Friday, May 29, 2026
Insider Tip!
This coming week is Rav Yeruchem's yahrtzeit.
Do you want to grow? Learn a LOT of his Torah!!
Complainers Vs. Thankers
There is a LOT of complaining in Bamidbar. Why? Like Rashi says - a תואנה. They looked for pretexts to complain. That is a rule of complainers. Most complaints are saying the same thing - I am not happy. It is not about the particular thing they are complaining about. It doesn't even say in the psukim what the מתאוננים were complaining about. They were just complaining. Happy, healthy people look for every reason to feel and express ... gratitude.
If you want to be happy - invest in relationships, in your deeper spiritual life, eat, exercise and sleep well, focus on increasing self awareness and always be kind and loving. And like I just wrote - constantly always look for reasons to feel gratitude and Baruch Hashem there are endless things for which to be thankful.
Thursday, May 28, 2026
The President And Deviant Movements
The President of the State of Israel is supposed to represent the State [even though he lacks political power].
Recently, the President spoke [via zoom] at the graduation of JTS and sang the praises of the Conservative movement. Ammiel Hirsch, a Reform cleric, related that the President called him and asked how he could help advance the goals of that movement.
So who exactly does he represent? Most Israelis are either religious or less religious to varying degrees but very few are Reform or Conservative, those errant movements with whom the President flirts.
How sad and unfortunate that a צדיק יסוד עולם like Rav Yitzchak Herzog has a grandson and namesake who has such distorted beliefs and in such a public way.
Wednesday, May 27, 2026
מתאוננים
דְּתַנְיָא רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר עֲתִידָה פָּרָשָׁה זוֹ שֶׁתֵּיעָקֵר מִכָּאן וְתִכָּתֵב בִּמְקוֹמָהּ וְלָמָּה כְּתָבָהּ כָּאן כְּדֵי לְהַפְסִיק בֵּין פּוּרְעָנוּת רִאשׁוֹנָה לְפוּרְעָנוּת שְׁנִיָּיה פּוּרְעָנוּת שְׁנִיָּיה מַאי הִיא {במדבר י״א:א׳} וַיְהִי הָעָם כְּמִתְאוֹנְנִים פּוּרְעָנוּת רִאשׁוֹנָה {במדבר י׳:ל״ג} וַיִּסְעוּ מֵהַר ה׳ וְאָמַר רַבִּי חָמָא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא שֶׁסָּרוּ מֵאַחֲרֵי ה׳.
מאחרי ה׳ – בתוך ג׳ ימים למסעם התאוו האספסוף תאוה להתרעם על הבשר כדי למרוד בהקב״ה. [רש"י]
ודברי רש"י הק' תמוהים לכל מעיין ומצוה גדולה ליישב.
The Longest Journey: From the Head to the Heart
“The longest journey you’ll ever take is the eighteen inches from your head to your heart.” This celebrated adage refers to the profound shift from a purely intellectual, mental-based way of interacting with life to an experiential, intuitive, and feeling-based way of being. It is a transition from observing life through a lens to feeling life through the soul.
From the perspective of the "head," truth is a puzzle to be solved through empirical data, science, and provable facts. This is the hallmark of rationalism—the narrative upon which Western society has "bet the farm." In this paradigm, truth is viewed as a singular, external monolith, separate from the observer and governed by rigid laws.
However, from the perspective of the "heart," truth is subjective and internal. It is a personal wisdom that synthesizes our senses, intuition, and emotional knowing. As Blaise Pascal famously wrote:
“The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of.”
As a culture, we have yet to complete this journey; in many ways, we appear to be walking backward, retreating further into the safety of data at the expense of depth.
The Throne of Reason
Rooted in the Western intellectual tradition, our society prizes the factual, science-based approach to existence. We are taught that all truths can be deciphered using the deductive and analytical mind. While many non-Western traditions honor the heart and body as vital centers of intelligence, the rationalist narrative places all its eggs in the intellectual basket. In this world, reason is king.
What this narrative overlooks, however, is that reason never exists in a vacuum. Logic is always filtered through the messy reality of human experience. As Anaïs Nin aptly noted:
“We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are.”
Our "pure" reasoning is constantly subverted by our emotions, language, power structures, and cultural conditioning. The person applying the logic is inseparable from the logic itself.
The Myth of the Singular Truth
The rational narrative assumes a singular, universal truth. Consequently, when we argue for the validity of our personal experience, we often mistakenly believe we are arguing for the only real truth. It is difficult for the ego to accept that what we perceive is merely a byproduct of our conditioning. To accept our truth as relative would mean accepting that someone else’s conflicting experience could be equally valid.
Yet, realizing that infinite truths can coexist is the key to liberation. As the poet Walt Whitman declared:
“Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself, (I am large, I contain multitudes.)”
When we stop believing that our story is the "one true reality" and that dissenters must be converted, we find true freedom. We no longer need the world to agree with us to feel validated. We can let others’ realities exist alongside our own, accepting their experience as real for them. Our truth becomes just one thread in an infinite tapestry, allowing us to wear our own stories with a newfound lightness.
The Fear of the Unknown
Our cultural conditioning has taught us that the unknown is a threat. If the mind cannot "figure it out," we feel vulnerable and out of control. We are raised to believe that "I don’t know" is a failure rather than a doorway.
“Be patient toward all that is unresolved in your heart and try to love the questions themselves, like locked rooms and like books that are now written in a very foreign tongue.”
The rational narrative insists we should understand everything. If we can’t, we feel we have failed. Our inner narrator is so uncomfortable with uncertainty that she will finagle facts and invent "why-stories" just to provide a sense of cohesion. We would often rather cling to a painful explanation than face the void of no explanation at all.
Waking from the Narrative Trance
The reality is that much of life—especially the complexity of human behavior—is unexplainable. Life is infinitely vaster and more mysterious than the intellect can decipher. By hanging onto the belief that everything has a rational "why," we grant our inner narrator permanent tenure over our lives.
Waking up from this "narrative trance" is about more than just noticing our personal stories; it is about examining the soil in which those stories grew. It is about recognizing the paradigms we’ve been fed and how they have shaped our definition of "truth."
As Carl Jung suggested:
“Your visions will become clear only when you can look into your own heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes.”
When we finally accept that reality is a changing perception filtered through lived experience, our entire system relaxes. The struggle to be "right" evaporates. We open ourselves to radically different, more fulfilling connections and, ultimately, to a profound sense of peace. At last, the struggle is over—everyone can be right, because everyone is living their own truth.
----
Note: This is NOT about religious and spiritual relativism. We believe באמונה שלימה that there is one truth and one truth alone - that השם אחד ושמו אחד, Torah Mi-Sinai etc. etc. All other religions and belief systems are unequivocally false [to varying degrees. Pure paganism is more false than Christianity and different streams of Christianity are more or less false].
This is about our own personal stories that we are constantly telling ourselves about everything we see and experience which most people conflate with Absolute Truth. It is not. It is just a story. Your story. One story among many. This doesn't mean that you have to negate your story. Just that we should all make room for alternative stories. This would solve must tension in both our personal lives and in Jewish society at large.
Parents Help Graduate Sound Out The Words On Diploma
TUCSON, AZ — Parents of high school graduate David Simpson helped their son sound out the words on his diploma after the teen expressed frustration at not being able to read the words on the piece of paper.
"Sound it out, sweetie," David's mom, Nancy, told her son. "H-I-G-H-S-C-H... yes, it's 'high school!' good job! You're doing so great."
Simpson told his friends he thought he'd eventually learn how to read in school, but his teachers mostly focused on how to be more gay and how to overthrow capitalism.
"In English class, my teacher mostly told us about how to protest Trump and what she thought about abortion laws," he said. "I thought maybe we'd go over phonics at some point, but... nope! Never."
Simpson's parents said they were proud of the progress their son has been making, but said they are a little concerned that he can't read.
"We helped him sound out all the words on his diploma, but we can't be with him in college, and I worry things are going to get harder for our little illiterate champ."
At publishing time, Simpson asked his parents to help him sound out the letters on the EXIT sign in the auditorium as he was having trouble leaving the graduation ceremony.
---
Not satire: At Dartmouth, for example, you can attend such courses such as -
Transnational Feminisms.
The Politics of Fashion.
Queer Visual Culture.
I personally, being a native Manhattanite, am considering going back to Columbia and majoring in "Black Feminist Theory: Exploring the intellectual tradition of Black women thinkers and their critiques of mainstream feminism and patriarchy."
Everyone In Chicago Shot Over The Weekend
CHICAGO, IL — The Chicago Police Department confirmed on Tuesday morning that every single resident of the city had been shot over the long holiday weekend.
According to officials, the shootings began on Friday evening and did not stop until 100 percent of the population had sustained at least one bullet wound. Hospital staff reported that waiting rooms were somewhat crowded as approximately 2.6 million people arrived at the same time to seek medical treatment.
"It was a busy few days," said police spokesperson Thomas Dewey while receiving medical treatment for a gunshot wound. "We generally expect a spike in activity during the warmer months, but the complete and total victimization of the entire municipal population was a bit higher than our internal projections."
City leaders noted that despite the massive injuries, public transit remained operational and municipal offices opened on time Tuesday morning. Residents were seen commuting to work with ice packs, slings, and various levels of bandages, ready to face the increased likelihood of being shot again.
At publishing time, Mayor Brandon Johnson urged citizens to remain calm and emphasized that the city was still entirely safe for tourism, provided visitors wear full body armor and avoid the corporate limits.
האם הצבא קדוש מעצם הגדרתו
עפ"י מכתב שראיתי לראש ישיבת הסדר:
לכבוד וכו' שליט"א,
שלום וברכה,
זכיתי לשמוע את שיעורו של הדר"ג .... לפרשת בהעלותך. ברשות הרב, ברצוני להעיר ולהקשות מעט על הדברים שנאמרו.
לעניות דעתי, קשה להחיל את הגדרת הרמב"ן – שהמחנה הצבאי הוא כ"מקדש השם" – על צה"ל בימינו. בצבא המקראי, ההנהגה הייתה בידי משה רבינו ויהשע, וההחלטות התקבלו על פי רוח הקודש וההלכה. יתרה מכך, מי שהיה "ירא מעבירות שבידו" היה חוזר מעורכי המלחמה, כך שהמחנה היה מורכב מאנשים קדושים בלבד.
כיום, הצבא מורכב מכלל ישראל על כל גווניו [וגם הרבה מאד גויים], ואינו מנוהל על פי חוקי התורה.
אם אכן נגדיר את המחנה כ"מקדש", הרי שהמציאות השוררת בו – שירות משותף של בנים ובנות, וקשיים רוחניים הגורמים לחיילים רבים לשנות את דרכם הדתית – הופכת לבעייתית שבעתיים. כפי ששמענו ממורנו הגאון הרב יעקב כ"ץ שליט"א, בעיות צניעות מסוימות בצבא הן בגדר "יהרג ואל יעבור". אוי ואבוי אם ב"מקדש" קיימות פרצות חמורות כל כך.
כתר"ה התבטא בחריפות שיש להימנע מקטרוג ולבלום את פינו מביקורת. אך אני תמה: האם אין זה תפקידנו דווקא לזעוק על הפרצות הללו מתוך דאגה ורצון לתיקון? האם השתיקה אינה מחלישה את התביעה לקדושה בתוך המחנה?
אשמח להבהרת דעתו של הרב בעניין.
בכבוד רב ובהערכה כנה,
---- ---
Modern Orth-Reform
A big MO shul in Manhattan invited a Reform "rabbi" to speak on Shavuos.
Presumably his speech was not entitled "I don't believe Sinai ever happened but absolutely LOVE cheese cake".
Tuesday, May 26, 2026
A Problematic Beis Din And The Possible Motivation
There is an "Orthodox" "Beis Din" in NY which converts ALLLLLLL types. Gay [are homosexuals really gay=happy?], lesbian, transgender and everything else. A commitment to Halacha is not required - as long as they don't say right before they dunk in the mikva that they reject mitzvos [which nobody is stupid enough to do].
Members of the "Beis Din" also conduct same sex "marriages".
Can one believe in Torah Mi-Sinai and marry men to each other who are going to be doing an aveirah from the Torah that mandates capital punishment?
So they deny Torah Mi-Sinai.
Are they kosher dayanim??
So the geirus is [according to most poskim] bogus [no kabbalas mitzvos] and the dayanim are bogus.
The head of the Beis Din presents himself as a savior of the Jewish people. He never mentions how many hundreds of thousands of dollars combined he makes for conducting these conversions. [There was an article in the New Yorker by a woman who was converted by this Beis Din, conducted in conjunction with a reform rabbi].
Why We Slander
At the conclusion of Parshas Beha’aloscha, we encounter the sobering story of Miriam speaking Lashon Hara (gossip) about her brother, Moshe. Even though Miriam’s intentions were ostensibly noble—she was concerned about the well-being of Moshe’s wife—the Torah is unyielding. Miriam is struck with tzaraas (a supernatural skin malady), and the Jewish people are commanded to remember this incident every single day.
This episode serves as the foundation for the laws of speech, but it also reveals a dark psychological phenomenon regarding how we perceive—and misperceive—the motives of others.
The Temple Treasury: A Study in Suspicion
A fascinating insight into the mechanics of gossip is found in the Mishna in Maseches Shekalim (Chapter 3). The Beis HaMikdash (Temple) maintained a vault for the Shekalim (coins used for sacrifices). The Halacha (law) was incredibly stringent regarding those who entered this vault to prevent even the slightest hint of embezzlement.
Workers could not wear garments with pockets, hems, or even shoes or Tefillin, lest they hide a coin inside. Most remarkably, they were required to speak the entire time they were inside; if they were talking, they couldn't be hiding a coin in their mouths!
The Mishna explains the reason: A person must be beyond reproach. If a worker later became poor, people might say, "He is being punished for stealing from the Temple." If he became wealthy, they might say, "He is spending the money he stole from the Temple." To avoid this, the Torah demands: “You shall be innocent before Hashem and before Israel” (Bamidbar 32:22).
The Malice of Mutually Exclusive Logic
The Perush HaKosev (in the Ein Yaakov) points out the staggering hypocrisy of the "suspicious observer."
If the observer decides the worker is a thief, he will use any data to prove it:
The worker is poor? "See! G-d is punishing him for his crimes."
The worker is rich? "See! He’s living off his stolen loot."
Logic would dictate that you cannot have it both ways. If poverty is a sign of Divine punishment for theft, then wealth should be a sign of Divine reward for honesty. Conversely, if wealth is the "fruit of the crime," then poverty should be proof of the worker's integrity—that he refused to take even a penny despite his need.
But the Baal Lashon Hara (the serial gossiper) does not care about logic. As the Perush HaKosev explains, the gossiper is so "warped and perverted" in his perception that he will use mutually exclusive theories just to ensure the target is always cast in a negative light. This is a game of: "Heads, you're wicked; tails, you're wicked."
Psychology: The "Horn Effect" and Confirmation Bias
Modern psychology has a name for this "warped" logic: The Horn Effect. This is a cognitive bias where our overall negative impression of a person causes us to interpret all their specific traits and actions negatively.
Once we decide someone is "the villain," our brains engage in Motivated Reasoning. We are no longer objective observers; we are "prosecutors" looking for a conviction.
Confirmation Bias: We only "see" the evidence that supports our negative view and ignore everything else.
The Fundamental Attribution Error: If we see someone we dislike succeed, we attribute it to "cheating" or "luck." If we see them fail, we attribute it to their "bad character."
In the book The Righteous Mind, it describes the mind as a "lawyer" defending the "client" (our emotions). If our emotion is "I dislike this person," our inner lawyer will twist any fact—rich or poor, silent or loud—to win the case against them.
The Passion of Slander
The Steipler Gaon notes that a person can become "passionately invested" in speaking slanderously. When passion enters the room, logic exits. This is why the Baal Lashon Hara doesn't feel the contradiction in his words. His goal isn't truth; it is the "hit" of dopamine that comes from feeling superior by demeaning another.
As Bernard Meltzer famously said: "Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it kind, is it necessary, is it true, and does it improve upon the silence?" The gossiper fails all four tests because they have replaced "Truth" with "Agenda."
Conclusion: Remembering Miriam
Why must we remember the story of Miriam every day? Perhaps it is because we are all prone to this psychological trap. Miriam was a prophetess and a righteous woman, yet even she fell into the trap of misinterpreting Moshe’s motives.
If it could happen to her, how much more so can it happen to us? We must constantly audit our thoughts: Are we judging someone based on facts, or are we bending the facts to fit a "Horn Effect" we’ve already created?
The lesson of the Temple treasury and the end of Beha’aloscha is the same: True integrity means being "clean before G-d and man," but true wisdom means realizing that if we want to find fault in others, our warped logic will always find a way—unless we choose the path of Dan L'Kaf Zechus (judging others favorably). To be a person of truth, one must first be a person who refuses to let their "inner lawyer" prosecute their neighbor.
Tranquility
In the center of Parshas Beha’aloscha, surrounded by special inverted Hebrew letters (nuns), we find two of the most famous verses in the Torah. These verses, which we recite every time we open and close the Ark, represent Moshe Rabbeinu’s prayers for the traveling nation:
“When the Ark would journey, Moses said, ‘Arise, Hashem, and let Your enemies be scattered...’ And when it rested, he would say ‘Reside tranquilly, Hashem, among the myriads and thousands of Israel’” (Bamidbar 10:35-36).
The prayer for the journey is intuitive. When a nation travels through a desert, they are vulnerable to external threats—the "enemies" and "those who hate You." But the prayer for the resting of the Ark contains a linguistic and psychological depth that speaks directly to the human condition.
The Linguistic Shift: From "Return" to "Tranquility"
Most translations, including the Targum and Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, translate the word Shuva as "Return." It makes sense: we have been traveling; now, Hashem, please return to Your resting place.
However, Rashi, citing the 10th-century grammarian Menachem ben Saruk, offers a different interpretation. He links Shuva to the word Nachas (calm/rest), as in the verse in Yeshayahu (30:15): "In tranquility and calm (shuva v’nachas) you shall be saved."
According to this view, Moshe wasn't asking G-d to "return"; he was asking G-d to grant the people Tranquility.
The Danger of the Idyllic: The Psychology of Idleness
Why did a nation camping in a secure, divinely protected environment need a specific prayer for tranquility? They had no taxes, no bills, no traffic, and no grocery shopping. The Manna fell at their door, and their clothes grew with them. It was a "utopian" existence.
The answer lies in a profound psychological truth: Human beings are often most dangerous to themselves when they have nothing to do.
Modern psychology refers to this as the "Existential Vacuum." Viktor Frankl, the father of Logotherapy, observed that when people lack a sense of purpose or a structured task, they often fall into a state of "abysmal boredom." This boredom is not passive; it is highly volatile. Frankl noted that this vacuum often leads to aggression, depression, and addiction.
When the Jews were traveling, they had a "mission." They had an external focus—getting to the next stop and watching for enemies. But when they rested, the external focus vanished. In the absence of a "struggle," the mind begins to eat itself.
The "Sunday Neurosis" and the Vacation Paradox
Frankl coined the term "Sunday Neurosis" to describe the depression that afflicts people who, after a busy week, realize the emptiness of their lives when the weekend arrives and they have no "to-do" list.
We see this in the modern phenomenon of vacations and retirement. Many people find that vacations are surprisingly stressful. Without the "scaffolding" of a daily schedule, small irritations with a spouse or children become magnified. 17th-century philosopher Blaise Pascal famously captured this: "All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone."
If we aren't "busy," we become "jumpy." Research on "Dread of Idleness" suggests that humans are hardwired to stay active. When we aren't active, our brains often default to "ruminative thinking"—focusing on perceived slights, old grudges, and petty complaints.
Retirement and the Loss of Structure
The transition to retirement is a classic example. Many people work their whole lives for the "rest" of retirement, only to find that their physical and mental health deteriorates once they reach it. Without the "front door" of an obligation, the "back door" of depression opens.
The Avos D’Rabbi Nassan stated this centuries ago: "If a person has nothing to do and he sits around idly, he becomes depressed... and ultimately leaves this world."
For the Jewish person, the solution to the "retirement trap" is the transition from Work to Learning. The Daf Yomi or a daily Halacha seder isn't just a spiritual activity; it is a psychological necessity. It provides the "Flow State" (as described by psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi)—a state of intense focus that provides the "tranquility" Moshe was praying for.
The Prayer for Internal Peace
When Moshe prayed Shuva Hashem Rivevos Alfei Yisrael, he was essentially asking for G-d to help the people manage their leisure. He was saying: "Hashem, now that we are resting and the external enemies are gone, please help us not to become our own enemies. Grant us the inner serenity (mirgo-ah) to live with one another in peace, even when we have nothing to do."
This is the ultimate "Measure of a Man." Can you handle rest? Can you find meaning when there is no crisis to solve?
Conclusion
Moshe understood that "peace" is not merely the absence of war; it is the presence of internal harmony. The greatest challenge for the "myriads of Israel" was not the desert heat or the Amalekite sword; it was the restless human heart.
As we close the Ark and say Shuva Hashem, we are asking for more than just a divine presence. We are asking for the wisdom to fill our "rest" with purpose, our "vacations" with growth, and our "leisure" with the tranquility that only comes from a soul at peace with itself.
The Measure Of Man
In Parshas Beha’aloscha, a profound psychological theme emerges regarding the nature of human desire and the source of our emotional distress. While the Parsha covers diverse topics—the Menorah, the offerings of the Princes, the "Second Passover," and the complainers in the desert—they are all linked by a single question: What is the "Measure of a Man"?
1. The Psychology of the "Patur" (The Exemption)
In Chapter 9, we meet a group of individuals who were ritually impure (tameh) due to contact with a corpse and therefore could not bring the Paschal lamb. Legally, they were patur—exempt. In most areas of life, an exemption is a relief. If a person is told they are exempt from a tax or a difficult chore, they usually react with joy.
Yet, these individuals approached Moshe with a cry of "Lama Nigara?"—"Why should we be deprived?" (Bamidbar 9:7).
The Sifrei describes them as Charedim—those who "tremble" to perform commandments. In modern psychology, this represents a shift from Extrinsic Motivation (doing something because you have to) to Intrinsic Motivation (doing something because it is core to your identity). To these men, the Mitzvah was not a "burden" to be discharged, but a "resource" to be consumed. They didn't see an exemption; they saw a deprivation.
2. The "Front Door" vs. "The Back Door"
The Gemara in Berachos (35b) contrasts the "earlier generations" with the "later generations." The earlier generations brought their produce in through the "front door" to ensure they would be obligated in tithes (Ma’aser). The later generations brought their produce in through the "back door" or via loopholes to remain exempt.
From a behavioral perspective, this describes a person’s Regulatory Focus.
Prevention Focus: The "later generations" were trying to avoid "loss" (giving away their grain). They looked for loopholes to minimize their obligations.
Promotion Focus: The "earlier generations" were seeking "gain" (spiritual connection). They purposely triggered the obligation because they saw the Mitzvah as an opportunity for growth.
As Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky notes, the "Measure of a Man" is found in whether he is looking for a way in or a way out.
3. Emotional Data: What Makes You Sad?
This theme continues at the beginning of the Parsha. Rashi explains that Aaron HaKohen became "depressed" (chalsha da’ato) when he saw the twelve Princes of the Tribes bringing their dedication offerings while he was not included.
Winston Churchill once famously remarked, "It is the measure of a man—what makes him angry." We can extend this to: "It is the measure of a man—what makes him depressed."
In clinical psychology, our emotions are "data." They tell us what we value.
If a person is depressed for a week because their favorite sports team lost, it reveals where their heart is invested.
If a person loses sleep over a dip in the stock market but feels no sting when they miss a chance to help a neighbor or learn Torah, it reveals their Value Hierarchy.
Aaron was not jealous of the Princes’ honor; he was grieving a missed opportunity for service. His "depression" was a testimony to his righteousness. He didn't say, "Great, I have less work to do today." He felt a void where a Mitzvah should have been.
4. Displacement of Despair: Onions vs. Meaning
Contrast Aaron and the "Why should we be deprived?" group with the Misonenim (the complainers) later in the Parsha. They, too, were depressed. They sat at the entrances of their tents and wept. But what were they weeping about? Cucumbers, watermelons, and onions.
Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs suggests that as humans evolve, they move from physiological needs (food, water) to self-actualization and transcendence. The Misonenim were regressing. Despite having the manna—a spiritual food—they were stuck in "Bottom-Tier" thinking.
When we look at these two groups side-by-side, the contrast is stark:
The Righteous: Depressed because they cannot perform a spiritual service.
The Complainers: Depressed because they must perform a spiritual service and miss the physical "spices" of Egypt.
5. Introspection: Auditing Our Sadness
Psychologist Viktor Frankl, in Man’s Search for Meaning, argued that humans are not driven by pleasure (the "onions"), but by the "will to meaning." However, when a person lacks a sense of meaning, they fill the void with "hedonic" complaints.
We must ask ourselves: What triggers my emotional reactions?
When we find a "loophole" that allows us to skip a responsibility, is our first reaction "Phew, I’m free," or "Lama Nigara—what am I missing out on?"
What has the power to ruin our day? Is it a petty slight, a material loss, or a missed opportunity to be our best selves?
Conclusion
The "Measure of a Man" in Parshas Beha’aloscha is defined by his Emotional Gravity. Aaron and the carriers of Yosef’s coffin had their hearts pulled upward; they were pained by spiritual distance. The complainers had their hearts pulled downward; they were pained by physical "deprivation."
The Torah is teaching us that "Patur is not always Patur." Technically, you might be exempt. But if you truly value the relationship with the Divine, an exemption feels like an exclusion. The goal of Jewish life is to reach the level of the "earlier generations"—to walk through the front door, seeking every opportunity to be obligated, to be involved, and to be present.
It Wasn't Just About The Onions
In Parshas Beha’aloscha, we encounter the episode of the Misonenim—the complainers (Bamidbar 11). Despite being sustained by the miraculous manna, the Jewish people began to weep, longing for the "delicacies" of Egypt: the fish, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic. They lamented, “Now our soul is parched; there is nothing but this manna before our eyes.”
It is a classic case of “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” Even today, Jewish life often seems to revolve around the quality of the catering! However, the Torah describes a scene far more dramatic than a mere culinary preference. The verse (11:10) notes that Moshe heard the people weeping “l’mishpachosem”—by their families—at the entrances of their tents.
Rashi, citing the Sifrei, notes that they weren't just crying privately; they gathered in public "family cry-ins" to broadcast their grievances. More provocatively, the Sifrei suggests that l’mishpachosem implies they were crying "concerning family matters"—specifically, the newly legislated laws of Arayos (forbidden sexual relationships).
According to this Rabbinic tradition, the main complaint wasn't about onions; it was about the restriction of their impulses. They said “onions,” but they meant “liberty.”
The Psychology of Displacement
Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky, in his Emes L’Yaakov, asks a fundamental question: How can Chazal depart so radically from the peshat (simple meaning) of the text? If the Torah says they wanted garlic, why do the Rabbis insist they wanted forbidden relationships?
The answer lies in what modern psychology calls Displacement. Sigmund Freud defined displacement as an unconscious defense mechanism whereby the mind substitutes either a new aim or a new object for goals felt in their original form to be dangerous or unacceptable.
When the Jewish people received the Torah, their entire social and moral fabric was restructured. The "freedom" of Egypt—which, though physically oppressive, was morally lawless—was replaced by a disciplined system of sanctity. Admitting, "I am upset that I can no longer follow my carnal whims" is ego-dystonic; it makes a person feel small or unholy. It is much easier to displace that frustration onto the food. As the saying goes in clinical psychology: "If it’s hysterical, it’s historical." The over-the-top weeping over onions was a red flag that the "onions" were merely a screen for a deeper, more painful adjustment.
The Subconscious Agenda
Rav Yaakov points out that Chazal apply this "psychological lens" throughout the Torah:
The Spies (Shelach): When the Spies reported that the land "devours its inhabitants," the Zohar explains their true motive: they feared that entering Israel would mean the end of their leadership roles. They didn't realize they were lying; their fear of losing status triggered a Confirmation Bias, causing them to see only the threats and none of the beauty.
Lot’s Choice: When Lot chose to settle in the wicked city of Sodom, the text says he chose it because it was well-watered. Chazal, however, say he chose it because he was drawn to its immorality. Lot convinced himself it was a "business decision," but his subconscious was looking for an escape from Avraham's morality.
Rav Yaakov explains that Chazal possessed a profound "sensitive intuition" into human nature. They understood that the conscious mind is often just the tip of the iceberg. As Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman explores in Thinking, Fast and Slow, our "System 1" (intuitive, emotional) often makes decisions based on hidden biases, while "System 2" (rational) creates a narrative to justify them after the fact.
The Problem of "Negius" (Bias)
In Torah terminology, this is called Negius—personal interest or bias. When we are nogeah in a matter, our vision is biologically compromised.
Psychology calls this Motivated Reasoning. We do not see the world as it is; we see it as we need it to be to protect our ego. This creates a "Blind Spot." Just as a driver cannot see a car in the lane beside him without a mirror, a human being cannot see his own subconscious motives without an external perspective.
The Solution: The "External Mirror"
How do we protect ourselves from these blind spots? The Mishnah in Pirkei Avos (1:6) provides the clinical protocol: "Make for yourself a Rav (mentor) and acquire for yourself a Chaver (friend)."
In modern terms, this is the necessity of "Peer Review." We need someone—a mentor, a therapist, or a brutally honest friend—who stands outside our ego-system.
A Rav provides the objective standard, the wisdom of experience that can see through our rationalizations.
A Chaver is someone we "purchase" (koneh) through time and vulnerability. As the psychologist Carl Rogers emphasized, "unconditional positive regard" within a relationship allows a person to finally be honest with themselves.
A 'chaver' is not just a social acquaintance; they are the person to whom you can say "this is how I feel," and who can respond, "I hear you, but are you sure it’s really about the onions?"
Preserving the Relationship
The Mishnah concludes: "...and judge every person with the benefit of the doubt (le'kaf zechus)." This is the final piece of the psychological puzzle.
Inevitably, your Rav or your Chaver will disappoint you. They will miss your Simcha, they will say something insensitive, or they will be unavailable when you need them. The ego's immediate defense is to discard the relationship: "He’s not a real friend," or "He’s not a real Rebbe."
But the Torah warns us: Do not walk away. Because you are nogeah (biased) regarding your own feelings of hurt, you are disqualified from judging the relationship fairly. You must bend over backwards to find excuses for them, not because they are perfect, but because the relationship is your only lifeline to objectivity.
Conclusion
The complainers in the desert weren't hungry for onions; they were struggling with change. They lacked the self-awareness to realize their own "hidden agenda." By highlighting these episodes, Chazal are "banging the idea into our heads": You cannot fully trust your own perceptions.
To live a life of truth, we must invest in relationships that challenge us. We must find a Rav and a Chaver who can help us distinguish between our "onions" and our "Arayos," ensuring that our conscious actions align with our highest values.
Redifas Ha-ta'anugim
כתב הגר"א קוטלר זצ"ל [הקדמה 'משנת רבי אהרן' ח"ב] וז"ל כל רדיפת התענוגים אינה אלא להפיג את העצבות הבאה מתוך החושך של החומר.
This should be at the top of every ad in every magazine and newspaper.
Just to keep perspective.
Man Discovers Amazing New Weight Loss Method Of Crippling Stress And Anxiety
NEW BRITAIN, CT — Local tax preparer Frank MacArthur recently discovered an amazingly effective way to lose weight that makes simple use of crippling stress and anxiety.
MacArthur had already given up on shedding the 40 pounds his doctor told him to lose when he accidentally stumbled on the potent new weight loss system.
"The weight is just melting right off," said MacArthur as he sat consumed by the burden of his responsibilities. "There's something about spiraling into the depths of 24-hour tension and pressure that works like no other diet I've ever tried."
According to sources, MacArthur had already failed at numerous diets, including the Atkins diet, keto, paleo, the Mediterranean diet, intermittent fasting, the carnivore diet, veganism, and even a humiliating stint at Weight Watchers. After Ozempic caused too many side effects, he accidentally discovered the new soul-crushing weight loss system while working one of his 3 jobs.
"Everything I'm dealing with has really kicked my lack of appetite into gear," said the harried father of five. "Of course, I was already dabbling in crippling stress and anxiety, but the last couple of months of a jam-packed calendar and added obligations really got the pounds disappearing fast. I don't even feel like eating most of the time. Thanks, crippling stress and anxiety!"
At publishing time, MacArthur was within 20 pounds of his target weight, with his doctor recommending a stressful family vacation to burn off those last stubborn pounds.
Monday, May 25, 2026
סיפור מצמרר על קידוש לבנה
... ואם תשאלו אותי למה התעקשתי כל כך, ולמה היתה לי תשוקה כל כך גדולה לקיים מצות קידוש הלבנה עד כדי כך שחפשתיה במסירת נפש ממש וברכתי אותה לילה אחרי זמנה, אספר לכם סיפור שלא גיליתי אותו בפומבי עד כה.
לפני ארבעים וחמש שנה, בני הראשון יעקב משה (על שם זקני הגאון הצדיק זללה"ה) חלה נורא. מצאו סרטן בראשו, וכל הטיפולים והניתוח של רופא מפורסם כהכירורג המוכשר ביותר בעולם לא הועילו. אולם, מצאנו רופא צעיר מבאפלו, ניו יורק, מלא אמון בעצמו שהוא יכול להציל את בני. כמובן, הסכמנו לניתוח השני, אף על פי שהרופא הראשון, המפואר ביותר, התנגד בתקיפות לניתוח שני. לא היתה לנו ברירה!
הניתוח נעשה בין יום הכיפורים לחג הסוכות, ואני ואשתי עמדנו ע"י מטתו של בננו היקר. רגעים ספורים אחרי שיצאו הימים הראשונים של החג, בנינו הפסיק מלנשום. רופאים מכל פינת בית החולים מהרו בתכיפות לחדרנו ובקשו מאתנו לצאת והתחילו לעבוד עליו. אחרי חצי שעה, הרופאים יצאו עם פנים עצובות ואמרו לנו שהוא נפטר ואין עוד מה לעשות. אֵבֶל כבד ומר נפל עלינו. באותו רגע שקבלנו את השמועה הרעה, אחת מהאחיות הודיעה לי שיש לי טלפון. כשהרמתי, שמעתי את קול אבא זצ"ל שואל על שלום הבן. כאשר סיפרתי לו מתוך בכי מה שקרה, הוא לא בכה ולא הגיב כלל וכלל לדברי. הוא רק שאל אותי אם עוד קידשתי את הלבנה. חזרתי ואמרתי לו: "לפני רגע בני מת, נכדך החביב מת, ואתה שואל על קידוש לבנה? בין כך עבר זמנו!" הוא הרים את קולו וענה: "אם עוד לא קידשת את הלבנה, מהר צא מבית החולים, תמצא את הלבנה, ותקדש אותה!"
בית החולים היה מסובב בבניינים גבוהים שלא נתנו לראות את הרקיע במלואו. רצתי יותר ממיל (ט"ו-כ' דקות) עד שמצאתי את הלבנה, וקידשתי אותה ע"פ ציוויו של אבא. בחזרי, כשקרבתי לביה"ח ראיתי את אשתי – לפלא מראה שקט על פניה – הולכת בחוץ לקראתי ולוחשת "יעקב משה חזר לחיים – יעקב משה חי". כל הרופאים אמרו שאף פעם בחייהם לא ראו דבר כזה. אמנם, הם הזהירו אותנו שהוא עדיין חולה אנושי והסיכויים שיתרפא הם לא טובים. וכן היה, במוצאי שמחת תורה בני נפטר, בדיוק שבוע אחרי המאורע הנורא. מאז, כמדומני שלא עבר חודש אחד שלא קידשתי את הלבנה.
SHOCKING!!! UNCONFIRMED REPORTS FROM THE WHITE HOUSE SAY THAT NOBODY TRIED TO KILL TRUMP TODAY!
For a change....
But we have to be aware of a different type of assassin..
הנה בגמ' (סוכה שם) קודם מאמר משכהו לבהמ"ד אי' יצרו של אדם מתגבר עליו בכל יום כו' ואלמלא הקב"ה שעוזר לו אינו יכול לו. שנראה מזה שגם ע"י תורה אין עצה נגד יצה"ר רק בעזר השי"ת. והיינו מה שהיצ"ר מתגרה באדם מעצמו יותר ממה שנפקד שעל שם זה נקרא רשע כמו שדרשו זה ממש"נ צופה רשע לצדיק ומבקש המיתו והוא שברשעתו רוצה להכשיל את האדם ועל זה שנטבע מיצירה היצה"ר לפי ערך כל נפש ונפש. עז"א (קידושין ל:) בראתי יצה"ר ובראתי לו תורה תבלין. אבל מה שמוסיף היצה"ר מדיליה ע"ז אין בכח האדם לעמוד נגדו ואין הקב"ה בא בטרוניא וה' לא יעזבנו בידו שעוזר לו. רק לא לכל עוזר הקב"ה אלא למי שמצפה לזה והוא ע"י התפלה להשליך יהבו על ה'. ובזה יובן פתיחת רשב"נ אשא עיני אל ההורים כו' ואני לא נזם א'. ולכאורה מה ענין זל"ז לפי דרשתו אל ההורים למלפני כו' שהאבות נותנים בית והון אבל לא הרב. אמנם בא רשב"נ ללמד שבודאי לא הצטער על טובת עוה"ז רק הצטער על קטרוג היצה"ר בחלוקה השני' שלא יועיל לזה ד"ת כאמור. וע"ז מרמז למלפני שגם התורה שלמד מרבותיו שם ועבר לא הועיל לו ומאין יבא עזרי. והביא ראי' שעדיין לא אתפני יצה"ר מכל וכל שהרי הוצרך ליתן כל ממונו לאליפז כמ"ש במדרש. ומזה הרגיש יעקב שלא הועיל לו תורתו לרפאות את היצה"ר מכל וכל. שאם היה מועיל לא היה לו שום פחד מעשו וכמו שאמרנו שזה תלוי בזה ומה יהיה עוד תקותו להבא. וע"ז נתמרמר בנפשו מאד לשפוך שיחו לפני ה' כש"נ ויפגע במקום ואז"ל (ברכות כז:) שתיקן תפלת ערבית. והיינו שבחשכות הגדול שיהיה לכל נפש עד שאין לו שום עצה בעצמו עכ"ז ישליך בטחונו על ה'. וע"ז רמזו במד"ר לית אנא מוביד סברי מן בריי אלא עזרי מעם ה' עושה שמים וארץ היינו שסובל ומרחם על כל הנפשות מרום המעלה שנקראו שמים עד שפל המדרגה שמכונים ארץ. וע"ז דרשו ושכבת וערבה שנתך שנ' וישכב וגו' שבזה נתגלה לו שדבוק ומקושר בהשי"ת גם למעלה מן הדעת ושכל האדם בעת השינה שנסתלקו המוחין ועכ"ז והנה ה' נצב עליו. וע"ז רמז דהמע"ה שוא לכם משכימי קום וגו' אוכלי לחם העצבים. היינו שלפעמים אי עצה גם בעסק התורה נגד היצה"ר. שזה נקרא אוכלי לחם העצבים שעסק התורה שקרוי לחם יש בו ג"כ ערבוב היצה"ר שנקרא עצבון. וכמש"נ ביעבץ לבלתי עצבי שלא ישגבני יצה"ר מלשנות (כמ"ש תמורה טז.) כן יתן לידידו שנה שרק שמי שהוא ידיד ה' כשלמה בנו שנקרא ידידיה וה' אהבו הוא מדובק וקשור בהשי"ת למעלה מן הדעת גם בעת השינה. וזה המדרגה נתגלה ליעקב בחלום והנה ה' נצב עליו כאמור ועי"ז ושכבת וערבה שנתך: [פר"צ]
1. המאבק היומיומי והצורך בעזרת ה'
"הנה בגמ' (סוכה שם) קודם מאמר משכהו לבהמ"ד אי' יצרו של אדם מתגבר עליו בכל יום כו' ואלמלא הקב"ה שעוזר לו אינו יכול לו."
הסבר: הגמרא במסכת סוכה (נב, א) מציינת שלפני העצה הידועה "אם פגע בך מנוול זה (היצר) - משכהו לבית המדרש", נאמר משפט אחר: יצרו של אדם מתחזק נגדו בכל יום, וללא עזרה ישירה מאלוהים, האדם פשוט לא מסוגל לנצח אותו.
"שנראה מזה שגם ע"י תורה אין עצה נגד יצה"ר רק בעזר השי"ת."
הסבר: המחבר מסיק מכאן מסקנה מפתיעה: אפילו התורה לבדה אינה פתרון קסם. גם כשהאדם עוסק בתורה, הוא עדיין זקוק לעזרה אקטיבית מה' כדי לגבור על היצר.
2. שני סוגי יצר הרע
"והיינו מה שהיצ"ר מתגרה באדם מעצמו יותר ממה שנפקד שעל שם זה נקרא רשע כמו שדרשו זה ממש"נ צופה רשע לצדיק וגו'."
הסבר: המחבר מבחין בין שני סוגי יצר. יש יצר שהוא "טבעי" לאדם, ויש יצר שמתנהג ב"רשעות" – הוא מתגרה באדם באופן יזום ובלתי צפוי ("צופה רשע לצדיק ומבקש להמיתו"). זהו כוח רוחני שלילי שחורג מהטבע האנושי הרגיל.
"והוא שברשעתו רוצה להכשיל את האדם ועל זה שנטבע מיצירה היצה"ר לפי ערך כל נפש ונפש, עז"א (קידושין ל:) בראתי יצה"ר ובראתי לו תורה תבלין."
הסבר: על היצר ה"רגיל", זה שטבוע בנפש מצד הבריאה כחלק מהאישיות, נאמר בגמרא בקידושין שהתורה היא "תבלין" (תרופה) עבורו. כלומר, כנגד היצר הטבעי – לימוד התורה עוזר.
"אבל מה שמוסיף היצה"ר מדיליה ע"ז אין בכח האדם לעמוד נגדו ואין הקב"ה בא בטרוניא וה' לא יעזבנו בידו שעוזר לו."
הסבר: אבל נגד אותו "תוספת רשעות" של היצר (ההתגרות הבלתי פוסקת), האדם לא יכול לעמוד לבדו, גם לא עם התורה שלו. לכן ה' עוזר לו, כי ה' אינו בא בטרוניה (בטענות לא הוגנות) לבריותיו ולא מצפה מהם לנצח כוח שהוא מעל ליכולתם.
3. חשיבות התפילה (השלכת יהבו)
"רק לא לכל עוזר הקב"ה אלא למי שמצפה לזה והוא ע"י התפלה להשליך יהבו על ה'."
הסבר: העזרה האלוקית אינה אוטומטית. היא מגיעה למי שמכיר בחוסר האונים שלו ופונה לה' בתפילה, מתוך ביטחון והשלכת הגורל עליו.
4. יעקב אבינו והיציאה לחרן
"ובזה יובן פתיחת רשב"נ אשא עיני אל ההורים כו' ואני לא נזם א'. ולכאורה מה ענין זל"ז לפי דרשתו אל ההורים למלפני כו' שהאבות נותנים בית והון אבל לא הרב."
הסבר: המדרש (בראשית רבה) דורש את הפסוק "אשא עיני אל ההרים" כ"אשא עיני אל ההורים" (מלמדים/אבות). יעקב יוצא לדרך בלי רכוש (בניגוד לאליעזר עבד אברהם שהגיע עם נזמים וגמלים) ותוהה "מאין יבוא עזרי".
"אמנם בא רשב"נ ללמד שבודאי לא הצטער על טובת עוה"ז רק הצטער על קטרוג היצה"ר בחלוקה השני' שלא יועיל לזה ד"ת כאמור."
הסבר: יעקב לא הצטער על חסרון הכסף (טובת העולם הזה), אלא על כך שהוא עומד מול היצר הרע (המיוצג על ידי עשיו ולבן) מהסוג השני – זה שהתורה שלמד עד כה לא מספיקה כדי להכניע אותו.
"וע"ז מרמז למלפני שגם התורה שלמד מרבותיו שם ועבר לא הועיל לו ומאין יבא עזרי."
הסבר: "מאלף" (מלשון לימוד). יעקב מרגיש שאפילו 14 שנות הלימוד בבית המדרש של שם ועבר לא נתנו לו מענה למצוקה הרוחנית העמוקה מול היצר, ולכן שואל "מאין יבוא עזרי?".
"הביא ראי' שעדיין לא אתפני יצה"ר מכל וכל שהרי הוצרך ליתן כל ממונו לאליפז כמ"ש במדרש."
הסבר: ההוכחה של יעקב שהיצר עודנו שולט היא העובדה שאליפז (בן עשיו) שדד אותו. העובדה שהוא נשאר בחוסר כל העידה על מצב רוחני של חוסר הגנה.
"ומזה הרגיש יעקב שלא הועיל לו תורתו לרפאות את היצה"ר מכל וכל. שאם היה מועיל לא היה לו שום פחד מעשו וכמו שאמרנו שזה תלוי בזה ומה יהיה עוד תקותו להבא."
הסבר: יעקב הבין שהתורה שלו לא ריפאה את היצר לגמרי. לו היה מנצח את היצר המוסרי הפנימי, לא היה מפחד מעשיו הפיזי (כי עשיו החיצוני הוא השתקפות של היצר הפנימי).
5. תפילת ערבית – הביטחון בחשיכה
"וע"ז נתמרמר בנפשו מאד לשפוך שיחו לפני ה' כש"נ ויפגע במקום ואז"ל (ברכות כז:) שתיקן תפלת ערבית."
הסבר: מתוך הייאוש והמרירות, יעקב פונה לתפילה. "ויפגע במקום" – חז"ל אומרים שזו תפילת ערבית.
"והיינו שבחשכות הגדול שיהיה לכל נפש עד שאין לו שום עצה בעצמו עכ"ז ישליך בטחונו על ה'."
הסבר: תפילת ערבית מסמלת את ה"חושך" – המצבים בחיים שבהם לאדם אין שום עצה או דרך פעולה הגיונית. במצב כזה, כל מה שנשאר הוא להשליך את הביטחון על ה'.
"וע"ז רמזו במד"ר לית אנא מוביד סברי מן בריי אלא עזרי מעם ה' עושה שמים וארץ היינו שסובל ומרחם על כל הנפשות מרום המעלה שנקראו שמים עד שפל המדרגה שמכונים ארץ."
הסבר: המדרש אומר שיעקב אמר: "אינני מאבד את תקוותי (סברי) מבוראי". ה' עוזר גם למי שנמצא בשיא הרוחני ("שמים") וגם למי שנמצא בשפל המדרגה ("ארץ").
6. המדרגה שמעל הדעת (השינה)
"וע"ז דרשו ושכבת וערבה שנתך שנ' וישכב וגו' שבזה נתגלה לו שדבוק ומקושר בהשי"ת גם למעלה מן הדעת ושכל האדם בעת השינה שנסתלקו המוחין ועכ"ז והנה ה' נצב עליו."
הסבר: כשיעקב ישן, הוא גילה שהקשר שלו עם ה' קיים גם כשהשכל ("המוחין") לא פועל. בשינה האדם חסר אונים, ובכל זאת "הנה ה' ניצב עליו". זהו קשר שמעבר להישגים האינטלקטואליים של לימוד התורה.
"וע"ז רמז דהמע"ה שוא לכם משכימי קום וגו' אוכלי לחם העצבים."
הסבר: דוד המלך בתהילים אומר שזה חסר תועלת להשקיע מאמץ מטורף ("משכימי קום") מתוך עצבות וחרדה.
"היינו שלפעמים אי עצה גם בעסק התורה נגד היצה"ר. שזה נקרא אוכלי לחם העצבים שעסק התורה שקרוי לחם יש בו ג"כ ערבוב היצה"ר שנקרא עצבון."
הסבר: "לחם העצבים" רומז לתורה (שנקראת לחם) שנלמדת מתוך תחושת מועקה ומאבק בלתי פוסק ביצר (עצבון). לפעמים המאמץ השכלי בתורה לא מספיק כדי לנקות את הנפש מהיצר.
"וכמש"נ ביעבץ לבלתי עצבי שלא ישגבני יצה"ר מלשנות (כמ"ש תמורה טז.)"
הסבר: יעבץ התפלל שהיצר הרע לא יגרום לו לשכוח את תלמודו ("לבלתי עצבי").
"כן יתן לידידו שנה שרק שמי שהוא ידיד ה' כשלמה בנו שנקרא ידידיה וה' אהבו הוא מדובק וקשור בהשי"ת למעלה מן הדעת גם בעת השינה."
הסבר: הפסוק "כן יתן לידידו שנה" אומר שה' נותן את המתנות הרוחניות הגבוהות ביותר דווקא בזמן השינה, למי שהוא "ידיד ה'". זוהי דבקות שלא תלויה במאמץ אנושי אלא בחסד אלוקי.
"וזה המדרגה נתגלה ליעקב בחלום והנה ה' נצב עליו כאמור ועי"ז ושכבת וערבה שנתך:"
הסבר: המדרגה הזו – של הגנה אלוקית מוחלטת שאינה תלויה במעשי האדם אלא בביטחונו בה' – התגלתה ליעקב בחלום הסולם. בזכות ההבנה הזו, שנתו הפכה לערבה (מתוקה/רגועה), כי הוא שחרר את החרדה מהיצר וסמך על ה'.
The Conservative Movement Does "Teshuva" And Welcomes Gentiles Into The Movement
שורש פורה ראש ולענה. If there is a rotten root - everything that grows from it will be poison. It started off quite bad and has just gotten progressively worse and worse over the years. It just follows Reform. Encouraging intermarriage is really a poor strategy to "conserve" Judaism.
----
The Conservative movement is formally apologizing for decades of discouraging intermarriage and committing itself to a new approach centered on engagement.
The shift marks a significant change in tone for a movement that long treated intermarriage as a threat to Jewish continuity, even as its longstanding ban on clergy officiating at such weddings remains in place.
Leaders of the movement announced the shift in a report released Thursday by a working group representing the denomination’s three main arms: the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, the Rabbinical Assembly and the Cantors Assembly.
“For decades, our movement’s approach to families where one partner is Jewish and the other is not was rooted in disapproval and shaped by fears about Jewish continuity,” the leaders wrote in a statement accompanying the report. “But today — as we connect with countless families who want to learn, participate, and belong — we are committed to welcoming people as they are.”
In the report, the movement also accepted responsibility for the consequences of that approach.
“We acknowledge that our movement’s historical stance has resulted in hurt, alienation, and disconnection from our community. We deeply apologize,” the report said.
The report does not itself change binding policy. Instead, it asks the movement’s Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, or CJLS, to revisit how its rules are interpreted, while recommending new educational, pastoral and ritual approaches aimed at intermarried families.
“The idea that we could discourage people from intermarrying through disapproval — all that did was push people away who really should have been part of our communities,” Rabbi Jacob Blumenthal, the CEO of both the Rabbinical Assembly and United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, said in an interview.
The Conservative movement’s formal ban on officiating at interfaith weddings dates to a 1973 “standard of practice” adopted by the Rabbinical Assembly, which also barred clergy from speaking during such ceremonies. While the rule remains in effect, the report argues that it effectively froze conversation for decades even as intermarriage became widespread across American Jewish life.
“What we stated in 1973 obviously did not deter intermarriage. So moving forward, how do we really embrace these individuals” who are part of intermarried families? asked Shirley Davidoff, a member of the working group and vice president of USCJ’s board.
The ban has long been framed by the movement as a matter of Jewish law, or halacha, which traditionally understands marriage as a covenant between two Jews. While the Conservative movement has historically embraced the idea that halacha evolves over time, leaders have argued that officiating at interfaith weddings raises complex legal and ritual questions that go beyond concerns about continuity.
The report contends, however, that halacha itself contains “expansive, creative” resources for welcoming interfaith families.
“We believe that our halakhic process already contains the necessary ingredients to address the needs of our constituents,” the report said.
The report is the culmination of a nearly two-year process that included responses to a questionnaire from 1,200 people, listening sessions, focus groups and commissioned papers from scholars and rabbis. The 17-member working group included clergy and lay leaders from North America and Israel and operated by consensus rather than formal votes.
The new report builds on a 2024 clergy-led review that maintained the officiation ban but called for greater engagement with interfaith families, expanding that work into a movement-wide process that included lay leaders and focused on repairing trust and widening pathways into Jewish life.
In its section on marriage rituals, the report explicitly notes that there was not unanimity among members, a signal of persistent internal disagreement, particularly over whether and how Conservative clergy should participate in weddings between Jews and non-Jews.
The working group stops short of recommending an immediate end to the officiation ban. Instead, it asks the CJLS to clarify ambiguous terms such as “officiation” and “wedding,” and to consider whether rabbis might offer blessings or other forms of participation before or after a wedding ceremony.
The report arrives amid a broader rethinking of intermarriage in some corners of American Judaism. Reform and Reconstructionist movements have long permitted officiation, and individual Conservative congregations have increasingly tested the boundaries — including a high-profile case last year in Minnesota, where a Conservative synagogue announced it would allow clergy participation short of officiation. In a separate case, a rabbi left the movement rather than face possible expulsion following a complaint to his rabbinical association over his officiation at interfaith weddings.
Blumenthal declined to comment on any internal disciplinary reviews, emphasizing that the report is about setting direction, not enforcing compliance.
“What we hope,” he said, “is that rabbis and congregations will think more deeply about what it means to truly engage people who want to build Jewish lives.”
Rabbi Dan Horwitz of Congregation Beth Yeshurun in Houston is among those opposing a more permissive policy, warning that attitudes in the United States are generally less traditional than elsewhere in the movement.
“Given what I know about the Rabbinical Assembly as a whole, a change in policy would rupture the assembly — particularly among older members and those living in Israel or Latin America,” said Horwitz, who was not involved in the working group and did not have a chance to review its report prior to publication.
But Keren McGinity, who served as director of intermarriage engagement and inclusion at USCJ until her position was eliminated earlier this year, said fears of mass defection have long been overstated.
“I have heard the concern about the fracturing of the movement for years,” McGinity said. “It’s not that no one would leave, but generally speaking, when people make that threat, it’s often hyperbolic.”
While acknowledging deep divisions within the movement, McGinity said she was not convinced that lifting restrictions would fracture Conservative Judaism. Avoiding change, she added, also carries risks, pointing to the 2020 Pew study showing that fewer than half of Jews raised Conservative still identify with the movement. “That,” she said, “is hugely concerning.”
Despite inevitable disagreements over policy and pace, members of the working group said they hope the report itself will be seen as a sign of institutional seriousness and as a unifying moment for the movement.
“I hope people will feel proud that we’re having this conversation,” Davidoff said. “That we’re willing to pull back layers, listen carefully, and include people that want to build a Jewish home.”
Torah is Not a Mirror for Our Politics
I recently listened to an interview with a prominent "Modern Orthodox" rabbi in Israel—an individual bolstered by a massive platform and significant funding from those who share his distorted worldview. It was truly uncanny; nearly everything he uttered was the direct antithesis of authentic Torah values. He performed a sort of theological malpractice, superimposing progressive, postmodern ideologies onto the Divine. Rachmana Litzlan.
The Yam Shel Shlomo (Bava Kamma, 4:9) famously rules that to misrepresent the Torah—to lie about its fundamental truths—is a transgression of Ye'hareg v’al ya’avor. This is precisely what we are witnessing.
Among the "lowlights": he claimed that according to the Torah, a "faithful Christian" or a "faithful Muslim" earns a portion in Olam HaBa. Where is the source for such a claim? It simply does not exist. It is a sugary, universalist fantasy that suggests, "Don't worry, keep your holidays and your foreign prophets, and you are good to go." This flies in the face of the Rambam, who clarifies that while the "Righteous among the Nations" have a share in the World to Come, this refers specifically to those who accept the Seven Laws of Noah because G-d commanded them, not those who adhere to competing religious systems (Hilchos Melachim 8:11).
Another egregious moment: he condemned a soldier for smashing a statue of "Yoshke," claiming the act was "anti-Torah." On the contrary, the Torah explicitly commands us: "You shall utterly destroy all the places where the nations... served their gods... and break down their pillars" (Devarim 12:2-3). While we may refrain from such actions today to avoid legal repercussions or Eivah (animosity), to claim that the destruction of Avoda Zara is "against the Torah" is a total inversion of a Mitzvah d’Oraita.
A Dangerous Convergence: The SPLC, the ADL and the Reform Movement
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) was known by many as a charitable organization devoted to fighting hate groups, particularly those on the Far Right such as white supremacists and neo-Nazis. It was recently indicted for helping bankroll such groups. It allegedly did so as a fund-raising ploy, underwriting extremist activities which it then could cite in its mass mailings as shocking evidence of the organization’s need for more funding to counter those very activities.
If true, the damage done by the SPLC goes far beyond those covered in the indictment. The SPLC has always been virtually silent on the scourge of extremism coming from sources other than the Far Right - from, for example, the Red-Green alliance: the Far Left and Islamists. The SPLC’s systematically overstating the threats emanating from the Far Right has almost certainly served to further avert the public’s gaze from hate-filled assault on the nation emanating from other sources.
Sadly, other organizations supposedly committed to fighting hatred - while not funding Far Right hate groups to amplify their perceived importance, as the SPLC is accused of doing - have likewise focused on pernicious Far Right groups and downplayed other entities sowing hatred in America.
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which exists to fight ethnic, religious and racial hatred, particularly antisemitism, is a case in point. Three days after the October 7, 2023, massacre in Israel, the ADL released a report entitled “White Supremacist Leaders Applaud Hamas Violence Against Israelis,” documenting the celebratory spewings in online posts by several neo-Nazi and white supremacist leaders and groups. It offered no comparable reports on Islamists and leftists who, at the same time and in much greater numbers, were celebrating Hamas and vilifying Israel and Jews.
In subsequent months, the ADL’s online “Hate Symbols Database” offered 214 examples of symbols and the hate groups using them, all neo-Nazi, white racist and related groups. There were zero examples of antisemitic Islamist groups and their symbols then proliferating on campuses. As one observer noted in a televised report: “When the protests broke out at Columbia University and spread to campuses across the country, it was only natural for terrorist organizations to express their support. The flags, logos, signs, posters, patches, headbands and other paraphernalia of Hamas, Hezbollah and the [Popular] Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), are visible and have often gone viral on social media.” Likewise on prominent display on campuses but omitted from the ADL inventory of hate symbols were those exhibited by Far Left groups, such as stars of David crossed out or equated to swastikas.
Only belatedly, and when the displays of antisemitism from non-Far Right sources became too blatant and widespread for the ADL to continue ignoring, did it begin addressing seriously those sources.
Elements of Reform Judaism, including among its leadership, have been explicit in declaring their reluctance to call out Jew-hatred other than that of the Far Right. They have done so, for instance, in the context of the Reform Movement’s announcing several years ago its opposition to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism being codified in law. (As of November 1, 2024, forty-five nations had adopted the definition, including the United States, as well as thirty-seven state governments and ninety-six American county and city governments.) The Reform announcement particularly objected to elements of the IHRA definition related to Israel. Among the examples of attacks on Israel that the IHRA deems antisemitic are: “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” and “Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.”
Why would the Reform Movement oppose such attacks on Israel being labeled antisemitic? The Movement, in stating its opposition, refers to concerns about “potentially problematic punitive action to circumscribed speech, efforts which have been particularly aimed at college students and human rights activists.” In essence, it refuses to recognize as hateful a type of speech that typically comes from non-Far Right haters like “college students and human rights activists.” It further states that the IHRA definition’s Israel examples “must not divert attention from the more frequent manifestations of antisemitism, too often violent, emanating from new streams in the hate movements... streams primarily associated with the Far Right.”
While antisemitism from the Far Right has been growing, is dangerous and certainly shouldn’t be downplayed, it is simply untrue to assert Far Right Jew-hatred is responsible for “the more frequent manifestations of antisemitism.” This was an obviously absurd claim to any unbiased observer before October 7, 2023, and is even more obviously so today. Far Left antisemitism has penetrated much more into the American mainstream, achieving a deep and widespread presence in higher education as well as K-12 classrooms, in the media, among cultural elites, in unions, and even in the halls of Congress. Far Right Jew-hatred, however poisonous and dangerous and however much it may be gaining ground, remains comparatively marginalized. Yet those Reform leaders that embraced the critique of the IHRA definition, like the leaders of the ADL, have sought all too often to divert their constituents’ gaze from the hate emanating from sources other than the Far Right. In doing so, they, hardly less than the SPLC, have deceived and betrayed those they claim to be protecting.
The consequences of that betrayal cannot be overstated. One factor that has virtually always served to advance the spread of antisemitism has been that it is typically cost-free for its promoters. With American Jews lulled by major legacy communal institutions into complacency and inaction about the major contemporary drivers of antisemitism - an antisemitism that has become, perhaps most notably, a key shaper of today’s Democratic Party policies - the result is a dearth of pushback and an easing of the path for purveyors of that hatred. The scope of the resulting dangers should be obvious to all Americans, Jews and non-Jews alike.
Sunday, May 24, 2026
Why We Need to Take Love Seriously
We live in a time of contradiction. We have the technology to allow for extraordinary connection, yet people feel incredibly alone and isolated. We could have almost anything at our fingertips, yet we find ourselves frustrated or bored. We are living in the information age, yet our world is marked by mistrust and apathy. We use the word “love” all the time, yet the way we use it increasingly blurs what it actually means.
Part of the problem in how we use the word “love” is due to semantic inflation and a broader shift in our culture towards hyperbolic language, whereby stronger and stronger expressions are used to convey the same feeling because our everyday language has lost precision and weight.
For example, when asked how something was, “good” is no longer enough. We say it was “amazing!” At the end of every interview, people no longer say “thank you,” they say, “thank you so much!” Similarly, instead of just liking something, we say we “love” it. Today, if we don’t use the most intense form of description, we risk coming across as giving a slight critique.
However, when we use stronger and stronger expressions to convey the same sentiment, we flatten distinctions between thoughts, emotions, and experiences. If everything is “amazing,” it becomes harder to distinguish what is truly exceptional. If every idea is “genius,” it’s hard to know what to really consider. If we “love” everything—from people to products to passing experiences—loving slides into “liking a lot,” and the language we rely on to express deep commitment begins to lose its hold on us.
People may very well realize the conceptual difference between loving a turkey sandwich and loving their children, but the concept creep of “love” into “like” does have practical ramifications. To see why, it helps to step back for a moment and look at what happens when language shifts in other areas.
Philosopher Eve Kitsik argues that when harm-oriented categories broaden to include a wider range of phenomena, it is not necessarily true that people will lose the ability to understand the differences between subgroups of the now-expanded category. We can still tell the difference between, say, physical and psychological harm. Yet, the expanded category instructs people on how to direct their attention to the issue. She writes, “How we use terms like "sexual harassment" or "human rights" influences what problems we select for acting on (addressing), first as individuals, and thereby as communities."
Said differently, the words we use don’t describe reality—they guide what we notice and how we respond. Broadening a category will lead people to see a wider range of issues —even when they vary in degree—as worthy of attention and response. Limiting a category will lead people to give priority only to those more extreme cases.
The crucial point here is not about harm. It is the more general point that language use affects perception and action. This is where using “love” so broadly comes back into focus. When love comes to include our sandwiches and strangers’ outfits, we give and prioritize attention and action to a wider category of things, even when we still know the differences between them.
However, here the analogy between harm and love breaks in an important way that shows what is really at stake when we misuse the word, “love.” The difference between “love” and “like” isn’t a matter of degree in the way harm is. It’s a difference in kind. When you like something, you want to engage in that thing, be around it, keep talking about it, and so on. When you love someone or something, it’s not simply that you just want more or feel more. You invest yourself in the subject or object of your love, and this investment unfolds through how you speak, act, and show up over time, shaping your identity.
Love is other-directed. It involves attention, commitment, and a willingness to give (and sometimes sacrifice) for something or someone beyond any immediate gratification. Love asks something of us. Yet, when we say, “I love this” to mean “I like this a lot,” the focus changes from the relationship to one’s personal satisfaction. We go from commitment to consumption. In this way, semantic inflation may actually reinforce a change in how we love.
In a recent (albeit small) study, investigators discovered that “increases in expressing love led to increased feelings of being loved over time; however, increases in felt love did not lead to increases in expressing love." While there may be several ways to interpret why this is the case, one thing is for sure: For love, the more you give, the more you get, but not the other way around. Of course, this may not be true in every case. People do find themselves in one-sided or bad relationships, whether platonic or romantic, but let’s not assume bad relationships are the rule and good ones the exception.
When using “love” in an exaggerated way becomes our default for speaking, it subtly trains us to approach the world—including other people—in terms of what they provide for us. We become more selfish.
We also become lonelier, despite how many people and things we love in our lives. Loneliness is not simply the absence of people. It is often the absence of meaningful relationships—of being seen, understood, and valued. When loving relationships are framed by what people do for us, each person sees the relationship as lacking rather than imagining what they could be doing to strengthen it.
Reclaiming a richer understanding of love doesn’t require policing our language, but it does require us to recognize the difference between liking something because we enjoy it and loving something in a way that shapes how we live.
psych. today
Rejected as a Talmid, Welcomed as a Gadol
The Scene
Imagine the mahogany-lined office of a prestigious Dati Leumi Rosh Yeshiva. Across from him sits Binyamin Netanyahu, seeking enrollment. The interviewer looks over his glasses and begins the intake.
"Mr. Netanyahu, let’s talk basics. Do you observe the sanctity of the Shabbat?"
Netanyahu shrugs. "I have a state to run. The beach, the cigars, the phones—they don't stop for the sun setting."
"I see. And prayer? Do you stand before the Creator three times a day?"
"I stand before the cameras daily," he replies. "The Siddur? I haven’t opened one for anything other than a photo-op in decades."
"Dietary laws? Kashrut?"
"I’ve been known to enjoy a non-certified seafood platter in London and Paris. It’s a matter of taste, not Torah."
"And your home life? Does your wife observe the laws of Taharat HaMishpacha (Family Purity)?"
"She went to the Mikva once, before the wedding. We checked that box already."
The Rosh Yeshiva closes the folder with a sharp thud. "I’m sorry, Mr. Netanyahu. This is a house of Torah. We hold our students to the standards of the Shulchan Aruch. You are a public violator of the Covenant. Perhaps try a Baal Teshuva program where they have the patience for beginners—but here, you don't fit the uniform."
The Aftermath
Fast forward to Yom Ha’atzmaut. The same Yeshiva is draped in blue and white. The same Rosh Yeshiva stands at the entrance, bowing. As Netanyahu enters, the student body—the very boys who would be expelled for a fraction of his transgressions—burst into a deafening roar of "Yamim Al Yemei Melech Tosif."
They sing to him as if he were the Gadol Ha-Dor. They accord him Kavod Melachim while he continues to trample the very laws they spend all day and much of the night studying. The cognitive dissonance is deafening. How can a man deemed unfit to sit on a Yeshiva bench be treated as the sovereign of the Torah world? The laws of Tochacha (rebuke) vanish, replaced by a desperate need for political proximity. It is a jarring spectacle: a community that prides itself on the meticulous observance of Halakha bowing low to a man who lives his life in open defiance of it.
Massie Blames Defeat On Jews Of Rural Kentucky
LOUISVILLE, KY — Anti-Israel and anti-Zionist commentators from the far left, the far right and Middle Eastern groups lamented Republican Thomas Massie’s loss in a primary election this week.
Massie is one of the Republican Party’s only anti-Israel representatives.
“Thomas Massie’s primary defeat is the saddest political development in a long time,” far-right commentator Tucker Carlson says, accusing a “globalist lobby” of orchestrating Massie’s loss.
“Globalist” is sometimes a dog whistle for Jews and anti-Israel commentators fixate on the pro-Israel lobby in the US.
“Thomas Massie was the standalone, lone voice, and lone vote against funding Israel” in the party, says the far-left Hasan Piker.
“I don’t agree with Thomas Massie on 98% of issues,” he says, “and yet on this one issue he showed integrity and he was punished for it.”
The Palestinian Youth Movement says Massie “consistently opposed aid packages to Israel.”
“Consequently, the Zionist lobby spent record amounts of money to unseat Massie,” the group says. “Tuesday night’s results show us just how dangerous the Zionist lobby remains on the US political scene.”
The far left, the far right and Middle Eastern groups represent the three pillars of the anti-Zionist movement in the US.
The three movements agree on little besides their shared antipathy to Israel.
Massie has accused the Jewish population of rural Kentucky of being the cause of his primary defeat.
After taking the stage to concede the race to Ed Gallrein, an angry Massie squarely laid the blame for his loss on the "dirty Zionists" of the tiny country towns that dot the Ohio River valley.
"I couldn't reach Gallrein to concede. He was probably lost with his supporters in yet another small-town Kentucky synagogue," declared Massie. "Yes, the deck was stacked against me by the Hebrew population of rural Kentucky. We ran a great campaign, I'm really proud of our team. We just couldn't overcome the Hasidic powers that control the farm towns of Appalachia."
Watching as the votes were tallied, Massie's campaign manager Randy Barnes stated that the Congressman had performed well in a few areas, but could not overcome the losses in heavily-Jewish areas of backwoods Kentucky. "Those nudniks really put the kabash on us," sighed Barnes. "Despite Israeli influence over the little villages of Kentucky, we showed a lot of chutzpah out there on the campaign trail. Mazel tov to Ed on his victory."
The Art of Gathering: Is Your Shul Truly a Knesses?
It is a painful irony of our time: when a new face enters a Beis Shmad i.e. a missionary "Messianic" congregation, they are immediately enveloped in warmth, often greeted by a designated "welcome committee" whose sole job is to make them feel at home. Why? Because they want to shmad every person they can and a warm welcome will help him feel at home.
Yet, so often, when a new face appears in our own shuls, they are met with silence, or worse—ignored. We have all seen it and experienced it.
We must remember that a shul is called a Beis Knesses, not merely a Beis Tefilla. While it is a house of prayer, its essence is the Knesses—the gathering. It is the place where the Jewish people come together to form a community. If we do not connect with the Jew standing right next to us, have we truly gathered?
When we daven, our nusach is phrased in the plural. We don’t just daven for ourselves; we daven for the welfare of all Klal Yisroel. That stranger in the back row is the very person we are mentioning in our Shemoneh Esrei. It is a spiritual contradiction to plead for a fellow Jew’s well-being in our prayers and then ignore his presence. It would be a beautiful קידוש השם if our "gathering" lived up to its name.
Shul Hack: Explain To Everyone Stacking Chairs That You'd Love To Help, But Your Specific Chelek In This World Is Chizuk
Getting a little tired of the Gabbai giving some mussar about the middah of Zrizus and Nesiah B'ol and then staring pointedly at you to help fold the tables after the Kiddush? Consider telling everyone you have a "Neshama of Chizuk."
This simple Shul hack can get you out of stacking another chair for the rest of your life. Think of it like being a Mashpiah, except you can do it while wearing your hat and jacket and staying perfectly cool. Heck, you don’t even have to stay for the cleanup; you can just send a WhatsApp to the Shul group on Motzaei Shabbos: "Incredible job with the herring cleanup, Tzaddikim. I know the Schar for such Mesiras Nefesh is huge. Yasher Koach!"
It all goes back to the Mishkan. Did Aharon HaKohen stack chairs? No. He was a "Rodeph Shalom." He brought people together. That’s a fact. And the Torah never once mentions him folding a single metal chair or dragging a heavy rack into the storage closet. Yes, he did a lot of other stuff in the Kodesh HaKodashim, but he never once dealt with those annoying plastic chairs that pinch your fingers. That wasn't his avodah.
So, the next time the Gabbai tries to tell you that "we all need to pitch in for the community," just tell him he shouldn't impose his Chumras on your specific spiritual path. In fact, you can give him a warm smile and a "keep up the holy work" as he struggles with a stack of twelve. That’s your Chelek, after all. It’s an act of Chesed to ensure the workers feel appreciated.
It’s not like Yanky is so much more frum just because he’s sweating through his white shirt stacking chairs. He might get a "Thank You" in the announcements, but we are ultimately judged by our Kavana and not by how many chairs we fit on the dolly. Just keep on dishing out the Chizuk and the "Good Shabbos" wishes from the doorway. Your recognition will be in Olam HaBa.
From A Recent Shiur
רמט
אפילו אם התכונה של הדבקות האלהית בולעת הרבה מאד מהתכונה המדעית והמעשית, אין לשום על לב, כי הסגולה הפנינית של האורה העליונה היא שקולה כנגד הכל, והיא משלמת בעד כל המגרעות של כל הדברים שהם כולם למטה הימנה, כי היא היא התכונה המבוקשת של דעת אלהים הטהורה, המלאה חוסן וחיל, אשר כל סגולה לא תערך לעומתה.
רנ
עיקר תכונת היראה נאותה היא אל הכוחות הגופניים. השכל צריך להיות מתנוסס בזיו הדרו, בעז טהרת חופשו. ויש שטועים בני אדם לתן חופשה להגוף או להגביל את תכונת היראה הגופנית על השכל, ויצא על ידי זה משפט מעוקל, עד אשר תתכונן תכונת היראה והחופש, כל אחת מהן על מעמדה הראוי לה.
רנא
יסוד הכעס בא מצד חסרון היצירה הרוחנית. קיבוץ כחות רוחניים, העומדים לצאת אל הפועל בציור ובתפארת מובלט, דוחקים את הנשמה ומצערים אותה בקצפון פנימי. כל מלחמות גויים, וכל רצח ושוד שבבני אדם, עד כל רוגז שבבעלי חיים, מארס הנחש עד עקיצת קטן שברמשים, בכונה של היזק, בא מצד הכעס הכללי, האצור בעולם, שמצד עצור כח היצירה. וכל מה שהיצירה הרוחנית מתרחבת, כל מה שהפלגים של הדעה הרחבה מסתעפים בעזוז מרוצתם, כל מה שהתורה תתגדל ותתאדר, השלום מתרבה בעולם, אז יחזק במעוזי יעשה שלום לי, שלום יעשה לי.
רנב
כל יצירה אופית באה תמיד משני המקורות בבת אחת: ממקור הרום האצילי שבשורש הנשמה בחביון עזה, וממקור התכונה החמרית במאפלי הרגשותיה. אלה התהומות קוראים הם זה לזה באין הפסק, ועל ידי פגישת קויהם - אור החיים, אור היש, אור החכמה, אור השירה, אור ההויה יוצא ומבריק. והתכלת, הים, הרקיע ואבן הספיר מתאחדים בהוד יפעת גילוייהם לחדות גאולים, שיבאו לציון ברנה ושמחת עולם.
Saturday, May 23, 2026
The Text Studied In A Recent Shiur
רמו
שפעת רוח הקודש המיוחדת לישראל היא רוממה הרבה במעלתה ומיוחדת במינה מכל מיני שפע של רוח הקודש, שכל אחד מבאי עולם זוכה לו על פי מעשיו. השפעה הישראלית היא נמשכת מפנימיותה של תורה. וההבהקה של החכמה המעשית, בתורה, ובכל הליכות החיים הפנימיים והחיצוניים, הנוגעים למפעלים, והרגשות, הקרובים לחוג הפעולות, הנה גם כן יוצאת בדרך ישרה מאורה של תורה. ועצמיות כחה העליון של זוהר התורה היא משפיעה על שני אלה הסוגים הרוחניים העליונים, סוג הרזי של רוח הקודש, וסוג הגילויי של אור התורה, שבהגבלה ומפעל, כלאה וכרחל אשר בנו שתיהן את בית ישראל. ותמיד אנו קרואים לתקן את שתי ההופעות הללו, הכמוסה והגלויה, שתהיינה פונות באורח ישרה לקבל את שפעת בהירותן מתוך אור עולם של אוצר החיים אשר באור ד', החופף על הוד יסודה של תורת אלהים חיים.
רמז
שני אלפים תוהו קדמו בעולם, כדי להשריש את היראה הגסה בעולם, שהיא יראת העונש. ואח"כ נלקחה התמצית המתעדנת שלה ונשרשה ביסוד יראת ד', כשהיראה השפלה נשארה כמו דורדיא דחמרא, לחזק ולאמץ את כל היסוד של היראה העליונה, המקיימת את המילוי של כל העונג וכל האהבה של קודש.
רמח
כל העבודה, כל התורה, כל החכמה, כל המוסר, כל כונניות העולם כולם, הנם הכנות להעלות את העולם כולו ואת האדם בכללו למעלת הדבקות האלהית. על כן האדם שהוא חש בקרבו נטיה תמידית ועצומה להדבקות האלהית, צריך שידע את תכונתו, ושיקר בעיניו ערכו, ולא יפחות את מעלתו בעסקים אחרים, כ"א ילך בדרכו ועל ד' יתענג, ובאור הדבקות האלהית ידבק ויתאזר. ואל יפחד ואל יבהל מכל מפריע, וידע כי ערך הרעיון ועומק הרגש האלהי המאיר שבקרבו הוא אוצר יקר בעדו ובעד העולם כולו, ויגיל וישמח במתת חבלו, וידע כי הוא ממלא תמיד את כל העולם כולו חסד, ומכריע את הכל לכף זכות. וישמר את ארחותיו, ויעריך יפה את רוממות הערך של כל הגיוניו, ואת כל מוצא שפתיו, כי הכל הוא אחוז באיתן קודש הקדשים. וידע כי הפלא ד' חסיד לו, ועטרת הענוה תהיה תמיד על ראשו מעוטרת בזר שמחת עולמים.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
