|
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Parashat Shemot introduces us to Moshe Rabbeinu, who was born in Misrayim at a time when the government issued a decree that, if followed, would have required all male Hebrew babies to be killed shortly after birth. Moshe Rabbeinu, however, survived the infanticide decree, grew to adulthood, married, and started a family. Then, one day while he was at work, shepherding sheep for his father-in-law Yitro, Moshe Rabbeinu had an encounter with HaShem, at what is known as the Burning Bush. “And the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of the bush; and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, but the bush was not consumed.” Shemot 3:2. “G-d called out to him out of the midst of the bush. . . .” Shemot 3:4. During the subsequent conversation that occurred between HaShem and Moshe Rabbeinu, HaShem told Moshe “I am the G-d of thy father, the G-d of Abraham, the G-d of Yizhaq, and the G-d of Ya’aqov.” Shemot 3:6. HaShem continued: I have surely seen the affliction of My people who are in Misrayim and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters; for I know their sorrows; and I [have] come down to deliver them out of the hand of Misrayim and to bring them up out of that land to a good and spacious land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of [Eretz Yisra’el]. . . . Shemot 3:7-8. One obvious question is why did HaShem take the Hebrews out of Misrayim, rather than simply solving their difficulties with the Egyptian government and thus making life in Misrayim tolerable. Another obvious question is why did HaShem promise to take the Hebrews to Eretz Yisra’el, rather than, for example, to Brooklyn, London, Paris, Madrid, Baghdad, Tehran, or some other place. The answer, of course, is because Eretz Yisra’el is holy; it is The Holy Land; The Promised Land. The Torah is singularly focused on this point. Now, the Lord said to Avram, get out of thy country and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, [and] go to the land that I will show thee [Eretz Yisra’el], and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great, and thou shalt be a blessing; and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curses thee, and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. Bereshit 12:1-3. “And the land which I gave to Abraham and Yizhaq, to thee [Ya’aqov] I will give it, and to thy seed after thee will I give the land.” Bereshit 35:12. The Torah explicitly states the reason for the Exodus. “I am the Lord your G-d, Who brought you out of the land of Misrayim, to give you the land of Kena’an [Eretz Yisra’el], and to be your G-d.” Vayyiqra 25:38. This pasuk is often misquoted as “I am the Lord your G-d, who took you out of Egypt to be your G-d,” omitting the all-important phrase “to give you the land of Eretz Israel.” The Talmud states: [T]he Sages taught: A person should always reside in Eretz Yisra’el, even in a city that is mostly populated by idolaters [gentiles], and he should not reside outside of Eretz Yisra’el, even in a city that is mostly populated by Jews. The reason is that anyone who resides in Eretz Yisra’el is considered as one who has a G-d, and anyone who resides outside of Eretz Yisra’el is considered as one who does not have a G-d. As it is stated: “To give to you the land of Canaan, to be your G-d.” Maseket Ketuvot, 110b. Halakha, that is, Jewish Law, states that the misva of living in Eretz Yisra’el is timeless; it is still the Halakha today. “If [a husband] proposes to ascend to Eretz Yisra’el and [the wife] does not want to [go], [the husband] must divorce her. . . . [And if the wife] proposes ascending [to Eretz Yisra’el] and [the husband] does not want to [go], he must divorce her.” Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 75:4. Life is short. There are many unforeseen circumstances and events which occur in a person’s life, not to mention that the world is changing faster now than ever before. So, instead of singing “Next year in Yerushalayim,” let us make it “This year in Yerushalayim,” while it is still possible to make Aliyah. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
0 Comments
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Parashat Vayhi opens with Ya’aqob Abinu extracting a vow from his son Yosef to “carry me [Ya’aqob] out of Misrayim and bury me in” Eretz Yisra’el. Bereshit 47:29-31. Ya’aqob then sits up on his deathbed and says to Yosef, “G-d Almighty appeared to me at Luz, in the land of Kena’an, and blessed me, and said to me ‘behold . . . I will give this land to thy seed after thee for an everlasting possession.’” Bereshit 48: 2-4. After Ya’aqob passed, Yosef had him embalmed, Bereshit 50:2, and then transported his remains to Eretz Yisra’el for burial. Bereshit 50:7. Parashat Vayhi closes with Yosef ill and about to die. “Yosef said to his brothers, “I die and God will surely visit you and bring you up [to Eretz Yisra’el] out of this land [of Misrayim], to the land of which [HaShem] swore to Abraham, to Yizhaq, and to Ya’aqob.’” Bereshit 50:24. Yosef then extracted a vow from his family that they “shall carry up [to Eretz Yisra’el] my bones from here.” Bereshit 50:25. “Yosef died, being a hundred and ten years old, and they embalmed him and he was put in a coffin in Misrayim.” Bereshit 50:26. Later, in Parashat Beshallah, we learn that Moshe Rabbeinu did, in fact, take “the bones of Yosef with him,” from Misrayim to Eretz Israel. Shemot 13:19. Parashat Vayhi thus opens and closes with Ya’aqob and his son Yosef both extracting from their relatives a vow that their remains be removed from Misrayim and buried in Eretz Yisra’el. In both instances, reference was made to Eretz Yisra’el as being the land that HaShem promised to the Jewish People and in both instances the body of the deceased was embalmed before it was transported to Eretz Yisra’el. Contrary to the events which are described in Parashat Vayhi, Halakha (Jewish Law) clearly states that a deceased person should be buried within twenty-four hours of death, or at least as soon thereafter as possible, and that embalming is prohibited. The fact that Parashat Vayhi repeats that both Ya’aqob and Yosef insisted on being buried in Eretz Yisra’el suggests that the importance of being buried in Eretz Yisra’el, even if one was not able to live in Eretz Yisra’el, is so great that it constitutes an exception to the general rules which prohibit embalming and require a prompt burial. The Biblical source for the concept that the body of a deceased person should be buried within twenty-four hours is derived from the passuk which states: And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and thou hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt surely bury him that day (for he that is hanged is accursed by G-d. Debarim 21:22-23. The Talmud explains: The Mishna teaches that everyone, not only an executed transgressor, must be buried on the day of his death, if that is at all possible. Rabbi Yohanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai: From where is it derived that one who leaves his deceased relative overnight without burying him transgresses a prohibition? The verse states: “But you shall bury him [kavor tikberennu]” [Debarim 21:23], doubling the verb for emphasis. From here it is derived that one who leaves his deceased relative overnight without burying him transgresses a prohibition. Maseket Sanhedrin 46b. The Talmud continues: Come and hear a proof from the Mishna: If one left his deceased relative unburied overnight for the sake of his honor, e.g., in order to bring him a coffin or shrouds, he does not transgress the prohibition of “his body shall not remain all night.” What, is it not referring to the honor of the deceased? The Gemara answers: No, it is referring to the honor of the living relatives of the deceased. Maseket Sanhedrin 46b. Thus, we see from the Gemara that the Biblical source which requires burial on “that day” refers to a person who was executed for a capital offense, not to an individual who died of natural causes, or an illness, accident, or the like. We also see that Halakha permits a delay in conducting the funeral where the purpose of the delay is “that the burial will be conducted with greater dignity.” Lastly, we know that Halakha discourages embalming, as the desecration of human remains is forbidden. However, just as it is permitted to delay a funeral so that the funeral “will be conducted with greater dignity,” so too it is permitted to do that which is needed for dignity and hygiene to preserve a body for burial. Parashat Vayhi shows, through Ya’aqob and Yosef, that there no greater dignity for a deceased than to be buried in Eretz Yisra’el. Thus, the delay in burying Ya’aqob and the exhuming of Yosef’s remains, transportation, and reburial in Eretz Yisra’el was, of course, proper. One lesson we can learn from Parashat Vayhi is that while it is preferable for a Jew to live and die in Eretz Yisra’el, “the land of which [HaShem] swore to Abraham, to Yizhaq, and to Ya'aqob,” the best alternative, if that is not possible, as we learn from the examples of Ya’aqob and Yosef, is to be buried in Eretz Yisra’el. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Parashat Vayyiggash marks the beginning of the Egyptian exile, which is instructive because: AND ABRAM PASSED THROUGH THE LAND. I will tell you a principle by which you will understand all the coming portions of Scripture concerning Abraham, Yizhaq, and Ya’aqob. It is indeed a great matter which our Rabbis mentioned briefly, saying: “Whatever has happened to the patriarchs is a sign to the children.” It is for this reason that the verses narrate at great length the account of the journeys of the patriarchs, the digging of the wells, and other events. Ramban on Genesis 12:6:1 In other words, history repeats itself. Just as the Israelites moved to Egypt, made significant contributions to that country’s success, and then became a disfavored minority upon whom blame can be assessed for every perceived wrong, real or imagined, so too, Jews in the United States and other diaspora countries will suffer the same fate. Reasons for Exile [גלות] (Galut) The reason for the Babylonian exile was punishment for sin. Rabbi Yitzḥak says: At the time when the First Temple was destroyed, the Holy One, Blessed be He, found Abraham standing in the Temple. He said to Abraham: “What has My beloved to do in My house?” Masekhet Menachot 52b. Although one reason for the Babylonian exile is punishment for sin, the Jewish people will, ultimately, repent and return to both HaShem and Eretz Yisra’el. The second reason for the exiles is perhaps more surprising: And Rabbi Elazar said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, exiled Israel among the nations, only so that converts would join them, as it is stated: “And I will sow her to Me in the land” (Hosea 2:25). Does a person sow a se’a of grain for any reason other than to bring in several kor of grain during the harvest? So too, the exile is to enable converts from the nations to join the Jewish people. Masekhet Pesachim 87b. Rabbi Elazar lived during the years following the destruction by the Romans of the second Beit HaMikdash. Although the purpose of the Babylonian exile (which occurred concurrently with the destruction of the first Beit HaMikdash), and perhaps arguably the subsequent exiles, was punishment for sin. However, at least one purpose of the current exile is to create Jewish converts, a purpose which, unfortunately, has largely gone unfulfilled. In Rabbinic literature, converts are sometimes referred to as “Holy Sparks” and the process of attracting converts is referred to as “gathering” those “Holy Sparks.” The source of these Holy Sparks can be traced all the way back to the beginning of the Torah itself. “And the earth was astonishingly [תהו] empty [ובהו], and darkness [וחשך] was upon the face of the deep [פני תהום], and the Spirit of HaShem [ורוח אלהים] hovered upon the surface of the waters.” Bereshit 1:2. “Astonishingly” [תהו] refers to the Babylonian exile (423-371 BCE); “empty” [ובהו] refers to the Median (Persian) exile (371-356 BCE); “darkness [וחשך] refers to the Greek exile (318-138 BCE); “face of the deep” [פני תהום] refers to the current, Roman exile (approx. 63 BCE through the present); and the “Spirit of HaShem” [ורוח אלהים] refers to the Messianic period at the end of days. Bereshit Rabba 2:4. The Babylonian, Median (Persian), and Greek exiles have all come to pass, just as the Torah tells us they would. We are now in the fourth, and last, the Roman, exile. And as we shall see shortly, we are “knocking on the door,” so to speak, of the Messianic era. Redemption We know that the appearance of Mashiach and the beginning of the Redemption will occur no later than 6,000 years from creation. Masekhtot Rosh Hashana 31a, Sanhedrin 97a; Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer, Gerald Friedlander, Sepher-Hermon Press, New York, 1981, p. 141; Zohar 1:117a, Zohar Vayera 119a. Each 1,000 years is analogized to one day, which means that each hour consists of approximately 41.67 years. The current year from creation, the year on the Jewish calendar, is 5785. Thus, there are 215 years, or approximately 5.16 hours left in the “day” that constitutes the final 1,000 years. Thus, if we assume that the “day” which constitutes the final 1,000-year period will end at 6:00 p.m., the current “time” is approximately 12:56 p.m. Recall that Mashiach may come at any time and that the 6,000 year “deadline” for the arrival of Mashiach is the latest time at which he could appear. Conclusion We know that there will be four major exiles, the Babylonian, Median (Persian), Greek, and Roman exiles; that 3 of the 4 exiles have come to pass; that we are in the fourth exile; and that the dual purpose of the exiles is to punish the Jewish people for sin and to gather converts, Holy Sparks,” from the four corners of the world. We also know that the Messianic period can begin at any time, but not later than the year 6000 from creation; that we are currently in the year 5785 from creation; and that, if each 1000 years represents one day, it is now almost 1:00 p.m. on the last day before Mashiach will come, at no later than 6:00 p.m. Lastly, our Sages teach that only 20 percent – 1 out of every 5 – Israelites left Egypt during the Exodus; meaning that 80% stayed behind! Rashi, Shemot 13:18. Who were these 80 percent? They are Jews whom we today would classify as assimilated; those who would prefer to stay in galut rather than come to Eretz Yisra’el. Time is rapidly running out. May HaShem bless all the Jewish people, as well as those who want to convert to Judaism, to stop sinning (including the secular political “leaders” of Medinat Yisrael), so that all Jews can now prepare to make Aliyah (immigrate to Eretz Yisra’el) without further delay. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. In Parashat Miqqez, we learn that, because of a famine in Eretz Yisra’el, Ya’aqob sent his sons, Yosef’s brothers, the brothers who had sold Yosef to the Yishme’elim, to purchase food in Mizrayim. Bereshit 42:1-5. Unbeknownst to Ya’aqob and Yosef’s brothers, Par’o had appointed Yosef to the position of “governor of the land [of Mizrayim] and [it was] he that sold [food] to all the people of the land.” Id. 42:6. When the brothers approached Yosef to purchase food, “Yosef knew his brethren, but they knew them not.” Id. 42:8. On a simple level, the pasuk “Yosef knew his brethren, but they knew him not” can be understood as saying that Yosef recognized his brothers because, when the brothers sold Yosef to the Yishme’elim, which was the last time they had seen each other, the brothers had beards, but Yosef, being young, had not yet grown a beard. Thus, Yosef recognized his brothers, but his brothers did not recognize him. Rashi, Bereshit 42:8, citing Masekhet Ketubot 27b; Masekhet Yevamot 88a; Bereshit Rabba 91:7. A deeper explanation is that “’Joseph recognized his brothers’ when they were given over to his hand, he recognized that they were his brothers and had mercy on them. ‘But they did not recognize him’ when he fell into their hand, by [not] treating him in a brotherly manner.” Id., citing Bereshit Raba 91:7. We often refer to our fellow Jews as our “brothers” and “sisters.” If our fellow Jews are our “brothers” and “sisters,” there must be a lineage that creates this familial bond. And, indeed there is. That familial lineage was formed at Har Sinai, with the giving of the Torah. When the Hebrews gathered at the base of Har Sinai, they prepared themselves to receive the Torah by, among other things, agreeing to accept unconditionally all of the precepts of the Torah and then learn the details of those precepts at a later time and by bathing, immersing in a mikveh (ritual bath), of sorts. In other words, the Hebrews arrived at Har Sinai as non-Jews, converted to Judaism, received the Torah, and then departed Har Sinai as Jews. Thus, we see that the source of the bonds that make our fellow Jews “brothers” and “sisters” is the Torah and, G-d forbid, without the Torah there is no such thing as Jews, Judaism, or Jewish “brothers” and “sisters.” Today, unfortunately, there are many Jews who do not recognize the Torah as Divine. There are also many Jews who, although they accept the Torah as having been Divinely given, do not recognize that it is HASHEM’S will that all Jews reside in Eretz Yisra’el. May all Jews be blessed to recognize the Torah as Divine and that it is HASHEM’S will that all Jews “recognize” their brothers and sisters, and to do everything possible to move to, and live with their brothers and sisters in Eretz Yisra’el. For those for whom it is not possible to move to Eretz Yisrael, may they be blessed to do everything possible to support other Jews to move to Eretz Yisrael. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Hanukkah [חנוכה], which means “inauguration” or “dedication,” is an eight-day rabbinic holiday which begins on the 25th day of the Hebrew month of Kislev, and which typically occurs during the Gregorian month of November or December. Hanukkah is sometimes referred to as the “Festival of Lights,” an apparent reference to the candles that are lit on each night of the holiday. Hanukkah celebrates the Jewish military victory, circa 2nd century BCE, of the Maccabees over the Seleucid Empire, an ancient Greek, Hellenistic empire which was founded by the Macedonian Greek general Seleucus I Nicator. Under the latter rule of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Greek Seleucid Empire conquered Eretz Yisra’el, which then consisted of both Judea, Yerushalayim (Jerusalem), and other areas in Medinat Yisra’el (modern-day State of Israel). Under the rule of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, thousands of Jews in Eretz Yisra’el were massacred; Jewish religious practice in Eretz Yisra’el was banned; the Beit HaMikdash [בית המקדש] (Holy Temple in Yerushalayim) was desecrated through the erection therein of an alter to the Greek god Zeus and the sacrificing therein of pigs; and, Jews were ordered to worship Greek gods. During the persecution of Jews by the Greeks, Mattityahu haKohen ben Yohanan (“Mattityahu”), while in his hometown of Modi’in-Maccabim-Re’ut, aka: Modi’in (which is about 35 kilometers southeast of Tel Aviv and about 30 kilometers west of Yerushalayim, not to be confused with Modi’in Illit); was ordered by a Greek official to sacrifice a pig to the Greek gods. When Mattityahu refused, a secular “Hellenist” Jew volunteered to perform the sacrifice. Mattityahu then killed both the secular Jew and the Greek official. Thus, the Maccabean Revolt [מרד החשמונאים], which consisted primarily of guerrilla warfare, was born. The Maccabees’ most consequential victory was the conquest of Yerushalayim and the capture of the Beit HaMikdash [בית המקדש]. Although only enough kosher oil for one day was found in the Beit HaMikdash [בית המקדש], that small amount of oil burned continuously for eight days, which was long enough for new, kosher oil to be squeezed from olives. Hanukkah is thus celebrated for eight days. During the decades that followed, the Maccabees continued their insurgent activities, using guerrilla warfare tactics against not only the Greek occupiers and oppressors, but also against the secular “Hellenist” Jews who sympathized and cooperated with the Greeks. The Maccabees achieved some degree of success. Although Eretz Yisra’el was still officially under the control of the Greek Seleucid Empire, the Maccabees acquired a degree of informal autonomy, which it used to raise an army and to continue prosecuting a civil war against the secular “Hellenist” Jews. The Hasmoneans, some of whose members were related to the Maccabees, rose to power. Unfortunately, the Hasmoneans, unlike the Maccabees, presided over great spiritual and moral decline within the Jewish nation. The last two Hasmonean rulers, the secular “Hellenists” Jews Hyrcanus and Aristobolus, had a dispute. In their attempt to settle the dispute, Hyrcanus and Aristobolus invited the Romans into Eretz Yisra’el to mediate and, hopefully, to help settle the dispute. The rest, as they say, is history. As the late American broadcaster Paul Harvey might have said, now you know “The Rest of the Story.” Subsequent to the time when the Jewish people, with the help of the Maccabees, conquered Yerushalayim, Jewish sovereignty over Eretz Yisra’el and Yerushalayim was lost for more than 2,000 years. In the Hebrew year 5708 (1948 on the Gregorian calendar), that sovereignty was restored, and subsequently retained though what can only be described as open miracles which were bestowed on the Jewish nation by the grace of Heaven. Unfortunately, however, not much has changed since the time of the Maccabees. The Jewish people still have an enemy who claim that the Jewish people are not the rightful owners of Eretz Yisra’el and who, by force of arms, seek to dispossess the Jewish people of Eretz Yisra’el. There are still Hellenized Jews in Eretz Yisra’el and, just as during the times of the Hasmoneans, these Hellenized Jews occupy positions of political power, while looking to Washington, D.C., rather than to Rome (the modern-day functional equivalent of Washington, D.C.), for salvation. As no Jew in his right mind wants another Jewish civil war, we must continue to pray for Devine assistance, while simultaneously using the democratic process to transform Medinat Yisra’el from its current status as a Hellenized, Jewish state in name only, into a state which is guided by Torah and Halakha and, thus, into a state which is truly Jewish. חנוכה שמח Hanukkah Sameach Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Parashat Vayysehev begins “וישב יעקב,” which literally translated means “and Ya’aqob sat down” in Eretz Yisra’el. Bereshit 37:1. The Midrash interprets this pasuk as saying that Ya’aqob sought to dwell in tranquility in Eretz Yisra’el. Ya’aqob had endured a hard life. From birth, he and his brother Esav were at odds with each other; Ya’aqob was taken advantage of during his years at Laban’s house; his daughter was raped; his sons killed the rapist and all the other men in the city where the rapist had resided, and then destroyed the entire city. As a result, Ya’aqob lived in constant fear of retaliation. Nevertheless, the Midrash rebukes Ya’aqob for seeking a life of tranquility: [The Satan] says: “It is not enough that [tranquility] is prepared for them in the World to Come, but they seek to dwell in tranquility in this world!” You should know that this is so, [for regarding] our forefather Ya’aqob, because he sought to dwell in tranquility in this world, he was met with the distress of [the sale] of Yosef. [This is the meaning of] “Ya’aqob settled [וישב יעקב].” Bereshit Rabbah 84:3. There are quite a few Jews who live in America and other countries of the galut [גלות] (exile) who have “retired,” that is, who have stopped working for a paycheck or other income and who have begun to rely on funds disbursed from a retirement account to pay their living expenses. A small percentage of those “retirees” have made Aliyah. Unfortunately, however, most do not. As the old Chinese proverb goes, we live in “interesting times.” Whether these “interesting times” are a blessing or a curse will depend in large part on our individual choices, with regard to how we live our lives. For a Jew, there can be no greater blessing than to live in the Land to which HaShem referred when he told Abram (whose name HaShem later changed to “Abraham”) to “Get out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, [and go to] the land that I will show thee, and I will make thee a great nation.” Bereshit 12:1. There are many obstacles to making Aliyah. Moving to Eretz Yisra’el is neither easy nor inexpensive. Living in Eretz Yisra’el is not the same as living in galut [גלות]. Retired Jews, like most Jews who live in galut [גלות], are not fluent in Hebrew, the language of the Jewish people and the official language of Medinat Yisra’el (the state of Israel). The cost of living in Eretz Yisra’el is higher than in many other countries, although there are major metropolitan areas in galut [גלות] where the cost of living is higher than in Eretz Yisra’el. Taxes are high in Eretz Yisra’el; however, taxes are high – and rising – in other countries, as well. Health care in Medinat Yisra’el is also a concern for those who make Aliyah, and often more so for retirees, whose health care needs are often greater than that of younger individuals. The good news is that health care in Medinat Yisra’el is much more affordable than in many western countries. The bad news is that, because Medinat Yisra’el has a socialized (government-controlled) health care system, the level of health care quality and service is not what one might expect in a free-market system. Olim (persons who make Aliyah) can, however, obtain in Eretz Yisra’el the health care services they need. After retirees make Aliyah and get settled in their new homes and communities, there is ample time and opportunity to become conversant in Hebrew; learn Torah on a level that cannot be experienced in galut [גלות]; travel within Eretz Yisra’el and personally experience locations that, heretofore, one had only been able to read about; become involved in helping other Jews; and, of course, make new friends. Although galut [גלות] may seem “comfortable” or “tranquil,” we learn from our Parasha that our purpose in this world [עולם הזה] is to work, to be productive, to not live in tranquility. Being “productive” does not necessarily mean working for a salary or running a business, but it does mean doing something productive, that is, something that benefits others. A Jew who makes Aliyah benefits other Jews, both individually and as a nation, simply by being physically present in Eretz Yisra’el. From that starting point, the possibilities for a “retired” Jew who lives in Eretz Yisrael to be of benefit to other Jews increases exponentially. As we learn from our Parasha, “retirement” as that term is commonly understood, that is, a life of tranquility, is not what HaShem intends; rather, it is a really bad idea. As religious Jews, we want to do HaShem’s will. So, if you are approaching retirement, or have already retired, you might want to consider whether HaShem would prefer that you live a tranquil retired life in galut [גלות] or whether HaShem would prefer that, as He instructed Abraham Abinu, you “Get out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, [and make Aliyah to Eretz Yisrael]. May all Jews, “retired” or not, merit to make Aliyah and live in the Land which HaShem promised to Abraham Abinu. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Some 3,500 years ago, “Ya’aqob [and his family] came to Shalem [שלם], a city of Shekhem [שכם], which is in the land of Kena’an, . . . [and] he bought a piece of land on which he spread his tent. . . .” Bereshit 33:18-19. The modern-day city of Shekhem [שכם] is located approximately 49 kilometers (30 miles) north of Yerushalayim. The seller of the land was a man named Hamor. Id. Dina [דינה], the daughter of Ya’aqob and Le’a, “went out to see the daughters of the land. And when Shekhem [שכם], the son of Hamor [חמור] the Hivvite [literally, “Donkey the Hivvite”], prince of the country, saw her, he took her, lay with her, and defiled her.” Bereshit 34:1-2. Hamor [חמור] attempted to negotiate with Ya’aqob a marriage between Shekhem [שכם] and Dina [דינה]. Rather than consent to a marriage of his daughter to a rapist, Ya’aqob’s sons – Dina’s brothers – Shim’on and Levi devised and implemented a plan that would leave the males of the city of Shalem [שלם] in a weakened physical state, and then attacked and killed them all, plundered their belongings, and took their wives captive. Ya’aqob’s response to his sons Shim’on and Levi was: “You have brought trouble on me to make me odious among the inhabitants of the land, among the Kena’ani and the Perizzi, and I, being few in number, they shall gather themselves together against me, and slay me, and I shall be destroyed, I and my house.” Bereshit 34:30. The questions raised by this event include whether Shim’on and Levi were justified in taking revenge against (1) Shekhem [שכם], as an individual, as well as on (2) the entire population of Shekhem [שכם]. Maimonides ruled that gentiles are: obligated to set up judges and magistrates in every major city to render judgment concerning [the Noahide Laws]. . . . A gentile who transgresses [any of the Noahide Laws] shall be executed by decapitation. For this reason, all the inhabitants of Shekhem [שכם] were obligated to die. Shekhem [שכם] kidnapped. They observed and were aware of [his deeds], but did not judge him.” M.T., Hilchot Melachim 9:14. As with other Biblical texts, our task is to determine how to best understand and apply the lessons of this Parashat to current times. To do so, we start with two postulates: (1) the acts of Shim’on and Levi were justified, and (2) Shim’on and Levi were acting on behalf of the Jewish nation, and not as individuals. We learn from the text of the Parasha itself that the acts of Shim’on and Levi were justified. Rather than rebuking Shim’on and Levi for having sinned, the righteous Ya’aqob said to Shim’on and Levi only that: “You have brought trouble on me to make me odious among the inhabitants of the land . . ., I, being few in number, they shall gather themselves together against me, and slay me. . . .” Bereshit 34:30. As the text of the pasuk clearly states, Ya’aqob’s objection to the conduct of Shim’on and Levi was based not on moral grounds, but rather, on practical considerations. Maimonides and other commentators concur. Regarding the Halakhic justification for their acts, Maimonides ruled that because Shekhem [שכם], the individual, had committed the capital offense of kidnapping and because the “country” known as Shekhem [שכם] had violated the Noahide laws through their failure to establish a court system which would administer justice, the actions of Shim’on and Levi’ were justified. Thus, rather than having two individuals (Shim’om and Levi) who were acting in their capacity as individuals to avenge the rape of their sister, our Parasha tells the story of one nation – the Jewish nation – acting through two of its citizens (Shim’on and Levi), retaliating against another nation (the “country” of Shekhem [שכם]) for a wrong that the latter nation had committed against a citizen of the former nation. Understood in this light, the lesson for our times is clear: when a member of another nation, for example, the nation of the descendants of Yishma’el, commit a capital offense against a citizen of the Jewish nation (a Jewish citizen of Medinat Yisra’el, the modern-day State of Israel), and the nation of which the offender is a member fails or refuses to administer justice in accordance with the requirements of the Noahide laws, the Jewish State is fully justified in retaliating against both the offending individual and the offending nation. The justification for Jewish retaliation is even stronger in cases where the offending nation does not merely fail to administer justice in accordance with the Noahide laws, but rather, affirmatively encourages such lawless and immoral behavior by paying “salaries” and “pensions” to its citizens who terrorize members of the Jewish nation. May HaShem bless Medinat Yisra’el with true Jewish leaders who will govern Medinat Yisra’el in a manner which is consistent with the Torah and not be, as was Ya’aqob, concerned with being “odious among the inhabitants of the land.” שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Man Was Created to Toil [כי-אדם לעמל יולד]. Iyyob 5:7. Likewise, the Talmud states: “Rabbi Elazar says: Every man was created for labor, as it is stated: ‘Man is born for toil.’” Masekhet Sanhedrin 99b. For textual evidence that Man Was Created to Toil, we need look no further than one of the opening psukim [פסוקים] (verses) of the Torah. HaShem “took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and to keep it.” Bereshit 2:15. A few parkim [פרקים] (chapters) later, HaShem tells Moshe Rabbeinu “When thou hast brought the people out of Mizrayim, you shall serve HaShem upon this mountain.” Shemot 3:12. In other words, HaShem was telling Moshe Rabbeinu that he need not fear Par’o and that after departing Mizrayim, the Jewish people would receive the Torah on Har Sinay [הר סיני]. Juxtaposing these two psukim [פסוקים] (verses) raises the obvious question of whether man was created to engage in physical work (e.g., to till the garden. . .) or to engage in spiritual pursuits (e.g., to serve HaShem). Parashat Vayyeze opens by informing us that “Ya’aqob went out from Be’er Sheva and went toward Haran.” Bereshit 28:10. That is, Ya’aqob left his parents’ home where he had lived and studied Torah in peace his entire life. On the way to Haran, Ya’aqob stopped at the yeshiva [ישיבה] of Shem and Eber, where he studied Torah for fourteen years. The reason for this delay was to allow Ya’aqob to learn how to survive in the spiritually-hostile environment that was Haran. Shem, who had lived during the generation of the Flood, and Eber, who had lived during the generation of the Tower of Babel, were particularly suited to teach Ya’aqob these lessons. Parashat Vayyeze tells us that after leaving Shem and Eber, Ya’aqob continued on to Haran where, despite many difficulties with his wicked uncle Laban – involving both business and personal affairs – Ya’aqob married both Rahel and Le’a, fathered children, and became successful in business, which involved a joint venture with Laban. Bereshit 30:31-34. This brings us back to where we started: Man Was Created to Toil. That is, man was created to work. Just as Ya’aqob had to work, both for his benefit and for the benefit of his family, so too all of mankind was created to work. Simply knowing that man was created to work does not, of course, provide any meaningful guidance as to what occupation or profession should be engaged in by any particular man. To begin to answer this question, we need to examine the general nature of man. As Rabbi Tatz explains: Free will defines the human being. The human is a reflection of the Devine; just as He acts autonomously, we are free to express ourselves autonomously. That is not true of other created beings – no molecule, animal or plant does anything that breaks the rules of its programmed nature. Only humans are free to choose what they do. Akiva Tatz, Will, Freedom and Destiny, at 15. In other words, HASHEM, being the Creator, represents the epitome of free-will, that is, the ability to choose. Man, having been created in the image of HASHEM, likewise possesses free-will. Explaining the boundaries, that is, the limits, of free-will, Rabbi Tatz writes: Free will is expressed in the moral or ethical zone. Of course[,] humans make choices in other areas too – which pair of shoes to wear or which flavor of dessert to eat must be decided too. But those are mere technical choices; animals make analogous choices, and indeed machines can be programmed to make selections among options. That type of choice is not what we mean when we speak of b’chira [בחירה (“choice”)]. The free choices that interest us in human development, the choices that express the Devine purpose in man’s creation, are those choices that must be made where a discerning of moral options and a decision between them must be made. Id. (italics original), at 33. Choosing an occupation or profession is a decision which is qualitatively different than, for example, choosing which pair of shoes to wear or which flavor of dessert to eat, as choosing an occupation, unlike the latter choices, affects people other than the person who is making the choice. In the opening perek [פרק] (chapter) of the Torah, HaShem commanded all of mankind to “Be fruitful and multiply, replenish the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Bereshit 1:28. To “subdue” and “have dominion over” something does not mean to destroy that something. Rather, to “subdue” and “have dominion over” something means to put that something to productive, beneficial use. So, we see that to “subdue” and “have dominion over” the earth and all that is in it means, among other things, to cooperate with other human beings for the purpose of harnessing and putting to productive use all of the earth’s various resources. Cooperating with other human beings for this purpose necessarily means selecting and pursing an occupation or profession. Having thus concluded that choosing an occupation or profession is a moral choice which is made through the exercise of free-will, we now turn briefly to the question of which economic system is best-suited for creating an environment which is conducive to making this moral choice. There exist two, and only two, economic systems. Although neither system exists, or has existed, in its purest form, or to the exclusion of the other system, we can identify those two systems as Socialism and the Free Market. Socialism, in very general terms, connotes an economy in which the State owns or controls business and industry. The Free Market, on the other hand, connotes the opposite, a system which is based on individuals (including voluntary associations of individuals) interacting economically with others on a voluntary basis. It follows that only a Free Market affords an individual the ability – the freedom – to make the choice – the moral choice – of which occupation or profession to pursue. One of the most often-cited arguments against a Free Market economic system is the question of how, or even whether, the State should provide for those who, for whatever reason, are unable to provide for themselves. This is where the conversation typically turns to “Tzedakah” [צדקה], often translated as “charity,” but more accurately translated, means “justice.” However, prior to addressing “Tzedakah” [צדקה], it’s appropriate to discuss the related concept of “nehama d’kisufa” [נהמא דכיסופא] (Aramaic) or “lechem shel busha” [לחם של בושה] (Hebrew), which in English means “Bread of Shame.” The Chakhamim [חכמים] (Sages) described receiving “unearned benefits” as the “Bread of Shame,” recognizing that the normal response to having received unearned benefits is to feel a sense of shame or embarrassment. In a similar vein, this feeling of shame or embarrassment has been analogized to a child who, as he matures, seeks independence and who wants to “do it myself.” Thus, giving an adult unearned benefits is similar to treating him as a child, that is, to shaming him. The Ramchal explained that HaShem’s “purpose in creation was to bestow of His good to another” and that HaShem “alone is the only true good.” Moshe Chaim Luzzatto, The Way of God, Sixth Revised Edition, (Feldheim 1998), at 37. In other words, given that HaShem is “the only true good” and that the purpose of creation “was to bestow” HaShem’s good[ness] on mankind, it follows that man, who was created in the image of HaShem, Bereshit 1:27, can receive HaShem’s goodness only by connecting with HaShem, which, in turn, can be done only by emulating HaShem’s middot [מדות] (lit. “measures,” commonly translated or understood to mean “character traits”), to the extent humanly possible. Since HaShem is not dependent on others, connecting with HaShem, and thus receiving His goodness, means, at least in part, being as self-sufficient as is humanly possible; that is, not partaking of the Bread of Shame through the acceptance from others of unearned benefits, regardless of whether those “others” are private individuals or the State. The Talmud is in accord, stating that “one who benefits from his hard labor is greater than a God-fearing [person].” Masekhet Berakhot 8a. It’s quite difficult to understate the importance of being financially self-sufficient. The great commentator Rashi stated that “one who is poverty-stricken is considered as if he is dead.” Rashi, Commentary on Shemot 4:19. Returning to “Tzedakah” [צדקה], Maimonides sets forth a hierarchy for the giving of charity. The highest, or most preferred level, involves helping someone to become financially self-sufficient through, for example, helping him start a business or finding a job. The lowest, or least preferred levels involve the giving the poor unearned benefits, that is, the Bread of Shame. See generally, Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Matanot Aniyim. Returning to Parashat Vayyeze, we see that Ya’aqob, by learning in the yeshiva of Shem and Eber, prepared himself spiritually to deal with the wicked Laban. After leaving the yeshiva, Ya’aqob traveled to Haran and, notwithstanding Laban’s numerous schemes, remained a holy and pious Jew who built his business and took care of his family, all while successfully fighting the corrupt influences of the secular world. Ya’aqob’s Torah learning allowed him to understand that man was created to toil; that HaShem gave, and thus expected man to exercise his, free-will; that the choice of a profession is a moral choice; and that to be poverty-stricken is akin to being dead. May we all be blessed to learn from, and successfully emulate, Ya’aqob’s example in our modern, contemporary world. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. In Parashat Toledot, which, loosely translated, means “history,” “generations” or “born of,” we read the story of Ribka’s pregnancy with the twins Ya’akob and Esav, from whom two great nations descended. Ya’akob, as we know, was righteous. Esav, on the other hand, was the manifestation of idolatry and other evils. The Torah then tells us: “And the children [Ya’akob and Esav] struggled in her [Ribka’s] womb,” Bereshit 25:22, and that HASHEM told Ribka that “Two nations are in your womb, Two separate peoples shall issue from your body; One people shall be mightier than the other, And the older [Esav] shall serve the younger [Ya’akob].” Id., 25:23. There is also Midrash halakhah that states, “It is a well-known rule that Esav hates Ya’akob.” Sifrei, Bamidbar 69. The implication of the clash between Ya’akob and Esav, which began in the womb, and the Midrash that Esav hates Ya’akob, is clear: the battle between good and evil will persist for a very long time. Ya’akob’s name was later changed by HASHEM to “Yisra’el.” Your name shall no longer be Ya’akob, but [rather, you will be known as] Yisra’el.” Bereshit 32:29. Ya’akob’s descendants are the Jewish People, the nation of Yisra’el. The descendants of Esav, on the other hand, are associated with the color “red.” “The first one emerged [was born] red, like a hairy mantle all over, so they named him Esav. Then his brother emerged [was born], holding on to the heel of Esav; so they named him Ya’akob.” Bereshit 25:25-26. Parasha Toledot also tells us that Esav liked a certain type of red stew. “And Esav said to Jacob, ‘Give me some of that red stuff to gulp down, for I am famished’ — which is why he was named Edom.” Bereshit 25:30. In Hebrew, the word “red” is “edom.” Thus, the descendants of Esav are known as the nation of Edom. Esav had a son Eliphaz. Eliphaz had a son, Esav’s grandson, Amalek. Throughout history, the Amalekites and their descendants have sought to commit genocide against the Jewish people. The spiritual descendants of Esav, the Amalekites, have included: Haman, in the Book of Esther (which recounts events which occurred in modern-day Iran); the ancient Romans; Nazis; and Stalinists. According to tradition, the modern-day descendants of Esav-Edom are mostly Western Europeans, more specifically, Christians, some of whom ultimately emigrated to, and founded, the United States. Interestingly, the United States flag and the flags of many European countries contain the color red, the color of Esav-Edom. Are all, or even a majority of, Europeans, Americans, or Christians, Amalekites who hate Ya’akob? That is, do they hate the Jewish People? No. Of course not. Many have a deep love of the Jewish people and have never held — or even considered holding — Amalekite beliefs. In fact, the founders of the United States were deeply committed to Tanakh. Furthermore, the United States was instrumental in the founding, and has been a staunch ally, of the State of Israel, ever since it was established in 1948. That does not, however, change the fact that, Biblically, members born into the Christian faith are the spiritual descendants of Esav-Edom. Notwithstanding this spiritual legacy, HASHEM gave each person free-will, that is, the ability (and responsibility) to make moral choices and decisions. Thus, a person is not irrevocably bound to his or her spiritual heritage. The purpose of Torah is not to confine an individual to his spiritual heritage, but rather, to assist each individual — Jew and Gentile alike — in achieving his innate potential through the exercise of free-will. “Whatever happens to the patriarchs is a sign to the children.” It is for this reason that the verses narrate at great length the account of the journeys of the patriarchs. . . .” Now[,] some may consider [the journeys (e.g., life events) of the patriarchs to be] unnecessary and of no useful purpose, but in truth they all serve as a lesson for the future: when an event happens to any one of the patriarchs, that which is decreed to happen to his children can be understood. Ramban, Commentary on the Torah, Bereshit at 169, quoting Tanchuma Lech Lecha 9a. As we learned four weeks ago, in Parasha Noach, HaShem made a promise to never again bring upon the earth a flood that is intended to destroy the entire world, as He did when the world was exceedingly corrupt in Noach’s time. Rather, HaShem gave the world the Seven Laws of Noach, which all the peoples of the world were commanded to follow. In about three months, we will read Parasha Yitro, which relates the giving of the Torah to the Jewish People at Mount Sinai. The result of these two events, the giving of the Seven Laws of Noach and the Giving of the Torah to the Jewish People, means that there is only one true “religion.” That true religion is the Torah, which, on a macro level, creates two classes of people: Jews and Noahides. Thus, by definition, all other religions are religions which reject Torah and which, therefore, constitute idolatry. So, what is a spiritual descendant of Esav-Edom to do? It’s simple: Persons who were not born to a Jewish mother, that is, persons who are not Jewish, should seek out an Orthodox rabbi who can assist them in learning, and living in accordance with, the Seven Laws of Noach. Alternatively, those who were not born to a Jewish mother may convert to Judaism; however, there is no requirement for them to do so. In a similar vein, persons who were born to a Jewish mother, thus making them Jewish, but who have not yet had an opportunity to learn Torah and Halakha (Jewish Law) need only to embrace Judaism by seeking out an Orthodox rabbi and to begin learning and practicing Judaism. It’s not easy to critically evaluate beliefs that a person has, for their entire life, assumed to be true; nor is it easy to so significantly change one’s life, especially considering the impact such change is likely to have on personal and familial relationships. This, however, is the high cost of ultimate truth. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Parasha Hayye Sara tells the story of the death of Sara, saying that: “Sara died in Qiryat Arba, which is in Hebron, in the land of Kena’an.” Bereshit 23:1-2. Abraham, seeking to purchase a burial site for Sara, went to the elders of Qiryat Arba and, through the elders, tendered to Efron the Hitti, an offer to purchase the Cave of Makhpela ([מערת המכפלה], literally, The Cave of Doubles). Addressing the elders of Qiryat Arba, Abraham said: If it be your mind that I should bury my dead out of my sight, hear me and intreat for me to Efron, the son of Zohar, that he may give me the cave of Makhpela, which he has, which is in the end of his field, for the full price; he shall give it [to] me for a possession of a burying-place amongst you. Bereshit 22:8-9. “Efron the Hitti answered Abraham . . . , saying ‘No, my lord, hear me. The field I give thee, and the cave that is in it, I give thee. . . . Bury thy dead.’” Bereshit 23:10-12. Abraham responded, “But if thou wilt give it, . . . I will give thee the price of the field. . . .” Id., 23:13. Efron then states his price: “My lord . . . , a piece of land worth four hundred shekels of silver; what is that between me and thee. Bury thy dead.” Id. 23:15. After Efron negotiates with Abraham by asking, “What’s a mere four hundred shekels between ‘friends,’” Abraham accepted Efron’s offer to sell the field, which included the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה] and paid Efron the purchase price. Efron then transferred title of the field and cave to Abraham. The Ramban (Moses ben Nahman, aka: Nahmanides (1194 (Spain)-1270 (Jerusalem)) explains that Abraham desired only to purchase the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה] which was at the end of the field, and that the field would be retained by Efron. But Efron, by way of good conduct or trickery [possibly hoping to receive a higher price for the larger transaction], said that he [Efron] would give [Abraham both] the field and the cave which was in it[,] since it would be unbecoming for such an honorable person to own the cave as a possession for a burial-place[,] while the field belonged to another. Abraham rejoiced at this suggestion and purchased [the field and the cave] in its entirety for the price mentioned by Efron. Ramban, Commentary on the Torah. Bereshit 23:9. Some commentators have suggested that Efron engaged in conduct which was less than honorable with respect to the sale to Abraham of the field which contains the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה]. To determine whether, as the Ramban pointed out, Efron’s conduct in this transaction was “good” or “trickery,” we must begin with the basic postulate that there are two, and only two, methods of acquiring title or ownership of property. One method is by force or fraud; the other is by voluntary agreement. Acquiring property by force or fraud may be either legal or illegal. Obtaining property by force or fraud is usually assumed to be illegal, as in the case of robbery, burglary, misrepresentation, or concealment of material facts (or, as Ramban might say, “trickery”). Legally acquiring property by force or fraud is accomplished when government, either against the will of others or through efforts to misrepresent or conceal of the truth, compels or persuades others to pay taxes or to otherwise transfer ownership something of value. Examples include the forced sale of real estate to the government (also known as “condemnation” or “the power of eminent domain”); the forced transfer of labor services to the government, such as with jury service or military conscription; or deceptive or misrepresented statements concerning tax laws. Acquiring property by voluntary agreement involves two or more people agreeing on the terms which will govern the transfer of ownership of property from one person to one or more other persons, and includes both the sale of goods and services as well as gifts. Regarding Abraham’s search for a burial site for Sara, the Talmud teaches that Abraham was unable to find a suitable location “until he purchased [the Cave of Makhpela (מערת המכפלה)] for four hundred silver shekels” T.B. Masechet Sanhedrin 111a (emphasis added). Thus, we learn that Abraham sought locations other than the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה] and failed to find any other location which he deemed suitable. Finding the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה] to be a suitable burial place, Abraham initiated negotiations for its purchase by telling the elders of Qiryat Arba that he, Abraham, was willing to pay “the full price” for the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה]. Bereshit 22:8-9. Efron responded, “saying ‘No, my lord, hear me. The field I give thee, and the cave that is in it, I give thee. . . . Bury thy dead.’” Bereshit 23:10-12. Abraham, who did not want to receive the Cave as a gift [bread of shame (לחם של בושה)], reasserted his offer to purchase both the field and the Cave, saying. “But if thou wilt give it, . . . I will give thee the price of the field. . . .” Id., 23:13. In summary, we see that Abraham offered to purchase the Cave. Efron declined to sell only the Cave, but then counter-offered to make Abraham a gift of both the Cave and the field in which it was located. Abraham declined the offer of a gift and reasserted his offer to pay “the price of the field.” Id. It was only after these negotiations that Efron named his price for both the field and the Cave, a price to which Abraham readily agreed. The question which is often raised is whether the sale price of 400 shekels of silver was “too high” or was “unreasonable.” Stated differently, the question is whether the sale price exceeded the “value” of the Cave and field in which it was located or was somehow an “unfair” price. To answer this question, we must turn to the issue of “valuation” and “fair” pricing. When attempting to determine the “value” or “fair” price of an item, a mistake which is often made is to assume that there is a connection between the current “value” or “fair” price and what the owner paid to acquire or manufacture the item. Although a seller may consider his cost of acquisition when setting the price for an item he wants to sell, such cost-basis pricing does not determine the item’s value. If a seller overpaid for an item, or the market price for the item has dropped since the seller acquired the item, no amount of wishful thinking on the part of the seller will raise the current market price (e.g., value) of the item. Rather, the real determinate of “value” in any given transaction is the subjective value of the item which is shared by both buyer and seller at the moment of the transaction. Simply stated, a sale will occur if, and only, if, the buyer prefers acquiring ownership of the item more than he values continued possession of the amount to be paid for the item and if, simultaneously, the seller prefers acquiring the amount to be paid for the item more than he prefers continued ownership of the item to be sold. This “sale price” represents the market price (e.g., “value”) of the item (or service) at the time of the transaction. In the case of the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה], the value to Abraham of that parcel of real estate equaled or exceeded 400 shekels of silver. How do we know this? We know this because Abraham, with full knowledge of what he was buying and without being compelled to make the purchase, voluntarily agreed to pay 400 shekels of silver for the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה]. Likewise, we know that Efron, valued the receipt of 400 shekels of silver more than he valued retaining ownership of the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה]; if things had been otherwise, the sale would not have occurred. The Talmud tells us that “Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: “The Holy One, Blessed be He, gave Yisra’el three precious gifts, all of which were given only by means of suffering: Torah, Eretz Yisrael, and the World-to-Come. [שלֹש מתנות טובות נתן הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל, וכולן לֹא נתנן אלא על ידי יסורין, אלו הן: תורה וארץ ישראל והעולם הבא]” T.B. Mesekhet Berakhot 5a. Thus, contrary to our after-the-fact assessment of the value to Abraham of the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה], where we might view 400 shekels of silver to be an “unfair” or exploitive price, we see that, in fact, 400 shekels of silver represented the market price for the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה] at the time Abraham consummated the purchase. As demonstrated above, the market price for something is the price on which a willing buyer and a willing seller agree, at the time and place of the transaction. Therefore, because Abraham and Efron agreed on 400 shekels of silver for the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה] and the field that surrounds it, that was the market price at the time of that transaction. Unlike Abraham, who purchased the Cave of Makhpela [מערת המכפלה] and the field that surrounds it, HaShem made a gift of the entirety of Eretz Yisra’el to the Jewish people. Thus, the question that each Jew must ask is: “How much to I value Eretz Yisra’el?” Given that Eretz Yisra’el is one of three things that can be acquired only through suffering, each Jew must ask: “How much suffering am I willing to endure to acquire (or retain) my portion in Eretz Yisra’el? שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Parasha Vayyera concludes with the story of Aqedat Yizhaq [עקידת יצחק], the Binding of Yizhaq, which begins: “And it came to pass after these things. . . . [ויהי אחר הדברים האלה]” Bereshit 22:1. The Rashbam (Samuel ben Meir [Troyes, c. 1085 – c. 1158], grandson of Rashi) wrote that “whenever we find the construction ‘after these things’ [אחר הדברים האלה] what follows is [related to that which immediately precedes it].” Rashbam to Bereshit 22:1. In other words, Aqedat Yizhaq [עקידת יצחק] is related to the treaty which Abraham made with Abimelekh, a treaty which is described immediately prior to Aqedat Yizhaq [עקידת יצחק]. Abimelekh, an enemy of the Jewish people, was a Philistine who occupied Eretz Kena’an (Eretz Yisra’el) immediately prior to Eretz Yisra’el being conquered by the descendants of Abraham. The essence of the treaty was a pact of non-aggression, a treaty which would be binding not just on the Abraham and Abimelekh, but also on their descendants. Abimelekh implored Abraham, “[S]wear to me here by HaShem that you will not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my son’s son, but [rather], according to the kindness that I have done to you, you shall do to me. . . .” Bereshit 21:23. Abraham consented to the treaty, saying: “I will swear.” Id., 21:24. Before signing the treaty, Abraham sought to resolve with Abimelekh the issue of a disputed water well. Abimelekh denied any knowledge or wrongdoing in relation to the well. Abraham and Abimelekh then “signed” their treaty with each other and Abraham gave Abimelekh seven [שבעה] sheep, which symbolized the seven-oath [שבועה] significance of the treaty. To commemorate the treaty, the location where the treaty was signed was named Be’er Sheva [באר שבע] which, literally translated, means “Well Seven” or “Well Oath.” As previously mentioned, the story of Aqedat Yizhaq [עקידת יצחק] is introduced with the pasuk, “And it came to pass after these things. . . . [ויהי אחר הדברים האלה]” Bereshit 22:1. The pasuk continues, “that HaShem tested Abraham [והאלהים נסה את-אברהם]. Id. The Rashbam wrote that: Whenever the root [word] נסה [“test” or “rebuke”] occurs . . . the connotation is an unpleasant one for the one being subjected to it. In this instance, HaShem, so to speak, indicated to Abraham that he [Abraham], had been foolish to think that he could guarantee the future well-being of Yizhaq and Yizhaq’s descendants, as Yizhaq might have his life terminated before he [Yizhaq] had produced any offspring who would be called upon to honor Abraham’s treaty with Abimelekh. Rashbam to Bereshit 22:1 In the case of the treaty with Abimelekh, Rashbam interprets the word נסה to mean “rebuke.” Why did HaShem rebuke Abraham for entering into a treaty of non-aggression with Abimelekh? After all, is it not good to be at peace with one’s neighbors? The answer is that Abimelekh was a Philistine who lived in the land of Philistia. Philistia, in turn, was located in the geographic area which is also known as Eretz Yisra’el, a geographic area that HaShem commanded the Jewish people to conquer. Thus, we see that Abraham committed the sin of entering into a treaty, of swearing – of making an oath [שבועה] – promising that neither he, nor Yizhaq and his descendants, would perform the Biblical commandment of conquering and settling in Eretz Yisra’el. The oath remained in effect until the days of Sampson, when the Philistines repudiated, and thus nullified, the treaty by attacking the Jewish people. Masekhet Sota, 10a. Fortunately, Abraham passed his next test of faith, that of Aqedat Yizhaq [עקידת יצחק]. In contemporary times, we see that Medinat Yisra’el (the State of Israel) has, likewise, committed the sin of entering into treaties and other agreements which have had the effect of divesting the Jewish people of portions of Eretz Yisra’el. Examples include giving the Jordanians at least partial control over Har HaBayit (the Temple Mount), and giving Arabs control over a portion of Yerushalayim, as well as control over both Gaza (עזה) and portions of Samaria (שומרון) and Judea (יהודה) and other areas of Eretz Yisra’el. May we, the Jewish people, like Abraham before us, pass our next test of faith by acquiring a Jewish government and leadership in Medinat Yisra’el that will not again commit the sin of divesting the Jewish people of any portion of Eretz Yisra’el, no matter how small, and which will work vigorously to undo the damage which has been caused by prior governments of Medinat Yisra’el. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Every Parashat of the Torah is just as important as every other. Parashat Lekh-Lekha, however, might properly be described as “one of the first, among equals.” Parashat Lekh-Lekha begins: Go for yourself from your land, from your relatives, and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you. And I will make you a great nation. I will bless you and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and he who curses you I will curse; and all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you. Bereshit 12:1-3. As an initial matter, it is important to the understanding of a text to view the text as a whole, and to not merely “cherry-pick” portions of the text and then attempt to understand the text through the “lens” of the “cherry-picked” phrase or section. It is from this perspective of Lekh-Lekha that we begin our analysis. In the first words of the first sentence of Parasha Lekh-Lekha, HaShem tells Abram, whose name HaShem will later change to “Abraham,” to “Go for yourself” to Eretz Yisra’el. From time immemorial, Jews living in galut [גלות] (exile) have been subjected to pogroms and expulsions. When HaShem told Abram to “Go for yourself” to Eretz Yisra’el, he was telling not just Abram, but the whole of the Jewish people for all generations, that Eretz Yisra’el is the eternal home of not just the Jewish people, but also of the Jewish nation. In other words, “Go for yourself” to the home HaShem has selected and given to the Jewish people and to what will become the Jewish nation. This understanding leads to the next idea which is expressed in the opening lines of Parashat Lekh-Lekha, that the benefits of Jews living in the Jewish Homeland accrue not only to the Jewish people, but also to the other nations of the world. The second half of this first paragraph of Parsha Lekh-Lekha starts with the pasuk [פסוק] (verse) “And I will make you [the Jewish people] a great nation.” This, of course, requires us to define what it is to be “a nation,” as well as what it means to be “a great nation.” A “nation” is defined as a people who are, first and foremost, “sovereign,” that is, who have the legal right and ability to make and enforce laws, and who are not subject to the law of any other nation. A “great nation” is often defined as a nation which possesses such things as “wealth,” “military power and strength,” and the like. These characteristics, however, are merely attributes of greatness, but do not, standing alone, made a nation “great.” What makes a nation “great” is having influence over other nations and peoples. Turning to Medinat Yisra’el (the modern-day state of Israel), we see that although the Medinat is a sovereign nation, it is not yet a “great nation.” Although the Medinat has extraordinary potential, it currently falls far short of achieving that potential. Geographically, Medinat Yisra’el is a tiny country, which is “treading water” in the middle of a “sea” of hostile Arab countries. Not only is the Medinat surrounded by hostile Arab countries, the Medinat itself is populated by a large Arab population which is hostile to its very existence. The Medinat does, however, have a large and strong benefactor, which is the United States. Although the United States professes a commitment to the security of the Medinat, that commitment is often contingent, implicitly, if not explicitly, on the Medinat doing, or refraining from doing, what Uncle Sam tells it to do or not do. This, of course, is hardly an example of Jewish national greatness. In the words of Tanakh, none other than HaShem himself intends that Medinat Yisra’el become “a light unto the nations; to open blind eyes. . . .” Yesha’yahu 42:6. So, the question remains: How can Medinat Yisra’el become a “great nation,” as opposed to merely being another “nation” among the many nations? That is, what must Medinat Yisra’el do to become a nation which influences other nations”? Before we answer this question, let us look at what HaShem promises if, collectively, the Jewish people, as commanded, do in fact: “Go for [themselves]” to Eretz Yisra’el. The opening paragraph of Parashat Lekh-Lekha continues: “And I will make you a great nation . I will bless those who bless you, and he who curses you I will curse.” The first word “And” in this part of the pasuk [פסוק] (verse) connects the Jewish people going to Eretz Yisra’el with HaSham making them a “great nation” and cursing their enemies. Unfortunately, this pasuk is commonly “cherry-picked” and recited in isolation from the other pasukim [פסוקים] (verses) which surround it, with the resulting implication being that HaShem will bless the Jewish people and curse their enemies without regard to where, geographically, the Jewish people may happen to be found at any given point in time. However, taken in its proper context, the pasuk [פסוק] (verse) means that the stated blessing and curse is contingent upon the Jewish people going “for yourself from your land, from your relatives, and from your father’s house to [Eretz Yisra’el, where HaShem] will make [the Jewish people] a great nation.” The opening paragraph of Parashat Lekh concludes: “and all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you.” In other words, if the Jewish people “Go for [themselves] to Eretz Yisra’el, HaShem will bless them, make them a great nation who will be a blessing, and protect them. Then, as a consequence of all this, “all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by [the Jewish people]. Ever since its founding in 1948, Medinat Yisra’el, rather than being a safe-haven to which any Jew in galut [גלות] (exile) could flee to for safety, has been – and continues to be to this day – the country where, each year, more Jews are assaulted and/or killed, simply because they are Jewish, both per capita and in absolute numbers, as compared with any other country in the world. It's bad enough to be the country with the highest rate of antisemitism in the world; it’s even worse when that country is the only “Jewish state” in the world. Clearly, then, despite Jews being in control of the only “Jewish state” in the world and notwithstanding significant numbers of Jews who, since 1948, have made Aliyah [עליה] (immigrated to Israel), the Medinat is not yet, as HaShem promised, a “great nation.” However, the failure of Medinat Yisra’el to become a “great nation” is not attributable to HaShem; rather, as difficult as this may be for some to accept, the fault lies solely with us, with the Jewish people. Medinat Yisra’el was established, in 1948, out of the ashes of the Shoah [שואה] (Holocaust). When the Medinat’s enemies attacked – on numerous occasions – HaShem repeatedly blessed the Medinat not merely with survival, but with military success that was beyond almost everyone’s wildest dreams. HaShem has – and continues – to do His part. We, the Jewish people, however, are coming up short. To be the “great nation” that is envisioned by the Torah, in general, and by Parashat Lekh-Lekha, in particular, means to be a “Jewish state.” One might object that Medinat Yisra’el is – and has, since its inception in 1948, been – a Jewish state. After all, Israel’s “Basic Law” declares the Medinat to be a “Jewish state.” However, when the Torah speaks of Medinat Yisra’el being a “great nation,” that is, a great Jewish state, it does not mean a state which is governed by non-Jewish law, a state which is governed by “secular” Jews, or worse, a state which is governed by non-Jews. It is only when the Jewish people – as a nation – are living in, and in control of, their land – Eretz Yisra’el – and living a Torah-observant life therein, that the Jewish nation will be a blessing – a light unto – the other nations of the world. It is only then that HaShem will “bless those who bless [the Jewish people], and he who curses [the Jewish people, HaShem] will curse; and all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by [the Jewish people].” As we learn from the plain language of the pasuk [פסוק] (verse) – as well as from history – the command that Abraham and Sarah – and their descendants – go “to the land that [HaShem] will show you. . . .” (Eretz Yisra’el) was not intended solely for the benefit of the other nations of the world. Rather, HaShem’s command that Jews make Aliyah [עליה] was to “Go for yourself” [לך לך] (Lekh-Lekha) – to make Aliyah “for yourself,” not for the benefit of others. In other words, HaShem is telling each and every Jew that it is in his or her best interest to make Aliyah [עליה] – that is, to not remain in the lands outside of Eretz Yisra’el [חוץ לארץ]. In other words, it is by doing what is in the best interest of every Jew – Going for yourself to Eretz Yisra’el – that you can secure all the blessings promised by HaShem. And, in doing so, you will be able to live a religious life and influence the direction of the Medinat, and thereby contribute to Medinat Yisra’el becoming a “great nation,” a “Light unto the nations.” May you, dear Jew, be blessed to “Go for Yourself,” to make Aliyah, to go up to Eretz Yisra’el, the Land HaShem gave you as an inheritance. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Jewish tradition teaches that the world, as we know it, will exist for no more than 6,000 years. “The world is destined to exist for six thousand years. The first two thousand years were of nothingness; the second two thousand years were of Torah; the third two thousand years are the days of Mashiach.” T.B., Masekhet Sanhedrin 97a. The first 2,000 years (1-2000 [3761 B.C.E. to approximately 1761 B.C.E.]), the years of “nothingness,” were the years before the Torah. The second 2,000 years, the years of Torah, were the years in which Torah flourished, a period which closed with the ending of the Tannaic era (2001-4,000 [1762 B.C.E. to approximately 238 C.E.]). The third 2,000 years are the years (4001-6000) during which it is possible for Mashiach to come. (Dates on the Christian/Gregorian calendar are inaccurate, and thus unreliable, due to internal discrepancies in that system of calendaring.) On 9 Av 3831 (July 23, 0071), Roman emperor Hadrian destroyed the Second Temple; banished Jews from Yerushalayim; destroyed the city, and, on top of the rubble, built a pagan city which he named Aelia Capitolina, in honor of himself (“Aelia” was Hadrian’s middle name) and in honor of the “god” Jupiter, whose temple was located on Capitolene Hill, in Rome. Hadrian also renamed the land “Philistia” (Palestine), after the extinct Philistines, an enemy of the Jews who once occupied the area. The name “Palestine” was revived by the British in 1917, when they conquered the Ottoman Empire. Lands west of the Jordan river, as well as the country of Jordan, which the British later created in 1923, were renamed “The British Mandate for Palestine.” Thus began a long history of Jewish galut ([גלות] exile). During galut, Jews have settled in many countries and, to varying degrees, have been persecuted in, or expelled from, each of those countries. Parashat Noah contains an allusion not only to the exile, but also to the fact that a Jew can never find permanent safety and security in the lands of galut. Regarding the pasuk: Then he [Noah] sent out the dove from him to see whether the waters had subsided from the face of the earth. But the dove could not find a resting place for the sole of its foot, and it returned to him to the Ark, for water was upon the surface of all the earth. So he put forth his hand and took it, and brought it to him in the Ark. Bereshit 8:8-9. The Midrash teaches: He sent out the dove. . . , but the dove could not find a resting place. . . . Yehudah bar Nachman said in the name of Rabbi Shimon, “Had it found a place to rest, it would not have returned [to the Ark]. Similarly, [Yisra’el] dwelled among the nations; but found no rest. [Ekha 1:3.] Had Yisra’el found rest, they would not have returned [to Eretz Yisra’el]. Bereshit, Midrash Rabbah 3:6. The lesson is that, in order to ensure that the Jewish people return to Eretz Yisra’el, HaShem has decreed that Jews will never find “rest,” that is, safety and security, in galut ([גלות] exile). Although there are many historical examples of this truth, perhaps the two most glaring are the Exodus from Egypt and the Shoah (Holocaust). In both of these examples, a large number of Jews chose to remain in galut, instead of at least trying to make their way to Eretz Yisra’el, a decision which, unfortunately, ended in tragedy. One need only read the news to know that antisemitism is alive and well in the countries of galut ([גלות] exile). Come home, dear Jew; come home to the land that HaShem has given you as an inheritance, an inheritance which Medinat Yisra’el protects with its Right of Return law. The year 6000 is rapidly approaching, which means that Mashiach could come at any time. Come home, dear Jew, before it is too late. You need Eretz Yisra’el and Eretz Yisra’el needs you. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. The Torah is a book that is intended to introduce Jews to the various laws which HaShem established for the conduct of both the Jewish people and the Jewish nation, as well as moral laws which HaShem established for all of mankind. The scope of this article is limited to the laws which HaShem established for the Jewish people and the Jewish nation. Laws for the Jewish people include, for example, laws relating to Shabbat, the holidays, and religious ritual practices. Laws for the Jewish nation include, for example, laws relating to kings and wars and the administration of criminal and civil justice. Therefore, one might reasonably ask, why does the Torah begin with the story of creation: “In the beginning, HaShem created the heaven and the earth [בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ],” rather than with the first misva in the Torah, Rosh Hodesh, the establishment by the Sanhedrin (the Jewish “Supreme Court”) of the New Month and, by extension, the establishment of the Jewish calendar which, in turn, establishes the day on which the various holidays will be observed in a given year? Rashi, a renowned commentator on Torah, in what is perhaps his most well-known elucidation of a pasuk in the Torah, asks “[w]hat is the reason that HaShem began [the Torah] with Sefer Bereshit?” Rashi, quoting the Midrash, then answers, saying the reason is: so that [the gentile nations] will not embitter Yisra’el and say to them, “Are you not a nation of thieves?” And Yisra’el would reply to them, saying, “Aren’t your own lands stolen? Didn’t the Caphtorim emerge from Caphtor and destroy [the Aviyim] and settle in their stead? [Furthermore,] the entire world belongs to HaShem; thus, when it pleased Him, He gave it to you, and when it pleased Him, He took it from you and gave it to us.” As it is written, “The power of His works He told to His people [Yisra’el], to give them the heritage of the nations [כח מעשיו הגיד לעמו לתת להם נחלת גוים].” Tehillim 111:6; see also Tanchuma Yashan 11. He told all of the generations of [Yisra’el]. Rashi, Bereshit 1:1. Thus, we see that the message of Sefer Bereshit – is that HaShem gave Eretz Yisra’el to the Jewish people and that HaShem declared – “[t]he strength of His deeds He declared to His people. . . .” – is addressed not to the gentile nations, but, rather, to the Jewish people! The obvious question is, “since HaShem gave Eretz Yisra’el to the Kena’anite nations and then took it away from them and gave it to the Jewish people as an inheritance, in other words, forever, why did HaShem direct His message to the Jewish people (“[t]he strength of His deeds He declared to His people. . . .”) and not to the gentile nations? The answer is that HaShem knew that the Jewish people might feel guilty about having acquired Eretz Yisra’el by conquest. Thus, the Torah begins with telling the story of the creation of the world to prove – not to the gentile nations but to the Jewish people – that Eretz Yisra’el belongs to whomever HaShem chooses to give the Land, and that HaShem chose to give Eretz Yisra’el to the Jewish people. Bereshit Rabba 1:2. Applying this concept to contemporary times, the reason many gentile nations do not accept that Medinat Yisra’el and the Jewish people are the rightful owners of geographic areas such as Judea, Samaria, Golan, and Gaza, is because of the failure of Medinat Yisra’el to assert sovereignty over those areas. The stated reason Medinat Yisra’el has given for not exercising sovereignty over the entirety of Medinat Yisra’el is that if it were to do so, the change in demographics would result in Arabs constituting an unacceptably large percentage of the country’s population. This objection, however, is easily resolved. The secular legal documents relating to the political nature of Medinat Yisra’el provide that the country is both a “Jewish state” and a “democracy.” The only way a Jewish state can be a democracy is if Jews, and only Jews, possess political rights (e.g., the right to vote, to hold public office, etc.). If it were any other way, the country would not be a “Jewish state.” An American-style “melting pot” composed of Jews and non-Jews does not a Jewish state make, especially if non-Jews can, through the democratic process, change the character of the country by voting to make the country a non-Jewish state (e.g., “Palestinian,” Muslim, or secular state). Furthermore, continuing a failed policy of refusing to exercise sovereignty over geographic areas in which large numbers of non-Jews reside, in an effort to prevent Jews from becoming a minority, only “kicks the can down the road,” leaving the problem to be solved for the future. Such a policy, of course, whether in one’s personal life or on a national scale, always makes a problem harder, more difficult, and more expensive to solve, assuming that when the problem finally is addressed “head-on,” the problem is still capable of being solved. Jewish law clearly provides that non-Jews, in general, and non-Jews who seek to annihilate the Jewish people, in particular, may not be citizens of Medinat Yisra’el, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim u’Milchamoteihem 1:1.b, 5:4, 5:5, 6:1, 6:4 and that non-Jews may not vote or hold public office in Medinat Yisra’el. Id. 1:4, 6:1, 6:4. Thus, the Halakhic answer is clear. Medinat Yisra’el, if it is to survive, must change its present course to one of Torah and Halakha. Specifically, Medinat Yisra’el must begin to save itself by discontinuing its current practice of allowing non-Jews to become citizens, to vote, and to hold any public office or government employment. May HaShem help the Jewish people, both in Medinat Yisra’el and throughout the Diaspora, to not only understand, but to accept in their hearts, that HaShem, the Creator of the Universe, gave Eretz Yisra’el to the Jewish people. May HaShem bless Jews in the Diaspora to make Aliyah en-masse and to then vote for changes that will result in Medinat Yisra’el being a reliable, permanent, and truly Jewish state. And last, but not least, may HaShem bless the Jewish people and their political leaders to be assertive in proclaiming, rather than apologizing for, the fact that HaShem gave Eretz Yisra’el to the Jewish people as an inheritance. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. The Torah commands the observance of Sukkot, as follows: “And the Lord spoke to Moshe, saying, speak to the children of Yisra’el, saying, The fifteenth day of this seventh month [15 Tishrei] shall be the feast of booths for seven days to the Lord.” Vayyiqra 23:33-34. “You shall dwell in booths [for] seven days.” Id., at 23:42. The Torah explains that the requirement to observe Sukkot “shall be a statute forever in your generations,” Vayyiqra 23:41, and that the reason for observing Sukkot is so “that your generations may know that I made the children of Yisra’el dwell in booths when I brought them out of the land of Mizrayim [Egypt].” Id., at 23:43. The purpose of dwelling in booths – in Sukkot (pl.) [סוכות] (sukkah (singular) [סוכה]) – is to remind the Jewish people of their dependence on the will of HaShem. It was HaShem who took the Jewish people out of Mizrayim; it was HaShem who provided for the Jewish people during their travels in the desert; it was HaShem who gave the Jewish people the Torah and made them a nation; it was HaShem who took the Jewish people to Eretz Yisra’el (the Land of Israel); and it was HaShem who gave Eretz Yisra’el to the Jewish people. As we discussed in our writings on Parashat Ha’azinu, man cannot thwart the will of HaShem. See, The Short Road to Geulah. Geulah [גאולה] (Redemption) will come; however, the Torah has given us the choice of whether it will come quickly and easily, or slowly and with great difficulty. As things now stand, the Jewish people are on the “slow and with great difficulty” road to Geulah [גאולה]. Since 1948, when HaShem returned the Jewish people to their homeland, the Jewish people have continually been plagued by terrorist acts committed by resident Arabs. The result is that there are more anti-Semitic attacks committed against Jews in Eretz Yisra’el (Land of Israel) than there are in any other country. It should, although apparently does not, go without saying that something is seriously wrong when Jews, who are legally sovereign in their own land, and who have enacted a “Law of Return” which allows Jews from anywhere in the world to immigrate to Eretz Yisra’el, are injured and killed in Eretz Yisra’el – solely because they are Jewish – in greater numbers and at a higher rate per capita, than Jews in any other country in the world. The Torah waned the Jewish people this might happen. From Parasha Ki Tissa, we learn that HaShem warned the Jewish people at Har Sinai, during the giving of the Torah, against entering into treaties which would allow those from whom the Land has been captured to remain in Eretz Yisra’el. Beware of what I command you today. Behold, I drive out before you the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, the Hivvite, and the Jebusite. Be vigilant lest you seal a covenant with the inhabitant[s] of the land to which you are to come, lest it be a snare among you. Rather, you shall break apart their alters, smash their pillars, and cut down their sacred trees. Shemot 34:11-17. In Parashat Mas’e, we learn that “HaShem spoke to Moshe in the plains of Moab, by the Yarden, near Yereho, saying, “Speak to the Children of Yisra’el and say to them: When you cross the Yarden [river and enter] into Eretz Kena’an, you shall drive out all of the inhabitants of the Land before you. . . .” Bamidbar 33:50-52. Likewise, in Parashat Shofetim, we are told that “But from the cities of these peoples that HaShem, you G-d gives you as an inheritance, you shall not allow any person to live. Rather, you shall utterly destroy them. . . .” Debarim 20:16-17. The Or HaHayyim wrote that: Even though the Torah says in Debarim 20:16 that “you must not allow a single soul [of the Kena’anite nations to remain in Eretz Yisra’el], . . . the Torah does not speak of [only] the seven Kena’anite nations[,] but [also] about others who lived among them. This is the reason the Torah chose its words carefully, i.e., “all the ones who dwell in the land,” that the Israelites were to drive out even those people who lived there who were not members of the seven [Kena’anite] nations. Or HaHayyim, commentary to Bamidbar 33:52. Likewise, Abarbanel said: Shemot 34:11-12 informs us that since HaShem is driving out the [Canaanite] nations, it would be improper for Yisra’el to forge a covenant with them. If a nobleman helps someone by fighting that person’s battles and banishing that person’s enemies, it would be immoral for that person to make peace with [those enemies] without [first obtaining the] nobleman’s permission. So, too, with HaShem driving out Yisra’el’s enemies, it is immoral for Yisra’el to enter into a treaty with them, for that would profane HaShem’s Glory. This is especially true considering that the treaty will not succeed. Because Yisra’el dispossessed them of what they believe to have been their land, there is no doubt that they will constantly seek to defeat and destroy Yisra’el. This is why it said, “[the Land] to which you are coming.” Since Yisra’el came to that Land and took it from its inhabitants, and because they feel that the Land has been stolen from them, how will they make a covenant of friendship with you? Rather the opposite will occur: “they will be a snare among you.” When war strikes you, they will join your enemies and fight you. Abarbanel, Commentary on Shemot 34:11-12. The solution to the problem is simple. Implementation of that solution, however, will be very difficult. The solution is that Medinat Yisra’el must abandon its non-Torah agenda and policies and begin following the Torah. Implementation of this solution will require, among other things, that Medinat Yisra’el convene a constitutional convention (or its equivalent) for the purpose of dissolving the Medinat’s current, non-Torah government and forming a new government through the adoption of a constitution (which the Medinat committed to doing in its 1948 declaration of independence, but has never quite gotten around to doing). A comment made in 2007 by the esteemed American jurist Richard A. Poser, a comment which is as valid now as it was then, states that: “Israel is an immature democracy, poorly governed; its political class is mediocre and corrupt; it floats precariously in a lethally hostile Muslim sea; and it really could use a constitution.” Richard A. Posner, “Enlightened Despot (reviewing Aharon Barak, The Judge in a Democracy (2006)),” New Republic, April 2007, at p.53. A Torah-based Constitution for Medinat Yisra’el would contain provisions such as: 1. Torah law would be the law of the Land; 2. Citizenship would be limited to Jewish persons; 3. Non-citizens would be ineligible to: a. Vote, b. Hold public office, c. Hold public employment, d. Own real property, e. Lease or rent real property for a period which exceeds one year, and f. Receive government benefit. 4. Non-citizens would be required to: a. Acknowledge and affirm that the Jewish People are the rightful and sole owners of Eretz Yisra’el (the Land of Israel), and b. Pay special taxes, over and above taxes that Jewish residents pay, for the privilege of continued residence in Eretz Yisra’el. Those who might erroneously believe that the above provisions are somehow arbitrary, capricious, or even racist, need only study and learn the appropriate provisions of Tanakh (Jewish Bible) and Halakha (Jewish law) to discover that these provisions are not only permitted, but are required by the Torah and relevant Halakhot. This proposed course of action would, of course, guarantee outrage from the other nations of the world, friend and foe alike. Many arguments can be made against this proposed course of action. The problem with each such argument, however, is that HaShem has commanded that the Jewish people govern themselves in accordance with Torah and not adopt to ways of the other nations. Thus, we see that the timeless message of Sukkot, and the reason for dwelling in a Sukkah for seven days each year, is to continually impress upon the Jewish people that they must – at all times and in all places – rely on HaShem, and not on other nations or other peoples, for their safety and security. חג סוכות שמח Hag Sukkot Sameah! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. In our Yom Kippur prayers, we say: And so, too, may Your name be sanctified, O HaShem, our G-d, upon Yisra’el, Your people; upon Yerushalayim, Your city; upon Zion, the resting place of your glory; upon the kinship of the House of David, Your anointed; and upon Your Dwelling and Your Sanctuary. And as we say on all days: Be favorable, HaShem, our G-d, toward Your people Yisra’el, turn to their prayer and restore the service to the Holy of Holies of Your Temple. Speedily accept the fore-offerings of Yisra’el and their prayer with love and favor, and may the service of Your people Yisra’el always be favorable to You. The theme which runs through the above prayers is our desire that the will of HaShem be done, through a return of the Jewish people to Eretz Yisra’el and a rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash (Holy Temple). In order to receive atonement [כפרה] for our sins which have resulted in Jews not returning to Eretz Yisra’el, as well as our failure to have rebuilt the Beit HaMikdash, we must do Teshuvah, that is, we must repent. Teshuvah consists of four elements: (1) ceasing the commission of the particular sin; (2) removing the particular sin from one’s thoughts; (3) resolving in one’s heart to never again commit the particular sin; and (4) verbally confessing commission of the sin. “The confession should be made ‘before G-d,’ and not in public.” Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Teshuvah 2:1, n.9; 2:2. Doing Teshuvah for the sins which have prevented Jews from returning to Eretz Yisra’el, and the sin involving the Jewish failure to have rebuilt the Beit HaMikdash, requires more than just a mere cessation of certain conduct; it requires the affirmative taking of a new and different course of action. Assuming the Jewish people have resolved to do Teshuvah for the national sins which have prevented Jews from returning to Eretz Yisra’el, as well as the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash, our Yom Kippur prayers raise certain questions: What can be done to encourage more Jews to return to Eretz Yisra’el, that is, to make Aliyah (immigrate to Eretz Yisra’el)? What must be done in order to rebuild the Beit HaMikdash? How to Encourage Jews to Return to Eretz Yisra’el If there is an overriding theme that runs through Torah, it is that HaShem separated the Jewish people from the other peoples of the world; that He designated Eretz Yisra’el as the one and only homeland for this separate people to “dwell alone;” and that to secure the blessings that HaShem has promised, the Jewish people must obey His commands. One of these commands is, of course, to Yishuv Eretz Yisra’el, that is, for Jews to make Aliyah (immigrate to Eretz Yisra’el) and settle the Land. The important statistic, however, is not how many Jews make Aliyah each year, but rather, the net increase in the number of Jews who make Aliyah each year. That is, the important statistic is the number of Jews who make Aliyah each year, reduced by the number of Jews who, after making Aliyah, leave Israel each year and return to their country of origin. According to some reports, as many as 40% of Olim from the United States return to America within two years of making Aliyah, while 60% return within five years. Although this statistic is, due to a lack of transparency by the Israeli government, difficult to confirm, it is an interesting statistic, especially in light of the fact that the Israeli government, on a monthly basis, provides new Olim with unearned cash (welfare) payments for the first five years after they immigrate, and that the monthly amount of those cash payments peak during year 2. Through discussions with prospective Olim in the U.S., as well as Olim in Medinat Yisra’el (“the State of Israel” or, simply, the “Medinat”), several things become apparent. First, many U.S. rabbinical leaders discourage Aliyah. Second, notwithstanding U.S. rabbinical opposition to Aliyah, there are many religious Jews in the U.S. who make Aliyah, or who plan to make Aliyah. Third, and most important to a discussion on maximizing the numbers of net Olim, is that the primary obstacle encountered by most Jews who are considering Aliyah is that of achieving and maintaining financial self-sufficiency post-Aliyah. For the purpose of analyzing their financial situation, Olim can be classified as being either: 1. Medical or High-Tech professionals, 2. Persons with a foreign source of income (e.g., retirees, remote workers, etc.), or 3. Other (not falling in category 1 or 2). Due to a market demand for employees, Olim who are medical or high-tech professionals appear likely to have the least difficulty integrating into the Israeli job market. Persons with a foreign source of income are also less likely to experience significant post-Aliyah economic difficulties. Although Olim in Categories 1 and 2 may leave the Medinat as a result of post-Aliyah financial difficulties, the subset of Category 3 Olim which consist of Olim who made Aliyah from a comparatively affluent (e.g., Western) country, appear to be the group of Olim who are most likely to return to their country of origin due to post-Aliyah financial hardship. Thus, the Aliyah failure rate for Category 1 and Category 2 Olim might be lower than the 40% and 60% rates mentioned above, while the Aliyah failure rate for the subset of Category 3 Olim from Western countries may be significantly higher than the 40% and 60% rates mentioned above. In order best assist all Olim in overcoming the challenge which is likely responsible for the highest rate of post-Aliyah departures to a Western country of origin, that is, to assist Olim in overcoming the challenge of achieving – and maintaining – economic self-sufficiency post-Aliyah, it is necessary to examine a little economic history. The economies of the Medinat and the U.S. are practically mirror opposites. The U.S. was officially founded almost 250 years ago, with the signing of the Declaration of Independence. However, in the year 1620, more than 400 years ago, the Pilgrims, the predecessors of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, arrived in, and began settling portions of, what is now the United States of America. The Pilgrims were a very religious group of Christians who analogized their voyage across the Atlantic Ocean to the Jews’ trek through the wilderness while en-route from Har Sinai to Eretz Yisra’el. The Pilgrims also analogized their conquest of the “New World,” that is, to what would become the United States, to the Jews’ conquest of Eretz Yisra’el. When the Pilgrims first sighted land from their ship, the Mayflower, they joined together in a communal recitation of Tehillim 100. As an indication of how important Tanakh was to the founding generations of Americans, some early courses at Harvard University were taught in Hebrew and, as late as 1817, an annual speech was given in Hebrew at Harvard. Tanakh also had an influence at Yale University. Yale’s coat of arms contained Hebrew letters which spelled the words “Urim and Thummim,” which the university translated as “Light and Truth.” Being Christian students of Tanakh, the Pilgrims modeled the constitutions and laws of their “Promised Land,” of the original 13 Colonies or “states,” on Biblical principles. Unfortunately, however, the Pilgrims’ understanding of Tanakh left quite a bit to be desired. On July 1, 1620, the Pilgrims, prior to departing Plymouth, England, signed a seven-year contract in which they agreed to pool “all profits and benefits that are got by trade, traffic, trucking, working, fishing, or any other means of any person or persons. . . .” The contract further provided “that at the end of the seven years, the capital and profits, viz. the houses, lands, goods and chattels, be equally divided. . . .” In other words, the Pilgrims brought socialism to America. However, instead of lasting seven years, the Pilgrims’ experiment with socialism failed after a mere two years. Shortages and starvation abounded, and about fifty-percent of the colonists died of starvation and related illnesses. Under the leadership of their Governor, William Bradford, the Pilgrims scuttled their socialist experiment and adopted a free-market economy. The effects of a free-market economy were both immediate and dramatic. When the Pilgrims were allowed to retain the fruits of their labor, productivity – and prosperity – increased almost overnight. Since abandoning its extremely short, but disastrous, experiment with socialism in favor of the free-market, America – and its economy – has grown from a handful of fledgling colonies to become the greatest economy the world has ever known. The only thing that is now harming America, the only thing which has ever harmed America, is its rejection and distancing of itself from Torah values. Medinat Yisra’el, on the other hand, is not 400 years old; rather, it is a mere 74 years old. The Medinat, unlike the United States, was founded by socialists, who implemented socialist policies. A “guiding principle” of socialism is that nothing – including HaShem – can be more authoritative or powerful than the State. One very important method that socialism employs to ensure that its monopoly on power is not threatened is the collective ownership of property, that is, the abrogation of the free-market and private property rights. The Torah, however, rejects socialism. This rejection can be seen as early as parashat Noah, with the story of the Tower of Babel, which is in Sefer Bereshit, right after the Flood. One need not look too far from the Tower of Babel to see other Divine endorsements of the free-market and the private ownership of property. The Ten Statements (“Commandments”) explicitly proscribe theft; a very large percentage of the 613 misvot deal, in one way or another, with free-market commercial transactions and property rights; and there are tractates of the Gemara which likewise focus on the private ownership of property and voluntary commerce. The Medinat, like the United States, also suffered through a failure of socialism. During the years 1978-1979, inflation in the Medinat, caused by government manipulation of the money supply, averaged 77 percent. By 1984-1985, the annual rate of inflation peaked at a staggering 450 percent! U.S. president Ronald Reagan offered the Medinat a $1.5 billion grant if the Medinat would abandon socialism and adopt free-market economic principles. The Histadrut, the Medinat’s labor union, objected. U.S. Secretary of State George Schultz responded with the threat that if the Medinat did not start implementing free-market economic policies, the United States would freeze all monetary transfers to the Medinat. The threat worked and the Medinat, although being “dragged kicking and screaming,” started to implement the free-market “recommendations” that were made by the Reagan Administration. As a part of its economic restructuring, the Medinat, on January 1, 1986, introduced, the New Israeli Shekel (NIS), which replaced the hyper-inflated Shekel at a rate of 1000:1. Like the impact of free-market principles on the Pilgrims’ colony under William Bradford, the impact on the Israeli economy which resulted from the implementation of free-market principles was both immediate and dramatic. Within one year, Israeli’s annual rate of inflation fell from an astounding 450% to 20%. Unfortunately, however, the Medinat’s mid-1980s forced move away from some socialist policies is not the end of its story of economic failure. Unlike America’s Pilgrims, Israel did not fully repudiate socialism. Rather, many of Israel’s socialist policies persist to this day, causing an unnecessary and significant burden on the Medinat’s economy. As the Pilgrims learned under the leadership of William Bradford, and as Israelis should have learned from the Medinat’s 1980s economic reform, socialism destroys an economy, while free-markets allow an economy to grow and flourish. Accordingly, the Medinat could best assist Olim by implementing economic policies that will not only benefit Olim, but policies that will benefit all Israelis. Those policies include: 1. Significantly lowering tax (personal, business, VAT/sales) rates. 2. Eliminating import and export taxes. 3. Eliminating wage and price controls. 4. Repealing labor and employment laws that hinder or otherwise interfere with at-will employment. 5. Repeal laws which create private-sector monopolies. 6. Privatize businesses which are currently operated by the government. 7. Repeal laws which disincentivize investment in Israeli businesses, including laws which discourage entrepreneurs from opening new businesses. Admittedly, these recommended policies cannot, and even should not, be implemented “overnight.” However, efforts should be made to strategically implement free-market economic policies over the long-term. Such long-term implementation should also include a refusal to extend or expand current policies, or to adopt new policies, which are incompatible with a free-market. Free-market reforms, such as those mentioned above, will work. Other, “more-of-the-same” reforms, such as increased welfare payments to Olim, while perhaps well-intentioned, can only result in “more-of-the-same” failed results that are currently being experienced. Medinat Yisra’el has tried the secular, socialist approach, which has failed. The Jewish State should now try the Jewish approach, that is, HaShem’s approach, the approach which is set forth in His Holy Torah and which G-d Himself has promised will succeed, if only it is tried. If the Medinat were to switch to the Torah approach for Jewish governance, not just with respect to economic policies, but as to all policies, the Medinat will have become the Light Unto the Nations that HaShem wants the Jewish people to be. Actions Required to Rebuild the Beit HaMikdash The Torah, in Parashat Teruma, sets forth the commandment that the Jewish people construct the Mikdash (Sanctuary) in the desert, so that offerings can be brought to Hashem. “And the Lord said to Moshe, saying, speak to the Children of Yisra’el that they may bring Me an offering. . . . And let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them.” Shemot 25:1-8. Parashat Teruma, then goes into painstaking detail to describe how the Mishkan (temporary Sanctuary) is to be constructed. Parashat Teruma, however, is not the only place where we find a command to build a Mikdash. These are the statutes and judgments which you shall observe and do in the land which the Lord God of thy fathers gives thee to possess it, all the days that you live upon the earth. . . . But to the place which the Lord your God shall choose [Beit HaMikdash] out of all your tribes to put His name there, there shall you seek Him, at His dwelling, and there shalt thou come, and there you shall bring your [offerings]. . . . Debarim 12:1-7. Thus, we see that the counterpart to the Mishkan (temporary Sanctury) in the desert is the Beit HaMikdash (permanent Sanctuary) in Yerushalayim. Further, we learn that building and maintaining a Sanctuary is a timeless obligation. In Parashat Teruma, the Jewish people were commanded to build a Mikdash in the desert. Later, in Sefer Debarim, the Jewish people were commanded to build a Mikdash “in the land which the Lord God of thy fathers gives thee to possess it, all the days that you live upon the earth. . . .” In other words, as the Ohr HaHayim (Hayyim ben Moshe ibn Attar, 1696-1743) held, it is a positive commandment for the Jewish people to build and maintain a Beit HaMikdash whenever the Jewish people reside in Eretz Israel. That is, when the Jewish people are in possession of the Eretz Israel, they are subject to a positive Biblical commandment to build and maintain a Mikdash “all the days that [the Jewish people] live upon the earth.” The Rambam (Moses ben Maimon, a.k.a Maimonides, 1138-1204) held that, upon entering Eretz Israel, the Jewish people became obligated to appoint a king, “erase the memory of Amalek,” and build a Beit HaMikdash. Rambam, Hilchot Melachim 1:1. The Rambam also held that the appointment of a king should precede the war against Amalek, and that the seed of Amalek should be annihilated prior to the construction of the Beit HaMikdash. Id., 1:2. An obvious difficulty with building a Mikdash only after a king has been appointed over Israel and after the king has “annihilated” the seed of Amalek, is the fact King Solomon built the first Beit HaMikdash, notwithstanding that the seed of Amalek has never been “annihilated.” The Talmud, on the other hand, states that “[e]very generation which did not witness the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash, is considered as if it was destroyed in that generation.” Talmud Yerushalayim, Maseket Yoma 1:1. The Sfat Emet (Yehudah Aryeh Leib Alter, 1847-1905) explained that the Talmud should not be taken literally, but rather, should be understood to mean that each generation must do its part to facilitate the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash. Today, the Jewish people have, after having been dispossessed of sovereignty over Eretz Israel for some 2000 years, once again possess political sovereignty over Yerushalayim and Medinat Israel (the State of Israel). What, as a practical matter, can we, the Jewish people, do in this generation to facilitate the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash? In order to construct any building, one must first prepare the construction site by removing anything and everything that is unnecessary or detrimental to the construction of the intended new building. Thus, the first step in rebuilding the Beit HaMikdash must be to remove all the mosques that currently occupy the Temple Mount and its surrounding areas. Preparing the Temple Mount for the Third Beit HaMikdash won’t be easy, but it is necessary. As most of us know from experience, the longer one delays in doing something that must be done, the harder it usually is to complete the task. Our purpose in this World is to work, so let us — without further delay — get down to the business of working to build the Third Beit HaMikdash, before that task becomes even more difficult that it already is. Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. There are two roads to Geulah [גאולה] (Redemption): the short route and the long route; the easy way and the hard way. Parashat Ha’azinu ([האזינו] “listen”) contains the roadmap for the short route. Parasha Ha’azinu concludes with HaShem’s last command to Moshe Rabbeinu. And HaShem spoke to Moshe, on that selfsame day [בעצם היום הזה (which, literally translated, means “actually this day”)], saying, Ascend to the mount of Abarim, to Mount Nebo, which is in the land of Mo’ab, that is facing Yereho, and see the land of Kena’an, that I give to the children of Yisra’el as an inheritance, and die on the mountain. . . . Debarim 32:48-50. One method of determining the meaning of a word in Tanakh is to look to other instances where the same word is used. Ideally, one should look to the first instance in Tanakh where the word is used. The Torah uses the phrase “selfsame day” [בעצם היום הזה] in two other places. One was when Noah, over the objections of the masses, entered the Ark, Bereshit 7:13; the other was when Moshe, over the objections of the Egyptians, took the Israelites out of Egypt. Shemot 12:51. When HaShem ordered Moshe to ascend Mount Nebo, it was over the objections of the Israelites, who believed they could prevent Moshe’s death by persuading Moshe to not ascend the mountain. According to Rashi, in each case, use of the phrase “selfsame day” [בעצם היום הזה] recounts an event where HaShem compelled an act “on the brightest part of the day, for all to see and over the objections of a large number of people,” to demonstrate that no one can thwart the will of HaShem. Rashi, on Debarim 32:48-50. In Parasha Beshallah, we learn that: Amalek came and battled Yisra’el in Refidim. Moshe said to Yehoshua, “Choose people for us and go do battle with Amalek. Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of HaShem in my hand.” Yehoshua did as Moshe said to him . . . and Moshe, Aharon, and Hur ascended to the top of the hill. And it came to pass, that when Moshe raised his hands, that Yisra’el prevailed, [but] when he lowered his hands, Amalek prevailed. Moshe’s hands grew heavy, so they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it. Aharon and Hur supported his hands, one on this side and one on that side, and his hands were steady until the setting of the sun. Yehoshua weakened Amalek and its people with the blade of the sword. Shemot 17:8-13. We learn from Parasha Ha’azinu that man cannot thwart the will of HaShem. From Parasha Beshallah we learn that success against the enemies of the Jewish people requires both competent and determined military leadership and action, combined with prayer. Medinat Yisra’el – the State of Israel – was established in 1948, after World War II and the Holocaust. Immediately after coming into existence, Medinat Yisra’el was attacked by each and every of its contiguous neighboring countries – all of which happen to be Arab. In a fashion similar to that of the Israelites, whose fight against the Amalekites is told in Parasha Beshallah, Medinat Yisra’el, with substantial and indispensable assistance from the Almighty, won its 1948 war for independence or, more accurately, it’s first war of survival. As a result, Medinat Yisra’el was able to establish sovereignty over a very small geographic area. During 1967, Medinat Yisra’el was again attacked by each and every of its contiguous Arab neighbors. Again, with substantial and indispensable assistance from the Almighty, Medinat Yisra’el prevailed. Not only did Medinat Yisra’el win the 1967 war, she managed to substantially expand her 1948 borders. Medinat Yisra’el’s post-1967 borders encompassed more of the Biblical areas of Eretz Yisra’el, including Har HaBayit (the Temple Mount), and Judea and Samaria. However, in direct contravention of the Torah, Medinat Yisra’el, since winning the 1967 war, has relinquished control of Har HaBayit to the Jordanians and has failed to exercise sovereignty over Judea and Samaria. We learn from the Torah, in Parashat Lekh-Lekha, that “HaShem said to Abram, ‘Go for yourself [לך-לך] from your land, from your relatives, and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you. And I will make you a great nation. . . .’” Bereshit 12:1-2. The commentator Maimonides (the Rambam) wrote: We were commanded to occupy the Land that HaShem gave our ancestors, Abraham, Yizhaq, and Ya’aqob. We must not abandon it to any other nation, or leave it desolate. HaShem said, “Clear out the Land and live in it, since it is to you that I am giving the Land to occupy.” Bamidbar 33:53-54. . . . Sefer HaMitzvot, Mitzvah 4. Thus, we see that HaShem gave Eretz Yisra’el to the Jewish people as an “inheritance” and that the Jewish people “for all time” and “even during the exile” are to reside in the Land. Implicit in this command is, of course, a prohibition against relinquishing Eretz Yisra’el, or any part thereof, to any non-Jew. From Parasha Ki Tissa, we learn that HaShem warned the Jewish people at Har Sinai, during the giving of the Torah, against entering into treaties which would allow those from whom the Land has been captured to remain in Eretz Yisra’el. Beware of what I command you today. Behold, I drive out before you the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, the Hivvite, and the Jebusite. Be vigilant lest you seal a covenant with the inhabitant[s] of the land to which you are to come, lest it be a snare among you. Rather, you shall break apart their alters, smash their pillars, and cut down their sacred trees. Shemot 34:11-17. In Parashat Mas’e, we learn that “HaShem spoke to Moshe in the plains of Moab, by the Yarden, near Yereho, saying, ‘Speak to the Children of Yisra’el and say to them: When you cross the Yarden [river and enter] into Eretz Kena’an, you shall drive out all of the inhabitants of the Land before you. . . .” Bamidbar 33:50-52. Likewise, in Parashat Shofetim, we are told that “But from the cities of these peoples that HaShem, you G-d gives you as an inheritance, you shall not allow any person to live. Rather, you shall utterly destroy them. . . .” Debarim 20:16-17. The Or HaHayyim wrote that: Even though the Torah says in Debarim 20:16 that “you must not allow a single soul [of the Kena’anite nations to remain in Eretz Yisra’el], . . . the Torah does not speak of [only] the seven Kena’anite nations[,] but [also] about others who lived among them. This is the reason the Torah chose its words carefully, i.e., “all the ones who dwell in the land,” that the Israelites were to drive out even those people who lived there who were not members of the seven [Kena’anite] nations. Or HaHayyim, commentary to Bamidbar 33:52. Likewise, Abarbanel said: Shemot 34:11-12 informs us that since HaShem is driving out the [Canaanite] nations, it would be improper for Yisra’el to forge a covenant with them. If a nobleman helps someone by fighting that person’s battles and banishing that person’s enemies, it would be immoral for that person to make peace with [those enemies] without [first obtaining the] nobleman’s permission. So, too, with HaShem driving out Yisra’el’s enemies, it is immoral for Yisra’el to enter into a treaty with them, for that would profane HaShem’s Glory. This is especially true considering that the treaty will not succeed. Because Yisra’el dispossessed them of what they believe to have been their land, there is no doubt that they will constantly seek to defeat and destroy Yisra’el. This is why it said, “[the Land] to which you are coming.” Since Yisra’el came to that Land and took it from its inhabitants, and because they feel that the Land has been stolen from them, how will they make a covenant of friendship with you? Rather the opposite will occur: “they will be a snare among you.” When war strikes you, they will join your enemies and fight you. Abarbanel, Commentary on Shemot 34:11-12. Just as the Torah promised, the Arab nations, in cooperation with each other, have collectively fought against Medinat Yisra’el, while the Arabs who live in Medinat Yisrael are today a “snare among” the Jewish people because the Jewish people have “seal[ed] a covenant with” them simply by allowing them to remain in Eretz Yisra’el. Considering the current state of affairs in Medinat Yisra’el, in the light of the lesson from Parasha Ha’azinu that man cannot thwart the will of HaShem; the lesson from Parasha Beshallah is that success against the enemies of the Jewish people requires both competent and determined military action and prayer. The lesson from Parasha Ki Tissa, the Or HaHayyim, and Abarbanel, is that treaties should not be made which would allow Arabs to remain in Eretz Yisra’el after their claim to the Land has been extinguished through military defeat. Unfortunately, it is abundantly clear that the current Jewish political leaders of Medinat Yisra’el have failed to apply the lessons of the Torah, including those of Parasha Ha’azinu and Parasha Beshallah. An obvious question is: “Why has the political leadership of Medinat Yisra’el not governed assertively, in accordance with the Torah, and in the best interests of the Jewish people? One answer, sadly, is fear and lack of “bitahon” [ביטחון] (trust in G-d). They fear Arab retaliation; they fear how the nations, including the United States, will react; and, perhaps most, they fear loss of their political power. If, however, they had “bitahon” [ביטחון], they would take to heart the Torah command that: When you go out against your enemy, and you see a horse and chariot – a people more numerous that you – you shall not fear them, for HaShem, your G-d, is with you. . . . Debarim 20:1-4. There are at least two important messages in these pesukim. The first is that if the Jewish people have “bitahon” [ביטחון], and if they perform “hishtadlut” [השתדלות] (exertion of human effort), HaShem will go “with [the Jewish people], to fight for [the Jewish people] with [their] enemies, to save [the Jewish people].” The second is that the Jewish people should treat their enemies as enemies. The pesuk commands: “when you go out against your enemy” to emphasize that war is being fought against an enemy, not a friend. The Midrash teaches that the Jewish people should, “Go against them as enemies! Just as they do not have mercy upon you, do not have mercy on them.” Tanchuma, Shofetim 15. In other words, when fighting a war, the Jewish people should fight to win, should not show weakness, and should avoid taking half-measures in the mistaken belief that doing so is somehow compassionate, righteous, or effective. We know from the Talmud that Mashiach can come at one of two possible times: at either a fixed point in time or earlier, if the Jewish people merit redemption. Masechet Sanhedrin 97a-b. May the Jewish people, especially its Jewish political leaders in Medinat Yisra’el, do complete Teshuvah [תשובה] (repentance), have “bitahon” [ביטחון] (trust in G-d), and perform “hishtadlut” [השתדלות] (exertion of human effort) in order to get Medinat Yisra’el on the right path and to merit immediate Geulah [גאולה] (redemption). שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson מאת: הרב מנשה ששון  This article is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. I. The Nature of Teshuvah Rosh HaShanah [ראש השנה], literally translated, means “head of the year.” It is, in other words, the holiday which celebrates the Jewish new year. However, unlike its non-Jewish counterparts, Rosh HaShanah is not observed with raucous parties and fireworks. Rather, it is a somber day of reflection and prayer. Tanakh refers to the holiday not as Rosh HaShanah, but rather, as Yom Teruah [יום תרועה], which, literally translated, means “day of ‘blast’ (of shofar), ‘trumpet call,’ ‘cry,’ or ‘alarm.’” “[T]here shall be a day of rest for you, a remembrance with shofar blasts [תרועה], a holy convocation.” Vayyiqra 23:23. Rosh HaShanah is the first of the two Jewish “High Holidays,” the Yamim Nora’im [ימים נוראים], the “Days of Awe.” The second of the two High Holidays is Yom Kippur [יום כיפור], the Day of Atonement. The ten days between Rosh HaShanah [ראש השנה] and Yom Kippur [יום כיפור] are known as the Aseret Yemei Teshuvah [עשרת ימי תשובה], the Ten Days of Repentance. The misva of Rosh HaShanah [ראש השנה] is to hear the blowing of the shofar, Vayyiqra 23:23, which is intended to motivate individuals to do teshuvah [תשובה], that is, to repent for one’s sins, during the Aseret Yemei Teshuvah [עשרת ימי תשובה]. Teshuvah atones for all sins. Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Teshuvah 1:3. Teshuvah, in turn, consists of four elements: (1) ceasing the commission of the particular sin; (2) removing the particular sin from one’s thoughts; (3) resolving in one’s heart to never again commit the particular sin; and (4) verbally confessing commission of the sin. Id., 2:2. “The confession should be made ‘before G-d,’ and not in public.” Id. 2:1, n.9. II. The Misva to Conquer Eretz Yisra’el HaShem commanded the Jewish people to expel the gentile inhabitants of the Land (Eretz Yisra’el) and to not enter into an agreement with those inhabitants that would allow them to remain in the land. Beware of what I command you today. Behold, I drive out before you the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, the Hivvite, and the Jebusite. Be vigilant lest you seal a covenant with the inhabitant[s] of the land to which you are to come, lest it be a snare among you. Shemot 34:11-17. Halakha – Jewish statutory law – relating to gentiles living in Eretz Yisra’el recognizes two classes of people: those who claim an ownership or similar interest in Eretz Yisra’el and those who do not claim any such interest. Regarding those who claim an ownership interest in the Land, the Torah is not referring merely to ancient civilizations who just happened to be occupying Eretz Yisra’el at the time the Jewish people crossed the Yardan (Jordan river) to enter and conquer Eretz Yisra’el. Rather, the Torah is referring to any people – for all time – who claim a legal right to Eretz Yisra’el which is superior to that of the Jewish people. According to the Or HaHayyim, the pesuk which states that: “You are to drive out all of the inhabitants of the land. . . .” means that: Even though the Torah says in Debarim 20:16 that “you must not allow a single soul [of the Canaanite nations to remain in Eretz Yisra’el], . . . the Torah does not speak of [only] the seven Canaanite nations[,] but [also] about others who lived among them. This is the reason the Torah chose its words carefully, i.e., “all the ones who dwell in the land,” that the Israelites were to drive out even those people who lived there who were not members of the seven [Canaanite] nations. Or HaHayyim, commentary to Bamidbar 33:52. Likewise, Abarbanel said: Shemot 34:11-12 informs us that since HaShem is driving out the [Canaanite] nations, it would be improper for Yisra’el to forge a covenant with them. If a nobleman helps someone by fighting that person’s battles and banishing that person’s enemies, it would be immoral for that person to make peace with [those enemies] without [first obtaining the] nobleman’s permission. So, too, with HaShem driving out Yisra’el’s enemies, it is immoral for Yisra’el to enter into a treaty with them, for that would profane HaShem’s Glory. This is especially true considering that the treaty will not succeed. Because Yisra’el dispossessed them of what they believe to have been their land, there is no doubt that they will constantly seek to defeat and destroy Yisra’el. This is why it said, “[the Land] to which you are coming.” Since Yisra’el came to that Land and took it from its inhabitants, and because they feel that the Land has been stolen from them, how will they make a covenant of friendship with you? Rather the opposite will occur: “they will be a snare among you.” When war strikes you, they will join your enemies and fight you. Abarbanel, Commentary on Shemot 34:11-12. III. The Misva to Reside in Eretz Yisra’el The Talmud states: [T]he Sages taught: A person should always reside in Eretz Israel, even in a city that is mostly populated by idolaters [gentiles], and he should not reside outside of Eretz Israel, even in a city that is mostly populated by Jews. The reason is that anyone who resides in Eretz Israel is considered as one who has a G-d, and anyone who resides outside of Eretz Israel is considered as one who does not have a G-d. As it is stated: “To give to you the land of Canaan, to be your G-d.” Maseket Ketuvot, 110b. Halakha states that the misva of living in Eretz Israel is timeless; it is still the law today. The Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer 75:4, states that: “If [a husband] proposes to ascend to Eretz Yisrael and [the wife] does not want to [go], [the husband] must divorce her. . . . [And if the wife] proposes ascending [to Eretz Yisrael] and [the husband] does not want to [go], he must divorce her.” IV. The “Palestinians” The Roman emperor Hadrian conquered Judea in the year 135 C.E. The Jewish warrior Bar Kokhba was killed and the Judeans (the Jewish residents of Judea) were exiled to the four corners of the earth. Hadrian enacted laws, punishable by death, which made it illegal for any Jew who remained in Judea to keep Shabbat, study Torah, or circumcise their children. Yerushalayim was bulldozed and renamed “Aelia Capitolina.” Hadrian also changed the name of “Judea” to “Palestine.” Notwithstanding that Hadrian changed the name of Judea to “Palestine,” there has never been a Palestinian people separate and apart from the Jewish people, nor has there ever been a State of Palestine. The modern-day Arabs who call themselves “Palestinians” are nothing more than a people who lost any contemporary legal right to Eretz Yisra’el that they might arguably have had – including Judea and Samaria – during the wars of 1948 and 1967. V. The Jewish Sins Which Require National Teshuvah The first Jewish sin which requires national teshuvah is the failure of the Jewish people, through their elected government officials in Medinat Yisra’el (the State of Israel), to have immediately asserted sovereignty over the entirety of Medinat Yisra’el following the conclusion of the 1967 war. When a person reacquires a lost object, his natural inclination is to immediately claim ownership of the object. If he does not immediately do so, he “opens the door” to competing claims. So too, it is with Medinat Yisra’el and the liberated territories of Judea and Samaria. The reason Medinat Yisra’el did not – and has not yet – asserted sovereignty over the liberated territories has to do with separate, but interrelated issues of demographics and an erroneous application of certain provisions of Medinat Yisra’el’s founding documents. Regarding demographics, Medinat Yisra’el is concerned, as it has continually been since its founding in 1948, that Israeli-Arabs will someday become a majority, rather than a minority. Were that demographic shift to occur, Medinat Yisra’el, through its democratic elections, would cease to be the nominally Jewish state that it is today. Medinat Yisra’el’s founding documents provide that Medinat Yisra’el is both a Jewish state and a democracy. Since its founding in 1948, Medinat Yisra’el has assumed that Israeli-Arabs must be granted the same political rights (e.g., the right to participate in the political process through voting and the ability to hold public office) as Jewish-Israeli citizens. This irrational, indeed schizophrenic, assumption has led to the present situation wherein the Jewish government is literally afraid to do what is in the best interest of the Jewish state and the Jewish people, for fear of antagonizing its Arab residents. The only way Medinat Yisra’el can hope to be both a Jewish state and a democracy is for citizenship, and the democratic rights relating to citizenship, to be reserved solely and exclusively for its Jewish citizens, to the exclusion of all others. To some, this idea might sound outrageous. The question that should be posed to these individuals is, simply: Which Arab state(s) allows Jews to vote? There is no historical precedent where two peoples, both of whom claim a legal right to a particular geographic area, have lived together peaceably on that land for any prolonged period of time. Medinat Yisra’el is no different. The second Jewish sin which requires national teshuvah is the failure of the Jewish people, through their elected government officials in Medinat Yisra’el, to adopt a legal system based on the Torah and to encourage non-Jews who claim a right to the lands of Medinat Yisra’el, through financial and political incentives, to emigrate from Medinat Yisra’el to other countries. May we, the Jewish people, do full and complete teshuvah for our national sins; receive atonement for those national sins; and thereby be written and sealed in the Book of Life. שנה טובה ומתוקה Shana Tova u’Metuka! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson מאת: הרב מנשה ששון  This week's Parashat piece is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Parashat Ki Tavo restates that the Jewish people are a nation, separate and apart, and, above all of the other nations, not because the Jewish people are somehow “better” or “superior” to gentiles, but solely because the Jewish people accepted the Torah. Thou has avouched the Lord this day to be thy God, and to walk in His ways, and to keep His statutes, and His commandments, and His judgments, and to hearken to His voice; and the Lord has avouched thee this day to be a people for His own possession as He has promised thee, and that thou shouldst keep all His commandments, and to make thee high above all nations which He has made, in praise, and in name, and in honour, and that thou mayst be a holy people to the Lord thy God, as He has spoken. Debarim 26:17-19. In other words, the Torah is reminding us that the Jewish people exist solely because their ancestors, the Israelites, accepted the Torah. The Torah is also telling us that, by extension, the Jewish nation likewise exists solely because the Jewish people accepted the Torah. Parashat Ki Tavo then relates the second “Admonition” (“reproof,” “rebuke”) [תוכחה], which was given to the Jewish people by Moshe Rabbeinu shortly before the people crossed the Jordan river [נהר הירדן] to conquer Eretz Yisra’el. The first “Admonition” was given to the Jewish people by HaShem. Vayyiqra 26. Although the text of the two sets of Admonitions differ, the message of both is the same: If the Jewish people keep the Torah, they will be blessed; if not, they will be cursed. The first Admonition provides: “If you walk in My statutes, and keep My commandments, and do them, then I will give you [blessings]. . . .” Vayyiqra 26:3. “But if you will not harken to Me, and will not do all these commandments [you will be cursed].” Vayyiqra 26:14. The second Admonition states: And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt harken diligently to the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe and to do all His commandments which I [Moshe Rabbeinu] command thee this day, that the Lord thy God will set thee on high above all the nations of the earth, and all these blessings shall come on thee. . . . Debarim 28:1. But it shall come to pass, if thou will not harken to the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe and do all His commandments and His statutes which I command thee this day, that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee. Cursed shalt thou be. . . . Debarim 28:15, et seq. Often overlooked is the fact that both sets of Admonitions warn against not performing the misvot in Eretz Yisra’el. The first set of Admonitions warn, “And you shall do My statutes, and keep My judgments, and do them; and you shall dwell in the land in safety.” Vayyiqra 25:18. The second set of Admonitions, as mentioned earlier, was given shortly before the Jewish people entered and conquered Eretz Yisra’el. Viewed in this context, it’s clear that the misvot are to be performed in Eretz Yisra’el. Religious Jews the world over are known for scrupulous adherence to keeping personal misvot. They keep Shabbat, pray three times a day, lay tefillin, keep Kosher, etc. Observance of national misvot, however, is much less scrupulous. Only a small number of Jews make Aliyah and, of those Jews who do reside in Medinat Yisra’el (the State of Israel), few seek the implementation of political reforms that would result in the Medinat being governed as a Jewish State, instead of its current, Westernized, Hellenized, and distinctly non-Jewish mode of governance. In this month of Elul, as we approach the High Holidays, may the Jewish nation endeavor to avoid the curses that the Torah describes in Parashat Ki Tavo, and elsewhere, by engaging in true Teshuvah (repentance) [תשובה] for its collective failure to keep all of the misvot of the Torah, including, and especially, the national misvot. As a part of its process of Teshuvah, may the Jewish nation undertake to reform Medinat Yisra’el so that the Medinat becomes a true Jewish state, as envisioned by the Torah. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson מאת: הרב מנשה ששון  This week's Parashat piece is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. There are a number of laws distributed throughout Parasha Ki Teza which, on their face, may not seem to have any readily apparent connection. Those laws include: 1. The inheritance right of the firstborn. “If a man will have two wives, one beloved and one hated, and they bear him sons . . . he [may not change the order of inheritance to disinherit the son of the hated wife]. Rather, he must recognize the firstborn, the son of the hated [wife].” Debarim 21:15-17. 2. Returning lost property. “You shall . . . surely return [lost property] to your brother. . . . So shall you do for his donkey, . . . his garment, and . . . for any lost article of your brother that . . . you find. . . .” Debarim 22:1-3. 3. Dangerous conditions on real property. “If you build a new house, you shall make a fence on the roof [to prevent people from falling off the roof]” Debarim 22:8. 4. Farming operations. “You shall not sow your vineyard with a mixture. . . .” Debarim 22:9. 5. Collateral for loans. “One shall not take a lower or upper millstone as a pledge, for he would be taking a life as a pledge.” Debarim 24:6. 6. Collection of loans. “When you shall claim a debt of any amount from your fellow, you shall not enter his home to take security for it. . . . Debarim 24:10-13. 7. Payment of wages. “You shall not cheat a poor or destitute [employee]. . . . On that day, you shall pay his [wages.]” Debarim 24:14-15. 8. Charity. “When you reap your harvest in your field, and you forgot a bundle in the field, you shall not turn back to take it; it shall be [charity] for the convert, the orphan, and the widow. . . .” Debarim 24:19-22. 9. Weights and measures. “You shall not have in your pouch a weight and a weight – a large one and a small one. . . . A perfect and honest weight shall you have, a perfect and honest measure shall you have. . . . .” Debarim 25:13-16. The unifying theme that can be discerned from these pesukim is that the Torah has a preference for – and indeed presumes – the private ownership of property. The next logical question is: What is implied by the Torah’s preference for the private ownership of property? Ownership of property, by definition, means the legal right of an individual, without interference from others, to use or dispose of property which is owned by that individual, provided that such use or disposition does not infringe on another person’s legal rights with respect to the other person’s property. This definition, of course, is consistent with the command “Thou shalt not steal” [לא תגנב]. Shemot 20:13. The Torah prohibition against stealing is absolute; it is not limited to individuals who commit theft, but rather, applies to both individuals and to groups consisting of more than one individual. The fact that the Torah prohibits stealing leads, logically, to the question: How may property be acquired without violating the prohibition against theft? There are two, and only two, methods in which property may be acquired in the first instance. One is through a voluntary act – a sale or a gift. The other is through the use of force or through the threat of force. There is no material difference whether the force needed to acquire property is applied by a common street criminal or by the State, under an illusion of legitimacy which the State attempts to create through the enactment of laws. When a State takes property from a person by force or the threat of force, that taking constitutes theft, if the property which is taken is used for any purpose other than to achieve the legitimate ends of government. Although reasonable minds might differ as to what constitutes “a legitimate end of government,” it must be remembered that any and all property acquired by the State is acquired through the use, or threatened use, of force. Just as there are two, and only two, methods in which property may be acquired, there are two, and only two types of economic systems: the free market, the foundation of which is voluntary exchange, and Socialism, the foundation of which is the use, or threatened use, force. Thus, we see that just as the acquisition of property by way of voluntary transaction or by force are polar opposites, so too, the free market and Socialism are polar opposites. Rabbi Akiva Tatz wrote that “[f]ree will defines the human being. The human is a reflection of the Divine; just as [HASHEM] acts autonomously, we are free to express ourselves autonomously. That is not true of other created beings. . . . Only humans are free to choose what they do.” Akiva Tatz, Will, Freedom and Destiny: Free Will in Judaism, p. 15. In other words, an economic system which is based on free will – voluntary exchange – is a system which is consistent with Torah, and any system which is based on force or the threat of force, is a system which is inconsistent with Torah. Medinat Yisra’el (the State of Israel) was founded in 1948 by Socialists. One of the fundamental tenants of Socialism is a rejection of G-d. According to Socialist doctrine, everything, including G-d and religion, must be subordinate to the State. Not surprisingly, Medinat Yisra’el, in its early years, was an openly Socialist state. Consistent with Socialist principles, the State regulated almost every aspect of the economy, including the monetary system. During the years 1978-1979, inflation, caused by the Israeli government’s manipulation of the money supply, averaged 77 percent. By 1984-1985, inflation peaked at 450 percent! U.S. president Ronald Reagan offered Medinat Yisra’el a $1.5 billon grant if Medinat Yisra’el would abandon Socialism and adopt free-market economic principles. The Histadrut, Medinat Yisra’el’s labor union, objected. U.S. Secretary of State George Schultz responded with the threat that if Medinat Yisra’el did not start implementing free-market economic policies, the United States would freeze all monetary transfers to Medinat Yisra’el. The threat worked. Medinat Yisra’el started to implement the Reagan administration’s free-market “recommendations.” The impact on the Israeli economy was both immediate and dramatic. Within one year, inflation fell from 450 percent to 20 percent. Although the economy in Medinat Yisra’el is much better now than it was in the 1980s, there is still much work to be done. Problems which still exist in the Israeli economy include: 1. Income and Sales Taxes. Income and sales (VAT) taxes are exorbitantly high, which in turn contribute to unnecessarily high rates of Jewish poverty. 2. Price controls, import taxes, and government-created monopolies. Price controls, import taxes, and government-created monopolies lead not only to prices which are above the market rate, they also cause shortages as well as the total absence and unavailability of some products. Many Jews from the former Soviet Union have personal experience with this aspect of Socialism. As with high taxes, price controls, import taxes, and government-created monopolies contribute to unnecessarily high rates of Jewish poverty. 3. Health care. State control of the health care system not only results in a loss of medical privacy, it is also causes waiting times to obtain treatment which are longer than those in a free market. State control of health care also results in a quality or level of care which is lower than that which would exist without State interference. 4. Employment. State regulation of employment contracts between private employers and their employees result in higher prices to consumers, as well as levels of customer service which are significantly lower than what would exist in a free market. 5. Regulation of Business. Businesses of all kinds are heavily and excessively regulated by the State, which result in higher prices and a reduced or complete unavailability of certain products and services. 6. Real Estate. The State owns more than 90% of all the land in Medinat Yisra’el. Title to those lands should be transferred to Jews, so the lands could be put to productive use in order to, among other things, make housing for Jews more affordable. 7. Fiscal and Monetary Policy. The fiscal and monetary policies which have been implemented by Medinat Yisra’el are the root-cause of a multitude of economic problems which continue to plague the Medinat, and thus should be reformed consistent with free market principles. The change from a non-Torah (Socialist) economy to an economy which is consistent with Torah began in the late 1980s, with a little help from the Reagan Administration. Much, however, still needs to be done to change the secular, Socialist government of Medinat Yisra’el to one which is based on, and follows, Torah principles, including the free-market principles which we find in Parasha Ki Teza. One way to effect a change from a State which is not based on Torah principles to one which is based on those principles is through the mass Aliyah of religious Jews who not only understand, but who also embrace, the free-market principles which we find in Tanakh and Talmud. May we all merit to being a part of the process of importing Torah into the government of our beloved Eretz Yisra’el. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson מאת: הרב מנשה ששון  This week's Parashat piece, which is especially relevant to the ongoing conflict in Israel, is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. The Torah commands: When you go out against your enemy, and you see a horse and chariot – a people more numerous that you – you shall not fear them, for HaShem, your G-d, is with you. . . . Debarim 20:1-4. There are at least two important messages in these pesukim. The first is that if the Jewish people have “bitahon” [ביטחון] (trust in G-d) and if they perform “hishtadlut” [השתדלות] (exertion of human effort), HaShem will go “with [the Jewish people], to fight for [the Jewish people] with [their] enemies, to save [the Jewish people].” We saw, in 1948 (War of Independence) and 1967 (Six-Day War) how, when the Jewish people do their part, HaShem responds in kind, just as promised in the Torah. The second is that the Jewish people should treat their enemies as enemies. The pesuk commands: “when you go out against your enemy” (italics added) to emphasize that war is being fought against an enemy, not a friend. The Midrash teaches that the Jewish people should, “Go against them as enemies! Just as they do not have mercy upon you, do not have mercy on them.” Tanchuma, Shofetim 15. In other words, when fighting a war, the Jewish people should fight to win, not show weakness, and should avoid taking half-measures in the mistaken belief that doing so is somehow righteous, effective, or compassionate. The Torah then lists three categories of people who are exempt from the obligation to serve in the military, which are: a man who has built, but not yet resided in, a new house; a man who has planted a vineyard and not yet redeemed it (in the fourth year, when fruit must be taken to Yerushalayim, or is redeemed and may be eaten for the first time); and a man who has betrothed a woman, but not yet married her. Debarim 20:5-7. Furthermore, as can be inferred from the structure and text of the exemptions, only men have an obligation to serve in the military; women are entirely exempt from military service. The Torah continues: When you draw near a city to wage war against it, you shall call out to it for peace. It shall be that if it responds to you in peace and opens for you [surrenders unconditionally], then the entire people found within it shall be as tribute for you, and they shall serve you. But if it does not make peace with you, but makes war with you, you shall besiege it. HASHEM shall deliver it into your hand and you shall smite [kill] all its males. . . . So shall you do to all the cities that are very distant from you, which are not of the cities of these nations. But from the cities of these peoples that HASHEM, your G-d, gives you as an inheritance, you must not allow any person to live. Rather, you shall utterly destroy them. . . . Debarim 20:10-17. We learn from these pesukim that there are two types of wars. The Torah distinguishes between wars against “all the cities that are very distant from you” and wars against “the cities of these people that HaShem gives” to the Jewish people as an inheritance. The latter category of war is known as a “milhemet misva” [מלחמת מצוה] (a mandatory war, or literally a “misva war” or a war which is a misva to wage). Wars which are included in this category include wars against “the cities of these people that HaShem gives” to the Jewish people, that is, wars against those who occupy Eretz Yisra’el and who claim, or seek to assert, that their legal right to Eretz Yisra’el is superior to that of the Jewish people, and wars against Amalek (defined as people who endeavor to exterminate the Jewish people). Mishneh Torah, Hilhot Melahim u’Milhamotem 5:1. The former category of war is known as “milhemet hareshut [מלחמת הרשות] (literally, a war for which HaShem has given “permission”, such as a war which is fought for the purpose of expanding the borders of Eretz Yisra’el or to magnify its greatness and reputation. Id., 5:2. Given that the Torah commands that the Jewish people dispossess, by force of arms, if necessary, those who seek to assert a claim to Erertz Yisra’al which is superior to that of the Jewish people, it follows that the Jewish people should not allow those same people to remain in Eretz Yisra’el. By logical extension, the Torah also forbids allowing those whom it requires be dispossessed of the Land from becoming citizens in the Land, and then potentially becoming a majority instead of a minority, voting to change the character of the government from that of a Jewish state to that of a non-Jewish state, and then subjecting Jews to being ruled in Eretz Yisra’el by the very non-Jews who should have been dispossessed of the Land. Parasha Shofetim concludes with the command regarding an unsolved murder of a Jew: If a corpse will be found in the Land that HaShem, your G-d, gives you to possess, fallen in the field, and it is not known who smote him, your elders and judges shall go out and measure toward the cities that are around the corpse. It shall be the city nearest the corpse, the elders of that city shall take a heifer, with which no work has been done, which has not pulled a yoke. The elders of that city shall bring the heifer down to a harsh valley which cannot be worked and cannot be sown, and they shall axe the back of the heifer’s neck in the valley. . . . Debarim 21:1-7. There is not, of course, even the slightest reason to suspect that any of the elders were personally involved in the murder of the innocent Jew whose dead body was found in a field. Nevertheless, the Torah commands the elders to publicly proclaim that they have not spilled the blood of the innocent Jew who was murdered. Why, then, does the Torah require the elders to make a public proclamation denying any involvement in the murder of the innocent Jew? It is because the elders, in their role as political leaders, are responsible for governing Jewish society in accordance with the Torah, so that when, Heaven forbid, an innocent Jew is murdered, the elders, that is, the political leaders, can publicly – and truthfully – proclaim that they did everything within their power to prevent the shedding of innocent Jewish blood. Masekhet Sotah 38b. Today, we see the Israeli government failing, among other things, to exercise sovereignty over the entirety of Medinat Yisra’el (lands within the borders of the State of Israel), to incentivize non-Jewish Arabs to relocate outside of Medinat Yisra’el, and to take meaningful action against Arab terrorists who murder innocent Jews. May HaShem bless the Jewish people to merit the acquisition of leaders who possess “Yirat Shamayim” [יראת שמים] (fear of Heaven) and “bitahon” [ביטחון] (trust in G-d) and who will govern Medinat Yisra’el in accordance with the Torah. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson מאת: הרב מנשה ששון  This week's Parashat piece is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. It is not surprising that the Torah often places related concepts in close proximity to each other. Parasha Re’e exemplifies this concept. Parasha Re’e opens with a blessing and a curse. “Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; a blessing if you obey the commandments of the L-rd your G-d, which I command you this day; and a curse if you do not obey the commandments of the Lord you G-d.” Debarim 11:26-28. The Torah continues, a few short pesukim later, “For you shall pass over the Yarden to go to possess the land which the L-rd you G-d gives you, and you shall possess it and dwell in it. And you shall observe and do all the statutes and judgments which I set before you this day.” Debarim 11:31-32. The Jewish people were then commanded to “take possession [of the land] from them, before you, and you will take possession [ירשת] from them and settle in their land. . . .” Debarim 12:29. The Hebrew word which is used for the second command to “take possession” of the Land is [ירשת] means “inheritance.” Thus, the implication is that not only are the Jewish people commanded to take “possession” of the Land from its inhabitants, they are commanded to take legal title to the Land, by force, if necessary, so that they can pass the Land down to their descendants. Commenting on this pasuk, the Sages said that “The misva [for Jews] of [all generations to live] in Eretz Yisra’el is equal to all of the other commandments of the Torah.” Sifre, Re’e 80. The Torah, simply stated, is here telling the Jewish people that if they obey the commandments, they will be blessed; if not they will be cursed. The Torah then continues with the command to enter Eretz Yisra’el; to “possess,” that is conquer, and dwell in the Land; and to “observe and do all the statutes and judgments” in the Land. The Talmud states: [T]he Sages taught: A person should always reside in Eretz Israel, even in a city that is mostly populated by idolaters [gentiles], and he should not reside outside of Eretz Israel, even in a city that is mostly populated by Jews. The reason is that anyone who resides in Eretz Israel is considered as one who has a G-d, and anyone who resides outside of Eretz Israel is considered as one who does not have a G-d. As it is stated: “To give to you the land of Canaan, to be your G-d.” Masechet Ketuvot, 110b. The misva of living in Eretz Israel is timeless; it is still the Halakha (Jewish law) today. The Code of Jewish Law, states that: “If [a husband] proposes to ascend to Eretz Yisrael and [the wife] does not want to [go], [the husband] must divorce her. . . . [And if the wife] proposes ascending [to Eretz Yisrael] and [the husband] does not want to [go], he must divorce her.” Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 75:4. In Parasha Bereshit, HaShem tells Abram (before HaShem changed Abram’s name to “Abraham”) “I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojourns – the whole of the land of Canaan – as an everlasting possession; and I will be a G-d unto them.” [ונתתי לך ולזרעך אחריך את ארץ מגריך את כל ארץ כנען לאחזת עולם והייתי להם לאלקים] Bereshit 17:8. As the great commentator Rashi explained, the phrase “and I will be a G-d unto them” means that, in Eretz Yisra’el, HaShem will be a G-d to the Jewish people, but any Jew who voluntarily resides outside of Eretz Yisra’el ) is as if he is without HaShem [ושם אהיה לכם לאלקים – אבל בן ישראל ה’הדר בחוצה לארץ כמו שאין לו אלוה]. Note: A person who was born outside of Eretz Yisra’el and who does not possess the ability, financial or otherwise, to provide for his family should he move to Eretz Yisra’el, is not considered to be “voluntarily” residing outside of Eretz Yisra’el. Furthermore, we find in Midrash Halakha the statement “Even though I exile you, continue to be marked with [perform] the misvot so that when you return to Eretz Yisra’el they [the misvot] will not be new to you.” Sifre, Eqeb 43. In other words, the reason a Jew performs misvot while outside of Eretz Yisra’el is not because he is commanded or obligated to do so, but rather, only so that he will know how to perform the misvot when he returns to Eretz Yisra’el! Statements, such as the following, can be found in many places in the Torah: “Behold, I [Moshe Rabbeinu] have taught you statutes and judgments . . . that you should act accordingly in the land. . . .” Debarim 4:5 (italics added). The Ibn Ezra explains the reason why the misvot can be performed only in Eretz Yisra’el. “For the L-ord knew that [the Jewish people] could not properly keep the misvot as long as they were in the land of others who ruled over them.” Ibn Ezra, Debarim 4:10. The Torah informs us that the Jewish people “are a people that shall dwell alone.” Bamidbar 22:9. Thus, we learn that the reason the Jewish people are to dwell alone – in Eretz Yisra’el – and why the misvot can properly be performed only in Eretz Yisra’el, is because the Jew, living as a minority in a majority gentile culture cannot help but be corrupted by that culture. “Dwelling alone” in Eretz Yisra’el contains two components: Aliyah and “driving out” the Arabs and any other people who claim to possess a right to Eretz Yisra’el which is greater than that of the Jewish people. One, without the other, is insufficient and, thus, will be ineffective. Lastly, there is the issue of the Jew who would rather not be “chosen,” that is, who wants to live outside of Eretz Yisra’el, who wants to live a so-called “normal” life, who does not want to be Jewish. The Torah is clear. “Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; a blessing if you obey the commandments of the L-rd your G-d, which I command you this day; and a curse if you do not obey the commandments of the Lord you G-d.” Debarim 11:26-28. There is no third option. There is no opting-out. For a Jew, there is only “blessing” or “curse.” That’s it. “Jewishness,” just as certain other personal characteristics, is immutable: it cannot be changed. May every Jew rise to the challenge presented by the Torah and choose to be blessed. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson מאת: הרב מנשה ששון  This week's Parashat piece is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. A question which is often asked is: “Who is a Jew?” The usual answer is, “A person who was born to a Jewish mother or a person who converted to Judaism in accordance with Halakha.” A related, but different, question which could be asked, is: “What is the defining attribute of a Jew?” The answer to this question can only be: “The Torah.” We know this answer is correct because without the Torah, there could be no Halakha. Without Halakha, there could be no legitimate or authoritative answer to the question, “Who is a Jew?” In other words, without the Torah, there would be no Jews, no Judaism, and, of course, no Jewish people. The term “Zionism” means a “national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel.” https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/a-definition-of-zionism. Thus, because the purpose of “Zionism” is to benefit “the Jewish people,” and because, without Torah, there could be no “Jewish people,” it follows that the term “secular Zionism,” that is, non-religious Zionism, is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. There is not, and by definition cannot be, any such thing as “secular Zionism.” Parasha Eqev begins: This shall be the reward when you harken to these ordinances, and you shall observe and perform them; HaShem, your G-d, will safeguard for you the covenant and the kindness that He swore to your forefathers. He will love you, bless you, and multiply you . . . in the land which He swore to your fathers to give to you. Debarim 7:12-13 (italics added). Parasha Eqev continues: Perhaps you will say in your heart, “These nations are more numerous than I; how will I be able to drive them out?” Debarim 7:17-19. In other words, HaShem is saying that if the Jewish people keep the Torah, including but not limited to, driving out the inhabitants from whom the Land is being taken, HaShem will bless the Jewish people “in the land,” that is, in Eretz Yisra’el, not in Brooklyn, Beverly Hills, Barcelona, or Bombay. Why is HaShem’s blessing for Torah observance seemingly limited to “in the land,” as opposed to other places in the world? Parasha Eqev continues – and repeats itself: “The entire commandment that I command you today you shall observe to perform, so that you may live and increase, and come to possess the Land that HaShem swore to your forefathers.” Debarim 8:1. One implication which can be derived from the portion of this pasuk which states, “you shall observe and perform, so that you may live and increase. . . .” suggests that a Jew might not live and might not increase outside of the Land. In other words, this pasuk is suggesting that the only true defense against anti-Semitism is for a Jew to make Aliyah, that is, to immigrate to, and reside in, Eretz Yisra’el. One question that might reasonably be asked is: What right do I, as a Jew, and the whole of the Jewish people, have to “drive out” the Arabs who once were a majority of the population in Eretz Yisra’el? Parasha Eqev answers: Do not say in your heart, when Hashem pushes them away from before you, saying, “Because of my righteousness HaShem brings me to possess this Land and because of the wickedness of these nations did HaShem drive them away from before you.” Not because of your righteousness and the uprightness of your heart are you coming to possess their Land, but because of the wickedness of these nations does HaShem, your G-d, drive them away from before you, and in order to establish the word that HaShem swore to your forefathers, to Abraham, Yizhaq, and Ya’aqov. And you should know that not because of your righteousness does HaShem, your G-d, give you this good Land to possess, for you are a stiff-necked people. Debarim 9:4-5. Thus, we see that the Jewish right to possession of Eretz Yisra’el is superior to that of the Arabs simply because HaShem gave the Land to the Jewish people, because HaShem swore to our forefathers that the Jewish people would inherit the Land, and, lastly, “because of the wickedness of these [other] nations,” not because of any merit on our part. Additionally, recent history cements the Jewish right to Eretz Yisra’el in international law. In 1947, the United Nations, through a “Partition Plan,” created separate Jewish and Arab states in so-called “Palestine.” The Arabs, both within and without Eretz Yisra’el, rejected the Partition Plan and called for what an Arab League official referred to as “a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades.” The Arabs believed that they, with the British troops leaving, could exterminate the Jews and create an all-Arab state. The Arab plan failed miserably. Not only did the Arabs lose the war against the Jews, the failed Arab plan led directly to the creation of the modern State of Israel – Medinat Yisra’el. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs – mostly the educated and elite – fled to neighboring Arab countries. All the land that the Arabs could have had, if only they had accepted the U.N. Partition Plan, was now lost. After the 1948 war, entire cities and villages that were formerly Arab came under the control of the newly-created Jewish state. Not only did the Arabs in Eretz Yisra’el lose land in the 1948 war, they also transitioned from being a majority, to being a minority, of the population. Indeed, HaShem, in spectacular fashion, kept his promise to the Jewish people. A similar miracle occurred in 1967, during the 6-Day War. Hashem has given Eretz Yisra’el to the Jewish people. All we need to do is accept this gift by keeping the Torah and misvot. One issue which concerns many Jews who contemplate Aliyah is how to earn a living in Medinat Yisra’el. Unless these new immigrants – Olim Hadashim [עולים חדשים] – are retired and are receiving (foreign) retirement income, they will need to be able to continue earning a livelihood after making Aliyah. Although the particulars of the answer to this question will be different for different people, the Torah provides reassurance: HaShem “afflicted you [for forty years, in the wilderness] and let you hunger, then He fed you the manna [המן] . . . in order to make you know that not by bread alone does man live, [but] rather, by everything that emanates from the mouth of HaShem does man live.” Debarim 8:3, 8:6-10. Some potential Olim Hadashim [עולים חדשים] might wonder if it is safe to live in Medinat Yisra’el. Parasha Eqev answers this question as well: Hear O Yisra’el [שמע ישראל], today you cross the Yarden, to come and drive out the nations that are greater and mightier than you. . . . But you know today that HaShem, your G-d, . . . He will destroy them and He will subjugate them before you; you will drive them out and cause them to perish quickly, as HaShem spoke to you. Debarim 9:1-3. This, however, is not a promise of individual safety. Rather, it is a promise of collective safety. If the Jewish people follow the Torah and “drive . . . out” from Eretz Yisra’el those who refuse to accept Jewish sovereignty over the Land, HaShem will protect the Jewish people, as He has done many times before. We are living in momentous times. No longer do we stand on the threshold of the Messianic era. With the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty through the formation of Medinat Yisra’el, we have entered the Messianic era. The establishment of Medinat Yisra’el after the Holocaust; the return of the Jewish sovereignty after 2,000 years of exile; the revival of the Hebrew language, a language that heretofore had been not, for centuries, been widely used as a spoken language; the beginning of the ingathering of Jewish exiles from all parts of the globe; is not a coincidence. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson מאת: הרב מנשה ששון  This week's Parashat piece is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. Tanakh is, at one and the same time, the most popular book in history (more copies of Tanakh have been sold than of any other book), as well as the most politically-incorrect book in history. How can this be? The answer, although simple, is not easy for many of us mere mortals to accept. Many people, including, and perhaps especially, Jews who consider themselves to be religiously observant, have difficulty reconciling what Tanakh actually says and what they personally consider to be the “Jewish” or to be the “G-dly” way of doing things. In short, these individuals are trying to remake G-d in their image, rather accepting the Yoke of Heaven and thus conducting their affairs in accordance with the dictates of Tanakh. These individuals, although tragically in error, at least deserve to be understood; after all, they are in good company. HaShem did not allow Moshe Rabbeinu to enter Eretz Yisra’el, or even to be buried in Eretz Yisra’el, because Moshe considered himself to be an Egyptian-Jew, rather than a Jew whose home was in Eretz Yisra’el, but who just happened to have been born and raised in Egypt. In the opening paragraph of Parasha Va’ethannan, Moshe, talking to HaShem, said “I pray Thee, let me go over and see the good land that is beyond the Yarden. . . .” Debarim 3:25. HaShem responded, “Speak no more to Me of this matter. Go up to the top of the Pisga and lift up thy eyes westward, and northward, and southward, and eastward, and behold with thy eyes, for thou shalt not go over this Yarden.” Id., 26-27. The Midrash explains that HaShem said to Moshe, “Whoever acknowledges his homeland is buried in his homeland, but whoever does not acknowledge his homeland is not buried in his homeland.” Debarim Rabba 2:8. The Midrash further explains that when the daughters of Yitro said “An Egyptian man saved us from the shepherds, Shemot 2:19, “Moshe heard them and remained silent.” Id. But, one might say, acknowledging one’s peoplehood or acknowledging one’s national identity is equivalent to acknowledging one’s homeland. After all, Moshe killed an Egyptian who was attacking a Jew. That incident, among others, proved Moshe’s loyalty to the Jewish people. Surely that should constitute a sufficient acknowledgment by Moshe of his homeland. However, acknowledging one’s people is not the same as acknowledging one’s homeland. Moshe, like many Jews who today live outside of Eretz Yisra’el [חוץ לארץ], might have believed that his country of birth – rather than Eretz Yisra’el – was his homeland. When Yitro’s daughters said that “an Egyptian man saved us,” Moshe remained silent, not because he did not want to identify himself as a Jew, but perhaps because Moshe considered Egypt – not Eretz Yisra’el – to be his homeland. Instead of remaining silent, Moshe, when described as being an “Egyptian,” should have objected by saying, “Although I happen to have been born in Egypt, my homeland is Eretz Yisrael, even though I have never been there. The same politically-correct mistake persists in modern times. In 2019, Democrat Muslim U.S. congresswoman Ilhan Omar, in a social media post, implied that some Jews who were born, raised, and live in the United States have “dual-loyalty” to the United States and to Israel. Omar’s social media post was widely denounced as “antisemitic.” However, contrary to popular belief, Omar’s social media post was not antisemitic. It was merely a statement which, hopefully, at a minimum, is at least partially true. As we see from the incident involving Moshe Rabbeinu and Yitro’s daughters, Moshe’s sin, like the sin of many Jews who were born in America (and other diaspora countries) is that they believe their country of birth – rather than Eretz Yisra’el – is their home, even if, like Moshe Rabbeinu, they have never been to Eretz Yisra’el. Then there was King Sha’ul, who was commanded by HaShem to kill “Amaleq and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.” I Shemu’el 15:3. However, “Sha’ul . . . had pity on Agog,” id., at 15:9, and substituted his “wisdom” for that of HaShem’s by failing to kill Agog, king of Amaleq, as well as some of Amaleq’s choicest animals. King Sha’ul’s attempt at political correctness, that is, at not doing as HaShem had commanded but, instead, substituting his value system for the value system of Tanakh, led to Jewish tragedies such as Haman, whom we read about on Purim, as well as Adolf Hitler, who was a spiritual descendant of Agog and Haman. In modern times, we see Medinat Yisra’el (the State of Israel) shunning the requirements of Torah/Tanakh and, instead, engaging in political correctness by failing to exercise sovereignty over the entirety of Medinat Yisra’el and by attempting to pacify Arabs who currently reside in Israel. If Medinat Yisra’el were to reject political correctness and comply with the requirements of Torah/Tanakh, it would deny Israeli citizenship to Arabs who live in Medinat Yisra’el and, simultaneously, implement financial incentives which would encourage them to emigrate to the Arab country of their choice. Parashat Va’ethannan also repeats the Ten Commandments [עשרת הדברות], or, more accurately translated, the Ten Statements. A comprehensive discussion of how contemporary societies in general, and Medinat Yisra’el in particular, engage in political correctness through a rejection of various Torah commandments is beyond the scope of this article. However, we will briefly discuss one commandment. “You shall not steal [לא תגנב].” Debarim 5:17. This commandment seems fairly straightforward. Simply stated, it means one is forbidden to take property which does not belong to him. The implications of this commandment, however, are many. First, a commandment which forbids stealing property necessarily implies the existence of private property ownership. Thus, by this simple statement, the Torah forbids political or economic systems which seek to abolish, or even limit or restrict beyond what is needed for the orderly operation of society, the private ownership of property. Next, the Torah does not qualify the prohibition against stealing by limiting it to stealing which is committed by a single individual. Rather, the prohibition applies to both individuals and to groups consisting of more than one individual. Thus, since it is a Torah violation to abolish or needlessly restrict the ownership of private property, as well as a Torah violation for both individuals or groups of individuals to steal, it follows that laws such as taxation which exceeds what is needed for the legitimate functions of government (e.g., military, police, and the like), or laws which impose restraints on trade (import/export taxes, grants of monopoly privilege, employment laws which interfere with the ability of employers and employees to freely bargain for labor services, and central banking systems which allow the money supply to be inflated through fractional-reserve banking) all violate the Torah. Medinat Yisra’el expends significant resources to promote Aliyah, the immigration of diaspora Jews to Israel. However, the Aliyah “coin” has two sides: one side consists of encouraging diaspora Jews to immigrate to Israel. The other side consists of creating both a Torah and economic environment that encourages Jews to remain in Israel. Medinat Yisra’el, a nation-state which was founded by socialists, is a country that is still recovering from socialism. During the years 1978-1979, Israeli inflation, caused by government expansion of the money supply, averaged 77 percent. By 1984-1985, inflation peaked at 450 percent! U.S. president Ronald Reagan offered Israel a $1.5 billion grant if Israel would abandon socialism and adopt free-market economic principles. The Histadrut, Israel’s labor union, objected. U.S. Secretary of State George Schultz responded with the threat that if Israel did not start implementing free-market economic policies, the United States would freeze all monetary transfers to Israel. The threat worked and the Medinat, although being “dragged kicking and screaming,” started to implement the free-market “recommendations” that were suggested by the Reagan Administration. As a part of its economic restructuring, the Medinat, on January 1, 1986, introduced, the New Israeli Shekel (NIS), which replaced the hyper-inflated Shekel at a rate of 1,000:1. The impact on the Israeli economy which resulted from the implementation of free-market principles was immediate and dramatic. Within one year, Israeli inflation fell from 450 percent to 20 percent. Although the economy in Medinat Yisra’el is much better now than it was in the 1980s, there is still much work to be done. Each year, significant numbers of Jews who made Aliyah return to their diaspora countries because of economic conditions in Medinat Yisra’el. Additionally, a good number of Israeli-born Jews, many of whom are young men in their 20s, move to diaspora countries where they can better earn a livelihood. Sadly, they sometimes resort to marrying non-Jewish women in order to be able to legally remain in those foreign countries. These Jewish tragedies, which are caused in large part by the non-Jewish government of Israel (a government which happens to populated mostly by Jews), are completely avoidable. May Medinat Yisra’el be blessed to learn and apply the lessons of Tanakh, the most politically-incorrect book in history, and thereby become a Jewish nation, and to not continue being a nation, like any other, which just happens to (currently) be administered by a majority of Jews. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
By: HaRav Menashe Sasson מאת: הרב מנשה ששון  This week's Parashat piece is dedicated to the Jews who have been murdered, abducted, or otherwise harmed or threatened in the current war against our Arab enemies. The “Torah,” which, broadly defined, consists of the Written Law and the Oral Law, is the most politically-incorrect “book” (Hebrew: “sefer” [ספר]; plural “sefarim” [ספרים]) that now exists, or which has ever existed. Written Torah is composed of the Five Books of Moshe: Sefarim Bereshit [בראשית], Shemot [שמות], Vayyiqra [ויקרא], Bamidbar [במדבר], and Debarim [דברים]. The names of these sefarim are often mistranslated as “Genesis,” “Exodus,” Leviticus,” “Numbers,” and “Deuteronomy,” respectively. Of the Five Books of Moshe, all of which are politically-incorrect to some extent or another, Sefer Debarim [דברים] is the most politically-incorrect of all. In Biblical Hebrew, Sefer Debarim [ספר דברים] is referred to as “Mishneh Torah” [משנה תורה], meaning “repetition of the Torah.” However, Moshe Rabbeinu (Moshe our teacher [משה רבינו]) “did not merely repeat everything that HaShem had commanded, but reiterated how HaShem had commanded” performance of the misvot (commandments [מצוות]). Hirsch, Rav Samson Raphael, The Hirsch Chumash, 2 (italics original). “However, the repetition of the Torah and the explanation of the Torah do not constitute the [entirety] content of the book of Debarim.” Id., at 2-3 (italics original). We know this because “of the more than one hundred misvot [which] are contained in the book of Debarim, more than seventy are new [and not] contained in the preceding books.” Id., at 3 (italics original). In chapter 16 (vv. 1-17), the Torah reiterates the misvot of the festivals. In this reiteration, only פסח [“Pesah,” aka: “Passover”], שבועות [“Shavout,” aka: Festival of Weeks], and סוכות [“Sukkot,” aka: Festival of Booths (or Tabernacles)] are mentioned. When we compare this section to the section on the festivals in Vayyiqra 23, we immediately notice that Scripture here [in Sefer Debarim] does not repeat שבת [“Shabbat,” aka: Sabbath], ראש השנה [lit. “head of the year,” aka: יום תרועה (lit. “Day or Rejoicing” or Day of Shofar Blowing], יום כיפור [lit. Day of Atonement], [or] שמיני עצרת [lit. “Eighth [Day of] Assembly;” Festival which occurs on the day immediately following the seventh day of Sukkot)]. Id., at 4. In other words, Moshe Rabbeinu, in his Mishneh Torah, his repetition of the Torah which we refer to simply as “Sefer Debarim,” was communicating to the Israelites that they were about to enter a new a new phase, a new era, of Jewish history, that era being national existence and independence. After entering into Eretz Yisrael, the Jewish people would no longer have HaShem’s Divine Presence, or miracles, to guide them. The Jewish people would now have to establish a national government and govern themselves, hopefully, in accordance with the Torah. Consistent with this transition away from the wilderness, when HaShem’s Devine Presence was always with the Jewish people, to an independent national existence in Eretz Yisrael, the words of Sefer Debarim, unlike the words contained in the other Four Books of the Torah, are not the direct words of HaShem, but rather, are the words of Moshe Rabbeinu, who was telling over to the Jewish people what HaShem had told him. What we are “witnessing” through the progression from the first Four Books of the Torah, to Sefer Debarim, and then through the rest of Tanakh, is nothing less than HaShem, our Father in Heaven, “raising” his Children, the Jewish people, from infants in Egypt, to teenagers in the Wilderness, to adults in Eretz Yisrael; that is, to adults who are expected to implement and live by the lessons taught to them by their Father, during their childhood. Just as many other young adults, the “young adults” who consisted of the Jewish people who crossed the River Yarden [נהר הירדן] and entered Eretz Yisra’el, either did not fully learn, or more likely, did not fully internalize or appreciate, the lessons that were given over to them by their Father. The Torah in general, and Sefer Debarim in particular, articulates values and a Code of Conduct for living which contradicts almost all of the concepts which are held dear by Western “civilization.” On a personal level, the Torah prescribes rules for marriage and family life; rules for the preservation of life, from young to old; rules for personal self-defense; and, among many others; rules relating to grooming, appearance, and mutilation of one’s body. On a national level, which is our current focus, we see that Moshe Rabbeinu – our teacher – taught us, the Jewish people, our Father’s rules for national Jewish governance. Like our Father’s rules for the governance of our individual lives, our Father’s rules for national governance likewise run counter to concepts which are held dear by Western “civilization.” Take, for example, “conquest.” The Torah commands the Jewish people to conquer Eretz Yisra’el. Then there is “democracy” and “equal rights.” The Torah both forbids the Jewish people to grant gentiles citizenship in Medinat Yisra’el (the State of Israel) and commands the Jewish people to expel from Eretz Yisra’el those gentiles who claim a right to the Land. Despite clear warnings in the Torah and our Sages of what will happen if we, the Jewish people, do not heed these laws of national Jewish governance, Medinat Yisra’el, through its politicians and electorate, have failed to implement our Father’s lessons. For example, at Har Sinai, when the Torah was given to the Jewish people, HaShem said, Beware of what I command you today. Behold, I drive out before you the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, the Hivvite, and the Jebusite. Be vigilant lest you seal a covenant with the inhabitant[s] of the land to which you are to come, lest it be a snare among you. Rather, you shall break apart their alters, smash their pillars, and cut down its sacred trees. Shemot 34:11-17. The commentator Maimonides (the Rambam) wrote: We were commanded to occupy the Land that HaShem gave our ancestors, Abraham, Yizhaq, and Ya’aqov. We must not abandon it to any other nation, or leave it desolate. HaShem said, “Clear out the Land and live in it, since it is to you that I am giving the Land to occupy.” Bamidbar 33:53-54. . . . Sefer HaMitzvot, Mitzvah 4. In Parashat Mas’e, we learn that “HaShem spoke to Moshe in the plains of Moab, by the Yarden, , near Yereho, saying, ‘Speak to the Children of Yisra’el and say to them: When you cross the Yarden [river] into Eretz Kena’an [Eretz Yisra’el], you shall drive out all of the inhabitants of the Land before you. . . .” Bamidbar 33:50-52. Likewise, in Parashat Shofetim, we are told that “But from the cities of these peoples that HaShem, your G-d gives you as an inheritance, you shall not allow any person to live. Rather, you shall utterly destroy them. . . .” Debarim 20:16-17. The Or HaChaim wrote that: Even though the Torah says in Debarim 20:16 that “you must not allow a single soul [of the Kena’anite nations to remain in Eretz Yisra’el], . . . the Torah does not speak of [only] the seven Kena’anite nations[,] but [also] about others who lived among them. This is the reason the Torah chose its words carefully, i.e., “all the ones who dwell in the land,” that the Israelites were to drive out even those people who lived there who were not members of the seven [Kena’anite] nations. Or HaChaim, commentary to Bamidbar 33:52. Likewise, Abarbanel said: Shemot 34:11-12 informs us that since HaShem is driving out the [Canaanite] nations, it would be improper for Yisra’el to forge a covenant with them. If a nobleman helps someone by fighting that person’s battles and banishing that person’s enemies, it would be immoral for that person to make peace with [those enemies] without [first obtaining the] nobleman’s permission. So, too, with Hashem driving out Yisra’el’s enemies, it is immoral for Yisra’el to enter into a treaty with them, for that would profane HaShem’s Glory. This is especially true considering that the treaty will not succeed. Because Yisra’el dispossessed them of what they believe to have been their land, there is no doubt that they will constantly seek to defeat and destroy Yisra’el. This is why it said, “[the Land] to which you are coming.” Since Yisra’el came to that Land and took it from its inhabitants, and because they feel that the Land has been stolen from them, how will they make a covenant of friendship with you? Rather the opposite will occur: “they will be a snare among you.” When war strikes you, they will join your enemies and fight you. Abarbanel, Commentary on Shemot 34:11-12. Just as the Torah promised, the Arabs are today a “snare among” the Jewish people because we have “seal[ed] a covenant with” them simply by allowing them to remain in Eretz Yisra’el. The reason which is often given for the failure to govern Medinat Yisra’el in accordance with the commands of the Torah is that to do so, that is, to limit citizenship to Jews and, among other things, to expel gentiles who claim a right to the Land, would somehow be “immoral.” This answer, however, is simply illogical and absurd, as it is our Father in Heaven, none other than HaShem Himself, who determines what is moral and what is immoral and it is HaShem himself that commanded the Jewish People to expel from Eretz Yisra’el all who contest Jewish ownership of, and sovereignty over, the Land. As human beings, we can, and should, try to understand HaShem’s decrees. However, our obligation is to abide by those decrees, regardless of whether we understand them. May we, the Jewish people, learn, accept, and implement HaShem’s will, just as it is written in The Most Politically-Incorrect Book Ever. שבת שלום Shabbat Shalom! Copyright © The Israel Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
|
THE ISRAEL FOUNDATION
