Enayim L'Torah Parshat Beshalach

The Trial of Affliction, The Trial of Affluence

Rabbi Zevulun Charlop

Several years ago, a grandson of mine, may he be well, spent only the last days of Pesach with us. This was the first time he and his parents were not able to be at our Seder, and he had a bone to pick with me. He wanted me to give him a chance at the Afikomen on Shvi'i shel Pesach to make up for the regular Afikomen he had missed on the first days. I explained to him that the Afikomen is a Mitzvah prescribed exclusively for the Seder night, and we would be guilty of the prohibitive commandment of Bal Tosif -- adding to the Mitzvah – if we instituted an Afikomen at the end of Pesach too. But he was not to be mollified.

I had to devise a substitute, and I came up with an idea that I believe may deserve emulation – the rechush gadol. It is very much like the Afikomen: The grandchild (I suppose all children can play this game as well) has to look for the rechush gadol Matza put away in some clever place by the grandfather, and when the young man or girl, as the case may be, finds the rechush gadol, he/she receives a reward which ought to be even more valuable than the Afikomen. For the idea conveyed by the rechush gadol fits more appropriately with the notion of prizes and expensive gifts. Whereas on the first days of Passover we recall through the Matza the Oni, the affliction of our ancestors, on the second days of Passover we focus on the rechush gadol--the great bounty--which Hashem promised Avraham when Hashem allowed him a glimpse of the future and told him that "his descendants were to serve 400 years in a strange land and would then leave with rechush gadol - great substance" (Breishis 15:14).

The collection of this "great substance" was in two stages. One, when Bnei Yisroel left Egypt, and their Egyptian neighbors, in a miraculous turnabout, sent them off with expensive farewell mementos that they had ostensibly borrowed. Two, the gold, silver and jewelry they picked up at the Red Sea on Shvi'i shel Pesach a week after the Exodus: the gorgeous armor of their Egyptian pursuers who drowned in the tumbling waters of the sea. This armor surpassed by far the wealth they had collected in Egypt. In fact, the Torah uses the imperative - Vayasa Moshe es Yisroel…"and Moshe forced the children to move on from the Red Sea" (Shmos 15:22). There are two explanations for the need for coercion here, which, superficially, seem altogether contradictory. Rashi says that Moshe literally had to tear them away from the Red Sea because they were so engrossed in accumulating the expensive remnants of the Egyptian cavalry. On the other hand, the Zohar, that central fount of Kabbalah and Jewish mysticism, understands the need for force here in an entirely different way. The Jews did not want to leave the Red Sea because never before did they sense so surely – so vividly and unmistakably – the Shechinah, Divine Presence.

My grandfather z"l, actually saw no contradiction here between Rashi's understanding and the Zohar’s. There are two tests of faith – the test of affliction, nisayon ha'oni and the test of affluence, nisayon ha'osher. It may sometimes be hard to recognize Hashem’s Presence and believe in Him when things are going ill with us, certainly when we are being crushed under heel by unspeakable oppression. But possibly even a more difficult test is the test of affluence, to believe in Hashem and heed His Word in times of well being and ease. When one recognizes Hashem’s Presence even in affluent times, it can be an even more sublime vision than in a time of adversity. There is no contradiction between Rashi and Zohar. For the powerful awareness of Hashem by Israel and their preoccupation with the riches at the sea were of one piece and indivisible. And this is what our tradition means when it says: "What the plainest maidservant saw at the Red Sea was not seen by Ezekiel in his marvelous conjuring of the chariot."

"What is expected of us," I told my grandson and anyone else who would listen, is "that we must be able just as certainly to feel the Shechinah when we are flushed with rechush gadol, and indeed it is possible to reach higher peaks of yedias Hashem in osher than in oni.

Mitzvah L'Hisnoses

Yossi Horowitz

After Hashem answers Bnei Yisroel’s frenzied demands for water, the Torah tells us, "There (in Marah) He established for it (the nation) a decree and an ordinance and there He tested it" (15:25). The words "decree" and "ordinance" (chok u'mishpat) are explained in Mesechta Sanhedrin (56b) as a reference to three mitzvos which were given to the Jews at this time in Marah, prior to the giving of the Torah at Har Sinai. The three mitzvos are Shabbos, kibbud av v'eim, and establishing a judicial system.

The Ramban explains that these three mitzvos were introduced at this time to accustom the Bnei Yisroel to the performance of mitzvos in anticipation of matan Torah. The test at Marah ("sham nisahu"), continues the Ramban, was to see if the Jewish nation would accept these mitzvos willingly and perform them joyfully.

Rav Boruch Halevi Epstein in his Torah Temimah complements the Ramban's idea with a brilliant insight into our Nusach HaTefilla. Why, he asks, do we add the phrase " b’ahava u’vratzon" (with love and favor) in the Yom Tov Amidah and Kiddush only when Yom Tov coincides with Shabbos? What is this added element of love that Yom Tov does not share with Shabbos?

The answer lies in the Gemara Shabbos (88a). Commenting on the verse, "And they encamped underneath the mountain" (Shemos 19:17), the Gerara relates that at the moment of matan Torah, G-d held Har Sinai over the heads of the Jewish nation, threatening to kill them if they were to refuse the Torah. Bnei Yisroel thus accepted the mitzvos given at Har Sinai under duress, against their collective will. However, the mitzvos accepted at Marah were accepted willingly and with love, "bahava u’vratzon". Thus, explains the Torah Temimah, it is fitting that only on Shabbos do we add the phrase "bahava u’vratzon", since Shabbos was accepted willingly, while other mitzvos (e.g. Yom Tov) were imposed upon Bnei Yisroel.

Rav Yosef Shaul Natanson in Divrei Shaul suggests an additional interpretation of the word "nisahu", traditionally understood to mean "He tested them." The word "nisahu" may also be derived from the word "nes," a flag or banner. We must view the mitzvos given to the Jewish Nation as a banner, that which separates and distinguishes us from all other nations of the world. The realization that mitzvos should be performed with a sense of pride, not embarrassment, coupled with the Ramban’s emphasis on the joy with which mitzvos should be observed, should stir us to avoid the pitfalls of "mitzvas anashim milumada" (Isaiah 29:13)--the rote performance of mitzvos.

A Song of Songs

Rachmiel Rothberger

In this week's sedrah we read the Shirahs Hayam, where Bnei Yisroel proclaimed shiros and tishbachos to Hashem after they crossed the Yam Suf. The Medrash relates that after Bnei Yisroel had crossed the Yam Suf, the malachei hashares came before HaKadosh Baruch Hu to sing shirah and proclaim thanksgiving to Hashem. Hashem told these angels to allow Bnei Yisroel to say Shirah first. According to the Medrash, this is what is alluded to in the first pasuk of the Shiras Hayam. The Torah's choice of Az Yashir Moshe, in future tense, rather than Az Shar Moshe, in past tense, suggests that Hashem told the malachim that Moshe and Bnei Yisroel should sing Shirah first, and only then may the malachim join in.

Why did the malachei hashares have to wait to sing Shirah? The Kotzker Rebbe suggests that unlike the Bnei Yisroel, the Malachim are always ready to sing Shirah to Hashem. Bnei Yisroel offer Shirah only when they are in a state of ratzon and particular closeness with Hashem. Rashi thus comments that Az Yashir Moshe u'Vnei Yisroel means alah b'libam sheyashiru -- a special moment of ratzon aroused in the hearts of the Bnei Yisroel the desire to sing Shirah to Hashem. But what prompted this she'as ratzon? What motivated Bnei Yisroel to sing Shirah?

The Shem M'Shmuel answers that had Bnei Yisroel sung at Yam Suf the song would not have contained Chiddush, but would have been a reflexive outpouring, like the angels' songs, inspired by the Shechina speaking from within them. The Shirah that Bnei Yisroel actually sang after Krias Yam Suf was at a time of ratzon when Bnei Yisroel had reached a level of Nevuah and were able to actively sing to Hashem. The Chiddush of Shiras HaYam was Bnei Yisroel's having reached this level of being able to personally give Shirah to Hashem with Ruach HaKodesh. This also answers the question of the Kotzker Rebbe as to why Hashem told the malachei hashares to wait with their Shirah, for it was an eis ratzon for Bnei Yisroel. When Bnei Yisroel reach this special madreigah of eis ratzon they can truly sing Shirah to Hashem, and that is why Hashem told the malachim to allow the Bnei Yisroel to sing Shirah first, Az Yashir, then they will sing, once that madreigah of ratzon is reached.

Contents | Archives | Subscribe Now | Editors & Credits | Back Home