Skip to main content

Shirat HaYam and Tu BiShevat - Parashat Beshalach- February 10, 2017

This week’s parasha, Parashat Beshalach, presents the splitting of the Red Sea - b’nei yisrael was saved from the Egyptians who drowned while b’nei yisrael was safe on the far shore. In response, Moshe led the Jewish People in shirat hayam – the Song of the Sea – a song of praise for Hashem for His miraculously saving b’nei yisrael.

In Masechet Megilah 10b, the gemara cites a well-known midrash – “As the Egyptians started to drown in the Red Sea, the heavenly hosts began to sing praises, but G-d silenced the angels, saying, ‘The works of my hands are drowning in the sea, and you wish to sing praises!’”

I discussed this gemara this morning with my students and we focused on one question – if it was improper for the angels to sing praises in the face of the death G-d’s creation (the Egyptians), why was Moshe and b’nei yisrael not subject to criticism? To answer this question, we examined a law in a very different context – but one that has a connection to Tu BiShevat which falls out this Shabbat.

Rabbi Yosef Karo in the Shulchan Aruch, (siman 211:1) deals with the case of a person who has multiple fruits on his plate, all requiring the same blessing – bor’e p’ri ha’etz. On which fruit should he make the bracha? The Shulchan Aruch explains that for the purposes of blessing, fruit is prioritized from three perspectives, in descending order: fruit that is on the list of the seven species from Israel (grapes, olives, dates, figs and pomegranates) followed by fruit that is in its whole form followed by fruit that a person likes. If a person has grapes and cherries on his plate, he should make the blessing on grapes. If he has cherries and a slice of orange on his plate, he should make the blessing on a cherry. If he has a slice of apple and a slice of orange, he should make the blessing on whichever one he likes better.

What is the foundational principle of this law? On what basis should a fruit of the seven species be used as the vehicle of blessing over a whole fruit over a preferred fruit? Our class suggested that this principle is rooted in an understanding of food-blessings. A blessing on food is a praise of Hashem – a recognition that His will yields to us the benefit of sustenance. We further suggested that when praising Hashem with a bracha, the halacha demands that we use the object that will yield the most rich praise of Him because of what is associated with that object. The best object is one that is universally associated with His providence – fruits of the Land of Israel where Hashem’s Providence is most evident. Short of that, the halacha prefers for us to use an object that is the product of His will – a whole fruit. Short of that, the halacha prefers for us to use an object that we, from our subjective framework, like the most.

What emerges from this analysis is that praise of Hashem can incorporate objective criteria – like a fruit’s association with the Land of Israel or it being in its agriculturally original state – whole, or alternatively, praise of Hashem can incorporate subjective criteria like personal predilections – the praise comes from one’s own experience and state of mind.

We proposed in class that this distinction between objective and subjective frameworks of praise can be used to explain why the angels were subject to criticism but the Jewish People were not. Angels are beings designed only to carry out Hashem’s will free of the influence of free will. They are designed to be purely objective. When singing praises to Hashem, angels must represent the entire picture – the objective frame. Hence, Hashem criticizes them because they did not incorporate the whole frame – they failed to acknowledge the loss of humanity that served as the basis for the salvation of the Jewish People. However, as human beings who experienced the salvation, there is no expectation for the Jewish People to maintain a completely objective framework – their song of praise emerged from their experience of salvation. Like the person who prioritizes making a blessing on a fruit – which is the means of his sustenance – using an object that is associated with the Land of Israel, the Jewish People sing praises to Hashem at the Red Sea – the place of their salvation – regarding Hashem’s greatness in His mastery over the world.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Unity Through Shared Purpose - Parashat Tetzaveh 5780, March 6, 2020

This coming week, we will celebrate the holiday of Purim. We know that Megilat Esther is the record of the miraculous saving of the Jewish People that occurred in Shushan and in the surrounding areas of King Achashverosh’s reign. One of the culminating themes in the  megila  is the unity within the Jewish People that was forged as a result of this miracle. This unity expressed itself in a number of ways. One of the expressions was the re-acceptance of the Torah that occurred in that generation –  kiyemu ve’kibelu . This re-acceptance included a unified acceptance of the mitzvah of Purim that was legislated by the Anshei Kinesset HaGedola – the Men of Great Assembly. Another expression of this unity is the emphasis on forging brotherhood within the Jewish People – we read the  megila  in big groups, we give money to the poor and we give food gifts to our fellow Jews. Clearly, unity is a fundamental theme of Purim. Given this focus on unity, there is a striking difference between P

Seeking Opportunities to Teach - Parashat Bemidbar - May 26, 2017

This week’s parasha , Bemidbar, recalls the death of two of Aharon’s sons, Nadav and Avihu. The Torah says, “and Nadav and Avihu died before Hashem because they brought foreign fire before Hashem in the Sinai desert; and they had no children.” The context of the incident of Nadav and Avihu is more fully treated in Sefer VaYikra. Moshe communicates Hashem’s command to Aharon and b’nei yisrael to bring ingredients for four different offerings – a chatat , an olah , a shelamim and a mincha – all for the culmination of the inauguration of the mishkan. All of the respective parties brought the proper ingredients to the mishkan in conformity with Hashem’s command. Moshe then gave Hashem’s next command of what to do with these ingredients – the result of which will be G-d’s glory appearing to the nation. Aharon and b’nei yisrael brought their respective offerings in exact conformity with Hashem’s command. Aharon lifted his hands to the nation and blessed them and then descended from pe

Honor and Glory - Parashat Termuah 5780, February 28, 2020

This week’s  parasha , Termuah, and next week’s parasha , Tetzave, introduce Hashem’s command regarding the plans for the  mishkan  and its vessels – including the clothing worn by the  kohanim . One of the vessels that Hashem commands to be built is the  menorah  – the candelabra. The description of the plans for the menorah are described in Parashat Terumah and the description of its service is described in Parashat Tetzave. In Parashat Tetzave, the Torah says, “and they will take for you pure olive oil pressed to be lit to raise an everlasting candle.” Each evening the  kohanim  were obligated to light the candelabra with enough oil to last the night. In the morning, the  kohanim  were obligated to fix and relight the  menorah , as necessary, thus ensuring that the candelabra would constantly be lit. The Rambam – Maimonides – explains, based on a later verse, that the  mitzvah  to light the candelabra in the mishkan creates “honor and glory” for the  mishkan . It seems obvious