In this week’s parsha, when discussing the luchos,
Rashi brings down the opinion of Rav Meir (B”B
14B) that there were two aronos. One held the
shivrei haluchos and the other held the second set
of luchos. The first one would go out to war with
Klal Yisrael while the second one had to stay in
Machaneh Leviah. What was the significance
behind each one’s role? When Moshe Rabeinu
broke the first set of luchos, the pasuk says he
broke it tachas hahar, under the mountain. Why is
that important for us to know? The last Rashi in the
Torah tells us that when Moshe Rabeinu broke the
luchos Hashem responded by saying, “Thank you
for breaking the luchos.” The Midrash says that the
letters of the luchos flew away and the structure of
the luchos became heavy and fell. If so, why is
Hashem thanking Moshe Rabeinu if they would
have broken anyway?
In order to answer our questions, we have to first
understand the difference between the two sets of
luchos. The first set was made completely by
Hashem while the second set had Moshe involved
in the making of it. Rav Chaim Friedlander
explains that the first set was completely spiritual
and the kedusha would come forth without any
need for human input. The second luchos were
made by Moshe Rabeinu’s physical contribution,
thereby mixing the physical with the spiritual,
causing the kedusha to be more hidden. Bnei
Yisrael was then required to work to bring out that
kedusha. The Netziv says that the way the luchos
were created represents our relationship with
Torah Sheb’al Peh. The luchos were kulo kedusha
and had no human contribution. The same was
with the Torah Sheb’al Peh. Moshe used the yud
gimmel middos, went through the sugya, and
would give over clear halacha with no need for our
contribution. Hashem wanted Moshe to be
involved in the creation of the second set of luchos
to teach us that we too need to be involved and
have to be mechadesh Torah. The Maharal asks
why it says “L’maan Yitav lach- so that it should
be good for you” by the second set of luchos and
not the first set? He explains that since the first set
was completely spiritual, it would have been
tremendously difficult for us to attain it on a
complete level, as we are physical beings. The
second set of luchos has an aspect of gashmius,
making it more relatable to us.
Going back to our questions, the first set of luchos
פרשת עקבBy: Rabbi Mechi Plittman
זתשע" מנחם אב 'כ August 12, 2017
were able to leave the machaneh and go to war with
Klal Yisrael because they represent kedusha that
was already revealed. When something is entirely
spiritual, there is no fear that the outside world
would be mashpiah on it. On the contrary, the
complete kedusha will affect those around it. The
second luchos which had kedusha mixed with
gashmius, had to stay hidden in Machaneh Leviah.
When there is a mixture of physical and spiritual,
the danger of being influenced from the outside
world is greater and one must take precaution
against negative hashpaah.
When Moshe Rabeinu broke the luchos, it says he
broke them “tachas hahar - under the mountain.”
We find a similar language by Matan Torah when
the pasuk says,”Vayisyatzvu b’tachtis hahar- they
stood under the mountain.” The Gemara says on
this that Hashem put a mountain over us, forcing us
to accept the Torah. The Midrash Tanchuma asks
why this was necessary if Bnei Yisrael already
accepted the Torah with naaseh v’nishma? He
answers that naaseh v’nishma was referring to
Torah Shebichsav and Hashem had to force us to
accept Torah Sheb’al Peh. We see that “under the
mountain” refers to Torah Sheba’l Peh. When
Moshe broke the luchos under the mountain, he was
sending us a message of why it needed to be broken.
He was telling us that we were not able and not
fitting to accept Torah Sheb’al Peh the way Hashem
originally intended it to be when we were “tachas
hahar”. Doing the chet ha’egel, an act of gashmius,
was showing we could not handle a Torah that is
kulo kedusha without any physical input. We
needed a Torah Sheb’al Peh that required physical
exertion and intellectual input to connect to and
attain it. Regarding the action of Moshe Rabeinu
breaking the luchos, they would have broken
anyway. Hashem was thanking Moshe for the
message he sent to Klal Yisrael while he was
breaking them; the message that they now needed a
Torah Sheb’al Peh that required physical and
intellectual input. This is implied by Rashi as he
says that Hashem was agreeing to Moshe’s
intentions when he broke the first set of luchos.
With this in mind, we should understand that we
must, like the Netziv says, exert ourselves, be
mechadesh Torah, and bring out its kedusha into the
world. May all of us be zoche to toil and be
mechadesh Torah.
Rabbi Plittman is a member of the Kollel.
Please join us for our Sunday Morning Avos U’Banim in Kehilas Bais Yosef at 9:30!
HALACHA CENTER
By: Rabbi S.Y. Fryshman הלכות תשלומין 7#
The Bais Yosef cites the Smak
who writes that one who forgot
Maariv does tashlumin as follows:
he says Birchos Krias Shema
followed by Shmoneh Esrei as
usual, and says Ashrei and then
davens his second Shmoneh Esrei
for tashlumin. The same applies to
someone who forgot Mincha and
is davening Maariv twice. One
question that stands out is when
one should say Tachanun. The
Levush writes that Tachanun
should be said after the second
Shmoneh Esrei he said for
Tashlumin, because the tefilah of
Tashlumin should be said as close
as possible to the main tefilah.
(However, there must be some
amount of separation - at least the
time it takes to walk four amos, as
the Shulchan Aruch paskens in
Siman 105. Therefore, it is more
appropriate to say Ashrei, so as to
stand Shmoneh Esrei coming off
of divrei Torah.) The Malbushei
Yom Tov writes that perhaps the
Smak intended that one should in
fact say Tachanun first. The
reason he did not say so is because
there are many days when
Tachanun is not said and in fact in
his other works he does indeed
pasken that Tachanun should be
said before tashlumin. The Elya
Rabbah understands that one
should say Tachanun and Ashrei
and then the second Shmoneh
Esrei, followed by Lamnatzeiach
and U’va L’tzion. The Machtzis
Hashekel (4) however, disagrees
and says that only Tachanun
should be said, except on days
when Tachanun is not said, and
then Ashrei should be said. The
Pri Megadim sides with the Elya
Rabbah. This seems to be the
opinion of the Mishna Berura.
The Mishna Berura does add that
one should also listen first to
Chazaras Hashatz. To be
continued…