two goldfish in a bowl are a pair of pets - sounds like parapets meaning MAAKEH (groan, hence the label 'bad pun') <=> Murex Trunculus from which T'cheilet is made on a background the color of T'cheilet, for G'DILIM TAASEH LACH... <=> Bubble bath for KETZEF in haftara <=> Dove with olive branch for MEI NO'ACH in haftara <=> Also, the dove with the olive branch is the well-known symbol for peace, which the Torah requires us to offer other nations before going to war with them. Only Amon and Moav are not given that option <=> TAGIM, the three small marks on some letters, and the left top part of others are found on the letters SHIN, AYIN, TET, NUN, ZAYIN (spelling SHAATNEZ - in the sedra) and GIMEL and TZADI (GETZ) <=> The eye whose eyelashes were being applied with mascara represents the prohibition for a man to wear a woman's dress. SIMLAT ISHA does not only mean women's garments, but it also prohibits other things that are recognized as things women do and that men generally do not <=> can also represent what the Y'FAT TO'AR does not do during the month <=> Gorilla for sale: The Torah prohibits M'CHIR KELEV, which means that if a dog was "sold" by exchanging it for one or more sheep (or goats, doves...), the animals that are M'CHIR KELEV are not usable as korbanot - probably so too with a gorilla <=> and this specific gorilla is Magila, which reminds of Parshat Zachor at the end of the sedra <=> the flowers are Forget-me-nots, as in LO TISHKACH. Final words of the sedra <=> the Witch Doctor song's opening two sounds are EEE (rhymes with see) and OOO (rhymes with sue). In our sedra, the word S'NU'A and S'NI'A - meaning hated (or less loved) occur with both vocalizations. So too, way back in Vayishlach, Yaakov Avinu is involved in naming a location P'NU'EIL a.k.a. P'NI'EIL <=> the logo of the taxi company GETT sounds just like the word for a Jewish divorce document, in the sedra <=> the letter HEI with the number 13 is for the 13 times the word NAARA is spelled NUN-AYIN-REISH without the last letter HEI (here's where they went) <=> The first place blue ribbon is for Ki Teitzei - first place in Mitzvot (74) and in Parshiyot (44) <=> The reminder strings are for Remember what HaShem did to Miriam and Remember Amalek <=> The arrow is pointing to door number three, or in Hebrew-English mix, to DOR SH'LISHI <=> The keyboard has 48 keys, as does Parshat Ki Teitzei <=> The coin (obverse and reverse, a.k.a. heads and tails, or PALI and EITZ in Hebrew) is a 1849 $20 gold double eagle, reputed to be the rarest US coin, with only one known to exist. The coin is SO RARE, sound alike to BEN SORER UMOREH (groan) <=> 2 Unexplaineds In Memory of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks z"l Letting Go of Hate KI TEITZEI Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness... - Martin Luther King I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain. - James Arthur Baldwin There is a verse in Ki Teitzei that is momentous in its implications. It is easy to miss, appearing as it does in the midst of a series of miscellaneous laws about inheritance, rebellious sons, overladen oxen, marriage violations and escaping slaves. Without any special emphasis or preamble, Moses delivers a command so counterintuitive that we must read it twice to make sure we have heard it correctly: Do not hate an Edomite, because he is your brother. Do not hate an Egyptian, because you were a stranger in his land. (D'varim 23:8) What does this mean in its biblical context? The Egyptians of Moshe's day had enslaved the Israelites, "embittered their lives", subjected them to a ruthless regime of hard labour and forced them to eat the bread of affliction. They had embarked on a programme of attempted genocide, Pharaoh commanding his people to throw "every male [Israelite] child born, into the river" (Sh'mot 1:22). Now, forty years later, Moshe speaks as if none of this had happened, as if the Israelites owed the Egyptians a debt of gratitude for their hospitality. Yet he and the people were where they were only because they were escaping from Egyptian persecution. Nor did he want the people to forget it. To the contrary, he told them to recite the story of the Exodus every year, as we still do on Pesach, re-enacting it with bitter herbs and unleavened bread so that the memory would be passed on to all future generations. If you want to preserve freedom, he implies, never forget what it feels like to lose it. Yet here, on the banks of the Jordan, addressing the next generation, he tells the people, "Do not hate an Egyptian." What is going on in this verse? To be free, you have to let go of hate. That is what Moshe is saying. If they continued to hate their erstwhile enemies, Moshe would have taken the Israelites out of Egypt, but he would not have taken Egypt out of the Israelites. Mentally, they would still be there, slaves to the past. They would still be in chains, not of metal but of the mind - and chains of the mind are the most constricting of all. You cannot create a free society on the basis of hate. Resentment, rage, humiliation, a sense of injustice, the desire to restore honour by inflicting injury on your former persecutors - these are conditions of a profound lack of freedom. You must live with the past, implies Moshe, but not in the past. Those who are held captive by anger against their former persecutors are captive still. Those who let their enemies define who they are, have not yet achieved liberty. The Mosaic books refer time and again to the Exodus and the imperative of memory: "You shall remember that you were slaves in Egypt." Yet never is this invoked as a reason for hatred, retaliation or revenge. Always it appears as part of the logic of the just and compassionate society the Israelites are commanded to create: the alternative order, the antithesis of Egypt. The implicit message is: Limit slavery, at least as far as your own people is concerned. Don't subject them to hard labour. Give them rest and freedom every seventh day. Release them every seventh year. Recognise them as like you, not ontologically inferior. No one is born to be a slave. Give generously to the poor. Let them eat from the leftovers of the harvest. Leave them a corner of the field. Share your blessings with others. Don't deprive people of their livelihood. The entire structure of biblical law is rooted in the experience of slavery in Egypt, as if to say: you know in your heart what it feels like to be the victim of persecution, therefore do not persecute others. Biblical ethics is based on repeated acts of role-reversal, using memory as a moral force. In the books of Sh'mot and D'varim, we are commanded to use memory not to preserve hate but to conquer it by recalling what it feels like to be its victim. "Remember" - not to live in the past but to prevent a repetition of the past. Only thus can we understand an otherwise inexplicable detail in the Exodus story itself. In Moshe's first encounter with God at the Burning Bush, he is charged with the mission of bringing the people out to freedom. God adds a strange rider: I will make the Egyptians favourably disposed toward this people, so that when you leave you will not go empty-handed. Every woman is to ask her neighbour and any woman living in her house for articles of silver and gold and for clothing, which you will put on your sons and daughters (Sh'mot 3:21-22). The point is twice repeated in later chapters (11:2, 12:35). Yet it runs utterly against the grain of biblical narrative. From B'reishit (14:23) to the book of Esther (9:10,15,16) taking booty, spoil, plunder from enemies is frowned on. In the case of idolaters, it is strictly forbidden: their property is CHEREM, taboo, to be destroyed, not possessed (D'varim 7:25; 13:16). When, in the days of Yehoshua, Achan took spoil from the ruins of Yericho, the whole nation was punished. Besides which, what happened to the gold? The Israelites eventually used it to make the Golden Calf. Why then was it important - commanded - that on this one occasion the Israelites should ask for gifts from the Egyptians? The Torah itself provides the answer in a later law of D'varim about the release of slaves: If a fellow Hebrew, a man or a woman, sells himself to you and serves you six years, in the seventh year you must let him go free. When you release him, do not send him away empty-handed. Supply him liberally from your flock, your threshing floor and your winepress. Give to him as the Lord your God has blessed you. Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and the Lord your God redeemed you. That is why I give you this command today (15:12-15). Slavery needs "narrative closure". To acquire freedom, a slave must be able to leave behind feelings of antagonism to his former master. He must not depart laden with a sense of grievance or anger, humiliation or slight. Were he to do so, he would have been released but not liberated. Physically free, mentally he would still be a slave. The insistence on parting gifts represents the Bible's psychological insight into the lingering injury of servitude. There must be an act of generosity on the part of the master if the slave is to leave without ill-will. Slavery leaves a scar on the soul that must be healed. When God told Moshe to tell the Israelites to take parting gifts from the Egyptians, it is as if He were saying: Yes, the Egyptians enslaved you, but that is about to become the past. Precisely because I want you to remember the past, it is essential that you do so without hate or desire for revenge. What you are to recall is the pain of being a slave, not the anger you feel towards your slave-masters. There must be an act of symbolic closure. This cannot be justice in the fullest sense of the word: such justice is a chimera, and the desire for it insatiable and self-destructive. There is no way of restoring the dead to life, or of recovering the lost years of liberty denied. But neither can a people deny the past, deleting it from the database of memory. If they try to do so it will eventually come back - Freud's "return of the repressed" - and claim a terrible price in the form of high-minded, altruistic vengeance. Therefore the former slave-owner must give the former slave a gift, acknowledging him as a free human being who has contributed, albeit without choice, to his welfare. This is not a squaring of accounts. It is, rather, a minimal form of restitution, of what today is called "restorative justice". Hatred and liberty cannot coexist. A free people does not hate its former enemies; if it does, it is not yet ready for freedom. To create a non-persecuting society out of people who have been persecuted, you have to break the chains of the past; rob memory of its sting; sublimate pain into constructive energy and the determination to build a different future. Freedom involves the abandonment of hate, because hate is the abdication of freedom. It is the projection of our conflicts onto an external force whom we can then blame, but only at the cost of denying responsibility. That was Moshe's message to those who were about to enter the Promised Land: that a free society can be built only by people who accept the responsibility of freedom, subjects who refuse to see themselves as objects, people who define themselves by love of God, not hatred of the other. "Do not hate an Egyptian, because you were strangers in his land", said Moshe, meaning: To be free, you have to let go of hate. Around the Shabbat Table: How does holding on to hatred keep people enslaved even after physical freedom is achieved? Can personal experiences of pain or injustice be transformed into compassion for others? How does the command to remember Amalek differ from the command not to hate the Egyptians? Y'HI ZICHRO BARUCH Message from the Haftara Rabbi Katriel (Kenneth) Brander, President and Rosh HaYeshiva of Ohr Torah Stone The Order of Consolation KI TEITZEI Is there any logical order connecting the seven haftarot of consolation read over the Shabbatot following Tish'a b'Av? They are all from the book of Yishayahu, but they are certainly not read chronologically or even sequentially. In fact, the haftara for our parsha, Ki Teitzei, actually precedes the haftara we read two weeks ago, on Shabbat Parshat R'ei. Is the order random? Or is there, perhaps, a deeper logic that traces a progression of ideas? Commentators throughout the ages have offered various suggestions. Let's explore two of the most compelling theories. The first is offered by Rabbi Yehoshua Ibn Shouaib, a 14th-century Spanish luminary and student of the Rashba, who wrote a seminal series of d'rashot on the different parashiot of the Torah. According to Ibn Shuaib, the seven haftarot read during these weeks correspond to different voices in the drama of Israel's exile and redemption – each of whom has its own need for consolation and salvation: (1) VA'ETCHANAN: God Himself accompanies Israel in exile, and will one day return triumphantly: "A voice calls out: 'Clear the Lord's way in the desert: smooth across the arid plain a road for our God'" (40:3). (2) EIKEV: The Mashiach longs to come to console the world and bring about the resettlement and flourishing of Israel's lands and cities, but has been delayed by Israel's behavior. "For your ruins, for your wastelands, for the land of your destruction, for you will be too narrow for your dwellers, while those who would destroy you will be far away from you" (49:19–20). (3) R'EI: The patriarchs, who looked on in sorrow as their descendants' folly led to disaster, await their rehabilitation: "All your children will be students of the Lord, and great will be your children's peace" (54:13). (4) SHOF'TIM: The Jewish people cry out for comfort, and God answers: "It is I, I who comfort you" (51:12). (5) KI TEITZEI: The land of Israel itself prays to be repopulated with life: "You shall overflow rightward and left, your children possessing nations, and filling forsaken towns with life" (54:3). (6) KI TAVO: Jerusalem longs to be rebuilt on eternal foundations: "Your gates will be always open, day and night, never closed" (60:11). (7) NITZAVIM: Zion, the site of the Temple, laid waste by Israel's enemies, waits silently for God's dramatic redemption - and Am Israel yearns for this moment. "For Zion's sake I cannot be silent, for Jerusalem's I cannot be still until righteousness bursts forth shining, and rescue burns like a brand, and all nations see your righteousness, all the kings your glory" (60:1–2). The beauty of Ibn Shouaib's interpretation lies in showing how the Jewish people are not alone in their pain and longing. The greatest spiritual forces in the world, God, the Mashiach, the Land, Jerusalem, Zion all yearn together with us, magnifying our strength and hope. Meanwhile, Rabbi David Abudraham, a Spanish commentator of the same era, offered a different perspective. He viewed the progression of the haftarot as a dialogue between three partners: God, Israel, and the prophet Yishayahu. The first haftara opens with God commanding Yishayahu to console the people: "Comfort, comfort My people" (40:1). But the nation refuses to accept his words: "The Lord has forsaken me; my Lord, He has forgotten me." (49:14–15) – hence, it is God Himself who must offer them comfort. The prophet relays this message back to God, protesting that the people refuse to be consoled – "oppressed and storm-swept, never comforted" (54:11). And so, over the three following haftarot, God agrees to address the people directly: "It is I, I who comfort you" (51:12). He recognizes their pain ("Barren woman, never a mother" - 54:1); announces that it will come to an end ("Rise, give light, for your light has come" - 60:1); and heralds the joy by the Jewish people that will replace the pain ("I shall rejoice, rejoice in the Lord" - 61:10). Abudraham's approach is elegant because of the direct connection and earnest communication between God and the Jewish People and the emphasis it places on relationship in the process of redemption. Whichever perspective we adopt on the connection between the haftarot, both resonate powerfully in our collective experience today. We are living in a fractured world where redemption cannot come to one part of Israel without the other, nor to the Jewish people without humanity as a whole. God's comfort must reach every corner: to our hostages in the dark underground tunnels, to families mourning lost loved ones, to the wounded struggling to heal, and to the heroic families shouldering the national burden as their husbands and fathers serve hundreds of days in reserve duty. Our need for redemption is collective and God offers consolation to us all, including Himself, as one. - PhiloTorah D'var Torah Dr. Seuss in the Sedra The above picture, the one from the top page of this week's PhiloTorah, comes from Dr. Seuss's first book, And to Think that I Saw it on Mulberry Street (1937). I remember reading the book to my daughters way back when, and staring at the page with this picture and thinking that there was something not kosher about it. I realized that it was the fact that an elephant and two giraffes were harnessed together, and tasked with pulling a bandwagon and a house-on-wheels of a kindly old man who would be able to listen to the band's music from beginning to end. The picture immediately brought to mind the prohibition from Parshat Ki Teitzei of plowing with an ox and a donkey together. The first question is, does the mitzva apply to pulling a bandwagon with an elephant and giraffes? Or not. Maybe it's only ox-donkey-plowing. The answer is, definitely yes! It is forbidden to harness an elephant with giraffes in order to pull a bandwagon. But it does not go without saying, because there are mitzvot in the Torah that are very specific and not to be generalized. The firstborn (if male) of a donkey (ATON in Hebrew; Jenny, in English) must be redeemed before its owner my derive any benefit from it. PIDYON PETTER CHAMOR. Horse, too? No. Dog? No. Cat? No. No. No. Just a donkey. Better example. Take a look at the two p'sukim (D'varim 22:10 & 11), each of which is a prohibition (LO TAASEI), that share the same 2-pasuk parsha: You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together. You shall not wear a mixture of wool and linen together. The first pasuk is the one we are focusing on: Do not plow with an ox and a donkey together. The second pasuk says Do not wear SHAATNEZ, wool and linen together. These two p'sukim are remarkably similar in structure. LO LO (Do not), verb - TACHAROSH (plow), TILBASH (wear), something and something - ox and donkey, wool and linen, YACHDAV YACHDAV, together. As similar as they are, look at how very different they are. SHAATNEZ - you cannot wear garments of wool and linen. How about wool and cotton? No problem. How about cashmere and linen? No problem. How about making a tapestry from wool and linen woven together? No problem. You can even make a Parochet from wool and linen for the Aron Kodesh in shul. SHAATNEZ is only wearing only wool and only linen together. There has not been any Rabbinic extension of the definition of SHAATNEZ. No CHUMRA to add any other fiber to this prohibition. Yet, we already said above, that the prohibition of LO TACHAROSH applies to an elephant and giraffes pulling a bandwagon. Plowing, in this pasuk and for this mitzva, represents any function; plowing is just a common example. Ox and donkey are only a common example, but the prohibition applies to any two non-compatible animals. How do we know all this? That wool is wool but an ox can be a giraffe? That a donkey is only a donkey in one place but can be an elephant in another place? The answer is simple. TORAH SHE-B'AL PEH, the Oral Torah. The Oral Law is an inseparable part of TORAH. It is joined at the hip (as the expression goes) and then some. Torah She-b'al Peh says in what context a BEN is a son, a male child, and in what context BEN means a child, offspring, male or female. It teaches us when YOM means daytime and when it refers to a whole 24-hour time period. Are we sure about that? That's another Definitely Yes! It is one of the foundation stones of Torah Judaism. In can be summed up as EMUNAT CHACHAMIM. MOSHE KIBEIL TORAH MISINAI... (the first of the two p'rakim of Avot for this Shabbat) - Moshe received ALL OF TORAH at Sinai and it is passed down from generation to generation. Back to the Dr. Seuss page. Okay, using an elephant and giraffes to pull a bandwagon is forbidden. But is that Torah Law, or rabbinic legislation that is inspired by Torah law? More difficult question. Maybe. The answer is that it is part and parcel of the same Torah command of LO TACHAROSH. Not one bit less than plowing with an ox and a donkey. Says who? TOSHBA (as Torah she-b'al Peh is affectionately referred to. Many peoples of the world - including some Jews, are convinced that the Bible is the Word of God - referring to the Written Torah. It is only part of the Word of God. That's how He wanted it. And that is a fundamental of our YAHADUT. PTDT MicroUlpan IVKA I wonder how many people know the Hebrew word for BUTTONHOLE. Button, yes - of course. KAFTOR But buttonhole? Ask around. See how many people know IVKA. Walk through the Parsha with Rabbi David Walk KI TEITZEI Don't Step on Me! This week's Torah reading contains more Mitzvot (74, about 12% of the 613) than any other. It's sort of a list of Mitzvot. Most of the Mitzvot fall into the category of MISHPATIM. These are Mitzvot which we understand because they contribute to a just ('have only accurate weights') or safe ('build railings on roofs') society. But there are those Mitzvot which make us scratch our heads (if not shake them) in confusion, and this week we have the reprise of one of the most famous: SHAATNEZ. SHAATNEZ is, of course, the prohibition of wearing clothes woven of linen and wool together. According to the Midrash, that word is a combination of three terms: one means a material that is pressed (SHU'A), or woven (TAVI) or twisted, (NOZ) together (Sifra, Kedoshim 4:18). The English called it 'linsey-woolsey'. As the OED records: earliest evidence for linsey-woolsey is from 1483, in Catholicon Anglicum: an English-Latin wordbook. Using a warp of linen and a woof of wool, linsey-woolsey is a mixed cloth that combines the properties of strong linen with spongy wool. Linsey-woolsey was an important fabric in Colonial America due to the relative scarcity of wool in the colonies. Cool! We rejected English wool as much as English tea! But, of course, this brings us to the issue of: Why is this prohibited? There are those who accept the idea that these CHUKIM are incomprehensible, and that's their power. Rav Ovadia S'forno explains: One of the foremost ways in which we demonstrate our reverence for the Lord is not by observing commandments which we find reasonable and useful, but by observing those commandments which we fail to understand, or worse, which run counter to what our intelligence dictates to our mind as being useful. Hence the Torah urges: You must make a special point of meticulously observing God's statutes (CHUKIM). The motivation for doing so, must not be merely fear of punishment, but blanket recognition that 'Father knows best', that the fact is that it was God Who legislated these statutes proves that they are intelligent and beneficial for us even if we fail to understand why. However, we rabbis can't control ourselves. So, there are a plethora of explanations for this ostensibly incomprehensible precept. I believe that it's the Ramban who takes the lead in this endeavor. He suggests that any mixing of diverse entities to produce a new creation (K'LAYIM) defies the intent and action of God's Creation. He discusses the prohibitions of mating different animals and the making of hybrid fruits and vegetables. All this leads him to conclude that this is the rationale behind prohibiting the production of cloth from the combination of animal fiber (wool) with vegetable fiber (linen). A number of authorities cite the presence of SHAATNEZ in the PAROCHET (the beautiful curtain separating the sections of the building within the Beit HaMikdash). There was also SHAATNEZ in the garments of the Kohen Gadol. We must not wear such items in everyday clothing, for it displays disrespect, if not an outright abomination. Finally, there's the historical approach. We don't want to be reminded of the first ever murder. According to one Midrash, Kayin, the farmer, kills his brother Hevel, the shepherd, over the disputes between these very different economic interests. We, also, are not surprised to find out that the farming society of Egypt denigrates shepherds, like Yosef. As Oscar Hammerstein wrote: The Farmer and the Cowman should be friends (Oklahoma! 1943). Well, we know very well why they can't get along. One needs to fence in fields; the other requires open range. So, the wearing of vegetable fiber together with animal thread reminds us of this enmity and violence which has permeated history. We'd rather not be enticed to think about such traditional competition and animus. Over the great majority of human history, people tended to make their own clothes. When we imagine a home from before about 1850, we tend to envision a spinning wheel in the tableau. People made their own cloth, and from that their own clothes. The Industrial Revolution put an end to that. Thank you James Hargreaves and your Spinning Jenny. Keeping the laws of SHAATNEZ was a snap until then, but how to keep this Mitzva when your suit is made in a factory far away is a dilemma. Even the labels in your garments (which themselves are relatively new) don't help, because manufacturers aren't required to list connecting threads or backings in their label of contents. Enter Reb Yosef Rosenberger! He became a one man movement to make the FRUM world aware of the problem of SHAATNEZ in modern clothing. He arrived in Brooklyn in 1941 as a boy straight from the Dachau Concentration Camp, in a rare prisoner exchange. He was amazing: tireless and focused. Never married or cared about his own needs (He lived many years in a modest apartment behind his 'lab' at 203 Lee Ave, Brooklyn). He made us aware of this issue. I already wrote about him in another post: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-power-of-one-3/ I met Reb Yosef in 1975, and he was just another person like the rest of us. But he made a difference because he cared and was dedicated. We can all effect changes in ourselves and those around us if we just become dedicated to the issue at hand. As we move deeper into Elul and think about the approaching YAMIM NORA'IM, please, remember this idea about Reb Yosef and SHAATNEZ: You can make a difference! What we understand or can't fathom isn't really important (as a Litvak it's hard for me to admit that). What's crucial is what we do and how we affect those around us. We can all be agents for change and improvement. Reb Yosef's catch phrase was: Please, don't step on me! He meant don't step on the CHOK of SHAATNEZ, but he could have been talking about himself and each of us! Be like Reb Yosef, don't give up! 5786 can be a better year for each of us and for Klal Yisrael, if we make it so. And always remember the Power of One! p Rav Kook Torah by Rabbi Chanan Morrison <-> www.ravkooktorah.com Faith in Troubled Times The following account, related by a student of Merkaz HaRav, took place during the 1973 Yom Kippur War. The story illustrates Rabbi Zvi Yehuda Kook's guidance on how we should conduct ourselves during troubled and difficult times. Yom Kippur that year, I prayed at Beit HaRav, the original location of the Merkaz HaRav yeshiva in Jerusalem. Rav Tzvi Yehuda Kook also prayed there. During the chazan's repetition of the Musaf prayer, we were startled to hear the civil defense alarms wailing throughout Jerusalem. After Yom Kippur ended, I was called up to my unit. For over a month I was stationed in the Sinai Desert. When I was finally granted a short leave from the army, I made my way to Jerusalem. First I went to the Kotel, where I prayed, pouring out my heart over the terrible sights I had witnessed during the war. Then I visited my fiancee. Our wedding date had already arrived, but due to the war it had been postponed indefinitely. My fiancee asked me, "What will be with our wedding?" I told her that now, in the midst of this dreadful war, with so many soldiers killed, wounded and missing, I didn't think it was the right time to get married. The situation was still very tense and we were afraid the fighting might break out again. It was impossible to know when and in what condition we would return from the war. Therefore, I explained, we must postpone the wedding until the situation stabilizes. Reluctantly, my fiancee accepted my decision. I returned to my unit in Sinai. We dug into our lines and kept a constant lookout for enemy forces. Tensions were high. Henry Kissinger, the American Secretary of Defense, had arrived in Israel, with his shuttle diplomacy between Jerusalem and the Arab capitals. But our worries and fears deepened. After a few weeks, I was granted a second leave. Once again, my fiancee asked, "What will be with our wedding?" I told her that the situation was still difficult. We have no choice but to wait. "You have a rabbi", she said. "Ask him. Seek daat Torah - consult with a Torah scholar." I was pleased by her suggestion and immediately made my way to Merkaz HaRav. The yeshiva was nearly empty, as many of the students had been called up for the war. I met with Rav Tzvi Yehuda Kook and related my dilemma. I spoke about the terrible war, about the unfathomable number of casualties and soldiers missing in action, about the palpable dangers we faced on the front lines. I explained that I felt that, in this difficult time, it was not appropriate to arrange a wedding. The rabbi listened to me with complete attention, and then he reflected on the matter. After a minute of silence, he said, "We act in accordance with the rules of Halacha. In Halacha, one decides according to the principles of ROV - the majority of cases - and CHAZAKA - the presumption that pre-existing conditions will persist. The majority of wounded soldiers recover, and the majority of those who go out to battle return." Normally, Rav Tzvi Yehuda would conclude with some guidance but leave the ultimate decision to the person seeking advice. This time, however, he finished his words with an unequivocal declaration: "Mazal tov!" Smiling, he shook my hand warmly. I went back to my fiancee and related the rabbi's verdict. We set a new date for the wedding. I returned to the army, and news of my upcoming wedding lifted the spirits of the entire battalion. They all rejoiced. Soldiers volunteered days of their army leave - it was called a 'Day Bank' - and proudly presented me with a gift of 13 vacation days. The day before the wedding, I took a flight to Lod airport. I prayed at the Kotel, immersed in a mikveh, and stood under the chupa. Rav Tzvi Yehuda Kook attended the wedding, as did a few fellow students from yeshiva and some soldiers on leave. The joy of the wedding raised everyone's spirits, infusing them with renewed strength. So it was that, during the very days of that blood-soaked war, when our enemies sought to destroy us, we built our home K'DAT MOSHE V'YISRAEL, "according to the laws of Moshe and Yisrael." In another incident from the war, involving the burial of one of the rabbi's beloved students, Rabbi Chanan Porat noted: "It was clear that our rabbi, in his unique manner, wanted to teach us that the Yom Kippur War - despite the many sacrifices, despite the deep crisis that it created - will not break us. On the contrary, our job is to increase light and engage in matters of the 'land of the living'." Translated from Mashmia Yeshuah (Harbinger of Redemption) by Simcha Raz and Hilah Volbershtin, pp. 359-360, 363 Parsha Story Stories and Parables from the famed Maggid of Dubno by Rabbi Chanan Morrison Spiritual Lessons from the Battlefield KI TEITZEI The Newcomer and the Town Assembly Eliezer, freshly arrived in a town where he knew no one, had a singular priority: to stay out of trouble. He was far from home, with no family or friends to fall back on, and in this unfamiliar place, that made all the difference. He kept his distance from the powerful and wealthy, mindful not to step on any toes that could crush him under their weight. But as for the common folk - the everyday townspeople and the poor, especially - well, they couldn't really hurt him, could they? So Eliezer wasn't shy about being a little less careful in his dealings with them. After all, they had no influence, no power. Or so he thought. Then one day, a neighbor - one of those "common folk" Eliezer had been so dismissive of - got into a heated argument with him. The neighbor, not one to back down easily, demanded that the whole town weigh in on who was right. An assembly was called, and suddenly, Eliezer found himself in the middle of a full-blown town trial. Can you imagine the scene? Eliezer, who had previously ignored the poor and acted as though they were invisible, now found himself scrambling to switch gears. The stakes had shifted. So, in an instant, he began treating everyone with the utmost respect. A polite nod here, a friendly word there. The wealthy? Still important, of course. But now the poor? They were powerful too. They had a vote, and they could sway the outcome of his case. Times of Judgment This is exactly what the Torah warns us about: "When a camp goes out against your enemies, you shall beware of everything evil" (D'varim 23:10). War, the Torah reminds us, is not like peace. In times of peace, we can afford to take a step back, to evaluate, and to weigh the gravity of our mistakes. Some missteps are large, demanding immediate action; others are minor, small enough to let pass without too much worry. In the calm of daily life, there's room to sort things out, to put mistakes into perspective. But in times of war, the rules change. Every mistake, no matter how small, carries weight. The Torah urges us to be vigilant, to "beware of everything evil". This is a call to heightened awareness. When danger looms, we cannot afford to ignore even the smallest fault. Every detail matters. When we stand before God during the High Holidays, we too find ourselves in a kind of spiritual "war". It's not a battle against external enemies, but against internal ones: bad habits, weaknesses, and shortcomings. Just as Eliezer realized that he needed to treat even the humblest townspeople with respect - because each had the power to determine his fate - we must recognize that every small misstep in our lives has consequences. We must treat our actions and mistakes with care, because, in the end, it is the sum of those small moments that will shape our judgment. During these days of T'shuva, we should be mindful of "everything evil". Every effort to correct our wrongs and improve ourselves has the power to shift our course and make us worthy of the new year ahead. Adapted from Ohel Yaakov, Ki Teitzei 11 Q&A Reprinted from Living the Halachic Process by Rabbi Daniel Mann - Eretz Hemdah, with their permission [www.eretzhemdah.org] Sleeping on Rosh HaShana Question: May one sleep on Rosh HaShana afternoon? Answer: It is difficult to balance the various aspects of Rosh HaShana. It is simultaneously a day of awe and of festivity. The minhag to limit sleep on Rosh HaShana stems from the awe of the Day of Judgment, and many take it very seriously. We will review the sources and suggest to the individual to choose his practice based on his custom, his strength, and his circumstances. The Rama cites and praises the minhag not to sleep on the day of Rosh HaShana. The source given is a Yerushalmi that states that if one sleeps on Rosh HaShana, then his mazal (roughly, his fortune) sleeps, implying that the judgment he receives may not be as favorable as it could have been. Certainly, we have precedent in Tanach that it is foolish to sleep when one's fate hangs in the balance. The Mishna Berura and others quote the Arizal as saying that after chatzot (midday), the heavenly situation is such that one may sleep. As few people finish davening and eating by chatzot, this minhag seems to have little impact on most of us. However, not all agree with the Arizal on this matter. The Bach mentions that the Maharam was totally lenient about sleeping on Rosh HaShana. It is noteworthy that a careful reading of the above primary source may suggest that many 'miss the boat' concerning this minhag. The source does not say not to go to sleep during the day of Rosh HaShana but "not to sleep". According to some, this means that one should wake up before the day begins, which may be as early as ALOT HASHACHAR, more than an hour before sunrise. (The straightforward implication of the Aruch HaShulchan and perhaps the Chayei Adam goes against that supposition.) Even according to this approach, there is room for leniency to sleep until sunrise, and all the more so if waking up so early will affect one's concentration during tefilla. Nevertheless, there are strong grounds for saying that if one is capable of getting up early, it is counterproductive to sleep longer in order to be able to stay up in the afternoon. The Mishna Berura says that not sleeping is not the goal in and of itself. Rather, one should spend his time on spiritually worthwhile activities such as learning Torah and reciting T'hilim. If a little sleep will facilitate learning, then it is a worthwhile tradeoff. The Mishna Berura goes on to say that wasting one's time is equivalent to sleeping. As the main day of Rosh HaShana and its judgment is the first one, there is additional reason for leniency on the second day. The Daily Portion - Sivan Rahav Meir We Can Do This! Translation by Yehoshua Siskin Sometimes we have so many obligations that it appears impossible to fulfill them. This week's Torah portion has more mitzvot than any other, 74 out of a total of 613 (more than 12%). Our Torah portion deals with every area of life, from family, marriage, education, and social interactions to economics and agriculture. So many obligations may seem onerous but our sages are not apprehensive about our ability to fulfill them. The fact that we received so many mitzvot testifies to God's faith in us. In any large project, the most capable workers will be given the most responsibility. If God gave us so many mitzvot it's because he knows of what we are capable. We have enormous inner strength and are suitable for carrying out the mission our Creator has designated for us. Every mitzva is not just another burdensome task but an opportunity to draw closer to God, an expression of His trust and love. It's an opportunity to show who we really are by bringing out the divine potential within us. In the month of Elul, and with the beginning of the school year, God reveals to us that He trusts us and believes in us, and reminds us to believe in ourselves. We can do it. To receive Sivan Rahav-Meir's daily WhatsApp: tiny.cc/DailyPortion From the Writings of Rabbi Ephraim Sprecher z"l A Modern Day Amalek N.B. This was written more than 13 years ago - yet... Over 9000 rockets and mortar shells have been fired at Israel since the Gaza withdrawal and the expulsion of almost 10,000 Jews from their homes in Gush Katif in the summer of 2005. The sporadic rocket fire continues until today. Why does Hamas reject any peace with Israel or even the existence of Israel itself? There are the public proclamations by Hamas for the destruction of Israel and the killing of Jews wherever they may be. It is not just Hamas because recently, PA TV reported that the reason why Palestinians should have children is so that their blood should be a "fertilizer" to saturate the land of Palestine by killing Jews. This statement comes from the so called "moderate" Palestinian Authority. Also, PA Mufti Muhammad Hussein gave a hate filled speech that was broadcast on PA TV. He said, "The hour of redemption will not come until you fight all the Jews. The Jew will hide behind stones and trees. Then the stones or trees will call, 'Oh Muslim martyr, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.'" Mufti Muhammad Hussein is following in the footsteps of the late Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, who, in a meeting with Adolf Hitler in 1941 at the Reich Chancellery, urged Hitler to speed up the annihilation and extermination of the Jews. In fact, according to certain Holocaust historians, the Mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini, was one of the architects of the Final Solution. Jews everywhere, not just in Israel, are referred to by Hamas as inherently evil, as responsible for all the evils of the world, as defilers of Islam and as "the sons of apes and pigs". On February 6, 2012, the PA signed a pact with Hamas for a unity government. This is genocidal anti-Semitism. From where does this cult of murderous hatred come? In Parshat Ki Teitzei, the Torah describes the Amalekite unprovoked terrorist attack on the weakest and most defenseless members of the Jewish people. This is exactly where Hamas aims their rockets at Jewish kindergardens and school buses. Rashi on Parshat Ki Teitzei describes what makes Amalek's hatred towards us unique and different from all other Jew-hating nations. He explains that Amalek's hate for us is greater than his love for his own life. Amalek is willing to destroy himself in order to kill us. This is precisely the tactic of Hamas's suicide bombers – glorifying suicide in order to murder Jews. The mother of the terrorist, who slaughtered the Fogel family including children, praised her son as a hero on PA TV. She told the PA reporter that she wished her other sons would also murder Jews. In a recent survey, a majority of the Palestinians justified suicide bombings against Israel and were willing to sacrifice their own children to murder Jews. There is an amazing verse in T'hilim 83:8, where the Psalmist compares Amalek to Philistia as the arch-enemies of Israel. Arafat always claimed that the Palestinians are the descendants of the ancient nation of Philistia. Rabbi Chaim Soloveitchik ruled that any nation that displays this irrational hatred towards Jews, i.e. who are willing to destroy their own lives in order to murder Jews, can halachically be defined as Amalek even today. According to this halachic ruling, (perhaps) Hamas would qualify as being a full-fledged member of the Amalekite nation. -ESP Ed. note: I removed the ? from Rabbi Sprecher's title. So too, my editing of the word (perhaps) Y'HI ZICHRO BARUCH OzTORAH by Rabbi Dr Raymond Apple z"l KI TEITZEI Watching Your Words "That which has gone out of your lips you shall observe and do" (D'varim 23:24) is good Jewish doctrine. So important is this rule that it is one of the reasons for having Kol Nidrei. People are sometimes buoyed up by emotion and promise the world. "Now that I have recovered from illness I will be in shule every week… I love you so dearly that I will never leave you for a day… I hate you so much that I will never speak to you again… I am so annoyed with the chazan that I'm never coming to shule again…". Some of the promises we make are magnificent and beautiful, others foolish and cruel. We should never promise things to other people unless we intend to keep them, and if we regret our promises we have to secure the other person's forgiveness and forbearance. Kol Nidrei, however, involves promises to God (or to ourselves), made at a moment when we may not have been realistic or practical. How can we face the Almighty in prayer on Yom Kippur with unfulfilled or unfulfillable promises on our conscience? That's why the Kol Nidrei declaration was formulated, to ensure we show God our regret for having promised too much and our request that He hold us back from promising what we cannot deliver. The fact that the High Holydays are now so imminent should spur our thinking to consider what new year resolutions we should be making. We can all do with a change for the better in our spiritual, ethical and practical Jewish development. There are things we should be doing, and things we should be doing better. For some the right approach is a total sea-change, but in most cases the practical thing is to upgrade ourselves gradually. If we know ourselves we will promise sensibly and work towards the goal rather than trying to get there in a hurry and possibly finding it was all too much. Remember - Don't Forget The sidra ends with a strange command: "Remember: do not forget" (D'varim 25:17-19). The subject matter is the inhumanity of Amalek. To remember what he did, that we understand. Not to forget - what does that add to the discussion? In fact there are two separate duties. To remember is to make a conscious choice to keep something alive in our memories. Not to forget is to prevent something slipping away into the recesses of our conscience and then disappearing altogether. There are times when we deliberately want to forget. Some people, for example, remember only the harm others have done and intentionally forget the good times and good deeds. Some work very hard to forget their humble origins and eventually persuade themselves that a less than upmarket beginning never ever existed. So it can be important to be told, "Do not forget!" But such is the dilemma of remembering and not forgetting that there are also times when we do need to be able to forget, especially a slight or an injury. It harms us over and over again when we obsess about something which needs to be allowed to recede and die. What tells us when "Do not forget" applies, or "Do forget"? Only a mature, sensible conscience, trained in the Torah way of thinking. -OZ Y'HI ZICHRO BARUCH Sedra Highlight - Dr Jacob Solomon, F.R.G.S. KI TEITZEI 'If a bird's nest happens to be before you, on any tree or on the ground… you shall not take the mother with the young. You shall send away the mother and take the young for yourself, so that it will good for you and prolong your days' (22: 6-7). This seemingly straightforward commandment has given rise to many questions, among which are: (1) The act of sending away the mother bird appears to be an act of mercy. Why therefore does the Talmud (B'rachot 33b) declare that if one says, "Your (i.e. G-d's) mercies extend even to a bird's nest" (i.e. the above commandment) he must be silenced? Surely this precept ideally represents G-d's 'mercy on all flesh' (T'hilim 145:9)? (2) The Torah promises that those who observe this commandment will be rewarded with good fortune and long life. This reward is also promised for two other specific precepts in the Torah - honouring parents (4:16) and honest conduct in business (using exact weight and measures) (25:15). What, therefore, have the commandments of sending away the mother bird, honouring parents, and integrity in business dealings got in common? (3) The Talmud (Kiddushin 39b) brings the following story. A father asked his son to climb a tree and bring down the eggs from the nest. The son climbed the tree, frightened off the mother bird and took the eggs. Thus he merited the rewards of good fortune and long life twice - for honouring his father and for frightening off the mother bird. However, on the way down he fell from the tree and was instantly killed. One of the answers given by the Talmud - that the Torah does not expect a person to behave recklessly in observing commandments - seems hard to digest. For many people - then and today (the writer among them) have missed disaster by a hairbreadth in far more dangerous situations than climbing a tree… So how may the boy's death be understood in the light of the Torah's promises? In working towards resolving these difficulties, it is important to look at the following. Firstly, the way various commentators understand the reasoning behind the requirement to send away the mother bird. Secondly, the different interpretations given to, 'so that it will be good for you and prolong your days'. The Rambam (Moreh Nevuchim 3:48) explains that the reason for this commandment is to avoid cruelty to animals. Animals instinctively love their young, and they suffer greatly when they see them slaughtered or taken away. The Ha'amek Davar goes further, by explaining that the special act of mercy involved here is the sending away of the mother bird. The mother could have flown away to save her own life, but instead she remained - willing to die for her children - thus showing exceptional mercy. So it is forbidden to abuse her compassion and grab her or the children. The Ramban changes the focus of this commandment, stating that its purpose is to inculcate compassion in people, not because (per se) He pities the birds and the animals. It is forbidden to say the latter (as per B'rachot 33b) because G-d does allow people to use and slaughter animals for their own needs. Rather, such commandments teach people to accustom themselves to act considerately and mercifully in daily life. The Rashbam taking it a step further by saying that even when you're overcome with desire to satisfy hunger, you must not in your rashness act cruelly towards animals. He also brings this dimension in explaining the prohibition of cooking a kid in its readily available mother's milk and to slaughtering an animal and its readily available parent on the same day. This explanation helps to answer the first question - why one who declares, "Your mercies extend even to a bird's nest" must be silenced: the reason for this precept is not to demonstrate mercy to the birds, but to elevate the spiritual level of the Torah Nation. However neither explanation appears to address the promise of quality, long life, and the issues raised by the story of the death of the son who fell from the tree. Abarbanel sees the p'sukim under discussion in much broader terms, and with very wide implications. He develops the theme of G-d wanting to ensure the continuity in His Creation, and to prevent anything from terminating before its time. So He permitted picking fruit, but forbade chopping fruit trees down (20:19-20). Similarly, He allowed removing the young, but banned taking the mother bird that can perpetuate the Creation by giving birth to more young. So the words 'so that it will be good for you and prolong your days' have global implications in terms of sustainability. Maintaining the continuity of the Creation means that Man will continually have the supplies and environment he needs to optimize his existence, so that he will live a longer and higher quality life as a result. Taken to extremes, this is not on the individual basis, as in the story of the fatal accident from falling from the tree, but on the community - as a single entity. This principle is of great importance today. As we continue to enjoy and benefit from the fruits of the Creation via the ducts of advanced technology, we have to treat the environment with wisdom and respect. We cannot afford to break the natural limits of the Earth by destroying the very forces that ensure a balance in nature, and Man's optimal symbiotic harmony with the Creation. Thus, for example, greatest caution must be taken in genetic engineering. It is something with the short-term potential of raising the standard of living (and creating yet more multi-millionaire food manufacturers), but it carries the long term high risk of upsetting the existing food webs and cycles of organic matter. Thus an individual project in genetic engineering must be approached by looking at this long-term issue - will the immediate satisfaction it is planned to give interfere with the Creation, disturbing the prospect of 'so that it will be good for you and prolong your days'? And this system of values helps us to see the common denominator between sending away the mother bird, honouring parents, and honesty in business. All three must be observed to ensure happy, long life for members of the community at large. Thus unbridled freedom is not what most children want from an early age - despite what they say. They want a feeling of love and security, which they can reciprocate. This is developed where the home atmosphere is built on the foundations of mutual respect. The parents affectionately, but firmly set reasonable boundaries, and the child (in the long run) obtains the psychological security he needs to make his or her way in the world, optimizing potential for the common good. Similarly, upright business ethics. Honest weights and measures symbolize the importance of trust within the community. Thus a society where people are appointed to key powerful positions on the basis on whom they know and/or are related to can feature, at best, ugly administrative incompetence - and at worst its complete breakdown at the hands of a selfish oligarchy. This has resulted in widespread disease and starvation in many Third World countries… the very antitheses of the life promoting forces for quality long lives… 2 Ed. note: Allow me to add that a promise of a good and long life should not only be thought of in context of this world, but more significantly, the World to Come. Menachem Persoff - menpmp@gmail.com This week we read the fifth of the Haftarot of Consolation, following on from Tish'a b'Av. The Haftara (Yishayahu 54:1-10) is poignant and stirring. The prophet addresses a people that was exiled and now lives with uncertainty. The prophet is speaking to an audience that was oppressed and to a city, Yerushalayim that was abandoned. Yishayahu could have been talking to us or, more precisely, to our parents and grandparents who survived the horrors of the Second World War but had the merit to see Yerushalayim rebuilt. One of the most potent lines of the Haftara reads, "For just a tiny moment I abandoned you but with great compassion I will gather you up." How many times, on both a personal and national level, have we felt that sense of abandonment? Do we not, even today, have a fear of the unknown? Do we not wonder what will be tomorrow, in a few years, in the more distant future? In truth, however, we see the Ge'ula unfolding before our eyes. We see desolate cities resettled, to cite the words of the prophet. We cry out to Hashem in our Elul prayers: "Hide not Your face!" – But we proclaim, "For in the day of trouble He will hide me in His pavilion... and my head will be lifted above my enemies" (T'hilim 30). Moreover, in these days when 'The King is in the field', we take solace from Yeshayahu's prediction that "My devotion to you will not waver and My Covenant of Peace will not collapse says He who shows compassion to you – Hashem. MP Dvar Torah by Rabbi Chanoch Yeres to his community at Beit Knesset Beit Yisrael, Yemin Moshe Graciously shared with PhiloTorah KI TEITZEI In this week's parsha there is a description of a seemingly obscure mitzva – the command of sending away the mother bird prior to taking her chicks or eggs (D'varim 22:6-7). The Torah refers to this mitzva as Shilu'ach HaKen. Some of the commentaries explain that the reason for this mitzva is to teach us the attribute of compassion. Ramban elaborates on this issue and carefully explains that this mitzva is not an animal rights issue. The Torah is going out its way to educate compassion to humanity. If we can learn to show compassion to the animal kingdom than we have the ability to understand the need to have compassion for humankind. This is the monumental reason for this mitzva. When looking at the p'sukim describing this mitzva, one may notice something out of place. The words used are KI YIKAREI KAN TZIPOR – "When you happen upon a bird's nest..." To describe the words "to happen upon" would make sense for the Hebrew word ending with a HEI from the root... KUF-REISH-HEI meaning by happenstance, it just happened, if a bird's nest chance to be. Yet the word in the pasuk ends quite differently. The word has been spelled with an ALEF at the end, from the root KUF-REISH-ALEF - meaning to call out. The pasuk, no doubt intends to describe a chance meet in the field of an inhabited nest. Why would the pasuk use a word that seemingly means, "If the bird nest CALLED OUT to you? Why use such a different spelling? I saw quoted by Rav Shalom Schwadron zt"l in his Sefer "Kol Dodi" a fascinating explanation to this spelling that its message can have a remarkable influence on our day-to-day life. An individual is walking along and suddenly a bird's nest appears before him in a field or in a tree. There is no such thing as "by chance" or "just happened". Rather, the mitzva of SHILU'ACH HAKEN is CALLING OUT to him. Perhaps, this seemingly coincidence moment is no coincidence at all, but G-d's way of calling out to the person that he needs and requires personal correction in his attribute of compassion. If it HAPPENS (YIKAREI, with a HEI), that this person of all people, runs into this scenario, then what really transpired here was YIKAREI with an ALEF – that the mitzva of chasing away the mother bird is CALLING OUT to him to put him on notice - that perhaps his practice of his compassion needs improvement. How many times do we find ourselves in situations that befall us suddenly and we throw it up to chance and coincidence, yet, if we think a little deeper, we may be able to associate the happenstance with an opportunity of G-d calling out to us. G-d has unique ways in telling us "This is what you need, this is what is necessary for you to experience." The Weekly 'Hi All' by Rabbi Jeff Bienenfeld KI TEITZEI 5784 Finding HaShem In the past, we have discussed the remarkable multilayered halachic institution of HASHAVAT AVEIDA - returning what is lost - which is found in this week's Parsha (22:1-3). In this chizuk, let us highlight one of the most extraordinary extensions of this mitzva. Of course, in particular, as we close on Sefer D'varim and approach the Yamim Nora'im, it behooves us to reflect upon this and other broader features of the mitzva of HASHAVAT AVEIDA as we consider - as we ought - the central mitzva of these Holy Days - the mitzva of T'SHUVA. The clear linguistic similarity between T'SHUVA and the HASHAVA of HASHAVAT AVEIDA should not be lost upon us. Of one such deeper layer of the HA'SHAVAT AVEIDA mandate, we present a deeply moving and enriching religious truth as articulated by Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik zt"l. (HaAdam v'Olamo, pp. 77-79). The Rav begins by explaining the expression, ELOKEI AVRAHAM. He asserts that it does not mean "the Gd who revealed himself to Avraham." Rather, its grammatical usage is in the possessive - the Gd Who, as it were, became "the acquisition of Avraham". The Rav then continues by referencing the institution of returning lost objects and suggests that prior to Avraham, Gd was "lost". He was forgotten in the pagan idolatries of the time. Gd was HEFKEIR - ownerless. And then, as Rambam states (Hilchot Avoda Zara 1:2-3), there arose the "pillar of the world, Avraham". Avraham begins searching for Gd Who has become lost and abandoned… and he finds Him! And once he does, much like someone who finds a lost item, Avraham make take possession of Gd Himself; hence, ELOKEI AVRAHAM. From this remarkable insight, the Rav draws an important message. In our age of HESTEIR PANIM - the hiddenness of Gd, His apparent concealment beckons a human response. Although the Master of the Universe appears lost and cast-off, He nevertheless can be found. It all depends, asserts the Rav, upon one condition. Like of Avraham, one must search for Him, quest and pursue after Him, and do so with all his might. The verse that the Rav often quotes is: "And from there, you will seek the Lord, your Gd, and you will find Him, if you seek Him with all your heart and all your soul" (D'varim 4:29). In a different source, the Rav, banking off Ramban's cryptic comment of the phrase, "You shall seek out His resting place and come there" (D'varim 12:5), expands upon his observation above and contributes an additional idea. "The words L'SHICHNO TIDRASHU mean search for His abiding, for His being present; search for His Presence right here and now. Search for Gd and you will find Him… Even when you do come to the realization that He is present in every experience, you will not stop there. UVATA SHAMA - you will come a little further. Where is the SHAMA You will be confronted by Gd from outside and beyond the universe. You will come further than your destination, "to see the face of the Master, the Lord, Gd of Israel" - to see the Gd who revealed Himself to Israel at Sinai. "And Gd descended on Mount Sinai (Sh'mot 19:20) - from outside the world, from beyond the world, from His transcendental abode." (D'rashot HaRav, pp. 180-182) The Alter Rebbe in his Likutei Torah (Parshat R'ei 32:2, s.v. MA'AMAR ANI L'DODI) also presents a similar idea, again referencing the halachot of HASHAVAT AVEIDA, and adds this religious insight: The great challenge of the Jew, he declares, is to retrieve the Divine sparks from exile. And such an act of spiritual recovery and repossession can only be accomplished through seeking those sacred sparks where they were lost. What the Alter Rebbe then asks is this: but where were they lost? His answer: In the inner recesses of the soul of the Jew. Of course, in this final expansion of the institution of HASHAVAT AVEIDA - it certainly seems that it is we who are charged to seek the Almighty. However, there is a far deeper idea implicit in this last seeking; a beautiful thought that perhaps brings us to the most radiant and exalted idea of all. The Kli Chemda (Metzora #1) and the Alter Rebbe (Igeret HaT'shUva, ch. 5, s.v. V'HINEI), among many others, quote this Zohar. On the verse in the Torah (B'reishit 2:7) which states that HaShem "breathed into his [man's] nostrils the soul of life. Chazal teach, " He who blew [into man], from Himself, He blew." In other words, our souls are but a CHEILEK ELOKI MIMAAL (Beis Yoseh L'haba, Vayikra 12:3, 13:2, among others), a piece of the Divine Essence. If so, may we humbly suggest this elevating spiritual truth: The very moment we steadfastly search for Gd and find Him, we quite suddenly - and blessedly - discover something else entirely. We meet our very souls, our pristine selves, our CHEILEK ELOKI MIMAAL. And with that glorious discovery, we turn - and return - ourselves to HaShem by revealing and unveiling the Almighty within ourselves. He, hushed and hidden, has always been there. In finding Him, in effect, we find ourselves! It thus behooves us to fulfill this final and ultimate extension of HASHAVAT AVEIDA. Because in doing so, we will succeed in fulfilling what is, after all, the fundamental core and supreme goal of this mitzva in its broadest and deepest meaning. That of T'shuva - the magnificent and glorious spiritual return of the Jew to His Maker! As the mitzva of HASHAVAT AVEIDA is found in Parshat Ki Teitzei, always but a few weeks before the Yamim Nora'im, let us conclude with Rav Soloveitchik's relevant, beautifully lyrical, and deeply moving reflection as we approach this awesome and sacred festival moment in time. "Judaism knows well the tensions and hesitations involved in the weary search for Gd, as well as the joy and ecstasy of the search. All the prophets called upon us to… search out the secrets of the cosmic process… and to uncover the hidden and obscure - the glory of the Creator's majesty, which hovers over mute creation. They all wove laurels for the searchers after Gd, both for those who seek Him within "mechanical" nature, in its gray opacity, and for those who tear open the windows of the wondrous higher realms of pure, utterly perfect being… "And on the nights preceding the High Holy Days, when the Jewish people recite their penitential prayers (S'lichot), the beloved clings to her lover and pleads with Him that her request should not be in vain, and that He should present himself to her when she goes out to greet Him. A whispered plea bursts forth and rises with the morning star that appears on the eastern horizon: "Present Yourself to us when we seek You, as it is written, 'And from there you shall seek Him with all your heart and all your soul' (D'varim 4:29). "Master of the Universe, behold, we search for and seek You with all our being; we long for You with every beat of our hearts; we run after You. You attract us with an awesome, enormous power that no one can withstand. We hear Your footstep; You are very, very near to us. Please be here with us now, tonight, the night of penitential prayers, [the night] clothed in secret and mystery, the night of extensive grace and manifold mercies. Please appear to us when we seek You!" (And From There You Shall Seek, pp. 19-20) Afterthoughts - Yocheved Bienenfeld BOREI N'FASHOT RABOT V'CHESRONAN #4 Since Elul is the harbinger of Rosh HaShana and thoughts of t'shuva abound, it led me to understand this bracha in yet, another way. No one is perfect, it was not meant to be that way. Gd created us, BOREI N'FASHOT RABOT V'CHESRONAN, specifically with CHESRONOT, failings, lackings. Why? Many reasons (which I've noted in previous entries). But in this pre-Rosh HaShana time, I think it refers to our job right now: T'shuva. We were given these CHESRONOT to see how we would respond to them, what we would do with them. It is up to me to fill in the gaps, to become a more "perfect" person, someone who would please Gd. And that would be through T'shuva, correct what needs to be corrected, fill in the blanks. The mishna in Makot tells us: RATZA HAKADOSH BARUCH HU L'ZAKOT ET YISRAEL, L'FICHACH HIRBA LAHEM TORAH UMITZVOT. Gd gives us opportunities to achieve merits by learning Torah and performing mitzvot. Therefore, in so doing, my T'shuva grants me a place in both worlds: L'HACHAYOT BAHEM NEFESH KOL CHAI - We merit a better (perhaps, longer) life here as well as in Olam Haba, as it says, BARUCH CHEI HA-OLAMIM. KI TEITZEI GM CAVEAT: The following GM does not apply to my marriage, B"H; hopefully, it never will. And hopefully, you who are reading this, will also experience - Marriage is… two people building one shared "home" in every sense. and not necessarily, this - Marriage is… hard work disguised as love, and love sustained by hard work. Still... look at the GM with a NPP (neat partial pasuk) from this week's sedra, and a pasuk from a very familiar chapter of T'hilim. D'varim 24:5 in Ki Teitzei - When a man takes a new wife, he shall not go out in the army, nor shall he be subjected to anything associated with it. He shall remain free for his home for one year and delight his wife, whom he has taken. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt"l was known to say that the one year in the pasuk gives the husband the status of CHATAN for a year - as far as others are concerned. But the Torah's command to delight his wife - is a forever commitment on his part. The gimatriya of this NPP is 2101. Its AT-BASH gimatriya is 1525. Of the ten p'sukim with 1525 as a gimatriya, this one jumped out: T'hilim 121:2 - My help is from HaShem, the Maker of heaven and earth. For those who need Divine help to guide them through rough spots in their marriage, let them draw strength and reassurance from this pasuk. For those blessed with a happy, smooth, trouble-free marriage with the highest form of mutual love... they should also know that HaShem has their backs (so to speak). The fact is, whether a marriage faces storms or sails in calm waters, the pasuk reminds us that EZRI MEI'IM HASHEM is always the foundation. Even the most loving partnership endures only because HaShem - OSEH SHAMAYIM VA'ARETZ - holds it steady. GM Many mitzvot in Parshat Ki Teitzei - 74, to be specific. All different types of mitzvot. Look at D'varim 25:4 - You shall not muzzle an ox when it is threshing [the grain]. Short pasuk; one prohibition among the Torah's 365 LO TAASEI. Why can't we muzzle an animal when it is working with food? Before you say that it would be cruel to the animal to muzzle it, you have to remember that the Torah does not give that reason - nor any reason. So officially and initially, the reason you cannot muzzle an animal when it is working with food is that G-d said so. Then, almost without hesitation, our Sages are pretty sure that this is a mitzva - one of a number - that teaches us and sensitizes us to be kind to animals. The gimatriya of this pasuk is 1367. None of the other four p'sukim in Tanach with the same gimatriya present an interesting GM. Nor do the seven p'sukim with gimatriyas that match the NISTAR gimatriya of our pasuk (1962). Nor the five p'sukim that match its MILUI gimatriya (3329). Nor the four p'sukim with gimatriyas of 1106, the AT-BASH gimatriya of our pasuk. But - one of the two p'sukim with a gimatriya of 746, the AL-BAM gimatriya of our pasuk, finally says: "Pick me!" T'hilim 116:5 - HaShem is gracious and righteous, and our God is merciful. Does this prove that the merciful G-d is teaching us mercy towards the animals? No, I wouldn't say 'prove'. But it is a nice numeric indicator that we are on the right track when we 'explain' this mitzva as one that commands us to avoid TZAAR BAALEI CHAYIM, cruelty to animals. RED ALERT! KI TEITZEI by Rabbi Eddie Davis (RED) of the Young Israel of Hollywood - Ft. Lauderdale (Florida) DIVREI TORAH <-> Y'FAT TO'AR. A Jewish soldier out fighting a war, sees a beautiful captive woman, and desires to possess her. This is a rare case in the Torah, whereby the Torah makes it possible for a Jew to yield to his evil inclination, his YEITZER HARA. Most commentators claim that the Torah actually allows him to be with her one time and then have her go through the conversion process before she becomes his wife. Rashi and the Ramban are the only two who stand firm, stating that he can never be with her even one time before she converts. The difference of opinion is whether they can believe that he can control himself before she goes through with the procedure. This is, I believe, the only time in the Torah that the Torah actually yields to a man's evil desires. It is a sad situation to believe that a man's passions would get the best of him. And there is no control. <-> The wayward and rebellious son. Another strange Halacha. An underage boy is so rebellious that he stands to be executed for that we believe he will do in life when he gets older. Our Sages state that this case never happened and never will happen. The Torah writes it to teach us sincere lessons in child raising. Maybe the Torah is teaching us that parenting is not perfect, but the attempt to do so will always be there. The Torah believes that the father is in control in the family, a concept that would be challenged today. But neither parent should ever be allowed to abuse a child. The result would be this type of child, on the road to doing some very terrible acts of crime later in life. The Torah states that the father and mother must be of the same voice in their discipline tactics with the child. The family dynamic is constantly in flux and requires proper discipline by all parts of the family. <-> If a Jew is found guilty of blasphemy or idolatry, he is to be executed by stoning. In 21:22, the Torah adds the execution is followed by hanging his body in public. The public display of the executed body is a demonstrated act by Hashem to show us how the Almighty abhors such a sin. The sin is a complete rejection of Hashem. Yet the Torah stipulates that the body may not be hung for a long time because the body must be buried before dark. Our Sages determined that the hanging of the corpse last for a very brief time and then immediately taken down for burial. The hanging is a deterrent for the rest of us, but it conflicts for the needed respect for a body that once possessed part of the divine image. There are many such conflicts in the Torah. It is part of the paradox that exists in life. <-> In 22:6,7 is the Torah commandment to shoo away a mother bird before taking the eggs or baby chicks for human usage. There is a Halachic debate as to whether this is a mandatory or optional Mitzva. By virtue of the fact that we are not hurrying around searching for such a nest clearly gives support that the Halacha is that this is an optional Mitzva. I look at an optional Mitzva as a way to judge our religious attitude in life. For example, Rav Moshe Feinstein described the Mitzva to live in Eretz Yisrael as an optional Mitzva. Centuries ago, travel to Israel was very dangerous, through natural and unnatural means. Today it is very debatable among Halachists. In today's society, finding such a nest for me, a definite urbanite, is very difficult to do, versus a farmer, who might find the situation more common. Another optional Mitzva, like wearing Tzitzit, is definitely a judge of one's desire to do the Mitzva, for I can avoid it by merely not wearing a four-cornered garment. Ed. note: Although Tzitzit is technically an optional mitzva on the Torah level, it is a required mitzva d'Rabbanan. <-> In the Rambam's Laws of Marriage in his Code of Jewish Law, he opens with a short description of how two people would marry before the Torah was given. A man and a woman would meet in the marketplace and agree to marry. They would enter his house and be intimate. And they were married. The Torah commanded a Jew to marry by "acquiring" her by giving her a gift in front of two witnesses and thereby creating a marital bond between them. The Rambam codifies that creating marriage is a Torah Mitzva. In this week's sedra, the Torah describes how to create a divorce. What the Rambam pointed out was that marriage is a religious concept, a bond blessed by the Almighty. We can end the marriage with a religious divorce, a GET. According to the Vilna Gaon, the word GET is a Made up word. The letter GIMEL followed by the letter TET, because these two letters never appear together throughout Tanach. <-> Divorce. In the Mishna, there is a difference of opinion debating what are acceptable grounds for a divorce. The upshot of the debate is the most lenient viewpoint, that there is no need to have grounds to a divorce. Two people may decide to separate for whatever reason and the Get dissolves the union. A simple conclusion in concept, but always complicated by children and financial assets. We live the real life of marriage and divorce in every generation, and it is never easy. The Torah does not dwell much on the topic. The emphasis in that paragraph in the Torah is to prohibit legalized prostitution. A divorcee may remarry her former husband, but not if she has been intimate with another man after her divorce from the husband. Otherwise we would see a system of legalized prostitution. <-> Amalek. Codified in the Torah and in Jewish history, is our hate for our eternal enemy: Amalek. But today we no longer know who are the descendants of Amalek. Rav Soloveitchik commented that whoever hates Jews so much is legally considered an Amalekite. Years ago, when I was learning with Rav Gustman in Yerushalayim, he used to tell us personal details of his experiences during the Holocaust, at Seuda Sh'lishit in his Yeshiva. He once told us that when the Nazis invaded Vilna, Rav Gustman was able to escape with his wife and daughter through an alley into the forest. He was discovered by a lone Nazi soldier. They fought, and Rav Gustman, who was then a strong young man, was able to prevail. He strangled the soldier, killing him right there. He paused when telling us the story, gave a wry smile, and remarked that he was able, at that point in the forest, to fulfill the Mitzva to blot out the memory of Amalek! Questions by RED From the text 1. What special inheritance does a firstborn male (a B'CHOR) receive? (21:17) 2. Before whom do the parents of a defiant and rebellious son originally bring him? (21:19) 3. What is Shaatnez? (22:11) 4. When may an Egyptian convert to Judaism marry into the Jewish people? (23:9) 5. How many Mitzvot are there in this Sidra? From Rashi 6. Does the law of a beautiful captive woman apply even if she is a married woman? (21:10) 7. Why may a woman NOT wear a man's clothing? (22:5) 8. Does the prohibition of plowing with an ox and a donkey together apply only to these two animals? (22:10) 9. A man is exempted from army service if he has a new wife (24:5). Suppose she is a widow. Is he still exempted? 10. In what position is a sinner whipped with lashes as he is being punished? (25:2) From the Rabbis 11. 12. True or False. The Torah hates dishonesty so much that we are not allowed to even OWN inaccurate weights and measures. (S'forno) 13. Is it a Mitzva to kill an Amalekite's horse? Midrash 14. The Torah states that a sinner gets 40 lashes. How does the Midrash derive that it is actually 39? Haftara - Yishayahu 15. Why is it necessary for Yerushalayim to expand its borders if its children were taken into Exile? Relationships a) Yitzhar - Korach b) Yocheved - Elazar c) Menashe - Orde d) Dina - Yov e) Na'ama - Yefet ANSWERS 1. A double portion of inheritance. 2. To the Beit Din, the Rabbinical Court of the city. 3. A garment made of linen and wool. 4. The third generation. 5. According to the Rambam, there are 74. 27 positive and 47 negative. 6. Yes 7. For fear that she would mix with men that will lead to promiscuity. The same is true for a man not to wear female garb. 8. No. It applies to all other different species, and for any type of work. 9. Yes 10. He is standing, bent over. 11. 12. True 13. Yes, to blot out even the memory of an Amalekite. 14. The last word of the verse preceding the word is 40 is the "number". Meaning the number leading up to 40, that is, 39. 15. Because they will all come back in greater numbers. Relationships a) Father & Son b) Grandmother & Grandson c) First Cousins (sons of Yosef and Binyamin) d) Aunt & Nephew e) Mother & Son