In the short description of Rosh HaShana the Torah specifies that there is an obligation to have a Yom Teruah and a Zichron Teruah. These verses reference the obligation to sound the shofar on Rosh HaShana. Why doesn’t the Torah explicitly state the commandment such as “Sit in the Sukkah” or “Eat Matzah” or “Take the four species”.   Instead, the Torah says that the day should be a day of the Teruah and a Zichron Teruah.

Another essential piece to the puzzle is our focus on making Hashem our king on this awesome day. It is  well known that this is an integral part of the Yom Tov, as seen in the laws of saying HaMelech HaKadosh, whereas the rest of the year we do not refer to Hashem as HaMelech in this context. Why is this major theme absent from the Written Torah?

In my opinion, the reason that the Torah does not explain the aforementioned must be to teach us something more significant by not telling us rather than telling us. With every additional word the Torah uses to further explain the mitzvah it becomes clearer to us. The less we understand a mitzvah the more likely that we can do the mitzvah for the reason that we are obligated to do it[1]. In other words, when we put on Tefillin there is nothing else to think of other than we are doing a mitzvah. When we do a mitzvah like Maakeh (to build a fence on a roof) the mitzvah may be performed in a way that is not totally due to the Torah’s obligation, i.e. safety. Generally, the mitzvos where we lack understanding can be more difficult to fulfill since we cannot grasp what we are doing except for the fact that we are fulfilling the will of Hashem.

It is possible that the acceptance of the yoke of Hashem must be entirely from the heart of a person. In other words, the Torah wanted for a person to approach Rosh HaShana from his heart not only his mind. Perhaps that is the reason for the teruos since they alert one’s heart to remember that Hashem is the King of this world. The whole year our eyes are covered from His glory and splendor. Had our eyes not been covered where would our free will be[2]? Rather, Rosh HaShana is a time set aside for alerting the heart of the People of Israel, but what for? To remember. Not to remember our sins[3] but that Hashem is our master. This thought is my interpretation of the foundation to understanding the essence of Rosh HaShana and the vague nature of the verses in the Torah.

From the day of Rosh HaShana we make Hashem our King once again[4]. We proceed from Rosh HaShana for the next ten days ascending to levels of holiness and purity until we reach the final day, Yom HaKippurim which represents the kesser or crown of the glory of Hashem. The concept of Malchus, or the kingship of Hashem, is a revelation of our actions. This means that the greater our actions, the greater the revelation of Hashem‘s Kingship.

It is said in the Seforim HaKadoshim that Yitzchak Avinu represents the Yom Tov of Shavuos. Yitzchak Avinu represents the attribute of din or judgment. We customary use a shofar made of the horn of a ram to remind us of Akaidas Yitzchak (The Binding of Isaac). There is also a connection between the shofar used on Rosh HaShana and the shofar used on Matan Torah[5] (The Receiving of the Torah). Because the verses regarding Shavuos and Rosh Hashana are juxtaposed, we also see a connection between these two holidays.  We also see the connection of Shavuos and Rosh Hashana when the gemara attempts to learn the three components of Rosh Hashanah dovening, Malchius, Zichronos, and Shofros, from the verse regarding Shavuos.

Even though I have already stated that the focus of the form of service on Rosh HaShana is through the heart, the Torah set a method of how to establish His Kingship. In other words, “Zichron Teruah”, “Yom Teruah” are the ways that we a establish The Almighty’s Kingship[6].  As we have already seen, Rosh HaShana is hidden, and what we have revealed to us in the Written Torah must be essential.  The way to achieve “teruah,” as in Yom Teruah and Zichron Teruah, is through blowing the shofar. We have already mentioned that the shofar is made from the ram’s horn which is connected to Akaidas Yitzchok. There is a concept of din and chessed regarding Akaidas Yitzchok that I now wish to explain.

It is well known that Avraham Avinu personifies the attribute of chessed as well as his son Yitzchak Avinu personifies the attribute of din. From this we can realize a very important fundamental idea. All din in the world is rooted in chessed. Just as Yitzchak Avinu is the son of Avraham Avinu so too din comes from chessed. All dinim from Hashem are completely rooted in chessed. That is a very deep idea, how the world could not stand on pure din and needed din and chessed.[7] As the verse says “Olam Chessed Yibaneh”, chessed is the foundation of everything. Now we can understand the connection between Yitzchak Avinu and shofar.

Due to Hashem‘s commandment, Avraham Avinu was prepared to sacrifice his only son as the verse says “Kach Na Es Bincha”. He listened to the decree of the King without question or doubt at all. Yitzchak Avinu stood upon that mountain prepared to sacrifice himself like a perfect korban in order to fulfill the will of Hashem. All of a sudden a Malach came and stopped the sacrifice from happening. This is a parable to Rosh HaShana. The whole year we are obligated to keep the six hundred-thirteen mitzvos of the Torah without doubt or question at all. However, we sin. In reality, one who disregards the decree of a king of flesh and blood would be killed instantly, however the King of Kings has chessed that has no limit and absolves us of our sins. Avraham Avinu listened to the decree of the King and was prepared to sacrifice his son who he loved more than himself. Yitzchak Avinu was prepared to sacrifice himself in order to fulfill the decree of the King since that was his purpose. For that reason we can understand why we blow the shofar with the horn of a ram[8], since on Rosh HaShana we recognize the glory of the King. The Avos were willing to actually give up their lives in order to fulfill the decree of the King, and with His endless chessed Yizchak Avinu’s life was spared. In other words Akaidas Yitzchak was an example of how his life was on the line and due to the glory of the King his life was spared[9]. I believe this that this explanation is also what the Shlah HaKadosh says in Mesechta Sukkah perek Ner Mitzvah ose 45.

This is a very fundamental idea as we want to have long lives with parnasah and success and everything that we need gashmius and ruchnius, for what? The purpose of it all is for the glory of the King! That is simple, if one has the ability to actually give up their lives and fulfill a mitzvah with all six hundred-thirteen parts of our bodies, what is greater than that? The Avos felt that their lives were only for the glory of the King, and nothing else.

I already wrote that Yitzchak Avinu is connected to Shavuos and Rosh HaShana. Regarding the order of the year, after Shavuos there is a personification of the attribute of din is from the beginning of Tamuz through Av until Elul. Those days are mesugal to the attribute of din.

The connection between shofar by Matan Torah and Rosh HaShana needs to be explained. I want to say a comment based off of the famous concept of the Bnei Yissaschar. He says that within the four letters of the holy name of Hashem there are twenty-four possibilities which are two sets of twelve. There is an understanding that there are two heads of the year one beginning with the attribute of chessed (Nissan) and the other with din (Tishrei). The whole year can be expressed differently when looking from the perspective of chessed or din. The ends of each year are Adar and Elul. Just as it is written that the Jews accepted the Torah during the time of Purim[10] through ahavah so too during the month of Elul there must also be an acceptance of the Torah, however it will be through yirah. The acceptance of the Torah in Elul is obviously linked to the month of Tishrei and this is another connection between Rosh HaShana and Torah.

I would like to suggest a nuance on something that I have heard many times from my great Rebbi, HaRav Nochum Lansky Shlita who said this idea in the name of the Gr”a z”l. In the first verse of the Shema there are six words. In the second verse of the Shema (Boruch Shaim) has five words. Says the Gr”a z”l that the word echad is the connection between the two verses. It is a well-known idea from the Arizal that Rebbi Akiva is considered the father of Torah Sh’Baal Peh (The Oral Law). The gemara in Berachos says that Rebbi Akiva passed on while uttering the word echad. Therefore, says the Arizal that Rebbi Akiva connects the two parts of Torah together. On that idea I would like to suggest that Krias Shema is the acceptance of the yoke of His Kingship and we learn from the Arizal that Krias Shema hints to the entire Torah therefore we see a great bond between Rosh HaShana and Shavuos as well as Yitzchak Avinu with Torah and Malchus.

Finally, I want to explain that there is a connection between Rosh HaShana and Shavuos. Rosh HaShana is in the seventh month of the year, and the number seven has very deep significance such as Shabbos, Shmittah, Yovel, Niddah, Shavuos. A commonality all of these have is they deal with tachlis or purpose. That is to say that just as Shabbos is called the tachlis maaseh breishis so too shmitah is end of the seven year cycle as well as Yovel. A Niddah becomes permitted to her husband on the seventh day. The seventh month is the beginning of the year and that is the foundation of Adam HaRishon, as he was created on the sixth day in order to fulfill the mitzvos of the garden and that of Shabbos which is the tachlis of the world. Generally, Rosh HaShana is a revelation of the attribute that we are able to purify ourselves (like niddah) and on Yom HaKippurim which is also in the seventh month, then we can obtain that level of observance of Torah and Mitzvah.

The Chazal write that we do not blow a regular horn because it hints to malchus and the attribute of din. However, shofar of the ram hints to the attribute of Rachamim. The strength of the shofar of the ram is to flip the attribute of din to rachamim.

I would like to conclude with a general thought. The Yomim Noraim are days of slichah and kaparah a time where the King sits on the kisai din. I want to mention the famous Rambam in Hilchos Teshuvah who states “what is teshuvah gemuarah”. He says someone who had sadly fallen to temptation and committed a sin against the decree of the King. Later this individual finds himself in the situation where he is tempted to sin again but stops himself from sinning. Why, says the Rambam? Because of the teshuvah. What does that mean? The teshuvah raises a person to a place above where he had been prior to his sin. On that subject even though he still has a Yetzer HaRa his Yetzer Tov is stronger! It is more than difficult to destroy and purge his Yetzer HaRa entirely, rather strengthen his Yetzer Tov.

On Rosh HaShana we are all merited to experience how the Rambam describes the blowing of the shofar. He says “Ooroo Ooroo Yishainim M’Shinaschem” (Wake up, wake up the sleeping from their slumber). However, the Chazal say that in reality regarding the mitzvah of the shofar there is a flip of the attribute of din to rachamim and then Hashem will rise from the kisai din and sit down upon the kisai rachamim. The implication from the words of the Chazal is seemingly opposite from that of the Rambam. The Rambam seems to imply that the mitzvah of shofar causes us to wake up and do teshuva. I believe that the two are not contradictions. Through the blowing of the shofar there is a possibility for Hashem to sit upon the kisai rachamim. In other words, through our merit that we establish the Kingship and realize the Hashem is the King of Kings we will become careful with all the mitzvos of the Torah. Once we realize the Kingship of Hashem and the great yoke that we have upon us the tears will follow, the embarrassment of what we have done will be apparent. Says the Mabit that our nishamos are unable to become dirty with our sins, it is only our perception that we feel dirty and impure. However, we feel and cry for each and every sin that we do…but it is the klipos that quiet us down for the whole year. Through the inspiration of the shofar we wake up and make it possible to perceive the glory of the King and the utter embarrassments that we have for not following his decrees. After that the King will arise and sit upon the kisai harachamim and absolve our past. Meaning that regardless of the fact that we “wake up” or not we still have past history.

I wish to give a berachah to all those who read this (and to those who don’t as well) that b’ezras Hashem Yisborach we should all be merited to be written in the book of life for the year ahead. Not for ourselves, rather for Him, for Hashem. In order to serve Hashem with all our might, in all areas of life, at all times, and in all situations. This year to come we will be merited to rise to the holy land and build our Avinu Malkainu his house and then and only then will His true glory be clear to the whole world.

[2] The basis of free will is that the will of Hashem is not overwhelming to the extent that you cannot act against it.

[3] There are no selichos there is no viduy on Rosh HaShana, it may not be agreed upon if it is a day of simchah, but it surely is not a sad day. All the tefillos are focused on being mamlich Hashem not on the fact there is a din on our future.

[4] Hashem is always our Melech as mentioned earlier we cannot have free will if we always feel that the Melech is looking over our shoulders.

[5] Shla”h Hakadosh in many places.

[6] The shofar brings us to be mikabel Hashem as the Melech.

[7] Even though din comes from chessed it by itself was still too potent that pure chessed was needed as well.

[8] The ram was brought as an olah in place of the sacrifice of Yitzchak Avinu.

[9] Meaning if you do mitzvos with every fiber of potential that you possess then you are living your life to serve Hashem. A person who is not put in the Sefer HaChaim doesn’t just mean they were rishaim rather, that for whatever reason their death will provide more Kavod Shemaim, i.e. m’siras nefesh for Kiddush Hashem.

[10] Kimu V’Kiblu Ha’Yehudim

If we were to take this seriously, it is unquestionable that we would have to prepare ourselves for this awesome day. We have a unique opportunity, something that doesn’t exist in the worldly courts. The chance to come before the judge is open before us. We can speak to him in his private chambers before the court proceedings. More importantly he will listen to us intently. We can ask him for whatever it is that we want. So what is it that we ask for? What do we want?

In the Tefillah of Rosh Hashanah we say: Attah Bchartanu, Yaale Vayavo, and when we get to the place in the Shemonei Esrei that we beseech Hashem for our needs what do we say?Malchiyos: Mloch al kol haolam kulo  beechvodecha: Reign over the entire universe, in your glory…reveal yourself in the majestic grandeur of your strength over all the dwellers of the inhabited world. Let it know, everything that has been made that you are its maker; … Hashem the God of Israel is king, and his kingship over everything rules. This is our request from Hashem! Is it really what we want? Is this the most important thing for us, especially when our very lives are on the line?

R’ Shimon Schwabb zt’l brings a parable to bring the point home: Picture a small group of Yidden in the shtetel on Motzei Shabos saying Kiddish Levanah in the winter months. In the prayer they ask Hashem to restore the power of the moon, to fill its flaw and bring it back to the way it was in the days of creation. Is this what they want? They are starving for bread, and freezing from the cold, hoping to get money for coal. Why would the flaws of the moon make any difference in these people’s lives?

Hashem tells us, Imru lefanai malchiyos kidei shtamlchinu Aleichem. Speak of kingship before me, in order to appoint me as your king. Why is this necessary? Hashem wants to give to us, bestowing on us all the good in the world. However a person cannot appreciate a free gift as he does something that he worked hard for. Therefore we were created with a body and soul. He gave us the Torah and mitzvos so he can give to us. Our bodies help the soul to accomplish the performance of the mitzvos thus enabling us to be worthy of Hashems love and kindness. Through our doing the mitzvos we “allow” Hashem to give to us.

The Ramban says one of the reasons Hashem created the world is so people should recognize that he is the master of the world and thereby have perfection. How is it that we may perfect the world? The way to get to perfection is through closeness to Hashem, and making him our king. Once we have done this everything else falls into place. We say in the end of Shemonei Esrei: With the light of your countenance you gave us Hashem, our God, the Torah of life, and a love of kindness, righteousness, blessing, compassion, life, and peace. When we have the light of Hashem in our lives then everything else is included.

This is why the Yidden in the shtetel prayed for the flaw of the moon. They realized that when the world becomes perfected and whole, when Hashem reigns over the entire world in all his glory; then nothing will be lacking. They will have everything they need, healthy, good family life, livelihood, money, fertility, and all the blessing they could envision. This is the reason why Malichus is the highlight of our judgment day. Once we crown Hashem as king over ourselves, we allow him to pour on us all the goodness in the world. It is in this way that we can be zoche to a successful judgment; a good year with all the things that we need bundled up into a nice neat package.

Food for thought:

One of the more famous prayers on Rosh Hashanah is “Avinu Malkenu”. R’ Avigdor Miller zt’l explains this phrase in an enlightening way. A father wants to fulfill his child’s needs, but is not always able to for he may be lacking in different areas. He may not have the money, or maybe isn’t strong enough, could be he’s even a bit lazy. A king is usually not lacking much of anything. He is rich, an accomplished warrior, and nothing is beyond him. Hashem is our father, and he wants to give to us. He is our king, and therefore has the capabilities in order to bring his good natured giving into action.

Halacha Corner:

The blowing of the Shofar is a mitzvah of the Torah, and is not rabbinical. Therefore extra attention has to be made in the concentration we have when performing this special annual mitzvah. With this being said there are a few things one should keep in mind: The mitzvah is only fulfilled when you have heard the sound of the shofar from the beginning till the end. Even if you heard the proper Shiur,( amount of time necessary) for the tekiah, and the Baal Tokei (one who is blowing) blows for a longer period, one still has to hear the entire blow. Many people rush to say the Yehi Ratzon after they have heard the “required amount”. Extra care should be taken, especially by the Tekiah Gedolah; for otherwise a person can have missed his fulfillment of the mitzvah.

Another thing to have in mind is that a person has to know exactly where the Baal Tokei is up to. This means a person has to know if the Baal Tokei made a mistake and is repeating the previous tekiah or is he continuing on to the next. It can happen at times when the Baal Tokei has to go back, and the congregants do not realize that he is repeating it over again, and they think he is moving on to the next point. This causes them to have kavanah on the wrong set. There is a suspicion that if one errs and doesn’t have kavanah for the proper Tekiah that they haven’t fulfilled the mitzvah.

אמרתי אפאיהם אשביתה מאנוש זכרם (לב:כו).

“Hashem said, ‘I will destroy them and make their name forgotten from mankind’” (32:26).

This verse is the subject of a tragic, yet famous and most relevant story. The Ramban (1194-1270) had a student named Avner (אבנר) who rebelled against the way of Torah and Mitzvos and painfully began to antagonize the Jews. He joined the Roman government and caused much suffering to his forgotten brothers.

One Yom Kippur, he had the audacity to demand that the Ramban show up at his house. The Ramban complied, knowing that many lives were at stake if he were not to show up. As he waited in Avner’s palace, he watched as Avner killed a pig, cooked it and then he ate it. The Ramban prayed and cried silently. Avner began the conversation asking him, “so how many prohibitions was that?” “Five”, replied the sage. “Wrong, I counted six…”, replied the brazen student after which a conversation ensued. Finally, the Ramban asked him why he turned away from the Torah. Avner said that he had heard the Ramban once say that every single person is hinted to in Parshas Haazinu and he thought this to be preposterous and thus turned away.

The Ramban faced Avner with pity, and asked him if he wanted to see his own name there. Avner was shocked and agreed. – אפאיהם אשביתה מאנוש זכרם the middle letters spell your name (אבנר)! Avner turned pale as the Ramban showed him his name in a verse promising annihilation and destruction… Avner broke down crying, true tears of remorse and regret, “Rebbe, I want to fix myself, is there any hope”?! “Yes”, he replied, “Hashem always accepts teshuva, don’t waste a second, repent”! Avner kept the rest of that Yom Kippur and early the next morning he rented a boat, sailed out to sea to be alone in contemplation, but alas, the verse was fulfilled and he was never seen by mankind again. He vanished at sea…

This is a very deep and moving story for many reasons. One of the most unique aspects here is the strange occurrence of his name found in the middle of the four words. Usually, we find the first (or last) letters of words making up hidden messages, why was Avner found in the middle?

Rabbi Moshe Wolfson explains that there are three stages in a person’s life.

1-Before birth

2- Lifetime

3- Olam HaEmes

Before birth, the Neshama sees the absolute truth and is taught the Torah and promises to serve Hashem. After death, the Neshama goes up to the Olam HaEmes and see the truth once again. The most challenging time is during one’s earthly lifetime when one is able to be distracted from the truth! Hence, the name Avner specifically emerges in the middle stage as that is the only time that sins are possible….

Shofar Application

…On this deep note, it is appropriate to mention the words of the holy Shlah. When listening to the Shofar, one should have in mind to fulfil a positive Torah command. Shlah adds an allegorical lesson.

The Shofar blasts begin and end with a Tekiah. This is a solid and straight blast (toooooooooot). In the middle we have Shevarim (tooot tooot tooot ) and/or Teruah (toot toot toot toot toot…). This represents the fact that Hashem created man to be straight and just, but man has free will and sometimes they breach that straightness. Our job is to hear the Tekiah ( ___________ ), the just path which Hashem placed us on, and to recognize that our sins have caused breaks in our perfection and proper character: Shevarim/Teruah (- – - / ———–). We want to fix that and bring it back to the way Hashem expects of us, which is the Tekiah at the end ( ___________ ). This is Shlah’s insight and depth of Shofar. As an aside, this now explains why Tekiah Gedolah comes last, as it represents ultimate perfection and revelation of the time of Mashiach.

Hashem created us and put us in this world to perfect ourselves and find success and happiness through his beautiful and meaningful Torah and Mitzvos. We strive to connect our three stages of life into one powerful theme of commitment to Avodas Hashem. In this merit, may we and our families be granted a life of health, happiness and success. Ksiva V’Chasima Tovah!

There are two very interesting points that we can learn from this. From what we have said we can ask a simple question. If both parents go to the Beis Hamikdash then who will watch the children? It is self explanatory that they will be brought along! We can learn from here how much Hakodosh Baruch Hu loves us.The Torah commanded this commandment on purpose, in order that it be considered a mitzvah. He gives us merits for something that we would have done anyway, because of his love for us and his nature wanting to give to us. (This idea is brought out from the Yalkut Haurim)

The second thing we can learn from here is that even though they are only children there is still an effect that takes place on them. We see this from the mother of Rabbi Yehosua who would take him to the Beis Midrash as a child, leaving him there, in order for him to be able to hear the words of Torah that were being learned. She understood the impression that hearing words of Torah would have on her child. We see from her actions, this important lesson, and have proof from the way her son turned out how everything our children hear, have an effect on them.

We can make a connection between the hearing words of Torah to that of the other senses as well. What a person sees as well as hears makes an effect on a person, especially a child. R Noach Orlewek brings down in his book “Roses Among the thorns” that children are like immigrants. They want to fit in to the world around them as much as is possible. Therefore they work hard at blending in and take in as much as they can. They watch their parents, and learn from them. They assume that if this is how their parents are acting then this is how we have to act as well in order to succeed. We see from here a very important thing, in whatever we do we are being watched. We are the ones that teach our children how to behave. The saying “act as I say, not as I do” has absolutely no implication here. We are our children’s main teachers, and it is us who greatly influence their growth and how they will turn out.

ועתה כתבו לכם את השירה הזאת ולמדה את בני ישראל שימה בפיהם… (לא:יט).

“Now write down this song, teach it to the Jews and put it in their mouths…” (31:19).

A fascinating exchange takes place in Meseches Megillah (3a) that relates to our verse and expresses a beautiful message. Yehoshua was the leader of the Jews and before they were to overtake Yericho, Yehoshua did two things, he stopped the Karban Tamid from being offered and he did not study Torah. At that point an angel appeared to him holding a sword and Yehoshua realized that he had done something wrong… Yehoshua asked him, on what account did you come?” The angel replied, “עתה באתי, I have come now”. The Gemara takes this to mean that he was in trouble for not learning Torah.

The commentators struggle to find any explanation as to what was happening here in general and how the answer of Bitul Torah is seen in the angel’s words specifically?! Tosfos (there) throws out our above quoted verse as the solution. Our verse uses the same word, “עתה”, hence, both must be about Torah!

However, this just adds to the mystery? Additionally, the verse itself is perplexing, why does it use the mysterious word “song”, can’t it just use the word, “Torah” if that’s what it meant?!

I believe that a fundamental lesson is being illustrated. Yehoshua made a call that the Jews must go to sleep early to prepare for the expected battle of the next morning. There is no way to argue with that decision in the least bit; it is justified and understandable. However, the complaint against him was not the course of action per se, but rather, the attitude expressed towards Torah. Torah is the lifeblood and passion of the Jewish people. A Jew without Torah is a fish out of water, unfathomable, impossible. The angel delivered a message of disappointment and failure in this department.

The Jewish perspective on Torah is that it should flow and be incorporated in our lives just as a passionate song stirs our souls! This is the meaning of the verse’s allegory. More so, the word “עתה” means, “now”, pressing. Torah is seen as the water that we are eagerly thirsting for. With that perspective, Yehoshua could have done or expressed things differently.

Imagine if a child tells you, “you never have time for me”, or you hear it from a spouse or friend. Those words are a painful and powerful accusation. Some might fight it (and sometimes rightfully), some may say, “listen my schedule is packed, I’m doing the best that I can…” But perhaps the complaint is deeper. Perhaps the only solution is to find a way to change our attitude and approach towards this person. Show them that we really do love and care for them. This was the complaint against Yehoshua. Torah must be pressing, foremost and songlike.

Immediately, Yehoshua admitted his oversight and strived to passionately embrace the Torah. May we all find joy, meaning and closeness to Hashem through His magnificent song of Torah!

That has always perplexed me. Why then should they need to strengthen their resolve if they see Hashem’s Guiding Hand so strongly?

The answer is simple though: we always need inspiration, especially at times of wonders and seeing the Hand of Hashem, we must make sure to internalize that experience and make it a part of our active cognizance (see also Tosfos Yom Tov [Avos 5:5]). At times of great inspiration, the danger of distraction and forgetfulness lurks. We must actively capture the lesson!

We are now approaching a most inspirational time of the year, the Yomim Noraim, let us strive to make this most exalting experience remain with us.

לא בשמים היא לאמר מי יעלה לנו השמימה…,ולא מעבר לים היא לאמר מי יעלה לנו אל עבר הים ויקחנה כי קרוב אליך הדבר מאד

“It isn’t up in heaven, if you are to say how are we to go to heaven to attain it… and it is not on in faraway lands, if you are to say who will bring us to the faraway lands to achieve it, but rather it is very close”

This famous passuk near the end of this weeks Parasha is talking about Teshuva (Ramban). It was the last day that Moshe was to live, and he had already spelled out all the blessings that they would receive if they keep the Torah, and the curses that would come about if they wouldn’t. With no details spared for either alternative, by the time Moshe told them these words they were well informed of what he wanted of them.

Yet, after Moshe portrays the consequences they will have to suffer if they reject Hashem in detail, he addresses them about something I’m sure they were all thinking about.
“You will one day make mistakes” says Moshe. “You may think that after these immense punishments mentioned, it will take an even bigger effort for Hashem to accept you back (Netziv). Not true – Teshuva is not in the heaven, for those who believe one must go to heaven to attain Teshuva. It is not in faraway lands, for those who say one must travel great distances to achieve it”

It is most likely that one who assumes these things in regard to Teshuva is not doing so out of his great fear and apprehension of Hashem’s presence, but rather out of an innate sense of futility regarding Teshuva. His Yetzer Hara will not try to make him believe that Teshuva is senseless, but it will tell him that Teshuva entails overburdening work and that one has to be an extremely holy person anyway. Not true, says Moshe. Teshuva is extremely attainable, and it’s extremely close, as close as ones mouth and heart.
There is an amazing Gemara (Avodah Zara 17) that illustrates this well. There was a man named Yehuda ben Durdaya who committed every Aveira known to man. He sunk to the lowest depths as he left no stone unturned searching for new, more, and worse.

One day, as he was sinning, he was tipped off by someone who told him that he has no hope in the world to come. Inspired like never before, he went and sat in a wide open place, in a valley between mountains, with a stream flowing by. Calling to the mountains, he cried out “mountains and valleys, save me from my fate!” The mountains responded “we can’t help you.”

Turning to the sun, he screamed out “Sun and moon! Will you help me?” The sun and the moon replied “we can’t help you.”

Yehuda ben Durdaya, now seeing that there is nothing in the universe that could help him, called out to Hashem, the One whom he had been hiding from his entire life. As the Gemara goes on to say, he placed his head between his knees and began to cry. He sat there crying and didn’t stop until he died. At that moment, there was a voice from heaven that announced that Yehuda ben Durdaya is now being prepared for the world to come.

While there are many things that can be learned from this, there is one thing that stands out. Yehuda ben Durdaya turned to the far away mountains and valleys and asked them to help him, but they couldn’t. He then turned to the sun and the moon, things that are higher than everything on earth, and asked for help, but they couldn’t help him.
He finally came to the realization that if anything or anyone is to help him, he would have to pay heed to these words of Moshe Rabbenu. ‘Lo Bashamayim Hi – It’s not in the heavens; Velo Me’ever Layam – And it isn’t in faraway lands; Ki Karov Ailecha Hadavar Me’od –But it is so close to you.

When he realized this, he put his head between his knees, which can be a sign of sadness and remorse, but it can also indicate his realization that Teshuva isn’t a faraway, unattainable act, but it was right there with him the entire time. And if he thought before that Teshuva was a ritualized, formal performance, he did Teshuva just by crying. He didn’t even say one word, and he earned his Olam Haba.

After that, the Gemara continues that just like there are those who earn their portion of Olam Haba throughout they’re whole lifetime, so there are those who earn their portion is one small amount of time. Yehuda ben Durdaya had just earned his Olam Haba through that Teshuva.

That is the way of Teshuva, says Moshe Rabbenu. All it takes is a sincere desire to do better, and that’s all. Nothing more is needed.

There is a famous saying:  “we can learn from everyone, some can show us what to do, and others can show us what not to do.” There was once a famous story that provides us a picture of the exact opposite of what we can learn from the possuk. There was once a person in old town Europe that loved to learn Torah. However, he didn’t learn because it was the will of Hashem. He learned for his own reasons. One Shabbos he was found “reading” a Shaylos U’ Teshuvos R’ Akiva Eiger and smoking a cigarette in the bathroom. That’s three big no no’s for a Torah observant Jew.

The Mishnah Avos 4:6 tells us that someone who wishes to learn in order to teach to others is provided the opportunity to learn and to teach and that someone who studies in order to practice is provided with the opportunity to study, teach, to observe, and to practice. It is the prayer of every Jew each morning before the reading of Shema. We ask Hashem in the prayer preceding it :”Father who is merciful, who acts mercifully have mercy on us, and instill in our hearts understanding to understand, to comprehend, to listen, to learn, to teach, to observe, to perform, and to fulfill all the words of the teaching of your Torah with love”. We ask Hashem for the snowball effect, to be able to have the good intentions, and to go on the right path, learning the Torah for the correct reasons.  R’ Avigdor Miller zt’l says in his sefer “Praise my soul”: “We request that all that we learn be carried out in deeds, and our learning should not be without intention of doing (see there for a more lengthy explanation).

The Torah is teaching us a monumental lesson. The Torah is not a story book, nor is it a history book; it is not something that is to be learned just for the knowledge itself. It is meant to learn in order to observe and perform. We are meant to take the teachings of the Torah and apply it to ourselves, bringing it in to our daily lives. Applying every application in its proper place, this is what separates us from the scholars of the world. There is a famous story about Aristotle. One of his students happened upon his teacher in the forest, sinning with a woman. When confronted his teacher told him “There is an Aristotle in the classroom, and there is the Aristotle outside the classroom”. Meaning that everything we learn is theoretical, nice flowery teachings but they need not be put into practice. I can act like an animal if I wish, for I answer to no one but myself, and my own conscience. A Jew is of higher caliber, assuming a non hypocritical nature. When we learn something, we learn it for its practical application; bringing it in to our daily lives, enriching it with holiness, purity, and meaning.

והיה כי תבוא אל הארץ …ולקחת מראשית  כל פרי האדמה (כו:א-ב).

“When you enter the Land…. separate your first crops [for Hashem]….”

The Torah places great emphasis on the Mitzvah of Be’kurim. As soon as the Jews entered the land the first Mitzvah commanded here was to separate the first fruit. What is the significance? Also, when the Be’kurim are delivered to the Kohen, the donator declares an entire narrative about how Lavan tried to kill Yaakov, what is this all about? More so, those exact words are read in the Pesach Haggadah; what makes them so significant?

The Ramban states that there is a specific Mitzvah to bring the Be’Kurim into one’s house and then to eventually bring them to Yerushalayim. What is this all about? Why can’t they just be left on the tree or in the field until they are brought?

This act of donating the first of one’s crops was very difficult. The Sefer HaChinuch explains that for a farmer that worked hard and toiled upon the land, it would be very difficult for him to be pulled away from the first crops that finally blossomed and showed him success. Never-the-less, we specifically dedicate those crops to Hashem to show our love and recognition that He is the provider of the bounty which we enjoy.

Hence, explains the Emunas Yirmiyah, this is why we specifically bring it into our houses. We should ensure that out children see and learn what we are doing! We must demonstrate to them in a most powerful and real way just how much we love Hashem. The children will ask, “why were the first fruits set aside”? We will them teach them that we are thereby thanking Hashem for His kindness.

Now we understand the significance of Be’kurim. The Torah stresses that as soon as one starts a home (in Eretz Yisrael), the focus is upon instilling the vibrant feelings of love between us and Hashem. A Jewish home is built upon a love and passion for Hashem.

Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l explains that Lavan tried to kill Yaakov by undermining this exact theme. Lavan wished to negatively influence the children of Yaakov. He wished to cool them down from their service of Hashem and to distract them from seeing Hashem’s kindness. Lavan lived a life of ignoring Hashem and acting according to his own desires. This is precisely what the Be’kurim came to fight against. This is why we mention the negativity of Lavan when presenting the Kohen with our fruits. This also explains why we read these verses over Pesach. The entire theme of the Pesach Seder is to recognize and feel Hashem’s care and love for us. Thus, Be’kurim is a powerful message of this. When we contemplate all of the great things that Hashem gives us, our hearts sing out in joy and we just want to share that recognition with others!

To download please click: http://ohr.edu/roshbook/

Enjoy and best wishes for a K’siva V’Chasima Tova!

Why is it that the reward for a mitzah is another mitzvah? R Dessler explains in Michtav Meliyahu, Strive For Truth, that it is impossible to get reward for a mitzvah in this world. When someone does a mitzvah, the reward is: All the pleasure ever experienced by any single being from the beginning of time, all the way to the end of time combined into one split second; and experiencing that “one second” for eternity. [The idea of eternity was once explained through a fine idea: Picture an empty lot, and you want to fill the entire lot with sand. If every 100 years a bird will come, with a grain of sand in its beak, and deposit it in the lot, it would take an eternity to fill the lot with sand. ] This is the reward for a single mitzvah. If this is the reward for a single mitzvah, imagine what the reward would be like for a lifetime of mitzvos! If a person would experience the pleasure of reward for a mitzvah in this world, he would surely die. The human body cannot handle so much pressure, compact into such a small span of time. Therefore it must be that in this world, the reward of a mitzvah is another mitzvah, because nothing else could compare to it in this world.

We see from here the importance of each and every mitvah, whether “small” or “big”. The chain reaction caused by our deeds is a very powerful idea and comes with great responsibility. If one performs a mitzvah, they have started a career in a mitzvah life. The inertia that builds up, as we explained can carry a person from one to the next; building up an everlasting train of mitzvos. Each one of us builds up inertia; the only question is which direction is your train going in?

Halacha Corner:

It says in the Mishnah Breurah 685:2 That on the second week of Adar we read the Parsha of Amalek. The reason for this stems from a halacha that requires us to not forget what Amalek did to the Jews on their departure from Egypt. The Poskim explain that in order to fulfill our obligation for this remembrance we must read it at least once a year. Being that the coming year is a leap year thirteen months will have elapsed since the last reading. This poses a problem, being that the reading is supposed to take place at least once in twelve months. A solution to this problem is that this week when the baal korei reads parshas Amalek you should have in mind to fulfill your obligation. [Whether or not you must notify the baal korei to have this in mind as well, along with all other questions that come up from this Halacha corner should be discussed with your local (or not so local) orthodox Rabbi! ]

It is well known in the name of the Vilna Goan that one of the aspects of why the word  גט is utilized is because throughout the Torah, the two letters “ג” and “ט” never appear next to each other. Much has been said about this “cute thought”. There is much depth to it. I believe that there is an expression of what a Torah marriage is meant to be. Hashem intended for husband and wife to connect and be together with the Torah as their guide. When this fails, then a גט is the result. Let us focus on how to achieve this outlook.

The very first description which Adam gives upon seeing his wife is (Beraishis 2:23): She is a bone from my bones and flesh from my flesh, she should be called Isha, woman, for she comes from Ish, man!

Why in fact did Hashem create the woman from a part of man himself? Could He not have just used raw material from another source, perhaps from dirt, just as Adam was formed?!

This is a simple yet fundamental question. The answer will prepare us to understand Hashem’s goal for marriage!

Hashem wanted man and woman to be one unified unit! True, each one would have different personalities, tendencies and strengths, in fact very diversely, but, in essence they would blend and work together! By creating their bodies (and souls as well, as stated in the Zohar) from one place, this gave them an intrinsic bond and connection that would last for eternity. Man and woman were to ponder their shared creation and realize the importance of building a deep relationship between them. Hashem created them from one body to teach them to work together to become like one! Their serving Hashem together by following His Torah and Mitzvos and treating each other with sensitivity and respect makes them into one! (based on Gr”a in Mishley 9:10)

Rabbi Yaakov Yosef Herman zt”l was once waiting in an office together with his wife and newly married daughter and son-in-law, ybl”c Rabbi Chaim Pinchus Scheinberg shlit”a. R’ Scheinberg was sitting next to his own wife and his in-laws were on the outer ends of the two of them. The young newlywed joked with his father-in-law saying, “I’m closer to my wife that you are to yours!”

Rabbi Herman chuckled and then retorted with his own quick rebuttal, a lesson that would last a lifetime: You just got married, so for now, in order for you to be close to your wife, you must sit right near her, but my wife and I have been married for years and we are so close and connected in our hearts that no physical distance can ever separate us! Thus, I am closer to my wife!

The classical example is when Yishmael (See Beraishis 21:17) was dying of thirst, the angels told Hashem that a person whose ancestors are in the future going to kill Jews by way of depriving water, he does not deserve to be given a drink! Hashem responded, “right now he is not guilty and thus does not deserve to die.” With that, Hashem sent him water and saved his life.

The Gemara tells us that the rebellious son in our Parsha gets put to death not because of his actions of stealing and eating with gluttony, but because eventually he will do bigger sins and so it is better to just execute him now. The question is, what happened to judging only based on the present time?!

There are numerous answers. I heard from my dear Rebbe, Rabbi Asher Zelig Rubenstein shlit”a a beautiful explanation which I later found to be hinted by Rabbi Menachem Recanti (d. 1310). The Ben Sorer U’Moreh is guilty now! The verse states that this young man, “doesn’t listen.” He has no interest in hearing about life and his personal responsibilities; this is the ultimate sin! It would be one thing if he was sinning because he was distracted and his passions got the most of him. At least he would know he was wrong and needs to improve. This is not the case. He has closed his heart to hear anything. For that he is punished accordingly.

Life is all about growth and self-improvement. Every day is an opportunity to learn, grow and enjoy!

 By Rabbi Mordechai Kuber

 Introduction – Shulchan Aruch (YD 84:16) prohibits intestinal worms, because they might originate outside the fish, but permits flesh worms, because they form in the permitted fish flesh.  Scientific research has long discredited SG (spontaneous generation), thereby casting the permissibility of flesh worms in doubt.  Many Poskim resolve this conflict by saying that worms appear to originate in the flesh, but that they actually begin in microscopic size outside the fish, but develop to visible, halachically relevant form only within the flesh.  Other Poskim, mainly in Eretz Yisrael, are not at all perturbed by this scientific rejection of SG, preferring instead Chazal’s literal word.

 Those who reinterpret SG confront numerous difficulties, as the microscopic-to-visible theory must clear numerous scientific and halachic hurdles.  Those who accept SG do not face any of these difficulties, but they nevertheless cannot permit worms that have been demonstrated to arrive in the flesh not through SG, but through invasion.  There are those who claim that the ubiquitous anisakis is such a worm, and is therefore prohibited.

 In this article, we present and discuss the difficulties confronting those who both reject SG and permit anisakis, and discuss the evidence presented that anisakis is invasive.

 This author publicly acknowledges that he is not a Poseik for Klal Yisrael.  His intention is only to acquaint readers with the issues, and to foster mature discussion.  In the final analysis, we follow the rulings of our Gedolim and Poskim.

 Difficulties with Applying Microscopic-to-Visible Theory – Applied to fish worms, this theory adopts the scientifically documented life cycle of internal fish parasites: microscopic larvae are ingested by crustaceans, which are subsequently ingested by the host fish; the larvae then migrate from the stomach to the flesh, where they develop and appear to have spontaneously generated.

 We presume the details to be roughly similar for all flesh worms, and therefore we discuss only the one most thoroughly researched.  Anisakis, when it hatches on the ocean floor, is 14-20 microns wide.  Some claim that the nascent worm is indiscernible by the human eye because of its narrowness.  Others note that it is as wide as angora hair and retinal stitches, which are both visible.  If anisakis is visible at this stage, and such external worms are confirmed as the source of fish-flesh infestation, then flesh worms must be prohibited.  Some counter that we may disregard the borderline visibility of hatched anisakis, and all the other difficulties we are about to present, because all this occurs in submarine secrecy, out of range of our detection.  Since we first discover the worms only within the flesh, we may presume that they originated there, regardless of how they actually arrived.  This approach is flawed, as the Gemara states that intestinal worms are prohibited because they are really outside trans-nostril invaders.  Thus, we are concerned about worms’ origins, even if their development and travels are shielded from view.  Therefore, if anisakis are visually discernible from the time of their hatching, they are certainly prohibited.

 Even if hatched anisakis are invisible, this theory must address the growth of the larvae to visible stage within the prohibited crustacean.  There is no explicit ruling concerning this, and the law seems to be disputed.  In addition, we would need to say that the transfer of the larva from the crustacean to the host fish is not considered as if the worm left its growth environment, for then it would be prohibited, even if it were permitted up to that point.  We would need to distinguish between these worms and a worm that develops within post-harvest fruit and crawls out, directly into another picked fruit.  In the latter case, we rule stringently, even though the worm never was exposed to the outside.  In this case, we would have to say that the host fish is also considered a growing environment, for the larva continues to develop there.

 We have still not cleared all the hurdles, even if the larvae have survived the triple challenge of their initial visibility, their development within prohibited crustaceans, and their transfer out of their growth environment to the host fish.  We still need to allow for their migration from the intestines to the flesh, while simultaneously claiming that other, prohibited larvae that could reside in the stomach cannot likewise pierce the intestinal wall.  This is obviously an untenable argument.

 Finally, a Gadol Hador has reputedly absolutely rejected the microscopic-to-visible theory.  He rules that even if larva is microscopic at the time of migration or initial ingestion, its visible, grown form is prohibited, since it developed from a migratory source.

 In summary, proponents of outside origin of permissible fish-flesh worms face significant challenges to their theory.

 The Migratory Evidence – As we mentioned in the introduction, worms that originate outside the fish are prohibited, even if we have not rejected SG.  Some have presented four proofs that flesh anisakis are migratory, and do not originate in the flesh.  First, identical anisakis are found in proximate abundance in the fishes’ stomachs.  Second, tunnels connect the worm-sites to the stomachs.  Third, worms seem less predominant in farmed fish, suggesting that worm-infested ocean waters are the external cause of flesh infestation.  Fourth, and finally, worms are more prevalent in the belly flaps and abdominal walls of fish, suggesting that this disparity of distribution results from the proximate source of the intestinal worms.

 Before we discuss these proofs, we mention that the current round of questioning the halachic status of flesh-worms was sparked by noticing migration from the peritoneum (abdominal-wall membrane) to the flesh underneath.  This membrane adheres to the muscle, and is not attached to the digestive tract.  There is no physical reason to classify it as part of the intestines.  In addition, there is no precedent in Halachah to prohibit the worms in this membrane; the worms there should be as permitted as are those in the flesh.  Hence, the worms observed to migrate are permitted worms, and there was never any cause for alarm!

 We now refute all four proofs.  First, proximity of intestinal anisakis does not compromise the ability of flesh to develop anisakis on its own, and therefore does not at all imply that the flesh worms are invaders.  Intestinal worms also developed within a fish or crustacean, and moved to their new, visceral home after the demise or ingestion of their former host.  Thus, there is no reason for the presence of intestinal worms to cast aspersion on the internally developing nature of their flesh-resident neighbors.  As an analogy, consider a farmer who purchases a few bushels of wheat at a roadside stand, and then dumps them between the rows of his wheat field.  Would it make any sense to suggest that the dumped wheat has not grown in a field, and then to continue along this faulty line of reasoning and conclude that the waves of grain have been transplanted?  Certainly not!  Likewise, the presence of ingested intestinal anisakis should not generate any suspicion at all about the native origins of the identical flesh worms.

 In addition, Pri Chadash (84:45) prohibits fish-liver worms because they invade through the nostrils, but does not seem concerned that abutting, intestinal worms might have infected the liver.  It seems that Pri Chadash is convinced that intestinal worms pose no migratory threat.  We also note that Pri Megadim (Sif’sei Daas 84:43) and others comment that intestinal worms are not certainly prohibited, but only out of doubt that they might have arrived from the outside.  It is likewise possible that they developed internally, as is the case with flesh worms.  So why should we be concerned about the presence of stomach worms, which might well have developed internally and be permitted?  We cannot permit them, because we are not certain, but that doubt should not foster speculation about possible migration of these unverified invaders.

 Regarding the second proof, we question the authenticity of the study that discovered these connecting tunnels.  How many worms were identified, and how many of them had tunnels connecting their location to the stomachs?  Apparently, not all worms, and not all fish, had connecting tunnels.  This author has observed worms without connecting tunnels.  The study seems inconclusive.  But even presuming that its observations are sound, we question its directional conclusions.  How do we know that these tunnels are evidence of migration from the stomach to the flesh?  Perhaps they are evidence of the opposite – of worms migrating from the flesh to the stomach!  

 Rav Yisrael Isserlin (Hagahos Shaarei Dura §47) says exactly this.  He permits white shwibrin worms that we observe burrowing from the surface deep into the flesh of fish, for we are certain that they originate within the fish flesh.  Rav Isserlin understands that even when we witness penetration of these worms, we may presume that they were originally internal, since we often find them in the flesh, and are therefore aware that they develop within the flesh.  Rav Isserlin is not concerned that these burrowing worms are originally external, and hence prohibited.  We presume that flesh worms developed internally, even when the possibility of external penetration is present!

 The third proof of migration seems more credible, for what else could account for the noticeably lesser incidence of infestation in farmed fish than in wild fish?  We could propose, with some lack of conviction, that controlled farm conditions are less conducive to worm generation than are the wild, polluted waters of the oceans.  Instead, we note with greater conviction that this proof is predicated on inconclusive and paltry evidence.  There seems to be no more than one publicly available scientific study, from 1989, that makes the case for the lack of incidence of anisakis in farmed fish relative to the abundance of its incidence in wild fish.  It discusses only salmon, comparing the zero incidence of anisakis in penned salmon, which are harvested at the age of only a year, to the abundance of infection found in wild salmon, which are caught as they return to spawn.  Thus, the study compares young, pampered fish to fish that have traveled thousands of miles and are hours away from death.  There is no question that the flesh of the older, more weary fish is much more susceptible to decay and worm generation than is that of the sprightly juniors.

 Finally, the fourth proof is the easiest to brand as presumptuous, because it could well be that the belly flaps and abdominal walls are more accommodating to worm generation than are other locations.  In a vacuum, stomach proximity might cause us to postulate about migration, but it is far from compelling enough to begin to challenge the universality of the Shulchan Aruch’s ruling.

 Arguments For and Against Permitting Flesh Anisakis

 Shulchan Aruch does not confine his ruling to a specific type of worm.  Therefore, if the possibility exists that other worms, possessing migratory capabilities, are prohibited, his blanket permissive ruling is unconscionably and irresponsibly misleading.  Rather, his unqualified ruling proves that migration is impossible.  Nevertheless, some Poskim claim that Shulchan Aruch discusses only worms known to him, all of which were not migratory, and not contemporary anisakis, whose migratory nature has been verified to their satisfaction.

 Some argue that modern-day catching and delivery methods allow fish to remain ungutted for much longer than in centuries, or even in decades, gone by.  Therefore, although Shulchan Aruch rules that we may presume that freshly caught fish could not have migratory worms in its flesh, we cannot safely presume the same for fish caught days ago.  We note that in Talmudic days, fishermen brought their ungutted fish to the market, sometimes a day or two after the catch (see Beitzah 24b and Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim 515).  So if Chazal were not concerned about post-catch migration even if fish were left unrefrigerated and ungutted two days after the catch, why should we be concerned about it nowadays if fish is left ungutted for a few hours, and refrigerated throughout?

 Some invoke the force of tradition: since the codifying of the Talmud, no one has discussed today’s state of infestation where both the stomach and flesh are infested.  They posit that it is unreasonable to presume that such tandem infestation was never reached throughout the millennia.  Rather, there were certainly many incidences of such infestation, yet none of our sages of years gone by felt that the presence of nearby stomach worms negatively affects the permissibility of the flesh worms.

Others suggest that we cannot escape the attestation of the scientists that anisakis originate outside the fish, and migrate to the flesh from the intestines after they are ingested.  We reject this view, as scientists cannot be the arbiters of post-Talmudic change.  They cannot be objective, since they do not believe that worms could form within fish flesh on their own.  Consequently, they believe that anisakis must migrate to the flesh from the stomach, and they will perforce misconstrue and ignore all contrary evidence, or rush to their preconceived migratory conclusions without convincing evidence of such.  Thus, the conclusions of the scientific papers presented should be judged as presumptuous at best, and fraudulent at worst.

We also note that even the scientists are quite unclear about the source of the flesh worms.  The CDC (Center for Disease Control) states unequivocally that intestinal worms migrate to the flesh only after the host fish dies.  They are not discussing migration after the catch, but migration when fish die in the open waters and wait a while before being ingested by larger fish.  Thus, the scientists admit that contemporary worms cannot pierce the abdominal wall during a fish’s lifetime.  Accordingly, they would be perplexed when asked to explain the presence of flesh worms that clearly did not migrate there in the short time between catch and gutting.  Thus, even scientific theory points away from migration!

We also note that if intestine-piercing migration does occur, we would expect to find intestinal ulcers, and we do not. 

 We conclude with one halachic argument.  Rav Yitzchak of Dura (Shaarei Dura §47 and §52) rules that we must prohibit all flesh worms, since trans-nostril invasion is possible.  Although they may well have internally generated, these natives would not be distinguishable from immigrants, and thus we must prohibit all worms.  Shulchan Aruch rejects Rav Dura’s minority ruling, but we remain with an important lesson.  If concern about the possibility of invasion trumps the universality of internal sourcing, then we must prohibit every flesh worm, without exception.  There is no acceptable middle ground.  Hence, claiming that we must be mindful of possible invasion is tantamount to completely rejecting Shulchan Aruch!

 May all our actions, including eating fish and pondering the halachic status of its worms, bring glory to the sacred name of HaShem.

————————

Due to publication constraints, this is an abridged and modified version of the original article.  For the complete version, which includes a comprehensive analysis of the Gemara and relevant Rishonim, please contact the author at JerusalemKosher@gmail.com.

Rabbi Mordechai Kuber, Rav of Beis Medrash Nachlas Tzvi Ohel Avraham in Telzstone, Israel,  is a world renowned kashrus expert and educator. He can be reached at JerusalemKosher@gmail.com.

One of the students of Tifferes Yerushalayim once decided to have a good time by sliding down the staircase banister of the Yeshiva. On his way down he accidentally hit an elderly man who happened to be standing next to the banister. The boy froze in stupefied shock, for he did not just knock down anyone, he knocked down the Rosh Yeshiva himself, R’ Moshe Feinstein! He was beside himself, there was nothing he could say, and nowhere he could hide. R’ Moshe however took the boy by the hand and began to apologize! “I am so sorry for being in the way, usually I stand on the other side of the hall, I don’t know what happened that today I happened to be in your way, I am sorry, please forgive me”. Afterward, R Moshe turned and walked away. R Moshe continued to apologize to the boy consecutively for about two weeks! The boy went to the mashgiach and asked him what to do. He told him to ask R’Moshe for a bracha, and then he will feel as if he has made amends. Needless to say, the boy probably never went for another ride on the banister again.

We see here the tremendous sensitivity that the Torah and a gadol B’Ysroel had for each and every person. Even if that person is outright one hundred percent without any doubt in the world wrong! The feelings of a person were guarded very carefully, no matter what the person did, or who the person was. When someone wrongs us, although it could be very hard it is commendable to emulate the gedolim and the Torah by taking into consideration several things. For starters we can judge a person favorably. It could very well be that there were reasons we may not know about that caused him to act this way. (Things can include habits he picked up, the environment that he was brought up in, and his nature.) This in turn can help us to be more forgiving and understanding to one that has “wronged” us. Even in the end of the day, if the person is one hundred percent wrong, we see that there exists a high level of still caring about another person.

מי האיש אשר ארש אשה ולא לקחה ילך וישב לביתו פן ימות במלחמה ואיש אחר יקחנה (כ:ז).

“Any man that just got married… should leave lest he die in battle…” (20:7).

Before the Jews went out to war, the Kohen would announce that anyone the just built a house, planted a vineyard, got married or is scared because of their sins, must stay back and not fight. In the last announcement, the Kohen says, “whoever just got married (within the year), should go home, lest he die in the war. Rashi makes a strong comment, “if he does not follow the words of the Kohen, he deserves to die”! This comment is perplexing for numerous reasons.

Firstly, why such a harsh punishment? Secondly, Rashi only focuses this comment upon the one who just got married, yet omits this comment regarding the man who built a new house or planted a vineyard, even though the verse itself uses the exact same phraseology there as well?

The Nodah B’Yehuda explains the reason that this punishment only applies to the one who got married. If someone built a house and decided that he was willing to take the risk of going to war, he had a right to stay and was allowed to make that choice, as it only effected himself. However, if a man who got married and then decided to go to war never-the-less, Rashi stresses that he is punishable as his decision is hurting his wife as well.

This idea is fascinating, however, the question which I always had on it is: this seems preposterous?! The punishment that he gets for going to war and hurting his wife, is that he will die. Isn’t this an even bigger hurt to her?!

The answer emerges from the following Gemara (Kesubos 62b). Rabbi Rachumi used to learn all year in the city of Mechuza. Once a year, he would come home on Erev Yom Kippur (and stay through Succos). One year, he delayed his departure and his wife was frantically worrying and asking, “when is he coming”. As the hours passed, she shed a painful tear of despair. At that moment, the roof that Rabbi Rachumi was on caved in and he died. A terribly sad story.

Rabbi Chaim Shmuelevitz states that this Gemara is so difficult to understand. He was punished for hurting his wife and causing her to shed a tear of anguish, but now that she is a widow, there will be buckets of tears, so what in the world was accomplished with this punishment?

Rabbi Shmuelevitz says a frightening and powerful principle here: When you hurt someone’s feelings, you are playing with fire; when you play with fire, you get burnt! This was not a punishment, it was (on their high level) a spiritual consequence for his hurting her.

I believe that the same holds true here. The Torah states the if a man who just got married goes to war and hurts his new wife, then he has unfortunately triggered a spiritual consequence of death. This teaches us how sensitive and careful we must be when dealing with other’s feelings.

This is most relevant as we enter Elul. We see the importance of not hurting others. Hashem’s mercy is great and surely one that cares for and is sensitive to others will be rewarded tremendously!

Rabbi Chaim Vital zt”l states that there is a more personal message hinted to here as well. Hashem grants us a body which has numerous abilities. Each one of our senses can be used for good, the service of Hashem, or the opposite. Our mouth can be used for singing the praise of Hashem, sharing friendly words, talking about Divrey Torah, eating Matzah or a delicious Shabbos meal, all of these things are great spiritual joys. On the other hand, one can misuse the mouth by speaking Lashon Harah, inappropriate words or eating something not permitted by Torah law. So too with our sense of hearing, sight, smell and the entire body.

Rabbi Vital says that the Torah is hinting that we must guard out personal “gates”, the organs of out body that help us interact with and experience the world. We must ensure that they are used in the most productive ways!