Parshas Yisro - Sunken Chunk

Parshas Yisro

Sunken Chunk

By: Daniel Listhaus

אַתֶּם רְאִיתֶם אֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתִי לְמִצְרָיִם וָאֶשָּׂא אֶתְכֶם עַל כַּנְפֵי נְשָׁרִים וָאָבִא אֶתְכֶם אֵלָי: וְעַתָּה אִם שָׁמוֹעַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ בְּקֹלִי וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת בְּרִיתִי וִהְיִיתֶם לִי סְגֻלָּה מִכָּל הָעַמִּים כִּי לִי כָּל הָאָרֶץ

“You have seen what I did to Egypt, and that I carried you on the wings of eagles and brought you to Me. And now, if you listen well to Me and you will keep My covenant, you will be a treasure to Me from among the all the nations, for the earth is Mine.”

-Yisro 19:4-5

As the B'nei Yisroel were getting ready to accept the Torah, Hashem commanded Moshe to announce that if we decide now to listen to the mitzvos of Hashem, then we will become a treasure to Him. Rashi¹ on this passuk (verse) explains based on the Mechilta² that Hashem was telling us the following, “If you accept the Torah upon yourselves now, then it will be pleasant to you from now on, for all beginnings are difficult.” The Sifsei Chochomim³ comments here that Rashi stresses the word “if” because it is a conditional statement: If you accept the Torah now, then it will be pleasant in the future.

If we read this Rashi carefully, we will realize that there are a couple of difficulties. First, why is it that if we accept the Torah now it will be pleasant to us from now on? Was this a promise or a fact? Second, what is Rashi coming to add by saying, “because all beginnings are difficult”? What is that coming to explain? It sounds like the whole condition in the beginning of Rashi is pivoted on this idea or reason. But where exactly does it fit into the picture? Is it the reason as to why one should accept the Torah now, or is it supposed to represent the reason why it will be pleasant later?

Perhaps we could better appreciate and understand this Rashi if we introspect a fascinating area of human psychology. The first fact to realize is that when a person invests time in something it becomes important to him. The Nachalas Yaakov⁴ writes that there are two approaches to Torah. One approach is to jump in and work hard at it. The other method is, as the mishna in Pirkei Avos⁵ warns against, the attitude of, “I'll study Torah when I get around to it”. Starting any new project is difficult, especially an endless, life-time task of learning Torah and becoming closer to Hashem. However, it is the willingness of a person to, despite its difficulty, invest time in such an undertaking which makes the task precious in his eyes. In other words, it is indeed the reason that all beginnings are difficult which makes it that if a person decides to spend the time working on such a difficult project, that it will in fact become pleasant from now on. Something which people invest time into becomes important to them. It is a cause and effect relationship and this is what Rashi is pointing out: If one takes the step forward and spends the time working on Torah when it is most difficult, then surely it will be pleasant in one's eyes from now and on. This is a natural effect in investing time in something, it gains importance in one's eyes.

This is a tremendous lesson to take to heart. There is a dual relationship between chashivus (importance) and how we spend our resources. On the one hand, we are willing and actually desire to spend time and money for things which are important to us. On the other hand, this relationship works conversely as well. Things that we spend our resources – time or money – on also become chashuv (important) in our eyes.

Unfortunately, there is a flip-side to this area of psychology which often times works to our detriment. There are times that we spend time or money on a certain task and then cannot get ourselves to stop even when we realize that continuing would be a complete waste of time. In economics, this idea is known as sunk costs. Essentially, this concept describes the idea that a decision at any given point should be made independent of the history associated with the task at hand. To make this clearer, let us analyze an experiment that Max Bazerman, a professor at Harvard, does with his MBA students each year.⁶ Every year, this professor comes to class with a $20 bill and tells his students that he will be auctioning off the twenty dollars. There are two rules to this auction. The first rule is that the highest bidder receives the twenty dollars. The second rule is that the second highest bidder must pay the amount he bid for his last, losing bid without getting anything in return. For example, if the winning bidder bids nine dollars and the second to highest bidder offered eight dollars, the nine-dollar guy will win the $20, while the eight-dollar bidder will have to pay the professor without getting anything in return.

The auction starts at one dollar and quickly reaches the $12-$16 range, at which point usually all students leave the auction except for two or three. Slowly, the bidding reaches $20. At this point all the onlookers start laughing because it is clear to everyone that it is impossible for any one of the remaining bidders to come out making money. Yet, despite this realization, the bidding almost always goes beyond $21. As a matter of fact, most of these auctions go beyond $50 and often up to $100. One time the winning bid actually went all the way to $204! The force behind this drive to keep bidding is called Loss Aversion. People are afraid to lose or feel that they have lost and will continue spending money in order not to admit to a loss.

This same principle could also be seen when it comes to spending time on something. For example, imagine you go to an amusement park and you really want to go on a certain roller coaster, however it is closed. So, you go and wait in line for the bumper cars. After standing in line for twenty-five minutes you hear that the roller coaster you really wanted to go on has re-opened. Chances are that you would choose not to go on the roller coaster at that point because, after all, you have already invested the time into waiting for the bumper cars. This is a sad truth even though you originally had no intention or desire to go on the bumper cars ride. This is also a form of loss aversion. We feel too bad to admit that we have wasted our time and as a result are more willing to waste even more time than to admit this to ourselves. This is know as the Sunk Cost Fallacy.

The reality is that it does not make sense to take into account costs that have already been spent. Whether it be a sunken chunk of money or time, a decision now should be made independent of those facts. If in an isolated decision between the roller coaster or the bumper cars, you would choose the roller coaster, then that should be the only factor in your decision even after waiting the twenty-five minutes in line. Those twenty-five minutes were spent already regardless of what you decide to do at this point, and therefore should not be taken into account as a relevant factor when weighing the option of staying on the bumper cars line versus going to the roller coaster. Rather, the decision at hand would be to decide if it is worth it to remain on this line for another five minutes, until it is your turn for the bumper cars, or go to the roller coaster line and wait there for five minutes. Those should be the only relevant factors in the decision. The fact that it is emotionally painful to admit that you just wasted twenty-five minutes is not a rational reason to waste another five minutes to continue to go on the bumper cars ride.

This concept is one that effects us on a daily basis in both physical and spiritual ways. How often does one go to a restaurant and find the food unappetizing. Yet one is willing to finish it, despite the stomach pains it may bring later, as to not feel bad about the money already spent on the food? How often does one start a video game and get bored half way through yet feel the need to continue to the end because of the levels already achieved? These are all bad decisions people make when blindly following the Sunk Cost Fallacy. We tend to forget that the money or time we spent on something does not know or care if we will choose to continue the task in which we invested.

We must be in-tuned to the fact that human psychology attributes chashivus to things we spend money or time on just as we would spend money and time on things that are chashuv to us. This converse relationship is one we must realize and watch for as to not fall into the trap of the Sunk Cost Fallacy. More importantly, though, if we do find ourselves doing something which is a waste of time we should train ourselves to remake our decisions constantly in the present, without being based on what we have done in the past. This way we will only continue to support that which we rationally decide to be important, and not just support projects on which we are afraid to admit that we have wasted time or money.

Perhaps this is another angle as to how to understand a different Rashi in this week's parsha. Rashi⁷ writes a few passukim earlier that Hashem demands of us to view the learning of Torah each day as if it was given today. Every day we should re-decide to follow ratzon Hashem and keep His mitzvos. It should not become a routine or an emotional need to go further because of the time, money, and reputation we already have invested in a Torah lifestyle, rather we should constantly realize that the investment of being a shomer Torah u'mitzvos (keeper of the Torah and mitzvos) is one that is worth everything and totally outweighs anything which might conflict with it at any given point. As a matter of fact, the Yalkut Me'am Lo'ez⁸ points out that in birkas HaTorah (Blessings made on the Torah) the text of the bracha is: Blessed are You, Hashem, our G-d, King of the universe, who selected us from all the nations...Blessed are You, Hashem, the Giver of the Torah.” The present-tense form of the word is used – “Giver”, as opposed to “The One Who gave”, in order to allude to the fact that every day we must re-accept the Torah upon ourselves.

The lesson of Rashi that success in Torah is correlated and conditioned with one's drive to spend time on studying Torah at the point which is hardest, is one of which we must constantly be aware. We must be careful in deciding which tasks and projects to undertake, but at the same time know that after a bad decision is made we must not be afraid to admit it to ourselves and re-decide based on the present conditions. In this way we will avoid falling into the trap of wasting our lives via loss aversion and the Sunk Cost Fallacy.

May we have the zechus to better decide and understand what is best for us so that we could invest our time into things that are chashuv to Hashem, and in return these things will become even more chashuv to us.

1Shemos 19:5

2Ibid

3Ibid

4Ibid

5Pirkei Avos 2:5

6Brafman, Ori and Rom, Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior. 2008. Random House Inc., New York. Page 30.

7Shemos 19:1

8Yalkut Me'am Lo'ez, Parshas Yisro; 3^rd Perek; 19:1
Photo Credit: http://braintrustgroup.com/2012/how-sunk-costs-can-be-minimized-with-agile/

Parshas Beshalach - In G-d We Trust

Parshas Beshalach

In G-d We Trust

By: Daniel Listhaus

וַיֹּאמֶר ה' אֶל משֶׁה הִנְנִי מַמְטִיר לָכֶם לֶחֶם מִן הַשָּׁמָיִם וְיָצָא הָעָם וְלָקְטוּ דְּבַר יוֹם בְּיוֹמוֹ לְמַעַן אֲנַסֶּנּוּ הֲיֵלֵךְ בְּתוֹרָתִי אִם לֹא

“Hashem said to Moses, 'Behold! I shall rain down for you food from heaven; let the people go out and pick each day's matter on its day, so that I may test him, whether he will follow My Torah or not.”

-Beshalach 16:4

After witnessing the wonders of kriyas Yam Suf (the splitting of the Red Sea) and the whole Egyptian army being wiped out, the Jews certainly realized their newly found freedom to a higher degree. They sung Az Yashir¹ and thanked Hashem from the depths of their hearts. However, it seems that it was only a matter of days until the Jews turned to Moshe and started a series of complaints. First they complained about the lack of water, and then they complained about not having food.² At that point, Hashem said that he would send the manna as a test to see if the Jews were ready to follow the Torah.³

Rashi⁴ explains that the manna came with two rules. The first rule was that one could not leave over any manna to save for the next day. The second, equally important rule, was that one cannot go out to collect the manna on Shabbos. Rashi continues to explain that the manna, with its rules, was actually a test us to see if the Jews in the midbar (desert) would be able to keep the mitzvos of the Torah.

This Rashi, and really the passuk (verse) itself, is hard to understand. How could this two-rule game properly gauge how B'nei Yisroel would measure up in being able to keep the Torah? Imagine yourself, for a moment, as a part of the Jewish population of that time in the desert. You just came out of Mitzrayim after having watched the Egyptians suffer through the ten makkos (plagues) and experience the finale of kriyas Yam Suf – a time when the whole world recognized Hashem's full control over nature. Now, you find yourself among a group of hungry, recently freed slaves in the middle of a desert. Hashem performs yet another miracle and provides manna from the sky to 600,000 men between twenty and sixty, let alone all the children, elders, and women.⁵

You see all of this, appreciate it, and internalize it. Yet, one morning decide to break the small rule and store some extra manna away and save it for breakfast the following morning. Does this action show in any way that you are totally incapable of performing mitzvos (Hashem's commandments)? If someone would subsequently challenge you to do any particular mitzva would there be any more of a reason to believe that you would be hesitant to doing it? Surely just because someone would be willing to break the rule of the manna, would not necessarily mean that one would stop from being a perfect, kosher keeping, shomer Shabbos Jew. Why did Hashem use the manna as a test to see if we were ready to keep the Torah? The requirements of the manna seem to have nothing to do with what we as Jews are tasked with on a daily basis through performing the mitzvos. Name a mitzvah and it would probably not cross such a person's mind to transgress on it: Performing Bris millah, putting on tefillin, wearing tzitzis, reading Shema, having a Pesach seder – what does keeping to the rules of the manna prove that demonstrates that he will be careful in all the mitzvos?

Let us take a step back to understand what exactly is the purpose of the Torah and its mitzvos. The Torah is much more more than a history book and is much deeper than a law book. Rather, the Torah is literally the blueprint and instruction manual for the world. Hashem is the creator of the world and he left an instruction manual which describes the guidelines as to the best way to live in this world. This is why, unlike any other religion, our Torah is all-inclusive. There is a set of rules for goyim (non-Jews), converts, slaves, and Jews. The Torah has a hierarchy as well as a system of different roles which recognizes that everyone has a purpose in this world and everyone has the ability to strive for more. This system is perfect but depends on the basic understanding that Hashem knows what is best and that everyone must be willing to accept his or her role in society within this system.

However, adopting a Torah lifestyle is not easy; and leaving aside the fact that it is not easy, so many aspects of it seem highly ridiculous. Does it really matter which shoelace I tie first? What times I daven throughout the day? The amount of time I wait between eating meat and milk? The Torah's rules are very demanding, intricate, and cover every aspect of life no matter how small and mundane the action may seem in our eyes. The only way that one could honestly accept such a lifestyle is if he or she has complete trust in Hashem that what He asks us to do is absolutely the best for us.

Conceptually, it makes sense that the creator of the world would no best how to live in it. Just as one would optimize a game board and pieces by reading the instruction manual provided by its creator, so too a person looking to optimize his life should consult the manual for the world provided by The Creator – His Torah. This is something which makes sense logically, but when there are other factors introduced it becomes hard to really internalize. When one starts to think about the “opportunity cost” of keeping the Torah – all those McDonald cheese burgers which one could have eaten, and all the “fun” that could have been had, it is harder to really appreciate the demanding life of a Torah-Jew. The only way to fight these thoughts and feelings is by realizing that there are no opportunity costs. There is nothing good outside of the Torah, and nothing lost by following the word of Hashem. It is this complete trust and faith in Hashem which is the only way that one will stay on the path of keeping Torah and mitzvos.

The ultimate test of faith and trust lays where a person would like to have the most control, but is willing to have complete trust in Hashem that He will take care of it. Being at the base of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, food is a necessity of life which we like to be in control over. When Hashem gave us the manna with rules that one cannot stash the leftovers for the next day or collect on Shabbos, Hashem was testing us to see if we had complete trust and faith in Him. Hashem wanted to see if we would accept whatever He would tell us to do without a question. This is the mindset needed in order for one to properly accept the Torah.

Every Shabbos by the seudah (meal) we use lechem mishna (two breads) to symbolize the extra portion of manna that fell on Friday for Shabbos – reminding us that we were not allowed to go out to collect manna on Shabbos.⁶ Additionally, we cover the challah by placing a board underneath and a cover on top in order to remember the fact that the manna came in a pre-packaged, individualized box per person, of a layer of dew underneath and a layer of dew on top.⁷ What better time is there to remember the manna than at a time we spend to become closer to Hashem? Shabbos is a time of dropping work and showing complete trust in Hashem – like a weekly mini sh'mita year, and at the same time it is used as a constant reminder of the manna – which contains the basics of being a Torah Jew.

The Gemara⁸ relates that the manna did not come to the same spot for everyone. If one was a tzaddik, he would find the manna right by the entrance to his house. The average person would have to go just outside the camp in the desert to collect their manna, while the r'shaim (wicked people) would have to go outside the camp to collect their manna. The manna represents our relationship with Hashem. The closer the relationship with Hashem, the closer the manna came to the individual.

The manna was the perfect test to see if we were ready to receive the Torah because it tested our trust in Hashem. A complete trust in Hashem that He knows best is a necessary prerequisite to accepting the Torah properly. Only with a trust that Hashem's laws and demands are perfect, does one realize that there is no risk in keeping the Torah, there are no opportunity costs in keeping the Torah, and no losses by choosing to follow the way of Hashem.

1Shemos 15:1-19. Moshe led the men and Miriam led the women (Shemos 15:20-21). We now say Az Yashir daily as part of Shacharis davening.

2The passuk (Shemos 15:22) says that they had traveled for three days and could not find drinking water, so they complained to Moshe. Then they were hungry and complained that they needed food.

3Shemos 16:4

4Ibid.

5Shemos 12:37

6Orach Chaim 274, 1 and Mishna Berura there.

7Orach Chaim 271, 9 and Mishna Berura there.

8Yoma 75a

Phot Credit: http://ww2.valdosta.edu/~canwilliams/ebook2.html

Parshas Va'eira - Don't Judge a Book by its Cover

Parshas Va'eira

Don't Judge a Book by its Cover

By: Daniel Listhaus

הוּא אַהֲרֹן וּמשֶׁה אֲשֶׁר אָמַר ה' לָהֶם הוֹצִיאוּ אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם עַל צִבְאֹתָם: הֵם הַמְדַבְּרִים אֶל פַּרְעֹה מֶלֶךְ מִצְרַיִם לְהוֹצִיא אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמִּצְרָיִם הוּא משֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן

“This is Moshe Aharon and Moshe to whom Hashem said: 'Take the Children of Israel out of Egypt according to their legions.' They are the ones who spoke to Pharaoh, king of Egypt, to take the Children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; this is Moshe and Aharon.”

-Va'eria 6:26-27

Rashi¹ comments that throughout Chumash, there are some times that the Torah puts Moshe's name before Aharon's, and other times that the Torah chooses to write Aharon's name before Moshe's.² The reason for this, as Rashi continues to explain, is in order to convey that Moshe and Aharon were equal in significance.

The Kli Yakar³ makes the same observation but explains in more detail. He writes that as one reads through the story of B'nei Yisroel in Mitzrayim, it does not take too much effort to realize who the protagonist is. Moshe was the one who met Hashem at the s'neh (the [burning] bush) and was the one specifically appointed by Hashem Himself as the one who would take B'nei Yisroel out of Mitzrayim and bring them to Har Sinai to receive the Torah. In order to counter such a perspective of the story, the Torah comes to tell us that indeed Aharon played just as much an important role as Moshe. The Kli Yakar continues to say that the Torah also must refer to them as “Moshe and Aharon”, with writing Moshe's name first, because one could also read through the conversations between them and Pharaoh and notice that because of Moshe's speech impediment, Aharon was the one who did most of the talking. Therefore, the Torah must also come to put Moshe's name first in order for us to realize that despite the fact that Aharon played such a vital role in communicating to Pharaoh, Moshe's role of communicating Pharaoh was deemed as equally important.

This Rashi and Kli Yakar are very difficult to understand. There is no question that Aharon was an incredible person. As a matter of fact, before Moshe came back to Mitzrayim, Aharon was the one who would get nevuos (prophecies) from Hashem. However, is it really possible that once Moshe came back from Midyan after experiencing talking to Hashem face-to-face – something that only Moshe ever experienced – that Aharon was even close to the greatness that Moshe possessed? The Torah itself testifies to Moshes greatness stating that, “This man Moshe was exceedingly humble, more so than any person on the face of the earth.”⁴ Furthermore, in the Ani Ma'amins,⁵ we declare that the nevuos (prophecies) of Moshe rabbeinu are all emes (truth; reality), and that he is the 'father' of of all nevi'im (prophets) – all those who came before him and after him. This is also expressed in the poem of Yigdal⁶ which states, “There was never anyone in the Jewish people as great as Moshe, nor will there ever be.” How can it be that Rashi and the Kli Yakar explain that Moshe and Aharon were of equal greatness if it seems that Moshe was clearly someone who achieved heights greater than anyone?

The truth is that a similar question could be asked exactly the other way. Aharon indeed played the key role in communicating to Pharaoh. Hashem Himself told Moshe, “You shall speak to him [Aharon] and put the words in his mouth; and I shall be with your mouth and with his mouth, and teach you both what you are to do; and it will be that he will be a mouth for you and you will be for him a master”.⁷ Aharon truly did more speaking to Pharaoh than Moshe, so why is the Torah calling them equals in this area? If the Torah is simply trying to convey that there were some things that Aharon did better than Moshe and other areas that Moshe excelled in, that is already apparent from the passukim and we would not need the Torah to switch the order of their names a few times in order to catch our attention and tell us this. If indeed the Torah is trying to tell us, as the Kli Yakar is suggesting, that they were both equal in both areas, then at least granted we would understand that the Torah would want to go out of its way to point this out, because it is not at all obvious. However how can this explanation be true after we know two basic facts: that Moshe was greater than any person to ever live and that Aharon was the one who spoke to Pharaoh?

It must be that Rashi and the Kli Yakar are teaching us an incredible lesson. We see from here that one cannot see a person's true success by what one perceives he accomplished in the world. Each individual has his or her own inner conflict, flawed character trait, or mission to solve in this world. Additionally, when Hashem sends us to live in this world, he programs us with certain settings: Which family will we born into? What number are we to be amongst siblings? Will we be wealthy or poor? Tall or short? Each of us is given a different combination of a variety of elements. It is within this environment, with the tools we are given, that we are expected to accomplish what we were put into this world for. Therefore, it is unreasonable that the same quantitative level and position be achieved by every person, or even to assume that it is possible for one to do so, because different things are expected from different people based on the abilities Hashem provided them with.

The Ramban, in his Igeres Haramban,⁸ writes that there is absolutely nothing of which man could be prideful. One could brag about his wealth, honor, or wisdom, but really these things come from Hashem. Therefore, really, every person is equal before Hashem. The fact that a person is wise makes him no more independent than the one who is not; and Hashem could, at any moment, easily reverse their situations with no effort at all. The Ramban continues to write that despite the fact that before Hashem all are equal, a humble person should look at others and assume that they are better than himself. If one sees someone else who is rich or wise, he must accord him respect because perhaps Hashem made him wealthy because he is a tzaddik (righteous person). Yet, even when one knows someone who is struggling to make a living or who is not so bright, one cannot assume that Hashem is upset at him. Rather, one must accord respect to such a person and think to himself that that person is more righteous than himself for when he himself does aveiros (sins) he does so on purpose, but this person only sins accidentally.

We cannot judge a person's accomplishments based on what we see as his successes. We may see two people standing right next to each other one and know for certain that one of them is clearly on a much higher spiritual level than the other. However, that means nothing about how much each accomplished percentage-wise of what Hashem expects of them as individuals, and therefore it is impossible to know who in fact is more accomplished.

The Gemara⁹ brings a statement from R' Yitzchak: If a person says to you “I tried but did not succeed”, do not believe him. If a person says, “I did not try but succeeded”, do not believe him. If a person says, “I tried and found success”, believe him.

On the surface this Gemara is difficult to understand. There are plenty of people who seem to have an easier time grasping things, while there are also certainly others who, as much as they try, just cannot understand.¹⁰ So why is it that we only believe the one who says “I tried and found success”? Is it really not possible to try and still not succeed?

Perhaps with the aforementioned concept we could understand this Gemara. True success is not necessarily defined as what objective level you achieve or the number of things you accomplish. Rather, success is measured by how much you fulfill what is expected of you. If you truly tried your hardest with the tools that Hashem provided you in the environment he placed you in, then of course, by definition, you succeeded, no matter how little it may be perceived by others that you changed. As individuals, we often think that our own lives are so intricate with so many details and challenges, and when we look at others we think of how easy they have it. However, we must not judge a book by its cover. It could be that the small things that that person is expected to accomplish are much harder for him than the many things that are expected of you, given each of your personalities and life settings.

There is no doubt that Moshe and Aharon were two different people with different challenges and personalities. Additionally, there is no question that quantitatively, Moshe achieved the highest possible level of kedusha (Holiness) and nevuah which was never, nor will ever, be matched by anyone else. However, that does not mean that no one could accomplish the same amount that Moshe did in his lifetime. Moshe utilized his settings and tools from Hashem to the max and achieved the level of success that was expected of him. In the same way, Aharon too matched Moshe in terns of what was expected of him as his role as a person and part of B'nei Yisroel. Additionally, Moshe was as much a speaker to Pharaoh, as little as he did, as Aharon was despite the fact that Aharon spent much more time speaking to Pharaoh.

We too have the ability to have our names worthy of being placed before Moshe's to demonstrate that, like Aharon, we have accomplished our role to the fullest. All we have to do is try our hardest to use what Hashem gave us to complete our purpose for being here.

May Hashem help us realize what our mission in life is as individuals and then help us maximize our potential in order that we could indeed honestly proclaim, “I have tried and found true success.”

1Shemos 6:26

2This format is the exception. The above quoted passuk (verse) is one such example. Another example is in Bamidbar 3:1.

3Ibid.

4Bamidbar 12:3

5The seventh Ani Ma'amin (Thirteen Principles of Faith) based on the Rambam.

6Yigdal mirrors the Rambam's Thirteen Principles of Faith. This poem could be found in the Siddur at the very beginning of Shacharis.

7Shemos 4:16

8This is a letter that the Ramban sent to his son.

9Megillah 6b

10This Gemara is specifically dealing with learning Torah and not business matters (which the Gemara describes could be decided that you not be successful despite working hard). However let us assume that the same would be true regarding working on oneself and trying to accomplish what one's purpose is.

Photo Credit:: www.k9safesearch.com/search.jsp?q=don't+judge+a+book+by+its+cover&v=i

Parshas Va'eira - Let There Be Hope

Parshas Va'eira

Let There Be Hope

By: Daniel Listhaus

וַיְדַבֵּר משֶׁה לִפְנֵי ה' לֵאמֹר הֵן בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא שָׁמְעוּ אֵלַי וְאֵיךְ יִשְׁמָעֵנִי פַרְעֹה וַאֲנִי עֲרַל שְׂפָתָיִם

“Moshe spoke before Hashem saying, 'Behold, the B'nei Yisroel have not listened to me, so how will Pharaoh listen to me? And I have blocked lips!”

-Va'eria 6:12

This week's parsha continues to express the unbelievable conversations that Moshe and Hashem shared. We know that Moshe was the greatest navi (prophet) to ever live,¹ yet it is still incredibly difficult to comprehend the relationship between Moshe – a person, and Hashem. Hashem had commanded Moshe to say to the B'nei Yisroel, “I will bring you to the land about which I have raised My hand to give it to Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov; and I shall give it to you as a heritage – I am Hashem.”² However, when Moshe relayed this message to the B'nei Yisroel, the passuk (verse) testifies that they refused to listen because of shortness of breath and hard work.³

In the next passuk, Hashem commands Moshe, “Come speak to Pharaoh, king of Egypt, that he send the B'nei Yisroel from his land.”⁴ Moshe responds that, “Behold, the B'nei Yisroel have not listened to me, so how will Pharaoh listen to me? And I have blocked lips.”⁵ Rashi⁶ comments that this argument that Moshe made to Hashem, is one of ten kal v'chomeirs⁷ found throughout Tanach. The Mizrachi⁸ explains that Moshe said to Hashem as follows, “If the B'nei Yisroel won't listen to me, and what I am saying is beneficial for them [that they will be able to leave], then certainly Pharaoh will refuse to listen because the news I am relaying is bad for him.”

This kal v'chomeir is hard to understand because there is a pircha (flaw in its logic). After all, Moshe seems to have conveniently omitted an important piece of information. As mentioned earlier, when the Torah says that the B'nei Yisroel did not listen to Moshe, it describes that the reason they did not listen was because they were stressed out from their strenuous labor. If so, Moshe did not have a valid reasoning because perhaps the B'nei Yisroel only didn't listen for that reason, but for Pharaoh, to whom the excuse of working hard surely did not apply, on what basis could Moshe be so sure that Pharaoh would not listen?

The Mizrachi discusses this issue as well and answers that Moshe himself did not know the reason why the B'nei Yisroel refused to listen to him; and that when the Torah was telling us that it was indeed because of being stressful from their work, it was telling us from an omniscient point of view.⁹

Let us take a step back, though, for a minute and examine the situation. The B'nei Yisroel were slaves in Mitzrayim. They had gone through so much at this point – babies thrown into the Nile, hard work, being beaten up, Mitzrayim at that time was no vacation spot for a Jew. Yet, for some reason, when Moshe came to them with a message from Hashem that they were going to be rescued from their horrible living arrangements and be brought into their own land, the B'nei Yisroel seem to have just turned the other way. One would think that if one were a slave and someone would tell him that he would be released to freedom, that he would be jumping for joy. So, why is it that the B'nei Yisroel seemed to be indifferent about staying in Mitzrayim? Did they enjoy doing work all of the sudden?¹⁰ Why did they not listen to Moshe? The passuk says that they did not listen because they were short of breath and tired of hard work. Wouldn't that be exactly the reason why the B'nei Yisroel should listen to Moshe?

In 1965, a scientist names Martin E. P. Seligman performed an interesting experiment.¹¹ At that time, everyone knew of Ivan Pavlov's famous experiment with his dogs which demonstrated that if you ring a bell every time you bring a dog its food, then you will observe that at a later time you could ring the bell, and even without having any food present, the dog will begin to salivate. This proved the concept of conditioning. The object of Seligman's experiment was to prove a similar concept by shocking dogs. Seligman had a bunch of dogs which he harmlessly shocked while they were restrained. Then, later, he put the dog in a shuttle-box which had two sides with a low fence dividing the two compartments. They went to the side the dog was in and shocked it, expecting it to utilize its freedom and jump to the other side. However, the dog just stayed put. Seligman showed from here that there is a concept of “learned helplessness”. The restrained dogs had learned to just give up hope without exploring other options. Therefore, even when the opportunity existed for the dogs to escape pain and suffering, they refused to make any such effort.

Unfortunately, dogs are not the only ones who could be conditioned to feel helpless. People too sometimes experience times of defeat and then give up completely and do not care when a solution is offered in the future. Feeling depressed without hope for a long period of time could dangerously effect the mind to start believing that there is indeed no hope – even when the answer appears later in front of one's face.

Perhaps this was the reason that the B'nei Yisroel refused to listen to Moshe. After being in Mitzrayim for a long time going through so many hardships, evil decrees, and manual labor, the Jews felt hopeless and were unable to accept the message of freedom when it was offered to them.

Hashem, though, proceeded to bring the ten plagues on the Egyptians and clearly differentiated between them and the Jews. It was a time of Hashem showing his pure love for us. A Jew must never give up and always have hope because we understand that Hashem cares about us and watches over each of us individually. If we could condition ourselves to constantly be aware that Hashem is always here for us, and does not allow for things to happen that will effect the life and circumstances we are supposed to find ourselves in, then we could live an enhanced life with hope even in the darkest of times. If we do not condition ourselves to think along these lines, then we never truly left Mitzrayim and would still be slaves to our own psychology that when things look grim, we just accept the position we are in and remain depressed over the fact that bad situations do not change.

May Hashem help us condition ourselves to truly believe that everything is in His hands. With this mentality, there is no room for giving up hope.

1The seventh of the “Ani Maamins” which could generally be found in the siddur immediately following shacharis davening.

2Shemos 6:8

3Shemos 6:9

4Shemos 6:11

5Shemos 6:12

6Ibid

7Kal V'chomeir is a fortiori argument based on logic which essentially states that if something applies in a more “kal” situation (where there is less of a reason for it to apply), then certainly it should apply by the “chomeir” – where there is more reason for it to apply.

8Ibid

9The Mizrachi continues to ask: Still, why don't we just throw that pircha into the kal v'chomeir as well (as we do often throughout the Gemara – for example see the beginning of Gemara Kiddushin), and construct the following argument that Moshe was saying: “If B'nei Yisroel won't listen to me and it is beneficial to them, even though they are stressed from the hard work; so certainly Pharaoh won't listen to me because the news is detrimental to him, despite the fact that he is not stressed from being in slavery.” The Mizrachi then gives and answer to this question as well.

10The passuk in Shemos 3:7 says that Hashem heard the crying of B'nei Yisroel, so certainly they were unhappy in Egypt.

11Learned Helplessness, by Martin Seligman

Parshas Shemos - Great Minds Think Alike...And Fools Never Differ

Parshas Shemos

Great Minds Think Alike...And Fools Never Differ

By: Daniel Listhaus

וַיִּשְׁמַע פַּרְעֹה אֶת הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה וַיְבַקֵּשׁ לַהֲרֹג אֶת משֶׁה וַיִּבְרַח משֶׁה מִפְּנֵי פַרְעֹה וַיֵּשֶׁב בְּאֶרֶץ מִדְיָן וַיֵּשֶׁב עַל הַבְּאֵר

“Pharaoh heard about this matter and sought to kill Moshe; so Moshe fled from before Pharaoh and settled in the land of Midyan. He sat at the well.”

-Shemos 2:15

Despite the fact that Moshe grew up in the palace of Pharaoh, he was unable to just sit quietly living a luxurious lifestyle when he knew that his fellow brothers and sisters were being worked hard on a daily basis. Moshe felt compelled to go leave the security of the palace walls to watch the Jews work so he could get at least a small sense of the feeling of how hard it must be on them physically and emotionally.¹ One day, he witnessed an Egyptian beating one of the Jews and, after determining that the right thing to do would be to kill this Egyptian, Moshe indeed got involved by killing the Egyptian using the Holy Name of Hashem.² Unfortunately, Dasan and Aviram informed Pharaoh of Moshe's actions and their lashon harah (evil speech) resulted in Moshe being forced to flee Mitzrayim for his life. Moshe ran to Midyan and headed straight for the town well.

It is quite peculiar that Moshe ran to the well. One would think that someone running away from home would spend his time looking for a good hotel to check into. So, why did Moshe set his GPS to the well in Midyan?

Rashi³ writes that Moshe learned to go to the well from Yaakov, who met Rachel at the well. It is interesting that Moshe decided to do this based on what happened to Yaakov in his life, because if one were to zoom out and compare the stories of Moshe and Yaakov, one would find that they are really remarkably similar in much more than just this aspect. The passuk (verse)⁴ testifies that Pharaoh sought to kill Moshe; similarly we find that Eisav wanted to kill Yaakov.⁵ Moshe was subsequently forced to leave Mitzrayim,⁶ and Yaakov too was forced to run away from home.⁷ Both ran straight for the well of the town to which they had fled: Moshe found himself by the well in Midyan,⁸ and Yaakov by the well in Paddan-Aram.⁹ Once at the well, each of them encountered a difficulty which they had to solve before they themselves watered the flocks of those who they rescued. Moshe actually saved the daughters of Yisro from the shepherds who were there,¹⁰ and Yaakov, by his experience, had to roll a boulder off the well in order to be able to water the sheep.¹¹ In both episodes, their actions resulted in their future wives running home to tell their parents what had happened: The daughters of Yisro ran to tell him how they were able to finish so early,¹² and Rachel ran back to tell Lavan what had occurred with the stranger at the well.¹³ After being invited to stay at their respective soon to be father in law's house, each of them swore that they would not leave without permission.¹⁴

Moshe married Tziporah,¹⁵ and Yaakov married Rachel along with his other three wives.¹⁶ Afterward, each of them were shepherds for their father-in-laws.¹⁷ The Torah describes by both of them that like their ancestor Avraham, they were extremely careful not to graze the sheep on others' property.¹⁸ Also, in both stories, either the one fleeing or the ones who were threatening to kill, died a “halachik death”.¹⁹ The Torah writes that when Yaakov saw Rachel he cried because he had nothing to give her. Eliphaz, the son of Eisav had followed Yaakov to kill him, as per his father's request. Instead of killing Yaakov, they compromised that Eliphaz fulfill his father's wishes by just stealing everything from Yaakov so that he would be poor and considered dead.²⁰ In Moshe's case, all those who were originally trying to kill him died while he was in Midyan. Pharaoh got tzara'as (leprosy) and was therefore considered dead,²¹ while Dasan and Aviram lost all their money and had become extremely poor.²²

Furthermore, in each episode, Moshe²³ and Yaakov²⁴ had a nevuah (prophecy) – each on a significant mountain²⁵ - during which Hashem reassured them that He was the G-d of their forefathers and will continue to be with them. Continuing with this theme, on his way back to Mitzrayim with his family, Moshe encountered a malach (angel) who tried to kill him.²⁶ Yaakov also, on his way back to his home with his family, met with the malach of Eisav who fought with him all night.²⁷ This chapter in their respective lives was followed by them meeting their brother who that hadn't seen since running away. Aharon, upon seeing Moshe was extremely happy and gave Moshe a kiss.²⁸ Eisav too, when seeing Moshe for the first time in years gave Moshe a kiss.²⁹ Finally, during both Moshe and Yaakov's meetings with their arch-enemies from whom they had originally fled, there was one side which had many people behind them but who then slipped away one by one: In the story of Moshe, he and Aharon had gathered together all the elders of the Jewish people and started heading together towards Pharaoh's palace. However, as Rashi³⁰ infers from the passuk, by the time Moshe and Aharon reached Pharaoh, they were alone because the elders had slipped away one by one. Similarly when Eisav came with his army to greet Yaakov, the four-hundred men who come with him had slipped away one by one, leaving Eisav alone.³¹ Yaakov's life of course concludes with his accomplishment of rejoining with Yosef and having the twelve shevatim (tribes) with him on the brink of galus (exile) Mitzrayim. Moshe concludes his life with the accomplishment of teaching the Torah to the B'nei Yisroel and leaving them on the brink of entering Eretz Yisroel.

There indeed is no doubt that the lives of Moshe rabbeinu and Yaakov were very similar. The lives they led, however, were not accidental. Rather, they were expressions of who they really were. The Kli Yakar³² writes that it is weird that Moshe was a shepherd.³³ After all, in those days it was known that the people in the shepherd business were dishonest and did not care about others' property, as they would graze the sheep in others fields. So how could Moshe be in such a profession? The Kli Yakar answers that it was obvious to everyone that neither Moshe nor any of the avos (forefathers) would ever steal.³⁴ Furthermore, continues the Kli Yakar, it was absolutely necessary for Moshe to be a shepherd because unlike other professions or people who sit at home, a shepherd has time to spend to himself and allow his mind to focus on his relationship with Hashem and the way Hashem interacts with His world.

Yaakov and Moshe together directly formed B'nei Yisroel. Yaakov was the father of the twelve shevatim and Moshe was their teacher who taught them the Torah. Only with both elements of a father and teacher - Olam Hazeh and Olam Habbah – is B'nei Yisroel complete and ultimately ready to enter Eretz Yisroel.³⁵

There is no doubt that the middos (traits) of the leaders responsible for these essential conduits to the Jewish people must be perfect. They must have a mind that only seeks emes (truth) while at the same time, despite their greatness as individuals, understand their place in the world as humans who are nothing without Hashem. When Yaakov sensed that there was a degree of emes missing amongst the shevatim he responsibly ensured that they declare “Shema Yisroel Hashem Elokeinu Hashem Echad” – that Hashem is One and there is nothing that exists external to Him. Indeed Yaakov represented the middah of emes. When it comes to Moshe, the Torah testifies that he was the most humble person to ever live.³⁶

Pharaoh, on the other hand, had exactly the opposite chemistry of middos. He was someone who was full of sheker (falsehood) – living in Mitzrayim, the center of magic and illusions – and gaivah (haughtiness). When Moshe and Aharon came to Pharaoh and gave their introductory remarks, “So said Hashem, the G-d of Yisroel, 'Send out My people so that they may celebrate for Me in the wilderness.'”³⁷, Pharaoh rudely and curtly responded, “Who is Hashem that I should listen to His voice to send out Yisroel? I do not know Hashem, nor will I send out Yisroel!” Pharaoh believed that no one could override his opinions or rules. He thought of himself as a god and actually had the audacity to try to pretend he was one.³⁸ The Orchos Tzadikkim³⁹ writes that gaivah and sheker are the core middos that are found within reshaim (wicked people). Similar to Pharaoh who said, “Who is Hashem that I should listen to His voice?”, Golias and Nevuchadnetzar also declared blasphemous statements denying Hashem's existence and proclaimed their own unchallenged authority. Such people end their false lives without any real sense of accomplishment, while those of the descendents B'nei Yisroel -formed with a foundation of emes and anivus (humility) – live a life of coming closer to Hashem and following in His ways by adhering to the middos of Yaakov avinu (our father) and Moshe rabbeinu (our teacher).

May Hashem help us sharpen our middos of emes and anivus so that we could be part of the group of the great minds who think alike and share similar experiences, and not part of those fools who never differ from brazenly asking, “Who is Hashem that I should listen to His voice?”

1Shemos 2:11

2Shemos 2:11-2:12 see Rashi and Sifsei Chachomim who discuss what Moshe's thought process was which allowed him to kill the Egyptian.

3Shemos 2:15

4Ibid.

5Beraishis 27:41

6Shemos 2:15

7Beraishis 27:43 (Rivkah tells Yaakov to run away) 28:7 (Yaakov ran away)

8Shemos 2:15

9Beraishis 29:2

10Shemos 2:17

11Beraishis 29:10

12Shemos 2:19

13Beraishis 29:12

14Moshe swore to Yisro in Shemos 2:21 (see Rashi there), and Yaakov did so in Beraishis 30:26 (see Rashi there). Note: Moshe indeed kept his word and although Hashem told him to go back to Mitzrayim, he first returned to Yisro's house to tell him that he was leaving in order to keep to his promise (Shemos 4:18). Yaakov, however, did not do this and instead ran away without telling Lavan (Beraishis 31:17). For a possible explanation as to what happened as a result of Yaakov not keeping this promise, see my d'var Torah on Parshas Vayeitzei – Truth Be Told.

15Shemos 2:21

16Beraishis 29:22-28

17Moshe: Shemos 3:1; and Yaakov: Beraishis 29:14 and see Rashi there. Yaakov was also a shepherd for Lavan before marrying Leah.

18Moshe: Rashi Shemos 3:1; and Yaakov: Rashi Beraishis 30:14 (this is in regards to Reuvein where Rashi comments that this trait of staying far from theft extended to the shevatim (tribes) who learned it from the house of Yaakov.

19There are certain types of people who the Torah considers dead even in their lifetime: Someone with tzara'as (leprosy), one who is poor, one who is childless, and a blind person.

20Rashi Beraishis 29:11. Furthermore, later on in the parsha (30:1), Rachel found herself unable to have children and says that without children it is like she is dead.

21Shemos 2:23

22Shemos 4:19

23Moshe had this experience with the burning bush (Shemos 3:2).

24Yaakov had the dream of the ladder (Beraishis 28:12).

25Moshe saw the burning bush on Har HaElokim (Har Sinai), and Yaakov had his dream on Har Hamoriah (where the Beis Hamikdash would be built in the future). This fits in well with what the idea that will be introduced at the end of the d'var Torah, that Moshe was the one who represented the Olam Habbah and Torah part of B'nei Yisroel, whereas Yaakov represented bringing Hashem into our lives in Olam Hazeh – hence the connection to the makom HaMikdash (place where Beis Hamikdash would be built) where we sere Hashem in this world.

26Shemos 4:24

27Beraishis 32:25

28Shemos 4:27

29Beraishis 33:4 (see Rashi there) According to the one who holds that Eisav tried to bite his neck but Yaakov's neck turned to marble, there is another interesting correlation because this happened to Moshe's neck too when the executioner tried killing him before he ran away,

30Shemos 5:1

31Beraishis 33:16

32Shemos 3:1

33The same question could be extended to the avos.

34In Moshe's case this was because he was not a shepherd of his own sheep, but rather Yisro's, and there is a concept that people do not sin for the benefit of others. This answer would presumably apply to Yaakov as well who was the shepherd of Lavan's sheep. In Avraham's case, it could be that it was just clear to everyone that Avraham and his immediate household (Yitzchak) would never steal because they spent their entire life advocating truth and peace in the world.

35Perhaps with this idea, the following question could be answered. When Moshe met with Hashem at the s'neh ([burning] bush), Moshe asked Hashem, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and that I should take the B'nei Yisroel out of Mitzrayim?” Hashem then responded, “For I shall be with you – and t his is the sign for you that I have sent you: When you t ake the people out of Mitzrayim, you will worship G-d on this mountain”. Rashi (Shemos 3:12) explains that Hashem answered both of Moshe's questions: That which you said, “Who am I to go to Pharaoh...”, the answer is that it is not you going but rather Me (Hashem). And that which you asked, “What merit do B'nei Yisroel possess that they should depart from Mitzrayim?”, the answer is that they are destined to receive the Torah upon this mountain three months after they leave Mitzrayim.” The problem with this Rashi is that Hashem never really answered why B'nei Yisroel now merit to leave Mitzrayim? How could it be that because of what Hashem was going to give them in the future that they should merit to leave now? Perhaps the answer is that B'nei Yisroel automatically deserved to leave Mitzrayim because they were never complete until they received the Torah.

36Bamidbar 12:3

37Shemos 5:1

38Shemos 7:15

39Orchos Tzadikkim: Sha'ar Hagaivah