Old School Blogging, Torah Trivia; Been A Long Time
I feel like it's been a while since I wrote a free style, old school, heavens to Betsy (did I just write that?) (how do certain terms just pop in the head?) blog post.
The librarian of the school I work in is amazing.I think there should be a show like Iron Chef only with librarians competing to see who can find information the fastest. I'm sure Mrs. Geller would win.
Unpretentious, amazingly talented, she has been one of the pillars of the school for many years, and please G-d will be for years to come. Sometimes I send kids to her to find sources, sometimes I ask for sources myself - I mean, in the realm of what I'm teaching. But there are also times when an out there question suddenly arises and I check in with her and she finds the answer in record time.
Yesterday I shared a few Jewish source related questions that make me go "hmmmm". Do you have pieces of Jewish lore that are simple to you, that you've known since you were a kid, that you assume everyone knows, only to find out one day that this is an arcane tidbit only you possess.
About 15 years ago Aaron Bulman, of blessed memory, was talking about the rainbow and mentioned that the direction of a rainbow's arc indicates a form of surrender. When you shoot at someone the string is in front of you and the solid arc faces you like a backwards C. When you face the C away from yourself you show that , at least for now, "you will study war no more."
Aaron learned this in Hebrew school and thought it part of Judaism 101 that the shape of the rainbow shows that G-d will not rain arrows of destructive rain on the world again. This was news to me and I found it cool and I don't remember of the other friends (at the Bulman table there are no awkward guests, everyone quickly becomes a family friend) there that Shabbos being familiar with this either. I asked Mrs. Geller where it is. She didn't know, but poked around and soon found that it's a Ramban!
This proves once again that so many ideas that have become organic parts of the whole of normative Jewish thought are found within the Ramban. (Rav Aaron Lichtenstein was once asked if he could have one book with him on a desert island, what would he choose. He said, "Ramban Al HaTorah.") (I recently told that story and one of the listeners, so to speak, corrected me and said that Rav Aaron actually said that he would take two desert island books with him. When I asked what he said the other one was, said corrector told he had no idea. This left me wondering about the mystery of personality, perhaps we'll talk more about that another time).
Here's the Ramban about the rainbow (Black Becomes a Rainbow just reentered my consciousness, joined now by She's A Rainbow - click on link for a pretty version without words. I recommend you just listen and not watch the slides):
רמב"ן בראשית פרק ט
יב) זאת אות הברית אשר אני נותן - המשמע מן האות הזה שלא היה קשת בענן ממעשה בראשית, ועתה ברא ה' חדשה לעשות קשת בשמים ביום ענן. ואמרו בטעם האות הזה, כי הקשת לא עשאו שיהיו רגליו למעלה שיראה כאלו מן השמים מורים בו, וישלח חציו ויפיצם בארץ (תהלים יח טו), אבל עשאו בהפך מזה להראות שלא יורו בו מן השמים, וכן דרך הנלחמים להפוך אותו בידם ככה כאשר יקראו לשלום למי שכנגדם. ועוד שאין לקשת יתר לכונן חצים עליו ואנחנו על כרחנו נאמין לדברי היונים שמלהט השמש באויר הלח יהיה הקשת בתולדה, כי בכלי מים לפני השמש יראה כמראה הקשת, וכאשר נסתכל עוד בלשון הכתוב נבין כן, כי אמר את קשתי "נתתי" בענן, ולא אמר "אני נותן" בענן, כאשר אמר זאת אות הברית אשר "אני נותן". ומלת קשתי מורה שהיתה לו הקשת תחלה. ולכן נפרש הכתוב, הקשת אשר נתתי בענן מיום הבריאה תהיה מן היום הזה והלאה לאות ברית ביני וביניכם, שכל זמן שאראנה אזכיר כי ברית שלום ביני וביניכם
יב) זאת אות הברית אשר אני נותן - המשמע מן האות הזה שלא היה קשת בענן ממעשה בראשית, ועתה ברא ה' חדשה לעשות קשת בשמים ביום ענן. ואמרו בטעם האות הזה, כי הקשת לא עשאו שיהיו רגליו למעלה שיראה כאלו מן השמים מורים בו, וישלח חציו ויפיצם בארץ (תהלים יח טו), אבל עשאו בהפך מזה להראות שלא יורו בו מן השמים, וכן דרך הנלחמים להפוך אותו בידם ככה כאשר יקראו לשלום למי שכנגדם. ועוד שאין לקשת יתר לכונן חצים עליו ואנחנו על כרחנו נאמין לדברי היונים שמלהט השמש באויר הלח יהיה הקשת בתולדה, כי בכלי מים לפני השמש יראה כמראה הקשת, וכאשר נסתכל עוד בלשון הכתוב נבין כן, כי אמר את קשתי "נתתי" בענן, ולא אמר "אני נותן" בענן, כאשר אמר זאת אות הברית אשר "אני נותן". ומלת קשתי מורה שהיתה לו הקשת תחלה. ולכן נפרש הכתוב, הקשת אשר נתתי בענן מיום הבריאה תהיה מן היום הזה והלאה לאות ברית ביני וביניכם, שכל זמן שאראנה אזכיר כי ברית שלום ביני וביניכם
It's Been A Long Time
1. Name a mitzvah from the Torah that can only be fulfilled if you are seated and then stand up.
2. a. Of the meraglim mentioned in parshat Shlach, where in the sequence (1-12) are Kalev and Yehoshua? b. What can we deduce from the answer to part a?
3. At the very start of Sefer Vayikrah, what alludes to Moshe’s humility? (Rashi, Ba’al Haturim)
4. What words in which pasuk in Sefer Vayikra can be understood to teach us that when you offer a korban, you are offering of your very self?
5. Which of the 4 Avot Nezikin share 3 of the same letters?
posted by rabbi neil fleischmann @ 6:46 AM
13 Comments:
I like the rainbow story. With everything else going on, it is good to know that G-d won't rain arrows of destruction down on us.
I'll take a wild guess on question #1 -- Honoring guests? Abraham getting up and rushing out to greet the angels?
(No, I don't think that's right.)
Thanks. I heart comments (that seems to be an in phrase these days, the I heart thing).
You don't have to be sitting and then stand to do hachnasat orchim that's just how it played out for Avraham.
1. Standing to honor an elder or scholar.
2. I see they are 3 & 5, but no idea what that indicates.
3. Small aleph.
4. Says "nefesh" by a minchah.
5. maveh; hever
Thanks Kishke. There are sometimes voices in my heart and head that cause me to pause over how many comments I get and how many responses I get to quetions. The adult me, the developed spiritual/emotional grown up that I strive to be knows that I write here because I want to and I have added extra blessing of about 100hits a day. Comments are gravy. There are many blogs, even ones by celebrities in various contexts, who don't have loyal commenters. I am grateful to G-d for those who are comfortable with commenting and able to do so. I thank you from all parts of my heart.
1. This is absolutely correct. (The question was submitted to me in a slighltly harder version by Mrs. Kranzler, a resource room teacher in my school and a kindred spirit and long time fan of my Torah thoughts/writings.
2. I composed and compiled these questions and then was assisted by Mrs. Korn, a long time, very dedcated teacher in my school. We spent many hours pouring over the computer, getting it together. While we were working some colleagues kept looking over our shoulders, offering comments and corrections. They said that no-one would get this question, but one of the students buzzed in immediately with the right answer fro his head.
I once heard Rav Noach Weinberg, ZTZ"L, point out that the order of the leaders here (some point out that nesi'im doesn't mean what it usually means, but here just means great men selected for this task) are not in the normal order of the shevatim. He wondered why this is the case and suggested that it makes sense to say that they are listed in order of their greatness. It is, then, interesting to note that Kalev and Yehoshua are not number 1 AND 2.
The vort here is that they each had special siyata dishmaya via tefilla, and that they used their bechira well to rise up and pass this nisayon.
3. Yes. Rashi doesn't say what many people think he says. The Baal HaTurim fills in the story.
4. Adam Ki Yakriv Mikem Korban LaHashem. Rav Zevin Z"TZL has a piece on this in LaTorah VeLaMoadim, in which he explains that the phrasing is irregular and the way that it is written doesn't simply mean - if a person from you brings a korban, rather that when you bring a korban, you must bring it from YOU - from your kishkas.
5. Yes. Our yeshiva is learning B"K his year and I thought this would cause for a bit more thought before buzzing in than if I just asked - what are the 4... (as I'd written in the first draft of the Q).
Well, there's a lot, lot more effort in writing a blog than dropping an occasional comment, so I should be thanking you. Thank you.
I could hear it with respect to Caleb, maybe. But Yehoshua, Moshe's heir, his closest talmid, the one who was allowed to advance highest up the mountain after Moshe, pnei Moshe k'pnei chamah pnei Yehoshua k'pnei levanah, Yehoshua who did not stir from the tent of Torah - that he should be less than any of the meraglim, who were merely tzadikim "b'oso shaah" - no way. I can't accept it. There's probably some other reason for the order. I recall it being discussed in commentaries, but don't remember what they said.
i hear your kasha - i also want to defend rav noach with the adage, ein shoalin al hadrrush. the maor einayim once said regarding drashot - es ha'eim tishalach, ve'es habanim tikach lach...
BTW, see the Meshech Chochmah in his pesichah to Shemos, who says that at this point, Yehoshua was at such a pitch of perfection that he was in a post-bechirah state, like a malach.
Just looked at the Ramban, which I saw earlier this year but forgot. What I took from the Ramban is something that has become quite controversial, namely, that we may accept scientific evidence for something that the pasuk (and kal vachomer Chazal) seemingly explained differently. In this case, Ramban provides an explanation, that HKBH rededicated the already-existing keshes to be the sign of the covenant. Elsewhere, another answer might work, or we can remain with a kushya. But the eitzah is not to pretend the evidence does not exist. Not to say that science cannot be questioned; just that where it is undoubtedly correct, we are not to dismiss it out of hand.
Thanks. I the M"Ch refering to before or after the tefila of Moshe for Yehoshua to be saved from the eitza of the meraglim?
Good point re science.
I haven't seen it in a while, but I believe he's explaining why Moshe's tefillah didn't violate the principle of bechirah: i.e. b/c he & Yehoshua were post-bechirah, which means it was before the tefillah.
let me know if you see exacrly where it is he says this.
Grrr. I wrote this all out and blogger lost it. I hate when that happens. I'll try again:
I looked it up, and it's not as explicit as I remembered. Meshech Chochmah says that the idea that Yehoshua had bechirah removed from him is alluded to in Moshe's blessing of יה יושיעך מעצת מרגלים. Now, left to my own meagre devices, I probably would not have gotten good pshat in the allusion, b/c it could very well mean that he prayed for him not to fall prey to his yetzer hara, which would mean he did have bechirah, so how does this pasuk show no bechirah? Fortunately, though, I was not left to my own devices. I heard from a certain huge talmid chacham this pshat in Meshech Chochmah (which I think he understood as the pashtus), that MC is implying that question of how can Moshe pray for Yehoshua not to sin, when this violates the principle of bechirah, to which he answers that Yehoshua was beyond bechirah. And that's how it's alluded to in the verse.
This is strengthened by Or HaChaim in Bamidbar 14:24, who says this is why the Torah says "avdi" only by Caleb not by Yehoshua, which, come to think of it, is also a proof that the removal of bechirah came before the meraglim (unless you say it came b/c of Moshe's prayer, which is very hard to accept, since a person would certainly have to earn such a level through his own merit).
Thanks K - mised this till just now. It's still all a bit fuzzy to me - I need to see it and really take it in. This is profound and sophisticated.
Post a Comment
<< Home