~ Something to Think About ~
בשלח פרשת
Parsha Stumpers
By: Daniel Listhaus
- How could
Hashem use ba'al-tzefon as a reference point if it is an avodah
zarrah?
- Rashi (14:15) writes that because of zechus
avos and B'nei Yisroel's belief in Hashem after leaving
Mitzrayim, they merited to have kriyas Yam Suf. How
do zechusim work? Certainly zechus avos could not have been
exhausted at that point that they would have to utilize the zechus
of their emunah, because zechus avos is something we still
depend on today. So how do zechusim get calculated to figure out
what different zechusim could do, how much power they have, and to
what extent they could be used in various circumstances?
- (15:15 – Rashi) What is so significant and great
about recognizing that Hashem was able to kill the horse with its rider?
- The Rambam writes that it is assur to attribute
any physical characteristics to Hashem. Yet, we find that the Torah does
so a number of times in this week's parsha. What are these references and
how could we understand them?
- There is a concept that for Tzadikim, Hashem uses
added punishments in this world in order to better reward in the next
world. Similarly, for reshaim, Hashem increases reward in this world in
order to give far worse punishment in gehenem. However, in this
week's parsha, Rashi (16:5) points out the not-as-bad mitzriyim had a
relatively quick death in the yam suf – as they drowned like a stone in
water; while the reshaim gamurim were tossed around like straw – suffering
a long painful death. Shouldn't it have been the other way around?
- There is a concept of zechus avos where a nation
merits things because of its forefathers – for example, Avraham, yitzchak,
and Yaakov, By goyim, we see the exact opposite by Moav, Amori, Mitzriyim,
and Amalek, where their descendents got punished based on the errors and
sins of their forefathers. How could we understand this general concept
why a whole nation should be rewarded of suffer based on what its
ancestors accomplished or did?
- Were preparations needed for the manna or
not?
- (17:12) Rashi writes that Moshe's hands became
heavy because he erred by not going to battle with klal yisroel against
Amalek. What was his calculation why he didn't? And why was he wrong?
- (16:20) The Torah refers to two “anashim”
(men) who left over from the manna. Rashi explains that the Torah
is referring to Dasan nd Aviram. Why does the Torah call them “anashim”,
which is a term reserved for tzadikim? (For example, see Parshas
Shelach by the meraglim when Moshe picked them out)
- (17:8) Rashi implies that Amalek coming to attach
B'nei Yisroel was no accident, it was deliberate from Hashem because B’nei
Yisroel had become lax in their belief. If so, what did Amalek do
wrong?
- (17:9) Rashi asks how do we
know that a Talmid (student) must fear his rebbe like Hashem, and answers
from a passuk where Yehushua said to Moshe: “My master, Moshe, make
an end to them...” where we see that Yehoshua felt that those who rebelled
against Moshe should be punished by death because it is as if the rebelled
against Hashem Himself. If Rashi holds that this is a good answer to his
question ,then what does Rashi do with the following: The Gemara Kiddushin
(57a) mentions that Shimon (or Nechemiah) Ha'amunsi gave an explanation
for what every “es” in the Torah was coming to teach. When he came to “es
Hashem Elokecha tirah” - and Hashem your G-d you shall fear. He
stopped because how could the “es” in that passuk be coming to
include fear for anyone on the same level as Hashem? However, the Gemara
continues that when Rabbi
Akiva came along, he resolved it by explaining that it is coming to
include talmidei chochomim who teach the derech ha'torah. It
is just as important to fear them because they are representing and
advocating Hashem's Torah. However, if this is something that Rashi in our
parsha already knows from a different passuk, then this “es”
should be re-opened and therefore no “es” could be used to learn
things out from to include?
- (17:9) Rashi [in his second explanation] writes
that Yehoshua needed to select men for battle who would be able to
“neutralize the sorcery of Amalek”. What would constitute such
qualifications? We would probably
think that it would simply mean people who fear Hashem, but that cannot be
because that is what Rashi explains in his first explanation.
No comments:
Post a Comment