This document summarizes and analyzes the juxtaposition of the mitzvot of bikkurim (first fruits) and remembering/wiping out Amaleik in Parshat Ki Tavo.
1) Some commentators note that bikkurim only requires entering and inheriting the land, while wiping out Amaleik requires being at rest from all enemies.
2) Ba'al HaTurim notes that both mitzvot relate to entering the land, as Amaleik tried to prevent the Jews from entering, and bikkurim depends on being in the land.
3) Others point out that bikkurim and Amaleik are both called "re
This document summarizes and analyzes the juxtaposition of the mitzvot of bikkurim (first fruits) and remembering/wiping out Amaleik in Parshat Ki Tavo.
1) Some commentators note that bikkurim only requires entering and inheriting the land, while wiping out Amaleik requires being at rest from all enemies.
2) Ba'al HaTurim notes that both mitzvot relate to entering the land, as Amaleik tried to prevent the Jews from entering, and bikkurim depends on being in the land.
3) Others point out that bikkurim and Amaleik are both called "re
This document summarizes and analyzes the juxtaposition of the mitzvot of bikkurim (first fruits) and remembering/wiping out Amaleik in Parshat Ki Tavo.
1) Some commentators note that bikkurim only requires entering and inheriting the land, while wiping out Amaleik requires being at rest from all enemies.
2) Ba'al HaTurim notes that both mitzvot relate to entering the land, as Amaleik tried to prevent the Jews from entering, and bikkurim depends on being in the land.
3) Others point out that bikkurim and Amaleik are both called "re
This document summarizes and analyzes the juxtaposition of the mitzvot of bikkurim (first fruits) and remembering/wiping out Amaleik in Parshat Ki Tavo.
1) Some commentators note that bikkurim only requires entering and inheriting the land, while wiping out Amaleik requires being at rest from all enemies.
2) Ba'al HaTurim notes that both mitzvot relate to entering the land, as Amaleik tried to prevent the Jews from entering, and bikkurim depends on being in the land.
3) Others point out that bikkurim and Amaleik are both called "re
UNIVERSITYS CENTER FOR THE JEWISH FUTURE Ki Tavo 5774 Download thousands of audio shiurim and articles at www.yutorah.org The Marcos and Adina Katz YUTORAH IN PRINT Ki Tavo 5774 Te Blessing of a Stif Neck Rabbi Mordechai Torczyner A m ksheh oref, the Divine description of Jews as a stif-necked people, was not originally intended as a compli-ment. It certainly was not a prescrip-tion, either! Rather, it was a statement of Divine frustration, kaviyachol, an epithet used by G-d three times over in the wake of the Golden Calf to justify His decision to separate from the Jewish people: Tey are a stif-necked people; leave me alone and I will rage against them and destroy them(Shemot 32:9-10). I will not ascend among you, for you are a stif-necked people and I might consume you en route(Shemot 33:3). You are a stif-necked people; in a moment I will ascend among you and destroy you (Shemot 33:5). Nonetheless, the sages of the Talmud saw great value and Divine purpose in our stubborn strength. Tey described three brazen entities Jews among hu-manity, dogs among animals, and roosters among birds - and they said of this brazen character, Had the Jews not received the Torah, no nation could have stood before them. (Beitzah 25b; see also Maharsha there) Brash chutz-pah can undermine our internal spiri-tual life, and in commerce among hu-manity it brands us as uniquely dif-cult, but it has been key in our Torah commitment and instrumental in our survival. No mater how hard we are hit, no mater how many ways we are hit, we keep moving forward. A stif neck has been the story of the Jew from the start. From the wilderness Jew who heard a Divine death sentence and yet marched forward to Canaan, to the Zevulunite who was vassal to the Ca-naanites and yet rallied to the call of Devorah and Barak, to the Aragonese Jew who was forced to sit through Chris-tian sermons but raised his children to perform mitzvot, and so on through the centuries to our own day, Jewish history has not a trail of tears but a monument to courage. A frustrated Martin Luther wrote, But the Jews are so hardened that they listen to nothing; though over-come by testimonies they yield not an inch. (Table Talk, Hazlet translation). He meant this as an insult, but we wear it as a badge far more native to our iden-tity than the yellow stars and red hats forced upon us by Muslim and Christian governments from the ninth century CE forward. Tis week we read the tochachah, a warning of horrifc punishments which may befall the Jewish nation, should they depart from the service of G-d. Over the centuries, we have had many oppor-tunities to compare our sufering to these Mosaic predictions. Whether the massacre of Jews by Roman forces two thousand years ago, the slaughter by Mohammeds armies at Khaibar in the seventh century, the pillaging of Jewish communities during the Crusades, the numerous expulsions from European lands in the Middle Ages, the Chmiel-nicki Massacres of 1648-1649, or the horrors of the Holocaust, we have en-dured not only the explicit tochachah, but also every inconceivable manifestation of its ultimate curse: Gd will also bring upon you every ailment and every blow which is not recorded in this scroll of the Torah. As Prime Minister Begin noted to President Carter, in the Holo-caust we were not merely decimated, we were tertiated and we sufered such high ratios of destruction multiple times in our history. Nonetheless, G-d designed the Jew with a boldness which cannot be cowed. It is a strength tailored to the demands of the Torah, to the high standards of per-sonal conduct and spiritual achieve-ment set by Avraham and Sarah. It is a brashness which makes us dangerous, but which also makes us capable of great heights. Tis is the double-edged sword of our stif neck. As we prepare to approach our Creator on the Day of Judgment, we would do well to look at our own indomitable streak and decide how best to harness that strength. Our brash chutzpah is meant not to sow discord among our-selves and undermine our service of G-d, but 2 YUTORAH IN PRINT A PROJECT OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITYS CENTER FOR THE JEWISH FUTURE Ki Tavo 5774 Download thousands of audio shiurim and articles at www.yutorah.org T he Talmud in the beginning of Yevamos tells us that even according to all opinions in the Talmud, it is legitimate, in regard to the book of Devorim, to expound halochos based on the juxtaposition of diferent laws to each other in the text of the Torah. Many commentators have gone the further step of deriving more homiletic - type messages from such juxtapositions. In this weeks parsha, some commentators note the juxtaposition of the mitzvoh of bikkurim to the last mitzvos in parshas Ki Seitzei, those of remembering what Amaleik did to us when we came out of Egypt, in order to arouse us to action and wipe out that nation. Ibn Ezra writes that in connection with the mitzvos of remembering and wiping Amaleik in order to wipe it out, the Torah says, And it shall be that when the Lord, your God, gives you rest from all your enemies all around, in the land that the Lord, your God, gives you as an inheritance to take possession of it, you shall wipe out the remembrance of Amaleik from under the heaven - you shall not forget (Devorim 25: 19). In contrast to this requirement of resting from all our enemies, which is a prerequisite for waging batle against Amaleik, the Torah then tells us that the mitzvoh of bikkurim requires only that we enter the land, inherit it and take possession of it. In practical terms, this means that the mitzvoh was operative afer the seven initial years of conquering the land and an additional seven years of dividing the captured sections among the various tribes. Te Chizkuni takes a similar approach to the juxtaposition, but expands the contrast to include many of the mitzvos that follow in parshas KiSavo, as well. Rabbeinu Yaakov ben Asher, in his commentary Baal HaTurim, reaches a somewhat diferent conclusion from the juxtaposition of these mitzvos. He says that the mitzvoh of bikkurim is dependent on the nation entering Eretz Yisroel, and Amaleik sought to prevent them from entering. For this reason, he adds, the farmer who brings his frst fruits to the Temple recites the section of Arami oveid avi, because it refers to Lavan, the Aramean who sought to destroy Yaakov, our father, by trying to prevent him from returning to Eretz Yisroel with his family, just as Amaleik later tried to do to the entire nation. While the approach of the Baal HaTurim is somewhat technical, focusing on the relation of the various mitzvos to the presence of the Jewish nation in Eretz Yisroel, other commentators make a more essential connection. Tey point out that just as Amaleik is referred to as reishis goyim - the frst among the nations (Bamidbar 24:20) - so, too, bikkurim is referred to, in parshas Ki Savo, as reishis kol pri ha-adamah - the frst of every fruit of the ground (Devorim 26:2). Rav Moshe Shapiro, as presented in MiMaamakim by his student, Rabbi Alexander Aryeh Mandelbaum, and somewhat diferently in a taped address on this topic, notes this connection, and adds that the Jewish nation is also referred to as reishis, in a verse in Yirmiyahu (2:3) - Yisroel is holy to the Lord, the frst fruits of His increase. Te midrash, in fact, based on this verse, says that the world was created bereishis, in the beginning, in the merit of Yisroel, which is called reishis, and in the merit of bikkurim, which are called reishis. Te idea being expressed here, explains Rabbi Shapiro, is that Gods presence in the world is hidden, and the Jewish people help make His presence discernable, by recognizing His hand at work behind the scenes. By expressing gratitude to God for the frst fruits that they produce in Eretz Yisroel, they are acknowledging that it is God Who created the world and is behind the workings of nature. Amaleik, on the other hand, denies that God created the world and works within it. Te Torah says of Amaleik, Amaleik is the frst of nations, and its end is destruction. Rabbi Shapiro explains that Amaleik considers itself the beginning and end of history, and, therefore, will, ultimately, be destroyed. Yisroel, however, by proclaiming that the true reishis is God, constitutes a beginning that has a story that follows, the entire history of the universe, Beginnings Rabbi Josh Hofman to defend against descent and to fuel our rise. Elul is the time to investi-gate the way we deploy our stif neck, and correct our course as needed. Te tochachah appears twice in the Torah, once in Parshat Bechukotai and once in this weeks reading of Ki Tavo. In the former it ends positively, with an invocation of G-ds covenant with our ancestors. Te second edition seems to end depressingly diferently, though, with a prediction that we will be sold as slaves and ein koneh, there will be no buyer. However, Rav Betzalel Zolty saw in this ending an upbeat note. He con-tended that the clause should be read, there can be no buyer. A Jew, even imprisoned and enslaved, always re-tains his freedom. (Hillel Goldberg, Tradition 38:2) May this ever be so. 3 YUTORAH IN PRINT A PROJECT OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITYS CENTER FOR THE JEWISH FUTURE Ki Tavo 5774 Download thousands of audio shiurim and articles at www.yutorah.org Writing the Teaching on Stones and Building an Altar Rabbi David Horwitz M oses and the elders of Israel charged the people, saying, Observe all the Instruction that I enjoin upon you this day. As soon as you have crossed the Jordan into the land the L-RD your God is giving you, you shall set up large stones. Coat them with plaster and inscribe upon them all the words of this teaching. When you cross over to enter the land that the L-RD your God is giving you, a land fowing with milk and honey, as the L-RD, the God of your fathers promised you- upon crossing the Jordan, you shall set up these stones, about which I charge you this day, on Mount Ebal, and coat them with plaster. Tere too, you shall build an altar to the L-RD your God, an altar of stones. Do not wield an iron tool over them; you must build the altar for the L-RD your God of unhewn stones. You shall ofer on it burnt oferings to the L-RD your God, and you shall sacrifce there oferings of well-being and eat them, rejoicing before the L-RD your God. And on these stones you shall inscribe every word of this teaching most distinctly (Deuteronomy 27:1-8, JPS translation). (Several English commentaries on this portion use the term steles to refer to the surfaces upon which the Teaching (=Torah)was writen. A stele is an upright stone or slab with an inscribed or sculptured surface, used as a monument or as a commemorative tablet in the face of a building. We will not discuss here the various views as to whether the entire Torah was writen on the steles or only parts of it.) Chapter 8 of the book of Joshua records the fulfllment as orchestrated by God. Although Rabbi Shapiro does not say this, perhaps we can add that for this reason, when the farmer brings his frst fruits, his reishis, to the Temple, he recapitulates the account of the exile and redemption of the Jewish nation, to emphasize that God is the true reishis, the Creator and controller of the world. Rav Yaakov Moshe Charlop, in his Mei Marom to parshas Ki Savo (no. 47), also notes the connection between Amaleik as reishis, and bikkurim and Yisroel as reishis, but in a diferent way than does Rabbi Shapiro. Rabbi Chaim ben Atar points out in his commentary Ohr HaChaim that parshas Ki Savo begins with the words, And it will be when you enter the land (Devorim 26:1). Te Hebrew word for the expression and it will be is vehaya, and the Talmud teaches us that whenever the word vhaya is used in Scripture, it implies a situation of simcha, of joy. What kind of joy is involved in this section of the Torah? Rav Charlop writes that true joy comes through a sense of renewal, of awareness that everything in the world is constantly being renewed by God, Who created it. Only the Jewish people, as Gods nation, understands this, and only in Eretz Yisroel, which is under Gods constant special providence, can it be truly recognized. Te task of the Jewish nation is to teach this truth to all the nations of the world. Amaleik, on the other hand, denies Gods creation of the world, and believes that everything is old, and run solely through the laws of nature. In order to promote its view of the world, Amaleik constantly tries to prevent Yisroels from entering Eretz Yisroel. When the nation does enter, and merits the frst fruits of their land, they bring them to the Temple in a joyous ceremony, as described at length in the third chapter of Mishneh Bikkurim. Because of the great joy involved in bringing the bikkurim, through the recognition of Gods constant renewal of the universe, the Torah ends the section by saying, And you shall rejoice with all the good that the Lord your God has given to you - you and the Levite and the convert who is in your midst (Devorim 26:11). Rabbi Charlops explanation of the connection between the end of Ki Seitzei and the beginning of Ki Savo thus incorporates both the approach of the Baal HaTurim, who points to the element of Eretz Yisroel, and the approach of Rabbi Shapiro, who points to the element of reishis. Based on Rabbi Charlops approach to the juxtaposition of the end of Ki Seitzei to the beginning of Ki Savo, we can understand why the farmer recites the paragraph of Arami oveid avi when he brings his frst fruits to the Temple. Since this mitzvoh emphasizes Gods constant renewal of the world, the farmer must recapitulate the historical experience of the nation, and thereby come to a renewed understanding of all the goodness that God has bestowed, and continues to bestow, on them. Just as God renews the universe on a constant basis, so, too, the Jewish people, as his nation, bears within itself the ability of self-renewal, and, as a result, carries the obligation to constantly renew its relationship with God. May we all, in this month of self- introspection, achieve a renewed relationship with God, and merit a wonderful new year 4 YUTORAH IN PRINT A PROJECT OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITYS CENTER FOR THE JEWISH FUTURE Ki Tavo 5774 Download thousands of audio shiurim and articles at www.yutorah.org of this commandment, as well as the fulfllment of the commands described in the later part of the chapter; namely, the readings of the blessings and the curses. At that time Joshua built an altar to the L-RD, the God of Israel, on Mount Ebal, as Moses, the servant of the L-RD, had commanded the Israelites- as is writen in the Book of the Teaching of Moses- an altar of unhewn stone upon which no iron had been wielded. Tey ofered on it burnt oferings to the L-RD, and brought sacrifces of well-being. And there, on the stones, he inscribed a copy of the Teaching which Moses had writen for the Israelites. All Israel-stranger and citizen alike- with their elders, ofcials, and magistrates, stood on either side of the Ark, facing the Levitical priests who carried the Ark of the L-RDs covenant. Half of them faced Mount Gerizim and half of them faced Mount Ebal, as Moses the servant of the L-rd had commanded them of old, in order to bless the people of Israel. Afer that, he read all the words of the Teaching, the blessing and the curse, just as is writen in the Book of the Teaching. Tere was not a word of all that Moses had commanded which Joshua failed to read in the presence of the entire assembly of Israel, including the women and children and the strangers who accompanied them (Joshua 8:30-35, JPS translation). Regarding the prohibition of hewn stones, we fnd elsewhere in the Torah as well the statement: And if you make for me an altar of stones, do not build it of hewn stones; for by wielding your tool upon them you have profaned them (Exodus 20:22). Why did God prohibit the use of an iron tool to cut the stones for the altar? Te Mishnah (Massekhet Middot 3:4) gives an answer. First the Mishnah in great detail which describes the procedures involved in preparing proper stones from the altar in the Bet Ha-Miqdash. It writes as follows: Te stones both of the ascent and of the altar were taken fom the valley of Beth Kerem. Tey dug into virgin soil and brought fom there whose stones on which no iron had been lifed, since iron disqualifes by mere touch, though a scratch made by anything could disqualify. If one of them received a scratch it was disqualifed, but the rest were not. Tey were whitewashed twice a year, once at Passover and once at Tabernacles, and the Hekhal was whitewashed once a year, at Passover. Rabbi says: Tey were whitewashed every Friday with cloth on account of the blood stains. Te plaster was not laid on with a trowel of iron, for fear that it might touch and disqualify. (A trowel is a fat-bladed hand tool for leveling, spreading, or shaping substances such as cement or mortar.) Finally, the Mishnah concludes: Since iron was created to shorten mans days, and the altar was created to prolong mans days, and it is not right therefore that that which shortens would be lifed against that which prolongs. Te Mekhilta of R. Yishmael to Exodus 20:23 (ed. Lauterbach, [Phila., 1949, p. 290] quotes the statement found in the Mishnah of Middot (in the name of R. Shimon ben Elazar) and adds the following comment in the name of R. Johanan ben Zakkai: Behold it says, You shall build of (whole) stones (Deut. 27:6). Tey are to be stones that establish peace. Now, by using the method of kal va-homer, you reason: the stones for the altar do not see nor hear nor speak. Yet because they serve to establish peace between Israel and their Father in heaven the Holy One, blessed be He, said (Deut. 27:5) Do not wield an iron tool over them. How much the more then should he who establishes peace between man and his fellow-man, between husband and wife, between city and city, between nation and nation, between family and family, between government and government, be protected so that no harm should come to him. (Te commentary of Rashi, for his part, to Exodus 20:22 is based upon these sources as well.) Remarkably, Rashis grandson Rashbam, on the other hand, in his commentary to Parashat Yitro, advances a diferent explanation for the prohibition to hew the stones for the altar with iron. In his view, since sculptors who would use iron to mold stones would draw fgures and idols on the stones with the iron implements, the Torah, in atempting to steer the Israelites from any idolatry, forbade the use of iron. Rashbam quotes Isaiah 44:12-13: Te crafsman in iron, with his tools, Works it over charcoal, And fashions it by hammeringHe forms it with scraping tools, marking it out with a compass. He gives it a human form.(See Martin Lokhshin (ed.), Perush Ha-Rashbam al Ha-Torah (Jerusalem, 2009), p. 250 and n. 46 ad loc., and his English translation, Rashbams Commentary on Exodus (Atlanta, 1997), pp. 222, and note 42 ad loc., for a discussion of the Rashbams view.) 5 YUTORAH IN PRINT A PROJECT OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITYS CENTER FOR THE JEWISH FUTURE Ki Tavo 5774 Download thousands of audio shiurim and articles at www.yutorah.org Te Creative Power of Words Rabbi Netanel Wiederblank T here is an obligation on every farmer to give portions of his crop to the Kohanim, the poor of Israel, and various other deserving recipients. Afer fnishing this tithing process, the Torah commands the farmer in this weeks parsha that he must then make a declarative statement that all the crops have been tithed and that the necessary portions have been given to the proper parties, an obligation colloquially referred to as Vidui Maaser. On a surface level, the obligation of Vidui Maaser is perplexing. What is the point of actively tithing crops and then declaring with words that the crops have been tithed? Arent these actions redundant? Shouldnt the deed alone sufce? Perhaps we can use the Chinuchs comments on this mitzva to answer these questions. He says the following: At the root of [Vidui Maaser] lies the notion that the singular quality of Man, the crowning element of his glory, is his power of speech. Animals function as Man does regarding all other functions besides speech. However, through speech Man is superior to all other creatures, and for this reason, there are people who dread desecrating their speech far more than they fear sinning in action. Te Chinuch further elaborates on the power of speech in Mitzva 340: Only through speech can Man become a partner in the supernatural realm. Speech is his living spirit , his distinguishing quality for all other parts of the body perish, [but through speech he can achieve eternality]. At a cursory glance, the above statements are puzzling. Many animals communicate defly, sometimes in surprisingly complex ways (such as dolphins use of echolocation), and surely it is mans ability to reason that distinguishes him from animals in a way that speech does not! Also, where do we fnd speech acting within the supernatural realms? And fnally, this statement seems to say that speech is more powerful than action, when in fact, in terms of punishment the opposite is true. Te transgression of a lav shyesh bo maaseh (a Torah prohibition that can be violated only via an active deed) is treated far more severely than the transgression of a lav shein bo maaseh (a Torah prohibition that can be violated without a deed)? Most people are accustomed to thinking of speech as a means of communication; however, the Torah repeatedly refers to speech as a method of creation. For example, the mishna in Avos informs us that the world was created in ten uterances. Considering that for the frst uterance there was no one around with whom Hashem could communicate, what else could the uterances refer to but creation and supernatural logistics. And perhaps this is what the Chinuch was driving at: in the heavenly spheres and not within the realm of punishment as administered on this earth, the words we say can move us closer to G-d like no other deeds that man has the ability to perform. Te creative power of speech is not limited to the context of our moving closer to G-d. Te Ramchal and Rabbi Chaim Voloziner write that human speech changes and shapes the world we live in by moving metaphorical mountains and facilitating celestial creations . Moreover, the creative capacity of human speech appears outside the mystical realm as well. Shlomo HaMelech declares: Death and life lie in the power of the tongue (Mishley 18.21). Tanchuma proclaims: Everything depends on speech (Maztorah 2). Normative Halacha asserts that for prayers to be efective they must be utered, and to achieve maximal reward in Torah study, it too must be spoken. Taking into account all these sources, we can understand why the declarative statement of vidui maaser is so essential to the proper performance of this commandment and that why via deed alone, maaser has not been adequately performed. Also, we can understand the Chinuchs original claim that holy people fear sinning with their tongue more than sinning with action. It is a fallacy to associate creation solely with action; rather, through the kind words we speak, we breathe into our world the full creative processes. Unfortunately, the reverse is also true, and through malignant speech, Chas Vchalilah, not only do we belitle fellow beings, we also destroy our own humanity, the very earth upon which we live. May it be G-ds will that we learn to harness the tremendous power of speech and use it only to forge and create! Hopefully, through this may we merit to come one step closer to the building of the Beis Hamikdash. 6 YUTORAH IN PRINT A PROJECT OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITYS CENTER FOR THE JEWISH FUTURE Ki Tavo 5774 Download thousands of audio shiurim and articles at www.yutorah.org I have to confess, Im great. Certainly an unusual sentence, but no more jarring than the phrase Chazal use to describe the ceremony at the beginning of this weeks parshah. When ofering maaser, a special formula is to be recited; this recitation is referred to by chazal with the term vidui maaser (see Sotah 32b; Megilah 20b). Tis phrase seems out of place. Vidui is conventionally translated as confession, which in turn is commonly defned as acknowledging sin or negative information. However, from a reading of the verses, the sense that emerges is anything but: I have removed the holy things from the house, and I have also given it to the Levite, to the proselyte, to the orphan, and to the widow, according to whatever commandment You commanded me; I have not transgressed any of your commandments, and I have not forgoten; I have not eaten of it in my intense mourning, I did not consume it in a state of contamination, and I did not give of it for the needs of the dead; I have hearkened to the voice of Hashem, my G-d; I have acted according to everything You commanded me (26:13-14). Is the word vidui, then, meant to be ironic, sarcasm from the rabbis? To address this issue it is worth reexamining the idea of vidui. Te Rambam, in beginning his codifcation of the laws of teshuvah, writes that if one violates any principle of the Torah, when he is ready to repent, it is a mitzvah for him to do vidui. Tis formulation troubled many commentators, in that it appears as if the Rambam, who devotes ten chapters of his yad to the laws of teshuvah, does not even recognize teshuvah as a mitzvah. Some indeed assumed this to be the case, that the Rambam understands only vidui to be a mitzvah, but not Teshuvah itself (see Minchas Chinuch, 364, and Avodas Melech). Rav Soloveitchik, zatzal, considered this to be an impossible position; the assumption that teshuvah is an obligation is central to Torah as a whole (see Devarim 30:1-2) and especially to the Yamim Noraim period. Te Rambams wording, then, refects not that teshuvah is not obligatory, but that it is expressed through vidui. Tis is because teshuvah, in reality, is not an action that one can perform or not perform, but an internal mindset (see the beginning of R. Kooks Oros HaTesuvah). A mitzvah must be directed at a performable action, not at a personality trait, emotion, or mindset. Vidui, then, as a defned action, is the stand-in for teshuvah, an action that can be commanded; and when it is performed, when one forces himself to confront his own sins and inadequacies, it is hoped that he will then be moved toward the internal change that is in itself teshuvah. With this perspective, it may be possible to revisit the concept of vidui maaser. True, the vehicle to teshuvah is very frequently acknowledgment of misdeeds, the antidote to the arrogance, self-satisfaction or self-delusion that ofen stands in the way of change. However, there is another impediment to growth that can be equally pernicious. Ofen, we are held back from changing because we believe, quite simply, that we are not capable of any beter. Yes, we readily acknowledge our shortcomings; in fact, we are slow to see anything else, and recognize no possibility of greater heights. In that circumstance, traditional confession does litle to move us toward spiritual growth. However, Chazal teach us that there is another form of the vehicle known as vidui: one that forces us to admit that there are times when we do fulfll commandments completely, when we are capable of accomplishing everything set before us; when we can declare I have hearkened to the voice of Hashem, my G-d; I have acted according to everything You commanded me. If we are capable then, we are capable other times as well. Te excuse that no beter can be asked of us loses its strength. We are forced to recognize that the bar can be set higher. At times, it is this awareness that can be the greatest impetus toward growth; it is this function that vidui maaser provides. As we approach Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur, we confess our sins and we hope the awareness of wrongdoing will prevent repeat ofenses. But at the same time, we focus on our untapped potential as well, and we use that awareness to push us farther. It is our mission, at this time, to remove the infuence of the Satan not only from behind us, but from in front of us as well. Confessions of a Tzaddik Rabbi Daniel Z. Feldman 7 YUTORAH IN PRINT A PROJECT OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITYS CENTER FOR THE JEWISH FUTURE Ki Tavo 5774 Download thousands of audio shiurim and articles at www.yutorah.org Reading the Klalos before Rosh Hashana Rabbi Rabbi Solomon Drillman ztl - Writen up by Rabbi Ben Kelsen T here are several times during the year that we fnd that certain parshios are linked to specifc time on the calendar. Te Gemara in Maseches Megillah (31b) tells us that one of the takanos enacted by Ezra HaSofer was an edict that the Brachos and Klalos found in Parshas Bechukosai be read prior to Chag HaShavuos and that the Brachos and Klalos found in Parhsas Ki Savo be read prior to Rosh Hashonah. Tere are two questions to be asked on this Gemara. First, according to the order of reading the Torah which is in use today, Parshas Bamidbar is always read on the Shabbos prior to Chag HaShavuos and Parshas Nitzavim is always read on the Shabbos prior to Rosh Hashonah. Terefore, we must ask why we deviate from the Takanah of Ezra? Second, according to the Gemara, one person reads the entire set of Brachos and Klalos found in Toras Kohanim (Sefer Vayikra), while several diferent people may read the Brachos and Klalos found in Mishne Torah (Sefer Devorim). Why does the Gemara distinguish between the diferent sets of Brachos and Klalos in found in Toras Kohanim and later in Mishne Torah? Te Rav, ztl, ofers an explanation based on Rashis commentary to Devorim 14:2. Te passuk there states : Ki am kadosh ata lHashem Elokecha.... Rashi explains Ki am kadosh ata as Kedushas atzmecha mavosecha, you possess inherited sanctity from your forefathers. Tere is, however, another type of Kedushah mentioned by Moshe Rabbeinu, that of ubcha bachar Hashem Elokecha lhiyos lo lam segulah. In analyzing this concept Rashi HaKadosh describes the following astounding principle: the Jew has inherently within himself two distinct forms of Kedushah. Te frst, that of Kedushas Yisroel, is universal and pertains to all of Klal Yisroel as derived through Yichus mAvos. Te second form of Kedushah is an individual Kedushah, Kedushas Atzmecha, which is granted to each Jew based upon our selection as Bnei Hashem, the Am HaNivchar. An interesting corollary to this issue is the Halachic status of a Meshumad and whether or not he retains a complete Kedushas Yisroel or if his Kedushah is lost due to his betrayal? According to the Gemara in Maseches Yevamos (47b) a Meshumad remains a complete Jew and any Kiddushin enacted by him is indeed valid. In contrast, however, the Gemara in Maseches Gitin (45b) states that he cannot perform various religious functions, such as Shechitah and Ksivas Stam. It is for this reason, explained Te Rav, ztl said that he felt uncomfortable saying defnitively that a Meshumad retained full Kedushas Yisroel. However, following the ruling of the Gemara in Maseches Yevamos, which Kedushah can we say that the Meshumad does in fact lose? According to Te Rav, the inherited Kedushah that is found within all descendants of the Avos is irrevocable as it is genetic in nature. However, a Meshumad does forfeit the Kedushah based upon his membership in the Am HaNivchar. Once we understand the concept that the Jew has two separate types of Kedushah, we come to the conclusion there must be two separate occasions or instances in which these Kedushos were conferred. Te Rambam in Hilchos Melochim (9:1) explains that one ascends to a higher level of Kedushah only through the acceptance upon themselves of additional Mitzvos. For example, even though the generation of Yetzias Mitzrayim underwent both Milah and Tevilah in Eretz Mitzrayim prior to the ofering of the Korban Pesach and Yetzias Mitzrayim, we fnd that Bnei Yisroel required an additional Tevilah at Har Sinai. Te Rambam explains that since new Mitzvos were accepted at Har Sinai, Klal Yisroel had to undergo a second conversion. What do we glean from this example? We deduce that the Jew has two distinct sources of obligation. Te frst, that of Matan Torah at Har Sinai, obligates all successive generations through our Yichus to fulfll the Mitzvos. Te second occasion of Krisas Bris is based on the concept of the existence of an individual Kedushah. Tis Kedushah requires a new Krisas Bris for each and every generation. Upon locating the occasion of these two conferrings of Kedushah, we must examine their nature more closely. To begin, where do we actually fnd them in the Torah? Te frst Krisas Bris is found in Parshas Bechukosai, while the second is found in Parshas Ki Savo (and, according to Rabbeinu Nissim Gaon, is continued in Parshas Nitzavim). [As an aside, when we are taught that at Matan Torah Moshe Rabbeinu read the Sefer HaBris while the Jews stood at Mount Sinai exactly what did Moshe actually read to them? Chazal tell us that he read the Torah from Breishis 8 YUTORAH IN PRINT A PROJECT OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITYS CENTER FOR THE JEWISH FUTURE Ki Tavo 5774 Download thousands of audio shiurim and articles at www.yutorah.org through the story of the Exodus. Tis is referred to by the Rav as the Sinaitic covenant and was built on the Exodus that was in turn built on the covenant with the patriarchs. In Toras Kohanim, Hashem mentions that He will recall the original covenant with Avrohom, Yitzchok, and Yaakov. In other words, the entire Sinaitic covenant is based on, and is the continuation of, the covenant of the Avos and transfers from generation to generation. Interestingly, in reality we fnd three covenants being entered into by Klal Yisroel with HKBH, the third being at Har Grizim. However, it is important to realize that the covenant of Har Grizim was a diferent type of covenant, one based on the concept Araivus, ones acceptance of mutual responsibility for his fellow Jews. Ed.] Shavuos, which Te Rav referred to as the holiday of Mishne Torah, is associated with the Brachos uKlalos in Bchukosai that were given at Mount Sinai. Tese Brachos uKlalos were part of the Bris entered into with the Avos. We read Parshas Bamidbar prior to Shavuos because the entire concept of Yichus is based on Parshas Bamidbar. Te entire concept of counting the people derives from the sanctity of the Avos and the lineage of the Shivtei Koh, the twelve tribes who trace that lineage back to Avrohom Avinu. As it says in the Parsha lmishpichosam ulbais avosam, vyisyaldu al mishpichosaihem. Chazal say that each person brought confrmation of his lineage proving that he was descended from the Avos. Te Gemara in Masehches Gitin (60b) tells us that Rabbi Yochanan said that the Mesorah was given to Moshe as the teacher of Klal Yisroel and the Shalsheles HaKabbolah, from generation to generation, started with his turning it over to Yehoshua. We learn from al pi HaTorah karati itchem Bris that while the Torah shebKsav was given to all of Klal Yisroel the oral law was given only to Moshe Rabbeinu as the Rebbe of Bnei Yisrael and he had to hand it over to his students. In other words, we mean to say that while the Bris on the writen law was consummated at Har Sinai, Bnei Yisroel were not included until the last day of Moshes life, once he had completed his role as rebbe. Rosh HaShonah is the time that all nations of the world are judged, val hamdinos bo yeamar ayzo lacherev... However, it is also the day that each individual is judged, val habriyos. It is for this reason that we read the Brachos uKlalos of Parshas Ki Savo and Parshas Nitzavim prior to Rosh HaShonah, in order to stress the centrality and importance of the Krisas Bris with the individual regarding the oral law as well as the writen law.