Parshas Nasso - Parsha Stumpers

~ Something to Think About ~

פרשת נשא

Parsha Stumpers

By: Daniel Listhaus

1. Why is the parsha of sotah so serious that based on suspicion we give her to drink from the bitter waters to determine whether she is guilty? We do not find this by other aveiros. For example, one who we suspect killed someone else, there is no potion to give him to determine his guilt, rather he is innocent until 2 witnesses come and go through the long process of demonstrating that their story is true and that the man is guilty?

2. Rashi (7:11) writes that Moshe did not know which order the n'si'im should bring their offerings: if it should be in age-order or in order of their travels. Why was Moshe unsure though, Hashem had not yet commanded Moshe the order of their travels so that should not have even been an option?

3. Why does the Torah repeat each karbon brought for each of the nasi'im? They are exactly the same! Why not just write it once and say that this is what each nasi brought?

4. The karbanos that the nasi'im brought consisted of a young bull, one ram, one sheep, and one he-goat. Rashi writes that the bull corresponds to Avraham, the ram corresponds to Yitzchak, and the sheep corresponds to Yaakov. The he-goat is to atone for the selling of Yosef.

a. What place does the goat for the atonement of Yosef have here?

b. Not all the shevatim were involved in the sale of Yosef – and certainly not Ephraim and Menashe who themselves come from Yosef? So Why was this a universal karbon for all the nasi'im?

5. Rashi (7:85) learns from the passuk that all the implements in the Beis Hamikdash were precise in their weight such as whether one would weigh them one by one or weigh them all together he would never find a discrepancy. What is Rashi coming to teach us? Obviously the collective sum of all the weights will always equal taking each weight separately and adding them together?

         

Parshas Bamidbar - Parsha Stumpers

~ Something to Think About ~

 במדבר פרשת 

Parsha Stumpers

By: Daniel Listhaus

1. Rashi (1:2) writes that the way Moshe counted B'nei Yisroel was through collecting a half-shekel per person. Why did he have count them like this?

2. The passuk tells us that the people had to establish their genealogy according to their families. Rashi explains that they each brought documents of lineage and witnesses of their birth in order to precisely trace each one's ancestry. Why was this necessary? Why not just believe them in the first place?

3. What is the significance of a flag?

4. (5:1) Rashi notes that the passuk refers to Elazar and Isamar as the children of Aharon and Moshe – Aharon because he was their biological father, and Moshe because he was their rebbe. However, in the following passuk (3:2) it repeats and only calls them the sons of Aharon.

ñ  Why should being someone's rebbe make one considered his father?

ñ  Why is the passuk switching in the next passuk to just call them the sons of Aharon?

5. (3:16) When it came to counting shevet Levi, Rashi (2:16) comments that Moshe did not know what to do. He said, “How can I enter the tents to know the number of their nursing infants?” Hashem replied, “You go outside the tent and I will let you know the number of who is in which tent.”

ñ  If Hashem was going to tell him through a bas-kol how many were in each tent, why did Moshe have to go up to the tents to begin with?

ñ  Why did this only first become an issue when it came to counting shevet Levi?

6. When it came to counting B'nei Yisroel, the Torah tells us that only those that were at least 20 years old were counted whereas at the end of the parsha when it came to counting shevet Kehas, they were counted starting at 30. Rashi in each place comments based on the words the Torah uses to describe the specific ages that we learn from here that the age of going out to war is 20, and the age of strength is 30. What is the significance of this and why were they counted based on these two different scales?                                                                                   

7. Why do we eat dairy on Shavuos?

Parshas Bechukosai - Parsha Stumpers

~ Something to Think About ~

בחקותי פרשת 

Parsha Stumpers

By: Daniel Listhaus

1. If the highest level of avodas Hashem is doing mitzvos lishmah, then why is it that in this pasha the Torah tells us that if “bechukosai teileichu”…then Hashem will give rain…?
2. Once the Torah did in fact choose to describe the rewards of those who walk in the way of Hashem, why choose the “minor leagues” of the rewards of this world as opposed to the major league rewards of Olam Haba’ah?

Parshas Kedoshim - Parsha Stumpers

~ Something to Think About ~

פרשת קדושים

Parsha Stumpers

By: Daniel Listhaus

1. What does it mean to be kedoshim? The Gemara in kiddushin describes that the rabbanan termed the hebrew word for engagement as “Kiddushin” because essentially by marrying a wife you are making her “assur to everyone else just like hekdesh”. What is the root of what it means to be a kadosh?

2. Parshas Kedoshim contains many mitzvos – within these the eseres hadibros are present. Some of them are straight out and some of them are alluded to. Where?

3. The passuk (19:17) says tjhat there is a mitzva to give others mussar...'and you should not bear a sin because of him'. What does this mean?

4. Why is 'v'ahavta l'reiacha kamocha' a 'zeh k'lal gadol ba'Torah?

5. The passuk (20:3), when describing prohibition of giving children over to molech (a certain form of avodah zarrah), says that Hashem will direct his face upon them and cut them off from their people. Rashi explains further that Hashem will turn aside, so to speak, from all his other concerns to deal with this person...

        a. Why does the Torah use this expression here more than other times in           chumash?

        b. The passuk in Acharei Mos 17:10 uses the same expression regarding eating   blood and Rashi explains it the same way? What is the connection?

6. Rashi (19:4) comes to explain that not only is one forbidden to make his own idols, one is also forbidden to worship the idols that someone else gives him. What is Rashi adding? If I can't make my own idols then why would I think someone else could give me idols and that would be fine for me to worship? Furthermore, our parsha contains two concepts which would counter such a mistake anyway: that of lifnei iver and divrei harav v'divrei hatalmud l'divrei mi shomim (see rashi by kibud av v'eim)?

7. A similar question as the one above could also be asked regarding molech. Rashi (20:3) comments that one might think that even though one cannot offer his child to molech avodah zarah, but perhaps one would think it is permitted to give over a  grandchild. Why would someone make such a drastic mistake to think that? Would someone really think that although one cannot sacrifice a child for avodah zarrah that it would be permitted to sacrifice a grandchild?

8. The passuk (19:14) says that one may not curse a deaf person. Rashi is bothered why the passuk limits this to only cursing deaf people and goes on to say that there is a different source to teach us not to curse anyone (based on shemos 22:27). Why isn't this a kal v'chomeir, though? After all, if one is not allowed to curse someone who cannot hear them, then certainly if that person could hear you which would cause even more conflict and strife?

9. The passuk (19:15) commands us to judge our friends favorably, yet there is another concept of v'hiyisem n'kiyim – that each individual has the responsibility to be “clean” in the eyes if his peers. Where does the line get drawn between these two ideas? Also, how far, in general, must one go when it comes to being dan l'kaf zechus?

10. The passuk  (19:26) states the issur of practicing divination and believing in “lucky times”. Where does the line get drawn between not making up superstitions versus listening to the messages that Hashem is trying to communicate to us?

11. Rashi (19:32) describes that displaying honor to an elder is accomplished by not sitting in his place, not speaking in his place, and not contradicting him. Interestingly, these were the same examples Rashi (19:3) used regarding acting towards one parents – but there Rashi gave them as the examples of fear of ones parents as opposed to the other examples chosen to illustrate honor to one's parents. Why the difference?

Parshas Acharei Mos - Parsha Stumpers

~ Something to Think About ~

 אחרי-מות פרשת 

Parsha Stumpers

By: Daniel Listhaus

1. Rashi 16:1 – Why necessary to spook Aharon out here by this mitzva more than anyone else by any other? And why Aharon more than anyone else? He understood right away with “va'yidom aharon ” that his children deserved to die?

2. Rashi 16:5 – Why would merely changing the clothes require tevilas yadayim v'raglaim?

3. 16:8 – Why were the two goats chosen via lottery arbitrarily to decide which one was la'hashem and which la'a'za'zel?

4. 17:10 The passuk (17:10) when describing prohibition of eating blood says that anyone who eats blood – Hashem will direct his face upon them and cut them off from their people. Rashi explains further that Hashem will turn aside, so to speak, from all his other concerns to deal with this person. What is so bad about eating blood that the Torah takes so seriously? (Extra Credit: Where else in the Torah does the Torah use the same expression and Rashi explain the same way? What is the connection?)

5. The Gemara in Yoma says that the picking of which goat was “for Hashem” and which was to go “to Azazel” was determined solely by the lot they had. Rashi in Parshas Kedoshim, though, explains the issur of “lo sinachshu” and “lo s'oneinu” (not to practice divination; and not to believe in luck) as viewing arbitrary events as meaningful omens. If one is not supposed to believe in luck or arbitrary outcomes, why is it that we use a lottery to determine which goat should be used on Yom Kippur as an offering to Hashem and which should go to its death in Azazel?

Parshas Metzora - Parsha Stumpers

~ Something to Think About ~

 מצורעפרשת   

Parsha Stumpers

By: Daniel Listhaus

1. Where is there an acronym for Motzee Shem Ra in this week's parsha?

2. (14:4) The Rambam writes (Mishna Torah and Shemoneh Perakim) that one who has failed in a particular middah and now wants to work on fixing it, should first balance it out by going to the other extreme. So, for example, one who had become a big ba’al gaivah and want to now work on suppressing his ego and becoming more humble, he should do things on the opposite extreme of what he had been doing until he is able to find the proper balance in the middle. If so, granted the hyssop is very necessary as part of the metzora’s tahara as Rashi explains, but why the cedarwood? Shouldn’t that specically be left out?

3. Rabbah bar bar Shila says on Daf Beis amud beis in Berachos that if in the passuk of “u'va ha'shemesh v'taheir”, u'va hashemesh=beeas ohro and v'taheir=tahor gavra; then the passuk should have used the word “vayitaheir” to illustrate the active requirement to become tahor instead of the word “tahor” which is a more passive sounding word (even without a kaparah).....Ask a question on this from this week's parsha.

4. (14:34) Why is tzara’as also Hashem’s method of letting people know when there are treasures behind the wall of a house?

Parshas Tazria - Parsha Stumpers

~ Something to Think About ~

תזריעפרשת 

Parsha Stumpers

By: Daniel Listhaus

1. (12:3) ”Rashi writes that just like man was created after animals, so too were the halachos of birth commanded after halachos of animals (kashrus).” Indeed sometimes the Torah instructs us that the proper order of teaching and responding is A-B A-B: That when two things are said the proper approach is to respond in the same order (See also when Eliezer responded to Lavan/Besuel). However there are also examples where the Torah orders in a A-B B-A format justifying that since the last thing taught is still fresh on the mind we respond to that first. (See Gemara Berachos 2a and Tosfos Bava Kamma 17a). What are the guidelines when to respond in the order of things mentioned and when to respond to the second item first?

2. (13:14) Rashi writes that when a person thinks he has tzara’as he must go to the kohen have it inspected. However, there are two exceptions: A chossen (during sheva berachos) and any person on a Yom Tov. How could we understand this? Why would the Torah push aside a pressing matter for personal happiness? Clearly the person deserves the tzara’as so why consider the fact that the afflicted will suffer on his “personal days”? It’s his own fault!

3. Tzara’as is a physical effect of something non-physical (harmful speech). The truth is that all speech creates realities. Where is that hinted to in the Hebrew word for “speech” and where do we hint to this idea in davening?