From: Netvort@aol.com
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006
3:55 AM
To: JoshHoff@aol.com
Subject: Netvort : parshas Ki
Seitzei, 5766
A Weighty
Issue
By Rabbi Joshua (measuredly known as The Hoffer)
Hoffman
At the end of this week's parsha, we are told
to remember the war that Amalek waged against the Jewish nation in the
wilderness, and to blot out any trace of that nation. This mention of
Amalek immediately follows the section which commands us to have honest measures
and weights. Rashi, based on the Midrash Tanchuma, explains this
juxtaposition by saying that if one is dishonest in measures and weights, he
should worry about provocation by the enemy. Rabbi Naphtoli Tzvi Yehudah Berlin,
or the Netziv, in his commentary Ha'amek Davar, notes that the implication of
this midrash is that Amalek attacked the Jews because they were dishonest in
measures and weights. However, he continues, this is very hard to understand.
After all, the Jews, in the wilderness, had all of their needs taken care of by
God in a miraculous fashion, and, thus, had no need to engage in commercial
activities. How, then, was this sin relevant to them, in their
situation?
The Netziv answers that the core of the sin of
dishonest weights and measures is a lack of belief in God's providence and His
control over our livelihoods. If one really believed that God provides for us in
accordance to our actions, he would realize that he would not gain anything by
cheating somebody else. In parshas Beshalach, when the people asked for water at
Rephidim, they asked whether God was in their midst or not. What they were
asking, according to the Netziv, was, how do we know, when the miracles end
after Moshe is no longer with us, and we live on a more natural plane, that God
will be among us and enable us to make a livelihood? This outcry indicated a
lack of faith in God, Who had sustained the nation for so many years until that
point in time. Because of that lack of faith, they were attacked by Amalek,
whose purpose for existence is to remove any trace of belief of God from this
world.
Based on the Netziv's explanation of the connection
between dishonest weights and the attack of Amalek, we can better understand
what the Torah tells us, in parshas Beshalach, about the battle that took place.
We are told that Moshe stood on top of a hill and raised his arms. When Moshe
raised his arms, the Torah tells us, Yisroel was stronger, and when Moshe
lowered his arms, Amalek was stronger. The mishneh in Rosh Hashanah (3:8),
explains that it was not Moshe’s arms which waged the war and determined who was
stronger. Rather, when Yisroel looked at Moshe’s raised arms, they looked
further up to heaven, subjugated their hearts to God, Who then made them
stronger than Amalek and granted them victory in the battle. Following the
Netziv, the idea expressed here is that since the attack of Amalek came from a
lack of faith and trust in God, it could only be won by a renewing that faith
and trust.
Interestingly, the Torah there says, regarding
Moshe's upraised arms,' vayehi yadav emunah,' - and his hands were faithful
(Shemos 17:12). Rav Eliezer Waldman, Rosh Yeshivah in Kiryas Arba, explained
that for faith in God to be real, it must be translated into action. Although
Rabbi Waldman said this in reference to the imagery of Moshe raising his arms
and thereby inspiring the Jewish nation to have faith in God, following the
Netziv's explanation for the reason behind Amalek's attack, we can further say
that Moshe was instructing the people that they need to translate their faith
into action in their daily life, by engaging in honest business practices, which
bespeak a belief in God's providence.
In parshas Shoftim, we
learn about the declaration made to Jewish soldiers before going out to war,
that anyone who is afraid and soft of heart should return home before the battle
starts. Although the exemptions from war granted to those who were awaiting
marriage, or the initiation work on a vineyard, of the completion of a house,
did not apply to a milchemes mitzvoh, or an obligatory war, such as the war
against Amalek, it would appear that the instruction to those who were ferarful
and of soft heart did apply. According to Rav Yose HaGelili, the Torah is
referring to people who were afraid because of sins which they had committed. In
parshas Beshalach, Moshe tells Yehoshua, "choose men for us, and go out, do
battle with Amalek" (Shemos 17:9). The Mechilta explains that the word ‘anoshim’
- men - refers to people who feared sin. It would seem reasonable to assume that
a person who feared sin, in the context of the war against Amalek, would
certainly abstain from the kind of sin that would make someone afraid to go out
in battle.
Rav Yosi HaGelili, in identifying the kind
of sin that would make a person afraid to go out to battle, says that it is the
sin of speaking between the prayer of Yishtabach and that of ‘Yotzeir,’
while Rav Yosi says that it is the sin of being married to a woman to whom one
is forbidden. The practical difference between them, says the gemara, would be
in regard to a rabbinic prohibition, such as speaking between the laying on of
the hand tefillin (phylactery) and the head tefillin. According to Rav Yosi
haGelili, a person who transgressed this sin could not engage in battle (for
more on this dispute, see Netvort to parshas Shoftim, 5759, available at
Torahheights.com). Rav Shlomo Yosef Zevin, in his LeTorah Ulemoadim, explains
that the tefillin of the hand symbolize action, and the tefillin of the head
symbolize faith in God. When one speaks between the placement of these tefillin,
he is breaking the linkage between his belief and his actions, and, thereby
committing the kind of sin which, according to the Netziv, generated the attack
of Amalek. That is, apparently, why such people were instructed to return home
from the battle front.
Please address all
correspondence to the author (Rabbi Hoffman) with the following address -
JoshHoff @ AOL.com.
To subscribe to Netvort, send a message with
subject line subscribe, to Netvort@aol.com. To unsubscribe, send
message with subject line unsubscribe, to the same
address.